My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL32399
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL32399
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:54:58 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 7:18:23 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981013
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
10/12/1993
Doc Name
TATUM PROPERTY LAS ANIMAS CNTY
From
JIM TATUM & ASSOC
To
DMG
Permit Index Doc Type
GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE
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.
/
2
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
III IIIIIIIIIIIII III <br />8703 Bonhomme <br />Houston, Texas 77074 <br />(713)995-7045 <br />Telecopier <br />(713)995-7191 <br />Law Offices of <br />Jim Tatum & Associates P.O. Box 86 <br />12630 Hwy. 12 <br />Weston, Colorado 61091 <br />(719)868-3310 <br />Telecopier <br />(719) 868-2612 <br />October 12, .1993 <br />Mr. Daniel I. Hernandez <br />Senior Reclamation Specialist <br />State of Colorado <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman, Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />htr. Joseph J. Dudash <br />Reclamation Specialist <br />State of Colorado <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />13].3 Sherman, Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />VIA C.M.R.R.R. #P 155 734 849 <br />VIA C.M.R.R.R. #P 155 734 848 <br />RE: Tatum Property Las Animas County, Colorado <br />Gentlemen: <br />I am increasingly concerned about what is being done here. I am <br />looking over the Mid-Term Permit Review of December, 1992, by Joseph <br />Dudash. <br />Rule 4.20.1 regarding subsidence damage. <br />Rule 2.06. 5(6)(a) relating to the damage to our water well. <br />Rule 2.05.6(6)(e)(ii) description of aquifer. <br />What about the requirements of Rule 2.05.6(6)(b) regarding worst <br />possible subsidence consequences'. Was this ever done and if not, why not' <br />It appears that prior correspondence from your office concludes that <br />no material damage could occur to our adobe buildings ---- it is <br />abundantly clear that the regulations call for a subsidence monitoring <br />program. It is undisputed that this has not been done pursuant to the <br />requirements of Rule 2.05.6(c). Why hasn't this been done and why hasn't <br />your office enforced this law? <br />I am also concerned about the requirements of § 784.20 30 CER Chapter <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.