PCHB249006649

PCHBPollution Control Hearings Board of the State of Washington

the ACC's request to file an overlength reply brief) The ACC seems to have forgotten the recent history of this matter. It created the current cramped briefing schedule. It was informed by the Board in the September 17, 2001 prehearing conference that its reply brief was to include any new issues raised by the Amended 401 Certification. Moreover, in that conference, after stating to the Board that the length of the briefs on the motion for stay should be adjusted, the ACC was told that its reply was not to exceed 30 pages. This latter directive is incorporated in the Agreement and Order Re Recission of 401 Certification entered by the Board on September 20, 2001. AR 006649 1Ecologyjoins inthe Port of Seattle'sMotionto Strikethe ACC'sOverlengthBrief. ECOLOGY'SRESPONSETOACC'S 1 ATTORNEYGENERALOFWASHINGTON Ecology Division MOTIONTOFILEOVERLENGTH POBox40117 REPLY BRIEF Olympia, WA 98504-0117 ORIGINAL FAX(360)586-6760 In its motions, the ACC claims that it needed to file the overlength brief because of the new issues raised in the Amended 401 Certification. This statement is belied by the contents of its Reply brief. There is, at best, a handful of pages of discussion of changes that appear in the Amended 401 Certification. In addition, the ACC states that, rather than file a separate brief on the changes, it elected to simply file the overlength reply. Again, the ACC seems to disregard the fact that the schedule it asked for and received from the Board did not include the opportunity to file such a separate brief. Ecology and the…
V V