Laserfiche WebLink
HALL: Let me frame it this way, I do not think that the remand from the ICA commands the <br /> Commission to open the record. I'll say that. I say that it leaves it open ended. If you guys need <br /> additional evidence, I really can't speak to that. I think that if you guys have read through the <br /> entire record and you're prepared to make a decision on that record then there's no need to open <br /> the record. And then the other one, if you feel like you're not prepared to make a decision after <br /> reviewing the whole record, then you may open for limited testimony. But I would advise on <br /> that motion is very broad and that it should probably be much more specific as to what <br /> specifically the Commission is looking for to supplement the record. <br /> REPLOGLE: And we should state that so that would be opening it only to those topics? <br /> HALL: Yes. <br /> REPLOGLE: Okay, thank you. <br /> CLARKSON: Well, if I may amend my motion then it should be reopened only for those items <br /> that the Appellate Court, only those items in the original Commission decision that the Appellate <br /> Court vacated. <br /> HALL: The entire Decision and Order was vacated Commissioner Clarkson. <br /> CLARKSON: Alright, well, what do you call those items that were specifically noted by the <br /> Appellate Court then? <br /> HALL: You would need the specific subject areas. The Court did highlight specific items of <br /> fact that they felt were not supported. <br /> CLARKSON: Right. <br /> HALL: But that doesn't necessarily mean that you couldn't support them with evidence that is <br /> already on the record, but that's up to the Commission if they feel like in an approval or denial <br /> can be supported by the existing record. <br /> CLARKSON: Well, its— <br /> REPLOGLE: Mr. Clarkson, yes. <br /> CLARKSON: Yes, it's clear that the record that support in fact the Court could find no evidence <br /> in the record to support a particular number of water use per student requirement. And so <br /> therefore there isn't clearly enough information in the record for us to reconsider that. I think we <br /> need to get evidence as to where that 60 gallons per student came from, or what a new or current <br /> value might be and I don't see how we can get that number simply by looking at a record where <br /> the Court declared that the information did not exist. <br /> REPLOGLE: Okay. <br /> 6 <br /> EXHIBIT B <br />