My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2007-05-10_ENFORCEMENT - C1981013
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Enforcement
>
Coal
>
C1981013
>
2007-05-10_ENFORCEMENT - C1981013
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:16:52 PM
Creation date
8/7/2009 3:58:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981013
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
5/10/2007
Doc Name
DRMS Brief in Support of NOV CV2007001, Civil Penalty & Proposed Decision on SI
Violation No.
CV2007001
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
100
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
IBLA 96-90,96-91 <br />the Tatunn property, and a sink hole near the Tabun residence. [7/ 'Ihe Tatum residence was considerably <br />damaged by the subsidence, which was caused by the mining operation. <br />(Decision at 4.) "l-he Judge awarded dhe Tatums compensatory damages for the diminution in value oftheir property. <br />In an order crated August 1.7, 1999, this Board directed the Office of the Solicitor to respond to Exhibit A-15 within 30 <br />days of receipt of that order. Over 60 days later, on October 25, 1999, the Board received a request from Counsel for OSM <br />seeking "an extension of time, consisting of 3 days, until Monday, October 25, 1999," in which to file a response to the <br />Board's order. On October 29, 1999, the Board received a request from counsel for a second extension oftime to file, this <br />time "until Wednesday, October 27, 1999." The Board received a third request for extension of time frvrn Counsel on <br />November 1, 1999, seeking an extension to file "until November 1999." CoLinsel did not the any response to our order. <br />By order dated November 11 2, 1999, the Board denied the requests for extension and ruled that any submission made <br />by counsel in response to Arrgnrst 17, 1999, order after the date of our November 12, 1999, order would not become a part of <br />the record in this case. <br />The evidence of experts for the State and OSM tends to establish that something other than subsidence, although there <br />is no agreement as to what, caused the structural damage to the Tat-ins' house. The Taturns' experts, on the other hand, <br />appear to agree that tyre is little' explanation for the damage other than subsidence. <br />F lowever, the Tahuns have also presented a copy of Judge Manzanares' decision which was rendered tollowing a 6-day <br />hearing in April 1997 during which he heard die testimony of "approximately twenty-eight (28) witnesses and received over <br />one hundred (100) exhibits into evidence." (Exh. A-15 at l .) OSM has not timely responded to a direction to address the <br />Judge's decision. In his decision; the Judge found that subsidence was the cause of "considerable" damage to the Tatu ns' <br />house <br />As stated above in the discuission concerning IBLA 96-90, under the regulations governing TDNs, an action or <br />response by the State regulatory authority that is not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion Linder the State program <br />is considered "appropriate action" to cause a <br />7/ We find no other reference to'a sink hole in the record in this case other than in Appellants' Response to Appellens <br />Original Answer, where they state at page 3, "[a] sinkhole or depression has now appeared just south of the Tatuun's house. <br />This fits the trial testimony that a sinkhole or depression could be expected in the event of soft floor or pillar failure." <br />151 IBLA 307
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.