Laserfiche WebLink
<br />By statute, as indicated above, the Division and the MLRB have a more expansive obligation <br />to protect and promote the health, safety, and welfare of the people ojthe state The MLRB's <br />jurisdiction is further defined in C.R.S. 34-32-105 (4) as: <br />"The boardshall have jurisdicliar arrdanthority over all persons and <br />property, public acrd private, necessary to er force the provisions of <br />this article. " <br />Additionally, the powers of the MLRB specifically address land use issues: <br />"Ifthe operator's choice ofreclamauon is for the development ofthe <br />affected land for homesite. recrenGonal. industrial. or other uses. <br />inchrdirrg food, shelter, and ground cover for wildlife, the basic <br />murimum requirements necessaryfor reclamatiar shut! be agreed <br />upon by the operator and the board " [emphasis added] <br />The Mined Land Reclamation Act does preempt the authority of a local government to set <br />performance standards for mined land reclamation activities. C & M Sand and Gravel v Board of <br />County Cumm's, 673 P.2d 1013 (Colo. App. 1983). This limited preemption, however, does not <br />abrogate the MLRB's police power directive and authority regarding the people of the state. The <br />term "reclamation" is statutorily defined in C.R.S. 34-32-103 (13) as: <br />"Reclamation means the employment during and after a mining <br />operation of procedures reasonably desiQrred [o minimize ns much as <br />practicahle the disruption from the nrinin~operatiar and to provide <br />for the establishment of plant cover, stabihzatiou of the soil, the <br />protection of water resources, or other measures appropriate to the <br />srcbseguern bene rcial use o such a,[fected lrnrds. Reclamatiar sha/! <br />he conducted in accordance wrth the performance standards of [his <br />article. " [emphasis addedl <br />Mining operators are responsible for assuring that the mining and post-mining land use comply <br />with local land use regulations. C.R.S. 34-32-109 (6). Additionally, eligibility for a mining permit <br />from the MLRB is conditioned on the operator obtaining permission for the land use by the local <br />government. C K M.Sand and Grm~el v Board of County Comm's, 673 P.2d 1013 (Colo. App. <br />1983). However, the importance ofthe exercise and application ofpolice power ofthe Division and <br />MLRB regarding land use issues is heightened by their power to disregard local government <br />regulations. In Reber v. South Lakewood Sarr. Di.ct., 147 Colo.70, 362 P.2d 877 (1961), the <br />Colorado Supreme Court states that even without statutory direction, courts of last resort have <br />recognized that state authorized governmental subdivisions have the power to overrule or disregard <br />the restrictions of county or municipal zoning regulations. In light of this unbridled power, the <br />responsibility of the Division and the MLRB to protect and promote the health, safety, and general <br />welfare of the people of the state is paramount. <br />Accordingly I request that the MLRB, on behalf of the people of the state, specifically <br />addresses within the context of processing the Line Camp Pit reclamation permit, each and every <br />issue and all related issues raised by the public and interested parties, including: <br />Visual impacts, including the San Juan Skyway <br />Cumulative impacts of multiple gravel operations in the Dolores River Valley <br />2 <br />