Laserfiche WebLink
August 31, 2010." AR:0045. The August 2010 Order also imposed the maximum possible civil <br />penalty of $1,000 a day for a total of $55,000, "with all but $2,500 suspended if the Operator <br />complies with this Order within the associated deadlines." Id. <br />In response to a draft of the August 2010 Order, Cotter sought clarification that the Board <br />did not actually intend to require Cotter to complete the dewatering process by August 31, 2010. <br />AR:0256. The Board rejected the proposed clarification requested by Cotter. AR:0256 -57. <br />On September 16, 2010, the Division sent Cotter the September 2010 Notice which stated <br />that, due to Cotter's failure to commence all required corrective actions in the August 2010 <br />Order and to pay the ordered statutory penalty, the Division was commencing a new enforcement <br />proceeding against Cotter. AR:0050. The September 2010 Notice further indicated that a <br />hearing would be held before the Board during its November 17 -18, 2010 meeting at which <br />Cotter would be entitled to present evidence. Id. <br />On September 24, 2010, Cotter filed a complaint for Judicial Review, Declaratory and <br />Injunctive Relief in the Denver District Court concerning the August 2010 Order. That judicial <br />review process, Cotter Corp. v. Mined Land Reclamation Bd., Case No. 2010CV7609, is still <br />pending in the Denver District Court. (The Court subsequently consolidated the instant case <br />with that proceeding in light of the December 2010 Order in this case relying on the validity of <br />the August 2010 Order.) <br />On October 15, 2010, Cotter filed a response to the September 2010 Notice ( "September <br />Notice Response "). AR:0057 -87. Cotter stated in its September Notice Response that it was <br />improper for the Division to file a new notice of reason to believe concerning the August 2010 <br />Order while the August 2010 Order was being appealed. AR:0059. Cotter also indicated in the <br />4 <br />