Laserfiche WebLink
14. The Respondent presented evidence that it did not stockpile overburden in the azea in <br />question. The Respondent azgues that it excavated the material from its mining <br />operation to use as fill for the azea in question. The Respondent argues, in essence, <br />that the material is part of the construction material it excavated and that its end use is <br />to improve drainage on the area in question. <br />15. The issue is whether the material in question is overburden or construction material. <br />16. C.R.S. § 34-32.5-103(17) defines overburden as earth and other materials that lie <br />above natural minerals and includes earth and other materials that are disturbed from <br />their natural state in the process of extracting construction materials. <br />17. Overburden is excavated and temporarily stockpiled for future use in reclamation. <br />Section 116(4)(1) prohibits the Respondent from stockpiling the material outside of <br />the permit area. <br />18. C.R.S. § 34-32.5-103(3) defines Construction Material as rock, clay, silt, sand, gravel, <br />limestone, dimension stone, marble, or shale extracted for use in the production of <br />nonmetallic construction products. <br />19. The purpose of mining operations is to excavate construction material to be removed <br />from the permit area and used in construction. If the material's final use damages <br />lands outside the permit azea, that is of no concern to the Division or the Board <br />because its final use is not regulated under the reclamation permit. <br />20. The Respondent spread the material over an area estimated at five acres. <br />Customarily, mine operators stockpile overburden in one or more large piles. It is <br />unduly expensive and damaging to spread overburden. The Respondent's witness <br />testified that it applied the material to improve drainage. This evidence supports the <br />