Laserfiche WebLink
Division's DMO determinations.2 It is only the potential reversal of the DMO findings that <br />they assert gives them a basis for intervention. See page 2 of Motion. <br />7. It is unclear whether or how the environmental groups would be able to voice concerns if <br />they are not granted intervention. For example, if the Mined Land Reclamation Board <br />("Board") denied the request for intervention and subsequently agreed with Cotter <br />Corporation that the JD mines are not DMOs, there is no rule to specify the procedure by <br />which EMLC could appeal or be heard. The rules only allow persons to petition for a <br />hearing when they disagree with the Division's decision, 2 CCR 407-1, Rule 7.2.1(4), and <br />only allow aggrieved persons to appeal an office determination, not a Board determination. <br />CCR 407-1, Rule 7.2.7. In addition, since the EMLC groups would not have been parties to <br />the DMO hearing, they could not seek judicial review under the Administrative Procedures <br />Act. § 24-4-106(4), C.R.S. <br />8. Given this predicament, the Division has no objection to the Motion to Intervene. <br />JOHN W.SUTHERS <br />Attomey General <br />CHERYL A. LINDEN, 14185* <br />First Assistant Attomey General <br />Natural Resources and Environment Section <br />Attorneys for Division of Minerals and Geology <br />1525 Sherman Street, 5th Floor <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Telephone: (303) 866-5127 <br />*Counsel of Record <br />Z EMLC refers to Hard Rock Rule 2.5.5 in support of its Motion to Intervene. Rule 2.5.5 <br />concerns declaratory orders. DMO Rule 7.2.1(4) refers to Rule 2.5.5. However, Rule <br />7.2.1(4) is inapplicable to the present matter because EMLC's appeal was filed pursuant to <br />Rule 7.2.7. <br />