My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE35557
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE35557
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:45:08 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 2:41:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981013
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
1/5/2001
Doc Name
BASIN RESOURCES INC NOV CV-2000-009 EXHIBITS FOR ASSESSMENT CONFERENCE
Violation No.
CV2000009
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
111
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
151 Interior Dec. 286 <br />(Cite as: 151 Interior Dec.. 286, *293, 2000 WL 1740340, **6 (D.O.I.)) <br />Page 7 <br />summarized: <br />~ [T]he Tatum residence has been damaged by settlement or displacements that <br />are primarily evident in the two-story portion *294 of the residence. However, <br />ecent cracks appear in other portions of the structure also. We have considered <br />variety of reasons for the damage that has occurred. Evidence does not exist <br />to categorically attribute the damage to a specific cause; therefore, judgment <br />as to be applied. Considering the possible causes of the damage, it is our <br />pinion that the surface movements due to coal subsidence are a likely reason <br />for the damage. <br />**7 (Attwooll Report at 7.) <br />Also, Carlton E. Gerity, P.E., Pioneer Engineering, provided the Tatums with a <br />"Progress Report on Tatum House Subsidence Issues" on April 12, 1995. Therein, <br />he referenced the Attwooll Report, characterizing it as having concluded that <br />"mining related subsidence could have caused the problem." (Gerity Report at 1.) <br />n his opinion, OSM "used an incorrect model in their computer subsidence <br />analysis. The correct model indicates that mine-influenced ground movement could <br />~ertainly have affected the Tatum house." Id. DMG reviewed both of these reports <br />nd in a memorandum dated April 14, 1995, Pendleton stated: <br />All the professionals involved agree that the Tatum residence is evidencing <br />xtreme structural distress. In my opinion the conclusion of Messrs. Gerity and <br />~ttwooll is that it hasn't been exhaustively demonstrated that subsidence did <br />not cause the phenomena observed. I have discussed these reports with Mike <br />osenthal of the OSM. Based on our professional experience in subsidence <br />observation and evaluation, both Mr. Rosenthal and I are of the opinion that <br />here is insufficient evidence for us to conclude that subsidence caused the <br />henomena observed at the Tatum residence. Semantically, these statements are <br />of in contradiction. Inherent within their structure is a disagreement <br />egarding the burden of proof. <br />On May 11, 1995, OSM and DMG officials, accompanied by BRI employees and <br />atums' expert, Gerity, again inspected the Tatums' residence. It was agreed <br />hat another inspection would take place to include Dr. Jesse L. Craft, a <br />subsidence expert with the Technical Assistance Team, Program Support Division, <br />Appalachian Regional Coordinating Center, OSM. That inspection took place on May <br />3, 1995. Dr. Craft was accompanied by OSM, DMG, and BRI representatives, as <br />well as Gerity. <br />That same day, another expert hired by the Tatums, John D. Reins, P.E., Senior <br />Consultant with Madsen, Kneppers & Associates, Inc., issued a report to the <br />Tatums of findings and preliminary conclusions following his inspection of their <br />residence. At page 4-5, he stated: "We understand that other investigators have <br />concluded that surface movements due to coal mine subsidence are a likely reason <br />for much of the damage to the house. Our observations and interpretations of the <br />istress are consistent with *295 that explanation." Concerning the foundations, <br />e observed that "[t]here was no significant distress or evidence of movement <br />~ffecting the concrete foundation walls of the basement at the west end of the <br />house." Id. at 2. In the foundation of the central portion of the house, there <br />ere "no indications of significant deterioration or distress," and he <br />haracterized the foundation as being "in surprisingly good condition <br />considering the age of the structure." Id. He stated that he was unable to make <br />Copr. m West 2001 No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.