PERMFILE54217 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

BEFORE THE bILVED LAND RECLAbtATION BOARD STATE OF COLORADO FND(1VGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW. AND ORDER IN THE MATTER OF GRAND JUNCTION PIPE AND SUPPLY, S0.4RING EAGLE GRAVEL PIT, FILE NO. bI-99-03~, APPROVAL OF A 113 PERMIT APPLICATION THIS MATTER havine come before the boned Land Reclamation $oard {"the Board"} on June 22, 1999, for a hearing the Board makes the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and enters the following Order: FLNDL~IGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. On March 8. 1999, Grand Junction Pipe and Supply filed a 112 Permit Application, File No. M-99-025, to conduct a sand and gravel operation in Mesa County, Colorado, Sec. 35, T1N, R2W, Ute P.M. 2. One timely objection to the application was received by the Division of Minerals and Geology ("Division"). As a result, the Division held an Informal Conference on May 17, 1999. A[ the informal conference, the Division discussed the parties and the issues to be considered. 3. The matter was scheduled for the June 22-23, 1999, Board heazings. 4. On June 3, 1999, the Division issued a recommendation to the Board to approve the permit application. On June 7, 1999, the Division mailed its approval recommendation rationale to the parties, addressing the objections and concerns raised during the public comment period and informal conference phases. 5. On June 14, 1999, aPre-hearing Conference was held in Denver, Colorado, to verify the list of parties and to state the issues to be considered by the Board at the final hearing. James B. Cooley presided as the Pre-heazing Conference Officer designated by the Board. The one objecting party did not attend the Pre-hearing Conference. As a result of the Pre-hearing Conference, apre-hearing order was generated. 6. At the Pre-hearing Conference, Mr. Cooley determined that the issues raised by the objector were not within the jurisdiction of the Board. As such, Mr. Cooley denied the objector party status on the Grounds that the objector had not met the requirements for party status set out in the State Administrative Procedures Act, Section 24-4-10~(2)(c). Furthermore, blr. Cooley determined that there were no issues for the Board to consider at the Final Hearing. 7. The Applicant did not submit lists of possible witnesses and exhibits for the Final Hearing at the Pre-hearing Conference.