A searchable audio archive from the 2013-2016 legislative sessions of the North Carolina General Assembly.

searching for


Reliance on Information Posted The information presented on or through the website is made available solely for general information purposes. We do not warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of this information. Any reliance you place on such information is strictly at your own risk. We disclaim all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on such materials by you or any other visitor to the Website, or by anyone who may be informed of any of its contents. Please see our Terms of Use for more information.

House | May 28, 2014 | Chamber | Fracking

Full MP3 Audio File

The House will come to order. Members, the House is going to be in recess until 3'oclock fifteen. That's 3:15, thank you. Representative Carney confused me. The prayer will be offered by Representative Verla Insko. Members and visitors in the gallery, please stand and please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance. And members and visitors, please silence all electronic devices and cellular phones. [SPEAKER CHANGES] In the summer months, the church I attend explores other faiths and various expressions of the Christian faith. The version of the Lord's prayer that I offer today is a translation by the Maori tribe in New Zealand. Let us pray. Eternal spirit, Earth-maker, pain-bearer, life-giver, source of all that is and that shall be. Father and mother of us all, loving God and whom is Heaven, the hallowing of Your name echoes through the universe. The way of Your justice be followed by the peoples of the world, Your heavenly will be done by all created beings. Your commonwealth of peace and freedom sustain our hope and come on Earth, with the bread we need for today feed us, in the hurts we absorb from one another, forgive us. In times of temptation and testing strengthen us, from trials too great to endure spare us. From the grip of all that is evil free us. For You reign in the glory of the power that is love, now and forever, amen. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Amen. I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore is recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, the journal for May the 27th, 2014 has been examined and found to be correct, and moves approval is written. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore moves that the journal for May 27th be approved as written. All in favor say aye. All opposed no. The ayes have it. Journal is approved as written. Petitions, morals, or papers addressed to the general assembly of the House, ratification of bills and resolutions, clerical read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Raleigh-Clark ???????????? station governor sent Bill 294 ?? It is regulated on ??????? discharged elimination program to utilize ??? station ??? prices, two box for lady and transportation project House Bill 688 at a ??? continuing education ??? certified will contracts of all in resolution ?? state officer state house charge ?????? resolution 1121 ???????? Mercer former member of general assembly. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Chapter bills be noted. Ladies and gentlemen, the chair would like to extend the courtesies of the floor in a welcome to the nurse of the day. The nurse of the day is from Greenville. Denise ?? Please stand and let us welcome you. Representative Stam, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? standing committees and permanent subcommittees, clerical read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Elections committed report Representative Lewis and Moore, favorable House bill 1108 ?? community elections technical corrections favorable community substitutes on favorablists to the original bill. House bill 1158 ?? order amendment unfavorablists substitutes on favorablists of the original bill Community substitute count on unfavorable, community substitutes favorable count. (Sorry for all the ????, the two speakers doing clerical reads were speaking way too fast)

Representative Stevens is recognized to send forth a committee report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stevens, Judiciary Subcommittee C. House Bill 1102 Mechanics Liens - Clarify Lien Agent Notice. Favorable? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Counter [SPEAKER CHANGES] Verification/Jurisdiction in juvenile cases. House Bill 1103. Favorable? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Counter [SPEAKER CHANGES] House 1104 Study oversight/ Conflicts of interests/ Foster Care. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Counter [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1110 Improve Oversight of Public Guardianship. Favorable? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Counter [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1101 Mechanics Liens lease public property favorable is to the committee substitute, unfavorable is to the original bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Counter is to the committee substitute. Unfavorable counter on the original bill. Representatives Jordan and Mcgrady are recognized to send forth a committee report. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Jordan and Mcgrady for the judiciary subcommittee B. House Bill 1027 DWI interlock violations/ DMV hearing site. Favorable? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Counter [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1032 Patent Abuse Bill. Favorable is to committee substitute number 2, unfavorable to committee substitute number 1 [SPEAKER CHANGES] Committee substitute counter. Original Bill unfavorable counter. Representative Blust is recognized to send forth committee report. Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Blust for the judiciary subcommittee A. House Bill 1117 Conform pledge of joint account laws. Favorable? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Counter [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1097 Service of Hearing Order/MV Dealer license favorable and re-referred to the transportation committee. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Favorable re-referred to the committee on transportation. Representative Marvin is recognized to send forth a committee report. Clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Marvin for the Regulatory Reform committee. House Bill 1152 Eliminate Obsolete Boards and Commissions. Favorable? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Counter [SPEAKER CHANGES] House 1153 OAH Electronic filing. Favorable? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Counter [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1163 Streamlined Rule making process. Favorable? [SPEAKER CHANGES] It was re-referred to the committee on rules. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1065 Amend OLB reporting requirement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Counter [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1170 Disprove funeral board rule. Favorable? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Counter [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1173 Licensing board rules for professional corps. Favorable? [SPEAKER CHANGES] [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1105 local erosion programs take over existing plans referred to environment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] It was referred to the committee on environment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1106 favorable and re-referred serially to environment [SPEAKER CHANGES] Bill is referred to the committee on environment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1140 Amend Hotel Carbon Monoxide Alarm Requirement favorable is to committee substitute unfavorable is to the original bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Committee substitute is placed on the favorable counter. The original bill is placed on the unfavorable counter. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1109 clarify existing rule readoption process favorable is to the committee substitute unfavorable is to the original bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Committee substitute is placed on the favorable counter. The Original bill is placed on the unfavorable counter. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1081 reform agency review of engineering work favorable is to the committee substitute unfavorable is to the original bill and so referred to environment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Committee substitute is placed on the favorable counter. Strike that. The committee substitute is referred to the committee on environment. The original bill is placed on the unfavorable counter. Representatives Howard, Brawley, Lewis and Setzer are recognized to send forth a committee report. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Howard, Brawley, Lewis and Setzer for the finance committee. Senate Bill 786 Energy Modernization Act. Favorable? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Counter without objection. Added to the day’s counter. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Objection. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Members, the question before the body would be a motion by Representative Howard who’s recognized for motion to add the bill on for today’s counter. Representative Howard, you’re recognized for that purpose.

Speaker Changes:Thank you Mr. speaker, yes i would move that we add senate bill 786 to today's calender, Speaker Changes:further discussion further debate for what purpose this gentlemen from ?? representative ??, Speaker Changes:to speak on the motion, Speaker Changes:The gentlemen is recognized to debate the motion, Speaker Changes: Speaking on the member's of the house we have the senate bill 786 the wracking bill is one of the important bills we had in the last couple of years we certainly have moved through the extraordinary speed of the senate and also is before us also a very speedy fashion the bill those many many things that will not go into the many issues and ways that you all know from the correspondence brings out a lot of people in favor of the bill many many people's concerned about contamination's of our environment particularly n the areas off course where the wracking is likely to happen it is simply inappropriate for us to move forward on a bill that was heard this morning in 11 a.m and prior to that in the finance committee and prior to that it was heard on 6 o clock in public utilities committee there was no comment in the public in public utilities committee and in finance committee there was only time for one 3 minute comment on the bill it was inappropriate and indefensible for us and bodies to move forward on the bill so quickly when the publicizes have absolutely no opportunity even though the bill is gonna be on today's calender we should oppose this motion in order to get the public at least overnight to contact all of us and let us know that how they the public feel us towards the bill please ?? no on the motion, Speaker Changes: representative ?? please state your purpose, Speaker Changes:to speak on the debate motion, Speaker Changes:the gentlemen is recognized to debate the motion , Speaker Changes:i m glad ?? that this is one important bill to three years and in fact this is been on going for four years since i have been in general assembly so ?? think us a little bit ?? what idea that this general public utilities on Tuesday when i got here is i what i want every office in occupying somebody in Tuesday morning to let them know we were gonna have a public utilities meeting and this bill gonna be on calender that was about to fall ten hours before we actually have the committee i did that because i want the folks to know,i want the folks to know that what we talk about and i want to be transparent ,didn't get any response that we have hour and hour of meeting in public utilities it could have gone three in three hours from the members we had a good and finance today and this is a good bill we have added this bill and we need you o move forward so i would need you to vote yes, Speaker Changes: representative Larry D. Hall please state your purpose, Speaker Changes: to speak on the motion, Speaker Changes: The general is recognized to debate the motion, Speaker Changes: Thank you Mr.speaker and members of house i rise t oppose the motion i think even then representative ?? said that many of you may have notice from him who are the committee that this bill was coming up we representative citizens of Carolina from all over the state affected by so is not enough to say that we gave yo ten hours notice the question is that how much time did the constituents use ?? to represent how the hear about improvised on information on this bill and their response their lives are gonna affected i don't think there is any wracking and to go on enroll so that's the no question that you have notice for you individually the question is did you have time to notice your constituents that who are gonna be affective by this did they have to be response so you can represent them as you promise and swore to do i think that's the issue you afford and we appreciate the fact that there be noticed their embers but we have a job to do and that is to make sure.

Represent our constituency and that is to give them this notice and let them be heard so I’d ask that you oppose the motion. Let’s give it one more day. Let’s go through the regular procedure and give us a chance to get input from our constituents. Thank you [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jackson, please state your purpose [SPEAKER CHANGES] For question of Chairman Hager. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hager, does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Chairman Hager, thank you for yielding. Were there any amendments passed in public utilities? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes sir [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker. As the chairman of finance, Representative Howard. If I could ask her a question? She would yield for question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Howard yields [SPEAKER CHANGES] Chairman Howard, were there any amendments passed this morning in finance? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No sir, there were no amendments. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Mr. Speaker, if I could speak on the motion? [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You know a lot of times that ?? refer to the affordable care act, I hear my friends on the other side of the aisle say if people voted for bill that hadn’t even read and I’d ask you how many of you have actually read the bill as currently amended, the whole entire bill, I personally hadn’t had a chance to do that and I generally don’t do it until after the bill goes through committee because you can’t ever remember or did you read the original version, the one that was amended three times, the next one? And so what I do is that I read the bill the night before and I think that’s a reasonable approach. Chairman Howard last year, we had a big tax bill and everybody voted for it except me and she came up to me asked me after session, why did you vote against my bill. I said it was 50 pages long and I hadn’t had a chance to read it and anybody who in the law school knows that that’s a reasonable response and I think we all noted that it’s a reasonable thought. I have heard nobody say why we are in a rush. I’d ask you to give us time to actually read the bill, ask tough questions and then if you want to vote on it, tomorrow we can do that. Thank you Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and Gentlemen, the Chair would just mention as a point of information that this is a 2 day bill. So the question of this motion also determines whether this is a Wednesday and Thursday vote or a Thursday and Friday vote. Representative Glazier, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, to briefly speak to the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I have just two points and then some ways to reiteration but I think they’re important. Representative Jackson made the point about the time in reading the bill but I make a second time point and that is that when this calendar goes out, it’s not only noticed to us and it is noticed to the public. That’s the purpose of the calendar. And we defeat that purpose by putting on the floor, bills that have no exigency. This hardly has one and so no one makes that claim. And so, while it’s important that notice was given and I agree with Representative Hager. The notice was given to the members even though very quickly but I appreciate what he did. And I appreciate Representative Hall’s point that it created difficulties and all of us giving notice to our constituencies through newsletters and otherwise. But that’s the purpose of the calendar. It’s for all those people we can’t reach by our newsletters or by our calls. It’s for the press to pick up and to notify the public. It’s for people to see it online so that they know that this bill that’s gonna affect their lives is on the calendar and we at least have given them an opportunity should they choose to exercise it. To write or to call in. We defeat that purpose here today on a most controversial bill and I think unfairly do that. And I’m going to vote against the motion because I think it’s unnecessary what we do today. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Moore, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak to the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, members. This is a simple motion. This is not a suspension of the rules. The rules fully anticipate that a committee may report a bill out and have it heard the same day. This is not something out of the ordinary at all. It is something that has happened regularly both when the democrats were in charge, the republicans were in charge. There’s nothing absolutely nefarious about it then and nothing nefarious about it now. It’s simply a mechanism to move this bill. This bill would then be eligible to be debated and amended, whatever the body wishes to do today. And guess what, it’s back again tomorrow for the third reading. Where the process goes all over again. The only purpose that would be achieved by delaying the bill being heard today is that we would be here on Friday. So, members I would advise the body to support the motion and as far as debating the merits of the bill, to save that for when the bill is actually before us and I would remind folks that this is only the motion to have the bill heard.

Representative Larry Hall, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker, I speak a second time on the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. The motion is second time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker and ladies and gentlemen of the house, again the question is getting information and notice through our constituents and so again we do understand we could waste a day today on this bill. Amendments aren’t ready for those people who weren't aware of what exactly came out in the final form of this bill and so to say we’re having an actual debate on this bill today when you haven't read it. People back home haven't heard about the provisions of it and we haven't had time to read it and then make any amendment or be prepared for discussion to explain why we even voted for. Does a disservice not just to integrity of this institution but a disservice to your constituency and so, again rather than go through a farce of saying we debated this bill today or we worked on this bill today when we don't even know what’s in it. Why not go ahead and give public some confidence that what we did, whether they agree with it or not, was done appropriately and transparently. So, again I’d ask you to think about that as you vote no on this motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Carney, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speak to the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. I rise to ask you to think of this in a different way. We can put this on the calendar today have it read in we have and start with the debate tomorrow and then if you really believe in this bill and you really support it, which might have a few questions left; the people that you need to ask these questions have them think about, are your constituents back home. So we could, the bill is being read in, let's take it through the regular process, read it tomorrow, debate it tomorrow on the floor. Take the weekend and stand up for this bill if you support it, talk to your constituents back home over the weekend, I have been here 12 years and we have done that over and over and over on many bills. It doesn’t mean that we have to come back on Friday unless that’s; our speaker who has every right to determine that we come back on Friday. But this bill does not have to be heard today. Of all the bills that we have before us, this is a bill that is extremely long impacting on the state. We’ve never been down this road before. I, for one wanna make sure that of the 120 rules that are in place, don’t talk about the bill if you’ve read it or not. How many of you have read all those rules? You are going to ?? the bill as it is right now, only have this chance to vote on this bill. Unless and then this is brought forth and then it gets come back to us again next year. I’m asking you to take the time; I don’t know why there’s a rush. I ?? you down unless there are people lined up outside of this building waiting to get a permit and then start drilling the minute we pass this. So I don’t know what the rush is. It’s extremely important, is it a good move for us to take? I’m not sure. But you make up your mind, you wanna rush it through or would you like to have the weekend for your constituents to respond to all of that and then come back and make a better informed decision based on what our citizens want. Thank You [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate on the motion. If not, the question before the house is the motion for ?? the house that house committee substitute to send the bill 786 to today’s calendar. All in favor, vote Aye. All oppose, vote No. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will let the machine record the vote. 66 having voted in affirmative, 50 in the negative, the motion passes. Senate bill 786 will be added to today’s calendar. Representative Collins is recognized to send forth committee report. The clerk will read. Gentleman will yield, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Collins, state personnel committee. House Bill 1079, Positions for State Treasurer Compliance Unit, favorable and ?? re-referred to appropriations. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The bill will be re-referred to appropriations. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Bill 1034, Volunteer Fire and Rescue Finances, favorable is to the committee substitute number 2, unfavorable to the committee substitute number 1 and re-referred.

to appropriations. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Committee substitute number 2 will be re-referred to the committee on appropriations. Committee substitute number 1, unfavorable calendar. Ladies and gentlemen of the House, I've had several members thinking about their county commissioners and sending a number of courtesies of the gallery requests. I know that we have several county commissioners and probably county managers and assistant deputy managers. So on behalf of all the members the Chair would like to extend the courtesy of the gallery to all of the folks who are here with us from the County Commissions and the participants in the County Commission Association. Please stand and let us welcome you and thank you for your service. [APPLAUSE] Also, upon motion, Representatives Riddell and Ross from Alamance County, the Chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to the Alamance Republican Women. Please stand and let us welcome you. [APPLAUSE] Calendar, House Resolution 1146, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Resolution 1146, a House resolution setting the date of the House Representatives to elect a member to fill an unexpired term on the state board of community colleges. The House resolves. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Johnson, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This resolution comes out of the education and it's basically filling the vacancy created by former board member Will Collins who took a job with the State Commerce Department and once this resolution is passed on the floor each member of the House will receive instructions and nominations. Nomination forms and the forms are due June the 4th at 5:00 and the election will be June 17th. I'd appreciate your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before the House is the adoption of House Resolution 1146. All in favor vote Aye. All opposed vote No. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will let the machine record the vote, 117 having voted in the affirmative and none in the negative, House Resolution 1146 has been adopted, will be ordered printed. Ladies and gentlemen, Representative Floyd to ask a question about amendments to the Senate Bill 786, we will accept any amendments today but if members need additional time this is a 2 day bill so we will also accept amendments on third reading tomorrow. House Joint Resolution 1112, the clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Joint Resolution 1112, a joint resolution to confirm the appointment of Charlton Allen to the North Carolina Industrial Commission. The House resolves, the Senate concurring. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Larry Hall, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Speak on the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I made my comments yesterday regarding this matter and would briefly restate to the body that again we appreciate the fact that Mr. Allen has offered him for service and he appears to have the qualifications to be a representative from the business community but the position that he is being nominated for on the board is one to be an employees advocate and representative and his qualifications do not appear and his statements do not appear to support that and qualify him for that and so, again, I'd ask that you vote against this resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Tim Moore, please state

Please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] To debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman is recognized to debate the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker. Members, we had a good vote on this resolution yesterday and wanted to simply again affirm the support the rules committee has had for Mr. Alan and this appointment. I don’t know what’s happened and what the motivations are for my friends on the other side, I don’t understand it. Mr. Alan has been a plaintiff’s attorney all these years, he perfectly fits the bill of this appointment. As best I can tell from piecing together, I don’t know, my good friend from Durham simply makes the statements but hasn’t said what the statement is that has him so concerned, has not done so on the floor nor did so in the committee. Mr. Alan was at our committee, was there, there were no questions propounded to Mr. Alan at all, not one from anyone and we were there as long as we needed to be. Yet we have these kinds of arguments being made that just appear to be political in nature for some reason. The only thing that I’ve been able to piece together is a civitas questionnaire like a lot of us filled out when Mr. Alan was running for state house where he asked if he defended the state’s right to work law and he said he did. I said the same thing, I submit a lot of folks sitting in this chamber on both sides of the aisles said that. I agree with Mr. Alan, I’m glad he has that position, but at the end of the day as an industrial commissioner or a commissioner of the industrial commission that’s not within their purview. It really doesn’t matter what his position is on that. His position on tax reform may be a good solid conservative position but as a member of the industrial commission it does not matter. The question is, does Mr. Alan have the qualifications, the education, and the experience to be a member of the industrial committee? To act impartially in a quasi-judicial role when individual cases come before that body? The industrial committee is not out there setting policy, the industrial commission hears an appeal. A person gets hurt on the job, they go before an industrial commissioner whose like a trial judge and they disagree with that opinion and they appeal that to the industrial commission which sits in panels and decides was the evidence fairly heard, was the worker treated fairly, was the employer fairly treated, and at the end of that process make a decision to determine what compensation if any that employee should receive. These notions about people’s political views don’t matter and I was sitting here trying to remember, and I’ll say I agree with Mr. Alan’s political views, but it’s honestly for this purpose irrelevant, but I was trying to think about when the other folks were in charge and when the governor sent nominations down, I can’t think of a time when any of us when we were in the minority started trying to get into ‘well where does this person stand on tax reform or the minimum wage?’ We didn’t do that, we simply looked at the individual’s merits and we made a decision so I hope that this is not a foretelling of what I think is a hyper-partisan politicization that does not need to happen in this short session and I would those folks in these kinds of appointments that we should continue these kinds of matters in the bipartisan tradition that has been the tradition of this house for many years and not go down the road that my good friend from Durham is going down. I just don’t see the reason or the wisdom in doing so. Members I would ask for your yes vote again today. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Hall please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Speak on the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman is recognized to debate the resolution a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker. I just want to clarify, many of you sat in the chamber yesterday and had the governor’s nominee which you participated in a unanimous vote for and I believe this is the third governor’s nominee and I think the first two had unanimous votes so I don’t think we’ve entered a hyper-partisan environment unless voting unanimously two thirds of the time would constitute hyper-partisan. Second of all, the position that he has been nominated for is one that’s supposed to be an employee’s advocate. The governor has three of those positions that he has the nominations for, we have the duty to examine them and to approve them or not approve them and so, again, I would ask that you oppose this nomination not on the basis of something unknown but on the basis of what his statements have been in the past in opposition to employee’s rights..

...and his oppositions to employees' benefits, both sick leave, paid sick leave, and other opportunities for fair treatment at work and in the workplace. So again, this is not a personal attack. Again, anyone who believes as Mr. Moore believes, that's their right, there're three positions reserved on the commission for people who specifically avow and express those views. There are three spots on the commission reserved for that. And the chairman. But we don't want a commission that is, at it's very outset, viewed by the public to be a commission where they cannot get justice or a fair hearing. And so, to have it stacked where you have four, or five representatives of business and only two at best who would represent employees - I don't think that's the message you want to send to employers who would come into this state, or employees who would come into this state and work. So I would ask you again to oppose the resolution. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stevens, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? Representative Hall would yield for question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Larry Hall, does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hall, did you hear what he did for a living? Mr. Allen, did you hear- [SPEAKER CHANGES] -Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] -that he was an attorney who represented plaintiffs in getting their money before the industrial- [SPEAKER CHANGES] Does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No further questions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The question before the House is the passage of the House joint resolution eleven-twelve on its third reading. All in favor, vote Aye, all opposed, vote no. The clerk will open the vote. (pause) The Clerk will not machine record the vote. Seventy-nine having voted in the affirmative, forty in the negative. House joint resolution eleven-twelve has passed its third reading, will be sent to the Senate by special message. Ladies and Gentlemen, the chair would like to extend the courtesies of the gallery again, to Charleton Allen, future appointee to the industrial commission. Welcome, Charleton. (applause) House bill ten-sixty, the clerk will read. (pause) [SPEAKER CHANGES] House bill ten-sixty, a bill to entitle an act to require the State Board of Education to identify military-connected students using uniform education reporting system, as recommended by the joint legislative education oversight committee, ?? ?? ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Horn, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. The House will come to order. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Ladies and Gentlemen, this bill comes before us actually at the recommendation of a representative from the Department of Defense. Here in North Carolina, we have frequently talked about us being a military friendly state, we know that we are actually one of the largest states in the nation for military personnel. With military personnel come military dependents and those include the kids. Now having been in the military, and many of you as well know what it's like to have to move around the world. Sometimes you have to leave your family and we know what that does - can do to the kids. They need a little extra, maybe, attention just - we need to be aware of where these kids are and how they're doing and how we can respond to their needs. Not only because of the frequent moves, and the pressure on them being in the military but sometimes the result of the pressure that comes from a deployed parents. It's kinda tough for some of these kids. Sometimes, you know, you just get moved with the PCS and that's a Permanent Change of Station not a Proposed Committee Substitute, and then you get deployed, sent either temporary duty or maybe not so temporary and kids get confused at "What's happening here with my parents, or my brother, or my uncle?" if they happen to live in the same household, that they're very close. We want to make sure that these kids are being looked after, cared for, and supported appropriately without being intruded upon. And that's the purpose of this bill, Ladies and Gentlemen I ask for your support. (pause) [SPEAKER CHANGES] Direct the State Board to come up with a statewide way to collect all this data so that we can a statewide look. Both in districts like in Onslow and Cumberland with a heavy military presence, but also districts like Wake County where my daughter's teacher may not know that she's a military child, also. So that's one of the best things that it will do but one other important thing that it will also do will- (recording ends)

Is a state and, as our systems apply to the federal government, for federal impact aid to mitigate the effect that our military installations have, who don’t pay property taxes. This will allow North Carolina and our local LEAs and counties to better compete for that aid also. It’s a great bill and I’d appreciate your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question for the House is the passage of House Bill 1060 on its second reading. All in favor vote aye, all opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will let the machine record the vote, 118 having voted affirmative, none in the negative. House Bill 1060 has passed its second reading without objection. Will be read a third time. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? of North Carolina ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before the House is the passage of House Bill 1060 on its third reading. All in favor say aye, all opposed no. The ayes have it, House Bill 1060 has passed its third reading and will be sent to the Senate. Ladies and gentlemen, upon motion of Representative Annie Mobley of Bertie, Gates, Hertford, and Pasquotank County, the Chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to Dr. Wesley Earl with the North Carolina Academy of Family Physicians. Dr. Earl please stand and let us welcome you. Ladies and gentlemen the bill failing deadline for local bills is today at 4 p.m. The Chair, unless there is objection, will extend the bill failing deadline to 5:30 today. Incidentally, that’s also for anything affecting state and local retirement systems, so local bills, and any bills primarily affecting state and local retirement systems. So ordered. Ladies and gentlemen, upon motion of the members from Buncombe County, the Chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to Representative Nathan Ramsey’s wife, Robin Ramsey. Robin, welcome back. Please stand and let us welcome you. I’m disappointed you didn’t bring Diva into the gallery. Extend our welcome to her too. Also upon motion of members from Henderson, Polk and Transylvania Counties, Chuck McGrady and Chris Whitmire, the Chair is happy to extend the courtesies of the gallery to the district attorney for 29B Judicial District, Greg Newman. Greg, please stand and let us welcome you. Representative Forsyth please state your purpose. I’m sorry, the representative from Forsyth, Representative Terry, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. A point of personal privilege. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized for a point of personal privilege. The House will come to order. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much. I rise today to inform this House that we have lost a wonderful person in the citizenship of Dr. Maya Angelou, who was the world’s most famous woman in ??. She moved to Winston-Salem, North Carolina as the R.J.R. Professor of American Studies at Wake Forest University and resided there until this day, when she passed away there. I would like to say that we should send our prayers and our thoughts to her personal family but also to the world, because the world was indeed her family. I happened to meet Dr. Angelou before she actually moved to Winston-Salem.

because she was a very dear friend of a very dear friend of mine, who was the spouse of the Provost at Wake Forest University, Dr. Edwin Wilson. From that moment until this ,I always considered Dr. Angelou as a very dear friend because during the time that I met her, she reminded me that all of God's people in the world are more alike than they are unalike. I just commend you to remember her family in your prayers and all the people in the world who admired and adored this woman, who offered and gave us so much through her words of wisdom, both with poetry, prose, and her biographies, which was six of them that absolutely helped change the lives of a lot of people in the world. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and Gentlemen, we are going to take a recess until 4:30. Representative ?? is recognized for an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The Republicans will caucus immediately in room 1228 downstairs. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The House stands in recess subject to introduction of bills and resolutions and receipt of committee reports until 4:30 [SPEAKER CHANGES] Introductions of bills and resolutions quick read [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative T. Moore, House Bill 1203, Private Hospital Toxicology Fee [SPEAKER CHANGES] Judiciary Subcommittee C, if favorable, Finance [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hager, House Bill 1204, Telematics Pilot Project [SPEAKER CHANGES] Appropriations [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Jeter, G. Martin and Hanes, House Bill 1205, Wounded Warrior Motorsports Scholarship Funds [SPEAKER CHANGES] Appropriations [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Jones, Millis, Riddell, and Fulghum, House Resolution 1206, House Select Constitution Convention of States [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rules, Calendar, and Operations of the House [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Faircloth, Brandon, Blust, and Hurley, House Bill 1207, High Point Charter/Council Hires City Attorney [SPEAKER CHANGES] Government [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Dollar, Burr, Johnson, and McElraft, House Bill 1208, Governor's Budget [SPEAKER CHANGES] Appropriations [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Dollar, Collins, S. Ross, and Glazier, House Bill 1209, Retirement Investment Accountability [SPEAKER CHANGES] State Personnel, if favorable, Appropriations [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Luebke, Earle, Insko, and Lucas, House Bill 1210, Rescind Income Tax Cut For Millionaires [SPEAKER CHANGES] Finance [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Goodman, House Bill 1211, Mount Gilead Charter Revision & Consolidation [SPEAKER CHANGES] Government, if favorable, Finance [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives S. Ross, and Riddell, House Bill 1212, Burlington Charter/Revision [SPEAKER CHANGES] Government, if favorable, Finance [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Ramsey, and Moffitt, House Bill 1213, Local Governments in State Health Plan [SPEAKER CHANGES] Government, if favorable, Finance [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Michaux, House Bill 1214, Durham/Payments for On-Street Parking [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rules, Calendar, and Operations of the House [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jordan, House Bill 1215, Community College Waiver [SPEAKER CHANGES] Appropriations [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jordan, House Bill 1216, Cemetery Commission Funds [SPEAKER CHANGES] Appropriations [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Jordan, House Bill 1217, Tort Claims Act Clarification [SPEAKER CHANGES] Government, if favorable, Judiciary [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Horn, Arp, and Brody, House Bill 1218, City of Monroe/Supervision of Attorney [SPEAKER CHANGES] Government, If Favorable, Judiciary A [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives S. Martin, Johnson, and Horn, House Bill 1219, Wilson Academy Innovation funds [SPEAKER CHANGES] Appropriations [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives McElraft, Avila, Carney, and Fulghum, House Bill 1220, Hope For Haley and Friends [SPEAKER CHANGES] Health And Human Services, if Favorable, Judiciary Subcommitee B [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Riddell, Whitmire, Brody, and Dobson, House Bill 1221, Limit E-Verify Exemption/Agriculture Industry [SPEAKER CHANGES] Judiciary [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Harrison, and Adams, House Bill 1222, Amend Expunction Act Laws [SPEAKER CHANGES] Rules, Calendar, and Operations of the House [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Adams, Harrison, Cunningham, and Hanes, House Bill 1223, Vacancy - US House of Representatives - Executive Committee Nomination [SPEAKER CHANGES] Elections [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Presnell, House Bill 1224, Job Maintenance And Capital Development Fund Modifications [SPEAKER CHANGES] Appropriations [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Blackwell, House Bill 1225, Future Use if Broughton Hospital Funds [SPEAKER CHANGES] Appropriations [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representatives Harrison, Fisher, Glazier, and Luebke, House BIll 1226

Enact or modify certain exemptions from requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act applicable to rules for the management of oil and gas exploration, development and production in the state and the use of hard zone drilling and hydraulic fracturing treatment for that purpose. Authorize issuance of permits for oil and gas exploration, development and production activities 60 days after the applicable rules become effective. Create the North Carolina Oil and Gas Commission and reconstitute the North Carolina Mining Commission. Amend the miscellaneous statutes governing oil and gas exploration, development and production activities. Establish a severance tax applicable to oil and gas exploration, development and production activities and amend miscellaneous statutes unrelated to oil and gas exploration, development and production activities and to direct the studies on various issues as recommended by the Joint Legislative Commission on energy policy. General Sinbeck, North Carolina UNACS. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hager, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. To request staff on the floor and debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The staff will be available to all members. The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. Senate Bill 786 is a culmination of about a year's worth of work. Representative Stone, Representative Boles, folks from this area, myself, senators that worked on this bill since we left the legislature last session. It is an inclusive bill that gets us a step closer, certainly doesn't put us into energy exploration, energy research right away. We still have the year to wait. We still have about a year and a half before the first drill could go in the ground. But it is a culmination of getting us there. It helps define some of the issues that we've all been talking about. What I would like to do is go over what I would consider the pertinent parts of the bill and then see what questions you guys have. I'm sure there will be many. So, Mr. Speaker I will do a brief explanation of the bill. It is a simple bill as you guys know. Not complex. I think Representative Hall could understand that. So we'll go through just a few of the sections real quick and see what questions we all have and try to get this bill passed out today. Section 1. If you guys have a copy it does extend the rule completion from the Mining Commission from October to January 1st of 2015. We were doing that to allow more time for some of these more complex rules that we're running into. To really look and let some of the studies come to fruition before we head the rules to the General Assembly. Section 2 really modifies the APA process and I'm trying to read my chicken scratch here. Basically, it does about three things. It really does away with the 25 day requirement of rules being adopted before they come to us. And part of that reason that you'll see some of these APA exemptions and modifications are if the rules process goes longer. If we don't get them on January 1st, if we get them on March 1st or April 1st. The APA process would not allow us to take some of these issues up this session. That's what you'll see in Section 2. Section 3 was originally the section that said a date certain from the Senate of July 1st of 2015. We modified that in public utilities to guarantee that the rules would be in place before the moratorium is lifted. If you guys remember in Senate Bill 76 , if you go back and read your Senate 76 Bill from last session or 2012 it says basically that the rules will be in place and the positive action by the General Assembly would include lifting the moratorium. And that's basically what the Stone amendment in the public utilities did. Section 4, 5 and 6 deal with reinstating, before the 9 year commission was established there was just a Mining Commission. And what this does is it bifurcates those two commissions once again, because the mining folks wanted their commission back, and establishes the enrollment of that and establishes the Oil and Gas Commission. And I haven't got kicked by staff yet so I must be doing pretty good on this. Section 7 just removes some antiquated language that we need to do to move forward with the issues. Section 8 is really about the trade secret issue. You guys have probably have heard a lot about that. It directs the MEC and Dener to keep these trade secrets and let me make sure everybody understands the difference between trade secrets and chemicals.

If you've got a beverage can sitting on your desk or a water bottle, you can flip around and you can see what's in that beverage can, that Coke, or that Pepsi, or whatever you have on on your list. But what you can't see is what percentage of each one of those things are, how they're mixed, what they're mixed with and all the details. A lot of these fluids are proprietary issues on how they're mixed. Not really what's in them but the sizes of each commodity and how they're mixed in there. Now if any of you guys have worked in a utility area, in an area that has equipment, you'll notice that there is what's called MSDS sheets, Material Safety Data Sheets which are mandated by health and safety folks. So when you arrive on that site, let's say a first responder arrives on that site, that commercial site, industrial site. If there's an issue they can go straight to the safety area right today and get the MSDS sheet. Those MSDS sheets say here are the chemicals that are on site. Here's how they react to humans. Here's how they react to fire. Here's how they react to explosives. It's no different on a mining site. You'll have the same issues. The MSDS sheets will be there, which says here are the chemicals we have on site. But what won't be there are the issues that say here's how you mix them to make the fluid we're we're working with. But they will be available in emergency issues to all first responders. Because remember now, the trade secrets are handled by ?? and MEC and I think the state geologist will be the receptor of those. Nine and ten are not as important as eleven. Eleven reduces the application to drill from 3000 dollars per drill on the pad to 3000 dollars for the first application on the same pad and then 15 dollars for every application on that same well pad after that. The reason being is the first drill is the one that's the most expensive. That's the one we have to do a lot of due diligence on. That's the one that has to have all the permitting on. The second ones are just multiples of the first one. So there's less, if there is a fee for service, that's what it's for. Moving on, twelve is not as important as we'd like to discuss here. 13 is talks about the presumptive liability of contamination of water of a well for drilling. And basically, originally it was 5000 feet and tended at, and Representative Stone and everybody worked on this originally it was 5000 feet diameter. It was easier if we moved it to a radius. It made more sense. We moved it to a half a mile radius because everybody can understand a half a mile radius. ?? requires five well tests and the first one of course is a pre-test. And 6 12 18 and 24 months after the production of the well starts. It does require a third party well testing. And the well testing are going to be on public. So the public can see them. Also in 13 it talks about the require the bonds of no less than a million dollars per well driller. And moving on to 14. 14 is the prohibit all in natural gas development. 17 through 19 deals with the severance tax. We can get into the exact numbers and questions you have on those. There's reasons we did that. Most of the states, take Arkansas and Texas, have what they call initial rates, incentive rates, to get folks to come in and drill. Now since they are mature in their gas play, they have default rates, I believe Miss Finell told me that. Default rates. We will get to those default rates. But it'll take us a few years. We're still in the initial high production, high cost well state right now. 20 28 are basically studies you will see out there. 29 is energy policy council can use legal support from ?? And 30 establishes what's called a GGE, a gallon gas equivalent for compressed natural gas and diesel gallon equivalent for liquified natural gas. And Mr. Speaker I would be happy to answer questions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stone, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentleman, we have been working a long time with the Senate on this 786. For most of you, you may think it's been the last year but it's really been the last 3 and a half years to get to this point on arriving to where we've came. This bill may say Senate bill but it's got a lot of House work in it. It's as much as the House as it is the Senate's. We cover some very important sections in this bill to make drilling better in North Carolina. You go back and you look at what we did for injection wells. That was a very controversial issue last year. We took injection wells out for North Carolina. You go look at the bad actors

laws and how we made it better, how we made it fit for North Carolina. That was a great addition. The biggest one of all is look at the trade secrets. It's 180 degrees opposite of what we had last year that was recommended to the House. So those were important issues when it comes to land, protecting our land, our water, and our air. Look at the testing for water, we went from three times to five times since this came to the House. We've done a lot of great things to make sure the quality of life is better in these areas while pushing forward to make sure we drill safe in North Carolina. It has been a lot of hard work. A lot of long nights and a lot of late nights of trying to get this bill together. We have 120 rules coming online here shortly and it's been an honor to work on this bill. We understand, or I understand, Lee County's in the heart of this so I very much appreciate, I've had the preview of being at the table the whole time. I can tell you that if I had to do it over again there's a lot of things I'd do different because I've been frustrated since 2012 on how to get input at the table. I open my office doors up to talk to the people that supported drilling in North Carolina and the people that opposed it. I even encouraged the people that came in my office that opposed this bill to not give me recommendations on how to shut it down but how to make a better bill and I told them that time and time and time again. Give me a better bill. And I can tell you that if any other state was wanting to move forward with natural gas exploration I would encourage you to put a four year limit and lift the moratorium 'cause then you would get input on how to make a better bill versus how to shut down the process time and time again in North Carolina. North Carolina is ready to be energy independent. This bill gets us one step closer to the process. The rules that we'll have will be ongoing and changing for a decade. Technology will get better, things will change in the economy and that will help us drive even a better bill. So I can tell you today that I stand up here proudly to support this bill and I ask you to support it and if you have any questions. But it's been a long, long rode but we still have a ways to go. I thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Fulghum, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Request of the Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman may state his inquiry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I request to be excused for voting on S786 under rule 24 of point 1A. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Without objection so ordered. Ladies and gentlemen, the Chair is in possession of five amendments. One from Representative Collins, three from Representative Stam, and one from Representative Meyer. As the Chair stated earlier today we will allow amendments tomorrow as well. Any amendments that will be considered today, any additional amendments the Chair would like to be in possession by the clerk no later than 5:00 otherwise they'll be considered tomorrow. Representative Stam is recognized to send forth an amendment. The clerk will read. And Representative Stam, please state the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Let's do the forty, sort of in numerical order 48, AMH-48. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Amendment AMH-48, Representative Stam moves to amend the bill on page 18, lines 22-40 by rewriting those lines to read: [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, members of the House, all three of these amendments have something in common. They were brought to me by the Representative of the Administrative Offices of the Courts as what I would call technical amendments. I've cleared them with people that appear to know something about the bill and just so I'll be very brief on each explanation. Apparently in writing, page 18, line 22-40 there was a section where they copied over a section from a 1987 Administrative Procedure Act when we had amended it in 2000 so this just puts the 2000 version back in to be more consistent with our normal administrative procedure. I move the adoption of the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hager, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Representative Stam did bring this to me and I am in full support of the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate. If not, the question before the House is the amendment sent forth by Representative Stam for the House Committee Substitute of Senate Bill 786. All in favor vote Aye, and all opposed No. The clerk will open vote.

The clerk will let the machine record the vote, 114 having been voted affirmative, 1 in the negative. The amendment passes. Representative Stam is recognized to send forth an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Blust, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I hit my yes button but it did not reflect. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman will be recorded as voting yes. Representative Holloway, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, I accidentally hit the wrong button. I meant to hit yes but hit no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman will be recorded as voting yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Amendment ALH-62. Representative Stam moves to amend the bill on page 19, line 1, by adding. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, members of the House, apparently there was some ambiguity in the underlying bill whether it was a Class 1 or Class 3 misdemeanor, so this makes it a Class 1 misdemeanor. This relates to discharges and I move the adoption of the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hager, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, as usual, as to Representative Stam’s amendment, I am in full support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Regardless of what people may feel about the policy here, I agree with Representative Stam that can be debated later, but this is simply a technical amendment and would urge that we adopt it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate, on the amendment? If not, the—Representative Hamilton please state your purpose. If not, the question before the House is the amendment sent forth by Representative Stam for the House Committee substitute of Senate Bill 786. All in favor vote aye, all opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will let the machine record the vote, 115 having voted affirmative, 1 in the negative. The amendment passes. Representative Stam is recognized to send forth an amendment. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Amendment ALL-82. Representative Stam moves to amend the bill on page 12, lines 43-45, by rewriting those lines to read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, members of the House, the Business Court is not actually a division of the General Court of Justice, rather it’s a portion of the Superior Court Division, so this just makes it clear that you file it in the Superior Court and then it’s designated as a Business Court matter. I move the adoption of the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the amendment, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and once again I agree with Representative Stam that this is a technical change. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further discussion, further debate? If not, the question before the House is the amendment sent forth by Representative Stam for the House Committee substitute of Senate Bill 786. All in favor vote aye, all opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote. The clerk will let the machine record the vote, 116 having voted affirmative, none in the negative. The amendment passes. Representative Meyer please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To send forth an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The House be at ease, we’re just trying to get the amendment in the clerk’s possession. We’ll be right back, Representative Meyer. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Meyer moves to amend the bill on page 10, lines 31-32, by inserting between those lines. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This amendment simply brings some alignment to this bill. I ask you to look at section 13 on page 15, lines 44-49, and you’ll see that, when a well is initially drilled, there’s a requirement of a bond of $1,000,000 as Representative Hager stated when he described the bill. My amendment goes to the section where a well would be closed and there’s vague language there currently, that simply says that sufficient funds are available, and I believe that having that type of vague language would end up with drillers and landowners in lawsuits because of the vague language. If we had alignment between the drilling of the well and the closure of the well it would work well for everyone involved, so I ask for your support for the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hager, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] To debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I do appreciate the Representative bringing forth the amendment

What we would love to do is allow the mining and energy commission there in the crux of this issue now. We’ve spoken with them on this issue and they’re going to have their language come forth ??? so we’ll be able to see that language instead of locking them down right now. They may require now, we don’t know that yet so I would advise everybody to vote no on this amendment and let’s let the mining and energy commission do what they need to do in this area. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Larry Hall please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Speak on the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker. I would just ask that people vote in favor of the amendment. Again, this is an opportunity for us to put a baseline in this bill, provide the same protection that’s supposed to be there when the well is open. There’s no reason that protection should not be maintained. Certainly it’ll ensure that our environment is taken care of for cleanup cost or whatever else that may result, and again if we’re going to force this on the citizens they should have some assurance that they will be protected in the case of a closure of one of these facilities. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Glazier please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] To speak to the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker. I rise to support the amendment for three reasons. One, as far as I can tell the US government accountability office notes the cost of reclamation on a single well site can range from $500,000 and above, that’s the first thing. Second, which means that the bond that’s being set by Representative Meyer is well within range of what the cost may be. Second the MEC has had plenty of time to put the number in, but chose for some reason not whereas they did put the previous number. Third, I think that it’s fine to let the rules work their way out, but if we’re going to be proceeding as we are today to vote we ought to know at least that the reclamation and costs are secure. That ought to be a baseline piece of information that’s available for the whole scheme and not something that’s going to be decided at the last minute, and for that reason since we’re pushing this bill forward as opposed to waiting for the full rules to come out then I think that we ought to have a number in there which can be changed by future legislation before the permitting occurs if that’s a wrong number, but to put in what the MEC or what’s in there now is just next to useless. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Hager please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Debate the amendment a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker. What we have is basically trying to bring the folks, the mining energy and commission the reason it’s vague now is because they haven’t developed that rule yet. There’s also a bond of reclamation that goes to the surface owner that they’re working on now that says how they will be closing and reclaiming the land so all these issues are there. So if we let the mining and energy commission do their job and look at the bond of reclamation, look at this bond we’re talking about now, and determine what’s the right levels for both of them. I doubt anybody on this floor has the depth of knowledge that folks sitting on that mining and energy commission does. We’ve been to three or four states, we don’t have that depth of knowledge myself, Representative Stone, Representative Boles. Those folks do, they know what it costs to close a well, they know what it costs to reclaim the land, they’re the ones that should be deciding this issue, not folks on this floor that really don’t know the specifics about how to do energy exploration, what it costs to do it, how to reclaim the land, how to put it back, how to fix any issues that we have. I ask you guys to vote no on this and let the folks who have been working for over two years now do their job. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Meyer please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] To debate the amendment a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman is recognized to debate the amendment a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker. I would just point out that as written the bill does not allow the general assembly to review the rules again after being passed by the mining commission and when land owners get into disputes with drilling companies over the cost of cleanup after a well is closed, they won’t complain about the mining commission, they’ll complain about the general assembly. I would like to have assurance that we’ve done our best to protect both parties. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Ladies and gentlemen, just as a point of clarification that is the last amendment we’ll be taken up today. Representative Collins has indicated that that may be taken up tomorrow and by clarification, when I said five o’clock, I meant only for amendments today. You have until tomorrow, we’re trying to work out the session time for tomorrow, once we determine that if it’s eleven the Chair would like to have all amendments into the Clerk’s office before 10:30, thirty minutes before session we’ll determine whether that’s 11AM or not before we finish the debate and the vote today. Now we’re back on the bill as amended. Representative Harrison please state your purpose.

to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The lady is recognized to debate the bill as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Speaker, ladies and gentleman of the House. I appreciate the improvements that Representative Stone highlighted in the bill. I think it's important that we added that that act or provision and the disclosure was toned down a bit and the maintaining the line on the injecting fracking waste water fluid into our aquifers would be a dangerous path for us to go down but I think a lot about this bill is very troubling. I don't really understand why we're rushing to fast-track this fracking bill. The House had always taken a very deliberative approach. I always appreciated the leadership of Representative Stone and Samuelson and Gillespie, when he was here, that the, we were gonna study it and make sure we had it right. We promised the public that we were gonna have the rules in place before the House lifted the moratorium but that's not what this bill does. It's too rushed and no state's gotten it right. I've heard a lot of references to Arkansas. I guarantee you that's one state we do not want to emulate in the regulation of fracking. The price is extremely low, it's so low that there's a lot of pressure to export it which is manifested in the study provision to perhaps set up a terminal and quarter at county to export the liquefied natural gas. The geology of North Carolina is such that it's gonna make it difficult to extract the gas. It's located close to our drinking water aquifers. In fact, it intersects Jordan Lake at one point. That's extremely troubling to me. The bill did not get the review of a substantive environmental committee in the House or the Senate and as we noted earlier it never got noticed to the public during the House debate. When I asked the sponsors why we were rushing this bill it was said it was because NorthConn needs the jobs and America needs the energy. Well the commerce department study that came out two years ago said that this would produce 387 jobs in North Carolina and as far as the energy it, we've been told it's a 12 day supply when it gets into the national market. So that's a lot of risk for not a lot of reward. There have been public health and environmental issues all over the country. I've got a stack of studies I've been looking at because I know that comes up every year that it's not been, there's been no documented contamination but there has been. A Texas court ruled, issued the first ruling last month that issued damages for a family who's health was significantly compromised by exposure to fracking contaminants, primarily through the air. We have studies of methane contamination, we have a decline in dairy production in Pennsylvania. We have birth defects in rural Colorado. We've got EPA studies in Pennsylvania and Wyoming demonstrating contamination. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection indicates hundreds of cases of contamination. We've got social calls associated with fracking that have been documented. So there are a lot of problems associated with fracking and I just think that we should slow it down here. And also if we're really talking about jobs we'd be talking about clean energy jobs. We have nearly 20,000 clean energy jobs in North Carolina. These are gonna go to North Carolinians unlike the fracking jobs that will go to fracking folks who come in from out of state and we're #3 in solar installed last year. We're #2 in energy, clean energy manufacturing in the country and we're #1 in wind potential offshore, off the North Carolina coast. These are good, clean jobs that can't be outsourced. For every dollar we invest in clean energy we create three and half times more jobs than that invested in fossil fuels. Now, I'll just highlight quickly some of the problems with the bill. I think the fact that we're lifting the moratorium after promising the public that we weren't going to is a big problem. That violates a promise. We're amending the EPA to limit the General Assembly's future on the ability to oversee these roles. It doesn't deal with the forced pulling issue which is gonna be a real problem for private property rights. It' criminalizes disclosure of the toxic chemicals. Now, while I hear different stories about it the way I understand it trade secrets could include just one individual chemical so you may be exposed to a toxin and you may not be able to know what toxin that is. It cuts the presumptive liability for contamination in half. It doesn't deal with long term contamination. Representative Meyer tried to do that in his amendment. It doesn't protect surface areas where the mineral rights have been sold to another property, to another owner. There's significant industry infrastructure that are not dealt with in this bill and that's gonna be a big problem. I've been reading up on this, our imminent domain laws are quite weak in this area and this could be a problem for property owners. It limits local government control. It doesn't deal with the ?? issue. This is a huge issue in other states. No other options of recycling, yes that will take care of part of it but this is talking about potentially sending it to treatment plants and we are not equipped in North Carolina to treat the toxins and the contaminants that are contained in fracking waste water and we certainly don't wanna be putting it in the surface water. Cities like Pittsburgh, ?? Pennsylvania, others around the country have had

Provide bottled water for their citizens because of documented contamination from fracking fluids. It doesn’t deal with air pollution issue, this is a significant public health hazard, and this is a huge problem. It provides a perverse tax incentive where that gives you an incentive to come drill now when we’re not really prepared to deal with drilling and we’re giving away our resources at a very cheap rate. This is a really bad and irresponsible bill. I think it’s bad for North Carolina, I think it’s bad for it’s citizens, it’s going to be a problem for our natural resources, I urge you to vote no. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Grier Martin please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] To debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you very much Mr. Speaker. Members, the lady from Guilford has talked about just a few of the problems with this bill, they’re numerous and if advocates or the folks involved in these issues had the appropriate amount of time to look at it we would have no problem in coming up with an even longer list and more detailed. If you want to give us more time to do that, have no doubt that we will come back to you with even more facts and figures to show you why this bill is bad, but given the rush to do this we’re left in many cases with just emotional arguments. So let me give you an emotional argument that’s based in fact and it’s what the lady from Guilford talked about, the provision of this bill that makes absolutely secret so many of the ???? that are going to be pumped and chemicals that are going to be pumped into our drinking water. As a father, the main reason I was put on this Earth is to protect my daughter, and you want me to vote for a bill that’s going to pump unnamed chemicals into her drinking water and the only recourse you give me is that after she gets sick you can release it to a doctor? Never. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Cleveland please state your purpose. Representative Larry Hall please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Speak on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman has recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker. Ladies and gentlemen, this bill is just not ready. We know we haven’t gotten the input from people that would help make it be ready. We have a current environmental catastrophe going right now regarding our power industry, our utilities industry in the state, and it’s caused by the waste created by energy production and now we’re entering into another phase where we’re going to have an industry, after we’ve learned this lesson from our utility companies, to say we’re going to create this industry without having a real plan, a vetted plan, to deal with the waste that’s going to result from it. Whether it’s the disclosure of the chemicals and their content or how we’re actually going to dispose of it and police that disposition, monitor it, and ensure it’s done properly, we don’t have it, it’s not ready now and this bill is not ready for your approval so I’d ask that you vote against it. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Pierce please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Ask Representative Rieves a question. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Rieves does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGE] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative, just to ask you a question. It appears from all that I have observed over the last couple of years with this bill that Lee County seems to be the area where it’s going to be affected, your county is going to be affected quite a bit. Is that correct? [SPEAKER CHANGE] It’s actually both counties. My district will probably be disproportionately affected. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Another question. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman yields? [SPEAKER CHANGE] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGE] What has been the conversation in your community from local folks? Does your county still have local control? Would the local government have any right, responsibility? Would they be able to have any comments on this once it gets to your community? The local government. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Well I think that’s one of the issues that we’ve got, well one of the many issues that we’ve got, is the fact that we don’t have a lot of local control at this point and time as this bill is proposed and we want to make sure we’ve got more local control, we want to make sure we’ve got more local involvement with anything that’s going to be coming in because that’s what these elected officials are tasked to do. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Follow up. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman yields? [SPEAKER CHANGE] Yes I do. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative I know that you’re new, we’re glad to have you in the general assembly. Have you had any conversation with anybody in your community about this bill? Regardless of what party, democrats, republicans, independents, have you had any comments from anybody in your community about this bill? [SPEAKER CHANGE] Because of the fact that the district is composed of two different counties, both Chatham and Lee County, I can tell you that there is no division in Chatham county whatsoever about their position about this bill.

[0:00:00.0] And they don’t wanna see a go through at this point of time and I think and that’s my part that’s not one of the other actually had republic and democratic commission is up to date. Now, that’s their concern we got hundreds of emails that concern about this position I have got and I can tell you exactly one email in favor hundreds not in favor and I think the ___[00:21] County that you see names similar training Steve voting public but he want the elected officials there is a concern about the speed of the bill at this point of time without there being any kind of rules in place with Mining and Energy Commission and you will find people that may say that they are comfortable with the speed but I think most of I have talked to and again all I can attribute or those that I have spoken to would say that they are uncomfortable with the speed at this time and we just like to have the rules in place before this bill is proposed. [SPEAKER CHANGES] One more follow up Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Gentleman… [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do, I know you too a lot of this but with any contract signed and those contracts still in place for folks who are ___[01:02] in contracts I thank you and I talked about that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Where a several leases that were signed at Lee County and I believe at this point of time a little bit over why that 50% of leases have expired and have not being renewed? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker just comment on bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you speaker, I just wanna to share those and ask few questions from the gentleman but I come from Scotland County a very prestigious part of the state and there are many folks that might just think as you know cannot be here today to speak for themselves. So, I thought it was my job today to speak on this field and frankly I can tell you nobody down my way is really in favor of this bill at all because we are concerned about for places like the Lee County a very wonderful place, ones the gas is gone then the local government stuck with the rails and the infrastructure they put in place, the state has probably worked on roads and improve roads to get the truck there or whatever and then the state is stuck with Lee because eventually when all drags up there is nothing left and the state is gonna be stuck with infrastructure they put in place. So, I just wanna say from my standpoint that I think we are moving little bit too quick, I wanna thank to members who have worked on it but I just think we headed in a wrong direction with this bill and I just thought members will take that in consideration and vote against it, thank you Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stan please state your purpose? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Debate the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker, Ladies and gentlemen we have set here and we have hear a lot of the arguments back & forth, the local control we have talked about, I want you to know that I think 39 states already have this process working currently, 39 states the process has taken the best rules from the other states and apply here in North Carolina. Lee County, we need the jobs, North Carolina needs energy independence and to move forward our nation needs to move forward with this. We talk about a six day supply, the good news if you write the free markets will work they will close up in their home. But the same thing was said in Pennsylvania when I said they had a very conservative number and I think it was 10 to 20 times what they came back with. We want the several communities and we didn’t just meet with pro drillers, we sit down and met with the people in the community that didn’t like it. We said, “What you don’t like about it? How did it make your life inconvenient? What can we do in North Carolina to do it right?” All of them came back to our community and applied it even things that we thought that need to be addressed and we turned into study committee because there were several issues when you talk about taxation where you wonder what you are gonna do with fall of revenue? That was a huge issue in our concern, we thought it was little controversial, we turn into a study committee. So, we do a lot to reach out all around all sides and find best way to make a bill to move forward. We have to send the message because for four years we have been debating on how we move forward with a bunch of everyone coming to our office and saying, “No, no, no.” But never anyone saying, “How can you do it better?” [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Peter please state your purpose? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ask the member question please? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Stan, gentleman ___[04:24] [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman ayes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Representative Stan, I travel to your county on my way home down quite a bit, I just want to ask you a question, do you have any concern I know we get a lot of these emails from different folks but I take a lot seriously when we talk about the health concerns I would be along ___[04:46], Representative Martin talked about his daughter, he talked about Pennsylvania fracking area where there were ____[04:51] concerns, ___[04:53] counsels and other problems, should we not take this serious I mean you are talking about the… [0:04:59.9] [End of file…]

Particularly your county, Lee County, I know that surely, surely you would have interest as it relates to health issues. Could you comment on that? Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Sure, thank you for the question Representative Pierce and I think that we’re always concerned. We always move looking at all the opportunities or the mishaps that could happen, but I’ll go back. Thirty-nine states have already looked at it and we’re looking at how to do it better than those other states. You spoke of Pennsylvania, remember Pennsylvania’s the only state that said let’s go do it and we’ll figure out the years ten years from now. We’re not doing that, we’ve been very cautious in doing it right and I also speak, when you go back to the letters of concern that I receive over the water, the land, and the air, and I receive tons of them. Maybe a hundred, maybe two hundred. Lee County is sixty thousand people so two hundred don’t speak for the majority. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Resume on the bill? [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman has the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker. Just going back, there has been a lot of hard work put in this bill as we move forward, and this is not the end. I will reference that again. There will be more language coming in the coming years to fine tune this, to make it even better, but we have to have a starting point to move forward and hopefully more people will come on board with how to make this bill better. So I ask you today to vote for this bill and support, vote for this bill and support the jobs of North Carolina, vote for this bill and support jobs for Lee County, and help make ??? energy independent. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Larry Hall please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Ask the gentleman a question please. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Stone the gentleman should keep in mind that he has a minute left and an answer to the question counts against your time. Does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGE] I yield. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker. Thank you Representative Stone. I just have a question, I heard you make a reference to the number of jobs your county was ready for and would ask how many jobs are going to be created in Lee County and what types of jobs are those going to be that you so surely express will be created immediately as a result of this bill? [SPEAKER CHANGE] I think as we travel amongst the states to look at it there’s two different kinds of jobs. You’ve got the direct jobs and the indirect jobs and I don’t know if anyone ever counts the indirect jobs but look at North Dakota, they’re having to truck people in there to find help so I think this is going to bring a great opportunity for jobs in Lee County and the state of North Carolina. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Just a quick follow up Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman’s time has expired so if the gentleman is seated, the gentleman may be recognized to direct a question, the gentleman may come back up. It will not count against his time. So now, Representative Stone does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGE] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker and Representative Stone I appreciate your answer but I was looking for an answer to the number of jobs that would be created in Lee County. I understand Montana has their own job force and their own resources and their own commission, but I was saying the number of jobs, if you say direct and indirect, the number of jobs that would be created in Lee County where this drilling and pollution is going to take place. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Well I think that all depends on the number of wells we drill and how big. You said six day earlier that was quoted in here and we’ve heard estimates that may be twenty-five years, all that depends on the number of jobs. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you. Representative Stone, speak on the bill a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman has recognized to debate the bill a second time. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker and I think therein lies the problem. We have this promise, some illusory promise of moving fast and not having the public involved, not addressing health concerns and there are jobs out there. We’ve been here before on a bill that we had last session where Representative ?? said all these jobs were going to get created and there would be all this economic benefit and I can report to you the last time we did this, that zero jobs have been created. That progress has not happened and I asked these same questions that time so this whole speculation about jobs and how there is no number, there’s no estimate, there’s just jobs out there in the ether somewhere and that’s why we should proceed without fully vetting this bill so again I’d ask you to vote against it. Let’s do the job correctly, if we’re going to create jobs let’s make sure that’s the reason we’re doing this. Let’s find out what they are and make sure the people are protected in the process. Again I’d ask you to vote against this bill. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Glazier please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGE] To see if Representative Stone would yield for one purpose? [SPEAKER CHANGE] Representative Stone does the gentleman yield? [SPEAKER CHANGE] I do. [SPEAKER CHANGE] The gentleman yields. [SPEAKER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker, thank you Representative. I just wanted to make sure I understood something. I know there was a suggestion about six days..

Representative Harrison said there’s some data to indicate that the amount of gas that’s available, if you looked at the development of the shale is about twelve days total for assuming a national consumption rate. I understood you to just say that you think there’s a study out there that suggests there could be as much as a range of twenty-five years. Are you saying that there’s twenty-five years worth of national consumption rate of natural gas in North Carolina and if so can you please cite me a study that supports that? [SPEKAER CHANGE] Representative Glazier thank you for the question. I don’t know it’s our responsibility. I think our responsibility is to put good rules and regulations in place and let the free markets decide if they want to spend the money to find out what’s down there to begin with. Then they drill a test well and decide they don’t want to drill anymore, that’s the free markets. They’ll get that information and decide more, but other states went through the same process we’re going through. They estimated very conservatively only to find out that it was a hundred times more than they originally thought, and the reason is because government usually doesn’t spend the money to find out what industry will find out. [SPEKAER CHANGE] One follow up Mr. Speaker. [SPEKAER CHANGE] Does the gentleman yield? [SPEKAER CHANGE] I yield. [SPEKAER CHANGE] The gentleman yields. [SPEKAER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker. Thank you Representative. I just want to again make sure, and I understand the argument, but you asserted a fact and because I think it’s important in the argument of what’s the cost benefit, what’s the risk benefit that’s potential here. You made a statement that there’s a study that would indicate up to twenty-five years of consumption. I want to know what study that is or are you just making that as an extrapolation in your own opinion from what happened in other states without any study or scientific evidence? [SPEKAER CHANGE] I don’t know that we could determine if there’s six days nationally or twelve days nationally or thirty years until there’s been a well drilled and more information. I don’t think we can gather that information to make a correct quote. [SPEKAER CHANGE] Last follow up. [SPEKAER CHANGE] The gentleman yields. [SPEKAER CHANGE] Thank you. Representative Stone, is there a study, anywhere, that supports or says twenty-five years? [SPEKAER CHANGE] I’m not aware of a study that says twelve days or twenty years. [SPEKAER CHANGE] Representative Hager please state your purpose. [SPEKAER CHANGE] Speak on the bill a second time. [SPEKAER CHANGE] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill as amended a second time. [SPEKAER CHANGE] Mr. Speaker may I ask Representative Stone a question? [SPEKAER CHANGE] Why not? Everybody else is. [SPEKAER CHANGE] I yield. [SPEKAER CHANGE] The gentleman yields. [SPEKAER CHANGE] Representative Stone could you tell me who Jim Womack is? [SPEKAER CHANGE] Jim Womack is the chair of the Mining and Energy Commission. He’s also a county commissioner from Lee County. [SPEKAER CHANGE] Follow up Mr. Speaker. [SPEKAER CHANGE] Does the gentleman yield? [SPEKAER CHANGE] I do. [SPEKAER CHANGE] The gentleman yields. [SPEKAER CHANGE] So would you say that he has been Lee County’s representative in the body that actually makes the rules for what Lee County will have to see in the future? [SPEKAER CHANGE] I would say Jim has been at the head of that Mining and Energy Commission along with many other individuals that are talented and I can tell you that there’s been a lot of hard work on that commission that I’ve been very supportive of with many different opposing ideas at the table. [SPEKAER CHANGE] Speak on the bill. [SPEKAER CHANGE] The gentleman is recognized to debate the bill. [SPEKAER CHANGE] Thank you Mr. Speaker. Two numbers I need to give you guys: first one is twenty-four. Twenty-four months so far the Mining and Energy Commission has been working around that time. They’ve worked tirelessly, I’ve been in their meetings, Representative Stone, Representative Boles have been in their meetings. These guys have went through with a fine tooth comb. The next number is eight. Eight more months they’ll continue to work on this process until we get the rules, bringing almost three years they’ve worked at this process. Now me as a little ADD and engineer thought we could probably do it in three or four months so I’m glad they got in there and said listen it’s going to take a while, we’re going to have the best rules, we’re going to protect the public. So all these things they said we don’t have yet, you’re right we don’t have them because we’re letting the folks that study this determine what we need, not Representative Hall, not Representative Glazier, not Representative Martin determine what we need. These are the folks who have studied it for almost three years now. They’re going to come with the best rules in the nation and we’re going to approve them and we’re going to move forward in this process. So what we need to do guys is vote yes on this bill, let the Mining and Energy Commission do their job and then let’s move on and create the jobs. Thank you. [SPEKAER CHANGE] Further discussion, further debate? If not the question before the House is the passage the House Committee Substitute to Senate Bill 786 as amended on its second reading. All in favor vote aye. All opposed vote no. The clerk will open the vote.

The clerk will let the machine record the vote, 62 having voted affirmative and 52 negative. The Speaker will be recorded as having voted aye as well. 63 in the affirmative, 52 in the negative. The House Committee substitute to Senate Bill 786 as amended has passed its second reading and will remain on the calendar. Ladies and gentlemen I’ve been advised, because of a concurrent vote that will be taking up tomorrow from the Senate, that we will need to come into session at 1 p.m. The Chair would ask that anyone wishing to submit amendments to the Senate Bill 786 to have them in the possession of the clerk by noon. Originally I said 30 minutes before, but since we’re going in later I hope that that’s acceptable to the members who are planning on preparing any amendments for consideration tomorrow. Notice is in announcement. Representative Faircloth, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For an announcement sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized for an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Speaker. We have talked many times this week about the wonderful celebration of Memorial Day Weekend last week and many references have been made to our veterans across the state of North Carolina and in our country. I wanted to make you aware that this weekend the Carolina Field of Honor, which is an absolutely beautiful new structure in Guilford County, at the border of Guilford County and Forsyth County, and it is being paid for by citizens who care about the 150,000 veterans there are in the triad area of the state. Beautiful obelisks there that would remind you of Washington D.C. It will be dedicated this Saturday at 7:00 P.M. It is located in Kernersville on East Mountain Street. The park sits right on the Forsyth and Guilford line. You can’t miss it. There are signs there. If you could make it, it will be something you will treasure. If you have folks that live in the area, please make them aware of it. We would love to have a good turnout and it’s a tribute to our veterans. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative West, please state your purpose. [SPEAKER CHANGES] An announcement, Mr. Speaker. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The gentleman is recognized to make an announcement. [SPEAKER CHANGES] House Environment will meet in the morning at 10:00, room 544. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Further notices and announcements. The clerk will read. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The House Committee on Government will meet tomorrow at 10:00 A.M. in 643 LOB. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Ladies and gentlemen, if the House would come to order. The Chair would like to make a note, and I hope that no members object. The Chair actually allowed an exception for the rule that doesn’t allow placards in the chamber because we thought these young people went to a lot of work to come out and communicate something that I think is important to all of us. The Chair would also, again, ladies and gentlemen up there, it’s actually not within the rules to come into the chamber so you’ve got a rare exception up there to have your signs. We appreciate you advocating for teachers. We’re trying to do our best as well. Ladies and gentlemen we are going to adjourn in memory of Maya Angelou. The Chair would ask everybody to return to their seats and if we could possibly, before we adjourn, have a moment of silence in memory of Maya Angelou. Representative Moore is recognized. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Speaker, subject to receipt of messages from the Senate, receipt of committee reports, receipt of conference reports, the referral

...bills and resolutions, appointment of conferees, and modifications to the calendar, I move that the house do now adjourn in memory of Maya Angelou, to reconvene on Thursday, May the 29th at 1:00 PM. [Speaker Changes] Representative Elmore moved, seconded by Representative Terry, and in memory of Maya Angelou, that the house do now adjourn subject to the receipt of messages from the Senate, receipt of committee reports, receipt of conference reports, ?? of referral of bills and resolutions, appointment of conferees, and modifications to the calendar, to reconvene on Wednesday May 29th at 1:00 PM. All those in favor say Aye. All opposed No. The Ayes have it; the House stands adjourned.