APPCOR10957 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

S~ A ALLEN BROWN MIC MA EL R. SCNOTTELRO TTE JAMES O BROWN ROBERT G. TWEEDELL LAW OFFICES OF BROWN AND BROWN 550 PALM ER~P O. BO% 9J DELTA, Coco @ADO 81419 May 14, 1982 III III III IIIIIII III ~ f AREA CODE 303 T CLEPNO NE B7A'AA51 ~~~~~~~~ Mr. Dan Mathews MAY 2 9 1982 Colorado State Bureau of Mine Land Reclamation 1313 Sherman street MfNED LAND RECLAMATION Rnom 423 Cale. Dept. of Natural Resource Denver, Colorado 80203 Re: Grand Mesa Properties Company, also known as Grand Mesa Coal Company Dear Mr. Mathews: We represent Charles T. Frey, Edwin J. Fischer and Elsa P. Thompson of Cedaredge, Colorado, who own coal rights in Section 11, Township 13 South, Range 95 West of the 6th P. M., Delta County, Colorado. The rights have been leased by these persons as lessors to Grand Mesa Properties Company as lessee under the provisions of a coal lease dated June 9, 1981, a true copy of which I enclose for your reference. At the time of execution of the coal lease the lessee held or acquired a permit from the Colorado Bureau of Mine Land Reclamation to remove fifty per cent of the subject coal. Our understanding is that the lessee is currently applying for an augmented permit which would allow them to remove one hundred per cent of the subject coal. The lessors, Mr. Frey and Mr. Fischer and Ms. Thompson hereby make their formal protest to the application. Although the lease does not expressly limit the lessee's rights to extraction of fifty per cent of the subject coal, that was in fact the intent of and the inducement for the agreement. While the lease was being negotiated the lessors expressed to the lessee their concern for preservation of surface support for the benefit of persons to whom they had previously conveyed the surface rights. In response to these concerns the lessee specifically promised and represented to the lessors that they would remove no more than fifty per cent of the existing coal so that substantial pillars would remain to support the surface shale. The present application made by the lessee for an augmented permit violates the representations and promises made to the lessors and would in the opinion of the lessors place the rights of the surface owners in jeopardy. Even if the risk of surface damage is demonstrated to be minimal, the lessors feel that their obligation to insure surface support for the benefit of their grantee should outweigh the desires of the lessee for an augmentation of their right to extract coal. We ask that you give us notice of all proceedings scheduled on the