Every question OSU says a community should ask. Our answer to each one.

The planning areas are North (560 acres, the proposed power plant site), East (400), West (305) and South (470). Each campus would hold multiple buildings. Three sites are in hand. East is City-owned industrial park land in which Plainsmen has expressed acquisition interest; it is not secured. These are campus areas, not approved building footprints. Parcel control, legal descriptions and buildable acreage will be documented with each IUA submission.

The illustrative sequence is partial capacity at all four campuses first, then South and North to full capacity, then West and East. The phase count and dates are not fixed; they will depend on the operator, its customers, equipment deliveries and infrastructure. What is fixed is the trigger: initial Intensive Use approval will not approve later phases, and the operator will carry the burden of a new IUA submission each time.

Up to 2.75 GW of computing capacity and up to 3.3 GW of on-site generation are the project's planning ceilings. The capacity approved in the IUA will become the enforceable maximum for each phase, and anything above it will go back through review. Campus acreage does not establish a right to build to those ceilings.

Expansion cannot proceed administratively. The notice and submission requirements will be confirmed for each application, and Plainsmen proposes that the operator publish each proposed change and its supporting studies before the relevant review.

Plainsmen's development agreement will be recorded at the county so that setbacks, noise limits, the neighbor program and the other protections bind any future owner or tenant. It will address successor assumption, continued reporting, funding and financial assurance. §11-8C-4(F) separately allows the City to require updated IUA terms on an ownership or lease change, and the operator will accept that term. Recording an agreement does not settle every transfer question on its own; the final documents will define who is bound, who enforces and how obligations survive a transfer.

Denser computing can raise power and water use without a new building. Plainsmen proposes that the IUA define what counts as a material change, including equipment substitutions and denser computing, so that an increase requiring review cannot be treated as routine maintenance.

§11-8C-7 bars any structure or substation within 500 feet of an abutting residential-zoned property line and requires lighting to be directed downward or shielded; §11-8C-4(D) requires landscaping at 80 percent opacity to buffer abutting residential property and screening of mechanical equipment and generators, with berms or walls up to nine feet as permitted methods. The noise and vibration limits are in the backup and air topic. The ordinance's test is residential zoning at the boundary, not every house. Plainsmen's proposed commitment goes further: no building within 500 feet of a home on any of the four campuses, including South, which sits outside city limits where the ordinance does not reach.

The approved plans and the IUA will make the boundary clear, including the difference between day-to-day operating variation within a limit and a proposed increase in approved demand or land.

The operator's IUA submission will propose daily and annual water quantities, peak MW and annual energy, building floor area and impervious area, and the number and ratings of backup generators. Water and peak-electric limits are provided for by the ordinance; the others are proposed project conditions. All would become binding through the IUA and the applicable permits.

The documents will identify metering points, units and reporting periods for each limit, and will state which limits are instantaneous peaks, daily totals and annual totals. Transfers of demand between campuses or related entities will not be allowed to defeat an agreed combined limit. Each new phase will be assessed against what is already operating plus the additional demand proposed.

Plainsmen proposes a fixed sequence: notice to the City within a set time, investigation, a corrective-action deadline, curtailment of commercial load if the deadline is missed, escalating consequences for repeat exceedances, and no new phase while a material breach is unresolved. Any curtailment step will protect Vance backup power and national-security compute while commercial load is reduced. The City will enforce local approvals and the IUA, the utility its service terms, and ODEQ its permits. Where the City retains discretion, the reporting and escalation deadlines will still be fixed.

The assessment will cover the four campuses and the power plant together, alongside existing industrial users and any other data center proposals known at the time. The ordinance lets the City hire its own outside consultants to test that work and invoice the operator. Publication, with any security or confidential-business redactions identified and explained, will be a term Plainsmen writes into the development agreement.

That means existing commitments and foreseeable demand from other users, drought and extreme temperatures, reservoir allocations, wastewater plant capacity, transmission constraints and plant outages. The broader water and power scope will be set in the IUA review requirements.

Expansion applications will use updated cumulative information. The utility and ODEQ keep their own service and permitting authority regardless of what the City decides. Plainsmen proposes tying the release of each phase to demonstrated resource availability and compliance with existing conditions.

These are design inputs, not approved limits. Opening-phase volumes will depend on the first phase and equipment the operator selects. The final water balance in the IUA submission will separately identify withdrawal from Kaw Lake, consumption (evaporation and treatment losses) and discharge to the sewer; the 562-million-gallon figure is the modeled annual requirement and should not be read as a verified gross intake or wastewater volume until that reconciliation is published. There is no "after expansion" figure: use above the approved limit will require a new review, and a change in the power configuration would require updated water figures.

Makeup is needed for leaks, maintenance, fluid replacement, treatment blowdown and sanitary use, plus the limited evaporative inlet cooling the turbines would use on the hottest hours of the year. The plan draws raw water from the lake into storage at North, where a project-owned treatment facility would condition it to the specification the cooling loops require before it is delivered to each campus through the backbone. Fill and refill volumes, frequency, water chemistry and process losses will be stated in the management and operations plan the ordinance requires in the IUA submission. Recirculating volume is not the same as water newly withdrawn.

The IUA submission will show the relationship between IT load, weather and makeup demand for the chosen design so the City can see it before setting the cap. Denser computing will not create permission to exceed approved resource limits.

OSU defines WUE as annual water use in liters divided by IT equipment energy in kWh. The combined campus-and-power-plant estimate cannot be presented as a data-center WUE without separating the water uses and stating the measurement boundary. Plainsmen proposes that the operator report design and measured WUE by campus, with the power plant's water use reported separately.

On a 7.3 MGD day, a 2 MGD supply leaves a 5.3 MGD gap, so 31.8 million gallons covers about six consecutive hottest-case days before allowing for a protected fire reserve, treatment losses or minimum operating storage. The 2 MGD figure is the base supply rate used in the engineering model; the modeled annual average draw is 1.54 MGD, and the two are reconciled through storage and scheduling rather than by drawing 2 MGD every day of the year. The operating plan in the IUA submission will reconcile supply scheduling, consumption, discharge and storage, and will separate usable process storage from protected reserves. Neither figure is a withdrawal commitment or permit limit. Storage sized for hot days is not a drought plan, which is addressed below.

The project would treat that raw water itself, at its own facility on the North campus, to the quality the cooling loops require. The only City water the project would use is for ordinary building needs such as restrooms and drinking fountains. Using raw water ahead of the City's drinking-water treatment does not make it an unlimited or separate resource: Kaw Lake and the pipeline serve other users, and allocation, supply contracts and drought rules still apply.

Compliance with City or utility curtailment orders during drought is an agreement term the ordinance provides for, and Plainsmen will write it into the development agreement so the operator will inherit it. The plan will set supply triggers, notice, reductions, operating limits and restoration of service, agreed with the City, the water provider and other authorities under applicable allocations and law. Vance Air Force Base is the distinction: the proposed backup supply for the base, and any compute load dedicated to national-security missions, may be treated as critical service and prioritized ahead of commercial load. Which loads qualify will be settled with the City, the utility and the federal parties involved; it will require separate authorization and will not be an automatic exemption.

The IUA and the supply arrangements will define the availability tests and the conditions under which a phase would be withheld. The ordinance requires each phase to be reviewed; the project-specific triggers and automatic actions still have to be adopted.

Fire-flow, duration, source reliability and refill requirements will be established with the fire and water authorities in the IUA submission. A protected fire reserve will be kept separate from usable process storage so the same gallons are not counted twice in hot-weather or emergency calculations.

Plainsmen will write the surcharge into its agreement with the City, and the operator will pay it. The rate, the definition of consumption, approved uses, the administrator and the audit will be agreed and recorded, with results published each year by an outside firm. The fund would support restoration; it would not by itself replace water consumed gallon for gallon.

Turbine inlet cooling is a separate, limited hot-weather use. Liquid cooling does not necessarily mean immersion in dielectric fluid; the equipment and its coolant chemistry will be the operator's choice. The IUA submission will identify the equipment, every fluid and additive (glycols, corrosion inhibitors, biocides, cleaning agents), quantities, safety data sheets and containment. Water-cooled computer loops still reject heat to the air, so final equipment selection will determine water use, noise and hot-weather performance.

The source assessment and the operator's equipment specifications will set the panel, sampling locations, frequency and operating limits. Expect pH, hardness, dissolved solids, conductivity, alkalinity, chlorides, sulfates, silica, nutrients and temperature, with PFAS and other contaminants evaluated where relevant to the source or the treatment train. The plan will name the laboratories, corrective actions and who is responsible.

Availability, existing rights and customer commitments, piping, treatment requirements, waste streams and energy use will be compared in the IUA submission. Enid already sells its treated effluent for industrial reuse; that existing arrangement is not a reclaimed-water contract for Thunderbird.

The agreement will require City approval for material changes to heat-rejection technology, with updated water and noise assessments, rather than treating them as routine equipment changes. An alternative design could not rely on an earlier water estimate or exceed the applicable approvals.

The intentionally consumptive uses would be the hot-hour turbine inlet cooling, makeup for closed-loop losses, treatment blowdown and sanitary use. Evaporation is consumption. Blowdown would not be lost: it would go to a second project-owned treatment facility that conditions it before it enters the City sewer. The IUA submission will give seasonal quantities for evaporation, recirculation, makeup and discharge for the campuses, the treatment systems and the power plant, and evaporated water will not be counted as sewer flow.

Blowdown and process water would be treated on site to the City's acceptance limits for temperature and composition, then enter the sewer for treatment at the City plant, where the City already resells treated effluent as gray water to industry. The operator will establish volumes, temperatures and chemistry, the required pretreatment, and sampling responsibilities (the operator samples, the City verifies). City acceptance and the applicable permits are separate approvals. This route does not mean all water withdrawn would return through the sewer.

Each phase will update the wastewater balance and pretreatment requirements before adding flow. Expanded operations cannot assume the City will accept an increased volume or temperature without review and authorization.

Turbine inlet cooling, air-cooled condenser performance and data-hall cooling are different engineering questions. Plainsmen proposes guarantees for net power and cooling capacity, sustained heat-wave and storage-refill analysis, and a load-reduction contingency. Final design will also address air recirculation, humidity, outages and the auxiliary power the cooling equipment uses.

The IUA submission will assess droplet carryover from the inlet coolers, identify any treatment chemicals and show the controls and separation distances needed, or substantiate that none occur. The absence of open towers is not by itself evidence that every source of mist is absent.

PUE is total data-center facility energy divided by IT energy. Values in the low 1.1 range are design objectives for modern closed-loop halls, not guaranteed results. The IUA submission will state opening and full-phase peak MW, annual MWh, load assumptions and metering boundaries, and the annual report will publish measured PUE. Power-plant fuel efficiency and auxiliary loads will be reported separately from data-center PUE.

The comparison will use the same geography, year and units: annual MWh against annual MWh, and peak MW against peak MW. On-site generation changes where the energy comes from, not how much the data centers use. Plainsmen proposes including that comparison in the IUA submission.

Hourly demand, average-to-peak ratio, ramp rates, commissioning loads and any flexibility depend on the workloads and the operator. The IUA submission and utility studies will also test sudden loss of load, generator trips, fuel interruption and transitions between available supplies.

Plainsmen proposes separate limits for IT load, total facility demand, on-site generation, grid imports and any exports, with MW and annual-energy boundaries and the review required for changes. The ordinance also provides for utility-capacity review before any amendment.

A municipally owned Patriot Utility District, a municipal trust, is proposed to own the shared backbone, water lines and dark fiber. Its formation, authority, ownership, financing and operating responsibilities will be documented. Any work on the regional grid will be determined between the operator and the utility; the balance of on-site and grid-supplied power remains under review, and routes, easements, ownership and delivery dates will be documented in the IUA submission.

That covers design, construction, operation, maintenance, capacity reservation and end-of-life obligations, with allocation supported by utility studies and contracts. The shared backbone would be built with bond proceeds and supported by project revenues, including concession fees, with no pass-through to existing customers. Public ownership does not by itself determine who bears a shortfall; that will be resolved in the financing and service agreements.

Reliability will be demonstrated for the complete power and fuel system: firm net capacity, gas-delivery capability, winterization, summer derating, reserves, outages and any dependence on grid imports or standby service. Plainsmen proposes defined load reductions for commercial load if available supplies cannot meet demand, with Vance backup and national-security compute treated separately.

Their ratings and duration are not final. They would support ride-through, not replace a demonstrated firm supply. Wherever the system connects to the utility network, protection settings, ramp controls, islanding, reconnection and any export restrictions will be set in the operator's interconnection studies before energization.

The ordinance requires a curtailment plan as part of hazard mitigation and allows mandatory curtailment terms in the IUA; it does not itself rank every customer. Vance Air Force Base is the distinction: the hardened backup power proposed for the base, and any compute load dedicated to national-security missions, may be given priority in the curtailment order. Which loads qualify, and how they are separated from commercial load, will be set in the hazard plan and the IUA with the City, the utility and the federal parties involved, and will require separate authorization.

Plainsmen has proposed hardened backup power and secure fiber for Vance, at no cost to the federal government, to help the base meet the federal resilience standard in 10 U.S.C. §2920. The campuses are not on the base. Vance leadership and the Department of the Air Force have been briefed; no agreement has been signed because the project is still conceptual, and federal review is needed. If it proceeds, that supply, and any compute dedicated to national-security missions, would be treated differently from commercial load and may be prioritized in drought and grid-emergency curtailment.

The inventory will be stated by phase and at full build, including any temporary construction equipment and the gas supply arrangement that feeds the permanent units. Primary generation at North will be identified separately. ODEQ determines whether an addition needs a permit revision.

The four campuses were chosen in part for their proximity to high-capacity natural gas transmission lines that already cross the campuses or can readily be brought to the property line, which is what makes gas backup practical where most data centers default to diesel. The no-diesel-in-operation commitment goes beyond the ordinance and will be recorded in the development agreement. Under the City code, backup generation is for grid emergencies or outages of up to 24 hours; longer operation will need City Manager approval. §11-8C-4(D)(6) requires monthly inspection and testing with records kept, and testing may not occur on federal holidays or during dark hours. Operating classifications and hours must also comply with the air permit and engine rules.

The operator's ODEQ air permit applications will carry the emissions inventory for primary and backup equipment, including startup, shutdown, testing and emergency operation, with the modeling, controls and limits ODEQ requires. A change in generation technology would require an updated inventory rather than reuse of turbine assumptions.

The ordinance cites EPA Tier IV non-road standards (40 CFR Part 1039); stationary natural-gas engines also carry equipment-specific federal rules, including 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart JJJJ where applicable, and the stationary plant will be permitted under its own state and federal rules. The operator's air consultant will reconcile the local citation with all applicable standards.

§11-8C-7 puts the burden of proving pre-development levels on the owner. The final acoustic protocol will define time periods, measurement methods and combined equipment operation. There is no single fence-line air number; the IUA submission will include cumulative modeling of all sources on the project. For a sense of scale on sound: Google's campus at Pryor has operated for about 15 years, was built before acoustic cladding, sound walls and berms were standard practice, and is a quiet neighbor; today's closed-loop halls run on quieter, more efficient equipment.

Neither Plainsmen nor the operator sets OG&E's rates, and nobody can promise what unrelated rate cases will do. That is why the ordinance's provision for utility documentation that local ratepayers will not bear project-driven costs is the right test; Plainsmen will record it at Step 2 and the operator will have to satisfy it in the IUA submission. The supporting documents will identify dedicated and shared facilities, capacity reservations, operating costs, financing, and responsibility if a customer leaves or reduces demand.

Oklahoma's Data Center Customer Ratepayer Protection Act (HB 2992, 2026) requires cost-causation allocation, separate tariffs, credit requirements and minimum terms for facilities contracting with a utility for 75 MW or more. Its definition excludes entities that build generation for behind-the-meter projects, so it will apply to the part of Thunderbird served by the utility, not to the part served by the on-site plant. That is why the ratepayer protection cannot simply be assumed from the statute: the IUA will require utility documentation and project-specific upgrade obligations, and Plainsmen will secure those terms. Any tariff relied on will be the approved tariff applicable to that service.

Before a phase proceeds, the studies and agreements will update the costs, funding, allocation, security and long-term responsibilities for grid capacity, water and wastewater. A general promise about fees will not substitute for a funded obligation covering the identified facilities.

The current proposal keeps agricultural land at West and South outside the rezoning request, leaves the creek corridor at West natural, and would keep the mapped floodplain on East open if that campus is acquired. The plans will distinguish buildings, roads, parking, equipment pads, landscaped land and protected areas, with the runoff assumptions for each.

Plainsmen proposes explicit analysis of the 10-year and 100-year events and an extreme-event overflow check, alongside any additional City criteria. Naming an event is not a completed model: the report will show rainfall assumptions, drainage areas, storage, outfalls and downstream conditions.

The studies will compare existing and proposed flows, evaluate downstream conveyance and outfalls, and demonstrate compliance with City requirements, including during construction when several phases may be underway. Ownership, inspection and maintenance of detention and outfalls will be assigned in the approved documents.

The plan will account for cumulative impervious area and temporary construction conditions rather than assess each building in isolation. Any change affecting storage, outfalls or neighboring drainage will be reviewed under the City's requirements.

If an agreement with the City on East is reached, East's layout will have to work around its floodplain, and that acreage will count against buildable land, not toward it. These descriptions are preliminary, not parcel-specific determinations; final surveys and mapping will establish the constraints for every campus in the IUA submission. Plainsmen proposes avoiding mapped floodplain where practicable, with any affected work engineered under the City's floodplain regulations. The City's floodplain administrator and state authorities keep permitting responsibility; the Oklahoma Floodplain Managers Association is a resource, not a permitting body.

The IUA submission will evaluate heat sources, air movement and recirculation, local weather, nearby homes and cumulative build-out, and set a baseline so later phases can be measured against it. Retained vegetation, the agricultural buffers, berms and equipment placement are the proposed mitigation tools. The review will determine whether detailed thermal modeling is needed.

The agricultural land withheld from the rezoning request at West and South and the West creek corridor are proposed retained features. Those commitments will be recorded with boundaries and maintenance responsibilities; they do not replace a site-specific habitat assessment.

Plainsmen's building standards, to be recorded in the development agreement, will require every data hall to be a new-generation closed-loop building with acoustic cladding, enclosed rooftop equipment, berms and sound walls with landscaping. The IUA submission will carry baseline measurements and a combined acoustic model covering all campuses, the plant, substations, backup testing and construction, including nighttime conditions. For a sense of scale, Google's campus at Pryor has operated for about 15 years, was built before that mitigation was standard practice, and is a quiet neighbor; the halls proposed here would use a generation of equipment that is quieter and more efficient, with that mitigation on top. The acoustic model, not the comparison, is what the City will approve against.

Plainsmen proposes screening and seasonal surveys appropriate to the locations, protected-species review where applicable, and mitigation tied to the actual disturbance. Landscaping and the restoration fund can support habitat; their benefits will be assessed alongside the effects of development rather than assumed to offset them.

The IUA submission will include a photometric plan with mounting heights, shielding, color temperature, operating hours, light at neighboring properties and the needs of wildlife, reconciled with safety and aviation requirements (FAA-required obstruction lighting, event-triggered security lighting and temporary construction lighting are the expected exceptions). Fixture descriptions alone do not establish the final off-site effect; the plan does.

OSU defines CUE as carbon dioxide emissions divided by IT equipment energy. The reporting boundary will identify on-site generation and any purchased electricity, the energy period and emissions factors, and whether upstream natural-gas emissions are included or reported separately. The ODEQ air-permit inventory is an input, not a substitute for that account. Plainsmen proposes that the operator report the boundary, assumptions and measured results annually.

Capturing the plant's own CO₂ for pipeline transport or geologic storage remains an option requiring engineering, capacity, contracts and approvals, limited to the plant's own emissions. No capture benefit is deducted from any estimate we publish. Any later claim will identify what is captured and stored, what emissions remain, and the evidence behind it.

Revised resource, emissions and reliability figures will be published together so that estimates from one power configuration are not presented as results for another.

These are planning estimates, not guaranteed local hires, and the construction figure is a workforce measure over the build, not permanent employment. Jobs by phase, occupation, employer, employment type and expected local participation will be part of the employment estimate the ordinance requires in the IUA submission.

The underlying roles, counts, source year and weighting are published with the calculation. Salary ranges, benefits, schedules and employee-versus-contractor arrangements will be set by the operator and its contractors and stated in the staffing plan in the IUA submission, separating what is guaranteed from what is estimated.

How those fees would be distributed among schools, services and infrastructure would be decided by the trust's trustees, not by Plainsmen, the operator or the City, and Plainsmen is strongly recommending that the trust include representation from the county's school districts and county services. Any fee, exemption or payment-in-lieu arrangement the operator seeks will be documented in public before it takes effect, with its recipient, legal basis, estimated value, duration, treatment on expansion and any clawback.

The scope of any broader cost-benefit analysis will be the City's to set in that review, including the areas OSU raises. Gross construction spending, project fees and net money available for public services are different things, and nothing Plainsmen publishes will present one as another.

The program as currently proposed includes offers above a pre-announcement appraisal, a $15,000 improvement grant for eligible owners who remain, closing costs covered, a three-year decision window, no one approached unasked and no one required to sell. Eligibility would be measured from the campus property line. Plainsmen will finalize and record the terms at Step 2, including eligibility, measurement points, appraisal and appeal procedures, funding, timing and successor obligations, and the operator will fund them. The schedule attached to the recorded agreement will control, and this page will be updated to match it.

How "local" is defined, outreach, qualifications, annual targets and reporting will be set in the operator's IUA submission and workforce agreement, without promising positions before an operator has a staffing model.

Construction of this scale would draw some specialized trades from outside the region. The IUA submission will state expected local and nonlocal workers, commuting or rotation, housing and traffic needs, and any anticipated visa use with numbers and duration, with construction labor and permanent staffing reported separately.

Plainsmen proposes obligations that flow through to subcontractors, with reporting and a way to address noncompliance. The staffing plan will disclose the employee and contractor split and any adopted protections rather than treat them as existing guarantees.

Sustained funding for Autry would be part of the civic return, so that the technical, two-year and four-year pathways into these jobs all run through Enid-area institutions. Curricula, apprenticeships, placement targets and funding will be finalized with the operator so that training lines up with the occupations and hiring dates in the phase plan. Until signed, these will remain proposed partnerships.

That means joint pre-incident planning, responder access, incident command, 24-hour contacts, drills, hazardous-material inventories, battery and electrical isolation procedures, evacuation and mutual aid. It will cover the gas plant, gas facilities and batteries, not only the data halls, and will address staffing and recurring response needs.

The operator's training plan will identify duties, authorization, refresher intervals, drills and records. General awareness training is different from qualification to work on energized systems or respond to a battery incident.

An emergency-service impact assessment and a funded agreement covering equipment, facilities, training, staffing and recurring costs, with an allocation and payment schedule, will be part of the IUA submission. Project revenues will not be assumed to meet those obligations without an actual funding arrangement.

Emergency responders and regulators will have the access their roles require. Public oversight will run through the annual reports, public meetings and the complaint process rather than access inside operating equipment areas.

Plainsmen proposes a public version of that plan identifying closure triggers, scope, responsibilities, schedule and the condition required for reuse. Final estimates depend on the facilities selected.

The instrument (a bond, letter of credit, funded escrow, or a guarantee from an investment-grade parent), its independently estimated amount, how it resets as each phase is built, inflation adjustments, replacement before expiry and the City's right to draw on default will be set in the IUA. A parent guarantee, if allowed, will be identified as such and supported by agreed credit standards and replacement triggers; it will not be described as a funded bond.

The obligation will carry to successors and will not be allowed to lapse. The plan will identify cleanup testing and sign-off for the intended reuse rather than promise a return to agriculture without a specified restoration standard.

Those agreements will name who owns, maintains or removes lines, substations, pipelines, batteries and water facilities, and who services related debt if a customer exits. The proposed municipal trust's obligations and protections will be stated explicitly; public ownership is not by itself a guarantee against stranded costs.

§11-8C-4(F) provides for an annual report to the City Manager covering water, wastewater and energy use, emissions and backup testing, employment, investment, complaints, insurance and financial assurance, and for the City's right to publish it. Plainsmen will record that report and its public posting as a development agreement term the operator will inherit. Reports will retain monthly or weekly data where appropriate and identify short-duration exceedances so an annual average cannot conceal them.

The IUA will identify City contacts, notice and response deadlines, investigation, corrective action and escalation, and will state for each limit whether the action is automatic or discretionary, with records showing what happened and how it was resolved.

Each Intensive Use Review will require the operator to mail notice to owners within 300 feet, hold a public meeting and post a comment period before the Planning Commission hearing. Plainsmen proposes publishing the notice, meetings, studies and deadlines for each review, and a named community liaison with response and escalation deadlines and published resolution summaries that protect personal information.

With its IUA submission the operator will publish a single directory of project, City, utility and agency contacts. A general inquiry to an agency is not necessarily entered into a permit record; follow the agency's posted procedure for a formal comment.