My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-10-25_REVISION - C1981033
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981033
>
2010-10-25_REVISION - C1981033
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:26:10 PM
Creation date
10/27/2010 12:59:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981033
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
10/25/2010
Doc Name
Power Pole Retention (email)
From
DMEA
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
SL4
Email Name
JJD
SB1
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.
/
4
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
It is not clear to the Division whether Oxbow owns a portion of the flat facilities area, as shown on Map 1, Surface <br />Ownership Map, or just leases the land from Arch, as it apparently leases the right to use the bridge. The Division would <br />appreciate if someone could clarify this point. <br />The Division agrees with Arch's position concerning the fence. The fence is mine related in the sense that the installation <br />of the fence was tied to the mine's existence and Arch, as property owner, has requested that the fence be removed. <br />The Division is assuming that all of the fence is on Arch property. If this is not correct, please advise the Division. BCC will <br />need to get a letter from Arch, for insertion through a minor revision into the Bear No. 3 Mine permit application, that <br />documents Arch's wishes concerning the fence. <br />This minor revision will need to be approved before the proposed decision for SL-4 is made. <br />The Division has requested BCC to contact DMEA concerning the retention or removal of the remaining power poles. As <br />an additional request, whichever company owns the land where the power poles are in place should inform the Division <br />as to their preference for retention or removal of the power poles. BCC should get documentation, for insertion into <br />their permit application through a minor revision, from that company concerning the final disposition of the power <br />poles. This minor revision will need to be approved before the proposed decision for SL-4 is made. <br />Finally, the Division is in agreement with Arch's plan to install a gate and fence on the town side of the bridge in order to <br />restrict access. The installation would not require permitting action with the Division. Of course, the details would need <br />to be worked out for all parties concerned. <br />This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. <br />For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email <br />This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. <br />For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.