Laserfiche WebLink
RMEEM44g] <br />BOOK .55 FACLE' 8 <br />Intervener White argued that they did not make a full <br />representation, and Mr. Aiello was not sure if they meant <br />that Fall or the following Fall, but contended that the <br />intent at the time is exactly as they stated - the purchase <br />of an additional plant to coincide with the one that existed <br />to meet the build -out needs of The Moorings at that time. <br />He continued that they did not get the plant in Jackson- <br />ville, which was a 100,000 gpd plant. <br />Attorney Micale asked Mr. Aiello to clarify his <br />position at the time of the hearing for acquisition of the <br />franchise in relation to the conditions that existed then <br />and the conditions that existed after the acquisition of the <br />franchise. <br />Mr. Aiello was confused with the statements made re the <br />$100,000 and wished to clarify that the September agreement <br />stated that as soon as they had received $100,000 in tap -in <br />fees, they would begin to build the plant - not that the <br />plant expansion would cost $100,000. <br />Chairman Scurlock noted that the dialogue which <br />suggested they were looking at total build -out anticipated <br />the purchase of a 100,000 gpd plant, and he assumed that <br />that was based on the existing 160,000 gpd plants being <br />utilized. <br />Mr. Aiello agreed, but noted it was based on a totally <br />different design done by a partner who is now deceased. <br />Chairman Scurlock asked if there was ever any <br />management decision not to effectively maintain the 60,000 <br />gpd plant based on the fact that they were going to move the <br />plant. <br />Mr. Aiello stated that they have always properly <br />maintained that plant; it was an integral part of the <br />design. <br />Commissioner Lyons asked if conditions have changed <br />with the DER as to what plant they would keep or not keep. <br />41 <br />