Replies to post #23259 on Beacon Redevelopment Industrial Corp (BCND)

[hotdog1012]

Interesting and nice find - Question:

Doesn't this further Dominion's position that they've been leasing the storage under the acres, whether they produced or not?

Thus, if Dominion wants to claim control of the NG storage under Beacon's property, while they don't have to show production, they do have to show that they've honored the leasing agreement!!!

Wooohooo!!

[wannabanana]

It would seem to me that this milestone becomes case law and would play to Beacons advantage where it concerns rights on the storage aspect. 22 years could infuse a considerable amount of money to Beacon.

[nupapa]

Response from Adam about Dominion ruling:

Hi XXXX

I am aware of that district court decision. I do note that it may not be binding on others since it's not an appellate decision. I assume the plaintiff in that case will appeal.

Regardless, under the clear terms of the 1954 agreements with the prior property owner, Dominion presently has no rights to operate their storage facility on our land. If we choose to allow them to lease it or to purchase an easement, we will require language that protects our mineral rights.

Thank you for your interest in BCND.

Adam Marek, President
Beacon Redevelopment Industrial Corp.