My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE33957
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE33957
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:44:09 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 1:58:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981041
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
6/8/2001
Doc Name
MEMO COMMENTS FROM POWDERHORN ON PROPOSED BOARD ORDER
From
NATURAL RESOURCES & ENVIRONMENT SECTION
To
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
Violation No.
CV2000010
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
OF'COIO Q <br />x rt <br />} X876 ~` <br />ICEN SALAZAR <br />Attorney General <br />CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO <br />ChieF Deputy Attorney General <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DEPARTMENT OF LAW <br />OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL <br />A L.4N .1. GILBERT <br />Solicitor General <br />June 8,2001 <br />TO: Mark Held <br />MEMORANDUM <br />Assistant Attorney General <br />Business and Licensing Section <br />FROM: Cheryl A. Linden 1~1d/. <br />First Assistant Atto~rtey General <br />Natural Resources and Environment Section <br />RE: Comments from Powderhom on proposed Board Order <br />III IIIIIIIIIIIII III <br />999 <br />STA"rE SERVICES BUILDING <br />1525 Sherman Street - 5th Floor <br />Denver Colorado 8020; <br />Phone 303 866-4500 <br />FAX 303 866-5691 <br />I have reviewed the comments and suggested changes to the proposed order in the <br />Powderhom Coal Company matter submitted by Bob Comer, Powderhom's attorney, on June 7, <br />2001. I have the following comments and objections to his proposed additions to the order: <br />FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW <br />Mr. Comer suggests stating in paragraph ~ that Frontier "has deferred its right" to a <br />hearing on suspension of its license. Nothing in the record supports that Frontier has <br />deferred its right to a hearing. The waiver executed by Frontier states that Frontier <br />"agrees without protest to the entry of the foregoing Order of Summary Suspension <br />without a hearing and understands that a hearing will be scheduled only upon written <br />application by the undersigned." There is no evidence in the record that Frontier has <br />made written application for a hearing or any other indication that Frontier has done <br />anything other than waive its right to a heazing on the suspension of its license. <br />The proposed changes to pazagraph 12 concern whether the Boazd agrees to stipulate <br />to a stay in the event Powderhom seeks judicial review of the Boazd's order. This <br />issue is for the Board to decide. The Division's only comment is that the director <br />made it cleaz in his remarks to the Boazd that any stay is up to the Boazd. Thereafter, <br />the Boazd does not specifically make a decision on whether to stay any future <br />litigation. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.