My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL39812
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL39812
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:59:10 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 10:22:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981037
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
12/8/1994
Doc Name
GEC WEST PIT RECLAMATION
From
DMG
To
CORLEY CO
Permit Index Doc Type
GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE
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.
Page 1 of 1
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
III IIIIIIIII <br />II <br />STATE II <br />II <br />OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OE MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department of Nawral Resources <br /> <br />1317 Sherman St., Room 215 ~ <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 ~~~ <br />Phone: (7031 866-3 56 7 <br />FAX: (303)832-8106 <br /> DEPARTMENT OF <br />December 8, 1994 NATURAL <br /> RESOURCES <br />Dr. W.D. Corley <br /> <br />The Corley Company Roy Romer <br />covernnr <br />P.~. $OX 1821 )amesS.Lochhead <br />Colorado Springs, CO 80901 Executive Director <br /> Michael B. Long <br />RE: GEC West Pit Reclamation: Divlslon oheuor <br />Dear Dr. Corley: <br />The Division received your letter dated December 6, 1994 in which <br />you expressed disagreement with my letter of November 3, 1994. You <br />disagreed with the statement in my letter regarding "final <br />determination of the scope of work" for the $800 retained from the <br />Harrison Western money being made by the Division in its contract <br />with the party doing the work. <br />As we discussed on the phone, and as the agreement indicates, the <br />Division will pursue maintenance or repair work identified by The <br />Corley Company in Section 24 with the $800 remaining from the West <br />Pit work. My statement about determination of the scope of work in <br />the Division's contract for the work was simply an acknowledgement <br />of the fact that the Division must specify the scope of work for <br />any reclamation project for which a contract is awarded in that <br />contract. As you pointed out in your latest letter, the Division <br />is the contracting party. <br />I do not believe that is insisting on anything contrary to what the <br />addendum states or which we discussed on the phone. Unless we hear <br />otherwise, the Division will presume the agreement which you signed <br />is valid. Kessler Reclamation anticipates being available to begin <br />work in the west pit soon. <br />Sincerely, <br />~?~~~. <br />Larry P. Routten <br />Environmental Protection Specialist <br />cc: Erica Crosby <br />c:\wp51\12894 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.