-------------------------------------------
"너죽고 나죽고 ♥"..추자현·우효광, 부부X선후배→'너는 내 운명' [종합] - Duration: 3:12.
For more infomation >> "너죽고 나죽고 ♥"..추자현·우효광, 부부X선후배→'너는 내 운명' [종합] - Duration: 3:12. -------------------------------------------
8/16 Morning Weather - Duration: 2:26.
For more infomation >> 8/16 Morning Weather - Duration: 2:26. -------------------------------------------
Birthdays and Anniversaries for Aug. 16, 2017 - Duration: 1:05.
For more infomation >> Birthdays and Anniversaries for Aug. 16, 2017 - Duration: 1:05. -------------------------------------------
Homework Diner expanding to more schools within APS - Duration: 1:41.
For more infomation >> Homework Diner expanding to more schools within APS - Duration: 1:41. -------------------------------------------
Wednesday midmorning forecast - Duration: 0:36.
For more infomation >> Wednesday midmorning forecast - Duration: 0:36. -------------------------------------------
SADE Greatest Hits Top 20 Best Songs Ever | Best Songs Of SADE - Duration: 1:25:59.
For more infomation >> SADE Greatest Hits Top 20 Best Songs Ever | Best Songs Of SADE - Duration: 1:25:59. -------------------------------------------
5 Simple Life Hacks|DIY|Hacks N Drills - Duration: 3:58.
5 Simple Life Hacks|DIY|Hacks N Drills
5 Simple Life Hacks|DIY|Hacks N Drills
-------------------------------------------
Designed for PT, OT & SLP
For more infomation >> Designed for PT, OT & SLP-------------------------------------------
Mercedes-Benz B-Klasse B 200 Sportpakket Ambition Automaat - Duration: 1:01.
For more infomation >> Mercedes-Benz B-Klasse B 200 Sportpakket Ambition Automaat - Duration: 1:01. -------------------------------------------
Mercedes-Benz B-Klasse 180 Ambition PDC NAVI XENON - Duration: 0:59.
For more infomation >> Mercedes-Benz B-Klasse 180 Ambition PDC NAVI XENON - Duration: 0:59. -------------------------------------------
Mercedes-Benz B-Klasse 200 CDI Business Class - Duration: 0:59.
For more infomation >> Mercedes-Benz B-Klasse 200 CDI Business Class - Duration: 0:59. -------------------------------------------
Hyundai i40 Wagon 1.6 GDI B. Bns Ed. - Duration: 0:54.
For more infomation >> Hyundai i40 Wagon 1.6 GDI B. Bns Ed. - Duration: 0:54. -------------------------------------------
Toyota Yaris 1.0 VVTI-I S-line Automaat - Duration: 0:59.
For more infomation >> Toyota Yaris 1.0 VVTI-I S-line Automaat - Duration: 0:59. -------------------------------------------
Nếu Có Duyên nghe được Kinh này Ph.ật T.ổ luôn Phù Hộ Gia Đình Bạn - Duration: 31:27.
For more infomation >> Nếu Có Duyên nghe được Kinh này Ph.ật T.ổ luôn Phù Hộ Gia Đình Bạn - Duration: 31:27. -------------------------------------------
Camp Grayling public information meeting to discuss PFC detection in monitoring wells - Duration: 1:38:48.
- Ready?
Alright, good evening.
Can everybody hear me?
Can everybody hear me now?
No?
How about now, I'll yell.
Is that good?
No?
Then move up here.
[laughs]
Alright, so we'll get started.
We do have some seats up in the front,
so if you want to move forward,
if not we'll get some more chairs out there,
but, come on up, it's not church,
so you can hear everything that's goin' on.
Now I'm gettin' louder.
Alright, so my name is Lieutenant Colonel Brown,
I'm the Deputy Commander here at Camp Grayling.
I'm also one of your neighbors.
I live on Evergreen, so I met a few neighbors
I hadn't met before, so hi.
I've been asked to moderate
this public information session.
Now I think you guys can hear me right?
We've turned down some of the fans.
What I'd like to do is welcome David Stephenson,
Crawford County Board Commissioner Chair.
Rick Harland, Grayling Township Commissioner.
Kyle Bond, he's representing the city
of Grayling, he's the DPW.
So thank you for attending here.
I'd also like to orientate you to the building.
So we got water up here,
and yes it is safe to drink.
It's been tested, so go ahead
and drink all the water you want.
The bathrooms, if you go out the hall,
it's going to be down to the right,
so we have restrooms down there.
And then if we have to evacuate this building
we're going to go out this garage door.
One of my guys is stayin' back there,
he'll open it up and we'll all move out there.
And then I have MP's, they'll move you
to wherever you need to go.
So that's the evacuation route, if somethin' happens.
So we're scheduled for a little over an hour
for presentation and questions.
And in order to get through what we need
to do with our board I want to set a few ground rules.
First, if you can hold your questions
until after the presentations,
and then secondly, when you move forward
to the two microphones here,
if you could ask one question at a time.
That allows everybody to get their questions.
And then we'll stay and get all your questions answered.
And then afterwards the subject matter
experts will go back will go back to their table
and answer any questions that we
don't get to here at the public forum.
Right now I'd like to introduce our board.
So we have Major General Greg Vadnais,
he's the ATAG of the Michigan National Guard.
Mr. Jonathan Edgerly, Department
of Military, Veteran's Affairs, Environmental.
Dr. Edna Wells, Department of Health and Human Services.
Mr. David Lindsay, Department of Environmental Quality.
Dr. Jennifer Morse, District 10.
Dr. Stephen Hussey, right, Hussey, oh there you are
from the Department of Agriculture.
And I see that Dave Borgeson, nope, yep,
from DNR, he snuck in on me, here from DNR.
So we should be able to answer all
of the questions that you may have.
What I'd like to do at this time
is welcome the General up here for a few comments.
- Thanks Theresa, and good evening everyone.
And appreciate everybody taking
time out of their schedules to come in this evening
and have a follow on conversation
from our May 18th meeting.
So we have an opportunity to share with you
what we have learned, information that we have gathered,
and what we don't know, we're going to talk about that,
and then we're going to talk about the road ahead,
and follow on meetings.
But let me start off this evening
by first of all reemphasizing to each and every one of you,
yeah, we've been here for 104 years.
This is very personal for us.
Many of the people affected, directly affected
by the issue are our soldiers,
our state employees, contractors,
or just part of the Grayling family.
So it is important us,
and my guidance to my team, is we've just got to get
to ground truth, we've got to figure out what
the issues are, and how we're going to move
out and mitigate where we've got issues.
So that's been the standing order.
And I got to tell you that it's been
an education for me in working
with multiple state and local agencies,
everybody from the community, to the state agencies,
everybody involved that have stepped up to the plate,
that have come together to kind of collectively
work through this issue.
Now I will tell ya, Grayling Army Airfield
is not unique with this problem.
This is a national level issue.
There are over 100, just from a National Guard
perspective, over 100 Guard installations
that are going through the same process that we are.
There's over 75 Air Guard bases
that are going through this same process.
It was the A triple F, which we think
is probably the source.
Which is been a widely used, saved a lot of lives,
fire retardant foam.
So it is, when scale and scope,
we've got a problem.
The other dynamic is, it's an emerging science.
And I have, I'm probably the least technical
guy in this room is me, right.
So if you go on to the EPA website
and you start reading some of the information
that they've put out there,
it's always kind of murky.
It never gives you a clean line of you know,
if you've got this, do that.
It's always kind of hazy.
So we've spent a lot of time talking about that,
so that we could at least get some consensus
amongst ourselves in terms of the right guidance
and the road ahead relative to our response.
Somebody asked me, and I did an interview earlier,
"so General are we close to the end of the investigation?"
And I said no, not by any stretch,
we are really at the beginning of the beginning.
It is a complex problem because you've got,
when you start thinking about multiple strata water flow,
possibly in different directions,
wells at different depths, there's just a lot
of information, and data that's got to be collected,
then analyzed and answer the question,
what does it mean?
And we are blessed in this state
to have such great talent and subject matter experts in it,
and I'm going to let them do what they do,
and give you, you know, once again, the information.
So I will just say to you that we've got
a very deliberate process.
We want to do step one before we jump to step four.
And as we figure this out,
but it is going to continue to evolve
as we gather more information,
as we learn more, we will react.
And in my world we will adjust fire
and go in the direction that the data
and the information gives us.
So again, I want to say thanks.
I may sound the emergency evacuation
if it gets much hotter in there.
And we're going to do this out in the old parking lot.
It is a little toasty in here.
But again, great to be here with you.
Looking forward to the conversation,
and Theresa, I'll turn it back to you.
- Thank you sir.
So what we're going to do next is have Jonathan come up.
He has a small presentation.
Kind of talk through where we were on May 18th,
and where we're headed and some of the results.
So Jonathan.
- Thank you.
Yeah, what I'd like to do is just go ahead
review what we talked about at the last public meeting,
cause I realize that there's several of you
that weren't at that initial meeting on the 18th.
Kind of describe how we've got to this point.
Identify or review what we talked about,
what we were going to work on between May 18 and now,
and then report back to you what we have been doing
from May 18 til this date.
So once again, my name is Jonathan Edgerly,
I'm the Environmental Manager for the Michigan
Army National Guard, and give you a quick brief here.
So this all started with the US EPA
coming out with their unregulated
containment monitoring rule.
Okay, I know that's a mouthful.
I'll refer to that as UCMR3.
So every few years the EPA comes out
with a list of emergent contaminants
under the UCMR3 rule.
As part of that list of contaminants
there were two PFC's identified
for the country to look at the prevalence
of these contaminants in the country.
So UCMR3 was published in 2012.
30 contaminants were on that list as part of that.
The US EPA mandated that any municipality
that serves drinking water to more than 10,000 residents
must sample their drinking water
for these two PFC compounds, PFOS and PFOA.
Next slide.
National Guard bureaus response to the UCMR3 rule.
They initiated a data call to every state
for them to look at every single drinking water supply
for every facility that the National Guard Bureau owns.
Every training site, camp, armory, et cetera.
They also wanted to identify the water sources
that have been tested for PFC's.
So once again checking back at those municipalities,
are the municipalities doing what they said
they were supposed to do and test for PFC's
in their water source.
And then also tasked to each state,
to start to investigate the use of AFFF,
historically in their practices,
as that could be a potential source
for PFC contaminations across the country.
Next slide please.
So I know this slide is pretty wordy
and I'll tell ya I know that several
of you probably can't read this.
This will all be posted to our website
in the very near, immediate future
for you to review these slides.
But the Michigan Army National Guard's
response to the UCMR3 designation.
We followed NGB's data call,
and we took a look into every single water source
for every single facility for the Michigan National Guard.
We also, per NGB's guidance,
started looking at historic use of AFFF at our facilities.
It was at this time that we found historic records
of military in conjunction with civilian entities
training with AFFF at the Grayling Army Airfield.
From that, it was out of our own due diligence
and proactivity we went out and sampled
five wells, monitor wells that we have
at the Grayling Army Airfield,
to run that sample for PFC's.
That initial result came back
with some analytical discrepancies.
So we immediately resampled those five locations
and added five more.
Those results came back, and it was much the same result.
That PFC's were identified in those monitoring wells.
It was at this point we initiated the help from our team.
And a big thanks to everybody up here
that are part of that team, the DHHS, DEQ, DNR,
DHD10, DEQ for joining us with this team.
And we came to our regulators and we said,
this is what we found, what's the next logical step.
We want to be proactive.
We want to get out in front of this.
We have identified an issue.
What's the next logical step?
And it was all agreed upon at this point
to reach to our border to the southwest, okay,
and run a line of monitoring wells
along that southwest border to try to understand
if PFC's are at our property line.
Chances are they may be off our property line.
In which case our number one priority
would be the location to the southwest
where individuals are on private
residential drinking water wells.
So it was all agreed upon by all these departments
that'd be the next logical step.
Next slide please.
So once again, I know this graphic
is hard to digest from a distance.
But those dots along the southwest and the south
were the locations where we put,
drew groundwater samples from.
The green annotates non detect.
The yellow is for detect PFOS, PFOA,
but below the 70 parts per trillion
lifetime health advisory by US EPA.
And the five red dots that you see on that graphic
show elevated, levels above 70 parts per trillion.
Next slide please.
So this is where we were at, at the last town hall.
So this is almost exactly the same slide
that was at the last town hall on May 18th
where we came to you and said,
this is what we plan on doing moving forward.
So we were going to continue to work
with our regulators and National Guard Bureau
to understand what this analytical sample
results are trying to tell us.
So we've done that.
We've shared all of our data with both
national and state level regulators
and experts in this field to help us
make sure that we're makin' the next appropriate steps.
National Guard Bureau has come through
and they are fast tracking a site investigation
for the Grayling Army Airfield that will begin this summer.
This will help start trying to answer
some of those questions that are out there
as far as source, sources, plume delineation,
what's going on with inside the fence line
of the Grayling Army Airfield.
And then we also said on May 18th
that we would, in consultation with other agencies,
begin sampling drinking water wells
in that priority zone.
So this is, once again, this is what we said
on May 18th that we were going to do.
And so this next slide speaks to what we've done
from May 18th to this date.
And once again, I realize it's wordy,
but we'll go through this.
So DHD10 in coordination with a consulting firm,
Amec Foster Wheeler, collected sample
requests for sampling information,
and to arrange sample collections
of resident's drinking water within that priority zone.
As of 14 July, 293 requests
for analysis have been collected,
and 178 samples have been taken.
Now to speak to the discrepancy between those two numbers.
We received several request a sample
that are at this point outside of our initial priority zone,
which is southwest of the Grayling Army Airfield
in between the Gaff and the river.
That's our initial step out priority zone.
That's where we're initial step to sample.
If at what point that data comes back to us
and shows that there's further
sampling that's required in whatever direction,
at that point that's what will be initiated
and further residential well sampling will occur.
And we have everyone's information
that submitted a card that are outside
of that priority zone.
So if we get to that point,
where we feel like it's necessary,
that the data shows and proves to us
that we need to make that appropriate step.
We have your information and you
will be contacted to get your well sampled.
State agencies have reviewed the analytical results
and validation began sending them out to the residents.
So most all of the individuals
who have had wells sampled,
should have their sample results.
I realize there are a handful of you
that have submitted a sample,
that have not got your results.
I believe it's 15 to 20 of you.
You will be contacted individually
and offered up this same group of people
to talk to once your results come back okay.
And the District Health Department, DHHS,
have all reviewed or are in the process
of reviewing your sample results and will be providing
you with your appropriate health information.
The three residents that were identified
that their residential well came back
above the 70 parts per trillion
lifetime health advisory by the US EPA,
were notified in person by a team of individuals
from the DMVA, the DEQ, and the District Health number 10.
Okay so there was face to face consultation
between those home owners and the team of workers there.
And in an effort to continue to maintain
absolute transparency, you know,
we really have tried hard to reach
out to the public and whichever media
fashion, form, way we could imagine
to keep you updated on the situation.
Whether that be door to door, handing out flyers,
to Colonel Brown calling individuals on the phone,
mailings, websites, phone numbers,
so we've really tried hard to maintain
that constant communication with you
to keep this transparency goin' through
as we move through this process.
Next slide please.
So this is a map that shows to you
where we've sampled and where we have not received cards.
Okay so the purple are locations
where a sampling form has not been received.
The light blue are locations outside of the priority zone
that at this time we are not actively sampling.
And the dark blue are locations
where we've collected samples.
And we do have graphics up, posted
several locations around here
that you can look at a little closer
to show that, but, hopefully this illustration
shows you that we have a pretty good swath
through that priority zone that we've been
able to get in contact with the home owners
and to make that sample occur.
Next slide please.
So this is a data table of showing you
what we know at this point as far as the sample data.
We've had 178 collected of which 166 have been analyzed.
161 of those have gone through the validation process.
And that validation process, you know,
can take a couple weeks where people
a lot smarter than me look into that lab data
and really go over it with a fine tooth comb
to make sure that that data is correct,
and there's no errors with sampling,
there are no errors with the lab,
that that data is true and correct.
So before it's disseminated,
it must go through that validation process.
So we have 161 of those samples
that have been validated.
Once again three, three homes have been shown
above the 70 parts per trillion
PFOS, PFOA total health advisory
and those individuals have been contacted in person.
We have 20 homes where they have detected
some PFOS or PFOA in their wells,
but are below that 70 criteria.
And we have 143 homes that were
non detect for PFOS and PFOA
which are the two regulated compounds
that have a health advisory associated to them.
So what happens next?
We, Michigan Army National Guard
are going to do some further investigating
in the Grayling Army Airfield,
and to look at further groundwater flow,
and also to look on the east side
and the north side of the airfield
to see if we have any issues there.
So that is something that will be
initiated in the very near future.
DEQ will be running point and running
on the second round of residential well sampling.
And Dave when he gets up, he can speak
to that a little bit more.
DEQ will also begin to do their site investigation off site,
off of our property to start looking at
plume delineation, plume flow, sources,
where they're traveling off site.
And that will occur with the DEQ on lead.
District Health Department number 10,
will be in charge of disseminating the filters.
That I believe several of you have received tonight.
NGB, their preliminary site assessment,
that will start this summer.
DHHS and DHD10 will still maintain availability
for questions that you may have
as we move through this process on health concerns.
Michigan Department of Ag and Natural Resources
will be there to address agricultural
and pet concerns that you may have.
And we understand the need,
and it's very important to us
to maintain the line of communication with you.
So we will continue to update the website.
The hotline number will continue to be available.
And we will, this fall, reach back out to you
with a big a blast as we can to get the information out,
with another follow up public meeting this fall.
So at this time I think that we're going to,
yes, sir.
- Why don't you tell them what we did
[trails off, off microphone]
- So the three homes, the question was,
what was our action, our immediate action
to those three homes that proved
to be above that 70 parts per trillion.
We immediately provided them, DHD10 and DHHS
immediately provided them with alternative water.
As an immediate fix, and they were also then offered
the filtration system to be installed as well.
Colonel Brown.
- Thanks Jonathan.
So up next we'll have DEQ, Dave.
- Hi, I'm Dave Lindsay, I work
for the Remediation and Redevelopment Division
of the Department of Environmental Quality.
And I'll be using the term PFOS.
And I want to let you know that that includes
the whole range of chemical compounds that were tested
for in the residential wells of Grayling.
So the DEQ right now, is in the process
of developing a groundwater investigation work plan.
And that will include an area from the airfield
all the way to the far side of the Al Sobel River.
But the first phase, what we're planning on doing
is resampling all of the residential monitoring wells
that have previously been sampled.
In the 83 wells that had detections of PFOS
we are going to treat those wells as a priority.
In other words, we're going to get the funding
and do that testing as soon as we possibly can.
However, I'd like you to understand
that there are only eight laboratories
in the entire country that do testing
for these kind of compounds.
So that could be a bottleneck,
and hold things back a little bit.
Also there are 22 residential wells
that are located within the service area
of the Grayling Municipal Water Supply Service
and we plan on sampling those.
And those have not been previously sampled.
As a next phase we are going to do
some vertical aquifer sampling.
And we're going to do that through borings
at several different locations.
That process involves taking groundwater samples
at several depth intervals within each of those borings.
We'll have those samples analyzed.
And based on the results of that sampling
along with the residential well sampling results,
we will then select strategic locations
to install monitoring wells.
And at some of these locations
the monitoring wells may have intakes
at several different depths.
Some of the main objectives of what
we're going to be doing are to define
the vertical and horizontal extent
of the PFOS within the groundwater.
And also the range of concentrations that are out there.
With these results and this work
we're also going to be able to determine
the materials that make up the aquifer.
The sands, silts, clays, and gravels.
And with that information hopefully
we'll be able to see what the role
of those materials play in how the PFOS
move through the groundwater
so that we can predict where they may be going
and what may be impacted next.
We also hope to identify any potential sources
that are down gradient of the airfield.
One of the questions people may have
is why does my well have detections
while my neighbor 150 feet away doesn't.
And some of this work we hope will answer that.
At this time it could be,
there could be several different reasons.
Could be that, you know, your neighbor's well
is at a different depth, that is within a plume.
It could be cross contamination
from products that are used in the plumbing.
There are several different reasons
but we hope we can have a better answer to all of that.
And I just want to let everyone to know that
we are going to continue to work with
the Department of Military and Veteran's Affairs,
especially regarding their source
area investigation at the airfield.
And I'll leave it at that.
- Thanks Dave.
Next we're going to have up DHHS and District 10,
Dr. Morse and Dr. Wells.
- Thank you very much.
Thank you, and I'm Dr. Eden Wells
and I'm with Michigan Department
of Health and Human Services, my colleague here,
Dr. Morse's been holding this great ship here,
the District Health Department 10,
with Kevin Hughes the Health Officer.
And they've been just absolutely incredible.
Can you hear me in the back?
Raise your hand, can you hear me now?
Oh, I really have to mote.
Okay there we go, he's going to,
Mr. Hughes is going to make sure I'm good.
Really here, we've been representing
the public health side of this for a while,
since this began.
And it is definitely not an easy issue.
And I think the General addressed that very well.
We're talking about emerging contaminants,
meaning that we truly don't know
what the health impacts are.
There's enough concern in some of the studies
that have been evolving over the last number of years,
that there may be an association of this PFOS,
this class of many chemicals, the PFC's,
that could have health effects
that we understand further studies
are going to probably show us they actually
have health effects, but right now,
we need to be suspicious,
and therefore err on the side of caution.
Some of the health effects, just so you know,
and this is again, associations,
nothing confirmed yet, reliably in studies,
would be possible and probable links
to hypertension during pregnancy,
meaning your blood pressure's gone up in pregnancy.
There may be links with kidney, or prostate,
or testicular cancer which is pretty rare,
but may be associations.
And some cholesterol issues, perhaps some
inflammatory or infectious bowel issues.
But these have not been confirmed,
but again, we need in this time,
and this is why the Environmental Protection Agency
has begun, and has asked our military areas
all around the country to start
measuring these levels in the environment.
We do get exposed by many many sources of these chemicals,
not just in the potential water contamination,
but by many of the chemicals such as non stick cookware,
some other types of things that are in our homes.
But the key here is that at this point
there was some water detection in wells,
in the area of Camp Grayling.
So when we were asked to look at this,
I worked with a great team of toxicologists.
And we've been working in great partnership
with the Department of Environmental Quality
is to assess at what point is there a health issue.
Now it is very, very clear.
You mentioned here that in the three homes
that had a level, or a life,
long term health effect level of 70 parts per trillion,
is we know that those people needed
immediate removal from the water system.
So they got an alternate source of water
and then filtration put in place.
That is known, we work with the EPA action level.
I saw a number of people today, by the way,
that also had non detects, which means,
they had undetected levels of all the chemicals.
Now there were more than two chemicals
tested by the great laboratory that's here,
and some specialists are here for questions.
They tested about eight in this class of the PFOS.
And in those, what the health people,
and again us health people being on the extreme side of,
want to be conscious, so we don't know much
about these chemicals, we looked,
and if there was any detect.
You look on the back,
on the back sheet on the first page
of your test results and you'll see a box
of about eight chemicals, if there's any detection
at all in those, you received a letter
at your home, hopefully all of you received it,
not all of you did, I know, there's some missed.
That talked about that we had detected it,
but it was not at that level of the 70,
which we knew was an action level for us to act.
But here's the question, that I think
is a very reasonable one that we
need to make sure everybody's clear on.
We want people, even at the detect levels
to have filters here.
Why is that?
You're levels aren't over 70, so what are we figuring?
Well if you had come to me in another city in Michigan
that was not having a PFOS issue that we know of.
Or if you came to me in an area of the Michigan
where there's a known source of PFOS,
and we do have those in the state,
then I would say well, your level's low.
You know, we'll keep monitoring you,
but you know you don't need a filter at this time.
Here in the area of Camp Grayling however,
there's a lot of private residential wells.
And it makes it very difficult for us
to serially monitor those wells over time
to see where the source of the water's coming from,
and whether it's coming to your wells.
And this is because we are so early on
as the General said, we're so early on
in the investigation, we don't know
where the source of the water PFOS's are.
So we don't know is this water
coming and moving toward certain
people's homes and not others.
Is it not moving at all.
Is there another source entirely.
These are all parts of the investigation
which our colleagues at Department
of Environmental Quality are going to be working on.
Especially with the very interesting
boreholes that your doing.
So given that it's very difficult to test serially,
and given that we are still waiting to know
about the source of this contamination.
The better part of valor, Dr. Morse, Mr. Hughes,
and those of us at the Department
of Health and Human Services said,
let's get a filter on those people
who had any detects at all, okay.
Because that way I think we can protect
you all until we have an idea of where
this contaminant is, and where it may be going.
Does that help?
And we'll be answering questions, you know, at the end.
Some questions that we did at the end,
and Dr. Morse, you know, you let me know
if I've forgotten anything.
One other issue here is that we're getting
some questions about why can't,
why is there not one more, you know,
can I get more than one filter.
And a lot of this had to do with brushing of teeth and such.
I would say that we don't recommend ingestion
of the water particularly now,
the real, you know, the health advisory here,
is for those people who had
the three levels greater than 70.
But if you're worried in your home
because we don't have the, you know,
and you want to, you're using filtered water
cause you're not sure what's going yet about the source.
If you swallow the water when you brush your teeth
then I would recommend taking a glass of the water
that's filtered from the kitchen
and putting it in your bathroom,
you know, in your master bedroom or so at night,
or something like that, that was something
that you know you had talked about.
There may be some other things [trails off]
and I think that I have one more question here.
Oh, I do want to say here also is that,
you know, this issue of being under 70
and yet you're the detected.
It's still okay to drink the water.
It's just that we have so much unknown.
So that's why we want to provide the filters to you all.
And so I think that's all I had,
unless Dr. Morse do you have anything to add?
- I think just that the [trails off]
the letters from the testing company
had stated not to use it to brush your teeth.
And again that's an abundance of caution
in case you were to swallow some,
so if you brush and spit, you're okay.
If you have concerns just take a filtered
bucket of water in the bathroom with you,
but to shower, bathe, well you know,
I'd take a filtered bottle or you know, container of it.
to bathe, brush and spit,
you know those things
are okay to do.
- Okay thank you very much.
- Thank you.
Next up we have the Department of Agriculture, Dr. Hussey.
- Good evening, my name's Dr. Steve Hussey,
and I'm with the Michigan Department of Agriculture.
I'm here today just to let you know
that I'm here as a resource,
the Department of Ag is here as a resource
to answer your animal health related questions.
I'm sorry, can you hear me now?
Okay, sorry.
So I just wanted to let you know
that the Department of Ag is here
to answer your animal health related questions.
Questions regarding pets and livestock.
Unfortunately there's virtually,
there's very little data,
that we have in regards to this chemical
and pets and livestock, so we have to extrapolate
a lot of our data from other research that's been done.
So we're not entirely clear of what
the clinical effects could be in pets and livestock.
And it's for that reason we are recommending
that if you have concerns with your pets
or any livestock that you may have.
The first step is really just to go to a veterinarian,
have a full physical exam, and get pertinent
and relevant diagnostic tests done.
And then we can be available for consultation
with you or your veterinarians as you have questions.
Okay right now we don't really know exactly
what kind of issues could be involved with pets.
We know it's probably going to be liver issues,
or potentially kidney issues,
and maybe some hormonal or developmental issues,
such as with the thyroid,
or with developing fetuses and things like that.
We can only extrapolate from other research animals.
We don't have any answers there.
So bottom line though is if the water
is considered needed filter, and is considered
not safe for drinking for people,
it should not be given to pets.
So using filtered water, bottled water
for your pets would be recommended.
Yes.
[someone speaking off camera and mic]
I'm sorry.
[someone speaking off camera and mic]
Well I don't have an answer to that.
I think initially it would have to be,
it would have to be you.
Because I don't know if you can correlate.
We don't know whether or not any of these issues
that may or may not come up with your pets
are going to be related to the water.
[someone speaking off camera and mic]
That is going to be a tough issue.
What I can do is, if you would like
to talk to me afterwords I can certainly
talk to you about that.
That's really all I have.
- Thank you.
And then we have from DNR Dave Borgeson.
- I'm mostly here to listen and learn.
But after the last meeting,
talked with the DEQ folks.
I don't know how we could help,
so one of the things that some of us were interested,
a lot of us were interested is the you know,
what about the fish in that area.
So I think the week after the meeting.
By the way I'm Dave Borgeson,
Fisheries Division, Unit Manager out of Gaylord.
And this Ross Sybel's within my unit.
So we sent a crew to the Al Sabo.
We worked up a plan with the DEQ,
decided to do a couple different sites.
One of them below I-75, below the confluence
of the East branch, we collected at least 10
brown trout and 10 suckers of varying sizes.
And we did the same southwest of the airfield
at Old Dam Road, so we thought we had
a decent coverage there and we're going to be
we have long term data sets as far as fish populations
in a lot of these areas, so in our sampling's
going to continue for awhile as far as the fish populations go.
And if any future sampling needs arise
we're here to help rather than at the DQ
send a crew up from Lansing, we're right here.
So thanks.
- Thanks Dave.
So before we get to the questions
I just want to put out just a couple more things.
If you've not gotten your results
we do have copies here, you can see
Amec representatives in the back after this
and they can get them to you.
The 12 people, which one of them is myself,
have not gotten your test,
or we haven't gotten 'em back yet,
we are going to go ahead and have that small
town hall meeting and I'll bring
some of the subject matter experts back
and answer your specific questions.
And we'll open that up to anybody else
who has some other questions.
So that'll be comin' up.
And then as Jonathan talked,
September, October we'll have another town hall
and just kind of talk through where we've been
and what we're goin' forward on.
So at this point if you guys have any questions
go ahead and go to one of the two microphones
so everybody can hear ya, and we'll take 'em.
- This on?
I had a couple of questions that popped up
while you were making your presentation.
It seemed to me the original slide
indicated some suspicion and problems in 2012.
And now we're here in 2017,
so it seems like a logical person would wonder
why it took five years to create this meeting.
Secondarily, I know there are other parallels,
meaningful parallels between the situation here,
and the situation over at Oscoda,
where I understand they have a do not
eat fish directive over there.
If there are similarities that we could address
I'd be interested in hear about that.
- Okay so let's take the first question from the 2012.
I think either Jonathan or DEQ can you answer.
- Sure I could speak to that.
Can you guys, oh yeah.
So while that UCMR was published in 2012.
The NGB data call didn't come out until 2016
identifying that PFC's were included in this AFFF,
and that we needed to then immediately
look at utilization of that AFFF.
So we went out preemptively, proactively
and sampled before we were mandated
by anyone to do any of that sampling.
We, this all transpired, and this has all gone down
in less than the last 12 months.
[audience member speaking off microphone]
That was when National Guard Bureau first notified us,
[audience member speaking off microphone]
I don't have an answer to that.
- And then for the second, the fish.
I think Dave from,
- Of these, of the samples,
the samples that we took, the results were similar
to background levels for, throughout the state.
So at this point in time,
there is no reason to have a no,
have an elevated consumption advisory
for PFOS is that region.
[audience member speaking off microphone]
- Our toxicologist might have an answer
regarding the Oscoda issue and why the fish
advisory was there, this is Christina Bush.
- Hi, I'm Christian Bush, and I've been involved
at the Oscoda former Wordsmith Air Force Base.
We took samples, the state took samples of fish
out of Clark's Marsh which is south
of the Air Force base there, it's between
the base and the Al Sabo River.
The concentrations of the PFC's
in the fish far exceeded a screening level
that we had for do not eat.
It was about 30 times the screening level,
that, where we would say do not eat the fish.
The fish that have been sampled from the Al Sabo
in town here, in Grayling, the points were,
DNR did the sampling, those results
are starting to come back and we're not seeing
any kind of impact on that fish.
Does that answer your question sir?
[audience member speaking off microphone]
Well we consider, at the State Health Department,
when we are evaluating fish data
we consider that the least amount of fish
that we want of a certain species is going to be 10.
And so we did have 10, and is was of the trout
that were evaluated and everything was good.
It's something that we are going to continue
to keep track of to make sure
that there is not an impact to the fish.
And as we learn more through the investigation
it may target certain areas of the river
where we may want to get fish samples sooner
rather than on a schedule that we're going to be setting up.
- [speaking off microphone] this gentleman
has a question so you might want to
just stand here for a second.
Oop, careful.
This also, it's coming back to the question
that this is a very early investigation
where we do not know where this plume is,
where it's gone, where it's going.
So the very early undetection is saying
okay the fish don't look like in sort of that trajectory.
But further investigation has to be done
as to where this plume is and where it's going.
But I know this gentleman might have a question for you.
- Miss Bush, did you say that you worked
in the, and I'm sorry was it Dr. Bush?
- No not Dr. Bush.
- Okay.
In Oscoda they found PFC's in the fish
back in 2010, 2012, and didn't they identify
this AFF as the source of the PFC's
back in a district health meeting in 2013?
Didn't they attribute it to this
AFF substance way back when?
- Right, my understanding,
are you hearing me well enough in back, okay.
My understanding from the way the investigation
at Wordsmith went was that the DEQ Project Manager
knew that, or had learned that AFFF,
the Aqueous Film Forming Foam,
a special fire fighting foam had been used at the base.
And he learned too that it can have,
it can stay in the environment an extremely long time.
So he knew where the fire training area was,
he sampled there, he found it there in the groundwater.
From there they knew that the groundwater
traveled to Clark's Marsh,
so they followed it down and yes,
the signature, if you were to take the proportions
of each individual chemical and determine
what that looks like, and then we call
it a signature, or maybe a fingerprint.
That matched what we were seeing
in the drinking water wells at Wordsmith.
Does that answer your questions sir?
- Yeah, I mean basically,
to follow up on what Mr. Stanza said,
if back in 2013 this foam was causing these problems
with the fish and the District Health Department
was having meetings in Oscoda to address that.
- Yes.
- Thank you.
- Hi I'm Steve Bend.
I run the soccer for the kids out there
at the county sportsplex.
I realize that we're not in the critical area.
But with between us, football, and baseball,
we have like four or 500 kids out there.
That's my major concern okay.
I did send in a request on a card,
okay to have our water tested.
The only reply I got last week was to come to this meeting.
And I had the public affairs number
for the camp and nobody ever called me back.
I did kind of contact the Health Department,
I've talked to other people,
but they don't have all the answers.
My answer is, I've got four or 500 kids
drinkin' that water nine months a year.
What do we do?
- Alright so we actually talked about this
this afternoon so I think I'm going to,
DEQ and DHSS can you guys kind of tag team that one?
- I think that we should,
sir do you have water sample results
[crosstalk]
- We don't at the soccer field.
So what we really need to do is go out there
and test the soccer field.
- Right, really we do need data
to make any determination.
- Well that's why we sent the card in seven weeks for.
And I got soccer startin' off in two weeks,
and football startin' up in two weeks.
What do we do to the interim
until we get the water tested and the results?
I don't want to feed the kids bad water.
Simple.
- I think we'll get you at the top of the list.
I just don't know how quickly it'll happen.
But we'll get it done as quickly as we can.
- I do have a standard water test
from the Health Department okay.
But that does not include this fluorocarbon thing.
- That is correct.
Standard Health Department testing
for new wells does not include this chemical class.
- Okay thank you.
- Go ahead.
- Hello, I was given a water filter today.
I'm just wondering when we're going to have
water filters for all pf my faucets in my house
so I don't have to inconvenience myself.
I know it might seem like something small,
like leaving a glass of water in your bathroom
to brush your teeth if you're afraid of that.
I'm pretty sure all of you don't have
to do that on a daily basis.
So when is that going to happen?
When every sink in my house is made sure
that it's safe even though I have a very small,
minute amount in there as you say.
I would feel a lot better if I
had filtration on all my sinks.
When is that happening?
- Either DEQ, or District 10 I guess that's yours.
- I'll start, and then I've talked
with Dr. Morse a little bit on this.
This is an early part of a response,
Public Health response, and it's very early
on in the investigation so right now,
that's the best right now to protect,
get a drinking water source that's safe.
If you've not tested over the 70, okay,
then at this point putting one in
so that you can have a drinking water system,
until we have an idea of what the source is going
is an exercise out of extreme caution.
But there is still a lot of information
to know about the source of the water.
How fast is it moving.
Is it fast, is it the water?
You know, all of those questions.
So I think that would be probably a question
that would need to evolve
a lot further down the line when they've actually learned
about what the source of the chemical is.
Okay because most of all the people
in the room who are getting filters today,
other than three people are getting them
out of the exercise of caution
knowing that we need to find out
more information about the source.
So I hope that helps.
- Okay thank you.
- You bet.
- We'll go over here.
- Marty Vandevin.
You talked earlier about retesting the wells.
There's a lot of us folks that leave here for the winter,
snowbirds, we head to Florida.
And the majority of us people turn off our water systems.
Okay, they're drained out.
When do you plan on doing the retesting?
And if you do it later in the year,
and we're not here, how will you test our water?
- We're going to do the testing as soon as we can.
I'm pretty sure we'll be able to do it
before mid to late fall.
And hopefully we'll have everybody tested,
retested by then.
If you're gone for the winter,
it'll have to, you know, it'll have to wait.
- Thank you.
- Hello, my house borders on the Al Saba river.
It's just south of the river.
So even though I've put in a request
for testing it was not tested.
And I'm thinking why was the river
selected as a boundary particularly when
we're talking about groundwater
at several different levels.
And is there any evidence that the river
actually acts as some sort of boundary?
- We don't know that yet.
In fact we don't have any monitoring wells
off of the airfield at this time.
As a part of our work plan is to go on the other side,
your side of the Al Saba River
just to see if the contaminants
are in existence on the other side of the river.
But we won't know that until we start
doing our verti-flock per sampling.
And if we do find them on the other side of the river,
certainly testing of your residential well
will become a priority at that time.
- I got to question.
I live in the first subdivision
between Old 27 and the airport.
And I've heard rumors,
I don't know what's going on.
You just got done sayin',
are they going to be testing any
of that water in those two subdivisions?
The one right there between Old 27
and the airport, the first one.
And then there's another one, a second one.
Yeah, down by the high school.
Out by the high school but this is before
the high school, it's right by the corner
where you turn to go north
[trails off turning away from mic]
- Yeah, if you're outside that initial testing area.
- Well where is the testing area?
[speaking off microphone]
That's outside of it?
[speaking off microphone]
- After we do the resampling of all the wells
that have already been sampled,
plus the 22, plus the wells that we
haven't got to that have put in a request.
If we see that we're getting hits
toward that perimeter then we will expand out.
- Well that's what I wondered.
Cause I haven't heard anything
about any of them being tested in that subdivision.
- If there's a reason to extend to that area
we will extend the testing to that area.
- Okay thank you that's what I wanted to know.
- Right, sir.
- I just have a question about
between all of these groups,
has there been any investigation into property values.
I think we've all taken a black eye here to some degree.
And there is a gentleman in the crowd
who has had two deals on his house go south,
virtually making his house unsalable
because of the water issue.
Is there going to be some sort of an agency
that's going to look into this
and say these people have been infractured
and we need to figure out how badly
they've been infractured by the fact
that we are now living in homes that people don't want to buy.
When they know about this water problem,
it's going to cause some issues for the people
back in there, in that, the area that's affected.
So in addition to all of this,
is there any plan to get some sort of authority
together to take a look and see.
We're infractured at this point,
but we're really kind of stuck.
I'm not saying that we're all
lookin' for a monetary handout,
but we want to figure out where we stand.
- Correct, right.
So Sue, Sue was, ran out on me.
Did you get the answer?
Not you.
Sir do you want to?
- So look, and we know this is an issue.
And we do have some anecdotal information,
cause this is the exact same thing
that's going on up in Oscoda.
And Sue you want to come up and maybe talk
a little bit about that,
and before she speaks I would just say
that you know, we're having a tendency,
and I understand that, you want answers now,
and everybody wants to fast forward.
That is not, remember what I said
we're at the beginning of the beginning
and that's where we're at.
And we've just got to gather more information
and I absolutely understand that dynamic.
But Sue, maybe you want to touch on
what we found in Oscoda.
- If I could say, I'm just wondering is it being addressed?
That's the question is it being addressed.
I don't thing anybody in here is in any hurry at this point.
But we want to know that somebody's got our back.
That's the whole thing.
- I think I can only reiterate what the General says,
and that is you know, we just don't know
where we're at right now.
Oh, by the way my name is Sue Leeming
I work for the Remediation and Redevelopment Division
in the Department of Environmental Quality.
And I'm not a real estate expert
or property value expert, I just want to let you know
I've been working with the folks in Oscoda.
To some extent it's something that the administration,
and DEQ, and all of us are very concerned about.
We're keeping an eye on it.
I think messaging is the best we can do.
And right now my message is just,
we don't know.
So I can't guarantee you anything up or down.
All I can say is we don't know, but we're on it.
We're lookin' at it,
and we're very concerned about it as well.
- And let me make one final comment on this end.
You know once we have the data,
and we've got a property,
first we're going to go and determine
do you have a problem or don't you.
And if you do, there are mitigating
steps that could be taken to deal with the problem
of that specific property so that it should
not impact the overall sale.
- So I know that's not a direct answer
to the question, but we are, I mean it's always,
it's been on our top 10 questions
and what we need to identify and get you guys an answer to.
So ma'am.
- Hi, you said that you do site investigations,
so does that mean you're,
you, okay.
You said you were doing site investigations
which would mean that you were studying
the geological and hydrological
and engineering properties of the underground
water system and rocks and fissures?
- Yes we're going to look at the lithology,
what materials make up the aquifer
and look into how that affects
the movement of the PFOS in the groundwater.
Also to determine how far these plumes extend.
Whether it's one plume, or many plumes.
Whether there's additional source areas
down gradient of the air field.
Now there's a lot of things that we hope
we can determine with our investigation.
And we're going to handle it in phases.
So it will take a long time to accumulate
the information and get answers with.
Yeah, that's what we hope we'll be doing.
- Have you guys, have you performed soil investigations?
Soil samples - No.
- Cause once it's in the soil, cause that's how it enters
the soil it goes to the groundwater.
So when it's in the soil it doesn't,
the biodegradation is very slow.
So it's going to stay in the soil around these homes
and it cannot be removed.
- Around the homes, source areas,
soil source areas are where the chemical
was applied to the ground.
So in these residential areas
we don't suspect that it was applied to the ground.
But if someone were to step forward and say
yeah we applied triple F foam to the ground
at this point, that would be an area
where we would look at the soil.
But for right now, we're going to
concentrate on the groundwater.
- Okay.
Now the reasons for no detect could mean
hopefully no threat, but it could also mean poor sampling.
- It could also mean the plume hasn't reached
there yet, and part of our ground water analysis
will be, we'll be able to predict where it's headed.
Even though you may be just,
you may have slight detections or non detect
it doesn't mean that eventually your water intake
may take up some of these compounds in groundwater.
- Exactly so are there going to be repeat testings
in case the no detect was a poor sample
or just the chemical hadn't reached.
- Yeah, and it's actually, and part of the retesting
of the residential wells is to give us information
as where to decide where we're going to
start doing our boring work.
- Okay.
- Once we get a monitoring well network in place
we'll be able to then monitor the groundwater
fairly frequently and get an idea
where things are going with our stabilizing
and where the highest concentrations are.
- Last, I guess it's just a statement,
but this information paper that I got
from Washington DC, it's actually a packet,
and there have been studies on populations
in both West Virginia and Ohio,
and there are very probable links to damage
to your liver, tumors, birth defects,
endocrine system which disrupts your hormones,
thyroid cancer, or thyroid diseases I should say,
and other illnesses so that's just a statement.
Because in essence, I think on page six
of the information packet from Washington DC.
- I'm very familiar with that thank you.
Again I will show that there's not been
any controlled studies or anything right now
that we can say that that has become
a listed carcinogen or problems.
But there are associations.
- Ma'am they studied the populations and they're
- All of us, so I'm not disagreeing with you,
populations, we all, the national surveys
that have been done, every few years
the national health studies show that many
of us in this country, many of us in this room,
if not all, have levels of PFOS in our blood right now.
- Exactly I know that.
- So we can't extrapolate that to where
these associations are.
So I'm not saying, when I said there's associations
that doesn't necessarily mean a direct causation
until further studies are done.
But I do not deny to you, that's absolutely correct.
- Thank you and then also Kingston Point,
a woman in New Hampshire that lived off an airfield,
military airfield, her water was tested the first time,
this happened over a year, so 2014,
I believe in August they said go ahead,
you're okay to drink your water, it was safe.
Second test came through a few months later.
They said yes you have some level of PFC's
but there was no safeguards in place.
They said she could still drink the water.
By the third test a year later in August of 2015,
she was told to immediately to stop drinking her water.
So these people that are getting no detects
I think should be very careful.
- I just wanted to add to the observational
studies that are done in West Virginia and Ohio,
those are around - And New Hampshire and some
okay, yep, we are familiar with those,
and those are around, most of those have been around
factories that have produced the chemical
and the exposure rate is extremely high.
Much, much higher than what we're exposed to here.
And again I'm not minimizing it,
but that really is the best data that we have,
and we do have data from animal studies,
that's really hard to compare to.
- These were population studies of humans.
- Correct, but those are not,
when you look at evidence from studies
those are challenging to interpret
When you look at it from a epidemiologic
research standpoint, but that's why we're using
a preponderance of caution here
and we're giving filters to people
with levels of contaminant that's below
what's considered concerning.
Much, much lower that what was in those studies.
- Well just a concern for the people
that have registered at any levels,
they bioaccumulate into the body.
- We are aware of that, and we can talk afterwards.
I just want other people to be able to ask.
- Unless they stop drinking the water
your body can't rid itself of these chemicals.
And only half are released from your body,
it takes four to eight years.
- That's why we're providing an alternate source,
ie filtered water so that people.
- What kind of filter's are being used?
- We're using the NSF approved filters.
And they're working on a definitive answer.
So everything that can be done is being done,
and we're happy to talk afterwards further,
but I would like other people to have a chance.
- Thank you.
- Thank you, sir.
- I guess mine's reference to gentleman
in selling his house, who knows,
maybe he's trying to relocate cause he's got a new job.
And he can't sell his home
cause the bank's won't finance it.
Is there any way that somebody
can subsidize this poor fella
so he's got a place to live while he's
waiting for his house to be approved for financing?
He's stuck, we're all stuck.
- You know we have gone out and talked
to some of the banks and some of the financial lenders
and we're not finding that that's been
what they have told us, that they're not asking.
That is not part of the sampling
or the information that they garner
when they do loans and all I know
is what we were told when we asked.
Now if you're experiencing something different
than that, then we'd like to know
what lending institution that is so we can follow up.
And you know, figure out what ground truth is.
- Let me ask you this.
Would you go look at a home in any of these areas to buy?
Personally, right now, honestly?
- Sir, I live in that area,
I mean I rented in that area.
- I ask you that, would you go there
to buy a house right now if you were
lookin' to buy a new house.
- If I was lookin' to buy a house?
For me personally, and I'm not talkin'
for anybody on the board, I mean,
I'm one of your neighbors and I'm out there.
And I know that there's, we are so early
in this investigation, and we don't know
what's going on out there.
- That's not the question. - I know, I know.
Would you go by a house in that subdivision?
- I would because I like living.
The subdivision that I'm livin' in.
- If you knew there was polluted water
there you'd go buy a house?
- But I know that there's only three
houses out there that's even above
the level. - Right now.
- I don't want to get into an argument with you.
- Honestly I don't think anybody in this building
would buy a house in that subdivision at this time.
[applause]
- Thanks for takin' my question.
This is in regards to the filtration unit.
Why can't the filtration unit be placed
at the entrance to where the water
comes into my home so that all my faucets
and everything will be protected
instead of just one place in my kitchen.
And if that's not the case,
will there be something down the road
where a filter can be installed
where the water enters my home?
- That's probably DHS.
- I'm not a water tester, but I'll just repeat
what I said before that there is still
a lot to know about where these plumes are and such.
And so it may be why you're needing a filter now
and we're putting one in for the abundance of caution
as we told the young lady before.
Because we know that there's potential health effects
from these emerging contaminants.
That once there's more knowledge
of I would say, I think Dr. Morse said it well,
of where the risk is, so we can actually
quantify risk, where people are, where they live.
Right now we know of three homes.
I don't even know if they're close to each other or not.
But this is what we need to know
before we make determinations about what houses
need what kinds of systems and how they're doing.
And the same goes, I think one of the things
to think about, and I want to thank
the National Sanitation Foundation about this.
That this is a filterable contaminant.
There are many things out there that are not.
This is filterable.
So that's something also to put in mind
as we think about sort of the other contaminants
that are in our water systems,
that are in our environments,
that can be filtered, some can't.
Lead, and PFOS, PFOA can do the NSF certifications.
[audience member speaking off microphone]
I think it's a different.
I think a whole house filter could be done.
I think it's reverse osmosis and such,
but I don't think that that's something that
we would do to every home until there's a knowledge
of where the source of the water is.
[audience member speaking off microphone]
No, we are doing this out of the abundance of caution.
You don't have to if you don't want.
I mean it's safe to, it's okay to drink the water right now.
If you're not over 70.
[audience member speaking off microphone]
And sir, you've heard me say today what I've said about it.
Okay, is that it's okay to do,
and we're doing it out of an abundance of caution.
- Alright sir.
- Yeah, I'm a little bit confused.
My letter said your well test results
did not detect any PFOS in your drinking water.
But that's not quite right because the analysis,
I have nine parts per trillion in my water.
And I know that's low, it's way below the 70,
I realize that, but you're saying that
I'm still going to need a filtration system?
- I think we may have to look at your report.
- Probably will have to look at your report
just to be sure of what it's saying.
But for those of you who have received reports.
- I mean the analysis is point 009 U.
- Yep it's the U, it's the U.
So what the 009 means is that is as low
as the machine, the analytical machine can detect it.
But the U after it says it didn't detect it at that level.
So it didn't find it.
- I gotcha.
I used to do this type of work 30 years ago,
so I understand, thank you.
- And we have a form in the back
that might help with an interpretation if you need.
- That's okay.
And we're going to be retesting all the wells
which were, like me less than 70 but detectable, right?
- We're going to retest all of the wells,
all the residential wells that have been tested.
- All of 'em, okay.
- Yeah, they're all going to be retested.
And then we're going to test additional wells beyond that.
- Okay thank you.
- Sir.
- I have a question, kind of down the road.
Now you do all this analysis,
you collect all your data, you know where the plume is,
now, can you contain it?
- Yeah, all this investigation work
will probably lead to a feasibility study.
The feasibility study will look at all
of the available technologies that may
be able to remediate or clean up the groundwater.
At that time we'll decide whether
it's going to be a feasible thing to do or not.
Then there'll be choices whether to extend
the municipal supply system to everybody
or take other measures.
That's a decision that will have to be made
after we do a lot more investigation.
- Sir.
- You have received I think 20 wells.
Is that what you identified that have
the contaminant in it that you received?
- 20.
- Do you have any kind of a map of where those wells are,
where that contamination is,
so that one might be able to see where is the problem?
- Yeah, I can tell you that there's no pattern
to the map, I think Jonathan if you want to talk that one.
- Can we see a no pattern map?
- Jonathan.
- Yes, the answer to that is yes
we have that on a map but to speak
to being able to distribute that to the community.
We understand that property values
are of a concern and so we're keeping,
- So it's a secret?
- Well it's not a secret.
We're sharing it with the regulators,
we've shared it with the DEQ so they can look at,
- Could you share it with me?
- I can share you your test results.
- I didn't get any test results, you didn't show.
- Have you been sampled?
- No I requested it, but I didn't receive any.
- Did you request in the last two weeks or so?
- I requested it at the time you had your last meeting.
- Okay, so in the back, they will have
your results back there.
- But that's off the point.
The point here is why can't we see
where the problems have been identified.
That's the point.
- Because of privacy issues with homeowners.
If the homeowner would like to divulge
that information to you that's their choice.
- Well can we see in general, other than this?
- We looked at trying to do that.
If there was a noticeable pattern.
But to Colonel Brown's there was not
a noticeable hot zone, if you will,
- And that decision was made by you
that there wasn't, not by us.
- The decision was made by the team
of individuals standin' up here.
- By the experts here. - Thank you.
Are there, go ahead.
- Let me just remind everybody first of all,
that that installation is a federal installation, okay.
And all the agencies sitting up
at this front table are from the State of Michigan.
And I got to tell ya, I mean we're tryin' our
damnedest to do the right thing.
And I understand you're frustrated,
you're not happy, trust me,
I'm not very happy about all this either.
It is a national level problem.
We are doing our level best
to try to address it.
Be even handed about what we're doing.
Being fair, being transparent,
and you know, everybody's got their own opinion
about how you define that okay.
And I get that, and I respect that.
But I just want to tell ya, that, you know,
there's a lot of work, a lot of people workin' hard
to try to solve this for you.
And I just ask you to keep that in mind.
- I'd just like to say thank you guys
for all your transparency.
And you say the source of this contaminant
is in the groundwater in plumes so to speak.
And if it's in the water, these plumes are moving
at some rate, in some direction, whatever,
and you already know you have positive hits of over 70.
So in just knowing that you do anywhere over there,
wouldn't it be smart to preemptively give everybody
a filter in that area knowing that that plume
can move to the neighbor across the street,
a block over, I just feel like everyone
should probably have access to a filter for that.
- Doctors you want to?
- So I don't, I can totally see where you're coming
out on that and the question is,
and this has come up before,
is we're doing this right now on those people
who had a detect as well as obviously
the people who went over 70.
So the question arises, okay,
what about my neighbor who's a non detect,
and where's the plume.
And that is why it's so imperative
that we actually get the further testing
because it could well be,
and I think the lady in the audience
who brought this up earlier,
you could be a non detect now,
and two months later be a detect.
And so that's why these studies need to occur.
So I don't disagree with you at all on that.
I think the issue is, is right now,
there's such an unknown about where is a plume,
is it multiple plumes, is there a plume,
and how fast is it going and where's it going.
I'm a resident of Ann Arbor,
so I learned about plumes a few years ago,
and understand that we have a nasty chemical
in one of ours, our plume.
And so we begin to understand that that really requires
that monitoring of the wells.
I think that that is going to have to guide,
and I think the General said at the beginning,
we have to have that data, that information,
but we absolutely do understand the question.
We have addressed that probably a million times,
but I think that's where we need more data.
And I think as we were doing
with the abundance of caution,
of having folks that as I said,
you don't have to but I recommend,
hey you know, because we don't know where the plume,
you're actually a detect now,
use the filter for your drinking water
until we have better characterization.
In the same way I would say,
if somebody becomes a detect in the next
serial round of testing and we're non detect before,
we would do the exact same thing
until we have an ultimate characterization
of the water source, the plume and where it's going.
Does that help?
- Kind of sort of.
I'm just, I think if you know a known contaminant
is in an area, you know, I feel like
everyone should have access to those filters.
- Well and that's where I think
a lot of it is, if we're so early on
we're not even sure where that area is,
really mostly at the point.
But I do understand, and I appreciate
your question, it's a good one.
- Ma'am.
- Hi, I just have a quick question,
so are you all done using this fire retardant?
Are you going to keep using it?
- I can answer that one, yes,
we haven't used that at the Grayling Air Force
or Air Base since late 1990's.
So we are done with it.
- I got to tell you one other thing about AFFF
with that chemical compound,
it's used as a fire retardant,
and it's used in clothing too.
And as we're talking about this,
the uniform that I have on,
probably has that fire retardant in it.
Now you'll see me in this uniform for the last time
cause I'm not going to wear the damn thing anymore.
But I mean that's how prevalent it is.
When you look at the list of stuff
that it has it in, you know, carpeting.
I mean what's the first thing you do with a baby?
You put it on a carpet.
I'm going, really?
No I was just talkin' about all the other products
that have this chemical in it.
This uniform being,
say again?
[audience member speaking off microphone]
But you crawl around on it,
and that's where you get it from.
That's why 98% of the people in this room,
if you were tested for PFC's, you'd have it.
- But I think the other part of your question is,
the military wasn't the only one that used this foam.
It was used by civilian fire departments,
wildfires, it was the greatest thing back then.
Kind of like smoking in the '40's.
Everybody was smoking, we didn't know it was bad for ya.
Well we thought the foam was great
cause it put out the fires quick.
So I know that everybody has stopped using that.
Ma'am.
- Hi, my question is kind of going the opposite way.
So if it's a problem,
and has been detected at a low level
is there any way that we can determine
if it was higher 20 years ago?
And how much higher?
- So Jonathan, or DEQ want to grab that one?
- That's a tough question.
I don't know if we can.
We can do the sampling and monitoring
and tell you what's happening in real time
and we can only make assumptions.
Sometimes contaminants move in a groundwater plume in slugs.
Where it was released 20 years ago at this location
and now it's showing up 15 miles further down.
If we see high concentrations at a location
that's way far away from the source area
we can probably assume that it was
at a much higher concentration in the past.
But that's only an assumption.
- But I think part of it is,
we didn't test for it in the past,
and technology in the last few years
has been able to let us test at the trillion level.
So I don't think that,
- Yeah, the ability to get down
into the parts per trillions is a recent
advance in the equipment.
The detection equipment. - Okay.
- Yeah, I guess I've just been thinking
about the half life of it and things like that.
And I was trying to go,
I know we have a lot of discussion
about where we're going to go from here.
But I'm also, I have this curiosity about where we've been.
- Yeah, and I don't think we know enough about
these compounds to really be, to tell.
We do know that they appear to be very persistent,
that they don't break down easily.
That concentrations maintain a certain level
for quite a period of time.
- If I could just add something.
As it is an interesting issue as we look at,
as we learn more about these chemicals.
The half life as you know is somewhere
eight to nine years or so,
but what's interesting is that
3M made a lot of the products that had
a lot of the PFC's within them.
And not a lot of companies do,
we were talking about the non stick pans and all of that.
But when they took it out,
and we start seeing manufacturers
actually begin to remove PFC's
from their manufacturing processes,
we're beginning to see, especially with PFOS,
that the blood lead levels over,
we look at nutrition, I'm sorry,
National Health and Nutrition surveys,
which are done every few years,
and they test the blood of people.
And we're watching the blood levels
actually decrease over the last decade or so.
And we think that is in association
with the fact that manufacturers
are beginning to pull this stuff out.
And maybe the fire retardant was pulled away.
But I think that is something that
we need to be aware of that this is an environmental
containment in so many ways.
And certainly with the potential health issues
is important but we are seeing a trend
that shows that public health,
or primary prevention can help.
And the more we're aware of what's in,
you know, what we're putting in our mouths,
what we're, you know, doin' with our young ones.
I talked to a grandfather today,
that's really key awareness is going to
be a big part of the battle.
- Ma'am.
- You mentioned that babies crawling
on the carpet can get this PFC in them.
Obviously then through their skin?
- I'm going to pass that off to,
- Do you want to do this [trails off]
- No actually, crawling, get it on their hands,
put their hands in their mouth,
or their toys on the carpet.
It's used as a flame retardant
and a stain protector on the carpet.
- I'm not convinced that it's safe to bathe.
The skin is a very receptive organ.
When you get,
I have a patch for chemo, they put it on your skin.
- Sure so this is a really good question.
And I actually have a form in the back,
and it's in a, I'll get that for you.
But some information that has to do with the clinical
absorption, some of the toxicologic issues.
And actually the dermatologic absorption
is pretty minimal, and they've not found
that the skin absorption, the dermatologic,
the skin absorption of this chemical
looks to be at all related to clinical outcomes.
But I can give that to you,
it's what the current agency for toxic substance,
that one there,
if you could bring that up,
it's the stapled one.
No there's one in a red folder back there Sue,
and it's in a red folder, it's called clinical.
And we can bring that up to this woman.
But we always worry about the different
routes of exposure too, but it turns out
with the young it may well be this hand to mouth,
or the ingestion of it as opposed to skin.
But thank you, it's a good concern.
- But if it's on like this gentleman's uniform,
and he wants to get rid of it, why is that?
Because do you think it's going to absorb into your skin?
- Yeah, no, I was just, it had the fire retardant material
in it and just some of the material I read,
getting prepared for this meeting,
I'm looking at this has got fire
retardant chemicals in it, so it would say,
and would it leech into my skin.
No but I touch it, I touch my face.
My hands get in my, those kinds of things.
So it's just.
- And it's water soluble too, so if he's out
in the rain and then he's sitting' there,
I'm sorry, go ahead.
- It's the medications that we can absorb
through our skin are like hormones
and things that are fat soluble.
This is a water soluble medication,
medication, I'm sorry, chemical.
You know if you're wearing something
all day long and you're perspiring in it.
I mean, again out of precaution you may not want to wear it.
But different medications can be absorbed
through the skin and that's a different
type of thing, as a water soluble thing,
those kinds of chemicals don't get
absorbed through the skin well at all.
Now if you were to soak in it all day,
you might absorb a bit,
but to shower normally it's not considered a harm.
- So the main issue for the general population,
drinking contaminated water could be a source.
Ingesting food contaminated with PFOS,
such as certain types of fish, and shellfish.
And we already, that's why the testing is going on.
Eating foods packaged in materials carrying PFOS,
and now many of the manufacturers
are pulling that away, but in the past
it would have been popcorn bags,
fast food containers, et cetera.
A lot of food now, a lot of its been
phased out of food packaging,
so we shouldn't be getting a lot
of exposure from that now.
And then most of the rest is that hand to mouth transfer.
Maybe it's even raining, and something like that,
and it's wet and you, and you damp,
and then you're doin' this or whatever.
But those are the kinds of things,
we don't anticipate a huge dermal transfer or skin transfer.
- Okay so we're going to take our last question
from this woman right here.
And then I've got, after this I want
the city to come up, they need
to put out some information and talk a little bit.
Go ahead.
- Hi, I'm just curious, where the money
for all this is coming from,
the drilling, the filters, who pays for it?
- The DEQ has an emergency contingency fund
for situations just like this
and that's where we're getting the initial
amount of funding for this.
- And that covers all, everything?
- It'll get us started.
- Okay.
- And it's taxpayers money.
- Yeah let me add on to that too
because this is a federal issue.
So we're certainly looking for the federal government
to step in and we're workin' that
through National Guard Bureau.
I mean that's part of the issue here.
The guys that really own the installation,
they're not here, I mean, I know
I represent the military, and I'm not tryin'
to push this off, I'm just tryin' to explain to you
the complexity of how this works.
And at the end of the day,
I mean the reality of it is,
I've been just thrilled that the state of Michigan,
and the county, and the community,
everybody has stepped up for a problem,
and you know, we've not,
that research has not been done yet.
But you know, it's not illogical to conclude
that it was probably caused by the AFFF
that we and the city, or the community
training that was done,
so now we got the state of Michigan
that's writin' the checks right, to deal with it.
But at the end of the day,
you know it's about takin' care of the people.
Steppin' out, dealing with the issue.
Then we'll figure out, you know, who is really responsible.
You know, and it's always about,
look it's about the money.
And this, these can get into big numbers.
So I'm workin' that each and every day.
But thank you for askin' that question.
- Okay, just, I'd like to put in a plug,
a request again to get filtration
at the source of the water.
Whoever's in charge of that,
I don't think it's outlandish to ask.
My kids drink out of the hose,
they drink their bath water.
I'd like to ask for that too.
Put another tick in that tally.
- Alright, so what I'm going to do
is close down the questions and the team
will stay here for the remainder.
So the board as well as the team that they have
will be in the back, but I want to brink up
Kyle and Richard just to, for a quick minute.
- Hi there, Kyle Bond, City of Grayling DPW.
Right after, about a week after the May 18th meeting
the city, we did test star wells.
Both wells, we have two wells, one on Roberts Road,
and one in between the hospital and elementary school,
on that dead end area there.
Those tests came back, well one,
which is the one by the elementary school,
had a few of the compounds in it.
Incidentally, I already had that well turned off.
That well was out of rotation,
I only run one well at a time to supply,
to supply the community.
Since then I have not turned the well back on.
We have retested, though, and they're also,
they're compounds that are not the same
as what's being found on the air field.
There's three compounds, two of them
were also found in the field blank,
which causes me to, causes us to believe
that it's atmospheric contamination.
One of them, which is one part per trillion,
was, or is not, is not a part of the 15
that's considered on the EPA's health advisory list.
We will continue to sample.
And keep an eye on that,
and right now I'm not putting that well back online.
- Yeah, good evening, I'm Richard Benze,
I work with the Drinking Water
and Municipal Assistance Division.
And as Jonathan mentioned early on,
a lot of this discovery of this contaminant,
or this group of contaminants originated
with EPA's unregulated containment monitoring regulation.
And in Michigan about 100 systems
over 10,000 had sampled for it.
And two of them found it.
And you know one of them, as Dr. Wells mentioned,
is Ann Arbor, and it's in the Huron River there.
And their treatment system, and Ann Arbor
has what we call the water torture plant.
Cause if there's a treatment method out there, they use it.
And they don't remove it.
It's there.
They're monitoring it.
They keep a good handle on it,
and they notified their residents about it.
Another one is a groundwater system
that serves about 20,000 people north of Grand Rapids.
And they like Grayling had the ability
to remove the wells that were contaminated
from routine use, but they're one mechanical failure
away from having to put them back online.
So they're out there.
We're finding them in public water systems.
Not everyone's been sampled.
Grayling was not during the unregulated
containment monitoring, but because it was being offered
as an alternative, for people in this area,
they decided that we should sample it.
And lo and behold, as Kyle said,
one of the wells initially reported
that the presence of low levels
of a couple of these PFC's,
they weren't the ones that were commonly
being found around the base, do we don't think
it's related, at least not yet,
that's part of what our sister agencies
will find out here when our RD and DMVA
does some other investigations on the nature
and extent of this contamination.
But we also wanted to collect repeat samples
to confirm what we found, and we just got
those results, today basically.
Last night for me, and today for Kyle.
And it did confirm the presence in well number two,
well number one of that same compound
again at even lower level than we saw the first time.
But it also reported it at almost the same level,
point nine parts per trillion in the other well.
So, and again I think the more we sample
community water systems, public water systems
around the state, the more we're going to find
these low levels, they're pervasive.
There's many sources, and they've been
widely used throughout the environment.
So we're all facing this new paradigm together here,
and trying to figure out how to deal with it.
And as we've said, an abundance of caution
has been used thus far.
As far as the city's concerned,
they will be monitoring this and keeping
a handle on it, typically at least quarterly monitoring.
You know every three months we'll get a sample from this
and we'll look to see what the investigations
do as far as finding out where's the source.
How much is it?
Is there a lot more coming towards the wells?
And the city will have to start
some long term planning about how do they
want to deal with this, you know,
do they want to start looking for a new well field.
Do they want to look at treatment of the city water.
Or are we going to decide at this level,
and at a steady state it's really not a risk
that's worth the investment to make
that kind of treatment, or alternate source investigation.
So in the interest of transparency
we wanted to let people know what we found.
We weren't expecting to have those confirmation results.
On Monday the lab told us they wouldn't have them.
On Tuesday they said, we think we can
get 'em to you this afternoon.
And I got 'em that evening and called Kyle at home.
And so we just have the paperwork in our hands.
- Thank you for sharing.
Right, so thank you for everybody coming here,
spending a hot evening with us here in the drill floor.
Fall we'll have another town hall meeting.
The 12 that haven't gotten your results,
we'll get with you and we'll set up a smaller town hall.
If you have not gotten results,
and you haven't, and you didn't request it
in the last two weeks, back in that back corner
they will have your results.
And then our team of experts here,
and their team will be in the back,
we can answer additional questions.
So thank you guys.
-------------------------------------------
Dembele | Bild: ¿se está mudando Dembelé? - Duration: 1:52.
For more infomation >> Dembele | Bild: ¿se está mudando Dembelé? - Duration: 1:52. -------------------------------------------
Eps 6. Yellow Flower - Jogja Burning - Duration: 6:45.
For more infomation >> Eps 6. Yellow Flower - Jogja Burning - Duration: 6:45. -------------------------------------------
Dembele | El ultimatum que le ha lanzado el Dortmund al Barça por Dembélé (y hay fecha límite) - Duration: 2:11.
For more infomation >> Dembele | El ultimatum que le ha lanzado el Dortmund al Barça por Dembélé (y hay fecha límite) - Duration: 2:11. -------------------------------------------
Top 10 People Who Woke Up During Surgery | Extreme Surgeries - Duration: 6:14.
Top 10 People Who Woke Up During Surgery.
People who wake up during surgery are usually traumatized by the experience.
Many of them feel the surgeon�s every cut and stitch.
Unfortunately, they cannot tell anyone of the agony that they are in, as they�re usually
given muscle relaxants before the surgery.
The medication paralyzes the patient.
10.
Carol Weihrer.
Carol Weihrer spent years living in pain due to a scratched cornea.
She had undergone 17 surgeries to try to fix it, none of which worked.
Her doctor told her that they could not save her eye; it would need to be removed.
Weihrer was relieved that the pain would finally be over.Carol scheduled the surgery.
The operation started successfully.
She was given anesthesia and fell asleep.
Weihrer woke up happily, thinking her pain was finally over.
Then she heard someone say, �Cut deeper.
Pull harder.� 9.
Donna Penner.
Donna Penner needed to undergo surgery on her abdomen.
She was given anesthetic, and she woke up as nurses were washing her stomach.
Penner thought that the surgery was over.
Then she heard the surgeon ask for a scalpel.Penner felt the entire surgery: She felt the surgeon
cut her open, she felt the surgeon slide medical instruments through her abdomen, and she felt
her organs being moved around.
Penner thought that she would die.
8 .Sidney L. Williams.
Sidney L. Williams needed to undergo open heart surgery, and the surgeon warned him
that he had a 50-percent chance of dying on the table.
Williams was given anesthetic, and he drifted off to sleep.
He woke up to the sound of a bow saw�his sternum was being opened.
Williams tried to tell the doctors that he was awake, but he couldn�t make a sound,
nor could he move, speak, or see.
Williams couldn�t even cry, as the drugs he was given stopped tear production.
7.
Jeannie Smith.
Jeannie Smith needed to have both of her ovaries removed after a doctor found a cyst on one
of them.
Smith was given anesthesia, and she was wheeled into surgery.
She soon woke up.
All she could see was a bright light shining in her face.
Smith was paralyzed from the medications and could not speak.
There was no way to show the doctors she was awake.Smith had to endure every second of
the 45-minute operation 6 .Caroline Coote.
Caroline Coote needed to have surgery to remove her gallbladder.
She was placed under anesthesia, but the line that delivered the anesthetic began to leak.
The drugs wore off soon after her operation had begun, and she woke up.The muscle relaxants
worked perfectly; Coote could not move.
She was force to lie there and endure the pain of the operation.
Coote focused every ounce of her willpower into alerting the surgeons that she was awake.
She tried to scream, but she could not make a sound.
5.
Hector Alonso.
Hector Alonso needed to have a cataract operation on his right eye.
He was given anesthesia, and he drifted off.
However, Alonso woke up in the middle of the surgery.
He could see the surgeon operating on his eye.
Alonso told his surgeon that he was awake, and he begged the doctor to stop the surgery.
4 .Diana Todd.
Diana Todd was placed under anesthesia to undergo a hysterectomy.
She woke up and heard people talking.
Todd tried to hear what they were saying.
Instead, she felt the first cut.
She felt the blade slice her open again and again; she stopped counting after the fifth
cut.
Todd was hit with constant waves of pain.
The agony was indescribable.
She was trying to scream as loud as she could, but she couldn�t make a sound.
The anesthesia drugs had paralyzed her.
3 .Ms. Y.
Ms. Y had appendicitis and ovarian bleeding, and she needed surgery to correct her health
issues.
She fell asleep, but she woke up before the procedure was over.
Ms. Y heard people talking.
Then she felt a cut being made in her abdomen and something moving inside her.
She tried to open her eyes, but she couldn�t.
Ms. Y heard people saying, �So much blood!
Quickly take some pictures.�The subsequent investigation found that the anesthesia machine
had malfunctioned during the surgery, an error which went unnoticed for 25 minutes until
the surgeon saw Ms. Y�s abdominal muscles move.
The surgeon alerted the anesthesiologist, who increased her dosage.
2.
Alexandra Bythell.
Alexandra Bythell�s anesthetic wore off shortly after her appendix removal surgery
began.
She woke up and began to panic.
Her eyes were taped shut, and there were breathing tubes in her throat.
Bythell tried to breathe, but she couldn�t manage a single breath.
She thought that she was going to die.Bythell was paralyzed.
She overheard medical staff discussing her size and weight, and she felt someone poke
and prod her.
Bythell heard a shout for more morphine, and she drifted back to sleep.
1.
Sherman Sizemore.
Sherman Sizemore underwent exploratory surgery to find the cause of his abdominal pain.
He was given paralyzing drugs to stop him from moving during the surgery, but he was
not given any general anesthesia.
Sizemore was awake for the first 29 minutes of his operation.
He felt everything.Sixteen minutes after Sizemore�s stomach was sliced open, the anesthesiologist
realized his mistake.
He gave Sizemore anesthesia and an amnesia-inducing agent.
The anesthesiologist did not tell Sizemore or the other doctors about his error.
-------------------------------------------
MOBIL Peugeot 108 TERBARU SUDAH DIRILIS - Duration: 2:38.
For more infomation >> MOBIL Peugeot 108 TERBARU SUDAH DIRILIS - Duration: 2:38. -------------------------------------------
지진희 부인(아내)이수연- 지진희 게이 과거 문제 - Duration: 11:27.
For more infomation >> 지진희 부인(아내)이수연- 지진희 게이 과거 문제 - Duration: 11:27. -------------------------------------------
Premiering This Saturday, Do... For more infomation >> Premiering This Saturday, Do...-------------------------------------------
For more infomation >> Premiering This Saturday, Do...-------------------------------------------
5 Simple Life Hacks|DIY|Hacks N Drills - Duration: 3:58.5 Simple Life Hacks|DIY|Hacks N Drills
5 Simple Life Hacks|DIY|Hacks N Drills
-------------------------------------------
For more infomation >> 5 Simple Life Hacks|DIY|Hacks N Drills - Duration: 3:58.-------------------------------------------
Le fils de Jacques Legros future star ? Armande Altaï n'a pas connu un tel talent - Duration: 2:43.
For more infomation >> Le fils de Jacques Legros future star ? Armande Altaï n'a pas connu un tel talent - Duration: 2:43. -------------------------------------------
For more infomation >> Le fils de Jacques Legros future star ? Armande Altaï n'a pas connu un tel talent - Duration: 2:43.-------------------------------------------
it be the first time you hear this - Duration: 2:24.
For more infomation >> it be the first time you hear this - Duration: 2:24. -------------------------------------------
For more infomation >> it be the first time you hear this - Duration: 2:24.-------------------------------------------
VlogMotte : Championnat de France Lamotte 2017🐎 - Duration: 6:16.
For more infomation >> VlogMotte : Championnat de France Lamotte 2017🐎 - Duration: 6:16. -------------------------------------------
For more infomation >> VlogMotte : Championnat de France Lamotte 2017🐎 - Duration: 6:16.-------------------------------------------
勝利為何IG發文又秒刪 誤會還是網民多疑？ - Duration: 1:54.
For more infomation >> 勝利為何IG發文又秒刪 誤會還是網民多疑？ - Duration: 1:54. -------------------------------------------
For more infomation >> 勝利為何IG發文又秒刪 誤會還是網民多疑？ - Duration: 1:54.-------------------------------------------
Premiering This Saturday, Do... For more infomation >> Premiering This Saturday, Do...-------------------------------------------
I'm nominated for Guldtuben 2017 - Duration: 1:41.
For more infomation >> I'm nominated for Guldtuben 2017 - Duration: 1:41. -------------------------------------------
Mercedes-Benz M-Klasse ML 320 Automaat - Duration: 0:54.
For more infomation >> Mercedes-Benz M-Klasse ML 320 Automaat - Duration: 0:54. -------------------------------------------
天城越え 石川さゆり -cov（●＾o＾●）🎶M - Duration: 4:41.
For more infomation >> 天城越え 石川さゆり -cov（●＾o＾●）🎶M - Duration: 4:41. -------------------------------------------
M&M's Ice Cream Surprise Toys Learn Colors for Kids Tayo the Little Bus and Police Car - Duration: 4:16.
For more infomation >> M&M's Ice Cream Surprise Toys Learn Colors for Kids Tayo the Little Bus and Police Car - Duration: 4:16. -------------------------------------------
What I'm Currently Reading | 2017 - Duration: 11:31.
Here is 'Unfinished Books that I'm Currently Reading' 'My Unfinished
Currently Reading Books' I don't know the title of this video yet.
This video is an idea I've had for a long time because I have a lot of books that I'm currently
reading, that I haven't finished. And this isn't books I've given up on.
These are books that I do intend to finish reading at some point. Lots of
them I've started before the beginning of this year maybe even a whole nother
year before. Hopefully these books will appear in a reading wrap up video in the
future, but since I really don't know when that's going to be and I have been
itching to talk about them. We're going to just go in order of physical size, so
we'll start with the tiniest one. Though it's not actually like the shortest one,
but it's like physically the most little. The Children of Húrin by J.R.R
Tolkien edited by Christopher Tolkien. This is a prequel thing, and it is very
wordy. Uh and I do enjoy very flowery explanations and long winded
descriptions. I mean obviously I love J.R.R. Tolkien, so that's kind of his style. But
this, this really takes it to another level. It is just so confusing at first
and I've made it to page...what have I made it too? I've made it to page 50, to
the beginning of the second chapter. I took this book with me on my recent trip
to Sweden and it was my train book. I always liked having a book for the
trains when I go anywhere in Europe. Honestly, I did more writing than reading
during my Sweden trip. But I do enjoy Tolkien.
I just don't know when I'm going to be in the right focus-y headspace thing. I'm
currently writing a post-apocalyptic story, not a fantasy story, so I'll dive
into this if I switch up what novel I'm working on writing, because this
definitely puts me in that hyper fantasy mood. That leads me to the second book
I'm going to be talking about, The Stand by Stephen King. It's actually the first
Stephen King book I've ever started reading. I bought this very recently
because I am writing, like I said a post-apocalyptic novel, and every time I
google post-apocalyptic fiction this is on all the lists. So I don't know, it's
very dark and my story's not going to be as dark. It's probably going to be YA
so I don't know how dark I can go. But I'm only on page 26 and I just started
it and I do not think this is going to be something I can read in the next year.
It's going to be my 'when I need inspiration and don't feel like watching
another episode Jericho' feeling. Next is Goddess of Yesterday, a tale of Troy by
Caroline B. Cooney. This is a book I picked up at a book festival, book
festival thing, a few years ago. I made a video about it. This was like a dollar.
It's interesting so far. I don't know, the bookmark fell out of it, so I don't know
what chapter I'm on. I feel like I'm a few chapters in, maybe less than halfway
through it. I don't know why I stopped reading it, I think there was just other
more exciting things to read. But this wasn't bad so I should try getting into
it again after this month, after Camp NaNoWriMo. Um this might be a quick read
because it is it looks like either YA or middle-grade type type reading. I don't know, I
like to cover. About Musicals, Teach Yourself. There's no author on this, oh
Susan Sutherland. This reads like a text book, like a like a theater history
textbook. Obviously it was purchased because Cats is featured on the cover. I
haven't gotten to the chapter about Cats. I don't think there's a whole chapter
about that, there's like a section probably. But I'm guessing they picked it for the cover
because it's a very beautiful photo. The costuming and the makeup of Cats is just
stunning and wonderful and I don't know. I just wanted to own it at the time. I
don't remember when I got this, I have a lot of random Cats related books lying
around. Okay, uh uh Ron Chernow wrote this biography on Alexander Hamilton. It was
the inspiration for Lin-Manuel Miranda's musical, Hamilton and yeah. I mean, every
fan probably has this or has read this. And I where's my bookmark, okay I am on
page 70. It's um, it's it's nonfiction and I normally don't read nonfiction very
often, but it is very interesting. I just I can't speed through nonfiction. This
is surprising, The Fate of the Tearling by Erika Johansen. I should have
finished this by now. I should have tore through it. I expected to, I really love
love love the first two books in the series. I have a whole video where I talk
about both of those books so you can see just how much I absolutely am in love
with this series. I don't know if it's because I've been reading them as
they've been released and because of that I tend to forget all the characters
names and who they are. And I mean, this is one reason why I don't read Game of
Thrones, it's just, there's so many people to keep track of that are active
characters and it's just, I get lost. I feel like I really should have read the
first two again and then went straight to this. But I also
want to read new things all the time. But I do have them still so I'm not sure if
I'll do that before going back into this or I'll get some kind of spark notes or
you know, watch my video about it. But see, it's more like the characters that I don't
remember...certain characters that become point of view type characters in this
book that I just I need...I need some fan art. I need some fan art, if there's fan
art for this let me know! That will help me to visualize it all and get, and
get back into it. Yeah, I don't know. I don't know. I'm on page 152 so we'll see.
Next is Haunted Mansion: Imagineering a Disney Classic bbyut Jason Sorrell.
And this book is so magical. I bought it at Disneyland when I was there for VidCon
very very recently. It is full of beautiful photographs and art and it's
just taking you through the history and then like literally every scene of the
ride and the differences between Disneyland and Walt Disney World and
Tokyo Disney and also the Tokyo Disney Disneyland Haunted Mansion Holiday with
Nightmare Before Christmas characters. Just everything is in here and it's just
so wonderful and it's just amazing history and art Imagineering and it's
beautiful. And I heard there's a fiction story about characters, not Haunted
Mansion like not the actual, not the movie with Eddie Murphy, but like, like
more of the of the Gracies...and I don't know is it good. I think I might see if
my library has it because I'm curious about it. But I knew that this needed to
belong to me completely. And I'm only reading it at night, and I've been
reading it like every single night for the past week till I fall asleep. And
last but not least are these three books. And the reason I haven't finished these...
I started them a while ago, like a year ago probably, is because I'm taking a
break. They're basically a workbook, well let's see.
This one is the workbook, so like it has writing in it but I'm also putting my
own information in. This one, I don't know if this really counts as something I'm
reading, it has prompts but a lot of its just like notebook style for writing
three pages of stream-of-consciousness every morning. And then this is the
actual book, book with chapters and you know, tasks and things. The Artists Way, a
Spiritual Path to Higher Creativity by Julia Cameron. This book always appears on
lists of 'amazing books you need to read' kind of things that are out there on the
internet that I've read. I was so curious because it's a course, a course in
discovering and recovering your creative self, and I'm very skeptical when it
comes to this kind of thing, you know? 'Find your inner creativity
and unleash your powers within yourself' like self-help books. I just I don't, I
don't like them. They're just so corny. But but this one, this was pretty good.
Because it actually has prompts of things to do and to write about and it
kind of takes you out of your comfort zone. I think that's why I took a break from
it. It was, it was demanding a lot of me and at the time I couldn't commit to it
fully and I didn't want to commit to it only partially. That's ten books that I
have started and put down. And since then I've read or audiobook listened...oh no!
There's one more, I'm actually listening to the audiobook of Neil Gaiman's
Trigger Warning. 11! Please let me know in the comments if you have read any of
those books or if you have any questions or if you have a bunch of currently
reading books that you just don't know when you're going to finish but
don't want to give up on. If you want to make a video like this I would love to
watch it, please let me know if you do. Thanks for watching. Meow!
-------------------------------------------
Mermaid Stiletto Nail with Crushed Shells - Duration: 11:51.
For more infomation >> Mermaid Stiletto Nail with Crushed Shells - Duration: 11:51. -------------------------------------------
Soy Luna - Gezanke zwischen Matteo und Nico [S2E47] Deutsche Untertitel Einschalten - Duration: 1:29.
For more infomation >> Soy Luna - Gezanke zwischen Matteo und Nico [S2E47] Deutsche Untertitel Einschalten - Duration: 1:29. -------------------------------------------
Scrum Sprint Review and Retrospective - Duration: 3:07.
For more infomation >> Scrum Sprint Review and Retrospective - Duration: 3:07. -------------------------------------------
Miavono - Surface (Fegarx Remix) - Duration: 3:38.
SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE !
-------------------------------------------
Push Ups and Legs - Duration: 2:40.
push-ups variety. Here we go. five slow
5 4 3 2 1
5 fast
now with a pause at the bottom and movement
wider
let's try a little wider
whoa, that's wet.
All the way together
close triangle make a triangle with your hands
most people have access to steps. If not you can make some little stair template
you don't even have to make the whole thing. Just make half
Ok, the goal on steps
get a good burn in your legs so every time I land I'm going to use that
landing as my takeoff constant movement and I don't count reps
I go for the burn when it burns go a few more three five. Just where it starts to
feel slightly dangerous alright starting on one all the way down all the way down
that's just the warm-up. Going into step number two and three
now they're burnin'!
Always using my landing is my take off
Knives in my quads!
Whooo!
-------------------------------------------
《Wanna One》賴冠霖輕鬆讀出韓國繞口令，「才學了8個月怎麼這麼厲害」連韓國人覺得難的單字也沒問題 Lai Kuanlin Teaches How to Learn Korean - Duration: 1:40.
For more infomation >> 《Wanna One》賴冠霖輕鬆讀出韓國繞口令，「才學了8個月怎麼這麼厲害」連韓國人覺得難的單字也沒問題 Lai Kuanlin Teaches How to Learn Korean - Duration: 1:40. -------------------------------------------
Tödliches Drama auf den Gleisen: Bahnmitarbeiter von Güterzug überrollt - Duration: 1:04.
For more infomation >> Tödliches Drama auf den Gleisen: Bahnmitarbeiter von Güterzug überrollt - Duration: 1:04. -------------------------------------------
Eps 6. Yellow Flower - Jogja Burning - Duration: 6:45. For more infomation >> Eps 6. Yellow Flower - Jogja Burning - Duration: 6:45. -------------------------------------------
HN News - 小柳歩、妹にイタズラされるＭのお姉さんに「エッチな感じになってます」 - Duration: 2:48.
For more infomation >> HN News - 小柳歩、妹にイタズラされるＭのお姉さんに「エッチな感じになってます」 - Duration: 2:48. -------------------------------------------
Understanding Electrics through keyboard macro - Duration: 20:44.
Too long didn't watched version in the description
-------------------------------------------
ZURICH TO HOST 18 FRESHLY-MINTED WORLD CHAMPIONS - IAAF DIAMOND LEAGUE - Duration: 4:14.
ZURICH TO HOST 18 FRESHLY-MINTED WORLD CHAMPIONS - IAAF DIAMOND LEAGUE
Organisers have confirmed that 18 freshly-minted world champions will be competing at the Weltklasse Zurich on 24 August, the first of this seasons two IAAF Diamond League finals.
Considering the star-studded entry lists, singling out individual highlights is almost impossible in the battle for a piece of the $US 1.6 million prize pot.
But in at least three events, the scenarios seem to guarantee athletics blockbusters providing thrills and goose bumps for everyone attending.
The men's 400m will not be a rematch, but rather a postponed duel between world record holder, Olympic champion, and world championship gold medallist Wayde van Niekerk of South Africa and his rival Isaac Makwala of Botswana.
Makwala missed out on the London 400m due to illness. Now, he is looking forward to challenging van Niekerk in the IAAF Diamond League title race.
Meanwhile, Great Britains Mo Farah recently added another 5000m silver medal and 10,000m title to his four consecutive double triumphs at global championships to wrote another chapter to the sport's history books.
In Zurich, Farah, one of athletics' greatest, will run his final track race before moving on to the roads and longer distances. Letzigrund Stadium is a worthy arena for Farahs final bow to cap an impressive track career.
Zurich is where Farah broke the 13-minute barrier for the first time in 2010, and it is where he was crowned double European champion in 2014.
His final track appearance, over the 5000m distance, could quite possibly come with an IAAF Diamond League title. His opponents will include the five top London finalists including world champion Muktar Edris of Ethiopia.
Swiss stars will also be getting a particularly warm welcome at Letzigrund. The Zurich crowd will be treated with finalists from both 400m hurdles contests, Lea Sprunger and Kariem Hussein.
There will certainly be thunderous support for the Swiss womens 4x100m relay team when they step onto the track for the Zürich Trophy. In London, they finished fifth.
The IAAF Diamond League Finals will be held according to the revised system for the first time this year.
The best athletes of the current season qualified for the final based upon points acquired at the 12 preceding Diamond League meetings. $US 100,000 will be awarded in prize money in each event with individual event champions collecting $50,000.
"The new system enhances the status of our meeting even further, and it provides for added suspense and drama, as the points collected at the qualifying meetings have no influence on the outcome of the finals.
Everyone starts at zero, said Andreas Hediger, Weltklasse Zürich Co-Meeting Director.
Hediger also noted: "All 16 final events feature the new world champions of London. The IAAF Diamond League thus also proves to be an ideal forum to get to the top of one's game for major championships.".
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét