|
Post by gumby on Jan 25, 2008 16:49:02 GMT -6
I was at the meeting and remember MM talking about the EPA testing, saying they weren't going to rely on Midwest Gen. testing. I'm too lazy to view the meeting again. Anyone else remember exactly what was said? They are going to order a Phase 2 Environmental study. The EPA will 'review' the results of that. According to M2: "Phase I environmental work was already completed and was clear. A Phase II is underway, by us, in an effort to make sure we have as clear an understanding of the situation as is possible. The term sheet includes a right to back out if we don't like the results of the testing. Separately, it also contains the EPA-required commitment of Midwest Gen to cleanup anything that's found. Not that we should trust everything a seller says, but Midwest Generation reports that in the time they've owned the land, they've only had motor oil and gasoline spills, all of which were cleaned up under EPA supervision. Given the presence of an automobile/truck maintenance facility, that sort of contamination is not surprising."
|
|
|
Post by proschool on Jan 25, 2008 17:10:11 GMT -6
Does the term sheet allow us to back out of the AME contract if we do not like the results at the Midwest Generation land?
|
|
|
Post by gumby on Jan 25, 2008 17:16:08 GMT -6
Does the term sheet allow us to back out of the AME contract if we do not like the results at the Midwest Generation land? Good question. I'll ask and see if I get a response.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jan 25, 2008 17:26:57 GMT -6
They are going to order a Phase 2 Environmental study. The EPA will 'review' the results of that. According to M2: "Phase I environmental work was already completed and was clear. A Phase II is underway, by us, in an effort to make sure we have as clear an understanding of the situation as is possible. The term sheet includes a right to back out if we don't like the results of the testing. Separately, it also contains the EPA-required commitment of Midwest Gen to cleanup anything that's found. Not that we should trust everything a seller says, but Midwest Generation reports that in the time they've owned the land, they've only had motor oil and gasoline spills, all of which were cleaned up under EPA supervision. Given the presence of an automobile/truck maintenance facility, that sort of contamination is not surprising." The land has traded many hands and I like the qualifier of 'the time they owned the land'. There were several numerical mismatches between the amount of DFO reported stored on site and the amount reported consumed for electricity production in the yearly(with monthly breakdown) data I found www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia906u.htmland www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia906_920.htmlOne that I pointed out was Jan 1993 reported having 17514 barrels of DFO in their stocks then in Feb reported 16905 with nothing down as being consumed. .. later in the year it shows electrical production and DFO consumption and the math on the stores works out fine. 1992 shows 17524 barrels with 0 consumption of DFO for the entire year and no electricity generated using that fuel (good). Same story for 1991. 17514 in stock, 0 consumed, 0 electricity produced using that fuel. 1990 has use and good math dropping to as low as 15000 barrels by Aug-1990 in stock, then it shows them topping it off to 17514 in November of 1990. That's our starting point in time to figure out where over 600 barrels of DFO went. (This was the most recent event at the site that I can find numerical documentation to something being in error). In the first years of operation, I found multiple such occasions where the stock dropped more than was reported consumed for electrical production.
|
|
|
Post by gumby on Jan 25, 2008 17:31:55 GMT -6
According to M2: "Phase I environmental work was already completed and was clear. A Phase II is underway, by us, in an effort to make sure we have as clear an understanding of the situation as is possible. The term sheet includes a right to back out if we don't like the results of the testing. Separately, it also contains the EPA-required commitment of Midwest Gen to cleanup anything that's found. Not that we should trust everything a seller says, but Midwest Generation reports that in the time they've owned the land, they've only had motor oil and gasoline spills, all of which were cleaned up under EPA supervision. Given the presence of an automobile/truck maintenance facility, that sort of contamination is not surprising." The land has traded many hands and I like the qualifier of 'the time they owned the land'. There were several numerical mismatches between the amount of DFO reported stored on site and the amount reported consumed for electricity production in the yearly(with monthly breakdown) data I found www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia906u.htmland www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/page/eia906_920.htmlOne that I pointed out was Jan 1993 reported having 17514 barrels of DFO in their stocks then in Feb reported 16905 with nothing down as being consumed. .. later in the year it shows electrical production and DFO consumption and the math on the stores works out fine. 1992 shows 17524 barrels with 0 consumption of DFO for the entire year and no electricity generated using that fuel (good). Same story for 1991. 17514 in stock, 0 consumed, 0 electricity produced using that fuel. 1990 has use and good math dropping to as low as 15000 barrels by Aug-1990 in stock, then it shows them topping it off to 17514 in November of 1990. That's our starting point in time to figure out where over 600 barrels of DFO went. (This was the most recent event at the site that I can find numerical documentation to something being in error). In the first years of operation, I found multiple such occasions where the stock dropped more than was reported consumed for electrical production. Ohhh, they aren't going to like reading that in their email.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jan 25, 2008 17:39:36 GMT -6
Ohhh, they aren't going to like reading that in their email. I sent this data and source to Dr. D yest. Told him to make sure they check the path from the tank to the turbines because that fuel had to get from the tank to the turbines somehow (underground piping perhaps? At the very least this data is called 'leverage' to strengthen the District's hand during negotiations. Who knows, the land may drop in price again
|
|
|
Post by gumby on Jan 25, 2008 17:43:07 GMT -6
Just Dr. D? Is he the one inquiries should be directed to now, or did you just choose him for some other reason?
Hopefully he'll get back to you. Otherwise, M2 seems pretty responsive.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jan 25, 2008 17:48:23 GMT -6
Just Dr. D? Is he the one inquiries should be directed to now, or did you just choose him for some other reason? Hopefully he'll get back to you. Otherwise, M2 seems pretty responsive. I started it off with something he mentioned about only DFO only being burned there on 2 occasions and even then for about an hour each time. I let him know his information (wherever he obtained it) was probably incorrect and gave him this data. If I hear nothing by tomorrow, I will FWD a copy to MM with that notation.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jan 25, 2008 19:11:33 GMT -6
Just to toss out there that whatever happened could be as benign as "We decided to fill up all out diesel service vehicles from our on-site supply for those time periods". There's a numerical discrepancy and it's worth finding out if it was something as simple as that or something not so simple.
|
|
|
Post by d204mom on Mar 17, 2008 10:29:05 GMT -6
New Dist. 204 high school secures a home By Justin Kmitch | Daily Herald Staff Published: 1/23/2008 12:36 AM---------------------------------------- Those speaking out against the decision urged the board to ensure the Eola site was free and clear of harmful electromagnetic fields from nearby power lines and that the soil is free from any potential hazards from the Midwest Generation plant. ------------------------------------------ The motion's addendum states the property must be "completely remediated of any and all environmental issues" before the anticipated March 10 closing. I think about this when the revisionists out there make claims about people's motives. And HAHAHA! Everyone understood at the meeting that the site would be remediated before they closed. Wishful thinking.
|
|