Write a subject line for this message:

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.
Testing at Station 3