Laserfiche WebLink
JIM TRTUM & RS$OCIRTES TEL~~3-995-7191 May 11~ <br />Law OtHoeeof <br />Jim Tatum & Associates <br />8703 Bonhomme <br />Houston Texas 77074 <br />(713)995-7045 <br />Telempia <br />(713)995-7191 <br />May 11, 1995 <br />3:10 No .002 P.02 <br />P.O. Box 28 <br />12630 Hwy. 12 <br />Weston, Colorado 81091 <br />(n9) sbe-a31o <br />Telecopier <br />(719)868-2612 <br />Ms. Susan McCannon FAX N0. (303) 832-8106 - <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />RE: Memo from Jim Pendleton; dated February 14 <br />RE: Clarification on Angle of Draw; and <br />Water well Issue <br />Ms. McCannon: <br />On May 4th, I requested a copy of the report reYerred <br />to by Mr. Pendleton in tii.e February '14th memo. At that <br />time, I advised you that our engineer, Carl Gexity, had not. <br />been able to locate such a report or document.at' the [J.fS. <br />Bureau of Mines office. <br />You advised me yesterday that Mr. Pendleton had been <br />attempting to locate the report, however was unable to do <br />so. You related that Air. Pendleton had advised you, that <br />possibly the report iie referenced in his memo had been done <br />by the Department of Energy end not the Bureau of Mines. <br />On May 9th, Mr. verity told you that the report Mr. <br />Pendleton was obviously referring to Would be the Woodward- . <br />Clyde report, a study done under the direction of the <br />Department of Energy on the Allen Mine - the same report Mr. <br />Gerity used in obtaining the calculations submitted 'in his <br />April, 1995, report. <br />Z suggest the following to you, "in the spirit of . <br />cooperation", quoting Mr. Pendleton in his February 14th <br />memo: <br />a. Mr. Pendleton, in his February 14th memo, makes tlte• <br />assertion that the u.s. Bureau of Mines, a highly respected <br />group of engineers had done a study, which Mr. Pendleton had. <br />obviously read, and, which study limited the angle oP draw ' <br />to 25-27 $; I have read the Woodward-Clyde report. I am <br />not an engineer. and would represent to you that I did not <br />understand everything that I read, however, I did not Pitid <br />anywhere in the report where this study "limited the Sngl®:: <br /> <br />