Laserfiche WebLink
i <br />Basin Resources further alleged that vacating the NOV without prejudice <br />violated state and federal law. As to the state Coal Act, Basin Resources <br />alleged that the Board could not vacate without prejudice without first <br />holding a hearing. As to federal law, Basin Resources alleged that in order <br />for the Division to appropriately respond the OSM's TDN, it had to either <br />find a violation or state why there was no violation. According to Basin <br />Resources, the Division could not simply vacate the NOV without prejudice. <br />Basin Resources requested that the court remand the case to the Board with <br />instructions that the Board find no violation, that the Board dismiss the NOV <br />with prejudice or that the Board hold a hearing to determine whether a <br />violation exists. <br />The Tatums moved to dismiss Basin Resources's complaint for judicial <br />review. The Tatums argued that the mining company had no standing to file <br />the suit since it was not injured by the vacation of the NOV. The Tatums <br />also specifically stated that Basin Resources had no protected interest <br />against the possibility that the Division could issue a NOV in the future for <br />subsidence damage and therefore was not injured by the NOV being vacated <br />without prejudice. I <br />The Board and Division filed a pleading stating they did not object to <br />Tatums' motion to dismiss and concurred with their legal arguments. In <br />addition, on October; 1, 2001, the Board and Division filed their own motion <br />to dismiss Basin Resources' action. The State's motion referred to the <br />court's order in O1 CA 038, in which the court granted temporary relief to <br />the Tatums, finding that the Tatums had a substantial likelihood to prevail on <br />the issues of the Division's authority to vacate the NOV and Basin <br />Resources' lack of standing to challenge the Division's action. The Board <br />thereafter issued its June 11, 2001, order. The Board and Division requested <br />that the court dismiss as moot Basin Resources' request for judicial review. <br />On October 26, 2001, the court found that Tatums' motion to dismiss was <br />meritorious. The court dismissed Basin Resources' lawsuit for judicial <br />review of the Board's June 11, 2001 order. <br />Appeal of Ol CV 077 (Ulu A 2410) <br />l <br />On December 10, 2001, Basin Resources appealed the trial court's dismissal <br />of its judicial review !action to the Colorado Court of Appeals. In its notice