Laserfiche WebLink
IBLA 96-90,96-91 <br />that expkvxition." Conceming the foundations, he observed that It)here was no significant distress or evidence of <br />movement acceding the coma ite foundation walls of the basement at the west end of the house." Id. at 2. In the foundation <br />of the central portion of the house, there were "no indications of significant deterioration or distress," and he characterized <br />the Ib ndation as being "in suprisingly good condition considering the age of the structure." Id. He stated that he was <br />unable to make a "close and de'tai led inspection of the foruidatioru for the eastern (two-story) portion of the house" because <br />of "I invited access." d. at 2-3. In describing the exterior of the house, he stated that "the south wall above the second story <br />level near the east end of the house was badly deteriorated from prolonged exposure to moisture. The deterioration <br />conesporxled with the interior damage we noted within the upstairs sitting room." Id. at 3. <br />By letter dated June 7, 1995, DMG responded to four separate letters it had received from the Tatums in May 1995 <br />warding various aspects of the damage to the Tatum' house and investigations thereof. Therein, DMG stated: <br />While it is true that we have observed evidence of movement of the upper walls in an Outward motion, absolutely <br />no evidence of movement Hof the foundation of the home has been observed by any parties. Movement of the <br />foundation is the critical indicator of mine subsidence. Without evidence of movement of the foundation we can <br />make no finding except that mine subsidence has not impacted the hone. Further we continue to believe that no <br />subsidence related to the 14 north mains has occurred. <br />i <br />Cm .lute 30, 1995, Dr. Craft released the report of his May 19, 1995, inspection. At pages 7-8 ofthat repot he <br />concluded: <br />'Elie Tatun building complex is well outside any potential mining-related subsidence influence--even <br />when conservatively assuuning that 75 percent of the coal I-W been extracted and only 11 percent of the <br />overburdcen is hardrock (Figures 3 and 4). With only 34 percent actual coal extraction. and 50 percent actual bard <br />rock, it is hi.Ily Unlikely that any surface subsidence has occured over the I North entry. This conclusion is <br />substantiated by two tads: 11) no railroad repair has taken place over the I North entry within the zone of expected <br />maximum deformation other than normal maintenance; and 2) the subsidence monitoring over the similarly- <br />configured 3 North entry shows no measurable subsidence. Furthermore, if the building complex was being <br />influenced by mine related subsidence, the garage, patio, and concrete included in this area would be damaged <br />The cracks in the house would be tension type, and, therefore, wider at the base becoming narrow upwards. The <br />water draining into the I North entry is from the coal bearing sttatigraphic interval. The overburden is <br />151 IBLA 295