Laserfiche WebLink
<br />III III III III IIII III <br />999 <br />STATE ~O\` <br /> <br />OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />131 3 Sherman SL, Room 215 ry <br /> <br />Denver, ColoraAo 80207 I <br />~ <br /> <br />Phone: 13071 866-7 567 II <br />FAX: 130 31 8 3 2-81 06 <br /> DEPARTMENT OF <br /> NATURAL <br />September 29, 1994 RESOURCE <br />Dr. W.D. Corley co R~,e` <br />P.O. Box 1821 <br /> <br />Colorado Springs, CO 80901 lames5 Lcw hhead <br />Exec Wive olmc~nr <br /> M ¢hael B. land; <br />RE: GEC West Pit Reclamation o~~~,~~n onedn. <br />Dear Dr. Corley: <br />The Division received your September 30, 1994 letter. Since I <br />spoke with Anne last week, Phil Kessler has found additional work. <br />He will apparently be ready to begin the West Pit work on or about <br />the last week of October. Prior to that time, the Division would <br />like to conclude an agreement with you on the amended west Pit <br />agreement. However, if you are no longer interested in amending <br />the original agreement, which your letter indicates is a <br />possibility, the Division will instruct Mr. Kessler to proceed with <br />the work when his equipment is available. <br />Perhaps I can clarify two points of concern mentioned in your last <br />letter. First, as indicated in my September 19, 1994 letter, there <br />is money remaining from the forfeited GEC bond. I cannot say how <br />much money will remain after outstanding 'issues with the East Pit <br />contractor are resolved. However, the Division has agreed to set <br />aside $800 of the Harrison Western money. If you need <br />reaffirmation of this, you might contact Jim McArdle in our office <br />for the latest developments between the Division and the <br />contractor. <br />Your letter raised a concern about a new condition placed upon <br />expenditure of the $800. My previous letter indicated the funds <br />would probably be spent in association with an IML project. This <br />seems the most likely scenario since the $800 could be more <br />efficiently used when a contractor is already on site. This is <br />not, however a requirement. The proposed agreement does not place <br />any restriction on expenditure of the $800. It simply reflects the <br />fact that this project (RN-COAL-MINES-8, which is the Kessler job) <br />will be terminated once the West Pit work is completed. <br />