Laserfiche WebLink
2-72-99;72'17PM;RANCN MANUFACTURING ;7.9 3~5 ~~~~ tt c/ <br />3e386bS39~T. of LaW-RF~.LRw • 372 Pft3 FEB 12 '9'3 11:53 <br />BEFORE THE MINED LAND RECLAMATION BOARD <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW, AND ORDER <br />ON A PETITION FOR REHEARING IN THE MATTER OF JOHNSON EXCAVATING INC., <br />NEW l IZ CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS PERMIT APPLICATION, No. M-98-058 <br />THIS MATTER having come before the Mined Land Reclamation Board ("the Board") on <br />]anuary 26, 1999, for a hearing pursuant to Construction Material Rule 2.9, the Board makes the <br />following Findings of Fact end Conclusions of Law, and enters the following Order: <br />FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW <br />The Board's Order in this [natter, dated December 16, 1998, is incorporated by <br />reference herein. <br />2. At the final hearing on this matter on December 16, 1998, the Board received and <br />considered, pursuant to Construction Material Rule 2.8.1(a), a letter submitted by objectors <br />Diane E. and Thane R. Anderson, dated December 14, 1998. Under Rule 2.8.1(a), the Board <br />"may receive all or part of the evidence in written form." The letter from the Andersons was <br />considered written testimony by aparty-objector, and was treated as such in the Board's <br />deliberations. <br />3. The Andersons petitioned the Board, pursuant to Construction Maurisl Rule 2.9, <br />for a reconsideration of the Johnson Excavating permit decision by a letter dated January 6, <br />{ 999_ The petition was timely made within ten (10) days of the Andersons' receipt of the <br />Boazd's written decision under Construction Material Rule Z.9.2. <br />4. The Office presented the Anderson's peAhon for reconsideration av a discussion <br />item at the Board hearing on January 26, 1999. The Andersons did not appear at the hearing to <br />provide testimony in support of [bait petition, and so the Board considered the petition solely on <br />the Andersons' written submittal pursuant to Conshuction Material Rule 2.9.3. <br />5. The Andersons' petitioa for reconsideration reiterated the concerns raised in their <br />written testimony submitted to the Board at the December 16, 1998 final hearing on the permit. <br />6. A petition for reconsideration must show that the Board's decision should be <br />changed due tr, the existence of newly discovered evidence or Facts which could not have been <br />discovered before the original decision was rendered. New tersev Zinc Co v Colorado Mined <br />Ind Reclamation Board, 738 P.2d 51, 53 (Colo. App. 1987). <br />