|
|
Enron Mail |
Larry,
I think you should go forward with the meeting to show that this is a critically important issue for TWP. I hope that Sarah can be there, but if she can't, is there another person in addition to yourself? Assuming Prabat joins Shudeish, we had anticipated this as the first step, particularly because we would like to resolve this with the "first-line" regulators for long-term good relations; Steve Burr will be cheering us on from the sidelines, to the extent he is consulted. If the first meeting is a stonewall, we then have to go to Cathy and Nancy, but let's make the first effort with Shudeish & Prabat. A couple of thoughts. ADEQ was required to give a completeness notice within 41 days of the application, at the latest; altho this time frame may not have been met, it may have been because of follow-up questions on the netting calculation. Also, was there any discussion whether any of the following applied: a. Facility change allowed w/o permit revision (R18-2-317) b. Minor permit revision (R18-2-319.A), which could shorten EPA review time and possibly avoid a public hearing c. Accelerated processing (R18-2-326.N) These may have been hashed out in pre-application meetings, and water under the bridge now, particularly because it appears that ADEQ is viewing these as NEW permits (compare the numbers on DEQ's completeness determination letters with the numbers on the "permit revision applications"), but the story of net benefits to air quality, as well as the need to improve energy supply to California, should be persuasive factors to get this back to head of the line, as you had been told in the spring. It may be that Shudeish and Prabat need to be reminded of the benign nature of this equipment change-over. Bottom line, I think you should go forward Thursday if that is the only day available this week. It is important that TWP know what barriers stand in the way of prompt evaluation and that TWP offer what assistance it can in overcoming those barriers. It is important also that ADEQ understand that there are a number of actions that TWP wants to initiate in order to meet the project schedule that it had developed last spring when it received initial assurances of prompt review. [can you send me that list?] If Shudeish and Prabat are to be barriers, it is important to know as soon as possible so we can start moving up the chain. There are, in fact, a number of energy projects gearing up in Arizona now, and the Corporation Commission's Facility Siting Committee is taking a pro-environment bent (following the Calif AQMDs), but a number of these projects also are dealing with county, rather than state, permits. I will be available Thursday to take before and/or after the DEQ meeting. Van Wolf The information contained in this electronic mail message is confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above, and may be privileged. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone (602-382-6000), and delete the original message. Thank you. G. Van Velsor Wolf Jr. Snell & Wilmer L.L.P. One Arizona Center Phoenix , Arizona 85004-2202 602.382.6201 (direct) 602.382.6000 (main number) 602.382.6070 (fax) vwolf@swlaw.com <<< <Larry.Campbell@enron.com< 9/18/2001 3:19:58 PM <<< Shudeish with the state of Arizona just phoned and said that he and Probaht Baragava are available to meet with us on Thursday at 2:00 pm. This is the only time and day of this week that they will be able to see us. I asked about whether Kathy OConnell and Nancy Wrona would be able to attend this meeting and he stated that their calendars were full this week and would not attend. He will need to know by tomorrow whether to book this meeting and who will be attending. Sarah had mentioned that Thrusday was not a good day for her. Should we schedule this and if so, who will be attending in Sarah's place? Larry Campbell 09/18/2001 08:29 AM To: John Shafer/OTS/Enron@Enron, Louis Soldano/ET&S/Enron@Enron, Jerry D Martin/ENRON@enronXgate, William Kendrick/OTS/Enron@Enron, shead@ensr.com, vwolf@swlaw.com, Richard Melton/ENRON@enronXgate cc: Subject: Telephone Conversation with EPA After the telephone conference call we had on 9/17, I contacted the Roger Kohn permit engineer with EPA about a possible meeting with his agency to resolve and assist the issuance of the air permits for stations 3 and 4. His message back to me was a reiteration of the last request I made to him, that he could see no way that Transwestern would be able to help the EPA in this matter. We discussed the possibility of Transwestern contacting his supervisor, Gerardo Rios, about a potential meeting and he indicated that we could choose this avenue if we desired. Gerardo's telephone number is 415-744-1259. ********************************************************************** This e-mail is the property of Enron Corp. and/or its relevant affiliate and may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient (s). Any review, use, distribution or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive for the recipient), please contact the sender or reply to Enron Corp. at enron.messaging.administration@enron.com and delete all copies of the message. This e-mail (and any attachments hereto) are not intended to be an offer (or an acceptance) and do not create or evidence a binding and enforceable contract between Enron Corp. (or any of its affiliates) and the intended recipient or any other party, and may not be relied on by anyone as the basis of a contract by estoppel or otherwise. Thank you. **********************************************************************
|