ENFORCE21782

• Permit No: M1984014
• IBM Index Class Name: Enforcement
• Doc Date: 8/17/2007
• Doc Name: Appellants response
• From: MLRB
• To: Colorado Buviron Coal
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

RECEIVED
~; lV1L.~P ~~ , ~ zoos
BEFORE THE MINED LA D RECLAMA ION BOARD
ST TE F OL DO ~ uivisio„ ~~ ~.~c~amation,
',d r AA _ /~ A ~ ~; v7 ~~ ~~/ Mining and Safety
1N THE MATTER OF COTTER CORPORATION'S APPEAL OF FINAL
DETERMINATION OF DESIGNATED MINING OPERATION~~HE JD-6, JD-
8, AND JD-9 URANIUM MINES, FILE NUMBERS M-1977-31 , M-1984- 14, -1977-306,
and
IN THE MATTER OF ENERGY MINERALS LAW CENTER'S APPEAL OF FINAL
DIVISION DETERMINATION REJECTING DESIGNATED MINING OPERATION
STATUS FOR THE SM-18 MINE, FILE NUMBER M-1978-116
APPELLANTS' RESPONSE TO DATA SUBMITTED BY COTTER
REGARDING THE JD-6, JD-8, JD-9 URANIUM MINES
Through undersigned counsel, San Juan Citizens Alliance, Information Network for Responsible
Mining (INFORM), and the Colorado Environmental Coalition (collectively "intervenors")
hereby file this response to data submitted by Cotter on July 17, 2007 that Cotter relies upon to
challenge the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety's ("DBMS") March, 2006 final Office
determination upholding the July, 2005 finding that the JD-6, JD-8, and JD-9 mines are
"designated mining operations" ("DMO") under the Mined Land Reclamation Act ("MLRA")
and applicable Mined Land Reclamation Board ("MLRB") Rules.
Procedural Background
The final DBMS determination of DMO status for JD-6, JD-8 and JD-9 mines was noticed as a
"Final Decision" in the April 12, 2006 Mined Land Reclamation Boazd ("Board") agenda.
Notice of a public hearing on the Cotter appeals was noticed in the June 2006 Board agenda.
Intervenors have participated in the DBMS decisionmaking process regazding these three mines,
supporting its position in writing based on a review of the evidence in the project file, facts
revealed by public records, and applicable laws. The Intervenors' January 27, 2006 letter
regazding the correctness of the DRMS's findings of DMO status was supported with legal
argument and evidence from state and federal project files that span some thirty-plus years of
reports and inspections.
In August 2006, the Boazd reviewed briefing and held a hearing on Intervenor's motion to
participate, at which the Board ruled in favor of granting intervention. The Board subsequently
entered an order formally granting intervention on September 13, 2006.