Laserfiche WebLink
Gonima, Deb <br />From: Gonima, Deb <br />Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 8:56 AM <br />To: 'Jodi Villa' <br />Cc: Gonima, Deb <br />Subject: RE: DMG Comments (3811-DMG) <br />I asked Carl the same thing since I'm new here & what he said makes sense. Basically, <br />we're using the inspection report to give you a heads-up on what items will be included in <br />the Adequacy Letter (that will come out sometime around the 17th of May). This isn't <br />usually done from what I understand, but I know you guys are working on an especially <br />abbreviated timeline, so I wanted to see if there was anything we could do to get you a <br />peek at what our initial Adequacy Letter might ask for. This way you guys can compile all <br />that info ahead of time. The reason we ask for you to not submit anything until after the <br />Adequacy Letter goes out, is that there may be (probably will be) additional items <br />requested at that time that haven't been included in this inspection report, plus there is <br />the potential for objectors to bring up questions that haven't been addressed, yet. So, by <br />not means does the inspection report include an exhaustive list of items - just most of <br />the biggies that jumped out at us & may take a little longer to obtain. Normally we just <br />hold off on everything until after the comment period. Plus, this way we don't get things <br />trickling in over the next month. I'll send out the adequacy letter, probably get a huge <br />packet of info from you guys a week or so later, and review it all at once. Does that make <br />sense? Good question, though - I had the same one! <br />Please don't hesitate to call me if I'm making things more confusing, rather than less. <br />Thanks! <br />-Deb <br />-----Original Message----- <br />From: Jodi Villa [mailto:JVi11a~Meurer.com] <br />Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2006 7:02 AM <br />To: 'Gonima, Deb' <br />Subject: RE: DMG Comments~(3811-DMG) <br />Deb, <br />In going over your fax, it says the DMG would appreciate it if the items <br />listed were NOT submitted until after the adequacy review letter has been <br />received by the operator. Weren't we planning on addressing them before you <br />prepared the letter so that you didn't have to put them in the letter and we <br />could get them taken care of asap?? <br />Thanks, <br />Jodi <br />-----Original Message----- <br />From: Gonima, Deb [mailto:deb.gonima~state.co.us] <br />Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2006 4:03 PM <br />To: 'Jodi Villa' <br />Cc: Gonima, Deb <br />Subject: RE: DMG Comments (3811-DMG) <br />Hi Jodi, <br />I'll send the fax in a few minutes. The public comment period is up 20 days <br />after the last of the 4 consecutive publications have run. So, if your 4th <br />consecutive publication runs on, say May 5th, the public comment period is <br />over 20 calendar days after that, and then shortly thereafter you'll get our <br />Adequacy Review Letter. Which is also why we want to get you as much info as <br />possible now with our inspection report. This way you'll be able to provide <br />us with all the info very soon after the adequacy letter comes out & there <br />will be less info to gather in a short time. So, the inspection report will <br />be like a preview to our adequacy letter. <br />45 <br />