My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE110893
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
200000
>
PERMFILE110893
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:07:33 PM
Creation date
11/24/2007 8:05:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2004067
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/7/2005
Doc Name
Reply of Appl in Supportof Denial Motion
From
Christopher G. Hayes PC
To
DMG
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
BEFORE THE MINED LAND RECLAMATION BOARD, <br />COLORADO DIVISION OF MINERALS AND <br />GEOLOGY, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL <br />RESOURCES <br />Board Address: 1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />303-866-3567 <br />Applicants: Clear Creek District Water Providers, LLC <br />Christopher G. Hayes #19799 <br />David R. Little, #13340 Permit Application No: <br />Bjork Lindley Little PC M-2004-067 <br />1600 Stout Street, Suite 1400 <br />Denver, Colorado 80202 <br />(303)892-1400 <br />(303) 892-1401 (facsimile) <br />Email: chayes@bjorklindley.com <br />REPLY OF APPLICANT CLEAR CREEK DISTRICT WATER PROVIDERS IN <br />SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DENY PARTY STATUS AND TO STRIKE <br />PARTICULAR OBJECTIONS, WITNESSES AND EXHIBITS <br />Applicant Clear Creek District Water Providers, LLC ("CCDWP" or "Applicant") <br />respectfully submits the following reply in support of its motion asking the Board to: (1) deny <br />party status to objectors who failed to appear at the Pre-hearing Conference; (2) not permit other <br />parties to present evidence relating to objections not authorized by the statute or other law; and <br />(3) deny standing to persons whose objections are solely based on issues not before the Board. <br />STATUS OF MOTION <br />1. One objector, Gilpin County, has filed a written response to CCDWP's motion. <br />2. As the basis for its objection, Gilpin County puts forward three speculative and <br />incorrect hypotheses: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.