Laserfiche WebLink
precedent that there is no private right of action to appeal Division enforcement decisions. <br />See Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order in the Matter of Abbot Ready Mix, File <br />No. M-1975-049. <br />6. There are provisions in the Act and Construction Materials Rules for internal administrative <br />review, including hearings before the Board, to protect legal interests covered by the Act. <br />For example, Construction Materials Rule 1.7 sets forth a process for persons to submit <br />written comments and to become parties to permit application, amendment and revision <br />procedures. It is not known if ULP participated in ZMK's permit application process, but <br />ULP had that opportunity under the Construction Materials Rules. Construction Materials <br />Rule 4.18 specifically authorizes any person who would be adversely affected by a warranty <br />release to object to a request for a warranty release. ULP will have an opportunity to object <br />to any such wan•anty release in the future. The Act contains no explicit authority for private <br />or third party review of Division enforcement decisions. <br />7. In a similar context, the Colorado Surface Coal Mining Reclamation Act specifically <br />confers on private citizens the right to participate in formal adjudications before the Board <br />involving enforcement actions. Section 34-33-124(1), C.R.S. (2003). No such authority is <br />contained in the Construction Materials Act. <br />8. The Division is charged with inspecting mining operations, investigating possible violations <br />and pursuing enforcement actions against mine operators. ULP's interest is therefore <br />protected by and aligned with the Division's interests. <br />