Laserfiche WebLink
08/12/2001 15:38 FAX <br />Snell & Wilmer <br />L.L.P. <br />June 12, 2001 <br />Page 3 <br />~ 004/005 <br />Findings Comment 112. To the best of Powderhorn's recollection, the Boazd received no <br />testimony or evidence concerning the bases for issuance of the NOVs. The Board made no <br />findings and issued no directives concerning the bases for issuance of the NOVs. As a result, no <br />statutory or regulatory bases should be cited for finding that the NOVs were properly issued and <br />unabated. Powderhom believes that the only evidence and testimony entered by counsel for the <br />Division pertained to property conditions and limited irrelevant testimony concerning Frontier. <br />Findings Comment 9s 4. 5 &6. Please see comments to Findings ¶2. <br />Findings Comment 117. Counsel for the Division would strike findings concerning evidence <br />actually presented to the Boazd. Powderhom offered testimony pertaining to its efforts to obtain <br />a replacement bond. Powderhom also submitted three Fortnightly Reports into evidence, which <br />describe certain of these efforts. Counsel to the Division offered no evidence or testimony to put <br />in question the efforts undertaken by Powderhor. In addition, the information pertaining to the <br />bankruptcy challenged by counsel to the Division actually is contained in the NOVs. After a full <br />day of hearing, the Board cleazly expressed its intent to have the parties work together. Counsel <br />for the Division would have the order read in a manner that supported its views, rather than those <br />of the Boazd, completely nullifying the spirit and intent of the views expressed by the Boazd. <br />The language contained in pazagraph 11 of the proposed order is reflective of the Boazd's <br />demeanor at the hearing. <br />Findings Comment ¶ 8. There is no need to change these findings. <br />Order Comment 4 1. There is no basis in the record for the order suggested by counsel to the <br />Division. <br />Order Comment 112. There is no basis in the record for the order suggested by counsel to the <br />Division. See Findings Comment ¶2, above. <br />Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Linden letters. Powderhom looks <br />forward to continuing to work with the parties to resolve this matter such that reclamation will <br />not be jeopazdized at the Powderhom properties. Please do not hesitate to contact ma should you <br />13b69.1 <br />