My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1993-01-14_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981017
>
1993-01-14_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2021 12:30:17 PM
Creation date
5/1/2012 9:46:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981017
IBM Index Class Name
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Doc Date
1/14/1993
Doc Name
Representative of the 3 major credit camps
From
Holden & Jessop, P.C.
To
Winston & Strawn, Fairfield & Woods, P.C. & Assist, Attorney Gen.
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.
/
11
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
Stephen W. Seifert <br /> January 13, 1993 <br /> Page 3 <br /> 390, 000 (let's call it $360, 000 ) . The estimates of value in my <br /> July 28 letter were $500-800, 000 for the industrial park and <br /> $300-500 for the fabrication shop. A copy of Mason & Morse's <br /> letter of December 15 is enclosed. That letter suggests <br /> subdividing the industrial park into 10 to 15 parcels. Bob <br /> Delaney agrees with Mason & Morse that this is the best way to <br /> maximize value. <br /> With respect to the rockdust plant, Resources has <br /> contacted people that it thought might be interested in the <br /> plant, and the only result is an offer from Pete Lien in the <br /> amount of $310, 000, which is for plant machinery only and <br /> excludes buildings and land. Cypress Coal also looked at the <br /> plant but no offer was received and we assume that their interest <br /> in a possible purchase has ended. Resources believes that it now <br /> makes sense to undertake a broader marketing program through a <br /> broker. Mike Ebert of M&E has expressed a desire to market the <br /> plant. If we proceed with Ebert, Resources needs the MLRD to <br /> agree on the retention and the terms of compensation. <br /> I am enclosing for your further review a memorandum of <br /> Bob Delaney, Resources ' counsel, dated December 28, 1992 , which <br /> describes the status of liquidation efforts from his perspective. <br /> This was transmitted directly by Delaney to Sanwa. <br /> Reclamation of mine site <br /> You will recall that a stumbling block at the November <br /> 5 meeting was the difficulty in coming up with a reliable <br /> estimate of the cost of reclaiming the mine. We still do not <br /> have all of the numbers worked out, but I wanted to discuss where <br /> we are in this regard. <br /> First, a brief review: the estimated cost of <br /> reclamation used in setting Resources' bond was $3, 000,000 . In <br /> estimating the amount of the bond, it was assumed that Resources <br /> would not perform the work and that the Mined Land Reclamation <br /> Division would have to contract out the work. Approximately <br /> $550,000 of the bond was allocated to contractors ' profit, <br /> performance bonds, insurance, and similar items. The direct <br /> costs of reclamation were estimated at $2 ,400, 000. <br /> Out of the $2,400,000 amount, $800, 000 was allocated <br /> for removal of structures. The sales and salvage contract with <br /> M&E requires M&E to remove, at its expense, all metallic <br /> structures (but not such structures ' concrete foundations) , which <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.