My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE102482
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
100000
>
PERMFILE102482
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 9:56:22 PM
Creation date
11/24/2007 8:52:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1980143
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Name
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS FN 80-143
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
39
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• -23- • <br />Shelton: 40 feet? 50 feet? And nobody was saying there couldn't be an operation <br />there, but what we were saying was that it couldn't adversely affect <br />th~it structure. There's a very big difference between those two <br />ap~~noaches. <br />Turner: I .agree, Lut since I'm not a lawyer I'm not going to try to interpret <br />wh;3t the intent of the... John? or Dick? <br />Shelton: Yol guys have been around a while linger on this thing, this is the <br />first time I've ever really heard an interpretation, was today. <br />Dick Ward: I think we need to decide where the burden falls as far as the... <br />Dick Ward: I hope [hat we have decided. The law doe^n't make it clear. It <br />seems unfair to have the decision made on after tlce damage has been <br />done, and I presume, I guess, you get professional engineers to come <br />out 'and say this is out of shape, and this is a naturll substrate, <br />and this is what I~appened. toy leanings are again, in this order, <br />tofinrl orerations without the appropriate permit and to provide a <br />cease and desist to all mining activity and that the operator <br />aid the staff consider how an appropriate permit may be finally <br />submitted, taking into account *_he proximity of houses to the existing <br />mine and whether indeed some movement of that mine may be in urder <br />with the appropriate reclamation of the part that's to be nn longer used. <br />Shelton: Iri terms of proof, I see here in Rule 9.1 that it says that "the <br />applicant bears the burden of proof in respect to each of r. he items set <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.