Laserfiche WebLink
<br />E. Whether the District Court improperly affirmed the issuance of a <br />reclamation permit despite the fact that the applicant failed to prepare an adequate <br />engineering evaluation to satisfy § 34-32.5-115(1)(e), C.R.S. <br />F. Whether the District Court improperly affirmed the issuance of a <br />reclamation permit despite the fact that the applicant failed to demonstrate that the <br />blasting from the mining operation would not adversely affect the stability of the <br />District's significant, valuable, and permanent manmade structures as required by <br />§ 34-32.5-115(4)(e), C.R.S. <br />G. Whether the District Court erred as a matter of law in finding that the <br />MLRB's factual findings need merely be supported by some rational evidence <br />rather than by substantial evidence, as is required by § 24-4-106(7), C.R.S. <br />III. TRANSCRIPTS <br />No hearings were held before the District Court. A transcript of the MLRB <br />hearing held December 14, 2005 has been produced as part of the District Court <br />Record. <br />IV. IDENTIFICATION OF COUNSEL <br />Kim J. Seter, Esq., No. 14294 <br />Seter & Vander Wall, P.C. <br />7400 E. Orchard Rd., Suite 3300 <br />5 <br />