Subject: Testing at Station 3
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 09:19:00 -0700 (PDT)

When we do the emissions testing at C/S No. 3, Luepp, we should be aware of 
the positives and negatives.  The positives being the information which Steve 
and company will collect.  This appears to be a  very useful tool.  There is 
also is no permit emission limits associated with the permit at this 
facility.  There also exists the potential to pay lower emissions fees should 
this investigation show that the emissions from the units to be significantly 
lower than what was placed into the permit application.  The downside to this 
effort is that the data we collect may in fact show that our emissions fees 
which we have been paying actually under estimate those submitted in our 
application and we would more than likely be held accountable for the 
difference (1996 to the present).  Additionally, enforcement action could 
result by the Navajos.  I say this to apprise everyone of the positive and 
negative potentials involved in completing this study.  From the emission 
estimates which were placed into the permit application we included a 
defendable buffer or excess of emissions to account for variations in the 
temperature, humidity, engine age and poor engine mechanics should they 
exist.  

And finally, we have the unknown of not knowing what the three units actually 
emit.  These units have never been tested.  This uncertanty in itself may be 
the driver to know so as not to have a situation which was similar to what 
happened at Atoka No. 3 several months ago.