My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1994-07-28_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981017
>
1994-07-28_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/4/2021 10:55:39 AM
Creation date
5/1/2012 10:05:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981017
IBM Index Class Name
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Doc Date
7/28/1994
Doc Name
Confirmation of Resources Chapter 11 plan and receipt sale of a number of assets
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 /> July 28 , 1994 <br /> Page 5 <br /> including the Division, "shall receive no other payment under the <br /> Plan. . " <br /> In short, under the Plan the MLRB receives certain funds, <br /> and Resources is left with no assets and no operating business . If <br /> the funds are properly administered, there should be enough money <br /> to fully perform the approved reclamation plan. If the reclamation <br /> plan is not fully performed, Resources will not have a bankruptcy <br /> discharge, but on the other hand Resources will have retained no <br /> property which could be used to satisfy any remaining liability. <br /> The Division has filed litigation against Resources' <br /> parent corporation and certain officers, directors, and employees <br /> (the "Reclamation Defendants" ) , seeking to impose liability for the <br /> cost of reclaiming Resources' mine . While the Reclamation <br /> Defendants have denied liability, that issue has not yet been <br /> adjudicated in the pending litigation. To the extent that the <br /> Division asserts that the Reclamation Defendants are liable for any <br /> bond deficiency, they are necessarily concerned about any actions <br /> by the Division which would expend Resources' reclamation funds <br /> needlessly and create a reclamation "deficiency" where none needs <br /> to exist . <br /> I met several days ago with the attorney for the <br /> Reclamation Defendants, Joel Cantrick, to discuss the Division' s <br /> current position regarding the implementation of the reclamation <br /> plan, and it is my understanding that he will be communicating with <br /> you regarding the position of the Reclamation Defendants . <br /> Immediate Concerns <br /> With the above comments as background, Resources has a <br /> number of immediate concerns, as follows. <br /> Site Maintenance. On January 31, 1994 , I wrote you a <br /> letter stating, in part, that <br /> If [the MLRB] wants to control the funds which Resources <br /> is making available for reclamation, Resources must yield <br /> responsibility for interim maintenance because Resources <br /> no longer will control any funds which could be used for <br /> that purpose . <br /> In addition, once the Board has taken control of the <br /> project, it will be in possession of the site through its <br /> own contractors . Those contractors will be in the best <br /> position to look after interim maintenance . Moreover, <br /> some interim maintenance issues may arise as a result of <br /> disturbances created by the Board' s contractor, and <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.