My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-02-09_ENFORCEMENT - M1977300
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Enforcement
>
Minerals
>
M1977300
>
2011-02-09_ENFORCEMENT - M1977300
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:30:54 PM
Creation date
2/15/2011 7:55:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977300
IBM Index Class Name
ENFORCEMENT
Doc Date
2/9/2011
Doc Name
Opening Brief of Plaintiff Cotter Corporation
From
Cotter Corporation
To
District Court
Email Name
DB2
AJW
DAB
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.
/
48
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
Concentrations in the Reservoir Increase, or Any Costs for Treating the <br />Creek and Reservoir ............................................................................................. 20 <br />C. The Board Failed To Evaluate the Reasonableness of Corrective Action <br />No. 2 ..................................................................................................................... 24 <br />III. The Findings Upon Which the Board Relied to Order Mine Dewatering and <br />Treatment Are Unsupported by Substantial Evidence; Accordingly, the Board <br />Unlawfully Ordered Corrective Action No. 2 .................................................................. 26 <br />A. No Substantial Evidence Exists That the Mine Pool Supports a Violation <br />of Colo. Rev. Stat. § 34-32-116(7)(g) .................................................................. 26 <br />B. No Substantial Evidence Exists That the Mine Pool Supports a Violation <br />of Colo. Rev. Stat. § 34-32-116(7)(c) .................................................................. 31 <br />C. No Substantial Evidence Exists That the Mine Pool Supports a Violation <br />of Colo. Rev. Stat. § 34-32-116(7)(h) ................................................................... 33 <br />D. The Board Lacks Statutory Authority To Order Mine Dewatering and <br />Treatment Under These Circumstances ................................................................ 34 <br />IV. The Order Was Arbitrary and Capricious in Ignoring Cotter's Argument That <br />Mine Dewatering and Treatment Did Not Qualify as a Technical Revision .................... 35 <br />V. The Board's Decision-Making Process Was Unlawful and Violated Cotter's <br />Rights to Due Process and Cotter's Rights Under the Colorado APA ............................. 36 <br />VI. The Civil Penalties Ordered by the Board Are in Excess of Statutory Jurisdiction <br />and Authority, and Unsupported by Substantial Evidence .............................................. 38 <br />VII. The Corrective Actions Ordered by the Board Are in Excess of Statutory <br />Jurisdiction and Authority ................................................................................................. 39 <br />CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................. 41 <br />ii
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.