Laserfiche WebLink
reclaim the area. The Division' s willingness is only offered if <br /> the liquidation plan is not a contract, since if it is, then all <br /> the creditors would have to consent to the change in plan. <br /> Sixth Claim for Relief <br /> In their sixth claim, MCR and the Trustee request the court to <br /> issue a declaratory judgment concerning a water quality permit <br /> issued by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment <br /> ( "health department") . They allege that the Division will perform <br /> reclamation work which will likely cause extensive sedimentation of <br /> certain ponds and that MCR' s water quality permit requires MCR to <br /> maintain the ponds . MCR states it is uncertain as to its rights, <br /> status or potential liability for cleaning the ponds of sediment <br /> allegedly caused by the Division' s actions . <br /> Position: This claim is subject to the Division' s motion to <br /> dismiss . It is the Division' s position that MCR and the Trustee do <br /> not allege sufficient controversy concerning MCR' s water quality <br /> permit to meet the requirements of standing. In addition, MCR has <br /> submitted to the health department an application for permit <br /> renewal . (This application is attached to the Division' s motion to <br /> dismiss) . In that renewal application, MCR asks the health <br /> department to amend its permit concerning the same ponds which are <br /> the subject of its request for a declaratory judgment . MCR' s <br /> application is still pending. Thus, MCR has failed to exhaust <br /> administrative remedies on this issue . As such, the court has no <br /> jurisdiction to hear this claim. <br /> Also, it is noteworthy that in its renewal application, MCR <br /> 20 <br />