GENERAL31674 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

IM',TRT.'UM 8 RSSOCIRTES TEL~71~995-7191 May 24.9 512 Mo.007 P.03 May 24, 1995 Page 3 negligence, is the proximate cause of injury. Complicity would be the state of being an accomplice. Is it possible that the State and the Federal Government should be held accountable for the misrepresentations of the mine? We, the plaintiffs believed we were protecting our rights, and our property by agreeing to the May, 1988, agreement. It would appear however that ALL parties who partook in the actions of the mine, the drafting and enforcement of Stipulation 28, Section 2.05.6 of the Board regulations, the drafting and enforcement of the Mining Reclamation Act, and the Colorado Regulations for Coal Mining, contributed to the damage we are suffering. such damage would include not only the damage to the actual structure, but the costs we have incurred to resolve this matter. The fact that neither the State nor the Federal government is willing to address the hydrological questions with regard to this matter would lead one to believe that they, the State and the Federal government, are not taking all possible explanations for the damage to our home into account. Dismissing the movement on the railroad, which has been documented by the mine, as insignificant le in sharp contrast to the position the State and OSM were taking BEFORE they were provided proof that movement has occurred on the railroad. Initially DMG and OSM made the ascertain that our housE: could not be suffering from subsidence since the rail road hadn't moved. Irrefutable proof now exists that the rail road has moved, however the agencies investigating this issue discard this evidence as meaningless. The mine must obtain a written waiver from the owner when the mine is 300 ft. Prom an occupied dwelling. An interesting requirement which means nothing. The owner has NO PROTECTION. The mine, the state, and the feds, use words like "no subsidence is expected to occur" or "no subsidence is anticipated from mining. within areas of limited (less than 50%) extraction." what about flooding in the mine, soft floors, etc? Obviously not anticipated but can and did occur. Further, z.05•-57 as revised on May 18, 1994, discusses the angle of draw and states the angle of draw COULD EXCEED 30 degrees in the=, area. Please provide me with the angle of draw of the. coal bed underlying my property. Any conclusions based on experience in the East may not be relevant and/or may have to be modified. The lithology in . ,:.~,,n.:: ~ ... . . ... .+. N'ti yti .n.I•u%.~~M bvF,.i r. .. f. r.\f i.}..i N.. J~A./Y{.\tiy~b.llyN>'L MwQ.IP