1984-05-22_REPORT - M1978352 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII RECEIVED CONOVER, MCCLEARN & HEPPENSTALL PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION GAINED LAND RECLAMAUGN DIVISION! ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW Colo. Dept. of Naturdl ReSGUCeS 2600 CENTENNIAL PLAZA I77S SHERMAN STREET TELEPHONE(303) B37-9222 DENVER,COLORADO 80203 TELECOPIER(303) B37-9975 May 22 , 1984 MICHAEL S.McCARTHY Mr. David C. Shelton , Director Mined Land Reclamation Division 423 Centennial Building 1313 Sherman Street Denver , Colorado 80203 Re: Permit Amendment Application for Nottingham Sand & Gravel/Eagle Pit/Permit No. 78-352 Dear David: This firm represents Nottingham Sand and Gravel Company ( "NS&G" ) in connection with its Permit Amendment Application for the Eagle Pit. We are in receipt of a letter dated May 14 , 1984 from Mr. Robert Stemwedel , an attorney represent- ing certain individuals and trusts, one of which, the Eagle River 1978 Trust , is an adjacent land owner with respect to the NS&G Eagle Pit. In his letter Mr. Stemwedel requests that the Board grant his clients "standing" to pursue certain ob- jections to the NS&G Eagle Pit Amendment, and participate in a public hearing on the Amendment that he has also requested in his letter. In addition, Mr. Stemwedel has requested yet an- other public hearing in which his clients seek to participate as parties with respect to a notice of violation that his clients now ask the Board to issue to NS&G. The requests for hearing contained in Mr. Stemwedel ' s letter are contrary to the express provisions of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder by the Mined Land Reclamation Board. We accord- ingly object vigorously to these requests and urge the Division and Board to deny them. The final public notice of the Eagle Pit Amendment appeared in the Eagle Valley Enterprise on March 29 , 1984 . As you know, Section �J�4 requires that any permit-related "protests or petitions for hearing shall be tit e ay mely filed o with t the Board not more than twenty days a er ast publication notice pursuant to section 34-32-112( 10) ." The period or t ng ili a protest or hearing request as mandated by the statute thus expired on April 18 , 1984 . Mr. Stemwedel 's letter, dated May 14, 1984, is nearly one month beyond the I