RE: [gnso-arr-dt] Revised Draft ARR Letter

["Rosette, Kristina" <krosette@xxxxxxx>]

Apologies for belated comments.  This looks great.  Many thanks to you
all for drafting.  
 
I have two questions:  1) What is the point we are trying to make
regarding alternates?  Are we simply raising the possibility without
taking a position?    I was not entirely clear on that.  2)  Are we
comfortable that the 90% number is correct?  I ask only b/c I would have
thought that persons encompassed by ALAC would have accounted for more.


________________________________

        From: owner-gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of William Drake
        Sent: Monday, January 18, 2010 5:17 PM
        To: Caroline Greer
        Cc: cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx; gnso-arr-dt@xxxxxxxxx
        Subject: [gnso-arr-dt] Revised Draft ARR Letter
        
        
        Hi 

        On Jan 18, 2010, at 8:53 PM, Caroline Greer wrote:


                Many thanks to Bill for the considerable polishing and
editing work.


        Sure, and thanks in turn for your input on the text.  Ok, since
Chuck suggested we finish by COB today in order to get it out, attached
is a revised version that takes on board the comments made here and
includes the Chatham footnote.  

        Best,

        Bill