Laserfiche WebLink
Fred R. Banta, Director August 10, 1990 <br /> MLRD, Denver, CO 80203 Page 18 <br /> affects Mid-Continent's ability to prepare for and address the <br /> allegations. <br /> 4 . The Division has been delegated no authority to redefine <br /> or re-legislate or otherwise restrict either a definition or <br /> application of a "pattern of violations. " The present regulations, <br /> 2 CCR 41 407-2 , §§ 5. 03 . 3 and 5-03 .7 (3) , are an unauthorized <br /> exercise of power not granted the Division and/or in contravention <br /> of its enabling authority. <br /> 5. The regulation purporting to define a pattern of <br /> violations, 2 CCR $ 407-2, § 5. 03 .3, is unconstitutionally vague, <br /> inconsistent, in contravention of the statutory definition, and <br /> fails to adequately define a "pattern of violations" so as to <br /> properly and legally advise persons and organizations subject to <br /> the regulation of what, as a matter of law, constitutes a pattern <br /> of violations and/or what are the constituent criteria of a pattern <br /> of violations and how they are to be applied. Without criteria or <br /> a satisfactory definition of a pattern of violations there is no <br /> objective standard of proscribed conduct, and alleged offenders are <br /> denied required notice and due process of law. <br /> 6. The statute, 14 Colo. Rev. Stat. § 34-33-123 (7) (1984 <br /> Repl. Vol. ) , is unconstitutionally vague and fails to adequately <br /> define a "pattern of violations" properly and legally so as to <br /> advise persons and organizations subject to it of what, as a matter <br /> of law, constitutes a pattern of violations and/or what are the <br /> constituent criteria of a pattern of violations and how they are to <br /> be applied. Without criteria or a satisfactory definition of a <br /> pattern of violations there is no objective standard of proscribed <br /> conduct, and alleged offenders are denied required notice and due <br /> process of law. <br /> We appreciate the opportunity to present the foregoing for <br /> your consideration. We further appreciate your consideration of <br /> the foregoing inasmuch as the all the proceedings undertaken in <br /> connection with settlement of the foregoing violations, other than <br /> Cessation Order C-89-019, have been informal and Mid-Continent's <br /> position may not be completely, fully or accurately reflected. <br /> In the event you decline to vacate your Show Cause Order, I <br /> hereby request on behalf of Mid-Continent that this entire matter <br /> be scheduled for hearing before the Mined Land Reclamation Board, <br /> and that adequate time be scheduled so Mid-Continent can fully <br /> present the facts and circumstances bearing upon the constituent <br />