Blasting Regulations

1. Blasting Regulations Proposed Changes to The Existing Ordinance

2. Revocation of Permit • Existing code does not have provisions for revocation for use of controlled substances or alcohol during operations • Proposal authorizes the Chief to revoke if evidence of use of alcohol or controlled substances exists while engaged in blasting operations.

3. Notification of Reissued Permit • Existing ordinance does not require re-notification when permit is reissued. • Proposal requires re-notification IF the original notification time period has expired.

4. Opportunity for 2nd Pre-blast Survey • Existing code does not address this concern • Proposal permits property owners that were eligible for a pre-blast survey to request another if remodeling or home additions requiring permits have been undertaken since the first pre-blast survey.

5. Definitions • Existing code uses the 1997 UFC/UBC definition of structure. • Proposal utilizes NFPA 495 “Explosives Materials Code” definition of structure. • Existing code does not define “blasting expert.” • Proposal provides a definition for “blasting expert.”

6. Application Checklist • Existing code did not include a checklist • Proposed ordinance creates an “Application Checklist” to provide applicants with a summary of required documents in the form of a checklist.

7. Insurance Requirements • Existing code has minimum coverage of $1 million per occurance, $2 million general aggregate. • Proposed ordinance increases to $2 million per occurance, $5 million general aggregate.

8. Scaled Drawing • Existing code did not specify what was acceptable and submittals ranged from sketches to blueprints. • Proposed ordinance requires that the drawing must be generated by the City’s GIS system and will provide both a map and an address list for the area and include the 1500 ft. notification distance and 500 ft. preblast survey distance.

9. Seismographic Monitoring • Existing code allows all monitoring to be conducted by the contractor. • Proposed ordinance allows contractor to monitor outside the 500 ft. boundary but requires an independent firm to monitor seismographs within 500 ft. of structures.

10. General Notification • Existing code allows notice to be posted on front door or mailed. • Proposed ordinance requires notice by mail and proof of notification.

11. Notification of Utilities • Existing code did not specify method to notify utility companies. Dig Safe was acceptable. • Proposed ordinance requires utility companies to be notified via Certified Mail and proof of notification required when utilities are within 500 feet.

12. Notification Information • Existing code provided information concerning contractor information, general project time and insurance company information. • Proposed ordinance includes the duration of the blasting permit, general blasting location and site map, and contact information for contractor and insurance.

13. Utilities within 500 feet • Existing ordinance did not address this issue. • Proposed ordinance requires that utility companies with facilities within 500 feet be notified via certified mail and given 10 days to object to the blast plan or request additional time to evaluate.

14. Posting of Notice • Existing code did not require any information to be posted at the site entrance. • Proposed code requires a site map, copy of the permit and certificates of on-site blasters to be posted conspicuously.

15. Pre-blast Notification • Existing code requires notification in writing but does not specify delivery method • Proposed ordinance requires notice to be sent to structures, pipelines and other buildings within 500 feet via certified mail 20 days in advance of blasting operations.

16. Pre-blast Surveys • Existing code requires 15 days to elapse after notification of pre-blast survey before blasting may commence. Utilities were not specifically addressed. • Proposed ordinance permits blasting to commence when pre-blasts are completed or specifically declined and utility companies have responded or the 10 day waiting period for response has elapsed. Blasting may also commence after 20 days has elapsed.

17. Air Blast • Existing code did not address this. • Proposed ordinance requires the maximum limits as outlined in NFPA 495 “Explosive Materials Code.”

18. Seismographic Monitoring • Existing code permits the contractor to conduct seismographic monitoring • Proposed ordinance requires an independent firm provide monitoring within 500 feet of structures, other buildings or pipelines. It permits the contractor to conduct monitoring for structures greater than 500 feet from the blast site.

19. Maximum Peak Particle Velocity • Existing code limits PPV to 1 inch/second maximum. • Proposed ordinance permits PPV to exceed 1 inch/second upon written consent of the property owner(s).

20. Monitoring Equipment Calibration • Existing code does not provide for this. • Proposed ordinance requires seismographic monitors to be calibrated and certified annually.

21. Blasting Within 100 Feet • Existing code does not permit blasting within 100 feet of structures. • Proposed ordinance permits blasting within 100 feet of structures, other buildings and pipelines if the owner(s) consent and the blasting conforms to the US Bureau of Mines Table of Scaled Distances.

22. Blasting Expert • Existing code does not specifically provide for outside technical review. • Proposed ordinance requires a blasting expert, hired by the contractor, review and approve the blast plan whenever blasting occurs within 500 feet of structures, other buildings and pipelines. The expert reports to the fire marshal and must have proof of liability insurance.