GENERAL53100 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

8-0?-L996 .: BLM!USFS 4~ P. 19 ID~9702405367 RUG 08'96 808 No.001 P.O1 _.. III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Yost-h'" brace fez trsnsmfltal memo 78rt sa vw• • 2, sss 12:0dPM FROM ENG. WEST ELK MINE 970 9295050 tir. Larry Maute 1998 Hvy 139 raonia, coloredo CO-039 f 81428 ~ Q 1 1993 REr ,lyaatg lSonataia foal Sxoloration 8aonest for bond Dear Mt. lleutzr ue have reviewed your recommendation that a bond be rctablished for your protection relating to damage of a crop (income) pertaining to prospecting eetivitiec planned by Mountain Coal Company (HCC). Having studied the Code of Federal Regulatioge found in CFR 3814(b) and 3814(c), wa have determined that according to t)L~esulatiQ~g there is no authority given to the 811! to see a bond co compensate foe damages suffered by the surface owner (enerynua, or patentee) unless [he person who is entering and occupying chs surface '...hns acquired from the United States the coal or other mineral deposits in any such land or Che right to mine and reawvr the cams...• and that she activitiec taking place are " ..reasonably incident to the mining or removal of the coal...' (CFR 3814(c)). J=. MCC currently dues not: have the right to mine the coal wirhin [he boundaries of your surface ownership. The exploration license held by MCC allows strictly the right to prospect for coal. CPA 3L10.3 Se the pertinent regulation for bonding a:ploretion licenses. The bond was ineended co be Implemented In chs absence of en agreement between the surface owner and the exploration licensee providing tompensaciun for damages to attrfaca improvements. Negotietioas for the agreexnt between the surface owner end exploration licenses should have taken place before the issuance of the exploration license. We underteand ehae you beeeme the owner of the land in Question subsequent to the Issuance of the exploration license to MCC and had no opportunity to enter into such an agreement. Given the nature of the land use prior to your ownership, and the absence of a claim by the previous owner chat surface improvementc exacted viehin the arse of the exploration license. no bond for the cowpensation of damages to curfaea improvements waa necessary. xe feel that the current rsclamation bond is sufficient to cover damages in the event that HCC is negligent i.n reclaimiag the surface dfetut'bances (roads and drill site pads) made during their exploration activities. since MCC is acting only on their right cu prospect, and are nee conducting mining sceivitfea on surface which you own. and since [here are no known or previously indicated surface improvements liable Co bs damaged, we Iuve determined rhea a bond other then the reclamation bond is nae appropriate in this Case. ~J ~cdR-. ~ (.~s~