My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-09-24_ENFORCEMENT - M1977300 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Enforcement
>
Minerals
>
M1977300
>
2010-09-24_ENFORCEMENT - M1977300 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:23:28 PM
Creation date
9/27/2010 9:06:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977300
IBM Index Class Name
ENFORCEMENT
Doc Date
9/24/2010
Doc Name
Order
From
DRMS
To
Cotter Corporation
Violation No.
MV2010018
Email Name
DB2
AJW
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
5. The Operator filed its Petition for Reconsideration on August 31, 2010. The <br />Petition for Reconsideration was added to the Board's September 15, 2010 meeting agenda <br />on September 1, 2010. The September 2010 Draft Meeting Agenda was posted on the <br />Division's website soon thereafter. The Division filed its Response to Cotter's Petition for <br />Reconsideration on September 10, 2010. <br />6. The Board has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to §§ 34-32-102 through <br />1.07, and 124, of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Act, §§ 34-32-101 through 127, <br />C.R.S. <br />7. Any party to a hearing may petition the Bogard to reconsider its decision <br />pursuant to the Mineral Rules and Regulations of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation <br />Board for Hard Roca, Metal and Designated Mining Operations ("Rules"), Rule 2.9.1. <br />8, The petition must state a clear and thorough explanation of the grounds <br />justifying reconsideration, including but not limited to new and relevant facts that were not <br />known at the time of the hearing and an explanation of why such facts were not known at the <br />time of the hearing. Rule 2.9.1(2). <br />9. The Board may grant or dcny the petition based solely on the written <br />submittals supporting and opposing the petition, or the Board may, in its discretion, grant the <br />parties an opportunity to present oral arguments. Rule 2.9.3_ Here, the Board considered the <br />Operator's Petition and the Division's Response. The Board did not grant the Operator's <br />request to present oral argument on its Petitions. <br />10. The Operator stated objections to the September 15, 2010 proceeding. <br />11. The Board did not find sufficient grounds to grant the Operator's Petition for <br />Reconsideration. <br />ORDER <br />Based on the foregoing the Board hereby denies the Operator's Petition for <br />Reconsideration. X? <br />DONE AND ORDERED this day of September,2010. <br />FOR THE COLORADO <br /> <br />Mined Land R,eclamatiA Board <br />Cotter Corp. <br />Schwartmalder Mine 2 <br />M-1977-300 <br />MV-2010-018
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.