2011-02-09_ENFORCEMENT - M1977300

Home Browse Search

number M-1977-300 or any other permit. See AR:00845-53. Since no such finding was made by the Board, its Order requiring that Cotter pay civil penalties is in excess of statutory jurisdiction and authority and should be set aside. Even if the Board had statutory jurisdiction and authority to order civil penalties against Cotter, the penalties it ordered are unsupported by substantial evidence. The Board has indisputably ordered civil penalties against Cotter for perceived violations involving the mine pool. AR:00853; 01048:18-01049:4. The Order makes this clear by stating all of the penalty except for $2,500 would be suspended if Cotter complied with its terms by the "associated deadlines." AR:00853. When the Order issued, Cotter had met the deadlines for Corrective Action No. 1, and the Board does not contend otherwise. Id. Therefore, the mine pool supplied the predominant basis for the Order's civil penalties. As discussed above, the mine pool does not provide a basis for finding any violation of the Act or of any permit issued to Cotter under the Act. Indeed, the Board's evidence established that, as of the date of the hearing in this case, the Division did not believe that the mine pool had made a contribution anywhere. AR:00902:5-7. Under these circumstances, the Board's Order requiring that Cotter pay civil penalties is unsupported by substantial evidence and should be set aside. VII. The Corrective Actions Ordered by the Board Are in Excess of Statutory Jurisdiction and Authority. The corrective actions ordered by the Board, including Mine Dewatering and Treatment, are in excess of statutory jurisdiction and authority. Corrective actions may be ordered under the Act only "if the Board determines that there exists any violation" and the Board issues a "cease and desist order." Colo. Rev. Stat. § 34-32-124(2)(a). Such order "shall set forth the provisions 39