Laserfiche WebLink
117 <br />1 whatever they need to do there. <br />2 MR. CATTANY: But I guess it could have <br />3 been documentation in another way. The <br />4 documentation could have been that we will issue <br />5 this notice of violation but recognize that -- that <br />6 is not a threat to the environment, that this is a <br />7 subsidence issue. So almost putting some of those <br />8 caveats on the front end to give some indication of <br />9 what the degree of the violation was as well. <br />10 If you can withdraw it based on <br />11 categories, then it seems to me that you need to <br />12 issue it based on categories as well so that <br />13 everyone knows going through the process whether <br />14 this is bad or really bad, and not -- <br />15 MR. PAULIN: I think their notice <br />16 expressed that, that there were two things, cracks <br />17 in the house and the damaged water line. I mean, <br />18 had there been other things, had the XYZ Creek <br />19 disappeared into the mine shaft, why, that probably <br />20 would have been noted also. <br />21 MR. JAVERNICK: But I don't think it's <br />22 necessary, Ron, for a division person if he's out <br />23 writing a citation to also reiterate what's already <br />24 in the statute. If the statute says if it's a <br />25 private, not state or environmental, I don't think <br />