ENFORCE31823 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~~~~fV ~~ ~~~ BEFO THE MINED LAND RECLAMATION BOARD.~U~ 1 ~ 200 STATE OF COLORADO Division of Reclamation, M ~ ~ Mining and Safety IN THE MATTER OF COTTER CORPORATION'S APPEAL OF FINAL DETERMINATION OF DESIGNATED MINING OPERATION STATUS FOR THE JD-6, JD- 8, AND JD-9 URANIUM MINES, FILE NUMBERS M-1977-3JA, M-1984-014, M-1977-306, and IN THE MATTER OF ENERGY MINERALS LAW CENTER'S APPEAL OF FINAL DIVISION DETERMINATION REJECTING DESIGNATED MINING OPERATION STATUS FOR THE SSM-18 MINE, FILE NUMBER M-1978-116 ~~ APPELLANTS' BRIEF IN SUPPORT REQUEST THAT THE BOARD FIND THAT THE SM-18 URANIUM MINE IS A DESIGNATED MINING OPERATION Through undersigned counsel, Information Network for Responsible Mining (INFORM), Colorado Environmental Coalition, and the San Juan Citizens Alliance (collectively "appellants") hereby submit this response to Cotter Corporation's submission of additional ~ information regarding Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety's ("Division" or "DBMS") !!! March 2006, final determination that the SM-18 mine does not meet the legal criteria for a "designated mining operation" ("DMO"). Exh. 1 (March 2006 non-DMO determination); C.R.S. § 34-32-103(3.5)(a). The present appeal requests the Board to adopt of the Division's original, correct July, 2005 factual findings and the legal determination that the toxic and acid-forming materials at the SM-18 mine satisfy the DMO criteria of the Mined Land Reclamation Act. Exh. 2 (July 2005 DMO Determination). I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF APPEAL This matter may be resolved by the Boazd's adoption the factual findings of the Division that confirmed the presence, exposwe, and distwbance of toxic and acid forming materials at the SM- 18 wanium mine, which requires a valid Section ] 12 permit to operate. Exh. 2 (July 2005 DMO Determination). No party has challenged the Division's factual finding that uranium mining has and will expose toxic and acid forming materials at the SM-18 uranium mine. Id. Rather, Division has accepted Cotter Corporation's contention that anon-DMO determination may be based on an analysis limited to likelihood of groundwater violations. Exh. 1 (March 2006 non-DMO determination). The Division reversed it previous position despite the admitted distwbance of such materials and despite the stringent standard for exemptions available only to 110 Operations where "that acid- or toxic-producing materials will not be used, stored, or disturbed in quantities sufficient to adversely affect any person, any property, or the environment...." 34-32-I 12.5(2).