Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Brock Bowles <br />Page 2 <br />November 14, 2016 <br />copy of the landowner's comments on the plan. The Division acknowledged receiving <br />Fontanari's October 27, 2016 comments, which oppose SCC's proposed plan. <br />However, when SCC sold the relevant property to Rudolph and Ethel Fontanari, it <br />expressly reserved an easement for the purpose of performing SCC's reclamation and <br />monitoring requirements under Permit C-81-041 as they existed at the time of the <br />conveyance or as they may be modified by the Division in the future. This easement was <br />described in paragraph 25 of the parties' July 21, 2003 Contract for Sale and Purchase of <br />Real Estate, attached as Exhibit A, and was reserved by SCC in the December 15, 2003 <br />Special Warranty Deed to Rudolph and Ethel Fontanari attached as Exhibit B. As you can <br />see, the easement allows SCC to access and use Fontanari's property "in any reasonable <br />fashion" to meet its then -existing, and later -accruing, reclamation obligations. Because <br />SCC's proposal sets forth a reasonable reclamation plan with respect to Fontanari's property, <br />SCC has the right to undertake those reclamation activities under SCC's reserved easement <br />without Fontanari's consent, and despite his objections. <br />Given this reality, SCC respectfully requests that the Division waive or withdraw its <br />request for a letter from Fontanari concurring with the proposed reclamation plan for the <br />hydrological repair. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you, or the Division's <br />representative from the Attorney General's Office, would like to discuss this matter, or to <br />confirm that SCC need not provide the Division with a letter of consent. We look forward to <br />hearing from you. <br />Sincerely, <br />HOSKIN FARINA & KAMPF <br />Profs* nal Co ration <br />John Justus <br />JPJ:KMH <br />Enclosures (2) <br />TR -69 A14-5-51 12/16 <br />