My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL51675
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL51675
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:37:50 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 6:59:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981037
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
5/16/1994
Doc Name
GEC PROJECT
From
COLORADO WEST LEASING
To
JAMES MCARDLE
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.
/
2
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
/ I , • • <br />~1 <br />f <br />was to be placed. The contract document states that "The OWNER will stake the outer <br />limits of grading where deemed necessary." We had asked almost daily for stakes during <br />the first month of worts, and at least weekly since. For the first month it was always "next <br />week" and since then we get no response except apologies from Bill Colgate. Your letter <br />also notes the requirement that we stay with a time schedule. From this, all I can assume <br />is that staking was not deemed necessary by your staff. It also seems strange to me that <br />this area did not concern you until weeks after it was covered with dirt and we started to <br />argue about the additional topsoil piles that were not identified in the contract documents. <br />B. Your assertion that we wasted 2419 cubic yards of overburden absolutely can not <br />be substantiated. There were three people at the area at that time, Bill Colgate, Lance <br />Rundle and Chuck Smith. I have questioned all three. Lance and Chuck said possibly <br />50 to 100 cubic yards. Bill told me that it was only the soils on the very edge of the <br />highwall that were unsafe to retrieve. <br />Whereas the highwall on the east side had different configurations ranging from <br />gently rolling, to vertical and some undercut, the safety distance varied somewhat. <br />However, John Nelson in his frequent visits did not object to the pertormance in this area. <br />Rather, it was clearly agreed between Dana Lamm and John Nelson that the length of <br />a dozer would be the appropriate distance most of the time. <br />John Nelson was on-site numerous times during this stripping operation. It seems <br />odd to me that, if he thought that we weren't pertorming to contract specification, he <br />would have brought it to our attention at these times, instead of waiting until weeks after <br />completion of this operation. <br />My operators went beyond the bounds of safety numerous times to salvage topsoil <br />for this project, because topsoil is so rare on this job. We pertormed this task in <br />accordance with the contract specifications. <br />C. The compaction also was pertormed to the specification outline din the contract. It <br />likewise seems odd that it is weeks after completion that you voiced a concem. We will <br />provide the owner with a written guarantee. It is also unclear to us if the compaction <br />requirements outlined in this contract, and followed by us, will prevent all settling. <br />D. All weekly or daily progress reports wi11 be in John's hands before our next progress <br />payment request. <br />To conclude: If the Division of Minerals and Geology tells me to use the two <br />topsoil piles in question, we will do so. But be informed that we will document the Dozer <br />and Scrapertime used and will bill the Division in accordance with terms of the contract. <br />Sincerely, <br />P,,a~-- <br />Preston Mease <br />cc: David Turner, Williams, Tumer and Holmes, P.C. <br />Maggie Van Cleef <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.