Laserfiche WebLink
LIN: So, Ms. Hall, the clarification would be that the applicant as well as the intervenor could <br /> make clarifications based off what the record states? So, we could ask them questions about <br /> certain points that were made on the record pertaining to their portion. Is that correct? <br /> HALL: Without introduction of new facts, yes. <br /> REPLOGLE: Okay. So, an as example, they I'm sorry go ahead, Ms. Galimba. <br /> GALIMBA: No, sorry I think you're probably going; I was confused about this interchange <br /> right now so. <br /> REPLOGLE: Okay, so. If I understand this correctly. I'm just going to pick a topic water <br /> because it was mentioned. Both the applicant and the intervenor can talk to the water question, <br /> but they can't add anything new like, oh, we got another 100,000 gallons coming from <br /> Kawaihae. That wasn't in the original record so you can't add that, but they can address the <br /> water as they understand it to make it clearer. Is that correct? <br /> HALL: Yes, they can present the fact that the information on the record is sufficient to make a <br /> decision to whichever way they go. <br /> REPLOGLE: Okay. Alright, thank you. <br /> CLARKSON: Excuse me Chair. I just don't understand that, because the Appellate Court has <br /> already said that the information on the record is not sufficient to determine whether the <br /> Commission's action was arbitrary and capricious or not. So, if we restrict and we have <br /> restricted ourselves to the information in the record we are declaring that we must only make an <br /> arbitrary and capricious decision on this matter. I mean to me following the court's logic, we're <br /> stuck! <br /> HALL: "—" Commissioner Clarkson that's basically what the applicant and the intervenor will <br /> argue to is whether you are stuck or not, whether that you need that information to approve or <br /> deny the application. They will make their argument on the present record. So, I don't want to <br /> go anymore deeper, because I don't want to give you an idea either way or represent either <br /> argument, but, I would just say that. Their job will be to show you that there's sufficient <br /> evidence on the record to present to support their arguments for approval or denial. <br /> REPLOGLE: Thank you. So, I'm sorry here but, I'd entertain, are we, we have a motion on the <br /> floor. Okay and Mr. Lin would you restate it please. <br /> LIN: I move that the Commission make a decision on the record as presented at our next <br /> Commission hearing. <br /> REPLOGLE: Okay, thank you. roll call please. <br /> LIN: You need a second? <br /> 11 <br /> EXHIBIT B <br />