GENERAL42290 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BLMiUSFS \_~ i ~.~ Mr. Larry Meutz 1938 Hwy 133 Peonia, Colorado ID~970?405~07 i~ AUG 08'9b Post•II" brand tax transmittal memo 7671 ~ or psp.. . nr r.«n Co. 0 Co. qpr, t ear' ~ vnono • ~ r J s... - So ... _ 53 07 g 6 81428 REo ,Z(>atbo Motuttain Coal t~nlozation Aaauaet for Dond Desr Mr. Meutzi 808 No.001 P.O1 III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII CO-033 ~ 2 ~ rasa we have reviewed your recommendation Chat a bond be established for your protection relating to damage of a ccop (income) pertaining t.o pr.vepeCting activities planned by Mountain Coal Company (MCC). Having studied the Code of Federal Regulations found in CFR 3814(b) end 3814(c), we have determined that accordin¢ to the reeuletions there is no authority given to the BLM to set a bond to compensate foc damages suffered by the surface owner (entrymen, nr patentee) unless the person vhv ie entering end occupying the surface '...has acquired £rom the United States the coal or other mineral deposits in any such land vc the right to mine and remove the ceme...• and that the activities taking place are ...reaeonnbly Sncidertt tv the mining or removal of the coat..." (CFR 3814(c)). MCC currently does not have the right to mine the coal within the boundaries of your aurfece ownership. The exploration license held by MCC allows strictly the right to prospect for coal. CFR 3410.3 le the pertinent regulation for bonding exploration licensee. The bond vas Intended to be implemented in the absence of an agreement between the surface owner and the exploration licensee providing compensation for damages io turlaca imprtnemanta. Negotiations for the agreement between the surface owner and explorstion Licensee chouid have taken place before the issuance of the exploration license. Ne understand that you became~ihe owner of the land in question eubcnquent to the issuance of the explorstion ]icense to MCC and had nn opportunity to enter into such nn agreement. Given the nature of the )and use prior to your ownership, end the absence of a claim try the previous Donee that surface improvements existed within the area of the exploration license, no bond for the compensation of damages to surface improvements was necessary. Ne feel that the current reclamation bond is sufficient to cover datnegea in the event that MCC is negligent in reclaiming the surface disturbances (roadc and drill Bite psdc) made during their exploration activitlee. Since MCC ie acting only on their right to prospect, ^nd are not conaiucting mining actlvltlee on surface which you ovn, and since there are nn known or previoucly indicated surface improvements liable to be damaged, we have determined the[ a bond other then the reclamation bond Ss not appropriate in [his Case. ... ... vim. _. ... ..,.ate ~ .......~... . .. ........... «e::-.~ ~,~.... y~ia~+.~..._ _,.-. . R- -