Laserfiche WebLink
BEFORE THE MINED LAND RECLAMATION BOARD <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />FILE C-84-065 <br />-------------------------------------- <br />FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSION OF LAW, AND BOARD ORDER <br />------------------------------------------------------------------- <br />IN THE MATTER OF AN OBJECTION TO THE DIVISION'S PROPOSED DECISION <br />TO APPROVE TECHNICAL REVISION NO. 9 TO THE NEW CASTLE MINE PERMIT <br />(NO. C-84-065) <br />------------------------------------------------------------------- <br />This matter comes before the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board <br />("the Board") on February 27, 1992 in Room 318 of the Centennial <br />Building at 1313 Sherman Street, Denver, Colorado upon a request by <br />Mr. Greg McKennis for a formal hearing to consider an objection to <br />the Mined Land Reclamation Division's ("the Division") proposed <br />decision to approve a technical revision to the New Castle Mine, <br />which is permitted by NCIG Financial Inc. ("NCIG"). The hearing <br />was held pursuant to the Colorado Surface Coal Mining Act, Section <br />34-32-101 et seq. <br />Board members James Cooley, Joseph Danni and Maxine Stewart were <br />present. Chairperson Luke Danielson presided over the hearing. <br />The hearing was held in accordance with C.R.S. 34-33-116(5) and <br />Rule 2.08.4(5)(b)(ii) of the Regulations of the Colorado Mined Land <br />Reclamation Board. <br />FINDINGS OF FACT <br />1. NCIG filed complete copies of an application for technical <br />revision number 9 ("TR-09") at the Division office and in the <br />Garfield County courthouse in accordance with Rule 2.08.4(5). <br />2. All of the information required by Rule 2.08.4(4) for permit <br />revision applications was on file for public review at the Garfield <br />County courthouse and at the Division office during the review <br />period in accordance with Rule 2.08.4(5). <br />3. The Division followed the procedures for review of TR-09 as <br />required by Rule 2.08.4(5) during the public comment period and <br />when it issued its proposed decision to approve TR-09. <br />