Laserfiche WebLink
10 <br />1 <br />2 <br /> <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9, <br />10 ~, <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />2 2 ', <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br />• <br />At this point, ~::e're only in the initial stages of issuing a <br />violation with Item No. 7. <br />THE CIIAIRtL'1N: Chips? <br />b1 P.. BP.P.RY: In deference to Mr. Yeates, I guess <br />I o.ould go ahead and conclude the formal hearing on the <br />t•;alouff. Recognizing that for your benefit particularly, that <br />we might want to come bac}: and reopen that item right after sae <br />finish with No. 7. I don't }:now what 'ire arc going to hear; <br />it_ may or may not affect it. The problem I have with the <br />motion, ~•re got a formal hearing, it's hard to keep that open <br />while we deal ~.aith a non-formal proceeding on a violation for <br />Item No. 7. I don't know, that gives me some procedural <br />problems. <br />I think we ought to conclude the formal hearing; <br />and if the want to come bac]: to it, we will certainly cons.idcr <br />it. <br />P1R. YEATES: The only reason I made the statement <br />was because of the very nature of the suspension, if he gets a <br />permit. I think. the evidence accumulating here wi1]. show he <br />has no intenY_ion of getting a permit ever. I am not sure there <br />ought to be a suspension, I thin}: you should consider the <br />potential -- <br />t1R. HOLDER: The staff was aware of Item 7 when <br />they made their recommn_ndation for Item 6. <br />.9 R. ZALKI!•]D: Absolutely. <br />rn.r.r.~~ c aRrrsn.R.c aesnclarrs. r~.t~ <br />(rrufirrl .5'hnnLend Rrpnrnv~ <br />nnn c n,•.,~~nno lrr~r,d <br />r.rrdrr~r.~ o,nr,rrdr.,~w:r <br />i2i-JM1 I .V S V <br />