Laserfiche WebLink
H. <br />FRONTIER'S LOSS OF ITS CERTIFICATE OF AUTHORITY CONSTITUTES <br />LOSS OF A LICENSE UNDER COLORADO REGULATIONS. <br />Powderhorn argues that holding a certificate of authority from the Department of <br />Treasury is only a requirement of federal law and that since Colorado is a primacy state, any <br />requirement for the certificate must be found in Colorado's regulation. Powderhorn asserts <br />that Colorado law does not require the certificate. Powderhom argues that the word <br />"license" as used in the coal regulations means license to do business in the state of <br />Colorado. The Division disagrees. Powderhorn's interpretation of the regulations is overly <br />restrictive. The term "license" includes the certificate of authority required by the <br />Department of Treasury. <br />Rule 3.02.4(2)(b)(v)(C) provides as follows: <br />Upon the incapacity of a surety by reason of bankruptcy, <br />insolvency, or suspension or revocation of its license, the <br />permittee shall be deemed to be without bond coverage in <br />violation of 3.02.1(2). The Division shall issue a notice of <br />violation against any permittee who is without bond coverage.... <br />If such a notice of violation is not abated in accordance with the <br />schedule, a cessation order shall be issued; or the Division shall <br />amend the relevant permit to include only those operation for <br />which any other or remaining bond liability is sufficient. <br />2 C.C.R 407-2, Rule 3.02.4(2)(b)(v)(C). <br />9 <br />