Correspondence between

xxxEND_PAGE:treasury01_b41_7622_7971_008 Dick Relied on Tom and Wayne Workman for the history Here are their comments (1) Mast of these dates involve DEQ et al in which we/Treasury did not play a role i.e., someone else [DEQ] would need to confirm their accuracy. (2) Just quickly, items we would question from the document or need to investigate further... (3) 12/20/12 (p.1) - we don’t have the notification that is referenced (4) 3/29/13 (p.2) — we are not aware of any veto by Kurtz. (5) The early offers by DWSD to reconnect were rejected because of the add’I cost, they were long term & the fact the City had executed a contract with KWA. On Jan 12 ’15 they waived the reconnection fee but there were still issues re the length/term of the commitment. (6) 3/12/15 —the Veolia report did mention corrosion control but the focus was on TTHM which was chlorination issue not related to the lead problem. | believe Treasury funded the study.

Let me know if this is accurate Thanks Dick Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: