Laserfiche WebLink
Rule 5.03.2(2)(e) provides for the Company to request an extension to the period of <br />abatement. The Company submitted such a request on 2 August 2005. <br />Rule 5.03,2(2)(e) requires the concurrence of the extension of time for abatement by the <br />Administrator. Concurrence is demonstrated in the attached memorandum of David A. Berry. <br />Rule 5.03.2(2)(e) requires that the extension of time for abatement be the shortest time <br />necessary to abate the violation. The due date for the proposed approval of TR-50 is 30 Sep <br />2005. A mandatory 10-day public notice period follows publication of the proposed notice in a <br />local newspaper. The publication usually takes a week. Thus final approval of TR-50 may not be <br />achieved until 17 October 2005. An allowance of two weeks for construction and validation <br />inspection places a determination of abatement azound October 31, 2005. Some economy of time <br />may be achieved by issuance of a proposed decision prior to 30 September 2005, but such <br />issuance is not expected prior to August 16, 2005 (end of August for final approval). Thus the <br />requested extension of the period of abatement to 7 October 2005 does not consume all the time <br />permitted to process a technical revision, and is considered the shortest time necessary to abate <br />the violation. <br />Rule 5.03.2(2)(e) requires the concurrence, with reasons, of the authorized representative's <br />immediate supervisor. Concurrence, with reasons, is demonstrated in the attached memorandum <br />of Daniel I. Hernandez. <br />Rule 5.03.2(2)(g) limits extensions to the period of abatement to 90 days. This proposed <br />extension to the period of abatement is 60 days. <br />I therefore respectfully request your signature on the attached NOV extension form. <br />3 Enclosures as stated <br />files: C-1981-056 CV 2005-005 <br />4 August 2005, page3 of 3 pages, R. W. Cattany <br />