My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1994-05-12_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981017
>
1994-05-12_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/3/2021 8:03:50 AM
Creation date
4/30/2012 10:04:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981017
IBM Index Class Name
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Doc Date
5/12/1994
Doc Name
Telecopier Transmission
From
Office of General Counsel Mid-Continent Resources, Inc
To
DMG
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
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.
/
9
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
Cheryl A. Linden <br /> May 12, 1994 <br /> Page 3 <br /> Steve Seifert has advised that the Committee is willing <br /> to tell Mid-Valley to drop its development contingency or have <br /> the Committee withdraw its objection. My understanding is that <br /> the DMG wishes to maintain its objection. Thus, we apparently <br /> are faced with the loss of the only non-contingent offer on the <br /> rockdugt plant real estate. <br /> The DMG's objection mentions that Pitkin Iron <br /> Corporation has operated the rockdust plant, and states that the <br /> DMG objects "to the requirement that the debtor, and ultimately <br /> the Division, absorb the expense of any clean-up, and to the <br /> requirement that $40,000 be retained to ensure that such clean-up <br /> occurs. " <br /> There appears to be a bit of confusion concerning the <br /> Eubank holdback provision. Paragraph 17 of the contract provides <br /> for retention of $40,000 in escrow "to assure clean up and <br /> removal of structures, limestone, magnetite, and personal <br /> property as above provided. " if that work is not done, Eubank is <br /> authorized to do the work and be reimbursed at cost plus 15t from <br /> the escrow. <br /> Paragraph 12 of the contract requires Resources to <br /> remove, at its expense, "all limestone, magnetite, personal <br /> property, conveyors, and structures. . . . " The main structure, <br /> including machinery, and the storage tanks, building and <br /> facilities attached to the packwall aggregate plant must be <br /> removed within one year. Everything else, including the <br /> limestone and magnetite deposits, must be removed within six <br /> months. Paragraph 14 requires removal of "all trash piles, scrap <br /> metal, waste materials, and all other debris from the property" <br /> within six months. <br /> Pitkin Iron currently is removing the limestone and <br /> magnetite deposits from the property. Rather than view the <br /> deposits as waste materials, Pitkin views them as a valuable <br /> asset which belongs to Pitkin. <br /> I am advised that Pitkin Iron is milling to sign an <br /> agreement affirmatively obligating Pitkin to perform removal of <br /> the limestone and magnetite, as well as the removal of trash, <br /> scrap, waste materials, and debris as required by Paragraph 14, <br /> and indemnifying Resources from any loss under the Eubank <br /> contract caused by any failure to perform such removal. <br /> Even if Pitkin completed the removal of limestone, <br /> magnetite, and trash tomorrow, the holdback would remain under <br /> b"d 8OSS3l '8 H3G_1OH WJIO:S0 b6. 21 ),dW <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.