Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Construction Materials Rules and Regulations (the "Rules") and C.R.S. X34-32.5-117(3), within <br />one year of such approval. The Applicant failed to timely submit a financial warranty. <br />Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 1.6.5(1), the Applicant is required to re-notice the Permit <br />Conversion Application and the Board is required to reconsider its prior approval of the same. <br />In its reconsideration of the Permit Conversion Application, however, the Board should <br />be concerned about more than just the Applicant's financial wherewithal. Specifically, under the <br />Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act (the "Act"), the state legislature declared that one of the <br />reasons for its enactment is the protection of environmental, wildlife and aquatic resources, and <br />the protection and promotion of the health, safety and general welfare of Colorado residents. In <br />particular, the General Assembly stated: <br />It is the further intent of the general assembly by the enactment of this article to <br />conserve natural resources, to aid in the protection of wildlife and aquatic <br />resources, to establish agricultural, recreational, residential, and industrial sites, <br />and to protect and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the people of <br />this state. <br />C.R.S. §34-32.5-102(1). <br />The Board is charged with ensuring that those interests are promoted and protected. That <br />task is accomplished by, among other things, ensuring that operators, like the Applicant, are <br />trustworthy and reliable and abide by the terms of their mining permits in order to protect the <br />public, other operators and the environment. In that regard, C.R.S. §34-32.5-110(5)(a) prohibits <br />the conversion of a Section 110 permit to a Section 112 permit until the operator/applicant has <br />conducted the related gravel pit operation for at least two consecutive years. For the policy <br />reasons stated above, that makes sense. It gives the Board, the DMG and the operator sufficient <br />time to establish that the successor operator has the ability, experience and the financial stability <br />to manage the operation without harming the public, other operators, the envirorvnent and other <br />conservation efforts. <br />In this case, the Applicant operated the Gravel Pit for a mere two months before it <br />applied for a conversion of its permit in order to substantially increase the potential mined <br />acreage. As discussed below, that action clearly contravened the plain language of the statute. <br />Accordingly, because the Applicant cannot even submit its request for a conversion of its 1 l0 <br />Permit until, at the earliest, September 10, 2006 (i.e., two years after the date the Board approved <br />the transfer of the 110 Permit from Hewes to the Applicant), the Board did not have jurisdiction <br />to grant the Permit Conversion Application in March 2005, nor does it have jurisdiction now <br />even to begin the administrative and public processes attendant to its reconsideration. The <br />Ranches, therefore, request the Board to revoke its prior approval of the Permit Conversion <br />Application. <br />~~~De . az~osoioooom ~ zsazi~ ~~ 2 <br />