Laserfiche WebLink
- Y~ <br />BEFORE THE MINED LAND RECLAMATION BOARD ,,,,,,, ,, ~, ~ ,c,~o^ <br />STATE OF COLORADO , . ~^' "~ ~'~~~`' <br />RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS KING MOUNTAIN GRAVEL, <br />LLC'S CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS APPLICATION, PERMIT NO. M-1978-314 <br />IN THE MATTER OF THE RECONSIDERATION OF AN APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL <br />OF A SECTION 112 RECLAMATION PERMIT, KING MOUNTAIN GRAVEL, LLC, FILE <br />NUMBER M-1978-314 <br />King Mountain Gravel, LLC ("King Mountain") submits its Response in Opposition to <br />the Motion to Dismiss filed by the Sleeping Lion Ranch d/b/a Bar-A-Ranch, LLC, ER Ranch, <br />LLC, and Egeria Park, LLC (collectively, the "Objectors"). For the reasons stated below, King <br />Mountain respectfully requests that the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board ("Board") <br />deny the Motion to Dismiss, and allow this matter to proceed to the scheduled January 10-11, <br />2007 Board hearing on King Mountain's financial warranty.t <br />BACKGROUND <br />This matter involves a gravel mine in Routt County, Colorado that the Board authorized <br />over twenty-eight years ago. On November 22, 1978 the Board issued a Section 110 Permit <br />authorizing limited impact gravel mining on less than ten acres under Colo. Rev. Stat. § 34-32- <br />110 (now § 34-32.5-I 10 ("Section 110")). On September 10, 2004, King Mountain became the <br />authorized operator of the gravel mine. Two months later -and nearly three decades after the <br />Boazd authorized the mine -King Mountain applied to the Board for a Section 112 Permit to <br />convert the mine to an up to 341 acre mine under the Colorado Land Reclamation Act for the <br />Extraction of Construction Materials ("Act"), Colo. Rev. Stat. § 34-32.5-1 ]2 ("Section ] 12"). <br />The Board approved King Mountain's application on March I5, 2005, and authorized King <br />Mountain to enlarge the mine under a Section 112 Permit, contingent on King Mountain filing a <br />financial warranty within one year. <br />THE BOARD HAS JURISDICTION TO AUTHORIZE <br />A 28-YEAR OLD MINE TO EXPAND <br />The Objectors claim that the Board does not have "subject matter jurisdiction" to <br />consider a request from an operator of a decades-old mine to expand that mine unless that <br />operator has held the permit for two years. They assert that Section 110(5}(a} of the Act <br />"prohibits the conversion of a Section 110 permit to a Section 112 permit until the <br />operator/applicant has conducted the related gravel pit operation for at least two consecutive <br />~ The Board has scheduled a hearing on January ] 0-] ], 2007 to consider King Mountain's financial warranty. This <br />Response addresses the Objectors' Motion to Dismiss, and does not address matters scheduled for hearing on <br />January ] 0-] ], 2007. <br />