EXH0122017924

PCHBPollution Control Hearings Board of the State of Washington

From=" Luster, Tom • / "_%_ -- -- Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 2:41 PM/ , _ White, Gordon / _,.._. _ To: " Subject: FW: Dinsmore Draft and draft denial le_er _ L__ ///_ DELmEnV DOC T Hi Gordon- Here'smy draftdenial letter,andthe latest draftof the withdrawal letter below... -- Tom L. From: Fdzpatdck,Kern • Sent: Wednesday,Septamber27,200011:35AM To: Luster.Tom;Helw_.Raymond;Marchiom,Joan(ATG);Stockdale,En_ Subject: FW:Din=mornDraft have made myedits, deletionsand additionsto the attached document in red. - Kevin J . . •Odginal Message---- From: Luster, Tom Sent: Wednesday, September 27, 2000 10:01 AM To: He,wig, Rayrr_ond;Marchioro,Joan (ATG); Fitzpatrick, Kevin;Stockdale, Edk Subject: RI=.Dinsr_ore Draft •.. Hi all - ATTORNEY CMENT PRIVILEGED ,/3:h_, Ray. I've made my editsintheattachment below. • 601a,'_.. haveacoupleofmainconcerns: The draft unnecessarily and inappropriately limits the scope of our review. We_'e received a number of comments in the past couple of weeks that I have not yet been able to review, and I assumethatsomeofthosecommentswillneedtobeincorporatedintooursubsequent401 cq review. Additionally, we will be going through another public comment period, and we are o_ likely to have several additional substantive issues raised that must be addressed if we areto v-- < DOE 11/28/00 3 1 3 o • providea defensible 401 decision. We cannot promise the Port that rids letter contains all the issues that need to be addressed, since - we don't know them all yet, and since that would completely ignore the required public process. It'snot likely that every issue raised during the public comment period will need to be a pan of _'_ our401review,buttherewillbesome,andwe shouldnotmisleadthePortonthis.…
V V