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 | March 26, 2015 | Committee Room | Environment Committee

Full MP3 Audio File

Not big enough for you to [xx] Good morning. And let's all keep Pett in our players she is not feeling well today and so the last minute was told out was going to chair this so I don't know everything we are doing I apologize, but first let me recognize our sergeant in arms which we're always wonderful people to have here, were got Regy Sales, Marvin Lee Terry Mcroy and Chris Mcreken thank you for being here, and we do have some pages on our list be able to raise you hands when I call you names. We got Terick Rotes, Keny Ruke and I guess Sean Kone did say that right? Very good, anybody else, thank you. Today we're going to introduce secretary Vander Vart from Dino and I asked the secretary to introduce his staff and then our next meeting we will go into more detail on what Dean was doing and then we'll follow that up with a [xx] update from Mr. Leader. thanks very much for that and I appreciate the chance to be here, I certainly can answer any questions you want at anytime but it's good to get over here and actually get a chance to get in front of you as a group I think most of all know me somewhat and I just want that briefly just make sure that everybody understands I'm an old time dinner employee and engineer by background I grew up here in Riley, so it's fun to be here, in sense it's fun to be here in this situation, but we have a lot of challenges that ordinarily before dinner the protection of our environment of course and the enhancement of appreciation of our natural resources are always a core functions, but as you know our last year and actually even preceding the actual spill, coal ash has been occupying the part of our time. So I thought it would be helpful because of the work in progress to have a chance for everybody to hear first hand how that process was going forward. I always cringe when I read some of the accounts of this coal ash thread and its really multiple threats and that's sometimes lost in the translation and just to recap, the impact of of coal ash can manifest in different ways, it can impact the ground water which is uniquely a state issue because the federal government does not regulate the ground water. There are threats to the surface water which can either take the form of leaks or sips or rather discharges that is still the preview of Carolina, but we're implementing clean water act requirement and that becomes in this context so we're pursuing those issues in a state federal partnership and a joint forceful agreement the catastrophic failure

of the structural system and that we saw at Nile river which, of course was a much smaller version of what happened at TVA where we really had a breach to the dam structure, but that is in regulatory balance it is illegal discharge but it is a massive one, and so again it is a clean water act violation but there also other issues in terms of the structural questions. So really you're talking about three distinct areas and of those we're boiling them down to the dam and structural components and then the ground water and the surface water issues so when you see something about [xx] I know can be confusing because you've recently seen a multiple announcements of various fines or settlements or what have you, it can become somewhat the [xx] as to why are all these being layered upon one another when in fact, they're separate. So you saw and that's nothing to say about the of course the shareholder action which has nothing thankfully to do with Dina. So when you read these accounts try to take your [xx] and try to sort it out because North Carolina's state obligation purely state obligation to getting us ground water and it was a ground water violation many of them that was the subject of the recently announced 25 million dollar fund at the certain facility, the surface water or clean water act civil violations have not been announced that's the subject of a as I said a state federal joint enforcement agreement and then you had the criminal aspects which those were announced already. So that's the context and what I wanted to do just before we ask the Tom Reader to give you a sort of an update on how we had to proceed remember the initial road map to this  what became the [xx] been act, was the subject of a lot of work last year, it was enacted by this general assembly and it became law and we've been implementing it and it's a very complex as you know complex legislation and you will be interested to see how that's playing out. Just to let you know very recently the federal government finally came forth with federal regulatory requirements for co-lash empowerment. I guess we shamed amend to it after some 30 years of explicit exemptions, I guess they figured they better to look good they want to play catch up but really this is North Carolina as the bend guide to this as far as other states where the first have a comprehensive management [xx] management legislation. So it's a first and you'll hear that being first sometimes has some difficulties. I did want to introduce some of my staff and then I think Tom is going to introduce some of his staff. My Chief Deputy Secretary is John Evans, and behind him is Drew Ellliot, Communication heads, and next to him I hope you've met Mark Dortham, who is the Legislative Liaison and we have other here that I think Tom is going to introduce but unless you've got any pressing questions for me, I was going to ask Tom Reader to come up and do what only Tom Reader can do and that isspeak very quickly and give you an update as to where we are in [xx]. Thank you very, we're probably to move on, thank you thanks Mr. Chair, I'm Tom Reader, I'm the assistant secretary of environment under secretary Vendervalt I just want to introduce some of our division directors here before I get started. From Delmar we have

Toby Vinson who's acting for Tracy Davis this we have Tom Francin, from DWR who's acting for Jay Zimmerman this week, we have I coalescing from the new division of mitigation formerly know as IP, we have leaned [xx] from the divisional waste management, heal a home and DAQ and Kemp Coleson from the division of water infrastructure, so those are our primary division directors in the enviromental side of the hour. So before I begin I just want to clarify something that Secretary Vandevoir said, I'm just going to do this he said that coal ash occupies a lot of our time. I would use a different word for that I would use obsession I mean I have particularly become obsessed with coal ash. I dream about coal ash and I know that because of that I've passed it on to a lot of my staff also who are also rapid becoming, rapidly becoming obsessed with coal ash too, and I don't pin that lightly it's probably becoming a little bit unhealthy, but there is no stopping it now. So let me talk to you about. I've got the same problem so we need to go in the rehab or something. I think we need some sort of group therapy maybe. Representative Mark Gredy. So let me go into this and I am really proud to be here and the reason I am so proud to be here today is because what I am going to tell in out the next 10 or 15 minutes, is that this administration, this department department and the staff of this department has done more coal ash in the last six to seven months than has been done in this state in the last 60 years, and I know you agree with me on that when I get done with this presentation. So here is what we are going to talk about we're going to talk about how this department has aggressively pursued and executed the mandate that were given in executive order 60 to and the coal ash management act which were both signed last August, and for just sake of reference we're often refer to the Coal Ash Management Act as CAMA. So when I say CAMA Act in this presentation I'm not talking about the coastal stuff I'm talking about Coal Ash Management Act. We'll talk about our enforcement actions, we'll talk about were we stand on litigation and we'll talk about some of the challenges that we encounter in moving forward with this thing. Now before I get into the four presentation I just want to tell the philosophy we've developed in implementing all of these requirements and Dino. A basically a three prone philosophy first and foremost is we want to address the immediate concerns. Stop pollution of service water and most importantly protect public health. The second problem is we want to look at this from along term strategic perspective. What we need to do to render this coal ash inert, so to speak, so it never poses a threat to North Carolina resources again. That's the second problem. Third thing, we have to hold Duke accountable for they've done. That's got to be it, so we haven't tried things there that guiding our philosophy when we implement these requirements both in the executive order 62 in Canon, so what have we done? I have talked a lot of PR already of what we have done, so let's get to it what have we actually done? Well, first and foremost we've kind of quantified all core combustion residuals in North Carolina so we know how many pounds, how many times of coal ash and where they are located just for your reference there a 150 million tonnes of coal ash in North Carolina not all of this is in pounds some of it is in this order [xx] pits and things like that but that's how much we have to deal with, 150 million tons. That's the first time the State's ever actually known the specific amount of coal ash in North Carolina we've been identified and located all public and private water supply wells within a half a mile of the compliance boundaries for all the 14 coal ash facilities and we've sampled pretty much sampled completed sampling of all those wells within a 1000 feet of the compliance boundaries. Those sampling results have been analysed by independent laboratories and those results have been sent on to the division of health and human services that's going to prepare a individual health recommendation, health risk aviation for each well owner we sampled, so we sampled about 300 wells and the first round of sampling, so each one of those well owners each one of those consumers we'll get a site specific health risk evaluation prepared just for them, that's going to tell them if there's any dangers associated with drinking that water from anything we found in that sampling. Protection of public health that's number one, that's what we always have to remember. What else have we done? Well we've approved all the ground water assessment plans for our 14 facilities and those are now being implemented, those have all been approved. These plans have I said before, are critical to us. These plants will allow us to determine, about the horizontal and vertical extent are the ground water contamination underneath these facilities, without that we can not make a scientific decision as to how to prioritize and classify these facilities for closure, we absolutely have to have that data, and those ground water assessment plants although

they are highly technical highly complex, involve a lot of complex modeling and things like that, would provide us with that data, accordingly Our staff has spent over 100 hours reviewing each one of those plans and commenting to do, going back and forth, relaying our comments, get changes of the north plant, so in total their staff have spent over 1400 hours on reviewing those ground water assessment plans for approval and implementation, by the way I should mention some of the people that have been reviewing those plans are new hires that we were able to hire with the collash money under the [xx] bill. One of the other things we've done is we've identified and located all unauthorized surface discharges, those are sips tow drains, which you hear about, you've all been identified, sampled and located okay, that's the first time in history of North Carolina that's been done, that all those unauthorized surface discharges have been located sampled and identified. We've also, we drafted National Elimination System waste water and storm water permit for the Alan river band and Marshal facilities, those have gone out for public notice there will be a public hearing for those on April 8 at Lexington which is not next week but the week after [xx]. Now let me tell you why that is so important, that river bench was federal permit for the river bank facility that we send out for notice, public notice and comment is the first time I think in the country that anybody has written a permit for one of these facilities that addresses these ships in a holistic manner and ensures the this scientific analysis that they will not pose a threat to surface water quality, first time it's ever been done, also it's the first permit I believe in a that has just got the issue of decanting and dewatering in a federal permit. So we work tirelessly with the EPA many, many different calls many face to face meetings, to get these permits drafted up to their approval so that we can get them out for public notice and comment but that river bend permit be because of really the first one of its kind in a nation so important that EPA actually sends it up to its headquarters and then they send it up to all the the other districts, the EPA districts in the United States so they could use that as a model for when they start dealing with their the coal ash problem, because we know this coal ash is universal throughout the United States. So basically North Carolina is setting up the models of how the the rest of the nation is going to deal with this problem, that's how far ahead of this issue we are than the rest of the country due to executive order 62, and the CAMA bill. What else have we done? Well, by the end of April, we're going to have draft and PDS these federal permits for waste water and storm water out of the Sutten Dan River Nashville facility,. That will be done by April 30, and those will go out for public notice some comment. You maybe wondering why Sutten river Nashville? Well because river bend which we already have done, Sutten dam river Nashbill with four permits those four if you remember that the governor ordered us to excavate. So those were the top of our list, we're going to get those permits in place first, so we can de water, decant those facilities, and begin excavating in that ash as soon as possible. That's what the governor told us to do in executive order 62, and that is exactly what we're doing. We've also just this week, issued for public notice and comment, structural field permits, mine reclamation permits, and for a one certification for break evening coal and mines that are done in Lee and Chatem County, and those who've gone out for public notice and hearing and those hearing things are scheduled for April 13th and 16th. One thing I should mention is you notice I keep saying that we noticed things for public comment, we're going to hold public hearings, we're absolutely committed to doing this process as transparently as we can. Absolutely no doubt about it. The governor has told us that that's how we wanted it done, that's what basically the spirit of the Kama access so everything we are doing is completely transparent, all these documents posted online anybody can read them and we're going to agree [xx] pursue public comments and input that every chance we can as we move along these steps. We completed a comprehensive inspections of all the dams in North Carolina and we've even done in camera inspection of all the piping associated with those dam, because you remember at Dan river it was the pipe that collapsed that caused that problem. So we've done that we've noticed deficiencies, minor deficiencies, nothing major, lot of minor deficiencies that Duke is in the process of correcting right now. All the dead lines to my knowledge, all the dead lines of both executive order 62 and Camen haven't meet be dinner even though it's a very aggressive schedule and we have to have people to work a lot extra hours sometimes on the weekends to meet this deadlines we've met them so far and I'm committed to meeting every one of them. Like I said all these documents posted on our webpage, anybody can see this. We are doing this as transparent as possible.

Let's talk about enforcement activities. First thing is something we are not really involved in. You may have read about in the papers. If you have you know as much about it as I do, that Duke is in the process of a criminal action with the US department of Justice. I've heard the figure $100 million thrown around, I don't know, we are not involved in that but that's something that at Duke that certain at Duke and their department justice resolving right now. Once that's resolved then we can move forward for any violations of the clean water act surface water quality standards that we've noted that we are in a joint enforcement action with the EPA. So the EPA doesn't want to move forward with that until the criminal charges have been concluded. So once that's done then we will move forward with our federal partners to assess and settle any civil claims we have resulting to the surface water quality violations and that includes the Dan River spill, however the EPA doesn't get involved in ground water. That's just state only problem and we know there is ground water termination of these facilities. Even though Duke has never admitted to it, we have irrefutable scientific evidence that there's groundwater contamination at these facilities that comes from [xx] energy So we [xx] issued for [xx] and as you may ever heard, we issued a penalty assessment for the certain facility, for the ground water contamination for $25.1 Million, I think we just did that a couple of weeks ago that, I'll just tell you this, that penalty was based on the execution of our normal assessment procedures and protocols for signing fines you have to remember the violation go all the way back to 2009, so there is a lot of violation to a assess. We used our normal procedures for that and the penalty came out to be $21.5 million. That may seem high to a lot of people, but it is what it is. We used our normal procedures we're set to find based on the duration, the extent of the contamination which is how we do our assessment features when we do fine. I've done a lot of fining in the past and my year with the department and it came out to be 25.5 million so that's what it is. [xx] I know these are possible in the future and that's really going to be up secretary of [xx] I believe. Alright, let's see what we've got here, what did I do here. Litigation activities okay, we have a law suit against duke process 14 sites. And that stems from 2013 because you remember what I said at the beginning of this presentation was that we are our first prong, the first prong of our philosophy is to address immediate threats to public health and surface water quality standards violations. So at the time back in 2013, thatwas the best two we had to do that was a civil law suit so we did that, we took that option to eliminate these unauthorized seats and get some sort of assessment of the level of ground water contamination at the site. Now we have Canima and executive order 62 and the federal coolash rule that also a tool we can use to assess this same things. So we're constantly reevaluating the effectiveness of the different tools that we have and decide which ones that put our finite resources towards, to move forward to get this done as most expeditiously as possible. Some of the challenges that we've had and I'll talk about these and a little bit of detail is that the cutting issue with The USEPA and are some of the clarifications we've needed with the college management act let's talk about the decanting first, because this is a really big deal. So, you may have heard that back in August of last year, we told Duke to go ahead and start decanting coal ash ponds, and what that means is, you got these ponds and you go all this water in these ponds sitting on top of the coal ash, so what we told Duke to do was start lowering the level of that pond down to the coal ash. Ok, so get rid of that water that's laying on top of the coal ash. We did that because we did a scientific analysis in that water and realized that Duke could do that without violating any water quality standards, they could do that and be still be in compliance with the clean water act and their NPDS permit, so we told Duke to go ahead and start doing that. Why did we want him to do that? Was a lot of good reasons, one is, it relieves a lot of pressure on the dam, so you have a less risk of a dam collapse. Also, by lowering the hydrolic head, the pressure on the ground water, you can eliminate some of these sips in an authorised discharges associated with these facilities,  plus by lowering that hydraulic card that pressure in the ground water, you also can alleviate some of the spread of that ground water contamination that's going on underneath these parks. And finally, it takes them about three to six months to lower there's so much water in these ponds, and some of them takes them about three to six months to lower that water level. So, if you get that water level down then you get dewater[sp?] the pond then you can excavate the earth, remember, at the end of the day, this whole thing is trying to find a way for Duke to expeditiously render that ash [xx], so longer presence of threat

to North Carolina, so that's why we told them to counting their part. Whether EPA stepped in and said no we don't think that's the right move they didn't really give us a reason, but they told we ask him for a reason they didn't give us a reason, but they said you are going to have an NPDES federal department modification before Duck can start decanting this ponds, that's what we're doing now. We are incorporating that in this new permits that we are releasing for public noticing comments however in this new permits we are not doing any more treatment to this water as if being decanted that what we had proposed back in August of 2014, so basically we've lost 69 months now and lowering this water tables and this ponds eliminating this seeps, reducing this hydraulic pressure on the ground water, reducing the pressure on the dams and we've also lost 69 months and we could start excavating the ash and inserting in places like that. I really wish EPA had not made that decision and over road us on that because it was really not in the best interest of North Carolina in my opinion. So one of the other things we are finding out is we go through we execute this things for the Camabell is that Cama is really a very comprehensive multidisciplinary bill, it crosses the entire department, it touches on our lots different divisions. We have sometimes have some difficulties working all those different pieces into our existing regulatory framework and statutory framework, so when we run into those problems and of course you couldn't have thought of everything that we are going to encounter when you drafted that bill, Right representative Mac Grady there was no way to do that. so a lot of times we need to go to the AG's office and ask for clarification and the AG's office is carrying in the same boat we're in. They're trying to figure out the stuff up on the fly too, so that slows down the process sometimes but we just, we always, when we go the AG's office we just tell him we need to have a decision as quickly as you can possibly turn it around, because again, at the end of the day, we want to move as expeditiously and safely as possible to deal with this problem in North Carolina. So where are we at? So I told about everything we've done for the last 6 or 7 months which is a lot. What are we going to do next? Well, like I said we're going to get those permits out forRiver Bend, Asheville, Satten,  and by end of April we'll get those out for public notice and comment, and then hopefully, we'll start decanting and watering those ponds, and we may even be able to start activating some ash in places like River Bend. By the end of the summer 2015 my goal and I hope I make it, my goal is to have some ash being excavated before the one year anniversary of the Kama bill which is August 20 so hopefully before August 20, we can actually start executing the excavation of some of the ash in North Carolina. We're going to have public notice and comment out for all the NTTS facilities for all 14 coal ash facilities sometimes during this year, remember we're going to continue to do this as transparently as possible, and most importantly, probably perhaps most importantly is we're going to get those ground water [xx] plans implemented, and we're going to get the data we need so we can make that prioritization decision that is required in Kama bill by December of 2015, and remember you all tasked us with coming up with a ranking and a classification of all coal ash ponds in North Carolina, all these 100 million tonnes or whatever it is by December of 2015, and we can't do that without that ground water data, and just to be honest with you that's the thing I worry about the most because, I'm not sure but I'm going to try to but I'm not absolutely sure we're going to have all the data we need to make good science based, scientifically dispensable decisions by December 2015. We're going to do absolutely everything we can to get that data by that time. And that's all I have unless you have any questions Thank you that was the most energetic presentation I have ever seen you make. So I do have some questions for my board members of Frank Gauler. Thank you Mr Chairman and could you give us about one minute on constructive use activities as far as utilizing the coal ash as we move it or what do we do with it in construction of highways and other. Beneficial use, Beneficial use, that's the term. While we're still continuing with the Asheville airport project that meets all of the requirements in the I think believe it me toll requirements is a federal bill too. That's a line project, that will probably use up most of the ash in the ash bill, coal ash facility. I know that EMC is in the process of doing a report on a beneficial re-use of coal ash that has either been delivered your will be delivered you and the near future and I know there are a lot of other entities working in the beneficial reuse in coal ash including Duke. I understand also that

the neighboring state South Carolina is already setting up actual companies [xx] and processing this to be used for it's a net version, is anything in the future that you say in the near future about that? That could happen, that would be up to that'll be up to people like yourself, you can always require Duke to see something like that I'm sure Duke is exploring those options. What we're focused on right now in Dino is just executing the requirements that we've been given under executive order number 62 and the CAMA bill and know the deadline so we want to render that ash and [xx], that's our main in focus right now, how that's done, that's kind of a secondary issue for us right now.  Representative Dixon? Thank you Mr. Chair. A brief comment with three points, if I may. Number one, thank you very much for the presentation. An observation in times like these when this quality of information is made available, it's always amazing to me how absent the press is, I don't see a lot of press, I don't see a lot of cameras here. The third point when we talk about the co-lash, I hope we all realize that the co-lash exist because all of us have switched on a light before. So if we look at the source of the development of the co-lash any of us that has ever switched on a light has contributed to it, and I think we should keep that in mind, thank you Thank you. I think Representative Adams, you had your hand up. I did. Yes, thank you, thanks for your presentation, I'm worried about this questions that we can ask them all and if we'll ask them all and pretty much save time. How different of Carley on and what's the condition to Carley doesn't need to worry assuring or and how can you [xx] without Those are excellent questions Sir. The ponds are varied in depth, some are like 30 or 40 feet deep and some of the dams 30-40 feet high, someone might less on than that, the co-lash lay at the bottom and it's kind of a slowly because it was loosened to this pads, once the co-lash burns what's listed our progress or whatever, what's listed under these ponds, so what you have to is, first you have to decant the pod, which is where you take that water all that water that's laying on top of the ash that's not heavily contaminated, that's very lightly contaminated, you get rid of that water and then you have to do something that's called de-watering, which is basically where you go down into the ashe itself and then between the ash part, and the that water out, that waters barely have any contaminate with coal ash constituents so that justcannt be pumped into our water ways, and then you dewater theirs basically you basically make a dry more less and then you can start activating. Representative Brown you need to turn your microphone still learning, still fresh, you understand. Okay, what work to move this staff ordered it, is it in powder form or is it in block form what do you. Its ash, its basically I think big Paul are ash, and that Are you saying things part of for, So you walted to keep it from being a [xx] and now your taking the order out to make control, The're going to have to be controlled then they move it to make sure that obviously, they have fugitive. We call it fugitive data asking science and you want it blowing all over the place. Thank you representative Besker Vill is recognized. Thank you Mr. Chair. Thank you Mr. Leader for this presentation has been excellent. You mentioned that all of the surface discharges have been identified and located. Is there like a comprehensive list? Is there a location folks can go and find the list of these unauthorized surface discharges? Yeah, I believe there is. I'll double check on that but that should be posted on our webpage. Yes sir. Thank you. Thank you, representative Harrison? OK, and thanks again for that excellent report and to all your staff worked on because this is a work that we. Thank you and you've listened to the challenge so that you for that. So couple of a quick questions following up on representative Bakervill the permitted verses unpermitted sips. I guess I still have a little bit of concern about the fact that we are actually permitting sips but I'd heard I think a couple on energies on public radio there is something cripling three million gallons a day from coal ash ponds seeping. There is different different

levels of seaps[sp?] mam and that's how we have to deal with them differently. Most of them, the vast majority are like in the range of three to five gallons per minute but there are some that are much larger than that and that's why when we go through and do the permitting we do a scientific analysis and we deal these sips completely comprehensively in the permits because some of these will not be allowed to continue to discharge. Some are going to have to be pumped back to the coal ash ponds because they'll have such a volume that they have the potential to violate water quality standards. So the only ones we are including in the permits are the ones that do not have any potential to violate water quality advantage, you've all clean water up. Fine, I and I gues the example you used was a little band, is that so I'm separate matter that said I'm fine and you said yo went back to 2009, is that because that is where you have the data to and floor open I gues this is just the 1st of May, of other pan potentials. This is just the first one. Okay right, thank you. Thank you, Representative Carney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and I too want to add my thanks for your presentation, it was certainly energetic and enlighting and Mr. Chairman this is more less just for you for houses the committee. I think there's probably a lot of other questions here and we're facing the time constraint. I would appreciate if we could have the department back and I thank the secretary for being here too. Maybe after the first round of public hearing to come back and let's have another presentation that we can have further comments and questions, this is so important and I really appreciate. I stand involved on this education and have it as you are going forward, and I really want to thank you, your energy is catching. Thank you. To answer your question. As you can see we are working hard to keep you educated on issues, we've got a lot of bills that will start coming up soon but I agree on you on that, we'll do that. Okay, Representative Blessing. Excuse me. Thank you Mr. Chair. Mr. Riddle, I think you are absolutely right to the den river spill here must not know anything about coal, I have know a little about it working with the pearl company for a few years so, but I'm still trying to absorp, when you open statements we do in the last year than we had in 60 years but it looks to me like we're really focused alone to big fines. The 25 Million Dollar fines to $100 million funds, and we all understand that we have a problem and we're all ought to be working together to do everything that we can to prevent it there from happening anymore, and it was not lack of a pond, it was a there was a pipeline in the beginning had to. My question was where was Dino in the 60 years, I mean this didn't accumulate over, so somebody would sign and I'll phone him and then not just pointing the finger at because a lot of these are owned by CPNA or Progress Energy. They inherited, they paid a lot of money to buy this stuff, but so where has Dino been in the last 60 years in signing off some and these own this coal ash ponds in. So I think maybe it's time to [xx] time to pointing fingers but trying to working together and get this [xx] you've seen what's happening in the the general public now will move in that coal ash, so we got a problem there, we can't find any place now. People are scared to death of it and it's really once you Jolly can stand no blame game without no redemption so in the panic mode and we've got to get out of panic mode we got get the public out the panic mode, and dealing like problem so what what do you see? I think representative Brison I think by continuing to move forward and to implement the requirements set us

associate which are contained in the governor's executive order, and the camera bill we would be out to move forward, and we will be out to lender this material and that there is a lot of good guidelines in there and I'm certainly not in a panic mode I am little bit overly obsessed with this, but I don't care about it and I don't think there is any reason for the public to panic about it because we are going to figure it out a sound scientific way to deal with this problem and we will render this material and then North Carolina can move forward, so, I agree we have our guideline there, we have the Camel bill, we have the governors executive order, we're executing those requirements and we'll prepare some day and render all those material in earth Okay, we're going, the last question, the last but not least representative McGrady Thank you, you referenced to $25.1 million fine and it was based on normal assessment of assigning fines. I've got a lot of questions about the size of that fine, and if you've got that size of fine here, where do you go next? Where can one go to understand your assessment process of these funds? I believe that information is all public record Yes, I assumed it's  We're happy to send you and show you the actual form we used to assess the penalty Okay, I would appreciate that because of getting a lot on it the only point that you made that I probably disagree with was your comment about the S4 airport and collage, and collage is still being produced, and my knowledge I wason the S4 airportboard and even though they have expanded the project I don't no that it will get rid of all that [xx] it makes a big dent, I think the point is well taken, and finally Mr. Chairman just for a comment I have now visited unfortunately a majority of the collage society around the state, and to colleagues I tell you that you just can't just get one picture, these things they're all very, very different. It's widely different when look at them. I'm really satisfied with the department in terms of how aggressively you've moved, happy with that vote too in the department have met its deadlines that were aggressive but you've hit them and no one on to my knowledge he has come back and asked to change those deadline threats which was the current turn that Chairman and I talk about a lot last night, so and we we were in as you put out you like it and several regulations came up so department the start of a longer process to deal with of problem has been here a lot. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you and thank you to Dino for being here and updating us on where you were. Thank you very much, and with that we're adjourned.