My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2000-05-24_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981037
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981037
>
2000-05-24_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981037
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/28/2021 8:06:54 PM
Creation date
11/29/2011 8:20:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981037
IBM Index Class Name
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Doc Date
5/24/2000
Doc Name
MLRB Transcript
To
DRMS
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
Email Name
DAB
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
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
1 <br />1 <br />1 <br />5 <br />1 be on the ground. <br />2 We had what we feel to be fairly <br />3 extensive communication with the Corley Company, and we <br />4 thought we had been meeting most of their needs. The <br />5 project design focuses on the reconstruction and <br />6 relocation of a road that traverses through the site. <br />7 The road serves not only this site but an uphill <br />8 landowner as well as an adjacent mine -- active mine <br />9 operation. This road services a fan at the operation <br />10 next door. <br />11 We also were hoping to have some money <br />12 available to address some very significant erosion <br />13 concerns on the site other than at the road location. <br />14 Our staff worked on the design and did some detailed <br />15 land surveys and did some hydrologic surveys on the <br />16 ground, and our staff engineer -- professional. <br />17 engineer, civil engineer put together what we believe <br />18 to be an absolutely outstanding design. <br />19 The road crosses a drainage that's <br />20 subject to extensive erosion, and we felt like this <br />21 needed detailed attention and that we should not <br />22 undershoot the design in any way at this facility. <br />23 Project went to bid in April. We <br />24 received what we thought was an outstanding bid, <br />25 approximately $40,000, to do the job, and there was <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.