|
05/31/2006 11:22 7192751715
<br />
<br />CONST SERVICES BLDG PAGE 03
<br />Motion for Continuance
<br />Permit Application No. N1-2005-080
<br />Pagc 2 of 7
<br />2.a. On Apri126, 2006, Objectors' counsel, Sheela S. Stack, submitted a request
<br />for all ofthe DMG document images for Petxnit File No. M-2005-08U. On Apri126, 2006, Ms.
<br />Stack personally picked up a copy of the document imaging CD from Mr. Tim Dupler at the DMG
<br />ofce at 1313 Sherman Street, Denver, Colorado. The last document imaged on the CD was the Pre-
<br />Heating Cotnference PHCO from Kate Pickford to Ran Cattany dated April 17, 2006.
<br />2.b. On May 18, 2006, Objectors' counsel, Sheela S. Stack, met with Mr. Dupler
<br />to obtain copies of any documents submitted by any party or interested persons in Permit File No.
<br />M-2005-080 a8er April 17, 2006, the date of the last document on the April 26, 2006 CD. Mr,
<br />Dopler provided three additional documents to Objectors' counsel: (1) Ms. Angela Ballaz~toni's, o£
<br />Environmental Alternatives, Inc. ("EAI"), correspondence to Kate Pickford dated May 2, 2006 re:
<br />Allen Drilling and Excavating File No. M-2005-080 Response to Apn1125, 2006 Adequacy Review;
<br />(2)DMG's Rationale forRecommendation forApprvval Over Objections; Regular 112 Construction
<br />Materials New Application, Allen Drilling and Excavating Co., Inc., File No. M-2005-080, dated
<br />May 5, 2006; and (3) Notice to Parties and Interested Persons to the Allen Pit Permit Application
<br />re:Pre-heating Conference and Formal Public Hearing for Allen Pit, Permit No. M-2005-080, dated
<br />May 8, 2006.
<br />2.c. On May 22, 2006, Objectors' counsel, Sheela S. Stack, spoke with Kate
<br />Pickford in the Durango Field Office ofthe DMG to confirm that the copies furnished to Ms. Stack
<br />was a complete copy of the DMG's file for Permit No. M-2005-080. Objectors' counsel, Sheela S.
<br />Stack, inquired as to the discrepancy ]n the date of the 18` Adequacy Review, dated Apri15, 2006 and
<br />fiA1's response dated flay 2, 2006. Ms. Pickford explained that there had been in fact three separate
<br />adequacy reviews completed and three separate responses by Applicant and the May 2, 2006
<br />response was to die 3~ Adequacy Review. Ms. Pickford explained that all documents received in
<br />the Durango field office and/ot tine Denver office are scanned into an electronic database and then
<br />the original document is archived. Ms. Pickford told Ms. Stack that the Denver office of the DMG
<br />may be behind ui scanning documents to the electronic database. On May 22, 2006, Ms. Pickford
<br />faxed the 2'~ Adequacy Review and Applicant's response to the 2nd Adequacy Review and the 3,d
<br />Adequacy Review and Applicant's response to the 3`d Adequacy Review to Objectors' counsel. Tine
<br />1" Adequacy Review was not included in the fax from Ms. Pickford. The document imaging CD
<br />Ms. Stack obtained on Apri126, 2006 anal the documents obtained &-om Mr. Dupler on May 18, 2006
<br />did not include (1) Applicant's response to the 1" Adequacy Review, dated April 14, 2006; (2) The
<br />2"d Adequacy Review, dated April 17, 2006; (3) Applicant's response to the 2"d Adequacy Review,
<br />dated April l7, 2006; and (3) The 3`d Adequacy Review, dated Apri125, 2006.
<br />2.d. On May 23, 2006, Ms. Pickford faxed to Objectors' counsel, Sheela S. Stack,
<br />the 1" Adequacy Review, dated April 14, 2006.
<br />
|