Laserfiche WebLink
the processes required by a city government, to obtain contractors' bid proposals <br />and complete the work required by the corrective action. <br />17. The Operator testified that it was in compliance with the current <br />reclamation plan and that the flood event was not contemplated in the prevailing <br />hydrologic balance when the reclamation plan was established. The Operator <br />testified that during the precipitation event, in addition to the rainfall, the South <br />Platte River was also receiving water from reservoirs in the area which were <br />dumping excess water. The Operator testified that the flood event that caused the <br />breach was not foreseeable, and the breach should not constitute a violation of <br />failing to maintain the prevailing hydrologic balance. <br />CONCLUSIONS OF LAW <br />18. The Board has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to the Colorado <br />Land Reclamation Act for the Extraction of Construction Materials, Article 32.5 of <br />Title 34, C.R.S. (2014) ("Act"). <br />19. Under section 34-32.5-116(4)(h), C.R.S., operators are required to <br />minimize the disturbance to the prevailing hydrologic balance in the surrounding <br />area. The flooding circumstances that resulted in the breach event were not <br />foreseeable. As such, the Operator did not fail to minimize the disturbance to the <br />prevailing hydrologic balance as required by the Act. <br />I' <br />Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Board <br />hereby finds that the Operator has not violated section 34-32.5-116(4)(h), C.R.S. <br />and, therefore, orders this matter DISMISSED. <br />DONE AND ORDERED this day of September 2015. <br />FOR THE COLORADO MINED LAND <br />RECLAMATION BOARD <br />Barbara Green, Vice Chair <br />Aggregate Industries — WCR, Inc. <br />M-1999-034 4 <br />