|
|
Enron Mail |
Either way is fine with me, however the reason I set it up to come from you
is that if it were to come from Louie or me it would have to go to a Koch lawyer, who in turn would just tell me to have my enviro guy speak directly to their's (which is what they've done in the past.) In the past, having Gary Fuller deal directly with Van Ryn allowed us to better move the ball forward. Lawyers I think should not tangle on this until we reach an impasse or other sticky situation. In my opinion, bringing lawyers in too early just results in a flurry of paper back and forth, but not much gets done. But however you want to do it, we'll do it. Larry Campbell@ENRON 06/19/01 01:29 PM To: Edward Attanasio/Remote/Eott@EOTT, Louis Soldano/ET&S/Enron cc: Scott Jones/Bakersfield/Eott@Eott Subject: Re: NCL -- Soil Contamination Issues Ed, I can send this, but a Legal endorsement on a letter has much more stroke and leverage than a letter coming from an environmental person. Louie, you make the call, should I send this or have one of you guys do it? From: Edward Attanasio@EOTT on 06/19/2001 01:43 PM CDT To: Larry Campbell/ET&S/Enron@ENRON cc: Louis Soldano/Enron@EnronXGate, Scott Jones/Bakersfield/Eott@Eott Subject: Re: NCL -- Soil Contamination Issues I thought we agreed that Larry was going to send the letter I drafted to Van Ryn (a copy of which is attached here for your convenience.) My further research into the California requirements shows that we have reporting and notification requirements for the other contaminations, but not the obligation necessarily to dig further. I think it might be helpful to have another phone call to discuss what the action plan should be. Maybe we should do that? Please let me know. Thanks. --ETA Larry Campbell@ENRON 06/19/01 09:03 AM To: Louis Soldano/ET&S/Enron cc: Scott Jones/Bakersfield/Eott@Eott, Edward Attanasio/Remote/Eott@Eott Subject: NCL -- Soil Contamination Issues Louie, it was my understanding that Legal would put a letter together to Koch concerning this. Get back with me on this, please...... ---------------------- Forwarded by Larry Campbell/ET&S/Enron on 06/19/2001 09:53 AM --------------------------- From: Edward Attanasio@EOTT on 06/13/2001 04:16 PM PDT To: Larry Campbell/ET&S/Enron@Enron cc: Molly Sample/Houston/Eott@Eott, Louis Soldano/Enron@EnronXGate, Scott Jones/Bakersfield/Eott@Eott, Bob Jacobs/Long_Beach/Eott@Eott Subject: NCL -- Soil Contamination Issues Just to follow up, did you send a letter to Van Ryn at Koch re the hydrocarbon and mercury contaminations? If so, could you please send me a copy? Also, have you been able to come up with any further info on what to do about the other soil contamination areas? Do you still want to determine the full lateral and vertical extent of all? FYI, I have made further inquiry as to whether we have any reporting or investigatory duties based upon the levels in the WZI report. I believe the numbers you cited in you 5/21 email may be only part of the story: as you have appropriately noted, in California it is not only concentration levels that matter; rather, other variables such as depth to groundwater, proximity to population centers, etc. determine whether any reporting or remedial (including further investigatory) obligations arise. Therefore, I'm checking further to see how these other variable impact our legal obligations here. (Again, I think this is very important inour case because we want to be careful about potenially jeopardizing our indemnity rights against Koch by performing any Phase II-type activities where not legally required. I expect to have more info on this by the end of the week. Perhaps we can chat then? Thanks. --ETA
|