GENERAL45596 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~T~ i ~ ~~'= ~~~.~~~~~~~ DIYt51QN OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY Department of Natulal.Resources 13Y3 shemwn Sc,.Raan-2l5 oe„ver Cdo>ado xo2o3;:.. Phone: (303} p66356T "'- _...FAXG9o3)832.8166._:..~-: ~ ... ):ebruary 4, 2004 Mr. Jim Tatum and Ms. Ann Tatum 129 North~Cotnmercial Street Trinidad, CD 81082 Re: Complaint letters of 7antuuy 9 and 19, 2004 - Permit No. C-1981-013 Mr. And Ms. Tatum: AD O N= 'D F ALS GEO.LO;G:Y- FECLAMATION.XINrM . :; OAF1T7•SCIENCE:-Y Bill Oxenc ~ ~ ~ _.._. Goremar creR t. w,kha Exeative Directs Rama w. Cafmny Oivi5i0n Olteeror N~rymal Rp5nU(G! rruuee This letter is written in response to your letters dated January 9, 2004 and 7anuary 19, 2004 (received January 12, 2004 and January 21, 2004, respectively). The January 12, ' 2004 letter states your position regarding water loss at two wells. The January 19, 2004 letter clarifies that the January 12, 20041etter is to be considered a new complaint. Tt is our uadaretanding that your complaint refer, to the wall located near the Golden Eagle Mine Northwest Airshaft (Tatum Windmill Well) and to a well located at ar neaz your bunkhouse. Tatum Windmill Well The Division of Minerals and Geology previously investigated the claim regarding damage to the water wall lvcuted near the Northwest ?.irsltaft, wi0x a fowl repu~t issued I on Juae 6, 1995. This investigation refers to the well as the Tatum Windmill Well. This investigation documented, in part, the nonfunctional condition of the well in question. The investigation also documented that although the area adjacent tq the shaft was injection grouted, water was known to be entering the shaft, and that such inflow of water to the shaft likely impacted the nearby well. Based upon the many observations and facts presented in the June 6, 1995, it was concluded that no injury occurred. The Interior Board of Land Appeals upheld this conclusion in theur Janttaty 5, 2000 ruling (lI3LA 96-90,96-91). It is our understanding that the January 5, 2000 was never appealed. This conclusion was also corroborated by the District Court, County of Las pnimaa Case No. 97. CV 17.7 ~lateri T)ecemher 1, 1997. Tt is our understanding that this decision was also not appealed. Based upon the previous investigations and rulings referenced above, and based on the fact that the pertinent bases. for the investigation and rulings do not appear to lie. e changed, we cannot find that a new damage Claim is warranted. 1 i I _ Offieeof Dificeof i ~ Colorado Mined Land R¢clamation ARivp and Inactive Mines GeoloBiFal Survey tt 39t1d Wflltil WIC 69t09b86tL 5S:5S L00Z/Z0/70