My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2013-01-29_REVISION - C1981008
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981008
>
2013-01-29_REVISION - C1981008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 5:12:31 PM
Creation date
2/20/2014 7:55:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981008
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
1/29/2013
Doc Name
Paintiffs Opening Brief 2010 CV 548
From
Christopher G. McAnany Dufford, Waldeck, Milburn & Krohn, LLP
To
District Court, Montrose County Colorado
Type & Sequence
PR6
Email Name
DAB
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.
/
36
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
TABLE OF CONTENTS <br />Page No. <br />I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND ............. ............................... 1 <br />II. RECORD FACTS .......................... ............................... 7 <br />a. Improper Removal and Soil Handling on the Morgan <br />Property............................... ............................... 8 <br />b. Improper Use of an Inferior Topsoil Substitute to Cover a <br />Topsoil Deficit ....................... ............................... 9 <br />C. Inadequate Attention to Post - mining land -use, Topography <br />andIrrigation ......................... ............................... 11 <br />III. ARGUMENT ................................ ............................... 12 <br />1. THE BOARD ACTED UNLAWFULLY BY FAILING TO <br />ORDER THE RETURN OF PRIME SOILS ........................... 13 <br />a. Defining Prime Farmland Soils .... ............................... 14 <br />b. Procedural Requirements for Operations on Prime Farmland 16 <br />C. Operational Requirements for Prime Farmlands ............... 19 <br />d. The Board Could Not Legally Approve PR6 Because WFC <br />Was Mining in Violation of SCMRA ........................... 20 <br />2. THE BENCH ONE SOIL IS NOT EQUIVALENT IN QUALITY <br />TO THE BARX SOIL ..................... ............................... 23 <br />a. The Board Erred in Excluding Evidence Showing that <br />Bench One Material is Inferior .. ............................... 25 <br />b. PR 6 Fails to Assure Mandated Replacement Soil Depths.. 27 <br />3. PR6 FAILS TO ASSURE THAT IRRIGATED FARMING CAN <br />BE RESTORED POST - MINING ........ ............................... 28 <br />III. CONCLUSION ............................... ............................... 30 <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.