Laserfiche WebLink
18. Objector Bijou Irrigation presented testimony regarding concerns that <br /> Applicant's proposed mining plan called for quarterly water quantity and quality <br /> monitoring, which Bijou Irrigation argued was not frequent enough. Bijou <br /> Irrigation also presented testimony raising concerns with Applicant's reclamation <br /> plan, arguing that the site has little top soil, is dry and prone to erosion, and that <br /> the porosity of the sand would allow any contaminants dropped during mining to <br /> affect water quality in Empire Reservoir. Bijou Irrigation suggested mitigating <br /> most of those problems by requiring Applicant to import top soil as part of the <br /> reclamation plan. <br /> 19. The Division presented testimony regarding AM-01 and its review of <br /> the permit amendment application. No acidic or toxic materials will be mined or <br /> used in processing, and the inert material proposed for use in processing by <br /> Applicant will not degrade water quality at the site. The Applicant will implement <br /> a spill prevention control and countermeasures plan and a stormwater pollution <br /> prevention plan, which includes paving roads and parking areas as well directing <br /> flows from fueling areas to a settling and treatment pond. The Applicant had <br /> satisfied all of the Division's adequacy review requests, and AM-01 satisfied the <br /> requirements of the Act and the Rules. <br /> 20. The Division recommended approving the permit amendment <br /> application AM-01 over objections. <br /> CONCLUSIONS OF LAW <br /> 21. The Board has jurisdiction over Applicant and this matter pursuant to <br /> the Act. <br /> 22. Under section 34-32.5-115(4), C.R.S., "the applicant must comply with <br /> the requirements of this article and section 24-4-105(7), C.R.S." <br /> 23. Under Rule 1.4.1(10), the Applicant"has the burden of demonstrating <br /> that the application meets the minimum requirements of the Act, Rules, and <br /> Regulations." <br /> 24. Under Rule 2.8.1(1) and section 24-4-105(7), C.R.S., "the proponent of <br /> an order shall have the burden of proof." As the party initiating this matter by <br /> filing the Application, Applicant was the "proponent of an order" at the hearing and, <br /> therefore, has the burden to prove that the Application is consistent with applicable <br /> laws and rules, and should be approved by the Board. <br /> Black Mountain Sand Weld LLC <br /> Lost Creek Mine/M-2018-051 4 <br />