My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL42022
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL42022
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:10:28 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 11:33:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981037
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
9/20/1993
From
CORLEY CO
To
DMG
Permit Index Doc Type
GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE
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.
Page 1 of 1
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
„ iii iiiiiiiiii~~i iii <br />The Corley Company <br />Pone 6]25050 P.O. Boa 1821 <br />COLD RnDO SP RING S.COLORaD08090~ <br />Sept. 19, 1993 <br /> <br />, v.010cJ}' <br />Mr. Dane.?.l I. I!err•andez <br />Division of Minerals & Geology <br />1313 Sherman St. <br />Denver CO 80203 <br />Dear Mr. Hernandez: <br />At the last Mired Land Reclamation Board meeting, I believe that the <br />statement was made that the Weckerling, dba Canon Coal Corp., bonds had <br />apparently been replaced by the GEC bonds. I•Jhat i s the basis for <br />believing that the bond; have been replaced? Is there any record of the <br />release of the bonds? <br />Prior to Larry Routten's bicycle accident, he said that the Division had <br />iourrd the $15,000 Weckerling bond, probably bond no. M908225, but had <br />lost the other bond, probably bond no. 235623L. <br />Pursuant to rule 3.02.4(2)(a)(i and ii) replacement of the above bonds <br />by GEC bonds would leave required the liability accrued to he transferred <br />to the replacement bonds. Is there any inclusion of leckerling <br />liability in any of the GEC bonds? Further, rule 2.08.6 provides fer <br />transfer, assignment or sale of permit rights. We are unaware that any <br />of 2.08.6 requirements Caere met by GEC. There was certainly succession <br />of c+pPrators in practice, but was there a formal succession of operators <br />in writing? <br />We have not had any reply to our Harrison Western Orphan Pit liability <br />question. <br />Sincerely, <br />(.U~~ <br />W.D. Corley, <br />President <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.