PERMFILE125951

• Permit No: M2001001
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Date: 9/29/2003
• Doc Name: Request for Change of Venue for Formal Public Hearing
• From: Caloia Houpt & Hamilton PC
• To: DMG
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

CALOIA, HOUPT & HAMILTON, ]P.C.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1204 GRAND AVENUE
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601
Wallace Erickson
Division of Minerals and Geology .--"
701 Camino Del Rio, Room 125
Durango, CO 81301
SHERRY A. CALOIA
JEFFERSON V. HOUPT
MARK E. HAMILTON
MARY ELIZABETH GEIGER r`
CYNTHL4 F. FLEMING
MELODY D. MASSIH
September 25, 2003 -"
R~'ceived
OtV/Si~ a ~ Q t@~Q~r~
818!0 G@pt~BY
7ELEPHONE [phone]
FACSIMILE [phone]
Sender's email: mem r~ilsopris.net
RF~~~G .
o~Y~ronaOCT ~~~~~_-
~~ Mir„~
Re: Request for Change of Yenue fo- r Formal Public Hearing and for Confirmation of
Date and Time of eating
Line Camp Pit,'Permit No. M-1001-001 ~~'~
Dear Mr. Erickson:
I received your notice dated September 18, 2003, in which you stated that the first Formal
Public Hearing in the above-referenced matter pursuant to the August 11, 2003 District Court
Order in Case No. O1CV3425 will occur during the October 29-30, 2003 meeting of the Mined
Land Reclamation Board,(the "MLRB" ).in.Denyer..This.letter will serve as a formal request for
change of venue for that hearing, pursuant to C.R.S., §,24-4-105(2)(a),, and a formal request that
the MLRB itself, .or .through the Department of Minerals and Geology ("DMG"),-confirm the
exact date and time the hearing will be held. -
C.R.S. § 24-4-105(2)(a) states that "[I]n fixing the time and place for a hearing, due
regard shall be had for the convenience and necessity of the parties and their representatives." In
this matter, the applicant, applicant's attorney, applicant's engineer and witnesses,
plaintiffslobjectors, plaintiffs/objectors' attorneys, and plaintiffslobjectors' witnesses all reside
on the Western Slope, and most of them reside in or around Cortez, Colorado. I have tried to
reach cot:nsel for Faur States Apgreeates, LL.C regarding this change of venue but he has not
returned my phone .calls. However, I believe under the circumstances the convenience and
necessity of the parties and their representatives requires the October hearing to be held in
Cortez, Colorado.
With regard to the date and time of the hearing, the notification sent on September 18,
2003, is too vague. C.R.S. § 24-4-105(2)(a) requires notification of a hearing to include the time
thereof. A two day window without an exact starting time is woefully insufficient when some of
the parties, witnesses or representatives must travel and obviously there must be preparation for
.the hearing.: Therefore, the MLRB/DMG must confirm in a timely manner exactly which";'dafe,
October 29. or 30, and which time the hearing will be held: _,.,.. ~ __- „,
BOYNTON-Itr-DMG-Erickson-2