Laserfiche WebLink
SINE BY~ 4~-95 :12~59PM 0 S• 303 832 8106:# 3/ 9 <br />April 5, 1995 <br />Page 2 <br />Senator, I hope that you <br />submitted to the Albuquerque <br />nln. I provided you a copy <br />February a, 15195. The actual <br />herein for your re:'erence. <br />are aware that the article T <br />I,aper was cut before it wag <br />of Lhe original article on <br />article published is enclosed <br />FIRST - Mr. L'ram advised Mr. ttume on February 23, 1993, <br />that "There are _easons for the delay but no excuses". I <br />note that Mr. Uram did not let any grass grow under his Ieet <br />in his February 23, 1995, response to my February 18th <br />article. Cram fires off his letter to Hume in FIVF. DAYS, my <br />appeal should have keen responded to as timely. T invite Mr. <br />Uram to provide me with the "reasons" which created the <br />delay. Mr. Uram refers to "a federal inspection of tier <br />vacation hofie in Colorado." I have rtevsr referred to my <br />Colorado residence as a vacation home. Is Mr. Uram's remark <br />patronizing, or is his intent to diminish the severity or <br />importance of this matter by suggesting a "vacation home" is <br />not as important as a main residence? our Dome and ranch <br />in Colorado is ._. multi-million operation and hardly a <br />"vacation homE+". <br />SECOND - "Soriebo~_has to determi.he wY1at's causing the <br />problems affecting Mrs. '1'atum's property. Thanks to OSM, <br />sta g regul<:tors. are revisiting the on-the-around <br />conditions. Mcr~aovcr, OSM is carefully monitoring the <br />state's handling of this case:." G1vE ME A t3REAK MR_. URAM - <br />Thanks OSM - ~ don't think so! ! ! Mr. U1 am and MY. Kay are <br />personally responsible fur not rendcrlnq a decision. The <br />record speaks for itself - I don't owe OSM-Washinyton <br />"Thanks" - they contributed to t11e monster this issue. has <br />become. Yes, Katy passed this issue back to the State of <br />Colorado, even after }coy was provided with proof that the <br />State hindered the initial investigation by not. F:r.oviding <br />OSM-Albuquerque with accurate, truthful, it1;~,rmation i. r. <br />December, 7.993, •dhile the State was responding to the TDN <br />letter from o~.M-A1b11querque. <br />'1'H'fI<D - "IL Caere ir: a coal minini3-relr:Led problem, it <br />will be cor::zctec." THERl 7S NOT A ~;HRF.^ O1 EVIDENCE THAT <br />THE PROBLEI.7S AFFE~:'TING MY HOME IN COLORADO A}tt; N()T Mlta ~ NG <br />RELATED. Tn fact, our engineers determined nottliny else <br />could be causing the problem. Tl~e State agread lta,it snother <br />source Lug' the prc!~lert, could not be determined, Ytowever they <br />then said the mit~~~ wasn't. responsible and OSM concurred with <br />their finding. Our engineers are still investigating - OSM <br />is not!!!! <br />~' <br />r <br /> <br />~: <br />J <br />~r <br />S <br />p Sc <br />a ~ <br />v i <br />H <br />