My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-10-27_REVISION - C1981041
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981041
>
2016-10-27_REVISION - C1981041
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/3/2017 12:00:39 PM
Creation date
10/27/2016 12:27:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981041
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
10/27/2016
From
James A. Beckwith Attorney & Councelor at Law
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
TR69
Email Name
BFB
DIH
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
217
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
JAMES A. BECKWITH <br />LETTER TO BROCK BOWLES, CO DRMS / SNOWCAP COAL COMPANY RECLAMATION / PG. 15 <br />plan stated in Fontanari's Mining Plan. Thus, repairs are not simply to "plug the hole", but also <br />to mediate the surface and drainage systems as well. Moreover, it requires analysis of <br />disruptions to the natural drainage of water from the site, as well as the Fontanari Mining Plan's <br />drainage system. Obviously, such data cannot be obtained until discovery during the basaltic <br />extractions. <br />One method of estimate is to borrow Snowcap's calculations: $48,000 for excavations <br />covering 0.4 acres and one hole. If there are 18 known sinkholes (at present), this would amount <br />to $864,000.00. This number must be adjusted upward, since the future emergence of additional <br />sinkholes (suggesting other sub -surface fissures) is merely a matter of time: i.e., it is not "if' they <br />will occur, when "when and where". <br />F. The Trust Fund <br />The conditions on Fontanari lands are not static. Fontanari and Carey can expect shifts in <br />sub -surface voids and continued collapses of rooms and pillars below the tract. By necessity, <br />any Reclamation Plan must be flexible in order to adapt to future changes and needs. To cover <br />present repairs, and to estimate for future repairs, Fontanari proposes a Trust Fund into which the <br />following sums will be deposited: <br />Irrigation System $ 409,000 <br />Carey Pond Lining 200,000 <br />Leveling <br />Tract 71/Carey 52,565 <br />Tract 70 73,410 <br />Future Fissure Repair 1,728,000 <br />Total $2,462,975 <br />Snowcap currently has $663,429 in unused and excess bond funds on filed with DRMS. <br />[Pg. 2, J.E. Stover letter to DRMS] The entirety of such funds should be deposited into a trust <br />fund: with fund administration by a third party commercial trustee. DRMS should order <br />Snowcap to deposit $1,799,546 into that Trust Fund to equal an initial trust corpus of <br />$2,462,975. Posting a bond will not be acceptable to Fontanari, nor should it be acceptable to <br />DRMS. A bond sets idle until demand is made upon it. A bond does not earn interest. Covering <br />future costs will require that the trust corpus be deposited into some interest-bearing account: <br />e.g., a CD or other commercial type account. <br />In accordance with C.R.S. §34-33-135(6), Snowcap should also be ordered to deposit the <br />attorney fees incurred by Fontanari and Carey in analyzing, opposing Snowcap's Plan, and <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.