Laserfiche WebLink
position regarding physical feasibility and safety challenges. Paragraph 31 of the Order adopted <br />Mr. Bird's positions at the hearing. <br />Cotter became aware of the Division's positions regarding feasibility of dewatering for <br />the first time at the hearing. Even though the Division requested Cotter to provide it with <br />Cotter's rationale for not conducting mine dewatering and treatment at a meeting on June 15, <br />2010, the Division elected not to respond to Cotter's positions, which included feasibility <br />challenges, in advance of the hearing, despite having the opportunity to do so in a pleading filed <br />on July 1, 2010. In Cotter's Response Brief, dated July 9, 2010 at pages 12-13, Cotter stated that <br />the Division failed to respond to Cotter's Rationale. This statement constitutes an objection to <br />the Division's refusal to provide a response to the Rationale before the hearing. This lack of a <br />response before the hearing justifies reconsideration of the finding regarding feasibility <br />challenges because Cotter was not aware of the Division's positions before the hearing. <br />Moreover, the Colorado Administrative Procedure Act ("APA"), Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-4-105(7), <br />requires that parties have the opportunity to submit rebuttal evidence. Not knowing the <br />Division's position before the hearing, it was impossible for Cotter to prepare a rebuttal. The <br />APA therefore allows Cotter to submit a Rebuttal in this Petition for Reconsideration. <br />In rejecting Cotter's position in the Rationale about the substantial feasibility challenges <br />in dewatering the mine, the Order relies on the Division's "proposed alternative methods and <br />equipment including lowering a pump inside a casing string and using centralizers to minimize <br />hanging inside the casing." Order 13 1. The Cotter Rebuttal, Exh. 1, at page 12 replies that the <br />Division fails to explain how the casing string can be lowered into the shaft without encountering <br />timbers, protruding edges, horizontal bracing, and other potential obstructions, evidenced by <br />Figure 6 of the Cotter Rebuttal. When running casing in open holes and setting pumps in cased <br />12