2018-11-15_REVISION - C1980007 (7)

Home Browse Search

Applicant testified that the Objectors' proposal would prolong surface disturbances because it would require building and using new roads earlier than necessitated by the progression of mining. According to the Applicant, Objectors' access to private land during the site visit was unnecessary because there was no dispute that Objectors' proposal to relocate roads to private land was feasible, but undesirable for a variety of reasons. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 30. The Board has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to the Act. Sections 34-33-104, 34-33-105, 34-33-115, and 34-33-119, C.R.S, specifically provide the Board with jurisdiction over this matter. 31. The Division and Board have the full power and authority to carry out and administer the provisions of this article. C.R.S. § 34-33-104. 32. Under section 34-33-114(1), C.R.S., the Applicant "for a permit or for a revision of a permit has the burden of establishing that such application is in compliance with all the requirements of [the Act]." 33. No application may be approved unless the application meets the requirements of subsections of sections 34-33.114(2) and 34-33-115(i)(b), C.R.S. The Application is accurate and gontains all informatipn required by the Act and Rules. ' E 34. Section 34-33-118, C.R.S. requires public notice of an application for a permit revision and provides a thirty -day period after the last publication of the notice for any person having an interest that is or may be adversely affected by a decision to submit written comments or objections to the Division. Those submitting comments or objections may also request an informal conference and, upon request from those objecting or commenting, the Division may arrange access to the proposed mining area to gather information necessary for the informal conference. Id. Rule 2.07.3(6)(b)(iii) also provides that the applicant shall not restrict the visitors' access to "those portions of the proposed mine plan area necessary for the gathering of information relevant to the conference." The Board concludes that Objectors were provided with the opportunity to comment on the Application in accordance with section 34-33-118, and that the Division properly arranged for both an informal conference and a site visit. Further, the Board concludes that the Objectors were not denied access to areas where information necessary to the informal conference could be gathered. It was not necessary for Objectors to access private property during the site visit to assess impacts related to the possible location of access roads. Mountain Coal Company, LLC. West Elk Mine 1 C-198-007