Laserfiche WebLink
true impact of the proposed mining and blasting operations may not have been <br />properly assessed, especially as to the new, state-of--the-art Black Hawk-Central <br />City Sanitation District Wastewater Treatment Plant. <br />The MLRB's erroneous and unsupported interpretations in these two <br />significant areas were perhaps carelessly condoned by the district court's <br />affirmation of the grant of the Permit in a brief and uninformative order. Yet, <br />neither the MLRB's decision nor the decision of the district court need be given <br />deference here. Washington County Bd. of Equalization v. Petrov Development <br />Co., 109 P.3d 146, 150 (Colo. 2005). The Court may, as a matter of law, <br />unreservedly apply the plain meaning of the statutes and rules at issue here, and <br />doing so will require the district court's decision to be reversed and the MLRB's <br />decision to be vacated. <br />V. Argument <br />A. Standard of Review <br />The question of whether the MLRB correctly interpreted the applicable <br />Construction Materials Rules and provisions of the Reclamation Act•is a question <br />of law, subject to de novo review by this Court. C Bar H, Inc. v. Board of Health <br />in and for Jefferson County, 56 P.3d at 1192. Further, because the review in the <br />district court was limited to reviewing the evidence and testimony presented to the <br />iz <br />