REV98225 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

As a follow-up to the informal conference held on February 12, 1987 concerning Blue Ribbon Coal Company's partial bond release request, the Allen Brothers Coal Company (Allen Brothers) submits the following additional comments: 1. Blue Ribbon Coal Company failed to consider, pursuant to Rule 2.05.5(2) of the CMLRB Rules and Regulations and Section 34-33-111(c) C.R.S., 1973, as amended, the implications and impacts of their proposed post-mining land use on the uses and plans of the Allen Brothers as legal or equitable owner of record of the surface of the proposed permit area. In support of this assertion, please note that the permit application issued on December 2, 1982 noted under the category of "identification of interests" that the owners of surface ownership, mineral ownership and leasehold interest all included Paul Allen, Hotchkiss, Colorado. Also note that the agreement of December 31, 1975 between Allen Brothers and Sunflower Energy Corporation was recorded on December 27, 1979 in Book 447 at Pages 532-599 of the Clerk and Recorder of Delta County. By its own identification of the agreement the Allen Brothers' interest in the surface ownership section in the permit application noted above and its recordation of that agreement with the Delta County Clerk and Recorder, Blue Ribbon Coal Company cannot now disclaim or apply retroactively an interpretation of this agreement that it did not represent a recorded documentation of surface interest. For the sake of consideration that this agreement did not represent total surface ownership, it should be noted that the 1975 agreement specifically reserved to the Allen Brothers grazing rights and the right to explore and extract all other minerals located within the property being leased to Sunflower Energy. These reserved rights for grazing and other mineral exploration implicitly require surface use and therefore represents an equitable interest in the surface property which could be affected by the operation, post-mining land use, and reclamation of the Blue Ribbon mine. It would be inequitable to allow a permittee applicant to identify those persons entitled to statutory and regulatory recognition and special consideration as surface owners and then subsequently interpret an agreement in such a way as to claim that they had no duty to notify or to consider the comments or concerns of such persons on the proposed post-mining land use and reclamation plans. In addition, paragraphs 10 and 11 of the 1975 a~ ADDITIONAL rIRITTEN COMMENTS BY