|
IBLA 96-90,96-91
<br />to determine what windmill parts were needecl," their position being that BRI's activities in 1991 caused the well to go dry.
<br />(Statement of Reasons for Appeal (SOR), IBLA 96-(X), at 10, 11.)
<br />By letter dated December: 18, 1991, the Tatuum first advised BRI that damage, which might be attributable to its
<br />underground mining operations, was ocCUning to their house. One year later, by letter dated December 15, 1992, they
<br />notified DMG that their water well was dry as a result of BRI's underground mining operations. On May 25, 1993, they
<br />sent a letter to DMG expressing concern that damage to their house was occrning as a result of subsidence caused by BRI's
<br />undergi-01-md mining operations. The letter was accompanied by a May 24, 1993, report prepared by Vince J. Vigil, Las
<br />Animas County Building Inspector. Vigil, who, at the Tatums' request, had inspected their house on May 18, 1993,
<br />observed nwnerous structural cIracks in the walls (both interior and exterior), ceilings, and comers of the various rooms and
<br />around the windows and doorways on both levels. He concluded that there had been recent earth movement in close
<br />proximity to the residence, but slid not attribute it to subsidence caused by BRI's nearby underground workings.
<br />(Memorandwn to the Tahrms from Vigil, dated May 24, 1993, at 3.) Rather, Vigil advised die Tatum to hire a struchual
<br />engineer to conduct an in-depth investigation of the cause and remedy. Id
<br />DMG responded to the May 25, 1993, letter and attached report on July 7, 1993, concluding that it did not appear that
<br />any damage to the house was caused by mine subsidence. In a subsequent letter to the Las Animas County Planning and
<br />[and Use Office, dated August; 12,1993, DMG expressed die same opinion.
<br />By letter dated November 30, 1993, the Tarium filed a citizen's complaint with OSM alleging the BPTS Lindergrvurxl
<br />mining operation had caused subsidence damage to their r>sidence arid damage to a water well on their property. On
<br />December 7. 1993, in response to the citizen's complaint, OSM issued TDN No. 93-02(}370-005 to DMG, listing three
<br />violations of Colorado State program standards. The TDN described the violations as a failure to properly conduct a
<br />subsidence survey, subsidence monitoring, and subsidence control plan for die Tatums' property, in violation of sections
<br />2.05.6(6) and 4?0 of 2 Colo. Code Regs. (1991) (Violation 1); failure to control adverse consequences to a water well on
<br />die property (Violation 2); and failure to provide a detailed operations plan of the proposed (or actual) underground
<br />workings as it related to the Tatum property (Violation 3). In accordance with 30 C.F.R. § 842.11, OSM required that die
<br />State take appropriate action to correct the violations or show good cause for failing to do so.
<br />On December 20,,1993, DMG responded asserting that BRI had not violated State standards as alleged in Violations 1
<br />and 3, and that, due to lack of historical information from the Tat urns concerning the water well, it did not consider BRI to
<br />have violated State starxlards, as, set forth in Violation 2. On February 4,1994, following the receipt of further information
<br />fiom DMG, the Albuquerque Field Office (AFO), OSM, infomhed DMG that
<br />151 IBLA 290
|