WPC# 2 ZBUUFXx6X@;X@PAPER8@6MSANDRA'S FORM =(!88 *!g88.E XX  pX xO#x6X@;X@# pXpX  Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y O^X#x6X@;X@# pXpX .  ^lined paper@6Mformed paper! =(!88 &*!g88.E XX  pXpX xO#x6X@;X@# pXpX  Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y O^X#x6X@;X@# pXpX .  ^TRY AGAIN)@6MRECENT ATTEMPT TO MAKE COPY )*!g88.EA=#x6X@;X@#=2 ctnx  PAGE 1038+@6ML9! =(!88 +*!g88.E    XX  pXpX xO#x6X@;X@# pXpX  Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y O^X#x6X@;X@# pXpX T-  ^NEWEST FORM@6MBOXED FORM REVISED MAR 1992 .*!g88.E n}  X  pXp xO#x6X@;X@# pp  Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y OX#x6X@ ;X@# pp   w#x6X@ ;X@# pp xD' SANDRA S. WILLIAMS, CCRCVRwBibliogrphy@6MBibliography! =(!88 3*!g88.E   Doc Init84@6MInitialize Document Style8 4*!g88.E     I. 1. A. a.(1)(a) i) a)DocumentҲ2@ p : qa1DocumentE+!*g8Document Style9! =(!88 9*!F *  ׃  a2DocumentE+!*g8Document Style9! =(!88 9*!   __________ __&a7Da3DocumentE+!*g8Document Style9! =(!88 9*! 0     a4DocumentE+!*g8Document Style9! =(!88 9*!  . 2 er ep<pa5DocumentE+!*g8Document Style9! =(!88 9*!  a6DocumentE+!*g8Document Style9! =(!88 9*!  a7DocumentE+!*g8Document Style9! =(!88 9*!` ` ` a8DocumentE+!*g8Document Style9! =(!88 9*!` ` ` 2N6Tech Init:@6MInitialize Technical Style8 :*!g88.E  1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 Technicala1Technical+!*g8Technical Document Style9! =(!88 ;*!4!!"     a2Technical+!*g8Technical Document Style9! =(!88 ;*!*#$    a3Technical+!*g8Technical Document Style9! =(!88 ;*!'%&   2lIba4Technical+!*g8Technical Document Style9! =(!88 ;*!&'(   a5Technical+!*g8Technical Document Style9! =(!88 ;*!&)*  . a6Technical+!*g8Technical Document Style9! =(!88 ;*!&+,  . a7Technical+!*g8Technical Document Style9! =(!88 ;*!&-.  . 2*#XMa8Technical+!*g8Technical Document Style9! =(!88 ;*!&/0  . Pleading8<@6MHeader for numbered pleading paper*!g88.E12   ,#x6X@ ;X@# pX  y*dddyy*dddy HH1 HH2 HH3 HH4 HH5 HH6 HH7 HH8 HH9 H10 H11 H12 H13 H14 H15 H16 H17 H18 H19 H20 H21 H22 H23 H24 H25 H26 H27 H28   Ӳ!*g88?@6MV9! =(!88 ?*!g88.E34REVISION8@@6MBOXED FORM REVISED 5/28/908 @*!g88.E56 XX   Xp xO#x6X@ ;X@# pp  Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y O #x6X@ ;X@# pp  HH y#x6X@;X@# pp D( SANDRA S. WILLIAMS, CVR y2)c!7$&REVISED8D@6MFORMED PAPER LOGGED 12-9-90 D*!g88.E78 XX   pp xO#x6X@;X@# pp  Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y O#x6X@;X@# pp  HH y#x6X@;X@# pp D( SANDRA S. WILLIAMS, CVR yNUMBERED PAG@6MFORMED PAPER WITH NUMBER AT BOTTOM OF PAGE88.E 9:   XX  ppX xO#x6X@;X@# pXpX  Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y O^X#x6X@;X@# pXpX T-  ^copies8K@6Mfor copies9! =(!88 K*!g88.EL;< XX  pXpX xO#x6X@;X@# pXpX  Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y OՆX#x6X@;X@# pXpX .  COPY COPY COPY COPY ĵ REVISED FORM@6MBACKUP TO NEWEST OF 11/15/90 N*!g88.E=> ,  pX xO#x6X@;X@#   Figure 1  Figure 1 y 0X 0y O #x6X@;X@#    y#x6X@;X@#  ,h( SANDRA S. WILLIAMS, CVR y2x0  *!n -"z/#/ALLRIGHT8R@6MLET'S TRY AGAIN=(!88 R*!g88.E ?@   XX   N#x6X@;X@#   Figure 1  Figure 1 y`$,`$,yN #x6X@;X@#    uX#x6X@;X@#   D) SANDRA S. WILLIAMS, CVRuAPAPER8V@6M9/26/929! =(!88 V*!g88.E!AB XX  pX   PX#x6X@;X@# pXpX ! Figure 1 ! Figure 1 y\+\+y Pr#x6X@;X@# pXpX  #SANDRA WILLIAMS, CCRCVRCMrSubHead.Sty@6Mconstitution! =(!88 Z*!g88.E"'CD#X9$B;X#Normal8\@6Mconstitution! =(!88 \*!g88.E#'EF#x6X@;X@#2?$0%D2&7'=Transcript@6Mtranscript9! =(!88 ]*!g88.E$BGH>#x6X@ ;X@#! Figure 1 ! Figure 1 y0*pX0*y>Boxed pages@6MBoxed page, line numbering ona*!g88.E%2IJ  M#Xxa!]#y"/Ldddyy"/pdddyy"/$dddyyF#,dddyyF#PdddyyF#v/dddy `"(#I MX#Xxa"]#J G. W. COLEMAN ASSOCIATES#&d Hh#QXH#у . POST OFFICE BOX 10114 z GREENVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA 29603X  pX No Numberg@6MBoxed page w/o line numberingg*!g88.E&KL  r#x6X@$;X@#  #Xxa%]#y"/Ldddyy"/pdddyy"/$dddyyF#,dddyyF#PdddyyF#v/dddy `#$K rX#x6X@&;X@#  #Xxa']#TG. W. COLEMAN ASSOCIATES#&d Hh(QXH#у T#POST OFFICE BOX 10114 TGREENVILLE, SOUTH CAROLINA 29603X   Title8j@6Mtitle page for Elaine's transcripts*!g88.E'MN #Xu:4ps);X#yxdddy *SANDRA S. WILLIAMS, CCRCVRCM #Xw6}` Ps*;XP#*Associate Reporting Agency, Inc. *409 East North Street *Greenville, South Carolina 29601 *(803) 2338111 2F(?)B*XD+ F1992 FORMm@6MBOXED FORM REVISED JAN 1992 m*!g88.E(xOP X  p O#x6X@+;X@# pp  Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y OX#x6X@,;X@# pp   t#x6X@-;X@# pp xD'SANDRA S. WILLIAMS, CCRCVRtLETHED8q@6MSTATEMENT9! =(!88 q*!g88.E)QR XX >#x6X@.;X@# Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y>d#x6X@/;X@#SANDRA S. WILLIAMS, CCRCVRd1st Page8t@6MNo Box9! =(!88 t*!g88.E*ST pp p x(08"$&@)+-H024P79@C`Ep X church style@6Mf9! =(!88 u*!g88.E+:UV p     2R,F-I.M/UOALL OTHERS@6MREVISED DEC 1992(!88 v*!g88.E,qWX X   xO#x6X@0;X@#   Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y OZX#x6X@1;X@#   `#$L Zt#x6X@2;X@#  SANDRA S. WILLIAMS, CCRCVRCMtGJ LINES8z@6MJUST STRAIGHT LINED PAPER WITH NUMBERS/GJg88.E-)YZ#x6X@3;X@#   y*dddyy*dddyy*%dddy#x6X@4;X@#       qq FIRST PAGE@6MFIRST PAGE BOX WITH CO. NAME AT BOTTOM!g88.E.V[\ X  p O#x6X@5;X@# pp  Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y O #x6X@6;X@# pp ,D"ASSOCIATE REPORTING AGENCY XD%409 East North Street DGreenville, South Carolina 29601 tD)803 2338111DATED FORM@6Mformed paper revised 12-9-90 *!g88.E/]^ XX  ppX xO#x6X@7;X@# pXpX  Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y O^X#x6X@8;X@# pXpX .  ^2Y0XLR1S2~V3XEY#1--NO BOX@6MNEW TITLE PAGE=(!88 *!g88.E0_` pXp p x(08"$&@)+-H024P79@C`Ep X #2 STATEMENT@6MSTATEMENTS FOR ARA!88 *!g88.E1ab 2d dd  pXX     DATE: INVOICE NO. 93* 64 RE: For Services Rendered in the abovecaptioned case: TOTAL AMOUNT DUE hh#(-pp27$* Thanks Sandra! FEDERAL TAX ID: 570947244GRAND JURY F@6MGRAND JURY FORMAT!88 *!g88.E2ocd qq  X  XXp O#x6X@9;X@# pp  Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y O #x6X@:;X@# pp   N#x6X@;;X@# pp  N MINE88@6MHOTPAPER9! =(!88 *!g88.E3ef2Wd4LY5\6]7VaAGRAND JURY@6MGRAND JURY STYLE(!88 *!g88.E4gh pp  XX  q qq p x (#p`h!$pLETTERHEADS@6MLETTER FORMAT =(!88 *!g88.E5Aij   #Xz_ p<7X# 3' * GRAND JURY@6MCREATED JULY 1995!88 *!g88.E6Jkl qq  X  p O#x6X@=;X@#   Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y OX#x6X@>;X@#    N#x6X@?;X@#   N x ACURRENT8@6MCURRENT BOXED PAPER REVISED JULY 95*!g88.E7mn qq  X   xO#x6X@@;X@#   Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y OX#x6X@A;X@#    t#x6X@B;X@#  Sandra S. Williams, CCRCVRCMt2g8Hd9e:cf;fpersonal let@6Mpersonal letterhead88 *!g88.E8op*#*0 xC7#Sandra S. Williams #b&_ xD7X#*Post Office Box 10011 *Greenville, South Carolina 296030011 *(803) 2338111 *FAX (803) 3701036a1Right Par+!*g8Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers!88 *!98qr@   a2Right Par+!*g8Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers!88 *!:Ast@` `  ` ` ` a3Right Par+!*g8Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers!88 *!;Juv` ` @  ` `  2j<g=h>7i?ia4Right Par+!*g8Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers!88 *!e{|` `  hh#@( hh# a7Right Par+!*g8Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers!88 *!?n}~` `  hh#(@- ( 2@j k04ka8Right Par+!*g8Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbers!88 *!@w` `  hh#(-@pp2 -ppp Ыx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@ ;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@ ;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@ ;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@ ;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@ ;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXX9$B;X89 2Times New Roman Bold (TT)Xx6X@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@ ;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXXxa!]3A$Arial Bold (TT)Xxa"]3A$Arial Bold (TT)&d Hh#QXH2 HA`$"Arial Italic (TT)Xx6X@$;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXXxa%]3A$Arial Bold (TT)x6X@&;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXXxa']3A$Arial Bold (TT)&d Hh(QXH2 HA`$"Arial Italic (TT)XXu:4ps);X):4 2Times New Roman Bold (TT)XXw6}` Ps*;XP*6}`  `*Times New Roman (TT)Xx6X@+;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@,;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@-;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@.;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@/;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@0;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@1;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@2;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@3;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@4;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@5;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@6;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@7;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@8;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@9;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@:;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@;;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXXz_ p<7X+_ 0CG Times Bold (Scalable)Xx6X@=;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@>;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@?;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@@;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@A;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@B;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiX*0 xC7**0 @Times New Roman Bold Italic (TT)b&_ xD7X)&_ `6Times New Roman Italic (TT)x6X@E;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@F;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@G;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXXz_ pH7X+_ 0CG Times Bold (Scalable)Xx6X@I;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@J;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXx6X@K;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiXXz_ pL7X+_ 0CG Times Bold (Scalable)Xx6X@M;X@<6X9`("Courier 10cpiX2!#|xNEWEST FORM n}  X  p xO#x6X@E;X@# pp  Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y OX#x6X@F;X@# pp   w#x6X@G;X@# pp xD' SANDRA S. WILLIAMS, CCRCVRw #Xz_ pH7X# DSOUTHERN APPALACHIAN MOUNTAINS INITIATIVE DGOVERNING BODY/OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING ^DSHERATON AIRPORT PLAZA HOTEL D CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA D'December 11, 1996 $D*10:00 a.m. D"R. LEWIS SHAW, CHAIRMAN NEWEST FORM n}  X  pp xO#x6X@I;X@# pp  Figure 1  Figure 1 y.X.y OX#x6X@J;X@# pp   w#x6X@K;X@# pp xD' SANDRA S. WILLIAMS, CCRCVRw!#Xz_ pL7X# pp  #x6X@M;X@# p`  MR. SHAW: I GUESS WE CAN GET STARTED. MY NAME IS LEWIS SHAW FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO MAYBE HAVEN'T MET ME BEFORE. I'M THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL AND MY JOB AT THAT AGENCY IS TO RUN THE STATE'S ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM. AND I HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT I AM TO CHAIR THE MEETING TODAY. HAROLD REHEIS IS UNAVOIDABLY DETAINED, NOT ABLE TO GET HERE. HAVING PROBLEMS WITH SOME OF HIS NEIGHBOR STATES, I UNDERSTAND. SOUTH CAROLINA IN THIS CASE NOT BEING THAT STATE. HE'S UNABLE TO BE HERE AND SENDS HIS REGRETS, SO I WILL BE CHAIRING THE MEETING. I'LL DO THE BEST I CAN TO STAY ON THE AGENDA. I GO TO MANY MEETINGS AND I HATE IT WHEN MEETINGS RUN OVER AND I'VE GOT A PLANE TO CATCH, SO WE WILL END ON TIME TODAY. I WILL MAKE THAT PROMISE TO YOU. BEFORE WE GET REALLY STARTED, LESLIE WANTS TO MAKE A FEW ANNOUNCEMENTS. MS. COX: YES. FOR LUNCH TODAY WE ARE GOING TO BE IN THE ATRIUM, AND THE DEAL WITH THE ROOM IS THAT SAMI HAS TO WRITE ONE CHECK FOR THE MEALS, BUT WE NEED YOU TO PAY US TWELVE DOLLARS AND FORTYFOUR CENTS. THAT INCLUDES EVERYTHING. IT'S A BUFFET LUNCHEON. WE REALLY DIDN'T HAVE ANY WAY THAT WE COULD GO OUT FOR LUNCH WHERE WE'RE LOCATED HERE SO WE WANT TO DO THAT. SO IF YOU COULD, BEFORE YOU LEAVE, GIVE LAURIE MOORHEAD RIGHT HERE NEXT TO ME A CHECK FOR TWELVE DOLLARS AND FORTYFOUR CENTS, WE WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE THAT. MR. LEVITAS: WILL YOU TAKE CASH? MS. COX: WE PREFER A CHECK BECAUSE WE'RE GOING ON TO ATLANTA FROM HERE, BUT WE MAY BE ABLE TO MAKE THE ARRANGEMENTS. MR. SHAW: WHY DON'T WE TAKE JUST A MINUTE TO INTRODUCE OURSELVES IN CASE THERE'S SOME FOLKS MAYBE NEW OR DON'T KNOW EACH OTHER. STEVE, WHY DON'T WE START HERE AND GO AROUND THAT WAY. MR. LEVITAS: I'M STEVE LEVITAS, THE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH AND NATURAL RESOURCES. MS. BREMAN:Č I'M SHEROL BREMAN, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF THE NORTH AND SOUTH CAROLINA PETROLEUM COUNCIL. MR. BAYLE: BRUCE BAYLE WITH THE FOREST SERVICE AT OUR REGIONAL OFFICE IN ATLANTA. MR. BUNYAK: JOHN BUNYAK, THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE, AIR RESOURCE DIVISION IN DENVER. MR. JOY: JIM JOY, THE AIR DIRECTOR FOR SOUTH CAROLINA. MR. SMITH: WINSTON SMITH, THE AIR DIVISION DIRECTOR IN ATLANTA'S REGIONAL OFFICE. MS. ANDERSONCARNAHAN: LINDA ANDERSONCARNAHAN WITH E.P.A. REGION IV. MR. CARR: I'M DAVID CARR WITH THE SOUTHERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER OUT OF CHARLOTTESVILLE. MR. SMITH: ARTHUR SMITH WITH THE SIERRA CLUB IN TENNESSEE. MS. MOORHEAD: I'M LAURIE MOORHEAD. I'M WITH THE SAMI OFFICE. MS. COX: LESLIE COX, SAMI COORDINATOR. MR. ELMORE:Č TOM ELMORE. I WORK WITH THE LAND AND SKY REGIONAL COUNCIL IN ASHEVILLE AND I'M ON LOAN TO SAMI FOR A YEAR. MR. JANSEN: JOHN JANSEN, SOUTHERN COMPANY. MR. HAYNES: ELDEWINS HAYNES, DUKE POWER COMPANY. MR. GRUSNICK: RICHARD GRUSNICK. I'M DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF ALABAMA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT. MR. KLIMEK: ALAN KLIMEK, AIR DIRECTOR OF NORTH CAROLINA. MS. ANDREWS: DIANA ANDREWS, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR AIR IN KENTUCKY. MR. CABOTSMETHURST: LUCY "" WELL, I CAN'T EVEN SAY MY NAME THIS MORNING, CAN I? CHAIRMAN OF THE P.A.C., I GUESS THE NEWLY FIRED CONSULTANT OF THIS STATE AND CHAIRMAN OF THE "" I AM ON THE BOARD OF A CONSERVANCY AND OBVIOUSLY NOT AWAKE. MR. METHIER: I'M RON METHIER, THE GEORGIA AIR DIRECTOR. MS. ZOELLER: ELAINE ZOELLER, EASTMAN CHEMICAL IN KINGSPORT, TENNESSEE. MR. WALTON: I'M JOHN WALTON, A TENNESSEE AIR DIRECTOR. MR. SILVERBERG: IRA SILVERBERG, T.V.A. MR. PITMAN: BILL PITMAN, T.V.A., KNOXVILLE. MR. SHAW: OKAY. AND WE DO HAVE A COURT REPORTER, RECORDER, HERE. IF YOU WOULD ANNOUNCE YOUR NAME WHENEVER YOU STAND UP TO SPEAK OR SAY SOMETHING THAT WILL HELP HER OUT. SHE HAS A LIST BUT I THINK IT WOULD HELP HER IF YOU WOULD DO THAT. SO WE'RE GOING TO GET STARTED WITH THE FIRST AGENDA ITEM, THE INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK. WHO'S GOING TO PRESENT IT? MR. SMITH: I'M ARTHUR SMITH. DOUG NEELEY, CHAIR OF THE TECHNICAL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE WAS NOT ABLE TO BE HERE. I DISCUSSED THIS SOMEWHAT WITH HIS SECRETARY. IT'S SOMETHING ABOUT SOME INSTITUTE OR INSTITUTION THAT HE'S CONFINED TO FOR THE NEXT TWO WEEKS. HE'S ASKED ME TO BE HERE TO REPRESENT THAT COMMITTEE, SO AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO CALL ON OUR TECHNICAL COORDINATOR, TOM ELMORE, TO TELL YOU WHERE WE ARE. MR. ELMORE: IN THAT STACK OF MATERIAL YOU HAVE ON YOUR DESK THERE IS ONE THAT SAYS T.O.C. UPDATE ON TOP, AND I'LL BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO THAT. MOST OF IT, THE MATERIAL I'LL BE WORKING FROM IS IN THE FORM OF OVERHEADS AND I'LL ALSO BE SHARING THE FLOOR WITH ARTHUR AND ELDEWINS HAYNES WITH DUKE POWER COMPANY WHO CHAIRS OUR ATMOSPHERIC MODELING SUBCOMMITTEE, AND SO THIS WILL BE A TEAM EFFORT. THIS IS TO GIVE YOU A BIG PICTURE VIEW. I THINK LUCY MAY RECOGNIZE THIS. IT WAS PREPARED FOR A P.A.C. MEETING A FEW WEEKS AGO. THE WAY WE ARE LOOKING AT THE INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK IS WITH FOUR MAJOR PIECES WHICH ARE GRAYED IN HERE. THE EMISSIONS INVENTORY, ATMOSPHERIC CHEMISTRY AND TRANSPORT MODULE, THE FOUR AFFECTS AREAS LISTED HERE AND THEN THE SOCIOECONOMIC ANALYSIS THAT'S OFF TO THE SIDE. DIRECT COSTS WILL ALSO BE ADDRESSED BUT IN AN ORGANIZATIONAL SENSE WE COMBINED THAT WITH EMISSIONS INVENTORY SINCE SOME OF THE SAME SKILLS RE REQUIRED FOR BOTH OF THOSE TASKS. WE HAVE A RELATIVELY SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME TO MOVE THROUGH A COMPLICATED TOPIC, SO I'M JUST GOING TO READ THROUGH THIS AND I'LL REMIND YOU FOLKS TO SLOW ME DOWN WITH QUESTIONS IF THERE'S AN AREA THAT YOU WANT TO PURSUE IN MORE DEPTH. FIRST I WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT DEFINITIONS. THERE'S A COIN THAT'S BEEN TERMED IN THE TECHNICAL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. IT'S CALLED A RESPONSE SURFACE. I THINK WE'RE PROBABLY NOT THE FIRST ONES TO USE THAT, BUT I'D LIKE TO DESCRIBE IN GENERAL TERMS WHAT WE MEAN BY THAT. I THINK IT WILL MAKE THE FLOW CHART "" HELP THE FLOW CHART MAKE MORE SENSE. IF YOU CONSIDER, FOR INSTANCE, A PLOT OF EMISSIONS VERSUS VISIBILITY, AND VISIBILITY IN THIS CASE REPRESENTING ONE OF THE AIR QUALITY RELATED VALUES, AND WE ASSUME THAT THERE IS SOME SORT OF RELATIONSHIP THAT WE'RE STILL TRYING TO DEFINE BETWEEN EMISSIONS SULPHUR COMPOUNDS AND VISIBILITY. AND GENERALLY, YOU MIGHT ASSUME THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE BETTER VISIBILITY WHEN EMISSIONS ARE LOW AND WORSE VISIBILITY WITH EMISSIONS ARE HIGH. AND SO IN A SIMPLE SITUATION THIS WOULD BE A LINEAR RELATIONSHIP LIKE THIS, BUT NATURE BEING WHAT IT IS, PROBABLY THAT RELATIONSHIP IS NOT LINEAR. BUT WE DON'T KNOW REALLY WHETHER THAT RELATIONSHIP GOES UP OR IT GOES DOWN OR IT CONCEIVABLY IS REAL FLAT FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME. AND SO THE T.O.C. IS SPENDING A LOT OF TIME IN THOUGHT ABOUT RESPONSE SURFACES FOR TWO REASONS. ONE IS TO GIVE POLICY MAKERS EARLY INDICATIONS OF WHAT THE OUTCOME MAY BE AND SECOND IS TO HELP US DEFINE WHAT DETAILED ELEMENTS ARE MODELED. SO THIS PARTICULAR RELATIONSHIP MIGHT HOLD, FOR INSTANCE, IN ONE LOCATION IN ONE CLASS ONE AREA, SAY, THE TOP OF THE SMOKIES, FOR INSTANCE. IF YOU MOVE THAT GEOGRAPHICALLY AND ADD A POINT IN THE SHENANDOAHS AND OTHER CLASS ONE AREAS AND FINALLY TAKE IN THE WHOLE SAMI REGION, THIS COLLECTION OF CURVES BECOMES A RESPONSE SURFACE. SO WHEN YOU ADD THE THIRD DIMENSION YOU MOVE FROM A CURVE TO A SURFACE. AND THEN ALSO YOU HAVE ONE OF THESE RESPONSE SURFACES FOR EACH OF THE PARAMETERS CONCERNED. SO VISIBILITY, ACID DEPOSITION AND OZONE WOULD HAVE A SEPARATE RESPONSE SURFACE. I GUESS THE POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF THIS SORT OF PLOT ARE THAT IF THE CURVE ENDS UP LOOKING SOMETHING LIKE THIS, YOU COULD REALLY DO QUITE A BIT OF INVESTMENT IN CONTROL BEFORE YOU SEE ANY EFFECT AND THEN YOU'D SEE A PRONOUNCED EFFECT. SO, IN OTHER WORDS, WHERE THIS BREAK IS IS FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT FROM A POLICY STANDPOINT. AND ANOTHER WAY TO LOOK AT THIS SAME SORT OF CONCEPT IS FROM THE INVESTMENT PROSPECTIVE. AND THERE ALSO WOULD BE A RESPONSE SURFACE FROM THE INVESTMENT SIDE THAT WITH LOW INVESTMENT YOU MIGHT END UP WITH RELATIVELY POOR VISIBILITY. WITH HIGH INVESTMENT, HOPEFULLY, THE VISIBILITY WOULD IMPROVE. SO THAT'S WHAT WE MEAN BY RESPONSE CURVE OR RESPONSE SURFACE, AND I'LL BE HITTING THOSE AGAIN AS WE MOVE ON. HERE'S AN EXAMPLE OF ONE OF THESE FOR "" CONCEIVABLY FOR ACID DEPOSITION AND HOW IT MIGHT BE USED IN A POLICY SENSE. THERE IS, I THINK, AN INCLINATION FOR THE OTHER COMMITTEES IN SAMI AND PERHAPS THE GOVERNING BODY TO WAIT UNTIL JUNE OF '98 WHEN THE I.A.F. IS COMPLETE OR AT LEAST THAT'S OUR TARGET. AND SO WE'D LIKE TO ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO START GETTING ENGAGED WITH THE POLICY IMPLICATIONS PROCESS MUCH EARLIER THAN THAT, MEANING THIS SPRING. AND THESE ARE SORTS OF PRODUCTS THAT WE HOPE TO BE COMING OUT WITH WITHIN JUST A FEW MONTHS, AND THIS IS WHAT'S BEING CHARACTERIZED AS THE PHASE ONE ANALYSIS. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE DEPOSITION AS AN EXAMPLE HERE, AND THE RATIO BETWEEN CALCIUM AND ALUMINUM IN THE SOIL IS SIGNIFICANT TO SOIL SCIENTISTS, APPARENTLY, AND ONE IS A SORT OF A BRAKE POINT FOR THE ECOSYSTEMS. AND SO IF WE WERE TO RUN OR LOOK AT THE EXISTING INFORMATION WE HAVE AND CONSIDER FOUR DIFFERENT STRATEGIES, THE NOCHANGE STRATEGY WOULD CONTINUE HAVING THAT RATIO, WELL BELOW ONE. THE ECOSYSTEM MIGHT STILL BE IN STRESS. WE COULD APPLY STRATEGY B AND WE WOULD SEE THAT WE APPROACH THAT BALANCE POINT WHERE RECOVERY WOULD START TO OCCUR. STRATEGY A, WE WOULD WELL EXCEED IT AND MOVE TOWARDS THE PRISTINE SITUATION. SO THESE ARE THE SORTS OF EARLY OUTPUTS THAT WE'RE STRIVING FOR OUT OF THE I.A.F. SO THAT WAS RESPONSE CURVE AND RESPONSE SURFACE. ANOTHER SET OF DEFINITIONS I'D LIKE TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT IS WHAT WE MEAN BY BASE CASE AND BASELINE. IF YOU LOOK AT EMISSIONS ON THE VERTICAL AXIS AND TIME MOVING IN THIS DIRECTION, WE ARE AT "" TO ESTABLISH "" I GUESS THERE ARE DIFFERENT WAYS TO TALK ABOUT THIS RELATIONSHIP BUT WITHIN THE T.O.C., WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE BASE CASE AS BEING THIS POINT IN TIME. IT WOULD BE PERHAPS A YEAR LIKE 1990. AND THEN THE BASELINE WOULD BE A PROJECTION THAT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS AS WELL AS GROWTH OF POPULATION, MILES DRIVEN, DEMAND FOR ELECTRICITY AND OTHER GROWTH FACTORS. NOW, I'D LIKE TO ADD A CAVEAT AND EVERY TIME I PUT THIS UP IT DRIVES JOHN CRAZY AND SO HE AND I NEED TO WORK ON WHAT THE REAL SHAPE OF THIS CURVE IS. SO IT'S TURNING STRAIGHT UP LIKE THAT. I THINK JOHN MIGHT SAY THAT IT WOULD BE MORE LIKELY TO LEVEL OUT, BUT THE POINT HERE IS THAT THERE IS A CURVE OF SOME SORT AND THAT THERE WILL BE GROWTH IN DEMAND FOR MILES DRIVEN AND ELECTRICITY AND THAT SORT OF THING. ANOTHER CONCEPT THAT I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE HERE IS THAT SAMI HERETOFORE HAS BEEN DEALING WITH A LIST OF E.M.O.'S. A HUNDRED OR SO WERE ORIGINALLY ON THE LIST. NOW THAT WE'RE GETTING ESTIMATES OF HOW MUCH IT'S GOING TO COST TO RUN THIS MODEL THAT WE'RE BUILDING, WE PROBABLY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO RUN THAT MODEL A HUNDRED TIMES AND WE'LL NEED TO CLUSTER E.M.O.'S INTO STRATEGIES OR GROUPS OF E.M.O.'S, AND FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD, I'M CALLING THEM STRATEGIES. SO IF THIS IS THE BASELINE, THEN ONCE WE ESTABLISH THE BASE CASE, THIS IS THE BASELINE, AND THEN WE'RE READY FOR E.M.O. RUNS. AND SO THERE WILL BE CLUSTERS OF E.M.O.'S THAT WOULD GENERATE STRATEGY A AND STRATEGY B AND VARIOUS SORTS OF RESPONSES AS WE LOOK AT EMISSIONS OUT IN THE FUTURE. SO THIS IS THE DEFINITION OF BASE CASE AND BASELINE THAT T.O.C. IS USING. THIS IS A PIECE THAT WAS IN YOUR MAILOUT, BUT I JUST USE IT HERE. JUST IGNORE THE PRINTED MATERIAL OTHER THAN "" THIS IS THE LAYOUT OF THE FLOW CHART. AND WE'LL DEAL FIRST WITH EMISSIONS INVENTORY, ATMOSPHERIC MODEL, THE SOCIOECONOMIC PART THAT'S ITEM FOUR AND THEN THE EFFECTS MODEL. AND SO I'LL BE STANDING IN FOR CAL OGBURN IN DOING THIS PIECE FROM THE INVENTORY SUBCOMMITTEE. ELDEWINS HAYNES WILL BE COVERING THIS. ARTHUR WILL BE COVERING THE EFFECTS PART, AND I'LL COVER SOCIOECONOMICS. ONE OTHER THING I WANT TO MENTION HERE IS THAT THE WAY THIS IS LAID OUT, IN GENERAL, TIME MOVES FROM TOP TO BOTTOM ON THESE PAGES. IN OTHER WORDS, THE FIRST ITEM ACCOMPLISHED IS AT THE TOP. AND IN GENERAL, PRODUCTS MOVE LEFT TO RIGHT. IF WE HAD UNLIMITED TIME IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO DECIDE COMPLETELY WHAT IT IS THAT WE WENT TO DO IN THE EFFECTS ARENA AND THEN START THE EMISSIONS INVENTORY, PROVIDE INPUT TO THAT, AND THEN DO THE ATMOSPHERIC MODEL AFTER WE'VE COMPLETED THE EMISSIONS INVENTORY. GIVEN THE FAIRLY LIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME THAT WE HAVE, ALL FOUR OF THESE EFFORTS ARE MOVING FORWARD TOGETHER. AND THAT'S NOT THE MOST ORGANIZED WAY TO DO THINGS, BUT TO MEET OUR DEADLINES WE NEED TO DO THAT. AND SO THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS THAT THE FLOW CHART IS AS COMPLICATED AS IT IS. SO EACH OF THE FLOW CHARTS HAS THESE BOXES THAT YOU SEE AT THE TOP HERE. THERE WAS A LITERATURE SEARCH DONE. IT RESULTED IN A CONTRACTOR REPORT AND THEN AN I.A.F. DESIGN THAT WAS PRESENTED TO YOU IN JUNE AND THE GOVERNING BODY APPROVED A GENERALIZED APPROACH AT THAT TIME. SO THE EMISSIONS INVENTORY FOLKS HAVE DIVIDED THEIR WORK INTO FOUR DIFFERENT CATEGORIES. FIRST IS THAT THIS CONTRACT IS "" OH, I WOULD SAY IT WOULD BE SIGNED WITHIN TWO WEEKS. THE CONTRACTOR IS VIRTUALLY SELECTED THERE. THEY'LL BE DOING A BASE CASE INVENTORY SO THAT ONE DOT ON THAT EARLIER BLOCK THAT I INDICTED WOULD BE THAT BASE CASE AND THAT WORK WILL START SHORTLY. WE HOPE TO SIGN A CONTRACT HERE WITHIN A COUPLE OF MONTHS TO START PROJECTING THAT BASELINE. WHEN THAT'S COMPLETE THERE MAY BE "" THERE WILL BE A SEPARATE CONTRACT TO DO EMISSIONS PROJECTIONS AND TO START DEALING WITH THE STRATEGIES, EMISSION MANAGEMENT OPTIONS. AND THEN FINALLY WHEN IT'S WELL UNDERSTOOD WHAT THESE EMISSIONS MANAGEMENT OPTIONS ARE GOING TO BE, THERE WILL BE A SEPARATE CONTRACTUAL EFFORT TO CATEGORIZE THE DIRECT COST. SO WE HAVE REALLY THREE LEVELS OF ACTIVITY PLUS DIRECT COST. EACH OF THOSE ARE FLOWING TO THE RIGHT. THERE'S A PIECE ON THE ATMOSPHERIC MODEL SLIDE THAT FEEDS BACK INTO THIS AND ELDEWINS WILL PROVIDE YOU MORE DETAIL ON WHAT THAT IS. BUT BASED ON SELECTING THOSE EPISODES, WE'LL ADJUST EACH OF THESE OUTPUTS THAT WILL, IN TURN, FLOW TO THE ATMOSPHERIC MODEL AND PROVIDE INPUT TO THAT FOLLOWING EXERCISE. BEFORE WE GET TO THAT SLIDE, LET ME JUST GIVE YOU A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES OF THE SORTS OF PRODUCTS THAT ALREADY EXIST IN THAT LITERATURE REVIEW. AND SO THESE ARE NOX EMISSIONS ACROSS THE STATES BY SOME VERY GENERAL SOURCE CATEGORIES, THE POINT, AREA AND MOBILE. SO YOU HAVE SOME GENERAL SENSE OF WHERE THE EMISSIONS ARE COMING FROM. SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT YOU MIGHT GATHER FROM THIS SORT OF INFORMATION IS IF YOU DON'T INVOLVE SOME OF THE STATES WITH SOME OF THE HIGHER SPIKES, THEN PERHAPS YOU'RE MISSING SOME CONTROL OPPORTUNITIES. AND THE SAME GOES FOR LOOKING AT SOURCES BY SOURCE CATEGORY, THAT IF NOX IS CONSTITUENT THAT IT'S A CONCERN, AND IT'S GENERALLY BELIEVED THAT NOX AFFECTS ALL THREE OF THE CONSTITUENTS THAT WE'RE INTERESTED IN, VISIBILITY, ACID DEPOSITION AND OZONE. IF SAMI DEVELOPS STRATEGIES THAT DON'T INVOLVE ONROAD VEHICLES OR DON'T INVOLVE ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION, THEN IT WILL BE REALLY CHALLENGING TO BE EFFECTIVE IN WORKING IN SOME OF THESE NARROWER SLICES OF THE PIE. SO I WOULD SUBMIT THAT FOLKS AT THE POLICY LEVEL CAN START THINKING IN GENERAL TERMS ABOUT WHAT THOSE STRATEGIES MIGHT BE BASED ON INFORMATION THAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN PROGRESS. SO AT THIS POINT I'LL TURN IT OVER TO ELDEWINS AND ASK THAT HE WALK YOU THROUGH THIS PIECE. MR. HAYNES: WELL, LET ME SEE WHAT I CAN DO WITH THIS. BASICALLY, WHAT THE ATMOSPHERIC MODELING PORTION IS IS IT'S LIKE THE MIDDLE MAN. WE'RE TAKING THE INFORMATION FROM THE EMISSIONS AND WE'RE PROCESSING IT AND PROVIDING DATA THAT WE USE FOR THE EFFECTS. THIS PROVIDES DETAILS ON WHAT THE ATMOSPHERIC MODELING IS ALL ABOUT. BEFORE WE DO THE MODELING, FIRST OF ALL, THE ISSUE "" YOU HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS MODELING WILL TAKE A LONG TIME IF YOU WERE TO DO IT WHAT THE MODELERS CONSIDER TO BE THE RIGHT WAY. YOU WOULD WANT TO MODEL A YEAR OR SEVERAL YEARS. ALL THIS TAKES "" IT JUST TAKES TOO LONG. IT'S JUST NOT PRACTICAL. YOU COULD SELECT ONE YEAR AND TAKE A FAIR AMOUNT OF TIME, BUT THEN YOU HAVE PRACTICAL PROBLEMS AS TO WHICH YEAR YOU SHOULD PICK. FOR INSTANCE, A GOOD YEAR FOR OZONE MAY BE A NOT SO GOOD YEAR FOR ACID DEPOSITION WHERE YOU NEED A LOT OF RAINFALL TO GET. SO WHAT WE'VE DECIDED TO DO WAS TO GO THROUGH AN EPISODE SELECTION PROCESS BY WHICH WE HAVE GOTTEN THE CONTRACTOR TO LOOK AT THE DATA SET OF AIR QUALITY, ACID DEPOSITION DATA AND METEOROLOGICAL DATA TO DEVELOP A SUBSET FOR A TENYEAR PERIOD WHERE CERTAIN TIME PERIODS ARE SELECTED THAT WILL CAPTURE THE ESSENCE OF ALL THESE DIFFERENT EFFECTS THAT WE WANT TO MODEL, OZONE, VISIBILITY, ACID DEPOSITION. AND THEY'RE IN THE PROCESS OF DOING IT NOW. THEY WILL HAVE THOSE RESULTS PROBABLY IN JANUARY. MS. ANDREWS: ELDEWINS, ARE YOU SAYING THAT THEY'RE GOING TO MORE OR LESS TAKE A COMPOSITE OF PERIODS FROM MANY YEARS TO DEVELOP A SNAPSHOT THAT WOULD BE A OZONE EPISODE AND THEN YOU'D MOVE TO A SEPARATE ACID DEPOSITION EPISODE? MR. HAYNES: WELL, IDEALLY, WHAT YOU'D HAV E "" THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. IDEALLY, WHAT WOULD BE DEVELOPED IS A SET OF DAYS OR A SET OF EPISODES. MS. ANDREWS: FROM MULTIPLE YEARS? MR. HAYNES: THAT MAY COVER MULTIPLE YEARS. BUT THE IMPORTANT THING IS NOT NECESSARILY THAT IT COVERS MULTIPLE YEARS, BUT IT COVERS MULTIPLE SITUATIONS SO THAT YOU HAVE REPRESENTED IN THERE THE ESSENCE OF THESE DIFFERENT EFFECTS. IN OTHER WORDS, FROM THE DAYS THAT ARE SELECTED THERE WILL BE SOME DAYS THAT WERE GOOD DAYS FOR OZONE. THERE WILL BE SOME THAT WILL BE GOOD DAYS FOR CAPTURING THE RANGE OF VISIBILITY. SOME THAT WILL HAVE GOOD DAYS FOR ACID DEPOSITION, THAT IS, CAPTURING ACID DEPOSITION EVENTS. SO, YOU KNOW, I MEAN IT'S A BREAKING AWAY "" AND I WASN'T SURE I WAS GOING TO NEED THIS. I BORROWED THIS, BUT IN CONCEPT, IT'S THE SAME KIND OF THING WHETHER YOU'RE LOOKING AT OZONE OR A VARIETY OF THE ISSUES. BUT WHAT YOU HAVE HERE, YOU HAVE FOUR "" THIS IS JUST A VERY GENERIC HYPOTHETICAL SITUATION. BUT YOU'D HAVE FOUR DIFFERENT KINDS OF EFFECTS. THERE ARE SEVEN BLOCKS ON EACH OF THESE BAR GRAPHS. EACH ONE MAY REPRESENT A DIFFERENT EPISODE. NOW, THE SAME EPISODE IS OCCURRING FOR EACH OF THESE EFFECTS, BUT EACH EPISODE MAY BE REPRESENTATIVE OF A CERTAIN FRACTION OF OZONE "" OF THE OZONE SPECTRUM OR A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF THE ACID DEPOSITION SPECTRUM, IN OTHER WORDS, A SPECTRUM OF EVENTS. SO FOR THIS SITUATION IT'S A "" THIS FRACTION OF THE WHOLE. FOR ANOTHER, IT'S A SMALLER FRACTION AND SO FORTH. SO THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE THE "" YOU HAVE SEVEN DIFFERENT BLOCKS BUT DEPENDING ON WHICH THING YOU'RE LOOKING AT, THEY ARE REPRESENTATIVE OF A CERTAIN FRACTION. WHAT THE EPISODE SELECTION PROCESS WILL DO IS DEVELOP A WAITING SCHEME SO THAT RATHER THAN MODEL HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF DAYS, WE MAY HAVE ON THE ORDER OF FIFTY DAYS, BUT THEY WILL DETERMINE THAT A GIVEN DAY OR GIVEN PERIOD IS REPRESENTATIVE OF SOME PERCENT OF OZONE OCCURRENCES OR SOME PERCENTAGE OF ACID DEPOSITION OCCURRENCES, SO THAT WE'RE BUILDING A "" IT IS AN ARTIFICIAL BUT REPRESENTATIVE YEAR OR PERIOD. MR. MICHAELS: MAY I OFFER A COMMENT? IF WE'RE SELECTING EPISODES AND TRYING TO CROSS THE SPECTRUM FOR THESE VARIOUS EFFECTS "" MR. HAYNES: THAT'S CORRECT. MR. MICHAELS: "" I PRESUME, FOR EXAMPLE, WE LOOK AT SITUATIONS FROM HIGH VISIBILITY TO LOW VISIBILITY. WE HAVE TO ADJUST VISIBILITY AS WELL KNOWN IN THE RAFEREE (PHONETIC) LITERATURE FOR SYNOPTIC WEATHER TYPES. THE NUMBER OF SAMPLE SIZE, THE SAMPLE SIZE TO BE SCIENTIFI CALLY DEFENSIBLE RISES DRAMATICALLY EVEN JUST FOR VISIBILITY, AND I WOULD SUBMIT THAT A BALLPARK FIGURE OF FIFTY DAYS IS NOT GOING TO BE SUFFICIENT TO CARRY THE DAY UNDER ATTACKS OF CRITICS. MY POINT IS IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO, SAY, FIFTY OR SIXTY DAYS, WHY NOT JUST THROW ALL THE DAYS IN. IT'S NOT THAT MUCH MORE DIFFICULT TO USE DAILY DATA. YOU ARE WORKING FROM TAPES AND RECORDS THAT ARE READABLE NOW ON OUR LARGE MACHINES. YOU KNOW, MAYBE TAKE THREE OR FOUR TIMES AS MUCH TIME BUT GIVE YOU A MUCH MORE ROBUST RESULT. HAVE YOU CONSIDERED THAT? MR. HAYNES: IN REALITY IT'S NOT A PRACTICAL THING. IN TERMS OF "" AGAIN, I STARTED OUT SAYING THAT WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS MODEL ALL THE DAYS, BUT BECAUSE OF THE AMOUNT OF TIME IT TAKES RUNNING THROUGH COMPUTERS, IT'S JUST NOT A PRACTICAL THING FOR US TO DO. THE DATA SET THAT YOU COULD LOOK AT IS TREMENDOUS. BUT IN TERMS OF THE SCOPE OF WORK THAT WE'VE ASSIGNED FOR THE EPISODE SELECTION, BASICALLY THE EPISODES THAT WE SELECTED WILL BE DAYS "" WILL BE PERIODS THAT ARE REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE SMOKY MOUNTAIN AREAS. SO THE GREAT SMOKY MOUNTAINS AND SHENANDOAH, THE DATA COLLECTED IN THOSE LOCATIONS, AIR QUALITY, METEOROLOGY, THE DATA FROM THOSE AREAS WILL BE USED TO GENERATE THE BASIS FOR SELECTING THE EPISODE DAYS. NOW, I KNOW THAT IF WE GO THROUGH THE PROCESS "" I THINK WHAT OUR CONTRACTOR MAY ORIGINALLY COME UP WITH MAY BE ON THE ORDER OF MAYBE A HUNDRED AND FIFTY DAYS, BUT BECAUSE OF TIME AND BUDGET, WE'RE GOING TO ASK THEM TO COME UP WITH THAT ORIGINAL ESTIMATE AND THEN COME UP WITH OTHER ESTIMATES THAT ARE USING A SMALLER AND SMALLER NUMBER OF DAYS SO THAT "" WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF DROPOFF. YOU'RE LOSING SOME OF THE DETAILS ON YOUR SPECTRUM AND, LET'S SAY, LET'S TAKE ONE OF THESE BAR CHARTS, FOR INSTANCE. LET'S SAY YOU HAVE SEVEN EPISODES AND WE DECIDED NO, WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE TIME OR THE MONEY FOR THE SEVEN EPISODES FOR WHATEVER REASON. WHAT CAN WE CUT OUT AND STILL HAVE A FAIRLY REPRESENTATIVE SPECTRUM. WELL, LET'S SAY, THIS SMALL LITTLE SLICE RIGHT HERE. IT'S NOT A WHOLE LOT OUT OF THIS WHOLE BAR CHART, BUT IT MAY REPRESENT THE SAME NUMBER OF DAYS AS THIS ONE DOWN HERE. SO LET'S SAY LET'S NOT INCLUDE THIS EPISODE. SO HOW MUCH DO WE LOSE? FROM THIS BAR WE ONLY LOSE A SMALL PERCENTAGE. SO I SAY THIS IN TERMS OF THIS BEING THE CONCEPT OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, THAT WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO "" IF WE'RE GOING TO MODEL ALL THE DAYS, YOU GO THROUGH THE EPISODE SELECTION PROCESS. YOU MAY MODEL MOST OF THE DAYS, BUT WE CAN ONLY MODEL SOME OF THE DAYS, AND WE WANT TO STILL HAVE A DATA SET THAT'S REPRESENTATIVE. MR. MICHAELS: HAVE YOU SELECTED THE CONTRACTOR FOR THE EPISODE ANALYSIS? MR. HAYNES: YES, WE HAVE. MR. MICHAELS: WHO IS IT? MR. HAYNES: IT'S S.A.I. MR. MICHAELS: WHO'S S.A.I.? MR. HAYNES: SYSTEMS "" SHARON DOUGLAS. MR. ELMORE: PAT, LET ME "" THERE'S SOMETHING I NEGLECTED TO POINT OUT, WHAT THESE LITTLE ASTERISKS MEAN, AND UP THERE, THIS ACROSS HERE IS THAT CONTRACTOR AT WORK. AND THE ASTERISKS MEANS IT'S AN EARLY PRODUCT AND WE NEED SOME COMMENTS. IT'S EXPLAINED DOWN HERE. IN THAT PROCESS, WE'RE ASKING YOU TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT UNCERTAINTY, AND SO IF THEY TAKE THE FULL "" IF WE RUN, YOU KNOW, ALL TEN YEARS OF RECORDS THROUGH THE COMPUTER MODEL, I MEAN THE BUDGET IS WELL BLOWN AT THAT POINT, BUT WE'RE TOLD "" WELL, THAT'S WHAT I'M TOLD. BUT HOW I PICTURE IT, WE'RE TOTALLY CERTAIN IF WE RUN THE ENTIRE RECORD, SO IT WILL MATCH THAT EXACTLY. AND SO THEY ARE SORTING THAT ENTIRE RECORD IN WAYS THAT WILL REDUCE THE NEED TO RUN THAT ENTIRE RECORD AND TRACK THE UNCERTAINTY EACH TIME THAT WE REDUCE "" WE MAKE ONE OF THOSE ASSUMPTIONS. SO I THINK YOUR CONCERN ABOUT HOW ACCURATE THIS WILL BE "" WE'RE EXPECTING TO GET THAT FROM THE CONTRACTOR WITHIN A FEW MONTHS AND IT WILL BE IN THAT REPORT AND WE WELCOME YOUR HELP. MR. HAYNES: I THREW THAT OUT JUST TO ANSWER A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT THE EPISODE SELECTION WAS ABOUT. THAT IS, AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THIS CHART, IS A SMALL PART. IT'S AN IMPORTANT PART BUT IT'S A SMALL PART OF THE ENTIRE PROCESS. ONCE THE EPISODES ARE SELECTED, WE'RE PROVIDED THAT INFORMATION, WE ALSO HAVE "" AT PRESENT WE HAVE "" WE'RE WORKING ON AN R.F.P. TO GET AN ATMOSPHERIC MODELING CONTRACT OUT. SO THE ACTUAL CONTRACTOR OBVIOUSLY HAS NOT BEEN SELECTED YET, BUT IN THE PROCESS THAT GROUP WILL BE SELECTED AND THEY WILL TAKE THE EPISODE SELECTION DATA AND START THE MODEL PREPARATION, GENERATE THE INPUT FILES. AFTER THE BASIC INFORMATION FOR THE MODEL IS PUT TOGETHER, WE'RE DRAWING ON THE BASE EMISSIONS INFORMATION, THE BASE CASE EMISSIONS FROM THE EMISSIONS INVENTORY GROUP, AND WE RUN THE MODEL FOR THOSE PARTICULAR EPISODE DAYS THAT WE'VE COVERED AND WE TABULATED OUR BASE CASE RESULTS. WITHOUT GOING INTO TOO MUCH DETAIL, ONCE THEY'VE GOT THE BASE CASE SETTLED THEN THERE WILL BE A SERIES OF SENSITIVITY ANALYSES THAT WILL BE DONE. THIS WILL NOT ONLY CHECK THE RESPONSIVENESS OF THE MODEL TO WHAT KIND OF "" TO GIVE US AN IDEA OF WHAT KIND OF SENSITIVITIES THAT IT MAY HAVE, ERRORS IN INPUTS, FOR INSTANCE, BUT WILL ALSO ALLOW US TO BE ABLE TO GENERATE OUR RESPONSE SURFACES. FOLLOWING THAT WE'LL GO THROUGH THE FEATURE CASE ANALYSIS ONCE WE HAVE OUR BASE CASE DONE, GO THROUGH THE FUTURE "" WE'RE LOOKING AT TWO FUTURE YEARS RIGHT NOW, 2010 AND 2030. AND FOR EACH OF THOSE FUTURE BASELINE YEARS, BASELINE SITUATIONS, WE'LL HAVE, AGAIN, NEW INVENTORIES THAT WE DEVELOPED FOR THOSE PERIODS AS INPUT. WE USE THE SAME METEOROLOGY AS IN OUR BASE CASE. AND SEE WHAT THE EFFECT WOULD BE OF EMISSIONS CHANGES, WHETHER IT'S JUST, IN THIS CASE, JUST A CLEAN AIR ACT IMPLEMENTATION. SEE WHAT THE EFFECT OF THAT IS IF WE WERE TO REPEAT THOSE SAME CONDITIONS OVER AGAIN. IF THOSE RESULTS ARE FAVORABLE, THEN "" WELL, WHATEVER THOSE RESULTS ARE WE GIVE THEM TO THE EFFECTS GROUP AND THEN THEY'LL DETERMINE HOW FAVORABLE IT IS. MS. ANDREWS: ELDEWINS? SORRY AGAIN. IS THERE SOMETHING SACRED ABOUT THE 2010 OR WAS THAT JUST A NICE DECADE OR I GUESS I WAS THINKING OF OTAG. WE'RE GROWING TO 2007 AND IT SEEMS LIKE WE COULD USE SOME OF "" WE COULD DRAW OFF OF THAT FOR EFFICIENCY. MR. HAYNES: WELL, I GUESS THERE'S A RELATIONSHIP TO THAT BUT BASICALLY, A LOT OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT MANAGEMENT WILL BE IMPLEMENTED FULLY AT THAT POINT. MS. ANDREWS: AT 2007? MS. ANDERSONCARNAHAN: YES. 2007, VERSUS THIRTEEN YEARS. MR. ELMORE: IF I COULD TOSS SOMETHING IN HERE. THE POLICY COMMITTEE MET LAST WEEK AND THAT ISSUE CAME UP. THEY'VE SET UP A COMMITTEE TO LOOK AT CONTROL STRATEGIES GENERALLY AND A WAY TO GROUP E.M.O.S IN A LOGICAL FASHION AS TO WHICH YEARS TO USE, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S 2010 OR 2007 TO MATCH UP WITH OTAG. THERE SOME ADVANTAGES THERE, SO AS FAR AS THAT GROUP'S CONCERNED, THAT'S AN OPEN ISSUE AND THE ATMOSPHERIC SUBCOMMITTEE CONTINUES TO TALK ABOUT TIME FRAMES, BOTH HOW FAR OUT WE NEED TO GO, FIFTY YEARS OR WHATEVER, TO GET THE TOTAL PICTURE, AS WELL AS HOW MANY OF THESE YEARS CAN WE AFFORD TO RUN. AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO STRIKE A BALANCE THERE. SO I THINK THE DISCUSSION IS ONGOING AND WE WELCOME YOUR SUGGESTIONS. MR. MICHAELS: EXCUSE ME. ON MY CHART THERE'S AN ASTERISK UNDER ATMOSPHERIC CONTRACTOR SELECTED AND AN 800K. IS THAT TRUE? MR. ELMORE: WHERE DO WE HAVE THAT? MS. ANDREWS: IS NOT AN ASTERISK. IT'S A DOLLAR SIGN. MR. ELMORE: YEAH, EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS IS THE ESTIMATED PRICE. MR. MICHAELS: AND SO THAT GROUP HAS NOT BEEN SELECTED? MR. HAYNES: NO. MR. ELMORE: NO. THE REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS WILL BE PRESENTED TO THE T.O.C. ON THURSDAY AND IF THEY APPROVE, IT WILL BE ISSUED EARLY NEXT WEEK, SO WE'LL BE INTO CONTRACTOR SELECTION AT THAT POINT. MR. HAYNES: OKAY. ANYWAY, AS WE CONTINUE ON, WE DO CLEAN AIR ACT AND WE WORK ON THE BASELINE. ANYWAY, WE'VE DONE THAT ANALYSIS AND IT GOES TO EFFECTS. WE WILL ALSO LOOK AT THE VARIOUS E.M.O. STRATEGIES. ESPECIALLY IF THE CLEAN AIR ACT IMPLEMENTATION BY ITSELF IS NOT GETTING THE KIND OF RESULTS THAT SAMI IS INTERESTED IN, CERTAINLY WE'D WANT TO LOOK AT THE DIFFERENT E.M.O. STRATEGIES. WE CAN MODEL THOSE AS TIME PERMITS. THAT GETS DONE AND THOSE RESULTS ALSO ARE "" FOR EACH STRATEGY WE HAVE TO HAVE ADDITIONAL INPUT FOR EMISSIONS INVENTORY. WE GENERATE THE CONCENTRATION FOR DEPOSITIONS FROM THAT AND GIVE THOSE TO THE EFFECTS GROUP AS WELL. ALONG THESE DIFFERENT MAIN STEPS THERE ARE PERIODIC REPORTS, MOSTLY VERBAL PRESENTATION, I THINK, IN NATURE, CONCERNS OF PROGRESS JUST TO KEEP YOU GOING, KEEP YOU UP TO SPEED WITH WHAT'S GOING ON AND TO FIELD QUESTIONS AS NECESSARY. AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE BUDGET FOR THIS IS "" CURRENTLY LOOKING AT EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS AND HOPEFULLY, WE CAN HAVE THE CONTRACTOR IN A "" LET'S NOT SAY A PERFECT WORLD, BUT IN A GOOD WORLD. THEY ARE ACTUALLY STARTING TO DO WORK PROBABLY LATE FEBRUARY OR MARCH OF NEXT YEAR. MR. WALTON: JOHN WALTON OF TENNESSEE. I'D JUST LIKE TO ASK A QUESTION. IF WE GET DOWN BEYOND THE CLEAN AIR ACT AND WE HAVE IN OUR PACKAGE HERE A LETTER HERE FROM RICHARD WILSON. IT WAS WRITTEN TO GEORGE FRAMPTON SAYING THAT E.P.A. IS PLANNING ON PROPOSING STANDARDS FOR EXISTING INDUSTRIES BY THE END OF '97. IS THE GROUP GOING TO CALL HIM TO COME AND TELL YOU WHAT HE'S THINKING ABOUT DOING OR WHAT E.P.A. IS THINKING ABOUT DOING? BECAUSE ONCE YOU GO BEYOND A CLEAN AIR ACT, IF AT THE END OF '97 E.P.A. IS GOING TO IMPOSE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY FOR EXISTING INDUSTRY, AND I ASSUME WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BIG INDUSTRY, WHICH IF THEY WERE BUILDING NOW WOULD BE SUBJECT TO P.S.D., THAT WOULD ALMOST HAVE TO BE CONSIDERED BEFORE WE MOVED ON BEYOND THE CLEAN AIR ACT. YOU KNOW, WHAT IS E.P.A. CONTEMPLATING? AND THERE'S A LETTER IN HERE FROM HIM TO GEORGE FRAMPTON AND ONE FROM GEORGE FRAMPTON BACK SAYING, WE LIKE IT. AND I'M JUST ASKING A QUESTION, YOU KNOW. AT THAT POINT EVERYBODY'S GOING TO BE AWFUL NERVOUS IF YOU DECIDE TO GO ON AND DO SOMETHING AND E.P.A. IS GOING TO BE PROPOSING A STANDARD THAT IF WE WOULD DO SOMETHING THEY MIGHT COULD TURN AROUND AND SAY A FEW YEARS DOWN THE LINE, WELL, WE COULD HAVE DONE IT FOR TEN MILLION. NOW WE'VE GOT TO ADD ON. IT'S GOING TO COST US ANOTHER HUNDRED MILLION. SO I'M JUST ASKING A QUESTION. IS HE GOING TO BE REQUESTED OR SOMEBODY IN THE KNOW REQUESTED TO COME AND SPEAK BEFORE THE FUTURISTIC STUFF IS REALLY DONE? MR. SMITH: WELL, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO DEVELOP THAT INFORMATION AS WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS. WE CERTAINLY DON'T HAVE IT NOW. MR. WALTON: OKAY. I UNDERSTAND. MR. SMITH: IT'S A LONG TIME, UNFORTUNATELY, BEFORE WE WILL NEED THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL. MR. JANSEN: LET ME RESPOND. THIS IS JOHN JANSEN. A LITTLE HISTORY. AS WE WERE DEVELOPING ALL OF THIS I WAS SORT OF RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL THOSE STARS, AND AFTER THE POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING LAST WEEK, I COMMITTED TO GO BACK AND CLARIFY A LITTLE BIT WHAT I MEANT WHEN I PUT A LOT OF THESE STARS UP BECAUSE THEY DON'T ALL MEAN THE SAME THING. GENERALLY, THEY MEAN SAMI REVIEW, GENERALLY. BUT WE WERE TRYING TO DEFINE THE INTERFACE BETWEEN THE POLICY COMMITTEE AND THE T.O.C., AND WHERE DOES THE T.O.C. NEED GUIDANCE FROM THE POLICY COMMITTEE IN ORDER TO GET THIS JOB DONE? AND I'VE LISTED SIX QUESTIONS, SEVEN QUESTIONS IN AN EMAIL I SENT LAST NIGHT TO TOM AND BOB KERR. AND ONE OF THE KEY QUESTIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED GUIDANCE FROM THE POLICY COMMITTEE ON IS WHAT DEFINES THAT BASELINE? WHAT DEFINES THE CLEAN AIR ACT IMPLEMENTATION? I THINK CLEARLY WHAT ONE IS GOING TO ASSUME ABOUT PROGRAMS LIKE THE ONE MENTIONED IN THAT LETTER IS GOING TO BE A CRUCIAL DECISION THAT WILL HAVE TO BE DECIDED BY SAMI AS A WHOLE, BUT PROBABLY THE POLICY COMMITTEE. IS THAT GOING TO BE IN OR OUT? OTAG IS AN EXAMPLE WHERE THE "" WHAT IS THE EQUIVALENT OF THE FUTURE BASELINE THERE, THEY DECIDED NOT TO PUT IN THE "" LET'S JUST SAY COST, FOR EXAMPLE. THEY DECIDED NOT TO PUT IN PHASE THREE OF THE M.O.U. BUT THAT WAS THEN THE FIRST LEVEL OF STRATEGY ADDED AS AN ADDITIONAL STRATEGY BEYOND. SO THOSE DECISIONS WILL HAVE TO BE MADE AND THAT'S HOW I WOULD RESPOND, JOHN, IS THAT WE'VE GOT TO GET THE POLICY COMMITTEE THINKING ABOUT WHAT DEFINES THAT BASELINE. AND THERE'S A LOT OF ISSUES TO BE DEALT WITH.MR. ELMORE: LET ME ADD A LITTLE TO THAT, IS THAT IF "" WHOEVER IT IS "" WELL, I MEAN THERE ARE SEVERAL DIFFERENT MENTIONS THAT THINGS ARE IN FLUX, THE NEW PARTICLE STANDARDS, NEW OZONE STANDARDS. ALL THESE THINGS ARE PART OF THE DEFINITION OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS. AND SO IF WE CAN KNOW IN THE NEXT FEW WEEKS WHAT THAT RELATES TO IN TERMS OF CONTROLS, THEN WE CAN CRANK IT INTO THE BASELINE. BUT AFTER OUR CONTRACTOR HAS COMPLETED THAT WORK, THEN WE'LL HAVE TO ADDRESS IT AS A STRATEGY SURROGATE, YOU KNOW, TO ADJUST THIS BASELINE IN SOME WAY. AND SO EVERY TIME WE ADD A NEW DIMENSION LIKE THAT, WE'LL BURN ONE OF OUR STRATEGY RUNS. SO I MEAN YOU'VE GOT TO DO IT TO KNOW WHAT THE BASELINE REALLY IS. BUT HAVING A MOVING TARGET DOESN'T MAKE IT ANY SIMPLER TO PUT THIS MODEL TOGETHER. MR. HAYNES: I'M JUST GOING TO CLOSE OUT WITH ONE LAST THING. THE RESULTS ON QUALITIES CHARTS HERE. YOU SEE A BUNCH OF DATES AND THE DATES ARE "" RIGHT NOW THESE ARE NOT SET DATES. THEY ARE DRAFT, HYPOTHETICAL, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT TYPE OF DATES. REALLY, THE DATES THAT WE'LL COME UP WITH WILL DEPEND UPON THE ATMOSPHERIC MODELING CONTRACT, AND DEPENDING ON WHAT THEY FEEL THEY CAN DO FOR THE MONEY FOR WHAT WE'RE ASKING, WE WILL, IN THE PROCESS OF LOOKING OVER ALL PROPOSALS, ONCE THAT'S SELECTED, THEN WE'LL REALLY HAVE A BETTER IDEA OF WHAT THE SCHEDULE REALLY IS. AND, WELL, UNLESS THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR ME, I'M GOING TO TURN THE PRESENTATION OVER TO ARTHUR. MR. ARTHUR SMITH: WELL, I WILL BRIEFLY ADDRESS THE EFFECTS SECTION OF THE WORK. WE HAVE HELD A WORKSHOP ABOUT A MONTH AGO ON OZONE. THERE WILL BE A WORKSHOP TOMORROW IN ATLANTA ON ACID DEPOSITION AND A WORKSHOP ON FRIDAY IN ATLANTA ON VISIBILITY. THESE ARE ALL, IN OUR VIEW, PHASE ONE INVESTIGATIONS IN THAT THEY TEND TO HELP DEVELOP RELATIONSHIPS AND HELP DEVELOP STRATEGY FOR THE EFFECTS GROUP TO ADDRESS. THE PHASE TWO STRATEGY, THAT WILL BE THE DEFINITIVE THINGS THAT WE USE TO DECIDE WHERE WE'RE GOING FROM HERE. IN OTHER WORDS, HOW THE AIR QUALITY RELATED VALUES WILL CHANGE AS AIR QUALITY IS CHANGED. THERE WILL BE AN ACID DEPOSITION STUDY ON TWO LIMITED AREAS, THE SMOKIES AND SHENANDOAH, AS PART OF THE PHASE ONE WORK, AND WE'RE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING GETTING THAT CONTRACT STARTED TOMORROW. PHASE TWO, THEN, WILL TAKE THAT SORT OF APPROACH, WHAT WE LEARN FROM THAT, AND APPLY IT TO OTHER CLASS ONE AREAS ACROSS THE SAMI REGION. AND I CALL YOUR ATTENTION TO PAGE FOURTEEN OF YOUR HANDOUT. IT'S THE SORT OF THING WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT. THIS WAS GENERATED BY ONE OF OUR INVESTIGATORS THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE PLACING THIS CONTRACT WITH IN CONNECTION WITH OTHER WORK. NOW, YOU NOTICE THAT HE STUDIES THE DIFFERENT SOIL LAYERS AND THE EFFECT OF REMOVING DIFFERENT LEVELS, SULPHUR FROM NITROGEN PRECIPITATION FROM THE SOIL, AND WATCHES THE SOIL IMPROVE IN ITS CALCIUM AS TIME GOES BY. AND UNLESS THERE ARE QUESTIONS, I THINK THAT'S ALL I CAN SAY ABOUT EFFECTS AT THIS POINT. THAT'S OUR NEXT AREA OF FOCUS. MR. ELMORE: I'LL TRY TO PICK UP THE PACE A LITTLE AND GET US BACK ON SCHEDULE. SOCIOECONOMICS IS PROBABLY THE MOST CONTENTIOUS AREA THAT WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH SO FAR, SO MUCH SO THAT WE'VE SET UP A SOCIOECONOMIC MEDIATION PROCESS THAT'S ABOUT WRAPPED UP. THERE'S A PIECE IN YOUR PACKET THAT SUMMARIZES MORE OR LESS WHERE THAT STANDS. A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO THE TECHNICAL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE REQUESTED THAT STAFF PREPARE A SURVEY OF THE STATES TO DETERMINE THEIR INTEREST IN SPECIFIC AREAS WITHIN THE GENERAL HEADING OF SOCIOECONOMICS. I GUESS THAT EXERCISE IS STAFF LIMITED RIGHT NOW. WE HAVE ABOUT SIX R.F.P.'S, REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS, IN THE WORKS AND THIS IS A PIECE THAT WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN TO BUT HOPE TO WITHIN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS. AND SO THOSE OF YOU THAT ARE STATE REPRESENTATIVES BE LOOKING FOR THIS DOCUMENT THAT WILL LAY OUT WHAT CAME OUT OF THE MEDIATION PROCESS. IT WILL ALSO LAY OUT A MENU OF CHOICES IN THE SOCIOECONOMIC ARENA. AND WE SEE STATES AS PRIMARY CLIENTS HERE AND WE'D LIKE TO PROVIDE INFORMATION TO THE STATES THAT THEY'LL FIND USEFUL IN THEIR DECISION MAKING, SO THAT'S THE POINT OF THAT SURVEY. MR. LEVITAS: EXCUSE ME, TOM. WHERE IS THE DOCUMENT THAT YOU REFERENCED? MR. ELMORE: YES. IT'S PAGE FIFTEEN.   IT'S IN A PACKET THAT I HANDED OUT THAT SAYS T.O.C. UPDATE ON THE FRONT. IT WILL BE THE FIRST BACK. IT'S THE MR. LEVITAS: GOT YOU. MR. ELMORE: PAGE FIFTEEN. AND THAT'S STILL DRAFT, BUT THAT WILL GIVE YOU SOME SENSE OF WHERE THE AGE PROCESS STOOD ON THAT. ELAINE ZOELLER, WHO'S A MEMBER OF YOUR COMMITTEE HERE, PARTICIPATED IN THAT, JOHN JANSEN, AND FOLKS FROM THE FEDERAL AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL COMMUNITY AS WELL. I GUESS ONE WAY OF LOOKING AT THIS, SINCE WE'RE NOT TO THE POINT OF ISSUING REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS OR SELECTING CONTRACTORS AND THAT SORT OF THING IS THAT THIS MODULE IS BEHIND THE OTHERS. RIGHT NOW IT APPEARS THAT A CRITICAL PATH TO COMPLETING THE I.A.F. IS THE ATMOSPHERE MODEL. AND SO WHENEVER THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR STAFF TO MOVE THAT ONE FORWARD, THAT'S WHERE OUR TIME HAS BEEN DEVOTED. THE AREA OF SOCIOECONOMICS IS FAIRLY WELL UNDERSTOOD. EVERY TIME AN I.A.F.'S IS DONE THERE ARE SOCIOECONOMIC BALANCES ASSOCIATED WITH IT. SO I'M OPTIMISTIC THAT WE CAN "" AS SOON AS WE DECIDE EXACTLY WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO BASED ON THIS AND THIS, THEN WE'LL BE ABLE TO MOVE FAIRLY RAPIDLY AND STAY AHEAD OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ATMOSPHERIC MODEL. SO I'M HOPING THAT THIS WILL NOT BE A LIMITED PARAMETER. SO TO PULL IT ALL TOGETHER, LET ME MOVE BACK TO THE EFFECTS PIECE. THIS IS WHERE EVERYTHING COMES TOGETHER. AND BASICALLY, EARLY IN THE PROCESS WE ASKED THE QUESTION: ARE THE CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS ADEQUATE? IF NOT, WE TEST SOME STRATEGIES FOR ACID DEPOSITION, OZONE AND VISIBILITY. WE'LL ACCESS THE EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT. WE'LL BRING IN THE COSTS OF IMPLEMENTING THE CONTROLS THAT LED TO THOSE VARIOUS STRATEGIES. WE'LL BRING IN THE SOCIOECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS THAT DERIVE FROM THE CONTROLS THEMSELVES. THE CHANGE IN THE ENVIRONMENT, AS WELL AS THE COST WILL AFFECT THE SOCIOECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS. THAT WILL ALL COME TOGETHER IN AN INTEGRATED REPORT AND OUR TARGET IS TO GET THAT TO THE GOVERNING BODY BY JUNE OF '98, WHICH IS OUR CURRENT DEADLINE. I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE INTO THE NEXT PIECE OF OUR PRESENTATION RELATED TO SCHEDULE. THIS IS ON PAGE TWO OF YOUR HANDOUT. THE CRITICAL PATH APPEARS TO BE THE ATMOSPHERIC MODEL, AND WE'RE PUSHING TO GET TO THAT REALLY AS HARD AS WE CAN ON THAT ONE. WE HOPE TO HAVE A RESPONSE SURFACE OUT TO YOU IN THE ATMOSPHERIC AREA WITHIN TWELVE MONTHS OF EXECUTION OF THE CONTRACT, WHICH ELDEWINS INDICATED AS BEING FEBRUARY, MARCH, A VERY RAPID DEADLINE OR A VERY TIGHT DEADLINE TO BE ABLE TO PRODUCE THAT. BUT THAT EARLY OUTPUT SHOULD BE WELL AHEAD OF THE JUNE '98 TARGET THAT WE'RE SHOOTING FOR. AND I'M OPTIMISTIC THAT YOU'LL BE ABLE TO START YOUR POLICY DISCUSSIONS IN EARNEST AT THAT POINT. WE'LL CONTINUE TO ADD INFORMATION AS THOSE DISCUSSIONS CONTINUE AND RIGHT ON THROUGH JUNE OF '98. AND ANOTHER POINT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IS THAT INTERACTION BETWEEN THE THREE MAJOR T.O.C. COMMITTEES IS VERY IMPORTANT. IN MAKING SOMETHING SIMILAR TO THIS SAME PRESENTATION TO THE POLICY COMMITTEE YESTERDAY, I POINTED OUT THESE MANY POINTS OF POLICY IMPLICATIONS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE I.A.F., AND THEY HAVE SET UP A GROUP THAT THEY CALL THE RAPID RESPONSE TEAM THAT HOPEFULLY, A FEW KEY INDIVIDUALS REPRESENTING THE VARIOUS CONSTITUENCIES WILL BE ABLE TO GET THESE CONTRACTOR REPORTS ABOUT THE SAME TIME THAT THE T.O.C. GETS THEM, LOOK INTO THOSE REPORTS FOR POLICY IMPLICATIONS, AND RESPOND QUICKLY. BECAUSE PARTICULARLY WHEN WE'RE DEALING WITH THE ATMOSPHERIC MODEL, THERE ARE A LOT OF THOSE ASTERISKS ON THAT FLOWCHART AND EVERY TIME SAMI TAKES LONGER THAN A WEEK OR SO TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK TO THE CONTRACTOR, THE SCHEDULE IS STRETCHED. SO I JUST WANT TO ALERT YOU FOLKS TO THAT AND THAT YOU MAY BE HAVING SOME POLICY ISSUES FORWARDED TO YOU BY THE POLICY COMMITTEE AS A RESULT OF SOME OF THESE EARLY OUTPUTS. BRIEFLY, I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT CASH FLOW AND BUDGET. BUDGET IS THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA AND SO I HOPE THAT YOU WOULD REFER THE BULK OF YOUR CONVERSATION TO THERE, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO JUST, WHILE I'M ON THE FLOOR HERE, POINT OUT ONE THING THAT I'D LIKE FOR YOU TO CONSIDER IN THOSE DELIBERATIONS. AND THAT IS THAT THE WAY THINGS ARE ARRANGED, WE'RE HOPING TO ISSUE A WHOLE SERIES OF "" LET A WHOLE SERIES OF CONTRACTS IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS. THE LARGEST OF THOSE IS AN EIGHTHUNDREDTHOUSANDDOLLAR CONTRACT WHICH IS FOR THE ATMOSPHERIC MODEL. AND THERE ALSO WILL BE ESSENTIALLY THREE EFFECTS CONTRACTORS WORKING ALL AT THE SAME TIME, THREE EMISSIONS INVENTORY CONTRACTORS, AND A SOCIOECONOMIC CONTRACTOR, ALL STARTING WORK MORE OR LESS AT THE SAME TIME SO THAT WE CAN HIT THE TARGET DEADLINE. THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH THAT IN THAT WE HAVE IN THE BANK ABOUT HALF THE FUNDS THAT WE NEED TO COMPLETE THE THREEMILLIONDOLLAR I.A.F., AND WE'RE FACED WITH A DELIMA. IS THAT WE CAN EITHER DELAY SIGNING THOSE CONTRACTS UNTIL THE FUNDS ARE AVAILABLE, WHICH WOULD DELAY THE OUTPUT, OF COURSE, OR WE CAN PHASE THOSE CONTRACTS IN A WAY THAT WILL PERHAPS ALLOW US TO KEEP THE CASH FLOW IN HAND. SO REALLY, THERE ARE TWO PROBLEMS. ONE IS TOTAL FUNDING IS NOT IN PLACE. WE HAVEN'T GOT HALF OF WHAT'S NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE I.A.F. THE OTHER IS RELATED TO THAT, AND SINCE DEMAND FOR FUNDS BASED ON COMMITMENT OF CONTRACTS IS EARLY IN THE PROCESS, WE HAVE A CASH FLOW PROBLEM. THERE ARE TWO SCENARIOS LAID OUT HERE, ONE DESCRIBED IN THIS COLUMN AND THE OTHER DESCRIBED IN THAT COLUMN. THE UNPHASED APPROACH IS IF WE DO NOT SIGN A CONTRACT UNTIL WE HAVE THE FULL AMOUNT OF FUNDING NEEDED IN THE BANK OR THE WAY THIS IS DESCRIBED, WE GO IN THE RED. WE SEE THAT IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR, IN ABOUT THREE MONTHS, WE GO NEGATIVE IN TERMS OF THE I.A.F. BALANCE IN THE BUDGET. ANOTHER APPROACH WOULD BE TO SAY, USING THE ATMOSPHERIC MODEL, FOR EXAMPLE, WE COULD BREAK IT INTO QUARTERS. AND WHEN WE SIGN THE CONTRACT WITH A CONTRACTOR WE COMMIT TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS INSTEAD OF EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS, LET THE CONTRACTOR KNOW THAT OUR EXPECTATION IS THAT EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS WILL BE THE FINAL AMOUNT, BUT WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO PRODUCE AN EARLY INTERIM PRODUCT AND AT THAT TIME YOU'LL GET PAID TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS. BEYOND THAT THERE ARE NO PROMISES, ALTHOUGH WE EXPECT THE FULL AMOUNT TO BE ROUGHLY EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND. IF WE PHASE ALL CONTRACTS ON A MONTHLY BASIS, THEN WE FIND THAT ABOUT THE BEGINNING OF NEXT FISCAL YEAR IS WHERE THE BALANCE GOES NEGATIVE. THIS IS REALLY A CUMBERSOME WAY TO RUN CONTRACTING, ESPECIALLY IF WE GO TO MONTHLY RATHER THAN QUARTERLY. MR. LEVITAS: THAT'S NOT A QUESTION. IT'S A STRETCH. MR. ELMORE: OH, OKAY. SO YOUR BUDGET DISCUSSION IS COMING UP BUT THE POINTS I'D LIKE TO LEAVE YOU WITH IS THAT THERE IS A RISK IN DOING THE PHASED APPROACH. IT SOLVES THE CASH FLOW PROBLEM BUT IF IT TURNS OUT THAT THE FULL AMOUNT OF FUNDING OF THE THREE MILLION DOLLARS IS NOT EVENTUALLY AVAILABLE, THEN WE'RE LEFT WITH PART OF AN ATMOSPHERIC MODEL WHICH IS PROBABLY OF VERY LIMITED VALUE. AND THE SAME GOES FOR ALL THE OTHER ELEMENTS OF THE I.A.F. SO THERE IS "" PHASING CONTRACTS SOLVES THE CASH FLOW PROBLEM BUT IT BRINGS WITH IT RISKS IN THAT IF THE FUNDS ARE NOT EVENTUALLY AVAILABLE WE'LL HAVE AN INCOMPLETE PRODUCT AND WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PRODUCE THE REPORT THAT YOU'VE REQUESTED. SO THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE ON I.A.F. UPDATING. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? MR. SHAW: TOM, IF WE COULD, UNLESS SOMEBODY'S GOT A BURNING QUESTION THEY WANT TO ASK RIGHT NOW, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT IF YOU'VE GOT ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS THAT YOU JUST WRITE TO TOM. WOULD THAT BE THE APPROPRIATE VOCATION ON THOSE? OTHERWISE, LET'S MOVE ON TO THE BUDGET ISSUE, AND LAURIE, ARE YOU GOING TO DO THAT? MS. MOORHEAD: YES. I'M LAURIE MOORHEAD. I'M GOING TO BRIEFLY REFERENCE THE TREASURER'S SUMMARY REPORT THAT WE INCLUDED IN YOUR PREMEETING MAILOUT. AND I HAVE EXTRA COPIES IF YOU DON'T HAVE YOURS WITH YOU. I CAN SEND THOSE AROUND THE ROOM. IN FACT, MAYBE I'LL JUST DO THAT AND TAKE ONE IF YOU NEED ONE. VERY QUICKLY, SAMI CONCLUDED ITS FIRST AUDIT IN SEPTEMBER OF '96 AND AS YOU KNOW, THAT IS A REQUIREMENT OF OUR GRANT. WE HAVE TO HAVE ONE ON AN ANNUAL BASIS. AND A LOCAL ACCOUNTING FIRM DID THAT FOR US, JOHNSON WHITE FIRM. WE CAME THROUGH WITH FLYING COLORS. THEY DID HAVE THREE VERY MINOR RECOMMENDATIONS. BYTHEWAY, WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED THE FINAL REPORT. I DO HAVE A DRAFT COPY IN THE OFFICE IN ASHEVILLE IS ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT IT. BUT THEY HAD THREE VERY MINOR RECOMMENDATIONS WHICH WON'T EVEN BE INCLUDED IN THE FINAL REPORT BECAUSE THEY ARE MINOR. BUT WE THOUGHT THEY WERE GOOD AND WE DECIDED TO ACT ON THOSE. ONE IS THEY SUGGESTED WE PURCHASE A SOFTWARE ACCOUNTING "" AN ACCOUNTING SOFTWARE, WHICH WE DID. IT'S CALLED PEACHTREE. AND IT IS REALLY JUST TO ASSIST IN ACCOUNT MAINTENANCE. I'M ABLE TO PRINT CHECKS OFF OF IT. I CAN EASILY RECORD EXPENDITURES WITH ESSENTIALLY A COUPLE OF BUTTONS. I'M NOT WELLVERSED IN IT, BUT I'M GETTING THERE. THEY ALSO RECOMMENDED THAT WE INSTALL SOME KIND OF AN INTERNAL CONTROL STRUCTURE, AND SO WE'VE ASKED PAUL MULLER OF THE ASHEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE IF HE WOULD EVERY MONTH TAKE A QUICK LOOK AT THE BANK STATEMENTS AS THEY COME IN SO WE CAN MAKE SURE I'M NOT WRITING A CHECK TO MYSELF OR TO ANY OF YOU OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THEY ALSO RECOMMENDED THAT WE MIGHT CONSIDER INVESTMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE ONE MILLION DOLLARS THAT WE'RE TO RECEIVE FROM GEORGIAPACIFIC THROUGH THE GOVERNMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS. OUR PRESENT MONEY THAT WE RECEIVE FROM THE E.P.A. HAS TO BE IN A NONINTEREST BEARING ACCOUNT. THAT, TOO, IS A GRANT REQUIREMENT FOR US. BUT WE CHECKED WITH E.P.A. AND WITH THE ACCOUNTANT AND WE CAN FIND NO SUCH STIPULATION WITH THE MONEY THAT WE RECEIVE FROM GEORGIAPACIFIC, SO I HAVE CONTACTED TWO BANKS, NATIONSBANK AND WACHOVIA, TO SEE WHAT THEIR INVESTMENT COUNSELORS MIGHT SUGGEST TO US. AND BYTHEBY, OUR CHECKING ACCOUNT IS THROUGH WACHOVIA. I ALSO CONTACTED THREE INVESTMENT FIRMS, MERRILL LYNCH, SMITH BARNEY AND FIDELITY, TO SEE WHAT THEY SUGGESTED. AND INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH OR NOT, ALL FIVE SUGGESTED A SIMILAR STRATEGY WHERE WE KEEP XAMOUNT OF MONEY IN A MONEY MARKET ACCOUNT THAT WOULD HAVE CHECK WRITING ABILITY AND THEN PUT AS MUCH AS WE THOUGHT WE SAFELY COULD IN TREASURY BILL NOTES. AS YOU KNOW, THEY'LL EARN A SLIGHTLY HIGHER INTEREST RATE. WELL, AFTER LOOKING AT ALL THAT AND TALKING AMONG OURSELVES, I THINK IT MIGHT BE BETTER TO JUST KEEP ALL OF IT IN MONEY MARKET ACCOUNTS BECAUSE A, IT'S SOMEWHAT RISKY TO DECIDE HOW MUCH CAN SIT OVER THERE FOR THREE TO SIX MONTHS. THEN I'M GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH MATURITIES AND MAKE SURE I MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION ON XAMOUNT SHOULD BE EXTENDED IN A NOTE OR A BILL. I THINK IT'S ULTIMATELY GOING TO BE EASIER TO KEEP IT IN A MONEY MARKET. AFTER LOOKING AT THE VARIOUS MONEY MARKETS, I LIKE THE ONE AT MERRILL LYNCH THAT'S CALLED A CASH MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT AND IT EARNS ABOUT FIVE PERCENT INTEREST, WHICH IS AS GOOD AS ANY OF THEM DO. THEY ALSO HAVE A MONEY MARKET CALLED AN INSTITUTIONAL MONEY MARKET THAT EARNS 5.06 PERCENT. NOW, THERE'S NO CHECK WRITING ABILITY ON THAT BUT I CAN WITH A PHONE CALL TRANSFER FUNDS FROM ONE TO THE OTHER AND IT'S A NO LOAD FUND. THERE WON'T BE ANY COST INCURRED. SO I'M KIND OF SUGGESTING TO YOU THAT PERHAPS WE SHOULD PURSUE THE MERRILL LYNCH MONEY MARKET ACCOUNT AND I'D LIKE MAYBE TO "" I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED A VOTE BUT MAYBE SOME DISCUSSION? WE DO NEED A VOTE? MR. SHAW: DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT NOW OR DO YOU WANT TO WAIT TO COMPLETE MS. MOORHEAD: I WOULD IF THAT WAS ALL RIGHT. MR. SHAW: ALL RIGHT. LET ME SEE IF I UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE. YOU'VE RESEARCHED WHERE TO PUT A MILLION DOLLARS. NOW, ASSUME WE'RE GOING TO GET IT ALL IN ONE LUMP SUM. MS. MOORHEAD:Č I WOULD ASSUME SO. MR. SHAW: OKAY. AND I'M ALSO ASSUMING THAT THERE'S NO PROHIBITION AGAINST SAMI EARNING MONEY. I GUESS WE HAVE A WAY OF "" MS. MOORHEAD: NOT THAT I'VE BEEN ABLE TO FIND. MR. SHAW: "" DOING THAT. AND YOUR RESEARCH HAS INDICATED THAT A MONEY MARKET ACCOUNT MAY BE THE BEST WAY TO GO. MERRILL LYNCH HAS A PROGRAM THAT BASICALLY HAS TWO TYPES OF ACCOUNTS. ONE IS A CHECKWRITING ACCOUNT AND ONE IS NOT A CHECKWRITING ACCOUNT? MS. MOORHEAD: BUT IT EARNS HIGHER INTEREST. MR. SHAW: ACCORDING TO THIS HANDOUT, IT EARNS 5.27 PERCENT? MS. MOORHEAD: OH, IS THAT WHAT I SAID? MR. SHAW: NO. YOU SAID 5.06. MS. MOORHEAD: THIS IS BETTER.MR. SHAW: THAT'S APPARENTLY THE CHECKING ACCOUNT. BUT YOU CAN MOVE MONEY WITH A PHONE CALL FROM ONE ACCOUNT TO THE OTHER? MS. MOORHEAD: RIGHT. MR. SHAW: OKAY. SO I UNDERSTOOD THAT. I HOPE ALL OF YOU ALL DID. I GUESS I NEED A MOTION TO DO SOMETHING HERE. DOES ANYBODY WANT TO "" ANYBODY FROM THE GOVERNING BODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? MR. METHIER: I MOVE WE DO THAT. MR. SHAW: OKAY. I NEED A SECOND. MR. WALTON: I SECOND IT. MR. SHAW: FOR THE RECORD WHO MR. WALTON: JOHN WALTON. MR. SHAW: OKAY. ALL RIGHT, WE'VE GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANYBODY WANT TO DISCUSS THIS? OKAY.MR. JOY: CAN I ASK A QUESTION? MR. SHAW: SURE. MR. JOY: YOU ALWAYS HATE TO ASK YOUR BOSS IF YOU CAN ASK A QUESTION. DOWN THE ROAD IS THERE ANY LIMITATION ON SAMI IF WE DO THIS IN TERMS OF THIS MONEY IF WE FIND NOT THAT WE WANTED TO SHOP IT AROUND, BUT IF SOMETHING SHOWS UP SIX MONTHS FROM NOW OR WHATEVER THAT'S BETTER AND/OR YOU HAVE SOME PROBLEM? IS THERE A LIMITATION ON SAMI IN TERMS OF KEEPING THAT MONEY THERE FOR AN AMOUNT OF TIME? MS. MOORHEAD: I DON'T BELIEVE THERE IS. MR. JOY: I'M SURE THEY'RE JUST HAPPY TO HAVE THE MONEY THERE. MS. MOORHEAD: THEY'RE REALLY HAPPY, YEAH. THEY WERE HAPPIER THAN WACHOVIA FOR SOME REASON, SO THAT'S ANOTHER REASON I LIKED MERRILL LYNCH IS THEY WERE VERY RESPONSIVE, VERY INTERESTED, AND THEY ARE FOUR BLOCKS AWAY FROM THE OFFICE. BUT NO, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WE ARE COMMITTING THE MONEY FOREVER AND THAT KIND OF THING, NO. AND THEY UNDERSTAND THAT WE WANT TO SPEND IT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. MR. JOY: JUST SO I UNDERSTAND, THE MOTION IS TO OPEN TWO ACCOUNTS WITH MERRILL LYNCH AND MOVE MONEY INTO THE CHECKING ACCOUNT AS NEEDED, THE CHECK WRITING ACCOUNT IS NEEDED? MS. MOORHEAD: RIGHT. MR. CARR: WHEN DO YOU ANTICIPATE RECEIVING THOSE FUNDS? MS. MOORHEAD: THAT'S THE NEXT DISCUSSION. MR. MICHAELS: PROBABLY WITHIN ABOUT THIRTY OR FORTY DAYS. MS. MOORHEAD: YEAH. THE CONTRACT HAS TO BE SIGNED BY BOTH PARTIES AND THEN THERE'S A THIRTYDAY WINDOW OF TIME THAT THEY HAVE TO GET INTO. MR. BUNYAK: I HAVE A QUESTION. JOHN BUNYAK, PARK SERVICES. LAURIE, ONE OF YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS IS TO PUT ALL THE MONEY INTO THE "" YOUR PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE WAS TO PUT IT IN THE MONEY MARKET. IS THAT DIFFERENT THAN "" IF I'M CONFUSING WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MS. MOORHEAD: NO. ONLY THE ONE MILLION DOLLARS IS WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, AND THEY HAVE TWO TYPES OF MONEY MARKET ACCOUNT. ONE HAS CHECK WRITING ABILITY AND THE OTHER DOES NOT. AND THE INSTITUTIONAL, IN MY UNDERSTANDING, IS A SUBSET OF THAT CASH MONEY MARKET ACCOUNT SO, HOPEFULLY, WE COULD PUT MAYBE HALF OF IT IN THE INSTITUTIONAL MONEY MARKET, AND THEN I'LL KEEP TRACK OF IT AND THEN WHEN IT LOOKS LIKE WE'RE GETTING LOW, I MAKE A PHONE CALL AND THEY SWEEP IT OVER. IT'S JUST LIKE MOVING FROM SAVINGS TO CHECKING. MR. LEVITAS: IF I COULD ASK ANOTHER QUESTION. WHERE IS SAMI'S CURRENT CHECKING ACCOUNT? MS. MOORHEAD: IT'S WITH WACHOVIA AND IT IS A NONINTEREST BEARING ACCOUNT. MR. LEVITAS: SO DO YOU ENVISION TRANSFERRING THE ENTIRE "" OH, YOU CAN'T MS. MOORHEAD:Č WE CAN'T MR. LEVITAS: THE E.P.A. DOESN'T ALLOW YOU TO DO THAT? MS. MOORHEAD: RIGHT. THAT IS E.P.A. GRANT MONEY AND WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO EARN INTEREST ON THAT. MR. LEVITAS: WHAT'S THE REASON FOR THAT, WINSTON? MR. WINSTON SMITH: YOUR GUESS IS AS GOOD AS MINE. I DON'T KNOW. THE ONLY THING I CAN THINK OF IS IT KEEPS GRANTEES FROM DRAWING ALL THE GRANT DOWN IMMEDIATELY AND JUST EARNING INTEREST OFF OF IT. IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE REIMBURSED AS IT'S SPENT. I DON'T KNOW. I'LL HAVE TO ASK SOMEBODY THAT UNDERSTANDS IT BETTER. MR. SHAW: I THINK THAT'S TYPICAL, THOUGH, WITH ALL OF THE E.P.A. MONEY. MS. MOORHEAD: ANY MORE QUESTIONS ON THAT? MR. SHAW: ARE WE READY TO VOTE ON IT? ALL IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSAL SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE. GROUP:Č AYE. MR. SHAW: ALL OPPOSED? (NO RESPONSE.) MR. SHAW: OKAY, THE MOTION PASSES THEN. MS. MOORHEAD: GREAT. WELL, LET'S QUICKLY MOVE ON TO THIS HANDOUT THAT YOU DO HAVE TODAY. THIS IS A VERY QUICK LOOK AT THE BUDGET. WE'RE FOLLOWING THE FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR BUDGET WHICH IS OCTOBER 1 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 30TH. IN SEPTEMBER YOU DISCUSSED ON A CONFERENCE CALL AND THEN HAD SUBSEQUENT VOTE BY MAIL OF A 2.31 MILLION DOLLAR BUDGET, AND THAT WAS BASED ON 2.31 MILLION DOLLARS OF MONEY COMING IN. SOME OF THAT "" ONE MILLION OF THAT IS THE S.E.P. MONEY FROM GEORGIAPACIFIC AND THE REMAINDER IS CARRYOVER FUNDS FROM E.P.A. IN '96 GRANT MONEY AND THEN E.P.A. '97 GRANT MONEY. THIS HANDOUT SHOWS THE LINE ITEM EXPENDITURES THAT YOU APPROVED ON THAT CONFERENCE CALL AND THEN YOU SUBSEQUENTLY APPROVED IT WITH A VOTE BY MAIL. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS IS A LINE ITEM OF WHAT WAS APPROVED PER EXPENSE, AND IT TOTALS 2.311 MILLION DOLLARS. FOR THE MONTHS OF OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER WE HAVE ACTUALLY SPENT THIS COLUMN DISBURSED. I'VE WRITTEN CHECKS FOR THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY. NOW, I SUBTRACTED DISBURSED FROM APPROVED. I COME UP WITH THE REMAINING COLUMN AND YOU CAN SEE HOW MUCH IS REMAINING ASSUMING WE GET ALL THE MONEY THAT WE ARE TOLD WE'RE GOING TO GET FOR THE REST OF THE YEAR. NOW, THE T.O.C. HAS RECENTLY SIGNED A THIRTYTHOUSANDDOLLAR CONTRACT DOWN HERE WITH S.A.I. THEY ARE BEGINNING THE WORK SO IN MY MIND THAT'S MONEY THAT WE'VE GOT TO HAVE IN HAND AND WE DO. SO FOR THE I.A.F., WHICH IS THE LAST ITEM, WHICH IS PROBABLY THE ONE MOST IMPORTANT AT THIS POINT IN TIME, THIRTY THOUSAND DOLLARS OBLIGATED. WITHIN THE NEXT THREE MONTHS OR BY THE END OF FEBRUARY THE T.O.C. IS GOING TO OBLIGATE 1.118 MILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF CONTRACTS. THEY ARE ON A VERY FAST TRACK AND IF THEY STAY ON SCHEDULE, AND ALL INDICATIONS ARE THAT THEY WILL, BY THE END OF FEBRUARY THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY OUT OF THEIR WHOLE BUDGET IS GOING TO BE OBLIGATED. THE NUMBERS ABOVE HERE, I HAVE GUESSED AT. THIS IS WHAT I THINK IS THE NEXT THREE MONTHS OF EXPENDITURES. I LOOKED AT THE LAST TWO MONTHS DIVIDED BY TWO, CAME UP WITH AN AVERAGE AND MULTIPLIED BY THREE TO GET THIS VALUE. NOW, OBVIOUSLY, THINGS LIKE MEETINGS AND TRAVEL, PARTICIPANT TRAVEL, ALL OF THAT KIND OF THING VARIES FROM MONTH TO MONTH, BUT IT WAS A BEST GUESS FOR ME. AND WHEN YOU SUBTRACT OBLIGATIONS AND ANTICIPATED OBLIGATIONS YOU GET THE REMAINING COLUMN HERE. NOW, AGAIN, WHAT I THINK IS OF MOST INTEREST IS THE I.A.F. LINE. BY THE END OF FEBRUARY THE T.O.C. WILL HAVE FIVE HUNDRED TWENTYTHREE THOUSAND DOLLARS TO PURSUE AN INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK, AND AS TOM MENTIONED I'M GOING TO PUT UP ON THE MACHINE THE SECOND ONE ON YOUR HANDOUT. I'VE GOT MORE DETAIL ON THIS ONE. I'VE LISTED THE WORK EFFORTS THAT THE T.O.C. IS PURSUING. THE S.A.I. CONTRACT THAT'S LISTED HERE IS A THIRTYTHOUSANDDOLLAR NEGATIVE. THESE NEXT FOUR WORK EFFORTS ARE HOPEFULLY CONTRACTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE SIGNED BY THE END OF FEBRUARY, AND THAT'S HOW I CAME OFF WITH A TOTAL OF 1.118 MILLION DOLLARS THAT YOU SAW ON THE FIRST PAGE. NOW, THE NEXT SEVERAL "" THESE NEXT THREE WORK EFFORTS ARE GOING TO BEGIN, I BELIEVE, IN THE MARCH TIME FRAME. CONTRACT VALUES, I ASSUME, ARE GOING TO BE ASSIGNED. WITHIN APRIL THESE WORK EFFORTS WILL BEGIN AND THEN THE DIRECT COSTS IS GOING TO OCCUR IN MAY OF '97. SO THAT ALL OF THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY, WHICH COMES TO 1.68 MILLION DOLLARS, IS GOING TO BE OBLIGATED BY THE END "" SOMEWHERE BEYOND MARCH. WELL, AS YOU REMEMBER FROM THE PAGE BEFORE, BEGINNING OF MARCH THE T.O.C. IS GOING TO HAVE FIVE HUNDRED AND TWENTYTHREE THOUSAND SEVEN FIFTYSEVEN. AND IF YOU SUBTRACT THAT YOU GET THIS AMOUNT OF MONEY. I THINK THE POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE HERE IS THAT "" I DON'T KNOW HOW TO DO THAT. I NEED MY COMPUTER. LET ME JUST DO THIS. YES, YOU'VE GOT A REALLY GOOD TREASURER. I RELY ON A CALCULATOR. BY THE BEGINNING OF MARCH WE'RE GOING TO NEED 1.156 MILLION DOLLARS IN ORDER TO PURSUE THE I.A.F. AS TOM MENTIONED OR WE CAN PHASE CONTRACTS AND SLOW DOWN THE RATE OF FLOW, BUT IT IN NO WAY NEGATES THE NEED FOR THE MONEY. I MEAN ULTIMATELY WE CAN BUY TIME BY STAGGERING THE DELIVERABLES AND INSTEAD OF NEEDING THE MONEY IN MARCH, WE CAN PUT IT OFF UNTIL THE SUMMER, PERHAPS. BUT IN ORDER TO COMPLETE AN INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK THAT COSTS 2.91 MILLION DOLLARS, WE HAVE TO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 1.156 MILLION DOLLARS SOMETIME THIS FISCAL YEAR. I'M ASSUMING THAT I'M GOING TO HAVE THE PROJECTED FISCAL YEAR '98 NEEDS. OBVIOUSLY, THE I.A.F. WILL BE WINDING DOWN EXCEPT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF JUST REPORT WRITING, AND WE'VE ALLOTTED A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR THAT. NOW, THE P.A.C. IS GOING TO REALLY NEED THE MONEY IN FISCAL YEAR '98 TO IMPLEMENT WHATEVER CONTROL STRATEGIES ARE DETERMINED BASED ON LOOKING AT THE I.A.F. THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND MIGHT LOOK LIKE A LOT, BUT THAT ONLY BREAKS DOWN TO THIRTYSEVEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED PER STATE, WHICH, IN FACT, ISN'T A GREAT DEAL OF MONEY. WE'VE ALLOTTED TWO HUNDRED FIFTY THOUSAND FOR THE POLICY COMMITTEE TO EVALUATE THE E.M.O.'S AND IT COMES TO A GRAND TOTAL OF NINE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS WHICH IS CONSERVATIVE ON THE LOW SIDE, WE THINK, FOR FISCAL YEAR '98. SO IN CONCLUSION, I'M NOT TRYING TO PAINT A GLOOM AND DOOM PICTURE, BUT RATHER A REALISTIC ONE THAT IN ORDER TO STAY ON TRACK AND MEET THE JUNE '98 DEADLINE, WE ARE IN NEED OF MORE MONEY IN THIS FISCAL YEAR. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS FOR ME?MR. LEVITAS: I'M STEVE LEVITAS. WHEN TOM MADE HIS REPORT ON THE I.A.F. BUDGET, HE SAID THAT WE HAD ABOUT HALF THE MONEY. MS. MOORHEAD: I THINK WHAT HE MEANT BY THAT IS THAT WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 2.31 MILLION DOLLARS COMING IN BUT WE ARE PURSUING AN I.A.F. THAT'S WORTH 2.91 MILLION DOLLARS. AND THAT DOES IN NO WAY REFLECT EMPLOYEE SALARIES AND ANY OF THAT KIND OF THING. MR. LEVITAS: RIGHT. WELL, LET'S SEPARATE OUT THAT STUFF. JUST THE I.A.F. BUDGET. IT'S 2.9 MILLION. MY UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY AVAILABLE AND COMMITTED TO THE I.A.F. IS MS. MOORHEAD: 1.691. MR. LEVITAS: RIGHT. ABOUT 1.7. ABOUT 1.7. SO IT'S "" THAT MEANS WE'VE GOT 1.2 REMAINING OF NEEDS, SO IT'S A BIT MORE THAN HALF. MR. ELMORE: THE GOVERNING BODY APPROVAL WAS FOR UP TO 3.2 MILLION DOLLARS, SO 1.7 COMPARED TO 3.2 IS WHERE I GOT THE HALF FIGURE. MR. LEVITAS: I SEE. MR. ELMORE: I GUESS WE KNOW NOW MORE THAN WE DID IN JUNE ABOUT WHAT EACH OF THESE ELEMENTS WILL COST, AND THERE WAS A RANGE OF FIGURES IN THAT ORIGINAL PROPOSAL. WHAT I CAN TELL YOU IS THE LOW END OF THE RANGE IS CREEPING UP. THE UPPER END OF THE RANGE HAS NOT STARTED CREEPING DOWN YET, SO IT'S "" AND YOUR GUESS IS AS GOOD AS MINE AS TO WHETHER THAT'S LIKELY TO HAPPEN. BUT I GUESS IT'S "" THE CONSERVATIVE APPROACH WOULD BE TO ASSUME THAT 3.2 MILLION WILL BE NEEDED AND THEN WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO GOOD NEWS IF WE CAN PINPOINT SOMEWHERE, BRING IT IN AT A LOWER PRICE. MR. LEVITAS: BUT YOU ALL ARE AGREED THAT WHAT IS NEEDED IN THIS FISCAL YEAR OR FOR THE PIECE OF WORK THAT YOU'VE IDENTIFIED AS PROJECTED TO DO IN THIS YEAR IS 1.2 MILLION? JUST UNDER 1.2 MILLION, 1.16 OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? MS. MOORHEAD: RIGHT. FOR THIS YEAR. THIS FISCAL YEAR.MR. LEVITAS: RIGHT. LET ME ASK AN ISSUE ABOUT THE "" MR. CHAIRMAN, IF IT'S NOW APPROPRIATE TO TALK ABOUT THIS ISSUE OF PHASING AND HOW WE GO ABOUT DOING THIS MR. SHAW: YEAH, I THINK IT'S FINE. WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT. MR. LEVITAS: TOM, YOU MENTIONED THAT THE ATMOSPHERIC MODELING WAS THE CRITICAL PATH IN THIS WHOLE FRAMEWORK. AND I WONDER WITH THAT IN MIND AND NOT KNOWING HOW THESE OTHER PIECES PLAY OUT OVER A TIME LINE, WHETHER IT MAKES MORE SENSE TO MAKE THE COMMITMENT TO THE THINGS THAT NEED TO BE "" THAT ARE MOST TIMES SENSITIVE AND WHETHER ALL OF THESE ITEMS THAT YOU HAVE PROJECTED TO BEGIN IN THIS YEAR HAVE TO BE DONE "" HAVE TO BE INITIATED ON THAT TIME FRAME IN ORDER TO STAY ON "" THE WHOLE PROJECT TO STAY ON SCHEDULE. MR. ELMORE: WELL, I GUESS WE ARE FOCUSING ON A CRITICAL PATH. THERE ARE SOME OPPORTUNITIES TO DELAY SOME OF THE OTHER ELEMENTS, FOR INSTANCE, SOCIOECONOMICS. IF WE DECIDE SOCIOECONOMICS CAN BE DONE FAIRLY QUICKLY, WE CAN WAIT TO COMMIT THOSE FUNDS TILL THE VERY LAST MINUTE, WHENEVER THAT TURNS OUT TO BE, IF WE COULD MAYBE SAVE A FEW MONTHS BY DOING THAT. BUT THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE REST OF THE I.A.F. IS SO INTERLINKED. FOR INSTANCE, THE ATMOSPHERIC MODEL IS ON A CRITICAL PATH RIGHT NOW, BUT IF WE DELAY EMISSIONS INVENTORY WORK, IT WILL BECOME THE CRITICAL PATH WITHIN A COUPLE OF MONTHS. SO IT'S REALLY HARD TO SEPARATE THE PIECES BECAUSE THEY ALL NEED TO FLOW TOGETHER. FOR INSTANCE, WE NEED THE EFFECTS, PHASE ONE RESULTS, TO DESIGN PHASE TWO IN ORDER TO KNOW THE OUTPUTS THAT ARE NEEDED FROM THE ATMOSPHERIC MODEL. THE ATMOSPHERIC MODEL WORK CANNOT BE DONE TILL EMISSIONS INVENTORY WORK IS PROVIDED TO THEM IN ORDER TO STRUCTURE THAT ANALYSIS. SO THERE ARE SOME OPPORTUNITIES TO JUGGLE WHOLE CONTRACTS BUT THOSE ARE LIMITED TO A FEW MONTHS THIS SPRING. MR. LEVITAS: WELL, IF I MAY JUST PURSUE THIS, IT DOES APPEAR TO ME THAT WITH THE FUNDS THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE IN THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, YOU COULD DO ALL THE THINGS IN THE FIRST "" I DON'T KNOW HOW IT SHOWS UP ON THAT HANDOUT, BUT ON THIS OTHER ONE THAT WE HAD, THE 1.18 THAT WAS PROJECTED FOR SOME OBLIGATIONS AS WELL AS THE ENTIRE EMISSIONS INVENTORY WORK WITH FUNDS, IT WOULD BE ABOUT TWENTYSEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS SHORT. BUT YOU COULD COMMIT TO ALL OF THOSE ITEMS NOW WITH FUNDS THAT ARE IN HAND. MR. ELMORE: WELL, LET ME "" THIS IS THE WAY I LOOK AT THIS PROBLEM. HERE ARE THE I.A.F. MODULES MORE OR LESS IN THE ORDER THAT WE'RE NOW EXPECTING THE FUNDS TO NEED TO BE COMMITTED AND THESE ARE THE AMOUNTS. AND IF THAT ADDS UP TO 2.9 MILLION DOLLARS AS THE ONLY THING "" ONLY EXPENDITURE BEYOND MAY OF THIS YEAR IS A HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS WHICH WOULD OCCUR IN MARCH OF NEXT YEAR, SO FOURTEEN MONTHS AWAY MORE OR LESS. SO WITH AN UNPHASED APPROACH WE NEED 2.8 MILLION DOLLARS BY MAY. MR. SMITH: OR WE NEED TO STRETCH THE SCHEDULE. MR. LEVITAS: ARE YOU SAYING THAT IF WE DON'T START DIRECT COST WORK IN MAY WE DON'T FINISH ON TIME? MR. ELMORE: THAT'S RIGHT. IN OTHER WORDS, I THINK PROBABLY DIRECT COST COULD BE DELAYED UNTIL "" FOR A FEW MONTHS, BUT SOME OF THE DIRECT COST OUTPUTS ARE NEEDED TO DRIVE SOCIOECONOMICS, SO I WOULD NEED TO LOOK AT THAT MORE CLOSELY. BUT ALL THIS EMISSIONS INVENTORY WORK IS CRITICAL. MR. LEVITAS: I UNDERSTAND. I UNDERSTAND THAT. I GUESS MY "" AND I'LL BE QUIET AFTER THIS COMMENT. BUT MY THINKING ABOUT THIS IS THAT WHILE THERE IS SOME INTERRELATION AS DEFINED IN THESE FLOWCHARTS THAT YOU'VE PRESENTED, THAT THE CORE WORK THAT HAS TO GET DONE IN ORDER FOR ANYTHING TO GO FORWARD IS THE INVENTORY MODELING WORK SO THAT YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT'S ACTUALLY HAPPENING OUT THERE IN THE AMBIENT ENVIRONMENT. AND THEN ONCE YOU HAVE THAT ANALYSIS DONE, YOU THEN LOOK AT HOW THAT TRANSLATES INTO EFFECTS ON H.U.R.V.'S AND THE COSTS AND THEN YOU GET INTO YOUR DECISION MAKING ABOUT WHAT YOU DO WITH THAT INFORMATION. SO IT DOES APPEAR TO ME THAT IF THERE IS A NEED TO STRETCH THIS OUT OR IF WE'RE FACING FISCAL RESTRAINTS, THAT YOU'D WANT TO HAVE THE CORE PIECES IN PLACE AND KNOW THAT YOU'VE GOT THAT, AND AS SOON AS YOU CAN FILL THOSE OTHER PIECES IN, BUT THAT'S JUST MY VIEW ABOUT THAT. MR. ELMORE: YEAH, TAKING THAT APPROACH WOULD PROVIDE YOU WITH EXPOSURE INFORMATION, SAY, THE SMOKIES, SHENANDOAH, ALL ALONG THE APPALACHIAN CHAIN, BUT IT WOULD NOT PROVIDE THE INFORMATION IN TERMS OF WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS IN THOSE CLASS ONE AREAS FOR OZONE VISIBILITY AND ACID DEPOSITION. MS. COX: ONE THING WE WANTED TO GET FROM THIS DISCUSSION "" AND FIRST LETTING YOU KNOW WHERE WE ARE ON THE I.A.F., WE'VE COME A LONG WAY SINCE WE GOT THE PROPOSAL APPROVED FOR THE DESIGN. WE KNOW MORE ABOUT THE DATES AND WE KNOW MORE ABOUT THE DOLLAR AMOUNTS NEEDED AND THE CASH FLOW. THEN IN MOVING ON TO BUDGET, WE WERE HOPING THAT WE COULD HAVE SOME DISCUSSION FROM THE GOVERNING BODY AND SOME COMMITMENT THAT THEY'RE GOING TO COME UP WITH A STRATEGY AND THEY'RE GOING TO COME UP WITH THE FUNDS THAT WE NEED. SO THAT'S ONE THING THAT WE ARE LOOKING FOR, A GOAL OF THE MEETING, TO IDENTIFY HOW ARE WE GOING TO ACCOMPLISH RAISING THE FUNDS THAT WE NEED. WHO'S GOING TO LEAD THAT UP? MR. SHAW:Č WHERE DO THE STATE CONTRIBUTIONS SHOW UP IN THIS BUDGET? MS. MOORHEAD: OKAY, I HAVEN'T SHOWN INPUT. I AM ASSUMING THAT THE "" THAT WE WILL GET 2.311 MILLION DOLLARS, AND THE E.P.A. CONTRIBUTIONS ARE A LARGE PART OF THAT, THE STATES' CONTRIBUTIONS THROUGH E.P.A. I DO HAVE AS A HANDOUT "" I DON'T HAVE AN OVERHEAD, BUT I HAVE A HANDOUT OF THE APPROVED BUDGET, AND IT SHOWS THE STATES' CONTRIBUTIONS THERE FOR FISCAL YEAR '97. MR. LEVITAS: THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE THREE SEVENTYFIVE FIGURE WHICH IS TWO TWENTYFIVE FROM THE E.P.A. AND ONE FIFTY FROM THE STATES? MS. MOORHEAD: YES. MR. LEVITAS: THAT LAST FIGURE BEFORE THE TOTAL INCLUDES THAT? MS. MOORHEAD: YES. THAT'S REPRESENTED IN THERE. BECAUSE, SEE, THE STATES GET GRANT MONEY FROM E.P.A. AND THE AGENTS TELL E.P.A. TO TRANSFER XAMOUNT TO SAMI, SO THAT'S WHY I'VE DONE IT THAT WAY. MR. LEVITAS:Č RIGHT. I UNDERSTAND. MR. SHAW: LET ME ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION AND LET ME ADMIT THAT I GET CONFUSED REAL EASY WHEN I START LOOKING AT MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. WE DON'T "" LET ME ASK IN THE FORM OF A QUESTION. IN ORDER TO STAY ON THIS SCHEDULE WE NEED 1.78 MILLION DOLLARS TO COME IN BY MAY; IS THAT MS. MOORHEAD: WELL, NO. SEE, WE ONLY "" WELL, YOU NEED 1.78 BUT WE WILL HAVE "" THE T.O.C. WILL HAVE FIVE HUNDRED AND TWENTYTHREE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED AND FIFTYSEVEN DOLLARS. SO I'VE SUBTRACTED THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT OFF OF THE 1.78. AND THAT'S HOW I CAME UP WITH 1.156. THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE THERE. MR. SHAW: SO THAT'S THE CRITICAL NUMBER? MS. MOORHEAD: THAT'S REALLY THE CRITICAL NUMBER. WE'LL TAKE MORE BUT THAT'S THE CRITICAL NUMBER. BUT NOW WE ALSO NEED ON THE OTHER COLUMN THE NEEDS FOR THE P.A.C. OUTREACH, WHICH THOSE EFFORTS SHOULD STEP UP TO MAKE THE REPORT ASSESSMENT SUCCESSFUL. WE FEEL THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME MORE E.M.O. EVALUATION NEEDS. THE POLICY COMMITTEE IS JUST NOW LOOKING AT HOW TO PURSUE EVALUATING THE FULL RANGE OF OPTIONS AND WE WILL NEED SOME ASSISTANCE THERE, SO WE'RE A LITTLE BIT FUZZIER ON THAT NUMBER. AND JUST THE GENERAL OFFICE NEEDS, LOOKING IN THE PAST AT WHAT IT'S COST FOR THE SALARIES, THE MEETINGS, THE TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT AND OTHER OFFICE RELATED ACTIVITIES. SO WE'LL NEED THAT MONEY IN ADDITION TO KEEP THINGS RUNNING. MR. SHAW: AND HOW MUCH IS THAT? UNIDENTIFIED: NINE HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS. MR. WALTON: NOW, I HAVE A QUESTION. FOR THE F.Y. '98, IS THAT ABOVE AND BEYOND ASSUMING THE SAME FEDERAL AND STATE CONTRIBUTIONS AS NINETY UNIDENTIFIED: THAT'S TOTAL. MR. WALTON: THAT'S TOTAL? MS. MOORHEAD: RIGHT. YEAH, TOTAL. MR. WALTON:Č OKAY. OKAY. BUT ON F.Y. '97, THE 1.156, THAT'S ABOVE AND BEYOND "" MS. MOORHEAD: THAT'S ABOVE AND BEYOND "" MR. WALTON:hhh"" WHAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW? MS. MOORHEAD: "" WHAT WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE, WHAT HAS BEEN COMMITTED, YES. MR. SHAW: SO WE NEED TWO AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS OR THERE ABOUT? MS. MOORHEAD: ROUND ABOUT. MR. SHAW: BY MAY? MS. MOORHEAD: AT THE LATEST. WE ONLY NEED 1.156 MILLION DOLLARS. WE NEED TO KNOW THAT THE NINE HUNDRED AND FIFTY ROUND ABOUTS WILL BE COMING IN IN '98 SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE THAT CASH FLOW PROBLEM AGAIN. MR. LEVITAS: A COUPLE OF THOUGHTS HAVE OCCURRED TO ME. ONE, I JUST WANTED TO ASK ARE THERE ANY DISCUSSIONS REGARDING OTHER SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECTS UNDERWAY IN ANY OF THE STATES THAT WE OUGHT TO KNOW ABOUT? MR. SHAW: THERE'S NOT ANY IN SOUTH CAROLINA. MR. LEVITAS: WELL, IF NOT, I JUST WANT TO SAY WITHOUT WANTING TOO AGGRESSIVE WITH REGARD TO OUR FEDERAL PARTNERS THAT THERE'S GOT TO BE A MILLION DOLLARS IN THE FEDERAL BUDGET TO KEEP THIS PROJECT ON TRACK BETWEEN E.P.A. AND PARK SERVICE AND FOREST SERVICES, IMPORTANT AS THIS IS AND AS CENTRAL AS IT IS TO WHAT E.P.A. SAYS ARE ITS PRIORITIES. I KNOW E.P.A. HAS BEEN A GREAT PARTNER BUT, NOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BILLIONS OF DOLLARS. THERE'S GOT TO BE A MILLION DOLLARS TO KEEP THIS PROJECT GOING. MR. WINSTON SMITH: THERE MAY BE SOMEWHERE. I DON'T "" I PERSONALLY DON'T KNOW WHERE IT IS BUT THERE MAY BE SOMEWHERE WITH REGARDS TO THIS CONTRACT MONEY AND STUFF LIKE THAT THAT ONLY WASHINGTON GETS. WE DON'T "" THAT IS NOT PASSED DOWN TO THE REGIONS. WE DON'T GET A POT OF MONEY OTHER THAN 105 MONEY, SO "" I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT ANY MORE OF THIS.MR. LEVITAS: I MIGHT REPORT THAT HAROLD AND BOB KERR AND I MET WITH MARY NICHOLS. I KNOW SHE WAS "" I WAS UNABLE TO BE AT THE LAST GOVERNING BODY MEETING AND SHE WAS THERE. BUT WE HAD A SUBSEQUENT MEETING WITH MARY AND DICK WILSON WHO WERE VERY SUPPORTIVE AND WERE ABLE TO MAKE SOME COMMITMENT REGARDING THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR. I HAD BEEN UNDER THE IMPRESSION AT THAT MEETING THAT WE WERE GETTING MORE OF A COMMITMENT THEN, BUT I REALLY THINK THAT THAT IS THE MOST LIKELY AND BEST AVENUE FOR PURSUING THIS. AND I WOULD HOPE THAT THE FEDERAL LAND MANAGERS, IF THEY'RE NOT IN A POSITION TO SUPPORT THIS THROUGH THEIR OWN BUDGETS, ARE IN A POSITION TO HELP SWING WHATEVER NEEDS TO HAPPEN IN WASHINGTON TO GET THIS FUNDING SECURED. AND I KNOW THAT WILL JUMP US AHEAD TO A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM, BUT I SUSPECT THAT THERE WILL BE A RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THAT AND SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN EXPRESSED BY THE OTHER MEMBERS ABOUT THE PROJECT. MR. CARR: THIS IS DAVID CARR. I HAVE A GENERAL CONCERN ABOUT PHASING AND PUSHING UP THE EFFECTS ANALYSIS TO FAR IN THE FUTURE AND JUST FOCUSING ON THE AIR QUALITY MODELING AND THE EMISSIONS INVENTORY. AS I UNDERSTAND IT FROM WHAT TOM IS SAYING, WHAT I'VE HEARD IN THE POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING AND HOW THESE FLOWCHARTS RELATE, THAT YOU NEED TO BE GENERATING THIS INFORMATION ABOUT THOSE RESPONSE RELATIONSHIPS OF POLLUTANTS UP THERE IN THE ATMOSPHERE SO THAT THEY CAN HELP GUIDE YOU IN TERMS OF WHAT YOU "" HOW YOU'RE GOING TO CONSTRUCT YOUR MODELS TO THEN GET TO THE POINT WHERE YOU CAN ASSESS EMISSIONS AND EFFECTS. PLUS, I THINK IT WOULD BE A MISTAKE TO LEAVE THOSE THINGS OUT THERE. WE MIGHT GET THROUGH AND ONLY HAVE THE MONEY TO DO THE MODELING OF "" THE AIR QUALITY MODELING AND NEVER GET TO THE EFFECTS AND NEVER GET THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTIONS. SO I WOULD EXPRESS A CONCERN ABOUT LEAVING THOSE THINGS TOO FAR IN THE FUTURE. MR. SHAW: I DON'T THINK WE CAN DEVELOP A STRATEGY HERE TODAY. THE GOVERNING BOARD NEEDS TO, I THINK, TAKE SOME TIME AND COME UP WITH A STRATEGY. STEVE, I WAS BORN A PESSIMIST AND HAVE REMAINED ONE THROUGH EXPERIENCE AND OTHER THINGS. A CONCERN I WOULD HAVE ABOUT "" I AGREE WITH YOU THAT THE E.P.A. OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO FIND SOME MONEY HERE. MY CONCERN IS THAT WE'RE IN A CYCLE. I'M NOT SURE "" I MEAN THE WAY E.P.A. FUNCTIONS AS A BUREAUCRACY, WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A FISCAL YEAR. I'M NOT SURE WE CAN GET A MILLION DOLLARS DUMPED IN OUR LAPS AND BE AUTHORIZED TO SPEND IT BY MAY EVEN IF WE HAD GOTTEN SOME MONEY ON OCTOBER FIRST UNLESS THERE ARE SOME "" I MEAN WITHOUT, I THINK, DIRECT CONDITIONAL INTERVENTION, I GUESS, IS WHERE I'M HEADED, I DON'T THINK WE'LL GET THROUGH THE E.P.A. PROCESS MONEY IN A TIMELY MANNER EVEN IF WE GET IT. MS. ANDREWS: WHAT ABOUT CONTRACTS? ARE WE NOT ABLE "" YOU KNOW, E.P.A. ALWAYS HAS CONTRACT MONEY. IS THAT AN AVENUE TO TAP IF WE USED E.P.A.L.O.E. CONTRACTORS FOR SOME OF THIS WORK THAT E.P.A. WOULD FUND? MR. WINSTON SMITH: WELL, IN THE REGION WE DON'T HAVE WHAT WE CALL CONTRACT MONEY. THAT MONEY IS ALLOCATED TO HEADQUARTERS TO DO HEADQUARTERS WORK ON STANDARDS AND OTHER TYPE STUFF THAT "" WHAT THEY DO UP THERE. THAT MONEY HAS BEEN REDUCED IN THE LAST FEW YEARS AND ALL OF THOSE HEADQUARTERS OFFICES HAVE NEEDS THAT ARE FAR GREATER THAN THE CONTRACT MONEY THEY HAVE. YOU'RE WELCOME TO TALK TO HEADQUARTERS ABOUT IT AND MARY NICHOLS ABOUT IT, BUT I DON'T KNOW, YOU KNOW, WHAT THE LIKELIHOOD WOULD BE OF GETTING THAT. I CAN'T PREDICT THAT. L.O.E. CONTRACTS ARE HOLLOW CONTRACTS. YOU HAVE TO PUT MONEY INTO THEM TO MAKE THEM WORK, AND SO WE CAN'T JUST CALL ON THE CONTRACTORS UNLESS WE HAVE MONEY TO USE FOR THAT. MR. ARTHUR SMITH: WE NEED TO CONSIDER PHASED CONTRACTS AS A FALLBACK POSITION. MR. SHAW: WELL, I THINK LET'S DISCUSS THAT A MINUTE. DAVID, YOU WANTED MS. COX: IN THE PHASED CONTRACT APPROACH THAT TOM PRESENTED WE COULD PUSH THE NEED FOR THE MONEY ON TO OCTOBER, WHICH WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH "" MORE CONSISTENT WITH THE FEDERAL FISCAL YEAR. AND WE DO HAVE AN APRIL MEETING COMING UP FOR THE GOVERNING BODY AND EVERYBODY. WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IS A COMMITMENT BY THE GOVERNING BODY, SOME DIRECTION FOR HOW WE NEED TO PROCEED AND A COMMITMENT THAT THEY WILL FIND THE FUNDS AND, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE NICE TO HAVE AN ANNOUNCEMENT AT THE APRIL MEETING THAT WE FOUND THEM AND WE KNOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE COMING IN BY OCTOBER. THEN THAT MIGHT MAKE PEOPLE A LITTLE MORE COMFORTABLE DOING THIS, THIS PHASED APPROACH, IF WE KNOW THE MONEY IS COMING IN. MR. SHAW: WELL, I'M UNCOMFORTABLE, AND I'M NOT SPEAKING AS CHAIR OR VICECHAIR. I'M SPEAKING AS A STATE REPRESENTATIVE ON THE GOVERNING BODY. I NEVER SIGN A CONTRACT FOR WORK IF I DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY FOR IT. MS. COX: WELL, WE WON'T DO THAT EITHER. MR. SHAW: OKAY. WELL, I THINK THAT'S A GOOD POLICY FOR YOU ALL TO HAVE. AND YOU'VE GOT SOME CONTRACTS YOU'VE GOT TO SIGN RIGHT AWAY IS WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE TO ME. MS. COX: TO MEET A JUNE '98 DEADLINE, WE DO. MR. LEVITAS:Č CAN I ASK A QUESTION ABOUT THAT? THE PHASED APPROACH THAT'S UP THERE, WOULD THAT KEEP THE PROJECT ON SCHEDULE AND YOU'RE JUST "" WHAT YOU'RE HAVING TO DO IS COMPLICATE THE CONTRACTING PROCESS BY PIECEMEALING IT? MR. ARTHUR SMITH: KEEPS IT ON SCHEDULE UNTIL OCTOBER. MS. ANDREWS: BUT HOW DID MR. LEVITAS: ASSUMING THAT THE MONEY COMES IN OCTOBER 1, THAT PHASE SCHEDULE WOULD KEEP THE I.A.F. ON TARGET FOR JUNE OF '98. MS. ANDREWS: BUT HOW ARE YOU "" I MEAN ARE YOU GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET CONTRACTORS TO BUY INTO THAT CONCEPT AND WHAT CHANCE WOULD THE MONEY BE "" WILL THERE BE FOR THE MONEY TO BE THERE IN OCTOBER? IF WE'RE LOOKING AT A STATE BASICALLY MAINTAINING OUR CURRENT LEVEL OF EFFORT AND REGION IV MAINTAINING ITS CURRENT LEVEL OF EFFORT, THAT ONLY GIVES US WHAT, THREE HUNDRED AND SEVENTYFIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS WE COULD COUNT ON IN OCTOBER. MR. ELMORE: IN GENERAL TERMS IF THAT LEVEL OF CONTRIBUTION SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'VE SEEN IN THE PAST CONTINUES, THAT MORE OR LESS MATCHES THE OPS FUNCTIONS AND STAFF FUNCTIONS WITHIN SAMI, AND THE I.A.F. IS AN ADDON TO THAT. I GUESS THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT THAT ADDON IS FOR A FAIRLY LIMITED AMOUNT OF TIME AND THERE WILL BE OTHER NEEDS DOWN THE ROAD. BUT THIS IS A "" RIGHT NOW IS A PEAK IN TERMS OF DEMAND FOR CASH IN DOING WHAT SAMI HAS SET OUT TO DO. I GUESS JUST AS A REMINDER, THIS WAS THE CHART THAT WAS IN THE I.A.F. PROPOSAL THAT YOU FOLKS APPROVED IN JUNE, AND THE TOTAL RANGE, IT GOES UP TO 3.6 MILLION DOLLARS COUNTING ON SUBSTANTIAL IN KIND CONTRIBUTIONS, BUT THE CASH NEEDS WENT UP TO 3.2. AND I PUT THAT UP JUST AS A REMINDER BECAUSE THE FIGURE HERE ADDS 2.9 MILLION, AND THAT ASSUMES THAT SOME OF THESE CONTRACTS WILL COME IN LESS EXPENSIVE THEN WE WERE EXPECTING THEM TO WHEN WE MADE THAT ORIGINAL PROPOSAL, ALTHOUGH WE DON'T KNOW THAT FOR SURE. THIS PIECE RIGHT HERE IS SPECULATIVE. THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT OTHER PEOPLE ON THE MODELING SUBCOMMITTEE WHO THINK THAT'S WAY LOW. AND SO I WANT YOU TO HAVE FULL INFORMATION WHEN YOU'RE CONTINUING THIS "" AS YOU'RE CONTINUING THIS DISCUSSION THAT PROBABLY THE CONSERVATIVE NUMBER TO USE HERE WOULD BE 3.2 MILLION RATHER THAN 2.9, BUT I'M TRYING TO GIVE YOU SOME SORT OF MIDDLEOFTHEROAD ESTIMATE TO SUPPORT YOUR DISCUSSIONS. MR. LEVITAS: WHEN DO WE HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION AS TO WHICH WAY WE'RE GOING ON THIS? MR. ELMORE: WELL, THE "" MONDAY WE HOPE TO PUT ON MS. ANDREWS: TAKE ALL THE TIME YOU NEED, STEVE. MR. ELMORE: LET ME FINISH THE SENTENCE. MONDAY WE HOPE TO PUT THIS PIECE ON THE STREET, REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS. RECEIVING PROPOSALS DOESN'T COMMIT YOU TO SPEND A DIME, BUT IF SAMI WERE TO SUBSTANTIALLY REVISE ITS APPROACH "" WE HAVE A BUNCH OF CONTRACTORS PREPARING FAIRLY DETAILED PROPOSALS. IF WE CHANGED THAT BUDGET IN SOME WAY THEY'D HAVE TO START OVER ESSENTIALLY AS WELL AS THE MODELING SUBCOMMITTEE. SO I GUESS WHAT WE NEED TO PROCEED USING THE PHASED APPROACH IS SOME ASSURANCE THAT THE MONEY WILL BE THERE EVENTUALLY. IF THE MONEY WE NOW HAVE IS LIKELY TO BE ALL THE MONEY THAT WE SEE, THEN WE NEED TO STOP IMMEDIATELY AND REGROUP, AND I CAN GUARANTEE A DELAY IN THAT JUNE '98 DEADLINE. MR. WALTON: TOM, COULD I ASK A QUESTION? IF YOU WERE GOING TO GO WITH THE PHASED APPROACH ARE YOU STILL GOING TO PUT IT ON THE STREET MONDAY? ARE YOU PREPARED TO DO THAT WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO MR. ELMORE: WITH THE PHASED APPROACH, THE WAY WE'RE GOING TO "" WE WOULD PUT THE R.F.P. OUT MONDAY FOR EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS. WE'LL GET PROPOSALS IN. IF WE GET ONE IN FOR FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS, THAT'S PRETTY GOOD NEWS. BUT WHAT I'M TOLD IS IT'S MORE LIKELY WE'LL GET TWOMILLIONDOLLAR PROPOSALS IN. SO WE'LL HAVE SOME WORK TO DO TO BRING IT DOWN TO THE EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS THAT WE HOPE TO SEE. IF WE ARE ABLE TO SETTLE ON A FIGURE OF EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS WITH THE ATMOSPHERIC CONTRACTOR, THEN THE PHASED APPROACH WOULD SUGGEST THAT "" OUR EXPECTATION IS THE FULL AMOUNT WILL EVENTUALLY BE EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS. WHAT WE'RE PREPARED TO COMMIT TO RIGHT NOW IS TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS AND YOU'LL RECEIVE THAT WHEN YOU DELIVER SOME EARLY INTERIM PRODUCT. AND AT THAT POINT WE'LL AUTHORIZE YOU TO TAKE THE NEXT STEP WHICH WILL BE AN ADDITIONAL HUNDRED THOUSAND OR TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS, WHATEVER WE COULD AFFORD. THAT ALSO TIES TO ANOTHER INTERIM PRODUCT. NOW, I MEAN THAT SOLVES THE CASH FLOW PROBLEM. IT DOES NOT SOLVE THE TOTAL CASH PROBLEM. SO AT THE VERY LATEST, BY OCTOBER, WE NEED THE FULL AMOUNT IN THE BANK SO WE CAN CONTINUE THESE PHASED CONTRACTS OR WE'LL HAVE A WHOLE BUNCH, LIKE TEN INCOMPLETE CONTRACTS AND CONTRACTORS JUST ABANDONING US BECAUSE WE'VE QUIT PAYING THEM. I MEAN WE CAN ARRANGE THIS IN A WAY THAT WE WILL NOT BE COMMITTING FRAUD OR NOT FULFILLING OUR CONTRACTURAL OBLIGATIONS, BUT WE MAY NOT BE GENERATING A LOT OF GOOD WILL IN THE CONTRACTING COMMUNITY AND ALSO WE WON'T BE DELIVERING THE PRODUCT YOU FOLKS HAVE ASKED FOR. MR. SHAW: WELL, IT SEEMS TO ME WE DON'T HAVE ANY OPTIONS AS FAR AS PROCEEDING FOR MONDAY. I THINK YOU NEED TO PLAN ON PROCEEDING AND I THINK YOU NEED TO BE THINKING IN TERMS OF A PHASED APPROACH. IN THE MEANTIME, THE GOVERNING BODY NEEDS TO BE TRYING TO FIRM UP POSSIBILITIES OF FUNDING AND IF WE CAN GET THAT DONE BY APRIL OR MAY, THAT WOULD BE WONDERFUL, BUT I THINK WE NEED AS LONG A TIME FRAME AS WE CAN TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. MR. LEVITAS: ONE THING THAT I MIGHT SAY. YOU SUGGESTED THAT THE PHASED APPROACH IMPLIES OR REQUIRES THE COMMITMENT TO GET "" TO SEEK ADDITIONAL FUNDS. BOTH OF THESE APPROACHES DO. I MEAN EITHER WAY TO IMPLEMENT THE CURRENT WORK PLAN IS DEPENDENT UPON A COMMITMENT FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS. AND WHEN YOU'RE SAYING WE HAVE THE BRAKES ON EVERYTHING, THAT WOULD BE IF THE GOVERNING BODY WERE TO SAY WE'RE NOT PREPARED TO SEEK ANY MORE FUNDS AND WE'VE GOT TO RETOOL EVERYTHING. I DON'T THINK THAT'S "" WE HAVE CROSSED THAT BRIDGE AND HAVE SAID ALL ALONG WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS. WE'VE GOT TO DO IT WITH A LEVEL OF EFFORT THAT WILL SUPPORT WHAT WE'RE ARE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. SO I JUST WANTED TO OBSERVE THAT EITHER ONE OF THESE APPROACHES GOING FORWARD IMPLIES A COMMITMENT ON THE PART OF THIS GROUP TO SEEK OBTAINING ADDITIONAL FUNDS. MR. ELMORE: WELL, IF THERE IS ANY QUESTION ABOUT THAT COMMITMENT, WE NEED TO KNOW IMMEDIATELY OR WE'RE GOING TO WASTE THE MONEY. IF THAT COMMITMENT STILL STANDS, AND WE CERTAINLY HOPE THAT IT DOES, WITH AN UNPHASED APPROACH "" IN OTHER WORDS, BEFORE WE SIGN THE ATMOSPHERIC CONTRACT WE HAVE THE FULL EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS IN THE BANK. WE'RE IN TROUBLE IN MARCH. IF WE PHASE IT, I MEAN WITH A WHOLE LOT OF EXTRA ADMINISTRATIVE RED TAPE FOR THE STAFF TO KEEP TRACK OF A DOZEN CONTRACTS INSTEAD OF ONE, THEN THE PROBLEM DOESN'T ARRIVE UNTIL OCTOBER, BUT THE PROBLEM STILL ARRIVES. I HAVE THE TENDENCY TO KEEP REPEATING A POINT UNTIL, YOU KNOW, I SEE ALL THE HEADS NOD, SO THERE IS A RISK THERE WITH THE PHASED APPROACH. WE COULD END UP WITH A BUNCH OF INCOMPLETE PRODUCTS IF THE MONEY DOESN'T ARRIVE. IF THE MONEY'S GOING TO ARRIVE WE'LL DELIVER THE PRODUCTS AS WE'VE PROMISED. MS. ANDREWS: I DON'T THINK YOU CAN GUARANTEE THAT THE MONEY IS GOING TO ARRIVE. MR. SHAW:Č I DIDN'T HEAR WHAT YOU SAID. MS. ANDREWS: I DON'T THINK YOU'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GUARANTEE THAT THE MONEY IS GOING TO ARRIVE. MR. SHAW: WELL, WHAT I'M HEARING ASKED HERE BY STAFF IS NOT A GUARANTEE BUT AN INDICATION THAT WE'RE GOING TO MAKE A TREMENDOUS EFFORT TO GET THAT MONEY. IF WE DON'T MS. ANDREWS: FROM WHERE? MR. SHAW: WELL, I MEAN WE'VE BEEN IN THAT POSITION SINCE DAY ONE OF THIS PROJECT. MR. LEVITAS: I THINK THOSE OPTIONS ARE PRETTY CLEAR. THE OPTIONS ARE E.P.A.'S CURRENT "" E.P.A.'S OR OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES' CURRENT BUDGETS, THEIR F.Y. '98 BUDGETS OR F.Y. '98 ADDON OR FOR A SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT WHICH DOESN'T SEEM TO BE IN THE WORKS, SO I TAKE THAT OFF THE TABLE. BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT GOING TO FEDERAL AGENCIES AND EITHER GETTING A COMMITMENT OUT OF THEIR FUNDS NOW, THEIR CURRENTLY BUDGETED FUNDS FOR NEXT YEAR, OR SEEKING AN ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FROM CONGRESS FOR THAT PURPOSE. MR. CARR: DOES ANYBODY KNOW WHAT THE ANNUAL BUDGET FOR OTAG HAS BEEN AND CAN THAT BE USED AS LEVERAGE WITH E.P.A. TO GET ADDITIONAL MONIES FOR SAMI? MS. ANDREWS: PROBABLY NOT. MR. LEVITAS: I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE NUMBER IS BUT I JUST MIGHT SAY THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MARY NICHOLS MENTIONED WHEN WE MET WITH HER WAS THAT THE GRAND CANYON COMMISSION, WHICH HAS BEEN BUDGETED, HAS WOUND DOWN, AND THEY HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF REALLOCATING SOME OF THOSE FUNDS TO SAMI. MR. ELMORE: AND THE OTHER THING IS THAT OTAG HAS PRODUCED A LOT OF WORK, AND WE TALKED ABOUT THIS IN THE POLICY MEETING AND THERE MAY BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO USE THINGS THAT OTAG HAS DONE TO CUT THAT BUDGET. I MS. ANDREWS: WELL, I HOPE THAT THAT'S ALREADY BEEN FACTORED IN, THAT INDEED THE EMISSIONS INVENTORY WORK THAT OTAG HAS DONE AND DONE AND DONE MR. CARR: I WOULD HOPE THAT "" I WAS HOPING MAYBE THERE WERE SOME SAVINGS YET. MR. ELMORE: THESE BUDGET FIGURES REFLECT AN ASSUMPTION THAT THE OTAG WORK WILL BE A POINT OF DEPARTURE. AND SO "" RELATED TO OTAG, OTAG HAS AN INTEREST IN FAIRLY SHORT EPISODES OF VERY HIGH CONCENTRATIONS AND SO THE MODEL RUNS THAT THEY'RE DOING, SOME OF THOSE RUNS MAY BE USEFUL TO SAMI, BUT THE SAMI ASSIGNMENT HAS AN INTEREST IN OZONE CONCENTRATIONS ACROSS THE FULL SPECTRUM, AND SO NOT ALL OF THOSE RUNS WILL BE USEFUL. MS. ANDREWS: WHAT ABOUT S.O.S.? MR. ELMORE: THERE HAS BEEN "" OH, THERE WAS A SESSION RIGHT AFTER I STARTED IN MARCH, I GUESS IT WAS. AIR SHARE WAS THE NAME OF THE EVENT. AND SO ALL THESE DIFFERENT ACTIVITIES WERE BROUGHT TOGETHER BY SAMI TO LOOK AT THE OPPORTUNITIES TO PIGGYBACK. AND WE'RE CERTAINLY USING A LOT OF THEIR INFORMATION IN DESIGNING THE MODELING DONE BY SAMI, BUT SAMI IS SOMEWHAT UNIQUE IN ITS FOCUS IN CLASS ONE AREAS, NONURBAN AREAS, AND THEN LOOKING AT ALL THREE OF THESE AREAS OF CONCERN AT ONCE. THE GRAND CANYON LOOKED AT VISIBILITY. OTAG IS LOOKING AT OZONE. MAYTAP LOOKED AT ACID DEPOSITION. BUT YOU FOLKS HAVE UNDERTAKEN AN EXERCISE THAT WILL COMBINE ALL OF THE COMPLEXITY OF ALL THREE OF THOSE IN A SINGLE COMPUTER MODEL, WHICH IS PROVING REALLY INTERESTING IN THAT DESIGN. MR. BUNYAK: JOHN BUNYAK, PARK SERVICES. YOU MENTIONED THE FEDERAL AND STATE BORDERS, AND I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THE BIG INDUSTRY COMPONENT AS A MAJOR STAKE HOLDER AS WELL. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY MECHANISM THERE OR ANY AVAILABLE FUNDS FROM THAT ASPECT. MR. SHAW: LET ME TOUCH BASE ON THAT. MY MEMORY IS NOT REAL GOOD BUT THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION OF NOT TAPPING THE INDUSTRIAL SIDE OF THIS BECAUSE OF A CONCERN OF UNDUE INFLUENCE. SO WE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION THAT THAT'S WHAT WE WERE GOING TO DO, WHICH PERSONALLY, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THAT. BUT I THINK THERE WAS A DECISION MADE THAT WE WOULD NOT SEEK INDUSTRIAL CONTRIBUTIONS.MR. BUNYAK: I THINK THAT YOU'RE RIGHT ON IT AT THE BEGINNING, AND I THINK IF IT GETS TO THE CRITICAL POINT OF WHETHER SAMI FAILS VERSUS, YOU KNOW, WE TOOK THAT AVENUE I THINK WE WOULD HAVE TO REOPEN THAT. AND I HAVE ONE OTHER POINT. TOM MENTIONED ABOUT THE COMPREHENSIVE "" THE THREE ASPECTS THAT ARE INTEGRATED INTO ONE MODEL, AND I'M WONDERING IF THERE'S ANY WAY TO MINIMIZE THE RISK OF GETTING ALL THESE UNCOMPLETED CONTRACT PRODUCTS. IF WE COULD FOCUS ON ONE ASPECT, SAY, VISIBILITY OR ACID DEPOSITION OR OZONE, AND FOLLOW THAT THROUGH, OR DO WE LOSE THE ECONOMIES OF SCALE THERE WITH DEALING WITH ALL THREE ASPECTS AT A TIME? MR. ELMORE: WELL, A SCENARIO THAT HAS BEEN RAISED IN THE T.O.C. AND NOT WELL RECEIVED IS THE IDEA OF IGNORING OZONE BECAUSE OTAG IS DEALING WITH THAT SO THOROUGHLY. AND THE ARGUMENT GOES ALONG THE LINES OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT CAN SAMI DO THAT WOULD SIEVE THE ATTENTION THAT'S BEING BROUGHT TO THAT ISSUE UNDER OTAG? SO WE COULD CONCENTRATE ON THOSE OTHER TWO AREAS AND COME UP WITH A SIMPLER MODEL TO DO THAT. THE RESPONSE THAT I HEARD, AND JOHN CAN PUT IT MORE ARTICULATELY THAN I CAN, IS THAT THERE ARE INTERACTIONS BETWEEN THESE CONSTITUENTS. IF A NOX MOLECULE IS WASHED OUT IN THE FORM OF ACID PRECIPITATION IT WILL NOT PARTICIPATE IN OZONE GENERATION. IT WON'T BE A VISIBILITY PROBLEM. ON THE OTHER HAND, IF THAT MOLECULE IS TIED UP IN AN OZONE REACTION, IT MAY NOT CONTRIBUTE TO ACID DEPOSITION AT THE TIME OR PLACE THAT YOU MIGHT EXPECT IT TO. SO THERE IS AN INTERACTION BETWEEN OZONE AND THESE OTHER CONSTITUENTS AND SO IT WOULD BE A MUCH MORE LIMITED ANALYSIS BY PULLING THAT PIECE OUT. SO I DON'T PERSONALLY UNDERSTAND THOSE ARGUMENTS OTHER THAN I CAN REPEAT WHAT I'VE HEARD OTHER PEOPLE SAY. JOHN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MR. JANSEN: I THINK IN RESPONSE TO THE QUESTION COULD WE SAVE MONEY ON RESOURCES IF WE TOOK ONE OF THOSE ISSUES OFF THE TABLE, IT'S NOT "" THE ANSWER IS IT'S NOT LIKE CUTTING IT A THIRD, OKAY? ON THE ATMOSPHERIC MODELING YOU WILL NOT SAVE NEARLY AS MUCH AS YOU'D THINK BECAUSE WE'VE TAKEN A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH. BECAUSE OF THE CHEMISTRY YOU'RE GOING TO RUN THE SAME KIND OF A CHEMICAL TRANSPORT MODEL. NOW, YOU MIGHT SAVE SOME RESOURCES ON THE ATMOSPHERIC MODELING BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE TO DO AS MANY EPISODES BECAUSE NOW YOU'RE NOT TRYING TO REPRODUCE THE SUM OF SIXTY FOR OZONE. YOU'RE ONLY TRYING TO REPRODUCE THE ANNUAL DEPOSITION OR THE VISIBILITY FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION, SO MAYBE YOU CAN GET AWAY WITH LESS THAN FIFTY DAYS OR WHATEVER THE NUMBER YOU COME UP WITH. SO YOU MIGHT SAVE A LITTLE THERE. CLEARLY, YOU'D SAVE ON THE EFFECTS ASSESSMENT SIDE, BUT YOU HAVE TO REALLY THINK IT THROUGH AND FIND OUT WHAT YOU'RE REALLY SAVING. I DON'T THINK YOU'RE GOING TO SAVE NEARLY AS MUCH AS, YOU KNOW, MAYBE YOU'D LIKE TO. MR. SHAW: I THINK THIS IS GOOD DISCUSSION BUT WE CAN'T TWEAK THE NUMBERS HERE TODAY, I DON'T THINK. RICHARD, YOU HAD SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO SAY? MR. GRUSNICK: YEAH. I'M RICHARD GRUSNICK WITH ALABAMA. I GUESS ONE OTHER OPTION THAT WE COULD CONSIDER, DEPENDING ON HOW THINGS EVOLVE IS EXTENDING THE SCHEDULE SOME. THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT HAVE CHANGED SINCE WE FIRST CAME UP WITH THIS. PRIMARILY MARY NICHOLS' ANNOUNCEMENT THAT SHE'S GOING TO CALL FOR SUPERVISIONS UNDER OTAG. THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY OR "" WELL, I GUESS THE DECISION "" E.P.A. HAS MADE THE DECISION NOW THAT THEY'RE GOING TO PROPOSE SOME REGULATIONS LATE NEXT YEAR ABOUT REQUIRING CORRECTION OF AIR QUALITY RELATED VALUE DAMAGE IN CLASS ONE AREAS. AND, YOU KNOW, INITIALLY IT STARTED OUT THAT THIS WAS A PROBLEM DEVELOPED FOR STATES TO DO, SOMETHING ABOVE AND BEYOND THE FEDERAL LAW THAT WAS NECESSARY TO PROTECT THESE AIR QUALITY RELATED VALUES. AND I GUESS WHAT'S ABOVE AND BEYOND THE FEDERAL LAW IS A LOT MORE AMBIGUOUS. YOU THROW IN THE REVISED STANDARDS NOW TOO. AND I DON'T THINK THE ENTHUSIASM FOR TAKING THAT STEP TO GO BEYOND THE FEDERAL LAW "" THE TIME TO TAKE THAT STEP, I THINK, HAS BEEN POSTPONED SOME NOW AS A RESULT OF ALL THESE THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO CLEARLY RESULT IN ADDITIONAL AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENTS. SO THAT'S JUST ANOTHER OPTION WE CAN CONSIDER AS THIS EVOLVES THAT WAY. MR. ARTHUR SMITH: WHAT'S THE POSSIBILITY THAT THIS IS AN INTERACTIVE PROCESS AND THAT THE THINGS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO WILL PROVIDE A STIMULUS TO A FEDERAL AGENCY TO KEEP THINGS MOVING FORWARD? MR. GRUSNICK: WELL, I'M NOT SAYING STOP OR ANYTHING. I'M SAYING THAT'S ONE MORE OPTION BECAUSE THERE WILL BE MONEY COMING IN FROM STATES EACH YEAR IF WE CONTINUE OUR CONTRIBUTIONS AND E.P.A. CONTINUES THEIRS. I WAS JUST "" WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT LATER, I'M SURE. MR. SHAW: LET ME ASK YOU TO STOP A MINUTE AND ASK A QUESTION. HAVE WE GOT A LUNCH DATE OR CAN WE GO TO LUNCH ANYTIME? MS. COX: YES. IT'S A LUNCH BUFFET AND, AGAIN, WE NEED TWELVE DOLLARS AND FORTYFOUR CENTS FROM EACH OF YOU. FIGURE THAT ONE OUT. MR. SHAW: WE CAN COMMIT TO THAT. MS. COX: BUT AT ANY RATE, WE PROBABLY NEED TO WRAP THIS DISCUSSION UP AND GO EAT "" I TOLD THEM TWELVE O'CLOCK "" AND PICK UP THE NEXT ITEM THE FIRST THING AFTER LUNCH. MR. SHAW:Č OKAY. BUT I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE THIS ONE TILL WE MAKE A DECISION. MS. COX: THAT'S RIGHT. MR. SHAW: I'M NOT MAKING A MOTION, BUT I'M SUGGESTING THAT SOMEBODY MIGHT WANT TO MOVE, BUT "" LET ME TALK THROUGH THIS A MINUTE. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY IN THE GOVERNING BODY IS PREPARED TODAY TO SAY STOP WHAT WE'RE DOING, THROW IT ALL AWAY AND LET'S GO HOME. SO WE'VE GOT TWO OPTIONS. WE CAN PHASE IT IN AND STRETCH OUR MONEY RAISING DEADLINE TO OCTOBER OR WE CAN GO FULL STEAM AHEAD AND WE'VE GOT UNTIL MAY TO GET OUR MONEY RAISED. AND I GUESS WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST, AND SOMEBODY MIGHT CONSIDER IT AS A PROPOSAL, IS THAT WE DO THE PHASED APPROACH RECOGNIZING IT'S GOING TO CREATE SOME PROBLEMS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION, THE STAFF, BUT IT WOULD GIVE THE GOVERNING BODY MORE TIME TO PUT TOGETHER STRATEGIES AND WORK THOSE ISSUES THROUGH UNTIL OCTOBER. SO IF SOMEBODY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT MOTION, MAYBE WE COULD COME TO A DECISION ON THIS. WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION?MR. LEVITAS: I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION. MR. SHAW: OKAY. THANK YOU, STEVE. A MOTION HAS BEEN MADE. ANYBODY WANT TO SECOND IT? MR. WALTON: I'LL SECOND IT. MR. SHAW: DISCUSSION? MR. LEVITAS: IS THAT WHAT THE STAFF AND THE T.O.C. RECOMMEND THAT WE DO? MS. COX: I DON'T THINK WE NECESSARILY CAME UP WITH A RECOMMENDATION. WE'VE JUST PRESENTED THE PICTURE TO YOU AND THERE ARE A COUPLE OF HARD CHOICES THERE. IT'S WHATEVER THE GOVERNING BODY MR. SHAW: AND TOM HAS MADE REPEATED REFERENCE TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN, THE ISSUE OF RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE CONTRACTING COMMUNITY, AND I'M NOT IN A POSITION TO EVALUATE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THOSE CONCERNS. MR. ARTHUR SMITH:Č I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING WE CAN LIVE WITH. MS. ANDREWS: WELL, MY CONCERN IS WHAT THE PRODUCT THAT WE'RE APT TO GET, THE QUALITY OF RESPONSE TO A PROPOSAL IF THE CONTRACTOR KNOWS UP FRONT WE'RE GOING TO, IN ESSENCE, NICKEL AND DIME HIM TO DEATH. I MEAN I'M JUST "" I'M AFRAID WE WON'T GET THE CONTRACTOR RESPONSE THAT WE WOULD HAVE IF THEY KNEW THEY WERE BIDDING ON AN EIGHTHUNDREDTHOUSANDDOLLAR CONTRACT. I MEAN WHAT'S THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THAT? MR. ELMORE: WELL, ACTUALLY, THE ONE CONTRACT WE'VE LET WAS ARRANGED SOMEWHAT LIKE THIS IN A PHASED APPROACH. IN ANY EVENT THE DIFFERENCE IS WE COMMITTED TO THE FULL AMOUNT WHEN WE SIGNED THE CONTRACT. THE WAY IT'S WORKING IS THAT IT'S TIME AND MATERIALS ARE BEING PAID ON A MONTHLY BASIS UP TO A DELIVERABLE CEILING. AND LIKE UNTIL WE GET THAT PRODUCT WE DON'T PAY ANY MORE THAN THAT. AND SO THE DIFFERENCE HERE WOULD BE WE'RE NOT COMMITTING TO ANY PAYMENT AT ALL BEYOND THAT ALTHOUGH WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT "" AND EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THAT WE HAVE A USELESS PRODUCT UNLESS WE GO BEYOND THAT. SO I THINK IT'S AN APPROACH THAT'S WORKABLE. I THINK THAT'S "" FROM A STAFF PROSPECTIVE IT'S A LOT MORE WORK FOR STAFF, BUT I THINK MUCH MORE DAMAGING TO THE SAMI PROCESS WOULD BE UNCERTAINTY OR DELAY AT THIS POINT. WE HAVE THESE COMMITTEES FULL TILT. I MEAN THEY'RE SPENDING WEEKS OF TIME ON THE TELEPHONE SETTING THESE THINGS UP AND MAKING SURE THAT EACH OF THESE MODULES WILL BE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER, AND I THINK THE DAMAGE TO MORALE WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT IF THERE'S ANY SORT OF UNCERTAINTY THAT COMES FROM THE GOVERNING BODY. THE DAMAGE TO MORALE WOULD BE MUCH WORSE, OF COURSE, IF WE GO BANKRUPT AND WHATEVER, SO MR. ELMORE: TOM, JUST ONE POINT. I AGREE WITH ARTHUR. WE CAN LIVE WITH THIS PROPOSAL BUT THERE'S ONE ADDITIONAL "" TALK ABOUT MORALE. IT IS NOT GOING TO BE STRAIGHTFORWARD TO PHASE THESE CONTRACTS, TO WRITE THEM IN A WAY THAT WE'VE GOT A DELIVERABLE FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONEY AND THAT SORT OF THING. AND THE ATMOSPHERIC MODELING ONE IS GOING TO BE EXCEEDINGLY COMPLEX. NOT THAT WE CAN'T FIGURE OUT A WAY TO DO IT, BUT THAT IS GOING TO BE A CHALLENGE, AN ADDITIONAL CHALLENGE, FOR THE T.O.C. AND I SAY THAT MORE TO PUT THAT ON TOM'S PLATE AND TO REMIND US THAT WE AS A T.O.C. AND THE PEOPLE TRYING TO DO THIS GET ON WITH TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO THAT NOT STRAIGHTFORWARDLY. MR. ELMORE: THE SCENARIO THAT I PUT UP WAS JUST FOR SIMPLICITY. IN MY ANALYSIS OF THIS MONTHLY PHASING, ONE ASSUMES A PAYMENT EVERY MONTH. I MEAN BREAKING THESE CONTRACTS UP INTO MONTHLY PIECES WILL BE VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE, SO I HOPE THAT YOU DON'T HOLD ME TO EXACTLY OCTOBER AS BEING THE CRITICAL POINT, BUT THAT IS JUST CONCEPTUALLY "" THERE IS A WAY AROUND STOPPING EVERYTHING RIGHT NOW AND WAITING FOR THE MONEY TO ARRIVE. MR. WALTON: TOM, ISN'T IT CLEAR, THOUGH, THAT IF YOU TAKE THE PHASED APPROACH, AT LEAST WE'RE GOING TO BE IN APRIL WHEN WE HAVE THAT NEXT MEETING? AT THAT POINT YOU CAN SAY, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE OCTOBER; IT'S GOING TO BE JULY? YOU'RE GOING TO KNOW? MR. ELMORE: WELL, RIGHT. I MEAN THAT'S ANOTHER POINT IS THAT YOU ALL WROTE THE CONTRACTS AND YOU KNOW THAT THERE IS A TENDENCY SOMETIMES FOR SCHEDULES TO SLIP, AND SO TO THE EXTENT THAT SCHEDULES SLIP, IT MAKES THE CASH FLOW PROBLEM LESS SERIOUS. IT MAKES MEETING THE JUNE '98 DEADLINE MORE SERIOUS. SO WE DO HAVE MORE OPPORTUNITIES IN APRIL. ALSO, WE'LL KNOW BY THEN WHAT THE BIDS ARE ON THE BIGGEST PIECE, THE ATMOSPHERIC CONTRACT, AND THAT'S OUR BIGGEST QUESTION RIGHT NOW IS HOW EXPENSIVE REALLY IS THAT PIECE GOING TO BE. MR. SHAW: AND THE WORST THING WE CAN DO IS GO ASK FOR TWO MILLION DOLLARS AND GET IT AND THEN NEED 2.5 "" MR. ELMORE: RIGHT. MR. SHAW: "" TO GET THROUGH. AND LET ME ASK ONE OTHER CLARIFYING QUESTION. IF WE SHOULD COME UP WITH THE MONEY BY MAY, EVEN THOUGH WE MAY VOTE TODAY TO PHASE IT, IF WE COME UP WITH THE MONEY BY MAY, WE'RE STILL BACK. I MEAN WE'RE NO LONGER IN THE PHASE SO THERE'S BEEN NO DAMAGE DONE. I GUESS THAT'S MY QUESTION. WOULD THERE HAVE BEEN DAMAGE DONE?MR. ELMORE: IF WE COULD GO AHEAD AND, YOU KNOW, THE NEXT TIME WE DEAL WITH CONTRACTORS, JUST EXTEND THE CONTRACT TO THE FULL AMOUNT AND WE'LL BE BACK ON TRACK. MR. LEVITAS: CAN I JUST CLARIFY OR QUALIFY MY MOTION FOLLOW-UP ON OTHER POINTS THAT JOHN AND TOM MADE. THAT IS, MY MOTION IS THAT WE AUTHORIZE THE STAFF TO GO FORWARD WITH A PHASED APPROACH, THE DETAILS YET TO BE RESOLVED. AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU IN DOING THAT TO DO SOMETHING THAT'S COMMON SENSE AND THAT STRIKES A BALANCE THAT YOU THINK IS APPROPRIATE BETWEEN THE TIMELINESS AND THE ADMINISTERABILITY OF WHAT YOU'RE DOING. AND IF THAT MEANS, FOR EXAMPLE, PUSHING "" YOU TALK ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF PUSHING THE DIRECT COSTS AND SOCIOECONOMIC PIECES OFF SOMEWHAT. IT WOULD GIVE YOU MORE FLEXIBILITY TO DEAL WITH THE ATMOSPHERIC MODELING PIECE. MY MOTION LEAVES THAT TO THE STAFF TO RESOLVE IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE T.O.C. MR. SHAW: OKAY. YOU MIGHT HAVE TO HELP ME WITH ROBERTS' RULES. THE MOTION HAS BEEN AMENDED. THE SECOND HAS TO AGREE TO THAT? MR. WALTON: I'LL AGREE. MR. SHAW: OKAY. SO LET'S VOTE ON THE AMENDED MOTION. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. GROUP: AYE. MR. SHAW: ALL OPPOSED? (NO RESPONSE.) MR. SHAW: OKAY, THE MOTION CARRIES. HOW MANY STATES ARE IN SAMI? EIGHT? EIGHT STATES. THAT'S EIGHT CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATIONS. THAT'S A LOT OF FOLKS THAT CAN GET ENERGIZED. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT I'M GOING TO HAVE AN EXPECTATION THAT ALL STATES ARE GOING TO BE WILING TO GET THEIR CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATIONS ENERGIZED TO HELP US GET THIS MONEY EITHER FROM E.P.A. OR FROM SOMEWHERE, BUT THAT'S A LOT OF CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATION MEMBERS THAT CAN BRING SOME SUPPORT TO THIS EFFORT. AND THE GOVERNING BODY WILL NEED TO GET A SPECIFIC STRATEGY TOGETHER I THINK BEFORE WE MEET IN "" WELL, WE NEED TO GET OUR STRATEGY TOGETHER AND GET MOVING WELL BEFORE OUR APRIL MEETING TAKES PLACE. SO WITH THAT LET'S BREAK FOR LUNCH AND LET'S GET BACK HERE AT ONE O'CLOCK AND, RON, WE'LL START BACK WITH YOU ON THAT. (OFF THE RECORD FOR LUNCH BREAK.) MR. METHIER: WELL, THE ONEMINUTE SUMMARY IS THE VERSION OF THE CONTRACT WITH GEORGIAPACIFIC THAT THE GOVERNING BODY APPROVED AT ITS FALL CONFERENCE CALL HAS BEEN SIGNED BY HAROLD REHEIS, SAMI CHAIR, AND IT'S SITTING WITH GEORGIAPACIFIC. AND WHEN THE E.P.A. CONSENT DECREE IS FINAL AND MADE AN ORDER OF THE COURT, GEORGIAPACIFIC WILL FEEL COMFORTABLE IN SIGNING THE CONTRACT. WE BELIEVE THAT COULD HAPPEN THIS WEEK OR NEXT WEEK. IT'S IMMINENT, SO IT'S PRETTY MUCH RESOLVED AND WE START IMPLEMENTING IT. MR. SHAW: AND THE CASH WILL ARRIVE SOMETIME SHORTLY AFTER THAT IS WHAT WE UNDERSTAND? MR. METHIER: WITHIN THIRTY DAYS. MR. SHAW: WITHIN THIRTY DAYS?MR. METHIER: THE ONE MILLION DOLLARS, RIGHT. MR. SHAW: WELL, YOU CAN COUNT ON A MILLION DOLLARS NOT ARRIVING UNTIL THE THIRTIETH DAY IF THESE FOLKS MANAGE THEIR MONEY THE WAY I THINK THEY DO. MR. METHIER: BUT THE CONTRACT DID RAISE SOME ISSUES ON WHO'S GOING TO DO WHAT TO MAKE THINGS HAPPEN AND I THINK LESLIE HAS MS. COX: YEAH. I'VE SENT OUT SOMETHING ENTITLED STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR LEAD IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSIBILITIES RELATED TO THE S.E.P. WORK PLAN TASKS, AND WHICH THIS WAS NOT CIRCULATED WIDELY. IT WAS DONE QUICKLY. RON ASKED ME TO PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER. I CHECKED WITH THE STAFF ON HOW SPECIFICALLY WILL WE IMPLEMENT THE WORK PLAN TASKS. I SUGGEST AS CURRENTLY THAT SAMI WILL DO IT. SO I TRIED IN MY MIND TO FIGURE OUT WHAT MADE LOGICAL SENSE FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION. JUST BECAUSE A PARTICULAR COMMITTEE, I SUGGEST, IS ASSIGNED TO A PARTICULAR TASK DOES NOT MEAN THAT THERE WILL NOT BE INVOLVEMENT BY OTHER COMMITTEES. FOR INSTANCE, WE SUGGEST THAT THE P.A.C. SHOULD BE THE LEAD FOR TASK NUMBER ELEVEN, WHICH IS THE E.M.O. NUMBER EIGHTYNINE, IMPROVING COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE FEDERAL LAND MANAGER AND PERMITTING AUTHORITY. AND THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION BROUGHT UP THAT ONE OF THE PIECES OF THE TASK FORCE, TO DEVELOP A PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET OR USE SOME INFORMATION THE DATA BASE PROVIDES, AND IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE THE EMISSION INVENTORY SUBCOMMITTEE INVOLVED WITH THAT. SO IN INSTANCES LIKE THAT, YOU KNOW, I'M JUST SUGGESTING THAT THESE PARTICULAR COMMITTEES TAKE THE LEAD ON THESE TASKS AND THEY CAN CONSTRUCT WHATEVER AD HOC GROUP OR WORK GROUP TO MAKE TASKS COME TO COMPLETION ON TIME. AND I SUGGESTED SOME SIMPLE WAYS TO MAKE SURE FOR THE E.M.O. ITEMS. WE HAVE A HUNDRED AND FIFTYFIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR THOSE THREE E.M.O.'S THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO IMPLEMENT. I'M SUGGESTING THAT WE COME UP WITH JUST A MINI WORK PLAN. I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT TOO DETAILED, BUT SOMETHING IN THE FIRST THIRTY DAYS TO SHOW WHAT THEY THINK THEY NEED TO ACCOMPLISH IT TO MEET THE MILESTONES AND HOW MUCH MONEY WOULD THEY NEED AND USING THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE ESSENTIALLY TO KIND OF LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE SO WE DON'T GIVE TOO MUCH MONEY TO ONE EFFORT AND LEAVE ANOTHER EFFORT SHORT. AND I'M SUGGESTING THAT THE STAFF TAKE THE PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THESE QUARTERLY REPORTS, WORKING WITH THE LEAD COMMITTEES. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? I HOPE THAT ALL OF YOU HAD A CHANCE TO READ THIS AHEAD OF TIME. AND I DIDN'T HAVE REALLY MUCH OF A CHANCE TO TOUCH BASE WITH THE CHAIRS, BUT I HAVEN'T HEARD ANY "" NO ONE'S CALLED ME UP AND COMPLAINED ABOUT THIS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS, IF THIS LOOKS GOOD OR SOME MODIFIED VERSION? WE'D JUST LIKE TO BE READY TO RUN WITH THE MONEY ONCE WE HAVE IT. MR. METHIER: I THINK IT GENERALLY LOOKED PRETTY GOOD. THE ONE QUESTION I HAD WAS ON THE TASK ELEVEN DEALING WITH THE E.M.O. EIGHTNINE, IMPROVED COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN THE F.L.M.'S AND PERMITTING AUTHORITIES. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE STATE DETERMINING AUTHORITIES ON THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE COULD TAKE THE LEAD WITH THAT. IT'S REALLY MORE OF SETTING UP THE DATA BASE, WORKING WITH THE BANK CLEARING HOUSE. AND THEN I THINK IF WE NEED ASSISTANCE FROM THE P.A.C. FOR SOME SORT OF, YOU KNOW, COMMENT SHEET, WE COULD DO THAT. BUT I THINK IT'S A LITTLE MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD THAN "" HOPEFULLY, IT'S A LITTLE MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD THAN MS. COX: SO BASICALLY SAY THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE WOULD HAVE THE LEAD ON THAT ONE AND THE STATES WILL BE PRIMARILY MR. METHIER: I WOULD SUGGEST THAT, YEAH. MS. ANDREWS: AND THAT'S SATISFACTORY WITH ME, LESLIE. AIRPLANE CONFERENCE. MR. SHAW: OKAY. I DON'T THINK WE NEED A VOTE ON THIS. MS. COX: WE JUST NEED GUIDANCE FROM YOU THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS HOW YOU WANT US TO PROCEED AND WE'LL JUST BE ABLE TO HANDLE THE S.E.P. MONEY ONCE IT COMES IN. MR. SHAW: OKAY. I'M SENSING A GENERAL CONSENSUS WITH THIS, SO WE'RE GOING TO SUGGEST THAT YOU PROCEED WITH THAT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. MS. COX: AND I'LL MAKE THAT CHANGE THAT RON SUGGESTED. MR. SHAW: ARE WE DONE WITH ITEM NUMBER THREE? MR. METHIER: THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE WILL JUST MAKE SURE THAT THIS MOVES ALONG AS IT'S PROPOSED. MR. SHAW: OKAY. AND I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST THAT THIS WHOLE DOCUMENT, I THINK THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE DOES NEED TO CONTRACT FOR THE GOVERNING BODY. OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR. BRUCE, YOU'RE GOING TO HANDLE THIS ITEM? MR. BAYLE: HOPEFULLY, EVERYBODY HAS GOTTEN A COPY OF THE "" IF NOT, LESLIE HAS PASSED AROUND SOME LETTERS. I JUST WANT TO GIVE YOU ALL SOME BACKGROUND FIRST WITH REGARD TO THESE LETTERS. THE FOREST SERVICE AND THE PARK SERVICE HAVE BEEN TALKING ON CONFERENCE CALLS FOR AWHILE. QUITE A FEW OF US HAD SOME OF THESE CONCERNS THAT ARE LISTED IN THESE LETTERS AND WE JUST THOUGHT INSTEAD OF TALKING INTERNALLY WE'D BETTER PUT THESE OUT, LET FOLKS SEE THEM AND SEE IF YOU ALL HAVE THE SAME CONCERNS, JUST PUT THEM ALL ON THE TABLE. MOST OF THESE CONCERNS AREN'T NEW TO US AND PROBABLY THEY'RE NOT ENTIRELY ALTOGETHER NEW TO A LOT OF YOU EITHER. WE DRAFTED THESE LETTERS IN SEPTEMBER AND IT'S TAKEN AWHILE FOR THE FOREST SERVICE AND THE PARK SERVICE TO AGREE ON THE EXACT LANGUAGE. AND IT'S POSSIBLE THAT SINCE WE DRAFTED "" STARTED WITH THE DRAFTING IN SEPTEMBER THAT SOME OF OUR CONCERNS RAISED HEREIN MAY BE ALREADY ADDRESSED. I THINK A COUPLE OF THEM ARE. IT'S NOT OUR PURPOSE TODAY TO GET CLOSURE OR AGREEMENT ON ALL THESE ISSUES AND CONCERNS. THE PRIMARY THING IS JUST TO ESTABLISH A DIALOG AND TALK ABOUT THESE, AND IF THEY ARE OF CONCERN TO A LOT OF FOLKS, YEAH, LET'S GO AHEAD AND PLAN ON SOME STEPS TO ADDRESS THESE CONCERNS. AND IF SOME OF THESE CONCERNS HAVE ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED AND WE'RE NOT AWARE OF IT, THEN PERHAPS THERE MAY BE SOME PROBLEMS WITH SOME OF THE COMMUNICATIONS, THAT WE'RE JUST NOT AWARE OF SOME THINGS GOING ON. JOHN, DID YOU HAVE SOME STUFF YOU WANTED TO SAY? MR. BUNYAK:Č NO, NOT ON THE BACKGROUND. I THINK THAT PRETTY WELL COVERS IT. IT WAS A JOINT EFFORT AND LIKE BRUCE SAID, WE DID HAVE A NUMBER OF CONFERENCE CALLS AND WE TRIED TO COORDINATE REGULARLY SO WE WERE KIND OF ON THE SAME WAVE LENGTH. MR. BAYLE: WE'VE GOT TWO LETTERS. THE SECOND LETTER "" WHICH I'M TRYING TO THINK HOW TO DIFFERENTIATE ON THIS. ONE I'M CALLING THE E.M.O. LETTER. THAT'S THE SECOND LETTER. THE FIRST LETTER IS THE ONE THAT HAS "" WITHOUT THE INDENTATION ON THE FRONT OF IT. THAT'S GOT ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR PRIMARY CONCERNS WITHIN HERE. YOU WANT TO GO THROUGH THESE GENERAL FOUR CONCERNS? LEWIS, WHAT'S THE BEST WAY? I ASSUME A LOT OF FOLKS HAVE ALREADY READ THESE. MR. SHAW: YES. I ASSUME EVERYBODY'S FAMILIAR WITH THEM. DO YOU WANT TO HAVE A DISCUSSION OF EACH ONE? IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING? MR. BAYLE: NOT NECESSARILY. HOPEFULLY, EVERYBODY WILL READ THESE OR AT LEAST "" I DON'T KNOW. DO WE WANT TO DISCUSS EACH POINT HERE OR WHAT'S THE BEST METHODOLOGY TO ACCOMPLISH THAT? THIS IS JUST THE F.L.M. CONCERNS WE HAVE. MR. SHAW: LET'S TAKE THEM ONE AT A TIME AND SEE WHAT KIND OF REACTION WE GET. MR. BAYLE: SURE. OKAY. OKAY, LOOKING AT THAT FIRST LETTER, IT'S TALKING PRIMARILY ABOUT THE SOCIOECONOMIC WORK GROUP AND TO THE LACK OF PROGRESS AND THE LACK OF EMPHASIS BEING PLACED ON THIS. SINCE "" I'VE SEEN SOME THINGS AT THIS MEETING THAT TOM HAS DEVELOPED THAT LEADS ME TO BELIEVE THAT YOU ALL THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, IT HAS BEEN MOVING SLOWLY AND THAT INCREASED EMPHASIS IS BEING PLACED ON THIS OR "" WHAT'S YOUR READ ON THIS, TOM? MR. ELMORE: WELL, YEAH. MY ASSESSMENT IS THAT IT'S "" OF THE FOUR MODULES, THIS ONE IS FURTHEST BEHIND, AND I WOULD NOTE THE REASON FOR THAT ARE REALLY TWOFOLD. ONE IS THAT THERE'S NOT A GREAT DEAL OF AGREEMENT. THE PARTIES WERE REALLY QUITE FAR APART ON WHETHER TO DO SOCIOECONOMICS AT ALL OR TO SPEND ANY SIGNIFICANT LEVEL OF RESOURCES ON SOCIOECONOMICS, WHICH IS ONE VIEW. AND ANOTHER VIEW "" IT'S PROBABLY MORE REPRESENTING THE FEDERAL LAND MANAGERS "" WAS IT'S ABSOLUTELY CRITICAL. THIS IS THE REASON WE'RE AT THE TABLE AT ALL AND SOCIOECONOMICS NEEDS TO BE DONE AND WELL DONE. SO BRINGING THOSE TWO VIEWPOINTS TOGETHER WAS THE INTENT OF THE MEDIATION PROCESS. AND I WOULD "" IT WOULD BE GOING TOO FAR TO SAY THEY ARE TOGETHER, BUT AT LEAST THERE'S A COMMON UNDERSTANDING OF WHERE ONE STANDS ON THAT. THE OTHER REASON FOR THE HOLDUP IS REALLY A STAFF LIMITATION. SUSAN MARTIN, AN E.K. REGION IV EMPLOYEE, AND I ARE LARGELY THE SUPPORTING STAFF FOR T.O.C. AND ALL THREE OF OUR COMMITTEES PLUS THE SOCIOECONOMIC WORK GROUP ARE HARD AT WORK NOW, AND IT'S HARD TO BE IN ALL PLACES AT ONCE, SO "" I MADE A STAFF DECISION TO FOCUS ON THE CRITICAL PATH ISSUES WHICH WERE THE OTHER THREE MODULES, AND THIS ONE HAS BEEN LANGUISHING AS A RESULT OF THAT DECISION ON MY PART. I'M CONFIDENT THAT ONCE WE REACH DECISION, I GET THESE SURVEYS THAT WE'RE ABOUT TO SEND OUT BACK AND DECIDE WHERE WE WANT TO POINT OUR EFFORT, THAT WE CAN DO CATCHUP AND THAT SOCIOECONOMIC WILL BE DONE AS WELL AS SAMI WANTS IT TO BE DONE AND IT WILL BE DONE IN A TIMELY MANNER. SO I GUESS JUST TO SUMMARIZE, THERE'S TWO REASONS FOR THE HOLDUP. ONE IS THAT STAFF POSITION. THE OTHER IS THAT IT'S REALLY A PRETTY CONTENTIOUS ISSUE AND WE'VE GOT TO SORT THROUGH THAT. MR. BUNYAK: EXCUSE ME. THIS IS BUNYAK FROM PARK SERVICE. IF I WASN'T UP TO SPEED ON SOME OF YOUR EFFORT LIKE THE SOCIOECONOMIC MEDIATION EFFORTS, WOULD YOU PLEASE HELP ME TO UNDERSTAND THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE? AND I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME DIFFERENCES OF OPINION ON HOW TO DEAL WITH THIS, AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL BE TOGETHER, BUT I THINK ONE OF THE PURPOSES OF PUTTING THAT IN THE LETTER WAS JUST TO RAISE THE IMPORTANCE LEVEL FROM OUR STANDPOINT, THAT WE THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. AND IT'S GOING TO BE CRITICAL TO SAMI'S SUCCESS WITH THE BENEFITS FACTORED INTO THE E.M.O. PROCESS. MR. ELMORE: YEAH. THAT LEVEL OF IMPORTANCE BY THE FEDERAL LAND MANAGERS WAS MADE VERY CLEAR TO ME IN THE MEDIATION PROCESS BY THE REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE FEDERAL LAND MANAGERS, AND I THINK IT'S VERY USEFUL FOR THAT TO BE VITALLY UNDERSTOOD.MR. BAYLE: THANK YOU, TOM. THE SECOND CONCERN WE HAVE HAS TO DO WITH THE TWELVE NEARTERM E.M.O.'S THAT WERE APPROVED BACK IN JUNE OF '95. IT SEEMS LIKE AT THAT TIME WE THOUGHT THEY WERE FAIRLY EASY E.M.O.'S AND THEY'D BE IMPLEMENTED FAIRLY QUICKLY, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF THOSE HAVE NOT BEEN IMPLEMENTED. ONE OF THE THINGS WE WERE SAYING IS TO DEVELOP AN IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE AND I WAS PLEASED TO SEE THIS E.M.O. SCHEDULE THAT "" DID YOU DEVELOP THAT, LESLIE? MS. COX: THIS IS FROM THE PUBLIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR THE SEVEN OF THE TWELVE E.M.O.'S THAT THEY WERE ASSIGNED. AND THEY HAVE DONE IMPLEMENTATIONS TRYING TO END OR EXPECTING PRODUCT BY APRIL AND THAT THIS WAS DONE AT THE LAST P.A.C. MEETING BACK "" ACTUALLY, IT WAS DONE BEFORE AND WE DIDN'T HAVE MONEY TO IMPLEMENT. AND WITH THE NEW BUDGET THEY MET IN OCTOBER AND REFINED THE SCHEDULE AND MADE IT MAKE A LITTLE BIT MORE SENSE TRYING TO HAVE THINGS DONE BY THE SPRINGTIME, AND NOW THAT WE HAVE MONEY TO IMPLEMENT THEM LUCY WILL TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT IN HER UPDATE. SO WE ARE DOING THAT FOR THOSE SEVEN. ONE WAS ALREADY IMPLEMENTED TO SOME EXTENT, THE ONE "" ACTUALLY, IT WAS TWO, I THINK, THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH, THE UTILITIES, IN A LETTER WE SENT OUT. AND THEN THE OTHER THREE ARE UNDERWAY, THE ONES THAT THE PARK SERVICE HAS THE LEAD ON AND IS WORKING ON AND THE ONE FOR THE POLICY COMMITTEE TO LOOK AT FUEL FORMULATIONS. THEY DID SOME WORK ON THAT AND ARE DOING SOME MORE AND I THINK THERE'S "" WILL BE IMPROVED COMMUNICATIONS. AND THREE OF THEM FALL UNDER THE S.E.P. WITH A SPECIFIC TIME FRAME THAT THEY HAVE TO BE DONE BY, SO I THINK WE DO HAVE SOME OF THE SCHEDULES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. MR. LEVITAS: PLUS THE THREE OF THAT WE FUNDED BY THE S.E.P., THOSE AREN'T A PART OF THIS? MS. COX: NO, THEY'RE NOT. THEY'RE NOT SUMMARIZED IN THIS. MR. LEVITAS: OKAY. SO THAT WILL "" HOPEFULLY, IT WILL GET ON TRACK ULTIMATELY. MR. CABOTSMETHURST: LET ME JUST ANOTHER COMMENT ON THAT. YOU KNOW, I HATE TO COMPLAIN ABOUT THE LACK OF STAFF AND THE STAFF HAS DONE EVERYTHING THEY CAN, BUT THAT HAS BEEN A PROBLEM BECAUSE WE'RE BASICALLY DEALING WITH VOLUNTEERS WHO HAVE A VERY HARD TIME EVEN THOUGH WE ARE "" THE LEVEL OF NAGGING AND PERSUASION HAS REALLY GONE UP IN THE LAST "" BASICALLY, THE LAST EIGHT MONTHS AND THEIR FEET HAVE BEEN HELD TO THE FIRE ON THIS. BUT THEY ARE VOLUNTEERS AND SOME OF THEM ARE SUFFERING DOWNSIZING AND, YOU KNOW, HAVE THE USUAL PLETHORA OF PROBLEMS. THESE ARE NOT EASY E.M.O.'S TO IMPLEMENT. THEY SOUND EASY. THEY'RE NOT EASY. AND I'LL GET INTO ONE OR TWO OF THEM A LITTLE LATER ON. I WON'T TAKE THE TIME NOW. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO SAY THAT I THOUGHT WAS A GREAT IDEA; WE NEED ALL THE HELP WE CAN GET IN OUR COMMITTEE. WE ARE, FIRST OF ALL, GOING TO SEND OUT A LETTER, AN ASSESSMENT THAT'S BEEN DONE, THE WAYWARD ONES WHO HAVE NOT PARTICIPATED AND WE'RE GOING TO BE "" HAVE A LETTER IN THE WORKS THAT WILL BE SENT OUT AROUND THE FIRST OF THE YEAR. THAT ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN DONE SEVERAL TIMES TO SEE IF WE COULD MOTIVATE, STIMULATE, DRAG THEM TO THE TABLE ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. THE P.A.C. IS REALLY GOING TO NEED EVERY MAN AND WOMAN AND CHILD "" AND I INCLUDE CHILDREN IN THIS "" THAT WE CAN GET TO HELP US IMPLEMENT THE OUTREACH STRATEGIES. PARTICULARLY, THEY INTENSIFY WITH THE MORE SERIOUS E.M.O.'S. AND I DON'T MEAN MORE SERIOUS. THE MORE DYNAMIC ONES. BUT THESE ARE NOT EASY E.M.O.'S TO IMPLEMENT. THEY'RE VERY LABOR INTENSIVE. AND I NOTICED WITH MY USUAL EYE FOR VOLUNTEERS AND MONEY THAT BOTH YOUR AGENCIES HAVE OFFERED HELP, AND I WANT TO ACCEPT HELP. I WANT TO ACCEPT MONEY AND I WANT TO ACCEPT HELP "" SORRY HAROLD ISN'T HERE TO HEAR THIS "" BECAUSE OF THE LABOR INTENSIVE NATURE OF IMPLEMENTING. WE HAVE A COUPLE OF YOUR PARK SERVICE PEOPLE, PAT STANEK, WHO IS OUR NEWEST ADDITION AND A GREAT ADDITION. AND WE NEED MORE OF YOU BECAUSE YOU ARE IN EACH OF THE STATES WHERE WE NEED TO IMPLEMENT STAFF, AND EVEN THOUGH YOU CANNOT BE FORMALLY SEATED ON THE P.A.C. AS A STATE, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE YOUR NUMBERS INCREASE A GREAT DEAL. SO IF YOU COULD HELP US WITH THAT "" AND WE'LL GET TO THE MONEY PART LATER. BUT RIGHT NOW WE NEED BODIES TO HELP BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE THAT I'M USING NOW ARE REALLY STRETCHED THIN. SO I MR. BUNYAK: YOU MENTIONED PAT. ANOTHER PERSON, I THINK, REPRESENTED IN THE NEW NOMINATIONS IS BOB CARSON. ONE OF OUR PEOPLE. MS. CABOTSMETHURST: RIGHT. I'D LIKE A PARK SERVICE AND A FOREST SERVICE PERSON ON EACH OF MY E.M.O. COMMITTEES, SO YOU CAN COUNT HOW MANY THAT IS, SO I WOULD LIKE FOURTEEN PEOPLE. MR. BAYLE: YES. FOURTEEN, BUT MS. CABOTSMETHURST: GOOD. GOOD. THAT WOULD REALLY, REALLY HELP AND I THINK IT WOULD HELP RAISE THE MORALE OF THESE PEOPLE WHO ARE FEELING "" WHO ARE VERY FAITHFUL IN ATTENDING. AND MY NAME IS LUCY SMETHURST. MR. ARTHUR SMITH: I'D LIKE TO ADD SOMETHING TO WHAT LUCY HAS SAID. I'D LIKE TO REINFORCE THE NOTION OF THESE E.M.O.'S DISTINCTIVENESS. IT'S NOT BECAUSE THEY'RE EASY. IT'S BECAUSE THEY DON'T REQUIRE A GREAT DEAL OF MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS AND DATA COLLECTION. THAT'S THEIR DISTINCTION FROM THE OTHERS WHICH ARE "" WE WERE LOOKING FOR GUIDANCE THROUGH THE T.O.C. FOR. MR. SHAW: STEVE, YOU WANT MR. LEVITAS: YES. JOHN, WHERE ARE WE ON THE PARK SERVICE RELATING AND E.M.O. RELATING TO VEHICLE USE IN THE PARKS? MR. BUNYAK: BOB CARSON IS PUTTING TOGETHER A TEAM OF PEOPLE FROM OTHER INTERESTS AND PREPARED TO DRAFT A REPORT THAT'S UNDER REVIEW. MS. COX: I CAN ANSWER THAT. I CAN GIVE A LITTLE MORE DETAIL. I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH BOB AND WITH A CROSS SECTION OF SAMI PARTICIPANTS. WE HAVE A SMALL GROUP THAT CROSSES OVER NOT ONLY INTEREST GROUPS BUT ALL THE COMMITTEES. WE DO HAVE A DRAFT REPORT OUT TO THE COMMITTEES. WE THOUGHT WE'D HAVE IT READY FOR YOU NOW BUT THE COMMENTS WERE A LITTLE BIT MORE LENGTHY AND HARDER TO DEAL WITH, SO WE ARE MAKING THOSE CHANGES. WE'RE GOING TO GET IT REVISED WHEN THE STUDY GROUP IS HAPPY WITH IT AND THEN SUBMIT IT TO THE POLICY COMMITTEE. OUR GOAL IS TO HAVE IT TO THEM BY THEIR FEBRUARY 24TH MEETING, WHICH THEY HAVE JUST PLANNED, AND THEN THEY CAN REVIEW, MAKE ANY COMMENTS, AND THEN WE CAN PRESENT IT TO YOU IN APRIL. MR. BAYLE: LUCY, LET'S GET BACK WITH YOU FOR A SECOND WITH REGARD TO ADDITIONAL HELP FOR LUCY IN THE FOREST SERVICE END. COMMUNICATE WITH OUR FOREST SERVICE FOCUS ON YOUR COMMITTEE WITH REGARD TO WHETHER TO "" EXACTLY WHAT YOU NEED FROM US. PLEASE PUT THAT IN WRITING. MS. CABOTSMETHURST: THAT'S EASY. MR. BAYLE: YEAH. MS. CABOTSMETHURST: OKAY. AND HOW ABOUT IT, JOHN? WHO DO I TALK TO IN YOUR SHOP? MR. BUNYAK: WITH PAT AND THEN BOB. THOSE ARE TWO PEOPLE ON THERE. OR YOU CAN SEND SOMETHING "" IF YOU WANT TO SEND OUT A LETTER YOU CAN SEND IT TO ME AS WELL. MS. CABOTSMETHURST: OH, OKAY. PAT AND BOB BAKER?MR. BUNYAK: BOB CARSON. MS. CABOTSMETHURST: BOB CARSON? SORRY. OKAY. GREAT. MR. BAYLE: OKAY, THE THIRD CONCERN WE HAVE LISTED DOWN HERE WAS SOMETHING THAT THE SAMI BYLAWS TALK ABOUT AS THE BALANCE ON COMMITTEES AND SUBCOMMITTEES, BALANCE BEING, I GUESS YOU'D SAY, THE INTERVIEW FOLKS ON HAND AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL PERSONNEL, THAT THAT HAS A BALANCE. AND WE FELT ON SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT ON PAPER THAT PERHAPS THERE IS A BALANCE, BUT AT SOME OF THE CONFERENCE CALLS WE PERCEIVED THAT THERE HASN'T BEEN AS MUCH OF A BALANCE AS WE LIKE TO SEE. WE'RE TRYING TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THAT OURSELVES. WITH THE F.L.M. FOLKS WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO BE MORE ACTIVE IN COMMITTEES HERE RECENTLY TO TRY TO REESTABLISH SOME OF THAT BALANCE. MR. BUNYAK: BRUCE, IT'S NOT ONLY THE INDUSTRY AND THE FEDERAL LAND MANAGEMENT, BUT IT'S ALSO THE STATE INVOLVEMENT AS WELL. I THINK WE WANT TO GET THE STATES INVOLVED IN THESE CALLS. AGAIN, MAYBE THAT'S JUST AN ISOLATED INCIDENT. IN SOME OF THE CONFERENCE CALLS IT HAS BEEN POINTED OUT THERE HASN'T BEEN MUCH BALANCE ON THOSE WITH STATE PARTICIPATION. AND LIKE WE'RE SAYING, WE'RE PART OF THE PROBLEM. WE GET STAFF RESTRAINTS JUST LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE AND WE'RE TRYING TO DEAL WITH THOSE. SO WE RECOGNIZE THAT PROBLEM. MR. BAYLE: DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THIS OR OBSERVATIONS? MR. CARR: YEAH. ON THE PUBLIC INTEREST COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT, THAT HAS BEEN DECLINING. WE'VE HAD SEVERAL KEY MEMBERS RESIGN FROM SAMI AND IT'S A CONTINUING STRUGGLE TO HAVE PUBLIC INTEREST REPRESENTATIVES INVOLVED IN THIS. SAMI STARTED WITH XNUMBER OF COMMITTEES AND NOW HAS SUBCOMMITTEES, AND AS YOU SPREAD THINGS OUT IN VARIOUS COMMITTEES, THEN THEY BECOME THE SAME NUMBER OR FEWER PEOPLE WHO GET INVOLVED IN THESE VARIOUS THINGS, SO THAT'S JUST GOING TO BE A CONTINUING STRUGGLE FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST COMMUNITY TO PARTICIPATE. I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER TO THAT. ONE OF THE REASONS I THINK THAT'S HAPPENED IS HOW LONG IT'S TAKEN SAMI TO GET UP AND RUNNING MAYBE TO THE POINT WHERE WE ARE TODAY. WE'VE BEEN AT IT FOR TWO OR THREE YEARS. I FORGET EXACTLY. MAYBE FOUR YEARS, '92. THE IDEA HAS BEEN HERE AND PEOPLE HAVE COME AND BEEN LOOKING AND TRYING TO GET THINGS DONE. FOR EXAMPLE, ON THE CLEAN AIR FACT SHEETS, THE VISIBILITY FACTS SHEETS AND THINGS THAT PEOPLE THOUGHT WOULD BE SIMPLE TO GET EXISTING INFORMATION OUT TO THE PUBLIC, THOSE THINGS HAVE NEVER GONE OUT. PEOPLE HAVE LEFT SAMI BECAUSE OF THAT AND THERE ARE OTHER REASONS. SO PEOPLE ARE "" THE PUBLIC INTEREST COMMUNITY IS FRUSTRATED WITH SAMI'S PROGRESS. I HAVE NOT BEEN INVOLVED AS MUCH AS I WAS AT THE FRONT END. I HAVE GOTTEN UP TO SPEED IN THE PAST COUPLE OF WEEKS ON WHAT'S GOING ON AND I THINK WITH TOM HERE THERE IS MORE HAPPENING WITH SOME MONEY ON THE TABLE. SO I THINK IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT WE'VE LOST PUBLIC INTEREST INVOLVEMENT, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT WE CAN REMEDY THAT IN GOOD FASHION. MR. MICHAELS: DAVID, YOU ARE THE, I THINK, AMONGST THE PEOPLE SITTING AT THIS TABLE, PROBABLY MORE CONNECTED TO THAT COMMUNITY THAN MOST OF THE PEOPLE SITTING AT THIS TABLE. PERHAPS YOU COULD USE YOUR CONTACTS TO LET THEM KNOW THAT WE ARE PROCEEDING AND IT WOULD BE VERY NICE IF THEY WOULD GET BACK IN THE GAME SO THAT THEY DON'T FEEL LEFT OUT. MR. CARR: ONE OF THE HURDLES IS THAT SAMI HAS MOVED TO THE INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK, A VERY TECHNICAL EXERCISE, HOPEFULLY A GOOD ONE, BUT IT'S JUST "" IT'S HARD FOR VOLUNTEERS TO PLUG INTO THAT PROCESS. ONE IDEA I HAD HAD, BUT AFTER LISTENING TO THE BUDGET DISCUSSION THIS MORNING I'M NOT GOING TO PROPOSE IT. BUT IT IS AN IDEA. AND THAT IS THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST COMMUNITY "" BRIAN MORGAN WAS PARTICIPATING ACTIVELY AND HAD EXPERTISE TO BRING TO THAT PROCESS. AND I CAN'T OR DON BUDDING (PHONETIC) PROBABLY CAN'T REPLACE THAT LEVEL OF EXPERTISE IN INVOLVEMENT. WHAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST COMMUNITY NEEDS BUT IS NOT GOING TO GET FROM SAMI IS A CONSULTANT TO GO TO OTHER STATES AND E.P.A. AND INDUSTRY. THAT MEANS SOMEBODY WHO'S FULLY VERSED IN ALL THESE VARIOUS ISSUES, AND THAT WOULD BE THE IDEAL THAT SAMI WOULD PROVIDE THE PUBLIC INTEREST COMMUNITY WITH. MR. MICHAELS: WAS THE PUBLIC INTEREST COMMUNITY SERVED BY BRIAN? I TAKE IT HE'S RESIGNED OR SOMETHING? UNIDENTIFIED: YES. THAT DIDN'T HELP HIS GROUP AT ALL AND HIS INTEREST, DID IT? MR. CARR: WELL, THAT'S A MATTER OF DEBATE THERE BUT WE DON'T NEED TO GET INTO THAT. BUT MR. MICHAELS: I'M ASKING IF YOU MAYBE COULD GET HIM BACK IS WHAT I'M SAYING. MR. CARR: NO. I CAN'T GET HIM BACK. I CAN'T GET THE FEDERAL DEFENSE FUND BACK INVOLVED WITH THIS PROCESS. LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE AT THE TABLE, WE HAVE LIMITED RESOURCES. WE HAVE TO ALLOCATE OUR RESOURCES IN SPECIFIC PLACES AND WE ALLOCATE THEM WHERE WE THINK SOMETHING'S GOING TO GET DONE, AND THAT'S "" THAT HAS NOT BEEN THE CASE WITH SAMI. HOPEFULLY, IT WILL BE IN THE FUTURE. MR. SHAW: LESLIE, ARE YOU WANTING TO SAY SOMETHING?MS. COX: YES. THEY STARTED OFF THE DISCUSSION. I KNOW THE STATES HAVE WORKED REAL HARD TO TRY AND FIND MORE PUBLIC INTEREST REPRESENTATIVES TO PARTICIPATE. WE'RE NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT THE TECHNICAL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. THERE'S, AS LUCY MENTIONED, A GREAT NEED FOR PARTICIPATION ON OUR PUBLIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE, AND AS WE GEAR UP TO START UNDERSTANDING THESE PRODUCTS THAT ARE COMING OUT OF THE ASSESSMENT AND FIGURING OUT HOW TO COMMUNICATE TO THE PUBLIC, WE NEED MORE AND MORE PEOPLE, AND IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO HAVE PEOPLE WHO MAYBE AREN'T SO TECHNICALLY ADVANCED SO THAT THEY CAN HELP US CREATE A CLEAR UNDERSTANDABLE MESSAGE. IF ANYBODY DOES HAVE ANY SUGGESTIONS ON HOW WE CAN ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO COME TO THE MEETINGS OR GET INVOLVED AT THIS POINT WORKING ON "" EVEN IF THEY CAN'T BE OFFICIAL MEMBERS, WORKING ON A SPECIFIC E.M.O. IMPLEMENTATION IDEA OR A PROJECT THAT WOULD BE A SET START AND FINISH TIME TO DEVOTE THEIR RESOURCES AND THEIR "" MATCHING IT UP WITH THEIR INTERESTS WOULD BE EXTREMELY HELPFUL TO US. WE HAVE TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT AND A SUBSIDY. IT DOESN'T COVER EVERYTHING BUT WE CAN WORK AROUND CERTAIN THINGS AND IT CERTAINLY WOULD BE HELPFUL TO US TO KNOW WHAT COULD GET PEOPLE INTERESTED AND HOW TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. JUST TO BRING THAT OUT. MR. LEVITAS: ONE OTHER THOUGHT THAT I HAVE IS I DON'T KNOW WHAT ARTHUR'S BACKGROUND IS, BUT I GATHER THAT YOU'VE BEEN PRETTY SUBSTANTIALLY INVOLVED IN THE T.O.C. ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLIC INTEREST COMMUNITY. AND WHAT I WAS GOING TO SAY, DAVID, AND WE CAN DO SOME OF THIS IN NORTH CAROLINA AND TRY TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN IS THE PAID STAFF OF THE PUBLIC INTEREST ORGANIZATIONS IS QUITE LIMITED IN THE SAMI REGION, BUT THERE ARE A TREMENDOUS NUMBER OF PEOPLE, TECHNICAL RETIRED PEOPLE, WHO OTHERWISE HAD AFFILIATIONS WITH THESE GROUPS OR MEMBERS AND, FRANKLY, A LOT OF THEM ARE LOOKING FOR WAYS TO GET INVOLVED IN INTERESTS AND MATTERS OF THIS SORT. AND I THINK THAT'S A RELATIVELY UNTAPPED POTENTIAL RESOURCE. MR. ARTHUR SMITH: WELL, I THINK ONE ITEM AT THE ROOT OF THIS PROBLEM IS THE FACT THAT PEOPLE WHO HAVE EXTENSIVE TECHNICAL TRAINING IN POLLUTION CONTROL, TESTING OR IMPLEMENTATION OR WHATEVER USUALLY ARE EMPLOYED BY A MAJOR UTILITY, BY SOME ELEMENT OF GOVERNMENT OR BY A MAJOR INDUSTRY. AND THIS, OF COURSE, TAKES THEM OUT OF THE PUBLIC INTEREST POOL OFF THE TOP. AS FAR AS RETIREES, I'M NOT PARTICULARLY AWARE OF PEOPLE WITH EXPERTISE IN THIS AREA IN TENNESSEE WHO ARE RETIRED. AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER JOHN HAS ANY KNOWLEDGE ALONG THOSE LINES OR NOT. MR. WALTON: I KNOW A FEW BUT I THINK MOST OF THEM HAVE RETIRED AND THEN RETIRED AGAIN. MS. ANDERSONCARNAHAN: HAS THERE BEEN AN EFFORT ON THE PART OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL GROUPS TO MAKE PRESENTATIONS ON SAMI TO SEE IF THERE IS MORE INTEREST? MR. ARTHUR SMITH: YES. I HAVE DONE THAT IN TENNESSEE. MR. CARR: AND THERE HAS BEEN OVER THE FOURYEAR PROCESS. THIS IS WHERE WE ARE. IT'S NOT GOING TO CHANGE OVERNIGHT. MR. BUNYAK: ONE OTHER ASPECT ON THIS COMMENT AND THAT IS WE SUPPORT SAMI'S POLICY OF OPEN COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP AND OPEN ATTENDANCE MEETINGS AND CONFERENCE CALLS AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF, BUT IT DOES LEAD TO ONE PARTICULAR PROBLEM WE TRY TO IDENTIFY AND THAT IS SOMETIMES PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY ARE ASSIGNED ON THOSE COMMITTEES DON'T "" YOU KNOW, FOR ONE REASON OR ANOTHER DON'T PARTICIPATE BUT THEN THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER PEOPLE THAT AREN'T OFFICIALLY ON THE COMMITTEE BUT THEY GIVE THEIR INPUT WHICH IS HELPFUL, BUT IT MAY BIAS THE PROCESS TO SOME EXTENT. YOU'VE GOT ONE GROUP BEING REPRESENTED EITHER OFFICIALLY OR UNOFFICIALLY, BUT THEY ARE PARTICIPATING ON CALLS AND ATTENDING THESE MEETINGS AND SO FORTH, SO I THINK THERE IS A TENDENCY TO SWAY SOME OF THE DISCUSSION. AND AGAIN, WE'RE PART OF THE "" I'M NOT POINTING A FINGER AT ANYBODY THOUGH, BUT I'M JUST "" AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE'RE NOT PART OF THE PROBLEM BECAUSE WE ARE. WE DON'T PARTICIPATE AND THAT'S OUR OWN FAULT FOR NOT PARTICIPATING. BUT THAT IS A REALITY. MR. SHAW: YOU THINK THAT CONTRIBUTES TO THE UNBALANCE? MR. BUNYAK: PARDON ME?MR. SHAW: YOU THINK THAT THAT CONTRIBUTES TO THE UNBALANCE SENSE THAT YOU HAVE THAT THERE MAY BE PEOPLE PARTICIPATING IN CONFERENCE CALLS THAT AREN'T ACTUALLY MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEES BUT THAT MIGHT REPRESENT, SAY, AN INDUSTRIAL INTEREST? MR. BUNYAK: RIGHT. AND THEN LIKE I SAY, SAMI'S POLICY HAS BEEN PRETTY MUCH OPEN TO ALL. MS. COX: WE CAN PROBABLY MOVE THIS DISCUSSION ON, BUT JUST TO THROW THIS OUT, YOU MENTIONED THAT, JOHN. WE DO, AS STAFF, IN WORKING WITH THE COMMITTEES KIND OF TRACK WHO'S PARTICIPATING AND WHO IS NOT. AND WE DID ESTABLISH A PROCESS BY WHICH WHEN WE SEE INACTIVE MEMBERS, THE CHAIR NOTIFIES THE NOMINATING AGENCY THAT, YOU KNOW, SOANDSO IS NOT REALLY PARTICIPATING. DO YOU WANT TO CHECK UP ON THEM AND SEE IF THEY STILL WANT TO BE ACTIVE OR CAN YOU CONVINCE THEM TO COME TO MEETINGS OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO REPLACE THEM? AND THIS HAS OCCURRED WITH EVEN SOME OF THE FEDERAL LAND MANAGER NOMINEES DON'T GENERALLY PARTICIPATE. SO IT'S ALL OVER ACROSS THE BOARD. IF YOU HAVE ANY SUGGESTIONS "" YOU DON'T HAVE TO ANSWER NOW "" COME BACK TO THE STAFF ABOUT ANOTHER WAY YOU MIGHT LIKE US TO PROCEED WITH THAT BECAUSE I MEAN IT HAS HAD SOME POSITIVE EFFECTS I KNOW ON LUCY'S COMMITTEE, FOR INSTANCE. AND THAT'S HOW WE'VE BEEN HANDLING IT UP TO THIS POINT. SO IF YOU HAVE SUGGESTIONS LET US KNOW. MR. SHAW: BRUCE, LET'S MOVE ON TO YOUR ITEM NUMBER FOUR. MR. BAYLE: OKAY. THE FINAL ITEM, OKAY. AT TIMES WE FEEL THAT SAMI'S MISSION, FOLKS LOSE SIGHT OF THAT. WE'RE TRYING TO BRING SOME EMPHASIS "" PUT THE FOCUS BACK ON THE H.R.V.'S AND WHAT SAMI'S WRITTEN MISSION STATEMENT IS. HERE WE GO. WE STATE HERE THAT FULL COORDINATION NEEDS TO OCCUR IN EACH SUBCOMMITTEE, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT IS PERFORMING TASKS THAT WILL MEET THE NEEDS OF OTHER SUBCOMMITTEES AND THAT THE RIGHT TASKS ARE BEING PERFORMED TO ACHIEVE PROGRESS TOWARD SAMI'S MISSION. JUST THAT WE FOCUS ON THE MISSION. MR. BUNYAK: I THINK ONE "" PUT ONE ADDITION TO THAT. SOME OF THE TIMES I SENSED THAT THE UNDERLYING PREMISE THAT WE HAVE ADVERSE IMPACTS IN OUR PARKS IS BEING QUESTIONED. AND I THOUGHT THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS DISCUSSED FOUR YEARS AGO WHEN IT WAS AGREED UPON BY BEING INCLUDED IN THE MISSION STATEMENT. BUT IT JUST SEEMED LIKE THERE'S "" YOU KNOW, I DON'T HAVE A SPECIFIC EXAMPLE, BUT IT JUST SEEMED LIKE SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS, WITH AN INDIVIDUAL PERMIT REVIEW, ARENA EXISTING CONDITIONS ARE BEING QUESTIONED. AND I THOUGHT THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, A PRETTY ACCEPTED FACT THAT WE DO HAVE ADVERSE IMPACTS AND WE NEED TO TAKE STEPS TO COMMUNICATE THOSE POSITIONS. I GUESS WHAT I MEAN, WE NEED TO FOCUS BACK TO THE CURRENT PROBLEMS. MR. SHAW: ANYBODY WANT TO COMMENT? MR. GRUSNICK: JOHN, DID YOU MENTION THAT HAPPENS ON INDIVIDUAL PERMIT REVIEWS BETWEEN A STATE AND Y'ALL'S ORGANIZATION OR IS THIS SOMETHING YOU'VE ACCEPTED RESPONSIBLITY ON. I'M ASSUMING. I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU SAY IT. MR. BUNYAK: I THINK IT'S KIND OF A STATE "" YOU KNOW, WE GET INTO AN ACTUAL PERMIT REVIEW, THERE SEEMED LIKE THE CURRENT CONDITIONS COME INTO QUESTION. AND I THINK THAT SHOULD BE A GIVEN, THAT WE HAVE ADVERSE IMPACT AND WE NEED TO "" THAT SHOULD BE ACCEPTED AND WE GO ON FROM THERE. WE TRY TO DEAL WITH THEM. MR. SHAW: LET ME COMMENT A SECOND. OUTSIDE OF THE SAMI PROCESS IN A PERMIT REVIEW ON AN INDIVIDUAL PERMIT, YOU'VE GOT A WHOLE DIFFERENT SET OF DYNAMICS TAKING PLACE. AND I THINK THAT THE STATE DOES HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO DEMONSTRATE TO OUR OWN SATISFACTION AS WELL AS THE PERMITTEE WHAT THE IMPACTS ARE. I'M NOT AWARE THAT WE'RE SAYING THAT THERE ARE NO IMPACTS, BUT MAYBE THE EXTENT OF THE IMPACTS IS WHERE THE QUESTION IS COMING. BUT I DON'T SEE THAT IMPACTING WHERE WE ARE WITH SAMI. AND YOU SHOULDN'T TRANSLATE HOW A STATE REACTS ON THE INDIVIDUAL PERMITTING DECISION TO HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT THE SAMI EFFORT IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE DOING. I SEE THOSE AS TWO DIFFERENT PROCESSES AT THIS POINT IN TIME. ONCE SAMI COMPLETES ITS MISSION THEN I THINK THERE WILL BE "" THAT WILL BE "" THERE WILL BE MORE CONNECTION THERE. MR. BUNYAK:Č I THINK THEY'RE DIFFERENT AND I DON'T THINK YOU CAN TOTALLY SEPARATE THE TWO. I MEAN YOU'VE GOT ONE AGENCY MADE UP OF STATE AIR REGULATORS SAYING THERE'S ADVERSE IMPACTS ON THE PARKS AND WILDERNESS AREAS AND ARE COMING UP WITH SOME ELABORATE COSTS TO DEAL WITH IT. BUT WHEN YOU GET INTO A PERMIT ARENA YOU CAN'T SAY, WELL, WE DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S PROBLEMS AND NOTHING NEEDS TO BE DONE. I MEAN YOU CAN'T "" I DON'T SEE HOW YOU CAN SEPARATE THE TWO EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE TWO SEPARATE PROCESSES. THE EFFECTS ARE STILL THERE WHETHER YOU'RE TALKING SAMI OR YOU'RE TALKING PERMIT REVIEW. MR. GRUSNICK: BUT AT THE SAME TIME "" YOU KNOW. FOR EXAMPLE, Y'ALL APPEALED A PERMIT THAT WAS ISSUED IN ALABAMA AND CLEARLY THE DYNAMICS ARE GOING TO BE DIFFERENT IN OUR INTERACTION THERE THAN THEY'RE GOING TO BE HERE. HOPEFULLY, I GUESS I VIEW THIS "" THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO AVOID THE NEED FOR APPEALS IN THE FUTURE BY HAVING ENHANCED DIALOG. WE THOUGHT IT WAS REAL GOOD HERE BUT, FRANKLY, THE DIALOG WE'VE HAD ON THE PERMIT THAT WAS APPEALED WAS NONEXISTENT APPEAL WITHOUT THE APPEAL, SO I THINK THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO. AND HOPEFULLY, THIS IS GOING TO AVOID THE NEED FOR THOSE SORT OF ACTIVITIES IN THE FUTURE, THE APPEAL. MR. BUNYAK: LIKE I SAY, I ACKNOWLEDGE THERE ARE DIFFERENT PROCESSES AND I DON'T THINK THAT THEY CAN TOTALLY BE SEPARATED. MR. SHAW: YOU WANT TO FOLLOWUP ON THAT? MR. JOY: WHILE ALL THAT WAS GOING ON I SAW ABOUT FOUR STATE AIR DIRECTORS RAISE THEIR HAND, SO I'M NOT SURE I WANT TO DO MORE THAN THAT. BUT I DO THINK THAT IN TERMS OF THE ADVERSE IMPACT, THAT WE MAY NOT BE DISAGREEING, BUT IN TERMS OF THAT ADDITIONAL SOURCE, WHEREVER IT MAY BE LOCATED, BEING THE CAUSE OF THAT IMPACT AND/OR THE POTENTIALS OR THE RECOMMENDATIONS OR THE SOLUTIONS BEING PROVIDED FOR THAT INDIVIDUAL SOURCE IS WHERE WE ALL COME BACK TO OUR DISAGREEMENTS. SO WE'RE NOT REALLY DEBATING THESE, IF YOU WILL, OR THE ADVERSE IMPACT OF A CAR, BUT WHETHER OR NOT THE PROPER APPROACH IS THAT NEW SOURCE THAT WE'RE FORCED TO DEAL WITH BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE CURRENT AUTHORITIES ARE. SO I AGREE WITH LEWIS' COMMENT BUT I DON'T NECESSARILY INTERPRET OUR SQUABBLING, IF YOU WILL, OVER NEW PERMITS AND INDIVIDUAL PERMIT EXERCISES THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE. AS A MATTER OF FACT, I SEE THEM AS TWO DISTINCT THINGS BECAUSE IF WE CAN SETTLE WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE HERE, WE MAY SOLVE PERMIT DECISIONS. (UNIDENTIFIED) WELL, THAT WAS THE INTENT, TO TRY TO COME UP WITH A REGIONAL SOLUTION SO YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO INTO THE PERMIT BY PERMIT APPEAL IN A CONFRONTATIONAL MODE. I THINK THAT'S TO EVERYBODY'S ADVANTAGE THAT WE AVOID THAT SORT OF THING. MR. JOY: BUT IN THE INTERIM WE CAN'T STOP REVIEWING THOSE PERMITS AND IN THE INTERIM YOU CAN'T STOP MAKING DETERMINATIONS ON THOSE INDIVIDUAL PERMITS UNTIL WE DO. I SEE THE CONTINUING DISCUSSIONS, DEBATES, DISAGREEMENTS, IF THAT'S WHAT THE INDIVIDUAL PERMITS INCUR. MR. SHAW: WERE THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT ISSUE. MR. SHAW: DO WE NEED ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THIS LETTER OR DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT YOUR SECOND LETTER? MR. BAYLE: YES. LET'S GO ON TO THE SECOND. SO THE FIRST LETTER DEALT WITH WHERE WE HAVE BEEN AND WHERE WE ARE TODAY, WHEREAS THE SECOND LETTER, I CALL THE E.M.O. LETTER, TO THE FUTURE, WHERE WE'RE GOING. THIS IS JUST LOOKING AT SOME OF THE POLICIES SAMI HAS TODAY AND WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT LONGTERM E.M.O.'S. THESE ARE SOME QUESTIONS THAT "" ACTUALLY, WE MADE A LIST OF EIGHT QUESTIONS HERE WHICH "" WE'RE NOT SURE OF THESE ANSWERS. THAT'S WHY WE MADE THESE, THAT THESE QUESTIONS BE ASKED AND ANSWERED FOR THESE LONGTERM E.M.O.'S TO BE EFFECTIVE. TOM, I'D LIKE TO GET YOUR LEAD ON THESE QUESTIONS WE'VE RAISED HERE IN TERMS OF YOUR WORK. MR. SHAW: I DON'T THINK TOM CAN ANSWER THAT. MR. ELMORE: I'M NOT COMPLETELY UP TO SPEED YOU KNOW, I'VE READ THIS DOCUMENT. I REALLY WASN'T PREPARED WITH A POINTBYPOINT RESPONSE, BUT I'VE HEARD THE FIRST QUESTION BROUGHT UP REPEATEDLY, I MEAN JUST WHAT ABOUT THAT, BUT NOT FROM A PROSPECTIVE OF THE T.O.C. OR HOW THE T.O.C. INTENDS TO DEAL WITH THAT. IT'S REALLY PRETTY MUCH IN THE POLITICAL ARENA AND WE ANXIOUSLY AWAIT YOUR DECISION ON THAT. MR. JOY: IT'S A STATE THING. MR. SHAW: FIRST OF ALL, LET ME SAY THAT I THINK HAROLD NEEDS TO RESPOND TO BOTH OF THESE LETTERS IN WRITING SO SOMEBODY TAKE HIM GOOD NOTES HERE. AND I DO HAVE SOME THOUGHTS, BUT STEVE RAISED HIS HAND. IF YOU'D LIKE "" YOU WANT TO MR. LEVITAS: I'LL FOLLOW YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. MR. SHAW: AS FAR AS THE STATES, SOME STATES HAVING PROVISIONS THAT SAY THEY CAN'T BE MORE STRINGENT THAN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, IN SOUTH CAROLINA WE DON'T HAVE SUCH A PROVISION. IN FACT, WE FIGHT IT BACK EVERY LEGISLATIVE SESSION AND I THINK SOMETIMES WE GET CLOSER AND CLOSER TO NOT BEING ABLE TO SUSTAIN OURSELF. PART OF THE PROBLEM IS WHENEVER WE, THE GOVERNMENT "" AND I'M TALKING ABOUT THE STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS "" PROMULGATE RULES AND REGULATIONS THAT AREN'T VERY WELL THOUGHT OUT FROM THE IMPLEMENTATION STANDPOINT, WE GET THIS KNEEJERK REACTION FROM THE REGULATING COMMUNITY WHO GOES TO A POLITICAL DECISION RATHER THAN TO A TECHNICAL DECISION. AND IN SOUTH CAROLINA WHATEVER WE DECIDE TO DO AS A RESULT OF SAMI, WE, THE STATE GOVERNMENT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO TO OUR LEGISLATURES TO GET THOSE THINGS IN PLACE. AND I WOULD SAY IN THOSE STATES WHICH HAVE RULES THAT SAY THEY CAN'T BE ANY MORE STRINGENT THAN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THEY'LL STILL HAVE TO GO TO THEIR LEGISLATURES AND MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT THESE RULES OUGHT TO BE IMPLEMENTED. BUT IT'S GOING TO BE ON A STATEBYSTATE BASIS. AND THE REALITY IS SOME STATES WILL NOT BE ABLE TO POLITICALLY MAKE THAT CHANGE AND SOME STATES WILL. I DON'T THINK THAT BECAUSE OF THAT REALITY WE SHOULDN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH IDENTIFYING SOME OF THESE THINGS. BUT THAT'S MY REACTION TO YOUR FIRST PIECE. I DON'T THINK THAT THE FEDERAL LAND MANAGERS SHOULD PUT LESS INTEREST IN THIS PROJECT BECAUSE OF THIS RESTRICTION SOME STATES HAVE. I THINK THERE ARE WAYS TO OVERCOME IT AND WE JUST HAVE TO DEAL WITH THAT WHEN WE GET THERE. MR. LEVITAS: WHAT I WAS THINKING ABOUT IS THAT THESE ARE VERY GOOD QUESTIONS AND I DON'T KNOW THAT IF "" THEY'VE BEEN ON PEOPLE'S MINDS FOR A LONG TIME. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S BEEN ESSENTIAL TO ANSWER THEM BEFORE NOW, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE VALUABLE TO APPOINT A WORK GROUP, AT THE RISK OF FURTHER COMMITTEE DATA, DAVID, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE VERY TIMELY AND APPROPRIATE, NOT JUST BECAUSE OF THESE QUESTIONS THAT THEY RAISED HERE IN THE ABSTRACT, BUT BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE THINGS THAT RICHARD AND OTHERS HAVE MENTIONED ABOUT DEVELOPMENTS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL. WE'VE GOT AT LEAST THREE MAJOR "" THREE OR FOUR MAJOR REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL. ONE THAT HASN'T BEEN MENTIONED TODAY AND, FRANKLY, I HAVEN'T KEPT TRACK OF IT, BUT THE REGIONAL HAZE RULES, THE LAST TIME I HAD AN OCCASION TO TALK WITH ANYBODY ABOUT THAT, THERE WAS SOME SENSE THAT THE WAY THOSE RULES WOULD UNFOLD WOULD LEND ITSELF TO DRAWING ON A PROCESS LIKE SAMI TO HELP FIGURE OUT HOW THAT WOULD "" THOSE RULES WOULD GET IMPLEMENTED AT A REGIONAL LEVEL. AND I JUST THINK THAT WE WOULD BENEFIT FROM HAVING A GROUP OF PEOPLE REALLY SIT DOWN AND THINK THROUGH THESE NUTS AND BOLTS IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES, PARTICULARLY AS THEY RELATE TO THINGS THAT ARE UNDERWAY AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL NOW. MR. SHAW: WOULD THIS BE A SUBSET OF THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE OR SOMETHING ATTACHED TO THE GOVERNING BODY? MR. LEVITAS: I THINK THERE ARE A NUMBER OF WAYS YOU CAN DO IT. THE POLICY COMMITTEE IS ANOTHER PLACE WHERE IT MIGHT HAPPEN, BUT I WAS THINKING OF SORT OF AN AD HOC GROUP TO REPORT TO THE APRIL MEETING AND THEN GIVE US AN OVERALL REGULATORY UPDATE AND A SENSE OF HOW WHAT WE'RE DOING FITS INTO THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON AND WHAT SOME OF THE OPTIONS MIGHT BE. YOU KNOW, THE QUESTION WAS RAISED HERE, I THINK, ABOUT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF OZONE TRANSPORT COMMISSION OR VISIBILITY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AND THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'VE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE NOW, AND WE RULED THAT OUT EARLY IN THE PROCESS BECAUSE CONGRESS, IN ITS WISDOM IN CREATING THAT CREATURE, BROUGHT WITH IT VARIOUS MANDATORY CONTROL STRATEGIES THAT DON'T MAKE ANY SENSE FOR THE REGION. BUT IT IS OF NOTE THAT WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS AS A VOLUNTARY EFFORT WITHOUT ANY CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORIZATION OR PARTICULAR SUPPORT IN CONTRAST TO THE GRAND CANYON PROJECT WHICH WAS WRITTEN INTO THE CLEAN AIR ACT. MR. MICHAELS: CAN I ASK YOU TO EMPHASIZE A POINT OR EXPAND ON IT? MAYBE I DIDN'T "" MAYBE I MISSED IT OR "" WANT TO MAKE SURE I'VE GOT IT RIGHT. YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU SEE SAMI AS AN ADJUNCT TO THE "" TO E.P.A.'S PROVIDING "" PROVIDING INFORMATION TO E.P.A. TO ASSIST IT IN RULE MAKING WITH REGARD TO HAZE, FOR THE NEW HAZE INITIATIVE? MR. LEVITAS: WELL, I QUALIFY IT BY SAYING I DON'T KNOW A WHOLE LOT ABOUT THAT, BUT THE CLEAN AIR ACT REQUIRED THAT THIS RULE MAKING WAS UNDERWAY, AND MY IMPRESSION THE LAST TIME I TALKED TO ANYBODY AT E.P.A. "" EIGHTEEN MONTHS AGO, PROBABLY "" WAS WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO WITH THAT RULE MAKING WAS BASICALLY TELL STATES AND REGIONS TO FIGURE IT OUT KIND OF REGIONSPECIFIC APPROACHES TO DEALING WITH HAZE. IF SOMEBODY ELSE WILL JUMP IN AND HELP ME ON THIS, BUT THE IMPRESSION THAT I HAVE WAS THAT SAMI WAS IN A POSITION TO HELP IMPLEMENT WHAT WAS GOING TO BE THE REGULATORY PUSH COMING THROUGH E.P.A., BUT ONE THAT WAS SITE SPECIFIC AND HAD SOME FLEXIBILITY TO IT, AND IT WOULD DOVETAIL VERY WELL WITH WHAT WE'RE DOING. I DON'T KNOW MR. MICHAELS: THAT WOULD BE MY IMPRESSION TOO. I SHARE THAT IMPRESSION. MR. METHIER: I THINK IT GOES BEYOND REGIONAL HAZE, THE FACT THE SUBCOMMITTEE IS LOOKING ON INTEGRATING HAZE AND OZONE AND FINE PARTICULATES. TALKING ABOUT WE NEED TO ACCEPT THE FACT THAT THEY'LL BE MORE ACROSS STATE IMPACTS OR INSTITUTIONAL MECHANISMS, IS THE PHRASE THEY USE, WHICH PRETTY MUCH IS WHAT SAMI IS. AND THERE MAY BE A WAY "" WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT ALL THE INITIATIVES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, PROPOSED OR TO BE PROPOSED, WE DON'T REALLY KNOW "" REALLY KNOW WHERE WE'RE HEADED AND THE END WITH THAT YET. BUT THERE COULD BE SOME OPPORTUNITIES FOR SAMI TO HELPS SOME OF THOSE THINGS HAPPEN OR AT LEAST INFLUENCE HOW THEY HAPPEN.MR. LEVITAS: I GUESS JUST ONE "" MY THOUGHT OF HOW THAT WOULD WORK IN AN IDEAL WORLD IS THAT E.P.A. IS COMING WITH THIS SERIES OF REGULATIONS AND MANDATES, AND THE EIGHT SOUTHEASTERN STATES NOW HAVE A MECHANISM IN PLACE TO SAY, DON'T HIT US WITH A BUNCH OF CONTROLS THAT DON'T MAKE ANY SENSE AND THAT AREN'T ABLE TO SOLVE THESE PROBLEMS. LET US USE THIS PROCESS TO FIGURE OUT ANSWERS THAT MAKE SENSE. MS. ANDREWS: BUT I DON'T THINK, STEVE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE LUXURY OF THAT TIMING IF, YOU KNOW, IF MARY NICHOLS COMES DOWN IN FEBRUARY AND SAYS, "THOU SHALT REDUCE," AS SHE INDICATED SHE WAS, OUR POWER TO SAY SAMI SAYS THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE IS GREATLY REDUCED. MR. BUNYAK: JUST KIND OF A FOLLOWUP TO DIANA. REFERRING TO THE RICHARD WILSON LETTER AND LOOKING AT THE REVISIONS THAT DEAL WITH DIFFERENT SOURCES, IMPACTS ON THAT, VARIOUS IMPACTS, CONDITIONS. AND IN THAT LETTER E.P.A. INDICATED THEY HOPED TO HAVE SOMETHING DONE BY 1997. IF THAT TAKES PLACE I THINK THAT WILL ALLEVIATE SOME OF OUR CONCERN THAT THE STATES DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY OR CAN'T GO BEYOND WHAT THE E.P.A. REQUIRES, THAT E.P.A. WOULD HAVE SOMETHING IN PLACE SO THAT THE STATES COULD FALL BACK TO THAT AS THE BASIS FOR ITS REQUIRING FORCE. I THINK THAT IF EVERYTHING'S KIND OF LINED UP AND EVERYTHING FALLS INTO PLACE, THEN SOME OF OUR CONCERNS WOULD BE ALLEVIATED. KIND OF WAIT AND SEE ON HOW ALL THAT SHAKES OUT, BUT IN THE MEANTIME I GUESS I LIKE STEVE'S IDEA ABOUT GETTING SOMETHING LOOPED TOGETHER TO TRY TO FOCUS ON SOME OF THESE ISSUES AND JUST HAVE SOMETHING LINED UP FOR THAT. MR. JANSEN: YES. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS. FIRST OF ALL I'VE TOLD A COUPLE OF PEOPLE LATELY THAT I HAVE A SORT OF AN INVOLVING DIFFERENT VIEW OF SAMI AND IT FLOWS ALONG THE LINES OF THIS INTEGRATED APPROACH. SAMI IS ACTUALLY, IF WE CAN GET ON WITH THE WORK OF DOING, WE WILL BE TRYING TO USE AN INTEGRATED MODEL TO MODEL IN ALL THESE AREAS. SO IT'S A FORUM FOR GETTING READY TO DO THAT KIND OF WORK AND THAT KIND OF WORK IS COMING DOWN THE PIKE, WHETHER IT'S STANDARD OR WHETHER IT'S REGIONAL HAZE RULES, WHATEVER IT IS. I THINK WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE MORE OF AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK TOGETHER TO DO THOSE THINGS. SO THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. EXACTLY HOW WELL THAT'S GOING TO SHAKE OUT, I DON'T KNOW, BUT I DO HOPE WE CAN CONTINUE ON WITH THAT WORK, SO WE'RE GETTING READY TO DO THAT WORK BETTER IN THE FUTURE. THE OTHER THING, THOUGH, IN RELATION TO STEVE'S SUGGESTION, I LOOK AT THESE QUESTIONS AS REALLY HAVING ANSWERS ALREADY IN MANY WAYS, AT LEAST. WHEN SAMI WAS FORMED I THINK A LOT OF THESE ISSUES WERE ANSWERED. MAYBE NOT IN WRITING, BUT THEY WERE ANSWERED IN THE DEBATES AND MAYBE THEY NEED TO BE REVISITED. MAYBE THAT'S APPROPRIATE. I WOULD ARGUE THAT THIS IS THE GOVERNING BODY OF THE EIGHT STATES AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL. WE COULD RESPOND TO THESE, THAT THIS GROUP IS GOING TO BE PUT TOGETHER, THAT IT REALLY NEEDS TO BE THE EIGHT STATES MAYBE TAKING ADVICE FROM THE OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, BUT THESE ARE THE FUNDAMENTAL UNDERPINNINGS OF SAMI. THE ISSUE OF NOT FORMING A TRANSPORT COMMISSION, THAT WAS A CONSCIOUS DECISION. IT WAS ONE I THOUGHT TOOK COURAGE AND SET US OFF ON A DIFFERENT WAY. I'VE TOLD THAT STORY MANY TIMES TO MY MANAGEMENT AND OTHERS WHO WANT TO UNDERSTAND HOW SAMI CAME ABOUT. AND IT'S A VERY FUNDAMENTAL UNDERPINNING. I THINK THE ANSWERS TO SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS WE ALL RECOGNIZED AT THE BEGINNING, AND MAYBE IT'S A MATTER OF THE GOVERNING BODY OR AT LEAST THE EIGHT STATES SITTING DOWN AND REARTICULATING OR REVISITING THOSE QUESTIONS. BUT IT'S REALLY THAT LEVEL THAT I THINK. MS. ANDREWS: WELL, JOHN, IF YOU REMEMBER, ONE OF THE FOUNDATIONS WAS A VOLUNTARY ORGANIZATION AND THE BYLAWS SAY THAT NO DECISION IS BINDING ON THE INDIVIDUAL STATE. MR. SHAW: AND I'D THINK THAT WAS AN IMPORTANT THING TO EMPHASIZE HERE. I GUESS THE TONE OF THESE QUESTIONS SUGGESTS MAYBE A DESIRE ON THE PART OF LAND MANAGERS FOR SAMI TO TAKE ON A DIFFERENT ROLE IN THE IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS OR AN ENFORCEMENT PROCESS, BUT FROM SOUTH CAROLINA'S PROSPECTIVE, AT LEAST, WE'RE HERE AT THE TABLE VOLUNTARILY. THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WE'RE HERE. WE WOULD NOT BE HERE IF WE THOUGHT THIS WAS GOING TO TURN INTO A TRANSPORT COMMISSION. IT MIGHT TURN INTO ONE WITHOUT US BUT WE WOULDN'T BE HERE IF WE THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO TURN INTO A TRANSPORT COMMISSION. AND I THINK THE VALUE OF THIS GROUP IS THE FACT THAT WE ARE ALL VOLUNTEERS. AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT I CAN COME INTO THIS GROUP WITH AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT POSITION BECAUSE IT IS VOLUNTARY. I COULD EVEN TALK ABOUT THINGS THAT I MIGHT BE WILLING TO DO THAT I WOULD NEVER ADMIT THAT I WAS WILLING TO DO IN A GOVERNMENTAL SETTING. I JUST WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO THAT. SO I SEE ONE OF THE STRENGTHS OF THIS ORGANIZATION IS THE FACT THAT IT IS VOLUNTARY AND, QUITE FRANKLY, I THINK THAT'S THE ONLY WAY WE CAN REALLY GO BEYOND COMMAND AND CONTROL REQUIREMENTS. I THINK SOME OF THE INDUSTRY ARE HERE FOR THAT VERY SAME REASON, THAT THIS IS A VOLUNTARY EFFORT. AND I REALIZE THIS IS ALL WELL AND GOOD FOR ME TO SAY AND THE PROOF OF THIS IS GOING TO BE IN WHAT DO WE ACTUALLY IMPLEMENT ONCE WE DECIDE WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. AND I GUESS MY REACTION TO YOU ALL IS TO TRUST US AT THIS POINT. AND MAYBE YOU DON'T HAVE GOOD REASON TO TRUST STATE AGENCIES OR MAYBE YOU DO, BUT I THINK AS LONG AS WE CONTINUE ON THIS TRACK WITH THIS VOLUNTARY EFFORT, I THINK THAT YOU WILL SEE SOME THINGS THAT END UP GOING BEYOND THE FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS THAT WE ALL AGREE OUGHT TO BE DONE AND WE ALL AGREE TO IMPLEMENT. BUT I DO THINK WE NEED TO RESPOND TO THESE AND I WILL MIX Y'ALL'S TWO SUGGESTIONS TOGETHER AND SAY THAT MAYBE THE GOVERNING BODY OUGHT TO "" AS A SECOND ISSUE, THE FIRST BEING WHERE WE'RE GOING TO GET MONEY, THE SECOND ISSUE BEING HOW DO WE RESPOND TO THIS, AND MAYBE DO IT THROUGH HAROLD REHEIS IN GETTING A LETTER BACK. MR. MICHAELS: I HAVE ONE CONCERN ABOUT THIS. I DON'T THINK THIS IS WHAT WILL HAPPEN OR COULD HAPPEN, IT WILL HAPPEN, BUT IT COULD HAPPEN. AND THAT IS THAT IN LOOKING AT WHAT E.P.A. IS DOING RIGHT NOW, WE COULD GO BACK TO WHERE WE WERE IN 1992, I.E., A LOT OF PEOPLE WANTING TO JUST WAIT AND SEE HOW THE CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS ARE IMPLEMENTED AND THEN WE'LL ASSESS WHETHER WE NEED TO DO ANYTHING. I THINK THAT SAME THING COULD ARISE NOW LOOKING AT THE NEW PROPOSED STANDARDS, THIS SUPPOSED S.I.P. THING ON EXISTING SOURCES. ALL THAT'S "" EXCEPT FOR THE PROPOSED STANDARDS WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THAT. WE DON'T KNOW WHEN IT'S GOING TO COME DOWN. WE DON'T KNOW WHEN IT'S GOING TO COME INTO EFFECT. AND I THINK IT BEHOOVES SAMI, ALONG THE LINES YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, TO MOVE ON AND DO ITS ANALYSIS AND BE PREPARED TO EITHER INTERFACE WITH THAT EDICT OR USE WHATEVER THEY'VE GOT TO RESPOND TO THE SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN REGION, ALL OF IT AT THE SAME TIME FOCUSING ON THE SAMI MISSION STATEMENT, AND THAT IS TO REMEDY EXISTING AND PREVENT FUTURE ADVERSE IMPACTS. THAT SHOULD BE THE FOCUS, NOT HOW CAN WE DEFLECT WHAT'S COMING DOWN FROM THE E.P.A. THE FOCUS WOULD BE ON HOW DOES WHAT E.P.A. IS DOING AND WHAT WE'RE DOING FIT TOGETHER TO PROTECT THIS RESOURCE? AND I ENCOURAGE THIS WORKING GROUP TO PURSUE IT IN THAT MANNER. MR. GRUSNICK: THIS IS RICHARD GRUSNICK, AND I GUESS I RAISED SOME OF THOSE ISSUES EARLIER TODAY AND I CERTAINLY DIDN'T INTEND TO SUGGEST THAT WE STOP DOING THINGS, BUT I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT "" I GUESS IT'S A LITTLE FRUSTRATING TO ME TO FIRST HEAR ABOUT THE FACT THAT INTERIOR AND E.P.A. HAD AGREED TO DEVELOP REGULATIONS AFTER WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR FOUR YEARS BY READING IT IN A NEWSLETTER. AND, YOU KNOW, THIS HAS BEEN "" AT LEAST ALABAMA HAS DEVOTED A LOT OF RESOURCES. I'VE GOT FOUR DIFFERENT PEOPLE WORKING ON COMMITTEES, FOUR OR FIVE DIFFERENT PEOPLE WORKING ON COMMITTEES IN HERE THAT ARE DOING THINGS THAT THEY "" THERE'S GOING TO BE A SURPLUS OF THINGS THAT THEY HAVE TO DO AS EXISTS FOR EVERYBODY. BUT "" YOU KNOW. AND I'M GOING TO CONTINUE TO SPEND THE EFFORT BUT WE NEED TO FOCUS THOSE EFFORTS IN A WAY THAT'S GOING TO MAKE SOME DIFFERENCE IN THE FUTURE. AND SO THAT'S WHY "" YOU KNOW, IF E.P.A. IS JUST GOING "" AND INTERIOR ARE GOING TO SIT BACK AND DECIDE WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, I WOULD HOPE THAT WE WOULD HAVE SOME INFLUENCE IN WHAT THOSE DECISIONS ARE MADE OR WHAT THOSE DECISIONS ARE. BUT WE NEED TO COORDINATE WITH THESE OTHER THINGS ALREADY ON TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT JUST SPINNING OUR WHEELS AND WHAT WE DO IS JUST GOING TO BE A WASTE OF TIME BECAUSE ALL OF US HAVE BETTER THINGS TO DO. AND SO THAT'S ONE THING I HOPE WE CAN GET MORE INFORMATION ON IS WHAT SORT OF APPROACH E.P.A. IS THINKING ABOUT PROPOSING IN THE FUTURE AND TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR EFFORTS ARE CHANNELED IN THE DIRECTION THAT WILL HAVE THE MOST INFLUENCE ON WHAT WILL BE A REASONABLE POLICY. MR. WINSTON SMITH: YEAH, WE TRIED TO FIND A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION TO SEE IF THERE WAS ANY DEFINITE PLAN ON THAT. MR. GRUSNICK: (INAUDIBLE) MR. WINSTON SMITH: THAT HAS NOT BEEN PUT TOGETHER YET. AS SOON AS WE KNOW SOMETHING OR SOME DESCRIPTION OF THAT IS AVAILABLE, WE WILL SHARE THAT AROUND WITH SAMI AND WITH EVERYONE TO SEE HOW IT BENEFITS ALL THIS. I CAN'T BELIEVE THAT WE COULD DO MUCH THERE WITHOUT UTILIZING WHAT SAMI'S DONE AND MAYBE UTILIZING THE SAME PROCESS. IT SEEMS TO MAKE A LOT OF SENSE, BUT I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE INFORMATION THAN THAT RIGHT NOW. MAYBE AT OUR SPRING MEETING WE CAN DISCUSS THAT. MR. BUNYAK: I HAVE ONE MORE BAFFLING COMMENT ON THAT, I GUESS IN RESPONSE TO WHAT RICHARD WAS SAYING. IT WASN'T THE INTERIOR THAT MADE THAT DECISION. THAT WAS E.P.A. SAYING THAT THE CURRENT CLEAN AIR ACT HAS THE ABILITY TO DEAL THAT ISSUE, SO I GUESS I REACT A LITTLE BIT TO THE INTERIOR AND E.P.A. KIND OF CONSPIRED TO COME UP WITH THIS PROCESS. MR. GRUSNICK: WELL, I GUESS THE ANNOUNCEMENT WAS MADE AND CONSPIRACY ISN'T A WORD THAT THEY USED. BUT, NO, IT WAS IN A LETTER TO INTERIOR WHERE IT WAS ANNOUNCED AND SO CLEARLY THERE WAS SOME DIALOG IN THERE. MR. BUNYAK: YEAH. WE WERE INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT IN SHENANDOAH AND THAT SORT OF THING. MR. MICHAELS: IT SEEMS TO ME THAT E.P.A. SHOULD BE FORMALLY APPROACHED BY SAMI IN SOME WAY TO SAY WE "" I WOULD WRITE A LETTER TO THEM SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT THAT WE KNOW YOU BELIEVE IN US AND WHEN YOU DON'T INCLUDE US IN YOUR PROPOSED RULE MAKING, YOU'VE THREATENED OUR EXISTENCE IN THIS PHYSICAL CLIMATE, SO PLEASE INCLUDE US AND NEED US. WILL YOU WRITE A LETTER TO THEM? I CAN SEE WHAT THEY JUST DID AS BEING A VEHICLE TO REMOVE FEDERAL FUNDING FROM THIS ORGANIZATION.MR. SHAW: I HADN'T THOUGHT ABOUT IT IN TERMS OF "" ALONG THOSE LINES. I CAN'T IMAGINE THEY WOULD WANT TO TAKE THAT STEP. I THINK YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT BUT MR. MICHAELS: WE NEED THEIR SUPPORT RIGHT NOW. WE CAN CALL THE SENATE AND CONGRESS AND SAY WHY SHOULD WE HAVE MONEY IN THE BUDGET FOR SAMI "" IF WE SAY THAT TO THE E.P.A. ADMINISTRATOR "" WHEN YOU'VE JUST COMPLETELY BYPASSED THEM IN YOUR PROPOSED RULING AND IT AFFECTS THEIR REGION. WHAT WERE THEY GOOD FOR? SO MAYBE WE COULD GET THEM ON OUR SIDE OFFICIALLY. MR. SHAW: WELL, I DO THINK MR. MICHAELS: IT WILL GIVE US MORE WORK, BUT MR. SHAW: I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH US COMMUNICATING WITH E.P.A., THAT THEY NEED TO REMEMBER WE'RE HERE AND WE'VE GOT A LOT OF VALUABLE ASSETS IN THE PEOPLE THAT WE HAVE AROUND THE TABLE. I'M THINKING ABOUT AT A DIFFERENT LEVEL, AT THE WASHINGTON LEVEL. AND WE CAN GET WINSTON TO ALSO BACK OR SOMETHING. BUT THEY DO NEED TO GIVE US THE COURTESY OF COMMUNICATING WITH US ON THIS ISSUE. IT IS THE VERY ISSUE THAT WE'RE HERE ABOUT. I THINK A LETTER LIKE THAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE FOR US TO DO. WE CAN TALK WITH HAROLD ABOUT GETTING SOMEBODY LIKE THAT. MR. SHAW: WELL, I CAN TELL HAROLD IF HE DOESN'T SHOW UP THAT THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS TO HIM. DO WE NEED ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THIS ISSUE? MR. MICHAELS: NO. I JUST LIKE THE IDEA THAT STEVE HAD OF INCORPORATING THAT. THESE QUESTIONS HERE, THE RULE MAKING ON THAT ONE AND, IN FACT, ADDRESS THAT FROM A SAMI PROSPECTIVE. MR. LEVITAS: WHETHER WE NEED A WORK GROUP OR NOT TO DO IT, I GUESS HAROLD CAN DECIDE AND APPOINT SOMEBODY, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL TO SEE AT THE SPRING MEETING A PRESENTATION ABOUT THE VARIOUS RULEMAKING ACTIVITIES UNDERWAY AND HOW THE WORK OF SAMI MAY RELATE TO THAT. MS. CABOTSMETHURST: I'M SENDING AROUND SOME COPIES AND I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T REALIZE THERE WAS GOING TO BE SUCH A VAST TURNOUT OF THE GOVERNING BODY NUMBERS. THERE ARE A COUPLE OF KEY ISSUES I WANT TO COVER AND I'M GOING TO ASK JIM JOY TO MAKE A BRIEF COMMENT AND THEN IRA IS GOING TO SHOW US A MOCK-UP OF THE HOME PAGE. BRIEFLY, WE HAVE HAD A "" SEVERAL "" WE'VE HAD A P.A.C. MEETING IN OCTOBER AND WE ACCOMPLISHED A VARIETY OF THINGS THAT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO UNDERSCORE CONSIDERING THE DISCUSSION AROUND IMPLEMENTATION OF E.M.O.'S. ONE WAS TO UPDATE THE JOBS AND TASKS OF THE E.M.O. COMMITTEES AND THEY ARE BEFORE YOU. AND I MIGHT SAY THAT THE ENERGY STAR PROGRAM WHICH IS "" PAGES ONE AND TWO HAVE BEEN COMBINED ON THIS "" MOVING ALONG QUITE NICELY. SOME OF THE OTHERS ARE NOT MOVING AS FAST AS I WOULD LIKE AND THAT'S, AGAIN, A FUNCTION OF DOWNSIZING. ONE PARTICULAR ISSUE THAT HAS BEEN A STICKY ONE HAS BEEN THE LAND USE PLANNING ONE, AND I MAY BE PRESENTING A SOLUTION OR A "" TO USE MY WORD NOW "" TEMPLATE OF AN ORGANIZATION THAT IS COMING UP WITH SOME REMARKABLE WORK IN LAND USE PLANNING, AND THAT HAPPENS TO BE THE GEORGIA CONSERVANCY, SO WE'LL BE COMING BACK TO YOU ON THAT. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS, SEE ME AFTERWARDS AND I CAN GO INTO DETAIL ON IT. ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT WE REALLY WENT INTO IN A LOT OF DETAIL WAS IN ASSESSING THE FACT THAT TOM AND HIS COMMITTEE AND THE P.C. ARE REALLY CRANKING OUT A LOT OF STUFF. IT LOOKS LIKE THE P.A.C.'S FIRST REAL OUTREACH ACTIVITIES MAY BEGIN SOMETIME THIS SPRING, AND SO I'M VERY CONCERNED WITH WHAT I NOW CALL THE INFRASTRUCTURE OUTREACH. AND SO ONE OF THE AREAS THAT OUR COMMITTEE IS GOING TO BE WORKING ON IS UPDATING OUR DATA BASE, BUT ALSO LOOKING FOR AVENUES SINCE WE BASICALLY HAVE PROBABLY STILL NO MONEY AND MAY NEVER HAVE ANY MONEY. HOW DO WE GET THE WORD OUT AND ACCOMPLISH THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION THAT IS NEEDED WITHIN STATES ON THESE ISSUES AND OTHERS, PARTICULARLY THE MORE CONTROVERSIAL E.M.O.'S. SO ONE OF THE DEVICES "" AND I'M GOING TO TURN THIS OVER VERY BRIEFLY TO JIM JOY WHO HAS COME UP WITH PART OF MY SOLUTION, NOT ALL MY SOLUTION, BUT PART OF IT, ABOUT AN INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS IN THE MAKING. JIM? MR. JOY: THIS IS WHERE I MAKE LUCY PANIC AND SAY WHAT? NO, ACTUALLY, SHE AND I AND OTHERS HAVE BEEN TALKING FOR AWHILE AND THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT STATE AIR DIRECTORS HEARD "" THOSE THAT WERE THERE HEARD AT A RECENT MEETING THAT WE HAD ABOUT A MONTH AGO. BUT FOR THE STATES OF VIRGINIA AND WEST VIRGINIA, IT MAY BE NEW TO THEM. ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT LUCY IS ACTUALLY ASKING ME ABOUT IS SHE'S AWARE THAT WE HAVE MEMBERS OF OUR STAFF IN THE AIR GROUP THAT WE HAVE THAT ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING CERTAIN OUTREACH INFORMATION AND HELPING US PUT TOGETHER CERTAIN ISSUES OR FACT SHEETS OR BROCHURES OR EDUCATIONAL PIECES, IF YOU WILL, AND THE RESPONSIBILITY OF DISSEMINATING THAT OUT TO THE PUBLIC. AND, AGAIN, THOSE ARE ISSUES THAT WE NEED AND NEED TO HAVE DONE. LUCY AT LEAST ASKED ME WHAT WOULD BE THE CHANCES OF BEING ABLE TO "" SHE DIDN'T USE THE WORD BUT I INTERPRETED IT TO BE CONFISCATE THAT RESOURCE AND USE IT FOR SOME "" HELP UTILIZE IT FOR SOME OF SAMI'S PURPOSES. I BROUGHT THIS TOPIC UP WITH THE AIR DIRECTORS IN TERMS OF AN INTEREST NOT ONLY FROM A SAMI POINT OF VIEW BUT JUST WITH ALL OF THE ISSUES GOING ON IN AIR AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROSPECTIVE AND WHATNOT. IT SEEMS TO ME SOME OF THE STATES WITHIN THE REGION MIGHT WANT TO AVOID DUPLICATING OR REDUPLICATING THE WHEEL AN AWFUL LOT OF TIMES WITH SOME OF OUR OUTREACH INITIATIVES AND COULD SHARE INFORMATION AND RESOURCES, TOOLS THAT WE'VE ALREADY DEVELOPED USING E.P.A.'S NETWORK, ANYTHING THEY'VE DONE IN SOUTH CAROLINA, OR WHAT MAY HAVE BEEN DONE IN NORTH CAROLINA, AND THEN USING THAT AS A BUILDING BLOCK OR TOOL TO GO AHEAD AND ACCOMPLISH THE SAME OUTREACH, IF YOU WILL, FOR OUR AREA OR FOR OUR STATE PROVIDED THERE IS NO COPYRIGHT PROBLEMS OR ISSUES OF THAT NATURE. BUT MOST OF THE INFORMATION WE SHARE, FACT SHEETS OR WHATNOT, WOULD NOT HAVE THAT BURDEN. I AT LEAST EXPLORED THAT OPPORTUNITY WITH OUR COUNTERPARTS WITHIN REGION IV AND THEY WERE VERY MUCH INTERESTED IN DOING THAT, SO WHAT "" WHENEVER YOU HAVE AN IDEA YOU GET CHARGED WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY, IT SEEMS. SO ONE OF THE RESPONSIBILITIES WE WERE CHARGED WITH WAS COMING AWAY FROM THAT MEETING WITH PULLING TOGETHER A SURVEY FOR OUR PURPOSES ON WHAT RESOURCES AND ACTUAL INVENTORY, NOT MEANING EMISSIONS, BUT DOCUMENTS ON OUTREACH THAT ARE ACTUALLY OUT THERE NOW, TO BEGIN SEEING IF THERE'S AN INTEREST TO COORDINATE SUCH A MEETING WITHIN THE REGION, TO IDENTIFY THE CONTACT FOR STATE, AND I WANT TO USE A WORD HERE, A PURPOSE, THE LOCAL AREA AGENCIES THAT ARE OUT THERE AND ACTUALLY COORDINATE A MEETING WHERE THEY CAN BEGIN PLANNING SOME OF THEIR FUNCTIONS. AND IN TERMS OF FOR SAMI'S PURPOSES HERE, SOME OF THAT INFRASTRUCTURE THAT THEY HAVE IN PLACE, SAMI MAY CAN UTILIZE SOME OF IT TO ACCOMPLISH SOME OF THIS DESIRED ACTIVITY IN THERE. THIS WOULD NOT BECOME THE SOLE FUNCTION OF THIS GROUP BECAUSE THERE'S OTHER AIR ISSUES THAT ARE GOING ON IN SOUTH CAROLINA AS WELL AS THE REGION, SUCH AS THE NEW PROPOSED STANDARDS AND EVERYTHING ELSE, OTAG, THINGS THAT WE'RE WORKING ON, PLUS THE STATE OUTREACH. BUT IT WOULD BE A VEHICLE AND A NETWORK, IF YOU WILL, OF STATE FOLKS THAT ARE USED TO DEALING WITH MEDIA, MEDIA CONTACTS, PRESS, PAPERS AND WHATNOT, AND AVENUES TO GET THAT INFORMATION OUT. WE ARE TRYING TO DO THAT, ARE EMBARKED UPON THAT SOMETIME WITHIN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS. THE SURVEY IS GOING OUT HOPEFULLY THE FIRST PART OF THE YEAR. THE INTEREST IS GOING OUT THE FIRST PART OF THE YEAR. AND EVERYBODY WHO WAS AT THAT MEETING WAS HIGHLY INTERESTED IN IT AND IT WAS OUR HOPE THAT WE'LL HAVE A MEETING BETWEEN NOW "" I CAN'T TELL YOU WHEN, BUT OUR HOPE WAS BETWEEN NOW AND NEXT MAY. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT LUCY AND I TALKED ABOUT WAS THE POTENTIAL OF MAYBE HAVING LUCY AND/OR SOME OF THE FOLKS WITH P.A.C. COME TO A PORTION OF THAT MEETING, IF YOU WILL, OR MAYBE SOME ASPECT OF THAT MEETING SO THEY CAN EXPLAIN WHO THEY ARE AND WHAT THEIR NEEDS MAY BE. SO THAT'S THE THOUGHT. THAT'S THE IDEA. RELATIVE TO HOW IT WILL FIT IN WITH SAMI, THERE'S A MUCH BROADER SCOPE TO THAT, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT COMES TO MY MIND IF WE DO THAT, WE PROBABLY NEED TO MAKE SOME CONTACT WITH VIRGINIA AND WEST VIRGINIA SINCE THEY'RE OUTSIDE OF REGION IV RIGHT NOW TO SEE IF THEY HAVE ANY INTEREST IN TRYING TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT EFFORT, PARTICULARLY AS IT GOES BEYOND OR STARTS SLIPPING INTO SAMI ISSUES OR INITIATIVES. MS. CABOTSMETHURST: THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT, JIM, AND THAT'S JUST EXACTLY THE KIND OF HELP WE'RE GOING TO NEED BECAUSE EVERY STATE WILL HAVE A LIST OF THE PEOPLE THAT THEY CONSULT ANYWAY ABOUT ALL THE ISSUES THAT ARE ON THE STATE AGENDAS. AND SO HAVING SAMI AS PART OF THE AGENDA WILL BE VERY HELPFUL AND I PROMISE NOT TO CONFISCATE YOUR IDEA. I PROMISE. DO YOU ALL HEAR ME? ONE OTHER FINAL BEFORE I TURN THIS OVER TO IRA TO SHOW US THE CONCEPT OF SAMI HOME PAGES IS YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TWO NEW E.M.O.'S THAT HAVE BEEN PASSED BY THE P.C., AND THEY ARE THE OZONE ADVISORY PROGRAM AND THE CLEAN AIR CAMPAIGN. I THINK I'VE MUTTERED TO SOME OF YOU ABOUT THIS BEFORE. THEY ARE BASICALLY "" I THOUGHT THESE UP. I'M THE COORDINATOR OF THE CLEAN AIR CAMPAIGN IN GEORGIA AND I SIT ON THE ATLANTA OZONE ADVISORY PROGRAM. THESE ARE TWO VOLUNTARY PROGRAMS. THEY'RE BOTH PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMS. IN THE CASE OF THE OZONE ADVISORY PROGRAM, IT WAS INITIATED BY THE ATLANTA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE IN CONCERT WITH THE POWER COMPANY AND SOME OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS AS WAS THE CLEAN AIR CAMPAIGN. THE E.P.D. HAS BEEN A VERY MAJOR PLAYER IN BOTH OF THEM. THE OZONE ADVISORY PROGRAM IS BASICALLY TO BEGIN TO ADVISE THE PUBLIC IN AN EDUCATIONAL WAY ABOUT LEVELS OF OZONE, PARTICULARLY EXCEEDANCES, AND WHAT THEY MIGHT DO TO HANDLE SOME OF THOSE CONCERNS. IN OTHER WORDS, MAKING THE PUBLIC "" HELPING THE PUBLIC IDENTIFY WHAT THE ISSUES ARE AND HOW THEY CAN BE A PART OF THE SOLUTION. THE CLEAN AIR CAMPAIGN HAS REALLY A SOLE MISSION THAT BRINGS ALL THE DIFFERENT ELEMENTS IN THE ATLANTA COMMUNITY TOGETHER. IT IS TO EDUCATE PEOPLE ABOUT WHAT "" ABOUT THE ISSUES, THE GENERAL PUBLIC ABOUT THE ISSUES OF AIR QUALITY IN THE ATLANTA REGION SO AGAIN THEY CAN BECOME PART OF THE SOLUTION. BOTH OF THESE PROGRAMS HAVE BECOME PARTICULARLY CRITICAL IN LIGHT OF THE NEW STANDARDS, PROPOSED STANDARDS, ETCETERA, ETCETERA, AND THEY HAVE IN BOTH CASES BROAD SUPPORT. THE CLEAN AIR CAMPAIGN IS "" WE'RE JUST ABOUT TO FINISH RAISING SEVEN HUNDRED AND FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS AND HIRE A PUBLIC RELATIONS "" HIRE AN ADVERTISING FIRM TO START IMPLEMENTING THIS PARTICULAR PROGRAM. WE'RE OFFERING THESE BECAUSE THEY TOOK IN EACH CASE FOUR YEARS FOR THE CLEAN AIR CAMPAIGN TO BE ORGANIZED AND ABOUT TWO AND A HALF FOR THE OZONE ADVISORY. SO WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH THE ORGANIZATIONAL MILL AND WE ARE OFFERING THESE AS VOLUNTARY TEMPLATES FOR ANYBODY WHO IS INTERESTED, ANY ORGANIZATION WHO IS INTERESTED, STATE ORGANIZATION, LOCAL ORGANIZATION, VERY MUCH IN THE WAY THAT JIM IS DESIGNING HIS REGIONAL MEETING, TO SHARE OUR RESOURCES WITH THEM, AND IT SEEMED LIKE THIS WOULD BE A VERY OBVIOUS PRODUCT FOR SAMI IN THE PUBLIC ARENA, PUBLIC EDUCATION ARENA, TO PUT ITS NAME ON. SO THEY'VE BEEN PASSED BY THE P.C. AND I GUESS IT WOULD BE UP TO ME, MR. CHAIRMAN, TO ASK YOUR COMMITTEE TO APPROVE THIS. WELL, NOT BEING ON THE GOVERNING BODY, I WOULD NOW DEFER TO YOU FOR PASSAGE OF THESE TWO. MR. SHAW: THIS REQUIRES A VOTE IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING? MS. CABOTSMETHURST: RIGHT. AND I HAVE SENT AROUND A PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY THAT THE P.A.C. HAS NOW GONE THROUGH AND IT'S PRETTY "" JUST TO LET YOU KNOW THE WAY WE'RE MOVING ON IT. YOU DON'T HAVE TO APPROVE THAT TODAY BECAUSE IT HASN'T BEEN THROUGH THE PROCESS. JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION. MR. SHAW: OKAY. BUT YOU WANT TO APPROVE THIS TODAY? MS. CABOTSMETHURST: YES, PLEASE. MR. SHAW:Č DO I HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR? SOMEBODY? DO WE NEED MORE TIME TO LOOK AT IT? MR. GRUSNICK: WE'VE DONE THINGS SIMILAR TO THIS IN ALABAMA AND I THINK THEY REALLY ARE GOOD IDEAS. IT HELPS EDUCATE PEOPLE AND GET THEM PLUGGED INTO THE THINGS THAT ARE COMING IN THE FUTURE, HELP PREPARE THEM A LITTLE BIT, PERHAPS, AND SO I THINK THEY'RE BOTH GOOD IDEAS AND I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT THEY BE ADOPTED BY THE GOVERNING BODY. MR. SHAW: OKAY. I'VE GOT A MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND? MR. METHIER: I SECOND. MR. SHAW: OKAY, SECOND. DO WE NEED ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY. MR. CARR: ONE QUESTION: IS IT WITHIN YOUR BUDGET TO SEND THAT OUT TO THE PUBLIC? MS. CABOTSMETHURST: WELL, I'M GOING TO "" NOW THAT WE HAVE THEM OFFICIALLY AS PART OF THE P.A.C., WE'LL NOW HAVE TO PUT SOME BUDGETARY NUMBERS ON THEM. WE HAVE A LITTLE MONEY, YEAH. AND THEN I'M GOING TO STEAL FROM BOTH ENTITIES, AS WELL, AS FAR AS SAMI COSTS ARE CONCERNED. MR. SHAW: OKAY. THAT CAUSED A QUESTION IN MY MIND. WE'RE NOT APPROVING MONEY AT THIS POINT? MR. CABOTSMETHURST: NO, YOU'RE NOT. MS. COX: WE'VE ALREADY APPROVED A BUDGET FOR THE P.A.C. THIS WOULD FALL UNDER THAT MONETARY BUDGET. MR. SHAW: OKAY. THANK YOU. OKAY. MS. CABOTSMETHURST: THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT. MR. SHAW: WAIT. WAIT. WE HAVEN'T VOTED YET. DO WE HAVE ANY MORE DISCUSSION? MR. JOY: LUCY, IF THESE ARE APPROVED IN ESSENCE WHAT'S BEING APPROVED IS THESE EXAMPLES THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED I GUESS IN ATLANTA? MS. CABOTSMETHURST: CORRECT. MR. JOY:Č AND WOULD THEN BE OFFERED AS MODELS FOR OTHERS TO AT LEAST LOOK AT? MS. CABOTSMETHURST: THAT'S RIGHT. MR. JOY: SO WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY BEING ASKED TO APPROVE IS THE SHARING OF THIS INFORMATION? MS. CABOTSMETHURST: THAT'S IT EXACTLY. IT'S VERY SIMPLE. MS. ANDREWS: THESE ARE SPECIFICALLY THE ONES YOU ALL USED IN ATLANTA? MS. CABOTSMETHURST: CORRECT. MS. ANDREWS: HAVE YOU LOOKED AT WHAT OTHERS ARE DOING IN THIS SAME ARENA? MS. CABOTSMETHURST: VERY MUCH, YEAH. MS. ANDREWS: SO WOULD YOU BE DISSEMINATING A BROAD RANGE OF PROGRAMS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED IN OTHER AREAS AS WELL AS JUST THE ATLANTA MODEL? MS. CABOTSMETHURST: IF WE CAN DO THE FUNDING FOR THAT WE CAN CERTAINLY MAKE THAT INFORMATION AVAILABLE. I'VE GOT A FIVEFOOT SHELF OF STUFF THAT PEOPLE COULD WRITE OFF FOR. YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. MR. SHAW: SO IS THAT A MOTION AND A SECOND TO MR. METHIER: MAY I MAKE ONE COMMENT. ONE ADVANTAGE TO PURSUING SOMETHING CLOSE TO THESE IS THAT WE HAVE SOME "" FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE OZONE ADVISORY PROGRAM, SOME UNIFORMITY IN THE APPROACHES AND THE MESSAGES THAT THE PUBLIC HEARS IN ATLANTA AND OTHER STATES. IT WILL HELP REINFORCE THE OVERALL REGIONAL SAMI MISSION RATHER THAN HAVING A HODGEPODGE OF EVERYONE DOING IT DIFFERENTLY. THAT'S THE ADVANTAGE WE SEE TO THIS. MR. SHAW: OKAY. LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THIS. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. GROUP: AYE. MR. SHAW: ALL OPPOSED? (NO RESPONSE.) MS. CABOTSMETHURST: I HAVE ONE MORE ITEM AND WE'LL BE OVER AND DONE. IRA, AS PART OF ONE OF THE E.M.O.'S, HAS IMPLEMENTED BY HIMSELF A MODEL OF THE SAMI HOME PAGE. IRA? IRA SILVERBERG? MR. SILVERBERG: IRA SILVERBERG WITH T.V.A. AND THE INTERNET IS ONE TOOL THAT CAN BE USED FOR COMMUNICATION. WE'RE USING IT INSIDE T.V.A. TO COMMUNICATE ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION. OF COURSE, E.P.A. IS DOING THAT. OTAG IS DOING THAT. AND I WANTED TO "" SINCE I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN T.V.A.'S HOME PAGE AND I KNEW HOW IT WAS DESIGNED, AND I DECIDED JUST TO GET A PROTOTYPE. AND ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO TELL YOU IS THAT I'VE SHOWN THIS TO THE P.A.C. AND THEY APPROVED OF THE "" APPROVED OF IT IN CONCEPT. ALL THE DETAILS THAT ARE HERE HAVE NOT REALLY BEEN DISCUSSED WITH THE P.A.C. OR WITH THE SAMI STAFF, SO THESE ARE MY IDEAS. BUT WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO TODAY IS JUST TO SHOW YOU WHAT CAN BE DONE TO SEE IF YOU AGREE WITH THE GENERAL APPROACH AND ALSO IF YOU HAVE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW THIS SHOULD BE DONE. LESLIE WANTS IT UP IN JANUARY. IF IT WAS APPROVED TODAY IT WOULD BE UP BY THE END OF THE WEEK, BUT THE ISSUE OF WHO GETS TO APPROVE THE CONTENT OF IT, I THINK, WILL MAKE YOU TAKE SOMEWHAT LONGER THAN THAT. BUT I DID WANT TO SHOW IN SOME OF THE WEB PAGES THAT I DEVELOPED THAT THERE IS A LOT OF MATERIAL THAT SAMI HAS ALREADY PRODUCED. IT'S ALREADYAPPROVED MATERIAL THAT WOULD BE NONCONTROVERSIAL, THAT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL TO OTHER SAMI MEMBERS AND TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC IN UNDERSTANDING WHAT SAMI IS ABOUT. JUST SOME OF THE TYPES OF INFORMATION THAT I WOULD SEE PUT ON THE WEB PAGE IS A DESCRIPTION OF SAMI, WHAT'S THE PURPOSE, WHAT'S THE HISTORY OF SAMI, WHAT'S THE SCOPE OF SAMI'S MISSION, WHAT ARE THE POLLUTANTS THAT ARE CONCERNED, WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS THAT ARE CONCERNED, SOME DISCUSSION ON THAT, SAMI'S TIME LINE, WHAT THE SAMI ORGANIZATION LOOKS LIKE. WE COULD HAVE MEETING NOTES UP THERE, APPROVED TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS. AND YOU'LL SEE SOME OF THAT DISPLAYED IN THE WEB PAGES THAT I'VE DESIGNED. SOME MORE THINGS. ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORTS, ALSO COPIES OF DRAFT DOCUMENTS THAT ARE IN THE REVIEW PROCESS. RIGHT NOW THOSE ARE BEING POSTED ON T.T.N. AND YOU CAN STILL DO THAT AND HAVE A LINK WITH THE WEB PAGE. IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT, THOUGH, THAT THEY WOULD BE DESIGNATED AS DRAFT DOCUMENTS. A LIST OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS, AND LINKS TO OTHER AIR QUALITY SITES THAT ARE ON THE WEB. THERE'S A WEALTH OF INFORMATION THAT'S RELATED TO SAMI ISSUES THAT WE CAN TIE TOGETHER IN ONE PLACE. MS. ANDREWS: OH. WOULD THIS BE ON THAT "" THE E.P.A. TTN2000 SITE THAT WE MR. SILVERBERG: NO. IT WOULD BE ON AN E.P.A. SERVER, BUT IT WOULDN'T BE ON THE TTN2000 SITE NECESSARILY. BUT IT'S "" THERE WILL BE LINKS. THAT'S THE OTHER THING THAT I CAN SHOW YOU IS THAT CLEARLY YOU'D WANT OTHER PEOPLE TO KNOW ABOUT IT AND YOU WOULD LINK TO THEIR SITES AND YOU WOULD TRY TO GET THEM TO LINK TO THE SAMI SITE SO PEOPLE CAN FIND IT. MY IDEA OF WHAT DOCUMENTS OR WHAT DOCUMENTS SAMI STAFF PROPOSED WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL "" I THINK THERE SHOULD BE SOME PROCESS, STREAMLINED PROCESS, FOR GETTING CERTAIN THINGS OUT THERE. WHAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED NONCONTROVERSIAL INFORMATION LIKE MEETING NOTES, SAMI STAFF SHOULD BE ABLE TO PUT IT OUT WITH THEIR MEMBERSHIP LIST AND ANY DOCUMENT THAT'S BEEN THROUGH A COMMITTEE AND BEEN APPROVED OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO GO UP THERE, LIKE THE MISSION STATEMENT AND FACT SHEETS ONCE THEY'RE APPROVED THROUGH THE GOVERNING BODY, ETCETERA. PART OF THE E.M.O. IMPLEMENTATION, ONE WAY OF COMMUNICATING E.M.O.'S, PARTICULARLY THE ONES THAT WE WANT THE PUBLIC INVOLVED IN, WE COULD DO THROUGH THE WEB PAGE. THAT WOULD BE JUST ONE AVENUE THAT YOU COULD USE. SOME THINGS WOULD BE CONTROVERSIAL AND WOULD REQUIRE SOME FORM OF APPROVAL. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE. IT COULD BE JUST AT P.A.C. LEVEL OR ALL THE WAY UP THROUGH THE GOVERNING BODY. SOME PROCESS WOULD HAVE TO BE PUT IN PLACE. I THINK IT WOULD PROBABLY BE PEOPLE THAT WOULD WANT TO APPROVE WHAT EXTERNAL LINKS ARE PROVIDED FROM THE SAMI SITE AND ALSO WORKING OF DOCUMENTS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN THROUGH THE SAMI COMMITTEE PROCESS. OKAY, E.P.A. REGION IV HAS AGREED TO HOST THE WEB PAGE, WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED IN TERMS OF DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE COST. THE MATERIAL THAT I PUT TOGETHER YOU'RE GOING TO SEE IN A FEW MINUTES WAS ABOUT TWO DAYS WORTH OF WORK. YOU CAN TAKE EXISTING DOCUMENTS, CONVERT THEM TO WORK ON THE WEB. IT'S NOT REALLY THAT HARD TO DO. IF E.P.A. WERE TO CONVERT THE DOCUMENTS FOR SAMI, THERE REALLY WOULDN'T BE ANY COST INVOLVED. WE COULD GET A CONTRACTOR TO SUPPORT THE WORK AND THAT'S BEING DISCUSSED. AND IF SAMI STAFF WERE TO MAINTAIN THE WEB SITE, THEN IT WOULD PROBABLY BE "" THERE WOULD NEED TO BE AN INVESTMENT IN SOME WEB DESIGN TRAINING AND ALSO SOME SOFTWARE AND HARDWARE UPGRADES. MS. COX: DO YOU HAVE THE COST OF SUPPORTING THE SITE? MR. SILVERBERG: IT WOULD NOT "" YEAH, IT WOULDN'T BE VERY EXPENSIVE. IT'S KIND OF HARD TO "" I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO THIS BECAUSE IT'S JUST SOME IDEAS I HAD. AND COSTS JUST FOR SOFTWARE, THERE AREN'T THAT MANY COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH IT. MS. ANDREWS: DON'T MOST OF US HAVE STAFF THAT USE THIS SORT OF THING THAT COULD "" MR. SILVERBERG: YEAH. THE ONLY THING IS MS. ANDREWS: "" DO IT FOR SAMI? MR. SILVERBERG: THAT'S POSSIBLE BUT IF YOU WANT TO DO IT IN THE MOST EFFICIENT MANNER, EITHER CONTRACTING IT OR HAVING SAMI STAFF DO IT WOULD BE MOST EFFICIENT. YOU COULD CERTAINLY HAVE HELP FROM THE STATES OR E.P.A. OKAY, THIS IS "" NOW, THE GRAPHICS ON HERE ARE VERY POOR BECAUSE IT'S NOT A GOOD MONITOR, BUT I DEVELOPED A HOME PAGE THAT HAS A GRAPHIC OF THE SAMI REGION THAT IS AN ACTUAL SITE IN THE SMOKIES, I BELIEVE. THERE WOULD BE LINKS TO THE MISSION STATEMENT AND YOU CAN DO SOMETHING ON THE MISSION STATEMENT BY CREATING THE MISSION STATEMENT AND HAVING A LINK TO WHAT ARE AIR QUALITY RELATED VALUES. AND THIS DEFINITION OF AIR QUALITY RELATED VALUES IS THE DEFINITION THAT COMES OFF THE PARK SERVICES PAGE. AND YOU HAVE DEFINITIONS OF THE CLASS ONE AREAS, AS YOU'LL SEE, AND ALSO OTHER LINKS. INTRODUCTION TO SAMI WAS A DOCUMENT THAT WAS PRODUCED AWHILE BACK, SAMI BYLAWS, ON GROUND LEVEL OZONE. THIS IS THE DEFINITION THAT CAME FROM E.P.A. OF COURSE, SOME OF THIS LANGUAGE YOU'D WANT THE COMMITTEES TO LOOK AT AND APPROVE IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT SAMI STARTED WITH. QUESTION? MS. CABOTSMETHURST: NO. SHE WAS JUST SAYING PLAIN ENGLISH.MR. SILVERBERG: OKAY. YEAH, THAT'S MOSTLY IN PLAIN ENGLISH, E.P.A.'S VERSION OF PLAIN ENGLISH. ONE THING I FOUND OUT TALKING TO LESLIE IS THAT A SIMPLE MAP OF THE SAMI REGION IS NOT SOMETHING THAT SAMI CAN AGREE UPON BUT SOME AGREED ON THAT. NOW, YOU CAN HAVE THE SAMI ORGANIZATION AND THEN THE GOVERNING BODY, AND YOU CLICK ON THE GOVERNING BODY AND LO AND BEHOLD, YOU FIND OUT WHO THE GOVERNING BODY MEMBERS ARE AND YOU SEE THE LOGOS OF THE STATE AGENCIES AND YOU EVEN FIND A PICTURE OF JUSTIN WILSON EXCEPT THAT THE PROJECTOR WENT OFF. THERE WE GO. THAT WAS OFF OF A STATE WEB PAGE. SO THERE'S PLENTY OF RESOURCES. A LIST OF E.M.O.'S, SCHEDULE. THIS WAS A SAMI DOCUMENT THAT I JUST CONVERTED TO PUT OUT ON THE WEB SO EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT THE SAMI SCHEDULE IS. ALMOST DONE. E.P.A. TTN BULLETIN BOARD, YOU HAVE A LINK TO THAT AND THAT'S WHERE YOU CAN DOWNLOAD DOCUMENTS. BUT IF YOU DON'T HAVE DOWNLOADING, YOU JUST WANT TO SEE DOCUMENTS "" I'VE GOT THERE SOMEWHERE HERE TOO. ACTUALLY, OUR FACT SHEET DIDN'T QUALIFY THE PARTICIPATION BUT THE FACT SHEET IS THERE. THAT'S A SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN ASSESSMENT ATMOSPHERIC TEAM REPORT. I'VE GOT LINKS TO OTHER AIR QUALITY INFORMATION LIKE THE CLEAN AIR ACT, ETCETERA. BASICALLY, THAT'S WHAT IT'S LIKE. ONE LAST EXAMPLE. IF YOU CLICK ON THE HOME PAGE "" I DON'T KNOW IF YOU "" WELL, IT DOESN'T WORK, BUT IT WAS "" I'VE TAKEN THE HOME PAGE AND PUT A LINK IN THERE TO SAMI. IT'S NOT A REAL LINK BUT IT HAS A LITTLE HAND TO TRY TO GRAB YOU TO GO TO THE SAMI HOME PAGE. AT ANY RATE, THAT'S THE PROTOTYPE I PUT TOGETHER. ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? MS. COX: CAN I ASK BEFORE THE DISCUSSION WHAT BASICALLY WOULD BE MOST USEFUL TO US IF EVERYONE AGREES WE DO NEED A HOME PAGE. I KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN SOME PROBLEMS WITH THE T.T.N. IN TRYING TO DOWNLOAD CERTAIN REPORTS AND NOT BEING ABLE TO HAVE GRAPHICS. THIS WOULD ALLOW US TO PUT UP THE REPORT IN ITS ENTIRETY AND PEOPLE CAN JUST PRINT IT RIGHT OFF THE SCREEN IF THEY NEED IT. IF WE CAN GET BUYIN FROM YOU TODAY THAT THIS FORMAT IS ACCEPTABLE AND PROMISE THAT WE WILL NOT PUT ANYTHING ON THERE THAT HAS NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY APPROVED OR "" YOU KNOW, WE CAN PUT MEETINGS, SUMMARIES, ANYTHING THAT WE PUT UP ON THE T.T.N. WE COULD PUT ON THIS, ANY APPROVED INFORMATION. AND AS WE HAVE NEW INFORMATION THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO IT WE COULD LEAVE, YOU KNOW, THE SITE BUT NOT PUT ANYTHING ON THERE BUT A LINK AND THEN JUST COME THROUGH THE COMMITTEE PROCESS TO GET APPROVAL TO ADD THESE THINGS ON IT, AND THEN WE COULD HAVE THIS UP AND RUNNING, LIKE I SAID, BY JANUARY. MR. SILVERBERG: AND AS PART OF THE CONTRACT REPORTS ON OZONE THAT WE'VE DONE FOR SAMI, THE FULL TEXT, IS THERE TO READ. MS. COX: DOES THIS TAKE THE PLACE OF WHAT'S ON THE TTN OR IS IT IN ADDITION TO IT? MR. SILVERBERG: SUPPLEMENT MS. COX: A SUPPLEMENT? MR. SHAW: OKAY. WITH THAT "" I DON'T THINK THIS NEEDS A FORMAL VOTE OF THE GOVERNING BODY. DOES ANYBODY ON THE GOVERNING BODY OBJECT TO LESLIE'S PROPOSAL AS SHE STATED IT? SEEING NONE, I'D SAY YOU HAVE APPROVAL TO PROCEED.MS. CABOTSMETHURST: MAY I MAKE JUST ONE MR. LEVITAS: GOOD JOB, IRA. MS. CABOTSMETHURST: EXCUSE ME. DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION, STEVE? MR. LEVITAS: JUST TO APPLAUD IT. IRA DID A GREAT JOB. MS. CABOTSMETHURST: JUST AS A CLOSEOUT TO THE P.A.C. REPORT, ONE OF THE SUBJECTS UNDER DISCUSSION IN OUR INFRASTRUCTURE OF LATE HAS BEEN HOW DO WE GET SOMEBODY FULL-TIME WHO IS GOING TO REALLY BE ABLE TO IMPLEMENT OUTREACH STRATEGIES AND GO TO THE STATES AND WORK WITH VARIOUS GROUPS AND SO ON. AND WE SEE A REAL POSSIBILITY, PARTICULAR WITH THE INTEREST OF THE FOREST SERVICE AND THE PARK SERVICE, AND, OF COURSE, ALWAYS E.P.A. NOT TO LET TO LET ANYONE OFF THE HOOK OF PERHAPS PURSUING AN I.P.A. SO WHILE THAT'S NOT IMMEDIATE, WE WILL BE DISCUSSING IT IN THE COMMITTEE AND THEN WITH SOME OF YOU ALL TO SEE IF THAT CAN BE DONE. SO THAT'S THE END OF MY REPORT. MS. COX:Č LUCY, I'D LIKE TO ADD ONE ITEM THAT I'M WORKING ON WITH SOME OF THE P.A.C. MEMBERS. IN ONE OF THE PROJECTS WE HAVE DEVELOPED A SAMI HANDBOOK. WE TALKED ABOUT PROVIDING INFORMATION TO PEOPLE AS THEY COME IN TO SAMI, AND WHAT I WANTED TO DO WAS TO GO AHEAD AND PROVIDE IT TO EACH MEMBER. I HAVE BEEN COLLECTING IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS FROM THE BYLAWS AND OPERATING PLAN ON UP TO IMPROVED E.M.O.'S AND SPECIFIC THINGS, ORGANIZING IT IN A FASHION, PRINTING IT ON THREERINGBINDER PAPER AND PROVIDING IT TO YOU. YOU CAN GET YOUR OWN THREERINGBINDER AND YOU CAN USE IT FOR YOUR PURPOSES ON WHATEVER COMMITTEE YOU'RE ON TO ADD INFORMATION THAT YOU FIND USEFUL, AND IF YOU WANT TO JUST KEEP IT AS GENERAL STUFF TO REFER TO BACK IN HISTORY OR IF YOU WANT IT TO BE A WORKING DOCUMENT. ONE THING THAT I'M ADDING TO THAT, THAT WILL GO THROUGH THE APPROVAL PROCESS BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE NEW INFORMATION, SOME OF THE NEW MEMBERS HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH ME TO PROVIDE ME WITH COMMONLYASKED QUESTIONS OF NEW PARTICIPANTS EVEN THOUGH WE'VE GOT THE INFORMATION SPREAD OUT. KIND OF A FACT SHEET ON THE QUESTIONS, HOW DID SAMI GET STARTED? WHAT IS IT? SO KIND OF A SEPARATE INFORMATIONAL THING THAT WE CAN PROVIDE TO THEM. THEY THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE REALLY HELPFUL. AND I WAS HOPING TO HAVE IT DONE IN DECEMBER BUT IT'S TAKING A LITTLE BIT LONGER TO GET THAT ACCOMPLISHED. BUT WE WANTED TO PROVIDE IT TO EACH MEMBER TO START OFF AND AS NEW PEOPLE COME INTO SAMI, WE'LL MAKE ONE COPY AVAILABLE AND THEN YOU HAVE TO KEEP UP WITH IT. MR. SHAW: THANK YOU. IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T FIGURED IT OUT, WE'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE A BREAK. IF YOU NEED TO GET UP INDIVIDUALLY AND REFRESH YOUR DRINKS OR WHATEVER, PLEASE FEEL FREE TO DO SO. WE'VE GOT A LITTLE BIT OF A PROBLEM IN THAT WE'VE GOT AN HOUR AND A HALF LEFT ON THE ORIGINAL AGENDA. WE'RE GOING TO KEEP PLUGGING ALONG. THE P.C. UPDATE? IT'S GOT BOB KERR? MS. COX: I THOUGHT HE WAS GOING TO BE HERE. I'LL WING IT AND DAVID CARR AND JOHN JANSEN ARE HERE AND THEY WERE AT THE MEETING AND THEY CAN ADD TO IT. THE POLICY COMMITTEE DID MEET DECEMBER FOURTH AND FIFTH IN CHARLESTON. WE LOVE VISITING SOUTH CAROLINA. AND WE FOCUSED A LOT ON WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? HOW DO WE DEAL WITH THE PLATE OF EMISSION MANAGEMENT OPTIONS THAT WE ALREADY HAD AND RECOGNIZING THAT THEY DON'T BY ANY MEANS COVER THE FULL RANGE OF OPTIONS. WE DISCUSSED THE EFFORTS OF OTAG AND OF THE GRAND CANYON VISIBILITY TRANSPORT COMMISSION AND LOOKED AT THE MATRIX POINT OF VIEW, HOW YOU MIGHT LOOK AT THE SOURCE CATEGORIES AND THE TYPES OF EMISSIONS AND WHERE THE GRAND CANYON LOOKED AT THE MAXIMUM AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES, AND THEN THEY HAD "" THEY LOOKED AT THE CAP AND TRADE PROGRAM, THE AIR QUALITY OBJECTIVES, AND THE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY SCENARIOS. OTAG HAS THREE DIFFERENT LEVELS THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT AND THE CLEAN AIR ACT AMENDMENTS. AND SO LOOKING AT WHAT WE'RE GETTING FROM OUR EMISSION INVENTORY REPORTS, WE'RE KIND OF HEADED IN THE DIRECTION NOW OF DOING SOME TYPE OF MATRIX THAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR SAMI. WE WILL NEED SOME CONTRACTOR ASSISTANCE AND THE COMMITTEE IS WORKING ON DEFINING WHAT SPECIFIC TASKS WE WOULD WANT TO CONTRACT FOR ASSISTANCE WITH AND WHAT WOULD THE SAMI COMMITTEE NEED TO BE COMMITTED TO WORK ON. AND SO THEY ARE MOVING FORWARD ON THAT. ALSO IN THE DISCUSSIONS, ON ONE PARTICULAR E.M.O., THE FUELS DIALOG WHERE WE DID A REPORT ALREADY ON ALTERNATIVE FUELS, IN THE S.E.P. IT CALLS FOR A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN THAT. IT CALLS FOR LOOKING AT INCENTIVES, SO WE ARE GOING TO BE REVITALIZING THE MINERAL SOURCES WORK GROUP, IF YOU WILL, AND HAVE BEEN TALKING WITH DUKE UNIVERSITY, SOMETHING STEVE LEVITAS INTRODUCED US TO, JOHN SIGMOND, WHO'S WITH DUKE UNIVERSITY. HE HAS SOME STUDENTS AND THEY'RE INTERESTED IN DOING SOMETHING, CLASS WORK, RELATED TO SAMI, AND WE THOUGHT THIS WOULD BE VERY APPROPRIATE TO HAVE THEM PURSUE THAT. ACTUALLY, THE GRADUATE STUDENT WHO DID THE INITIAL REPORT IS ONE OF THOSE STUDENTS. I DON'T KNOW IF HE'S GRADUATED YET OR IF HE'S GOT MORE TIME THERE. BUT IF IT'S EFFECTIVE "" THEY WOULD DO IT OVER THE SEMESTER AND BE ABLE TO PRESENT A REPORT TO US IN APRIL. AND IF IT'S EFFECTIVE AND WE WANT TO USE THEM FOR OTHER ACTIVITIES, WE CAN ASSIGN SPECIFIC INTERN'S JOBS LATER ON. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WE WILL REQUEST THAT THE PROFESSOR PUTS HIS NAME ON ANY PRODUCT THAT THEY GIVE TO US. WE'RE LOOKING AT A LOWDOLLAR AMOUNT. THEY MIGHT ASK US TO MATCH A FEW FUNDS, BUT IT WOULD BASICALLY BE FOR TRAVELING TO MEET WITH SOME OF THE SAMI PARTICIPANTS, SO JUST A COUPLE OR FEW THOUSAND DOLLARS, MAYBE. AND ALSO THIS IS NOT ON OUR CRITICAL PATH. THE TIME WE HAVE TO IMPLEMENT THIS PARTICULAR MANAGEMENT OPTION IS TWELVE MONTHS, SO WE'RE LOOKING AT A TIME FRAME THAT IF WE WERE NOT HAPPY WITH THE PRODUCT, IT REALLY WOULDN'T HAMPER OUR EFFORTS TO REVITALIZE IT AND TAKE IT IN WHATEVER DIRECTION WE FELT NECESSARY. SHEROL BREMEN WHO IS SITTING IN THE BACK HAS KINDLY VOLUNTEERED TO ASSIST US WITH DEVELOPING KIND OF A WORK PLAN. WE WANT TO PUT SOME BOUNDS ON THE GROUP, SOME PARAMETERS, BUT WE WANT TO ALLOW THEM FLEXIBILITY. SHE WAS IN A PROGRAM SIMILAR TO THIS AT CHAPEL HILL AND SO SHE HAS SOME EXPERIENCE THERE. SHE'S ALSO WITH A.P.I., SO SINCE THIS IS DEALING WITH FUELS, IT'S NICE TO HAVE THAT INPUT. FRED ELLIS WHO IS ON THE MOBILE SOURCES WORKING GROUP IS ALSO HELPING CRAFT THIS, AS ARE CINDY KEEVER WITH THE FOREST SERVICE AND JULIE CONDENS WITH THE PARK SERVICE. AND WE'RE LOOKING AT GETTING KIND OF THE WORK SCOPE OUT QUICKLY BECAUSE THE STUDENTS ARE GOING TO BE STARTING SCHOOL IN JANUARY AND THEN CRAFTING KIND OF ANOTHER MOBILE SOURCES WORKING GROUP WITH RESOURCE PEOPLE THAT THE STUDENTS CAN TAP INTO. SO WE ARE DOING SOME IMPLEMENTATION NOW TRYING TO PURSUE SOME THINGS. IS THERE SOMETHING ELSE I SHOULD ADD TO WHAT THE POLICY COMMITTEE IS UP TO? MR. CARR: I THINK THE HIGHLIGHT IS THAT THE POLICY COMMITTEE HAS BEEN MIRED IN THESE NINE SEPARATE E.M.O.'S FOR A YEAR AND A HALF AND HAVE BEEN SORTING "" TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO PROCEED WITH THESE THINGS THAT ARE APPLES AND ORANGES IN MANY CASES. WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS GET ABOVE THAT AND LOOK AT EMISSION CONDUCTION STRATEGIES FOR VARIOUS GROUPS LIKE NOX, WHATEVER. START WITH THE BIG PICTURE, DO AN OTAG TYPE OF MATRIX OR A GRAND CANYON TYPE MATRIX, AND THEN WHEN WE GET THAT ESTABLISHED THEN FILL BACK IN WHATEVER E.M.O.'S WE HAVE. AND WHERE WE DON'T HAVE STRATEGIES OR E.M.O.'S TO FILL IN THE MATRIX, WE WILL NEED TO DEVELOP THEM SO WE HAVE THE COMPLETE PICTURE. A MENU OF OPTIONS TO CHOOSE. MR. JANSEN: I GUESS I WOULD ADD ONE OTHER THING AND THAT IS THAT THERE HAS ALSO BEEN EXCHANGES WITH THE T.O.C. PROVIDING A GOOD DESCRIPTION THAT WE SAW HERE TODAY. AND THEN THERE WAS A GOOD EXCHANGE OF WHERE IS THIS ACT? WHAT DOES T.O.C. NEED FROM THE POLICY GROUP? WHAT DOES THE POLICY GROUP NEED FROM T.O.C.? AND I THINK THAT'S GOING TO HELP US FOCUS ON WHERE THOSE INTERCHANGES ARE. I PROPOSE A LITTLE BIT OF MY RESPONSIBILITY TO ASSUME THAT WITH TOM AND GIVE WHERE I SEE THOSE LINKAGES ARE. I THINK THAT COMMUNICATION IS GOING TO NOW START BECAUSE THERE ARE THINGS THAT THE POLICY COMMITTEE NEEDS TO START DOING IN ORDER FOR THE T.O.C. TO DO ITS JOB. THE MATRIX OF E.M.O.'S AND OPTIONS IS A GREAT PLACE TO START. MS. COX: ANY QUESTIONS? MR. SHAW: BEING NO QUESTIONS, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM. THE TECHNICAL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE? TOM? MR. ELMORE: YEAH. YOU'VE PROBABLY HEARD MORE THAN YOU CARE TO ABOUT T.O.C. ALREADY TODAY, BUT JUST TO CHECK THIS ONE OFF THE LIST, THERE ARE TWO THINGS I'D LIKE TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION. ONE IS "" ONE THING THAT I WAS GOING TO BRING UP UNDER THIS WAS TO GET YOUR EXPLICIT RECOGNITION THAT THERE WERE THESE SERIES OF EXPENDITURES THAT ARE ABOUT TO HAPPEN PROBABLY BEFORE YOU WILL MEET AGAIN, AND I BELIEVE I GOT THAT ALREADY IN YOUR MOTION AND ACTION THIS MORNING. THE OTHER THING THAT "" IN THIS STACK OF MATERIAL IS A COLLECTION OF SUMMARIES OF T.O.C. REPORTS. THE LUMINA REPORT HAPPENS TO BE THE FIRST ONE ON THE STACK, NOT TO SUGGEST THAT THIS IS ALL LUMINA REPORT. BUT THE ORIGINAL STACK IS ABOUT EIGHT INCHES HIGH AND WE ARE SAVING YOU SEVEN AND A HALF INCHES OF READING. IF YOU ARE ON THE PLANE ON THE WAY HOME, JUST FLIP THROUGH THESE AND KNOW THAT THERE'S MORE DETAIL WHERE THESE CAME FROM. WE'RE GOING TO BE TURNING THESE OVER TO LUCY FOR HER REVIEW AND TO SEE WHAT THE P.A.C. MIGHT WANT TO DO WITH THEM. AFTER YOU HAVE LOOKED THEM OVER, IF YOU WOULD PASS THEM ON TO YOUR TECHNICAL STAFF THAT MIGHT BE APPROPRIATE FOR EACH OF THESE SUMMARIES, WE CAN PUT THEM IN TOUCH WITH THE FULL DOCUMENT IF THEY WOULD LIKE THAT. THESE ARE ALL ON THE WHOLE REPORT. AND UNLESS THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS THAT'S IT.MR. SHAW: GREAT. NO QUESTIONS. SO NOW WE'VE GOT PLENTY OF TIME TO TAKE A BREAK. LET'S GO TO THE NEW NOMINEES. LESLIE, ARE YOU GOING TO HANDLE THAT? MR. COX: WELL, WE CAN ZIP THROUGH THIS ONE IN LESS THAN TEN MINUTES. I HAVE PRINTED OUT A CORRECTED SHEET, BUT YOU SAW BASICALLY MOST OF THE CHANGES. THERE'S JUST A SLIGHT MODIFICATION. IF YOU'LL GLANCE AT THE NAMES, THE PARKS SERVICES HAS NAMED SOME NEW PEOPLE. SOME PEOPLE HAVE LEFT THEIR POSITIONS AT A COMPANY AND WHOEVER TOOK THEIR POSITION HAS AGREED TO CONTINUE ON. WE'RE LOOKING FOR ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX PEOPLE TO BE CONFIRMED AS NEW MEMBERS. I WANTED TO POINT OUT WE HAVE TWO NEW GOVERNING BODY MEMBERS. RICHARD GRUSNICK, HIS POSITION CHANGED, SO HE'S GOING TO BE ON THE GOVERNING BODY. AND JERRY BELSON IS THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE. ALSO ON THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE NEW TO SAMI, DON BARGER IS TAKING OVER FOR BRIAN MORTON TO REPRESENT PUBLIC INTEREST ON THE DAILY ACTIVITIES OF SAMI AND RON GORE WILL BE FILLING THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE SPOT FOR ALABAMA. AND I JUST LISTED SOME OF THE OTHER PERIOD. THERE'S NO ACTION TO TAKE ON THE ONES WHO HAVE RESIGNED BECAUSE THEY'VE RESIGNED. AND DOWN AT THE BOTTOM IT SHOWS YOU WHAT VACANCIES STILL EXIST, IF THAT'S NOT TOO CONFUSING, BY COMMITTEE, AND IN SOME INSTANCES LIKE ON THE POLICY COMMITTEE, IT SPECIFIES WHETHER IT HAS TO BE A PUBLIC INTEREST REPRESENTATIVE FROM A STATE OR AN INDUSTRY REPRESENTATIVE FOR THAT COMMITTEE. WE HAVE CERTAIN CONSTRAINTS FOR GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC INTEREST AND INDUSTRY TO FILL THOSE POSITIONS. WE DID NOT SET THOSE LIMITATIONS ON THE P.A.C., AND AS LUCY GAVE HER PLUG EARLIER, IF YOU KNOW PEOPLE WHO ARE WILLING TO BE ACTIVE, SHE CAN USE THEM AND SHE DOES KEEP THEM BUSY. AND WE DO HAVE ONE VACANCY ON THE T.O.C. AND I KNOW DIANA'S BEEN WORKING ON THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE FOUND ANYBODY YET. SO BASICALLY, IF WE CAN JUST GET THOSE COMMITTEES APPROVED AND IF THOSE OF YOU WHO SEE VACANCIES FROM YOUR ORGANIZATION WILL CONTINUE TO WORK TO TRY AND FILL THEM, THAT WOULD BE EXCELLENT. MR. SHAW:Č OKAY. WE NEED TO VOTE ON THE FILLING OF THESE VACANCIES. I'LL ACCEPT A MOTION FROM A MEMBER OF THE GOVERNING BODY TO APPROVE. MR. LEVITAS: I'LL SECOND. MR. SHAW: GOT A MOTION ON IT. NEED A SECOND? MR. LEVITAS: SECOND. MR. SHAW: ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. GROUP: AYE. MR. SHAW: ALL OPPOSED? (NO RESPONSE.) MR. SHAW: THE FUTURE OPERATIONS OF SAMI? WINSTON, ARE YOU OR RON MR. METHIER: I CAN START IT OUT REAL QUICKLY. AS MOST OF YOU KNOW, LESLIE'S I.P.A. ASSIGNMENT, AND BY E.P.A. LAW OR RULE OR FEDERAL LAW OR RULE, CANNOT GO BEYOND FOUR YEARS WHICH ENDS NEXT SPRING, SO LESLIE WILL NO LONGER BE ABLE TO FUNCTION FOR SAMI AS SHE HAS DONE SO WELL OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS. JIM JOY AND I HAVE TALKED WITH WINSTON AND LINDA ABOUT WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE. WHAT WE HEARD WAS A COMMITMENT FROM REGION IV THAT THE WORK THAT LESLIE HAS DONE WILL CONTINUE IN SOME FORM BY SOMEBODY "" BY REGION IV. BUT I HAVEN'T TALKED TO YOU IN THE LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS, WINSTON, SO THIS IS WHY I'M PITCHING TO YOU ON HOW THINGS HAPPEN OR WHEN THOSE DECISIONS COULD POSSIBLY BE MADE, UNDERSTANDING THAT WE HAVE SEVERAL MORE MONTHS TO FIGURE THIS OUT. BUT WE NEED TO "" WANT TO HAVE IT AS SMOOTH A TRANSITION AS POSSIBLE. MR. WINSTON SMITH: I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS TO DEALING WITH THE CONTINUITY AND THAT SORT OF THING, AND IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO PICK A CERTAIN ONE RIGHT NOW. OBVIOUSLY, LESLIE LEGALLY CANNOT GO BEYOND FOUR YEARS. WE'VE RESEARCHED THAT AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT AND THAT'S AN ABSOLUTE CONDITION THERE IN THAT JOB. SHE WILL RETURN "" IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING E.P.A. REGION IV, SHE IS REQUIRED TO RETURN TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND HER ASSIGNMENT BACK AT E.P.A. IS UNDECIDED AT THIS POINT. AND IT WILL DEPEND SOMEWHAT ON HER AND SOMEWHAT ON REGION IV AS TO WHERE SHE'S REASSIGNED. BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S IN ANYBODY'S INTEREST TO ALLOW THE WORK COORDINATION AND THE OTHER WORK SHE'S DONE TO FALL THROUGH THE CRACKS SOMEWHERE, AND AS SOON AS THAT DATE IS DETERMINED WE CAN LOOK AT ALTERNATIVES OF HOW WE MIGHT DO THAT. BUT REALLY, A LOT OF ALTERNATIVES ARE "" SOME OF THE WORK COULD STILL BE DONE IN REGION IV. I THINK IT "" AND IT COULD BE DONE ANYWHERE. I THINK TO SOME DEGREE IT'S PROBABLY BETTER THAT IT BE DONE IN THE SAMI HEADQUARTERS JUST FOR THE INDEPENDENCE AND ORGANIZATION, THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT I THINK "" AND THERE'S ALWAYS THE POSSIBILITY OF ANOTHER I.P.A. AND SOMEBODY ELSE'S INTEREST IN I.P.A. WE HAVE NOT APPROACHED THAT RIGHT NOW TO ANYONE, IF THAT'S FEASIBLE. IT'S POSSIBLE "" I ASSUME "" I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY ALL THE STATE LAWS FOR THE STATES OR AGENCIES OR ORGANIZATIONS TO I.P.A. SOMEONE OR DETAIL SOMEONE OR THINGS LIKE THAT, SO "" I THINK AS SOON AS WE HAVE A DEFINITE TIME FRAME HERE AND WE KNOW WHAT THE SITUATION WILL BE LIKE IN REGION IV, THEN WE CAN WORK WITH SAMI AND ASSURE THE CONTINUITY IN ORGANIZATION. I THINK THAT'S WHAT PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT. IF WE'VE GOT A MECHANISM WE CAN WORK ON THAT LATER. WE FIND OUT WHO WOULD LIKE TO DO THIS WORK AND HOW IT MIGHT BE CONTINUED. BEYOND THAT IT'S HARD TO REALLY MAKE A COMMITMENT ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. MR. SHAW: I NEED TO ASK A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. IS E.P.A. NOW PAYING LESLIE'S SALARY OR IS SAMI PAYING LESLIE'S MS. COX: SAMI IS PAYING. UNIDENTIFIED: SAMI IS PAYING WHAT, A HUNDRED PERCENT? MS. COX: YES. A HUNDRED PERCENT. E.P.A. USUALLY PAYS IT AND THEN THEY BILL SAMI AND SAMI REIMBURSES. MR. SHAW: OKAY. BUT IT'S NOT A FIFTYFIFTY OR SEVENTYFIVE? SO SAMI'S A HUNDRED PERCENT PAYING HER? UNIDENTIFIED: A HUNDRED PERCENT, YEAH. SO THE MONEY SHOULD BE, I ASSUME, IF YOU'RE CONTINUING THE SAME BUDGETS, THEORETICALLY BE STILL AVAILABLE. MR. SHAW:Č AND THIS IS NOT TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT WITH SAMI BUT I WILL. AM I HEARING YOU SAY THAT YOU'RE NOT SURE THAT LESLIE COULD SPEND A HUNDRED PERCENT OF HER TIME "" IN OTHER WORDS, I DIDN'T HEAR YOU SAY THAT SHE CAN JUST DO HER JOB HERE IN ATLANTA. MR. WINSTON SMITH: I DON'T THINK SHE CAN JUST DO IT HERE IN ATLANTA. I THINK I'LL JUST BE TRANSFERRING THE SAME "" WELL, SHE WOULDN'T BE ON OUR "" YEAH, I DON'T THINK YOU'D WANT THAT. ESSENTIALLY, E.P.A. WOULD BE TAKING OVER THE COORDINATION ON SAMI AND WE'D BE RUNNING IT. THAT'S AS A FEDERAL EMPLOYEE. I THINK "" EXCEPT FOR A VERY SHORT TRANSITION TIME, I DON'T THINK THAT'S IN ANYBODY'S BEST INTEREST. IT'S BEST TO KEEP SAMI AS AN INDEPENDENT "" AS IT IS, YOU KNOW, NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION. I THINK "" WHAT I'M SAYING IS WE WOULDN'T LET THINGS FALL THROUGH THE CRACK AND NOTHING HAPPEN BECAUSE THERE WAS NOBODY TO DO THAT, BUT SOMEHOW STEP INTO IT UNTIL A PERMANENT CORRECTION CAN BE MADE. MR. SHAW: BUT YOUR EXPECTATION WOULD BE THAT AT SOME POINT IN TIME AFTER A REASONABLE TRANSITION IT WOULD BE SOMEBODY ELSE? MR. WINSTON SMITH: YEAH. I ACTUALLY THINK "" I RECOMMEND THAT WE REACH SOME SORT OF AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THAT WOULD BE SO THAT IF THERE IS GOING TO BE ANOTHER PERSON, FOR INSTANCE, INVOLVED, THAT THAT PERSON COME ON BOARD EVEN BEFORE LESLIE LEAVES AND THERE'S SOME OVERLAP THERE. THAT WOULD BE THE "" TO ME IT SEEMS LIKE AN IDEAL THING TO DO. MR. SHAW: WELL, PERSONALLY, I THINK WE NEED TO SIT DOWN WITH LESLIE AND TALK TO HER ABOUT HER CAREER GOALS AND UNDERSTAND WHAT SHE WOULD LIKE TO DO, AND THEN WE NEED TO "" THE GOVERNING BODY NEEDS TO COMMUNICATE WITH YOU ON WHAT THE POSSIBILITIES ARE AND THEN WE NEED TO LOOK AT OTHER ALTERNATIVES THAT MIGHT BE AVAILABLE TO US. AND I WILL MENTION, RULES BEING RULES AND LAWS AND LAWS AND WHATEVER, I'M AWARE OF ONE SITUATION WHERE E.C.O.S., ENVIRONMENTAL COMMISSION OF THE STATES, HAD AN I.P.A. FOR FOUR YEARS AND WE RECENTLY WENT TO MARY NICHOLS AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED BUT THE I.P.A. IS STILL GOING TO BE WITH US FOR ANOTHER TWO YEARS. SO I CAN "" I MAY BE MISINFORMED AS TO WHAT HAPPENED, BUT I'LL TRY TO FIND OUT THE DETAILS OF THAT. AND I REALIZE THAT WASHINGTON MAKES THE RULES. MAYBE THEY CAN BEND THE RULES. MR. WINSTON SMITH: I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT INSTANCE AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SITUATION WAS, BUT I KNOW THE INNER PERSONNEL AGREEMENT ACT IS A LAW OF CONGRESS AND THAT'S WHAT GOVERNS THE LENGTH OF TIME PEOPLE MAY BE ON IT, AND THAT'S ONE THING. THERE IS AN ABSOLUTE LIMITATION IN YOUR ENTIRE CAREER OF SIX YEARS ON I.P.A., BUT IT HAS TO BE SEPARATED BY A FAIRLY LONG PERIOD BETWEEN. I MEAN YOU'D HAVE TO GO MORE THAN ONE, OBVIOUSLY. MR. SHAW: WELL, I'LL TRY TO FIND OUT THE DETAILS, AND I MAY "" WHAT I THINK HAPPENED MAY NOT BE EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED. BUT I'LL MR. WINSTON SMITH: YEAH. MR. SHAW: AND IF THERE IS A CREATIVE WAY TO GET SIX YEARS IN I'LL GET BACK WITH YOU ALL AND WE'LL SHARE THAT INFORMATION.MS. ANDREWS: AND THERE'S NO WAY TO I.P.A. TO ANOTHER STATE AND THAT STATE THEN DO THE WORK OF SAMI? MR. WINSTON SMITH: YOU MEAN IF A PERSON "" WELL, THE WAY I UNDERSTAND THE LAW, AN INDIVIDUAL WHO WORKS FOR THE GOVERNMENT AND GOES ON I.P.A., THE MAXIMUM LENGTH OF AN ASSIGNMENT IS FOUR YEARS. THE MAXIMUM LENGTH OF ALL I.P.A. DURING A CAREER IS SIX YEARS. AND YOU CAN BE ON ANY NUMBER OF JOBS FOR SIX YEARS. AND IF YOU'RE ON ONE FOR FOUR YEARS IT'S THE MAXIMUM FOR ONE TIME AND YOU HAVE AT LEAST, I THINK, A ONEYEAR SEPARATION BETWEEN WHEN YOU'RE ON AN I.P.A. AND LIKE WE WENT THROUGH THIS ONCE BEFORE WITH ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL AND THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE LAW REQUIRES. MR. SHAW: AT ANY RATE, WE NEED TO DO A LITTLE MORE HOMEWORK ON THIS, BUT "" LESLIE? MS. COX: AND IF THIS DISCUSSION IS WINDING DOWN, ANOTHER FUTURE OPERATIONS WITH SAMI RELATED ISSUE IS TOM ELMORE'S CONTRACT IS COMING TO A CLOSE AS WELL, AND DOUG NEELEY COULD NOT BE HERE. BUT I KNOW WE'VE BEEN VERY HAPPY WITH HIS WORK AND WANT THINGS TO CONTINUE. INSTEAD OF TRYING TO MAKE THINGS TOO COMPLICATED, WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE GOVERNING BODY FOR APPROVAL TO DO IS TO EXTEND TOM ELMORE'S CONTRACT BY ONE MONTH WHICH WILL MAKE IT END, I THINK, MAY FIRST INSTEAD OF APRIL FIRST. THAT WILL CARRY US THROUGH THE SEMIANNUAL SAMI MEETING, AND WHEN DOUG GETS BACK OVER THE NEXT FEW MONTHS, WE CAN NEGOTIATE THE CONTRACT FOR THE NEXT YEAR AND BRING IT BEFORE YOUR ATTENTION WHEN YOU'RE ALREADY SCHEDULED TO HAVE A MEETING IN APRIL. SO JUST LEAVING EVERYTHING THE SAME, THE SAME RATE, JUST EXTENDING IT FOR ONE MONTH AND THEN NEGOTIATING WHAT IT MIGHT BE "" WHETHER OR NOT THERE WOULD BE ANY CHANGES TO IT FOR THE NEXT YEAR, AND THAT MIGHT LINK UP A LITTLE BIT MORE WITH THESE OTHER CHANGES THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH. WE'VE GOT TO MAKE THIS NEW TRANSITION. AND WE WON'T HAVE TO BOTHER YOU BY PHONE. MR. SHAW: OKAY. I THINK WE NEED A FORMAL VOTE ON THAT ISSUE, THE ISSUE BEING EXTENDING TOM'S CONTRACT AS IT IS FOR ONE MONTH, WHICH WOULD BE FROM MAY MR. LEVITAS: APRIL FIRST TO MAY FIRST. MR. SHAW: FROM APRIL FIRST TO MAY FIRST. DO I HAVE A MOTION FROM THE GOVERNING BODY TO DO THAT? MR. GRUSNICK: SO MOVE. MR. METHIER: I SECOND IT. MR. SHAW: OKAY. GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND. DO WE NEED ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY, LET'S VOTE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. GROUP: AYE. MR. SHAW: ALL OPPOSED? (NO RESPONSE.) MR. SHAW: MOTION CARRIES. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER BUSINESS ON THIS ITEM? WE'RE GOING ON TO THE MISCELLANEOUS NEW BUSINESS AND LESLIE WANTED TO MS. COX: YES. I HAVE TWO QUICK THINGS. WE'RE GOING TO GET OUT EARLY, ACTUALLY. I WANT TO JUST THROW SOME DATES OUT TO YOU. WE'RE STARTING TO FILL OUR CALENDAR. I AM GOING TO GET A NEWSLETTER OUT HOPEFULLY BY THE END OF THIS MONTH AND HOPEFULLY BEFORE CHRISTMAS, BUT I'M NOT PROMISING. WE HAVE OUR TECHNICAL CHAIRS' MEETING. SOME OF YOU HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ATTEND THAT. YOU'VE HEARD THE PRESENTATION THIS MORNING ON THE I.A.F. IF THE STATES WOULD LIKE TO COME AND HEAR MORE OF THE INTERACTIONS AND THE SPECIFICS, WE HIGHLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO COME TO THESE MEETINGS. WE'LL BE MEETING IN ASHEVILLE ON JANUARY SIXTH. OH, EXCUSE ME. I'M SORRY. JANUARY THE NINTH. WE WILL BE MEETING IN ATLANTA ON FEBRUARY 25TH FOR THE TECHNICAL CHAIRS' MEETING. ALSO IN ATLANTA THE DAY BEFORE ON FEBRUARY 24TH WILL BE A POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING. AND THEN WE WILL BE MEETING IN ASHEVILLE FOR THE TECHNICAL CHAIRS' MEETING MARCH 19TH. OUR SEMIANNUAL MEETING IS SET. IT'S GOING TO BE AT THE RADISSON DOWNTOWN IN ASHEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA, APRIL SEVENTH THROUGH THE NINTH. THE SEVENTH WE'RE GOING TO GO BASICALLY FROM ABOUT TEN TILL THREE, COMMITTEE WORK SESSIONS. THAT'S A MONDAY. ON THE NEXT DAY WE'LL HAVE THE MORNING TO WRAP UP COMMITTEE WORK SESSION. WE'LL DO THE LUNCHEON AGAIN, AND THAT AFTERNOON WILL BE OUR PLANARY SESSION. WE HOPE TO HAVE OUR CONTRACTORS REPORTING ON RESPONSE SURFACES AND ANY OTHER INFORMATION TO BE PRESENTED TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC AT THAT TIME. AND THE GOVERNING BODY SESSION WILL BE WEDNESDAY MORNING, THE NINTH. AND WE WILL BE FILLING IN THE CALENDAR WITH MORE MEETINGS AND MORE. WE'VE GOT A LIST OF CONFERENCE CALLS BACK IN THE OFFICE, IF YOU EVER WONDER WHAT'S GOING ON, AND WE DO A LOT OF CONFERENCE CALLS EVERY WEEK, SO WE ARE BUSILY WORKING. IF YOU FEEL LIKE SITTING IN ON ANY OF THEM, YOU ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO DO SO. I WOULD LIKE THIS GROUP TO BE THINKING AS WE GET TO APRIL, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO ONCE AGAIN PULL OUT YOUR CALENDARS SO THAT WE CAN SET THE NEXT MEETING DATE AND LOCATION BECAUSE IT DOES "" WE HAD A HARD TIME GETTING THIS ONE LOCKED IN AND FINDING A PLACE THAT COULD HANDLE US AND WE WERE RUNNING OUT OF TIME. THE MORE TIME WE HAVE TO PLAN IT, THE EASIER IT IS. ANY QUESTIONS ON THE MEETINGS? MR. MICHAELS:Č THAT 24TH AND 25TH OF FEBRUARY, WHICH GROUP WAS THAT? MS. COX: THE POLICY COMMITTEE IS GOING TO MEET ON THE 24TH AND THE TECHNICAL CHAIRS ARE GOING TO MEET ON THE 25TH. AGAIN, THAT TECHNICAL CHAIRS' MEETING IS THE EXCHANGE OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE "" PRIMARILY OF THE SUBCOMMITTEES TALKING ABOUT THEIR NEEDS AND THEY TALK ABOUT THE R.F.P.'S THAT ARE COMING DOWN THE PIPE. MR. MICHAELS: I PRESUME THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET A LOOK AT THAT ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCE PROPOSAL, THE RANK AND FILE? MS. COX: YOU'RE COMING TO THE ATLANTA MEETING THIS WEEK? MR. MICHAELS: YES. YES. MS. COX: YEAH. MR. MICHAELS: ARE WE GOING TO HAVE A MEETING "" SEEING AS THAT IS SUCH AN IMPORTANT MODULE OR COMPONENT OF THIS MODULE, ARE WE GOING TO HAVE A MEETING OF THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE?MS. COX: THAT'S WHO'S "" THE TECHNICAL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE IS SCHEDULED TO MEET ON "" IS IT TOMORROW? UNIDENTIFIED: TOMORROW AFTERNOON. MR. MICHAELS: RIGHT. BUT NO, TO REVIEW THAT PARTICULAR PROPOSAL. MS. COX: THAT'S IT. MR. SHAW:  "" EPISODE SELECTION CONTRACT PRODUCT. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? MR. MICHAELS: NO. THE EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLAR ONE. MS. COX: THE EIGHT HUNDRED THOUSAND MR. SHAW: OH, YEAH. IT'S "" YEAH, IT WILL BE REVIEWED AT THE TECHNICAL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE MEETING TOMORROW AND MR. MICHAELS: THAT ONE YOU DO HAVE A PROPOSAL ALREADY? MR. SHAW:Č YES. MS. COX: THE R.F.P. R.F.P. MR. ELMORE: OH, THE R.F.P. THE REQUESTS FOR PROPOSALS WILL HIT THE STREET IF THINGS GO REALLYWELL ON MONDAY AND THEN IT WILL BE ABOUT MONTH LATER "" I THINK IT'S JANUARY 23RD WE'LL HAVE THE PROPOSALS IN. AND THEN THERE WILL BE A SELECTION PROCESS THAT COULD TAKE SEVERAL WEEKS AND THERE WILL BE A CONTRACT WRITTEN AT THAT POINT, SO MR. MICHAELS: HAVE YOU FORMALIZED THE SELECTION PROCESS FOR A PROPOSAL OF THAT MAGNITUDE YET? MR. ELMORE: THE PROCESS THAT WE HAVE LAID OUT FOR ALL T.O.C. WORK IS THAT THE SUBCOMMITTEE IN CHARGE DOES THE REVIEW OF PROPOSALS, RECOMMENDS TO THE T.O.C. THE T.O.C. MAKES THE DECISION ON WHICH CONTRACTOR TO SELECT. STAFF NEGOTIATES THE CONTRACT WITH THE OVERSIGHT OF THAT SUBCOMMITTEE. THE CHAIRMAN OF THE GOVERNING BODY SIGNS THE CONTRACT. MR. MICHAELS:Č IS THERE ANYTHING IN "" THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT POINT BECAUSE I AM VERY, VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT EIGHTHUNDREDTHOUSANDDOLLAR MODULE. IS THERE ANYTHING IN THE SAMI RULES AND BYLAWS THAT MIGHT SAY THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO LET A CONTRACT, SAY, FOR MORE THAN FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS THAT THE TECHNICAL "" THE PROPOSERS OR THE FINAL PROPOSERS, LET'S SAY, WHEN YOU GET IT DOWN TO THE FINAL THREE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, DEFEND THEIR PROPOSALS IN FRONT OF THE COMMITTEE AND HAVE FACETOFACE QUESTIONS? MS. COX: IN THE PAST, LIKE WHEN WE DID THE LUMINA CONTRACT, WE DID HAVE "" WE NARROWED IT DOWN TO THREE "" MR. MICHAELS: I REMEMBER THAT. MS. COX: "" AND WE HAD THEM COME AND PRESENT. IN THE EPISODE SELECTION CONTRACT THAT WAS RECENTLY LET, I DON'T THINK THERE WAS AS MUCH MR. MICHAELS: THAT'S NOT THAT LONG. MS. COX:Č WELL, IT WASN'T AS LARGE, BUT IT ALSO WASN'T CLOSE. IF ONE OF THEM CLEARLY SHINES ABOVE THE REST, THEN IT WOULDN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT WE NEED TO HAVE OTHERS COME AND PRESENT. BUT WE ALSO DO HAVE A PROVISION THAT THE GOVERNING BODY HAS TO APPROVE CONTRACTS OF THAT MAGNITUDE. IT MUST BE DELEGATED TO MR. MICHAELS: THAT PROPOSAL WAS NOT SENT TO EVERY MEMBER OF THE TECHNICAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE. MS. COX: WE DON'T DO THAT THROUGH THE DRAFTING PROCESS. WE USE THE EXPERTISE OF THE PEOPLE ON THE MODELING SUBCOMMITTEE TO PUT THAT TOGETHER AND THEN WE PRESENT IT TO THE TECHNICAL OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE WHICH IS TOMORROW. WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT YET. ONCE WE PRESENT IT TO THE T.O.C., THEY MAKE THE FINAL DECISION. AND IF THEY APPROVE IT THEN THE R.F.P. WILL GO OUT AND WE WILL RECEIVE THE PROPOSALS. WE USE THE MODELING "" FOR A MODELING CONTRACT WE WOULD USE THE MODELING SUBCOMMITTEE TO BE THE ONES WHO REVIEW THE PROPOSALS BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONES WHO CAN UNDERSTAND THE LINGO. MR. MICHAELS:Č BUT YOU ALREADY APPROVED THE EVENT SELECTION PROPOSAL? MS. COX: THE EVENT SELECTION? YES. THAT WAS DONE THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS. MR. ELMORE: LET ME DESCRIBE THE PROCESS AND, YOU KNOW, WE WELCOME YOUR REVIEW OF THIS, BUT THE "" OH, LAST SUMMER, I GUESS IT WAS, THE TRADITION WAS THAT THE T.O.C. WOULD BE QUARTERLY, AND WITH THE I.A.F. HEATING UP THE WAY IT WAS, THAT DIDN'T APPEAR TO BE FREQUENT ENOUGH. WE GOT SOME FEEDBACK FROM VARIOUS FOLKS WHO WE THOUGHT MIGHT HAVE AN OPINION, AND THE CONCLUSION WAS THAT MONTHLY MEETINGS OF THE T.O.C. WOULD FIZZLE JUST BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A HUGE DEMAND ON TRAVEL. SO WHAT WE SET UP AS AN ALTERNATIVE IS THAT EVERY MONTH THE CHAIRS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEES ASSEMBLE USUALLY IN ASHEVILLE AND TO DEAL WITH ISSUES AND FRAME ISSUES REALLY FOR THE T.O.C. AS A WHOLE, WHICH MEETS ON A CALL, USUALLY A FEW DAYS LATER. AND THEN EVERY THIRD MONTH, ONCE A QUARTER, THE FULL T.O.C. MEETS FACETOFACE AND THAT'S WHAT HAPPENS TOMORROW. SO THE PROCEDURE HAS BEEN THAT THE PROPOSAL SCREENING HAS BEEN DONE AND IS ENVISIONED TO BE DONE BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE WITH THE LEAD. IF IT'S EPISODE SELECTION, IT'S THE MODELING SUBCOMMITTEE. IF IT'S EMISSIONS INVENTORY, EMISSIONS INVENTORY TAKES THE LEAD THERE. AND THEY OVERSEE STAFF NEGOTIATING THE CONTRACTS AND THEN THE CONTRACT IS FAXED OUT OR WHATEVER. IF IT GOES TO THE FULL T.O.C., NOTHING HAPPENS UNTIL THE T.O.C. ACTS, EITHER FACETOFACE IN ONE OF THOSE QUARTERLY MEETINGS OR IN REVIEWING AND ENDORSING THE DECISIONS MADE BY THE CHAIRS AT THEIR FACETOFACE MEETING EVERY MONTH. SO THAT'S THE PROCESS WE'RE USING NOW. THERE REALLY IS NO INTENT TO RAILROAD ANYTHING OR KEEP ANY INFORMATION HIDDEN. WE'RE ACTUALLY TRYING TO PROMOTE AS FREE A FLOW OF INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE. MR. MICHAELS: SO THE EPISODE SELECTION PROPOSAL REALLY HAS NOT BEEN FINALLY APPROVED? MS. COX: THAT'S TOMORROW. MR. MICHAELS: THAT WOULD BE TOMORROW? MR. LEVITAS:Č NO. THAT CONTRACT IS SIGNED. IT'S ON THE WAY. MS. COX: OH, THE EPISODE SELECTION. MR. MICHAELS: WHEN WAS THAT PRESENTED TO THE T.O.C. FULL BODY? MR. LEVITAS: IT WAS ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO. IT WAS ON A CALL. MR. MICHAELS: SO IT WASN'T A FULL MEETING OF THE T.O.C., THEN? MR. LEVITAS: RIGHT. THE MATERIALS ARE FAXED OUT, SO EVERYONE ON THE CALL HAS ALL THE MATERIALS AS IF THEY WERE FACETOFACE AND WE AVOID THE TRAVEL. AND AN AGENDA IS PRESENTED AND APPROVAL OF THAT CONTRACT IS BROUGHT UP. IT'S DISCUSSED, ANY CHANGES MADE ARE MADE, AND APPROVAL TAKES PLACE. MR. ARTHUR SMITH: IS PAT NOT BEING MADE AWARE OF OUR WORKING CONFERENCE CALLS? MR. MICHAELS: AND I CERTAINLY COULD HAVE MISSED IT. MS. COX:Č PAT, ANOTHER THING THAT WE HAVE JUST RECENTLY STARTED IS KIND OF A MARATHON CALL FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEES. EVERY TUESDAY FROM TEN UNTIL ONE THE SUBCOMMITTEES HAVE A CONFERENCE CALL. FIRST THE EMISSIONS INVENTORY BEEPS IN AT TEN O'CLOCK. THEY GET OFF AT ELEVEN. YOU GET BEEPED KIND OF AROUND THAT TIME AS THE MODELING PEOPLE ARE GETTING ON FOR THEIR ELEVEN TO TWELVE SLOT. AND THEY'VE GOT THAT SET TIME TO TALK ABOUT THINGS. AND AS THEY'RE WINDING DOWN, THE EFFECTS PEOPLE BEEP ON. SO IF YOU'RE NOT AWARE OF THOSE CALLS, WE CAN MAKE YOU AWARE OF THOSE. THEY TALK ABOUT THE SPECIFICS AND THEN ONCE A MONTH THE T.O.C. IS HAVING THAT CONFERENCE CALL. THE T.O.C. IS MAKING THE FINAL DECISION. SOMETIMES IT'S BY CONFERENCE CALL AND SOMETIMES IT'S BY A MEETING. IT DEPENDS ON THE TIMING OF WHEN YOU NEED THE DECISION WHETHER EVERYONE COMES TO A MEETING OR NOT AND, AGAIN, THE TRAVEL IS A DEMAND ON A LOT OF PEOPLE, SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE TRYING TO USE CONFERENCE CALLS. MR. MICHAELS: IF I COULD AND NOT TAKE UP ANY MORE TIME. IF THERE'S ANYBODY HERE THAT HAS A COPY OF THAT PROPOSAL, I'D LIKE TO READ IT ON THE PLANE TO ATLANTA THIS EVENING. DID YOU HAVE A COPY OF THAT? MR. LEVITAS: THE EPISODE SELECTION CONTRACT AND SO FORTH AND THAT SORT OF THING? YEAH, WE CAN PROBABLY GET YOU ONE IN ATLANTA. MR. MICHAELS: NO, YOU DON'T "" NOBODY'S CARRYING ONE WITH THEM? MR. SHAW: OKAY. CAN I TRUST YOU TO BE AT THE MEETING TOMORROW? MS. COX: THE LAST ITEM, IF NOBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT MEETINGS, I INCLUDED IN THE PACKET SOMETHING THAT I'M SENDING OUT ON BEHALF OF E.P.A. THEY WERE VERY HELPFUL IN GRAPHING THE INFORMATION FOR ME TO SEND OUT TO YOU. I JUST DID IT IN MEMORANDUM FORM SO THAT I COULD SEND IT OUT TO ALL PARTICIPANTS. THEY HAVE SELECTED US TO BE THEIR ACCOUNTABILITY MONITORING PILOT PROJECT FOR '97 AND '98 AND WHAT THEY'RE MS. COX: THIS IS GOING TO AFFECT HOW GRANTS ARE ISSUED IN THE FUTURE, AND WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS TIE PRODUCT TO PROJECTS LIKE SAMI. SAMI IS "" IT'S GOOD THAT SAMI IS PART OF IT BECAUSE SAMI IS UNIQUE IN THAT WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF TANGIBLE PRODUCT. AND SO WE CAN HAVE SOME INFLUENCE IN HOW THINGS MOVE IN THE FUTURE AND HOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE USING THIS. AND LINDA ANDERSONCARNAHAN IS HERE AND SHE COULD PROBABLY TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT IT. BUT WHAT I'VE INCLUDED IS WHAT THE PERFORMANCE PLAN FOR SAMI IS AND ALSO JUST A SIMPLE TRACKING MECHANISM. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TRACK THINGS QUARTERLY. WE'LL WANT TO KEEP TABS ON INKIND CONTRIBUTIONS AND YOU CAN FORWARD COMMENTS TO ME IF THE FORM IS NOT USEFUL. WE'RE JUST TRYING TO KEEP IT REAL SIMPLE. LINDA, DID YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD? MS. ANDERSONCARNAHAN: NO. JUST THAT MOST OF THE REPORTING ON THIS WILL BE E.P.A.'S ROLE. BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT ONE OF THE OUTPUTS IS TO SORT OF ENHANCE STATE HOLDER PARTICIPATION IN SAMI, IT WOULD HELP US IF YOU COULD SORT OF TELL US ABOUT THE INKIND RESOURCES, NUMBER OF MEETINGS ATTENDED, THAT SORT OF THING. AND AS LESLIE SAID, ULTIMATELY, THE GOAL FOR E.P.A. AND OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES IS TO TIE BUDGET TO OUTPUTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL INDICATORS ULTIMATELY. SO IT'S AN IMPORTANT PROCESS AND IT'S A CHANCE FOR US TO HAVE OUR INPUT SO THAT WE DON'T COME UP WITH SOMETHING A COUPLE OF YEARS DOWN THE ROAD. MR. JOY: AND IN F.Y. '99 ALL E.P.A. GRANTS. MS. COX: I JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE YOU AN ADVANCE COPY. I'M MAILING IT TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THIS LIST THAT ARE NOT HERE. DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION, LEWIS? MR. SHAW: NO. I JUST WANTED TO WRAP IT UP. I'M GOING TO TAKE PREROGATIVE OF THE CHAIR A SECOND AND RECOGNIZE STEVE LEVITAS, GIVE HIM THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY A FEW WORDS TO THE GOVERNING BODY. MR. LEVITAS: THANK YOU, LEWIS. AS MANY OF YOU MAY KNOW, THIS WILL BE MY LAST GOVERNING BODY MEETING. I'M LEAVING MY POST AS DEPUTY SECRETARY OF D.E.H.N.R. AT THE END OF THIS MONTH TO RETURN TO PRIVATE BAR PRACTICE. I'LL BE JOINING THE FIRM OF BROOKS, PIERCE, McCLENDON, HUMPHREY AND LEONARD IN RALEIGH AND WILL BE EASY TO FIND. I AM VERY GRATIFIED TO "" WELL, FIRST OF ALL, TO HAVE BEEN A PART OF SAMI, SINCE THE CREATION, BUT FOR THE LAST FOUR YEARS AS A MEMBER OF THIS GOVERNING BODY, AND REALLY FEEL THAT THINGS ARE MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. THIS IS A GREAT MEETING AND THE REPORTS, I THINK, ARE VERY ENCOURAGING, AND SO I AM GLAD TO BE TAKING MY SWAN SONG UNDER SUCH ENCOURAGING CIRCUMSTANCES. THERE IS THE SMALL MATTER OF ADDITIONAL FUNDS THAT YOUR ORGANIZATION NEEDS TO COMPLETE ITS WORK, AND I HAVE ENOUGH OF A VESTED INTEREST IN THIS THAT I HOPE THAT I CAN HELP YOU OVER THE NEXT FEW MONTHS IN SOME FASHION TO TRY TO SECURE THOSE FUNDS AND GET ON WITH THE WORK. BEYOND THAT, I'LL CERTAINLY LOOK FOR WAYS TO REMAIN A MEMBER OF THE SAMI FAMILY. I'VE REALLY ENJOYED THE TIME WITH ALL OF YOU. I, AS YOU KNOW, THINK THIS IS EXACTLY THE RIGHT WAY TO GO ABOUT TRYING TO SOLVE ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS AND I THINK IT SPEAKS A LOT ABOUT PROGRESS, I GUESS, THAT WE'VE MADE IN THIS COUNTRY IN TRYING TO DEAL WITH THESE ISSUES, THAT SO MANY PEOPLE HAVE PUT SO MUCH OF AN EFFORT ON A VOLUNTARY BASIS INTO THIS PROJECT. AND I'M CONFIDENT THAT IT WILL YIELD GREAT BENEFITS OVER THE LONG TERM. I DO WANT TO SAY THAT "" THERE ARE VARIOUS ACCOUNTS RELATED TO MY DEPARTURE THAT SHOULD NOT BE BELIEVED. SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE SEEN THIS FROM THE CHARLOTTE OBSERVER. DAVID CARR SHARED IT WITH ME. THIS IS A PICTURE OF ME AND NEXT TO IT SAYS, "SPORTS BETTING. NINE PEOPLE ARE CHARGED WITH RUNNING AN ILLEGAL GAMBLING OPERATION." AND I ASSUME THAT REALLY HAPPENED. IT'S TRUE THAT IT HAPPENED. THIS IS NOT A MOCKUP. THIS WAS A REAL CHARLOTTE OBSERVER. THEY DESCRIBED THIS AS THE GREATEST MISTAKE THAT THEY HAD MADE IN THE HISTORY OF THE PAPER. BUT I NOTICED IN THE SAME ISSUE THAT THEY DID THIS NOT JUST ONCE. THEY DID HAVE SOME EDITIONS OF THE PAPER THAT HAD THE STORY RIGHT, "THE ENERGY SECRETARY RESIGNS." BUT THERE WERE OTHER EDITIONS THAT SAID "" WELL, HAD MY PICTURE AND SAID, "FIRING UPHELD. PRISON GUARD WHO SLEEPS ON JOB." WE'VE HAD A GOOD TIME WITH THIS. ANYWAY, THANKS TO ALL OF YOU AND I HOPE TO HAVE OPPORTUNITIES TO SEE YOU AND WORK WITH YOU IN THE FUTURE. MR. SHAW:Č WELL, STEVE, I WANT TO SAY ON BEHALF OF THE GOVERNING BODY THAT CERTAINLY YOU WERE INSTRUMENTAL IN THIS ORGANIZATION BECOMING A REALITY AND YOU HAVE CERTAINLY PROVIDED LEADERSHIP TO THIS GROUP OVER THE YEARS, AND IT WOULD NOT BE WHERE WE ARE TODAY WITHOUT THAT AND WE'RE GOING TO MISS YOU. I DID NOTE THAT NORTH CAROLINA HAS GOT A PUBLIC INTEREST VACANCY. YOU MIGHT WANT TO APPOINT YOURSELF AS A FINAL ACT. MS. CABOTSMETHURST: YOU CAN COME ON MY COMMITTEE, STEVE. MR. SHAW: AND WE WILL CALL ON YOU FOR HELP IN WHATEVER NEW CAPACITY YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO HELP US IN. AND I KNOW YOU'RE NOT GOING TO MISS BEING IN THE NEWS FROM TIME TO TIME, RIGHT OR WRONG, BUT WE DO SINCERELY APPRECIATE ALL OF YOUR EFFORTS, AND LET'S GIVE HIM A HAND. MR. SHAW: IF THERE'S NOT ANY MORE BUSINESS, WE WILL ADJOURN. SO ENDETH.  STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) ) C E R T I F I C A T E COUNTY OF GREENVILLE )   I, SANDRA S. WILLIAMS, CCRCVRCM, A NOTARY PUBLIC FOR THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINAATLARGE, DO HEREBY CERTIFY: THAT ON THE 11TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 1997, THE SAMI MEETING WAS HELD WITH MR. LEWIS SHAW AS THE CHAIRMAN AT THE FOREGOING PLACE FOR THE SOUTHERN APPALACHIAN MOUNTAINS INITIATIVE, GOVERNING BODY/OPERATIONS COMMITTEE MEETING; COMMENCING AT THE HOUR OF 10:00 O'CLOCK A.M. THAT THE APPEARANCES WERE AS STATED PREVIOUSLY; THAT THE SPEAKERS WERE NOT SWORN; THAT THE FOREGOING PROCEEDINGS WERE TAKEN BY ME VIA STENOMASK AND THEREAFTER REDUCED TO TYPEWRITING UNDER MY SUPERVISION AND THE TWO HUNDRED FOURTEEN (214) PAGES CONSTITUTE A FULL, TRUE AND EXACT TRANSCRIPTION OF THE PROCEEDINGS, THAT I AM NOT OF KIN OR IN ANY WAY ASSOCIATED WITH ANY OF THE PARTIES TO SAID CAUSE, OR COUNSEL, AND THAT I AM NOT INTERESTED IN EVENT THEREOF. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I HAVE HEREUNTO SET MY HAND AND SEAL THIS 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 1997.   hh#   hh#SANDRA S. WILLIAMS, CCRCVRCM  hh#NOTARY PUBLIC FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA  hh#COMMISSION EXPIRATION: 6/6/2005(#(#K