Laserfiche WebLink
TABLE OF CONTENTS <br />PAGE <br />II. The Mine Reclamation Permitting Process .................................................................5 <br />III. The Prehearing Order Was Prepared In Substantial Compliance With Board <br />Rules ............................................................................................................................ 8 <br />N. The Plaintiffs Were Not Prejudiced By The Absence Of The Water Quality <br />Control Division Witnesses .......................................................................................10 <br />V. All Plaintiffs Had A Full And Fair Opportunity To Present Evidence .....................13 <br />VI. There Is No Evidence To Support The Allegation That The Board Was <br />Impermissibly Biased ......................................:.........................................................15 <br />VII. Four States' Application Complied With § 34-32.5-115 and 116, C.R.S . ................18 <br />VIII. The $oard Has No Authority To Adjudicate Plaintiffs' Zoning Issues ....................22 <br />CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................24 <br />APPENDIX -CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS RULES <br />r <br />