Laserfiche WebLink
Moreover, exclusion of the letters was at most harmless error. The <br />suitability of the Bench 1 substitute soil was determined under TR -57, and that <br />finding was not appealed, as discussed below. The Board also heard extensive <br />testimony from Ms. Turner and Michael Morgan about the contents of the letters. <br />R. 7341:25- 7342:10; 7344:7 -13; 7349: 2 -9; 7377:16 -19; 7384: 13 -19; 7394:25— <br />7394:11; 7406: 17- 7407: 10. In addition, the gist of the letters, which concerns <br />the "land class capability" of Barx soil, is not relevant under the prime soil <br />regulations. 2 CCR 407 -2, Rule 4.25.4 does not require that "other suitable <br />material ", in this case Bench 1 material, be a particular land class capability <br />category. Thus, exclusion of the letters from NRCS was proper. <br />II. THE BOARD'S APPROVAL OF PR -6 WAS A PROPER RESPONSE <br />TO THE PRE -2008 TOPSOIL MANAGEMENT OF WESTERN <br />FUELS - COLORADO. <br />Plaintiffs identify as a "central issue in this case" that the Board did not <br />"take any action to address prime farmland violations of [the Colorado Coal <br />Program] which occurred prior to February, 2008." Opening Brief at 13. The <br />plaintiffs contend that because of these alleged violations of the Colorado Coal <br />Program no permit revisions are legally allowed. The heading of plaintiffs' <br />argument states that the Board erred by failing to order Western Fuels - Colorado to <br />import soil from other locations to aid in the reclamation of the Morgan Property. <br />100145923 2 } 17 <br />