|
~.,
<br />Motion for Continuance
<br />Permit Application No. M-2005-080
<br />Page 2 of 7
<br />2.a. On Apri126, 2006, Objectors' counsel, Sheela S. Stack, submitted a request
<br />for all of the DMG document images for Permit File No. M-2005-080. On Apri126, 2006, Ms.
<br />Stack personally picked up a copy of the document imaging CD from Mr. Jim Dupler at the DMG
<br />office at 1313 Sherman Street, Denver, Colorado. The last document imaged on the CD was the Pre-
<br />Hearing Conference PHCO from Kate Pickford to Ron Cattany dated April 17, 2006.
<br />2.b. On May 18, 2006, Objectors' counsel, Sheela S. Stack, met with Mr. Dupler
<br />to obtain copies of any documents submitted by any party or interested persons in Permit File No.
<br />M-2005-080 after April 17, 2006, the date of the last document on the April 26, 2006 CD. Mr.
<br />Dupler provided three additional documents to Objectors' counsel: (1) Ms. Angela Bailantoni's, of
<br />Environmental Alternatives, Inc. ("EAI"), correspondence to Kate Pickford dated May 2, 2006 re:
<br />Allen Drilling and Excavating File No. M-2005-080 Response to Apri125, 2006 Adequacy Review;
<br />(2) DMG's Rationale for Recommendation for Approval Over Objections; Regulaz 112 Construction
<br />Materials New Application, Allen Drilling and Excavating Co., Inc., File No. M-2005-080, dated
<br />May 5, 2006; and (3) Notice to Parties and Interested Persons to the Allen Pit Permit Application
<br />re: Pre-hearing Conference and Formal Public Hearing for Allen Pit, Permit No. M-2005-080, dated
<br />May 8, 2006.
<br />C_.
<br />2.c. On May 22, 2006, Objectors' counsel, Sheela S. Stack, spoke with Kate
<br />Pickford in the Durango Field Office of the DMG to confirm that the copies famished to Ms. Stack
<br />was a complete copy of the DMG's file for Permit No. M-2005-080. Objectors' counsel, Sheela S.
<br />Stack, inquired as to the discrepancy in the date of the 15' Adequacy Review, dated Apti15, 2006 and
<br />EAI's response dated May 2, 2006. Ms. Pickford explained that there had been in fact three separate
<br />adequacy reviews completed and three sepazate responses by Applicant and the May 2, 2006
<br />response was to the 3`d Adequacy Review. Ms. Pickford explained that al] documents received in
<br />the Durango field office and/or the Denver office aze scanned into an electronic database and then
<br />the original document is azchived. Ms. Pickford told Ms. Stack that the Denver office of the DMG
<br />may be behind in scanning documents to the electronic database. On May 22, 2006, Ms. Pickford
<br />faxed the 2"d Adequacy Review and Applicant's response to the 2nd Adequacy Review and the 3`d
<br />Adequacy Review and Applicant's response to the 3`d Adequacy Review to Objectors' counsel. The
<br />l~' Adequacy Review was not included in the fax from Ms. Pickford. The document imaging CD
<br />Ms. Stack obtained on Apri[ 26, 2006 and the documents obtained from Mr. Dupler on May 18, 2006
<br />did not include (1) Applicant's response to the I~` Adequacy Review, dated April 14, 2006; (2) The
<br />2"d Adequacy Review, dated April 17, 2006; (3) Applicant's response to the 2"d Adequacy Review,
<br />dated April 17, 2006; and (3) The 3rd Adequacy Review, dated Apni125, 2006.
<br />2.d. On May 23, 2006, Ms. Pickford faxed to Objectors' counsel, Sheela S. Stack,
<br />the 151 Adequacy Review, dated April 14, 2006.
<br />
<br />
|