From: Garrahan Paul
Sent: Tue Jun 25 09:39:15 2013
To: CURTIS Andrea
Subject: RE: EQC approval of LRAPA rules - 2010 Industrial Streamlining Corrections
Importance: Normal
I’ve asked our tech folks if they can open your winzip file for me.
Paul Garrahan
Assistant Attorney-in-Charge, Natural Resources Section
Oregon Department of Justice
971-673-1943 (Portland Office; T, Th & F)
503-947-4593 (Salem Office; M & W)
From: CURTIS Andrea [mailto:CURTIS.Andrea@deq.state.or.us]
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 9:34 AM
To: Garrahan Paul
Subject: RE: EQC approval of LRAPA rules - 2010 Industrial Streamlining Corrections
I sent them in a WinZip folder. I’ll try resending as individual files.
From: Garrahan Paul [mailto:Paul.Garrahan@doj.state.or.us]
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2013 9:30 AM
To: CURTIS Andrea
Subject: RE: EQC approval of LRAPA rules - 2010 Industrial Streamlining Corrections
Andrea: I can’t access those records. What software were you using to try to send them to me? If they’re too large to send as email attachments, I can get our IT guy to help figure out the best way for us to get them.
Paul Garrahan
Assistant Attorney-in-Charge, Natural Resources Section
Oregon Department of Justice
971-673-1943 (Portland Office; T, Th & F)
503-947-4593 (Salem Office; M & W)
From: CURTIS Andrea [mailto:CURTIS.Andrea@deq.state.or.us]
Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 11:31 AM
To: GARRAHAN Paul
Subject: EQC approval of LRAPA rules - 2010 Industrial Streamlining Corrections
Paul,
Attached are records from LRAPA’s 2010 Industrial Streamlining Corrections Rule. We want to assess whether LRAPA’s public notice was satisfactory and whether there’s any need for DEQ to duplicate the public notice before proposing the rules to EQC for adoption.
Attachments include:
· Fiscal Impact Statement (I’ll get a signed copy from LRAPA, but for this exercise, the attached unsigned copy seems fine)
· DEQ’s Notice submitted to SOS
· December 2009 SOS Bulletin
· An affidavit of a newspaper ad published Dec 11, 2009 (there are two other newspaper ads not included that were published 12/26/09 and 12/24/09)
· Notice to interested parties
· LRAPA Board Minutes for January 12, 2010 (with public hearing and rule adoption)
· Hearing Officer Report
We don’t have a letter from DEQ saying the proposed rules are as stringent as DEQ’s. Considering the proposal is a correction to the 2008 rules instead of new requirements, is it ok that we don’t have a letter?
Records for the other LRAPA rulemakings will come in a separate email.
Thanks,
Andrea Curtis
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
Air Quality Division
503-229-5946
From: GINSBURG Andy
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 12:26 PM
To: OLIPHANT Margaret; CURTIS Andrea
Subject: FW: EQC approval of LRAPA rules
Can you get this info to Paul?
Thanks.
Andy Ginsburg
Air Quality Administrator
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality
(503) 229-5397 - Office
(503) 572-7195 - Mobile
From: Garrahan Paul [mailto:Paul.Garrahan@doj.state.or.us]
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 9:59 AM
To: GINSBURG Andy
Subject: EQC approval of LRAPA rules
Andy: To ensure that I provide thorough advice, could you ask your staff to send me all of the relevant LRAPA rulemaking documents used to approve the four rules that the EQC must now approve and submit to EPA for incorporation into the SIP? It would be helpful to have the rulemaking and hearing notices, including the FIS and other related documents.
It would also be helpful, for my comparison, to get the same set of documents for last year’s approval of the Oakridge PM 2.5 plan approval, including both LRAPA’s rulemaking documents and those DEQ used to approve that plan.
I want to include an assessment of whether differences in the processes, if any, might present any legal risks. And also try to figure out how to align the process for the four rulemakings that the EQC needs to approve with the process that worked fairly well for the Oakridge approval.
Thanks.
Paul Garrahan
Assistant Attorney-in-Charge, Natural Resources Section
Oregon Department of Justice
971-673-1943 (Portland Office; T, Th & F)
503-947-4593 (Salem Office; M & W)
*****CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE*****
This e-mail may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the addressee or it appears from the context or otherwise that you have received this e-mail in error, please advise me immediately by reply e-mail, keep the contents confidential, and immediately delete the message and any attachments from your system.
************************************