APPCOR12147 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

thirty days. (See C.R.S. §34-32-106, Duties of the board, specifically, C.R.S. §34-32- 106(1)(e) "Perform such other duties as are required pursuant to article 33 of this title") As noted by the Colorado Supreme Court in Industrial Comm. v. Plains Utility Co., 127 Colo. 506, 259 P.2d 282, 286 (1953), "It is almost universally recognized that the jurisdiction of the subject matter cannot be waived, nor can it ever be conferred by agreement " Yet, that is precisely what Trend is attempting to accomplish. In light of the reasoning and decision of the Colorado Supreme Court in both Industrial Comm. v. Plairu Uliliry Co. and People v. Cuentl:er, neither the Board or Trend can (as attempted by Mr. Granberg's letter of October 09, 1990 (See Exhibit "E")) bestow upon this statutorily created body, jurisdiction in excess of the appellate jurisdiction conferred upon the Board by the legislature of the State of Colorado pursuant to C.R.S. §34-33-119 and specifically C.R.S. §34-33-119(5). In this case now before the Board on appeal, the failure to hold the formal hearing on or before October 28, 1990, resulted in the expiration of the Board's statutorily conferred appellate jurisdiction and consequently this appeal must be dismissed and the Operator's permit (as approved by the Division pursuant to C.R.S. §34-33-101, et seq., must be issued without further delay. CONCLUSION It is apparent from the above recitation of facts, cited case law and statutes that Trend has failed to properly and/or timely initiate and/or process this appeal. Conse- quently, this appeal of the proposed decision of the Division to approve the Operator's application for permit to conduct coal mining and reclamation operations must be dismissed and the Operator's permit must be issued without further delay. Respectfully submitted, Doris A. Waters Attorney for William T. Davis, Rimrock Coal 5353 W. Dartmouth Ave. Suite #500 Denver, CO 80227 (303) 989-6655 6