2006-12-04_REVISION - M1978314 (2)

Home Browse Search

Any operator conducting an operation under a permit issued under this section • who has held the permit for two consecutive yeazs or more and who subsequently desires to expand it to a size in excess of the limitation set forth in subsection (1) of this section may request the conversion of the permit by filing an application for a permit pursuant to subsection (1) of this section or section 34-32.5-112; except that the applicant need not supply information, materials, and other data and undertakings previously supplied, including any additional materials provided to the board during the course of his current operation or resulting from the board's inspections thereof. Colo. Rev. Stat. § 34-32.5-110(5)(a). Under this provision, the mine applicant who applies for and receives an expedited small mine permit cannot apply to expand that small mine for two years. Such an operator must have "held the permit for two consecutive years or more" before filing an application under Section l l z. Ia. This two-yeaz provision is rational because Section 110 provides "expedited" permit processing and a decision "within thirty days" for mines that are "less than ten acres." The two- year waiting period prevents applicants from abusing the fast track of Section 110. Without the two-yeaz waiting period, large mine applicants might misuse Section 110 to get quick approval of the first ten acres of a large mine. Section 110(5)(a) expresses the Legislature's view that a mine applicant with a large mine proposal should submit the full proposal to full review under • Section 112 up front without segmenting it into a ten acre first phase. 2. Section 110(5)(al Applies to the Initial Permit Applicant Section 110(5)(a) is one long sentence. The Objectors quote only the first part. They omit any reference to the second part. See Motion at 3-4. Perhaps that is because the full sentence shows that their argument about the two-year provision is wrong. The second half of Section 110(5)(a) makes cleaz that the "operator" subject to the "two consecutive yeazs" waiting period is the one who "previously supplied" an application to the Board and received the 110 permit, not a successor who, like King Mountain here, acquires the mine decades later. Specifically, Section 1 ] 0(5)(a) provides that a 110 permit operator who seeks to expand "need not supply information, materials, and other data and undertakings previously supplied." Id. (emphasis added). That language demonstrates that the applicant subject to the two-year provision is the one that "previously supplied" an application for a mining permit under Section 110(1)(a). See Colo. Rev. Stat. § 34-32.5-110(1)(a). Nothing in Section 110(5)(a) states that an operator that acquires a 110 Permit mine that has been in existence for at least two years must wait two yeazs before applying for a Section 112 mining permit. The Objectors claim that their interpretation is based on the plain language of the statute. Far from it. They aze seeking to interject a dramatic limitation into the statute that appeazs nowhere in the Act. •