Good afternoon everyone. Welcome to Senate Education Wednesday, March 29, 315. We just returned from the floor and we have one agenda item today. It will take us about 45 minutes or so. PCV testing in schools. And we have Dr. Levine with us and Commissioner Belling of the Department of Environmental Conservation. Just a review with us, Dr. Levine, if you would, some PCVs in general, testing protocols. Kind of bring us back to where this committee has had a little bit of this conversation this year. And I know committee members have questions. So, sort of an information gathering afternoon. Super. Perfect. Well done. What I will do in a very brief time is talk a little bit about health because I have to. Yeah. Talk a little bit about the Vermont framework, if you will, for testing and why it's based on air. And why we believe we should not cause that. Okay. That sounds reasonable. Thank you. There we go. So this is just an overview of health. I'll go into these in minimal detail. But the overall line concept is PCVs are bad because serious health problems. And we shouldn't doubt that years after we actually created a legislation to do the testing. We have studies of animals that are very clear. We have reports from humans that show outcomes that are seen in animals happen in humans as well. And they don't call these forever chemicals like the PFOA compounds. They are in your body for a very long time. A very long half life, if you will.  You're infant. Exactly. Okay. And just so everyone knows, this is in our pile. And some of these health effects can be interrelated, as I'll show you. So just, you saw the cancer. Melanoma is the one that has been most conclusively recognized as a causal relationship. Breast and liver and lymphoma of the Hodgkin's typhoon are also concerned. When you think you hear in the media some controversy about on these bad or not, it's because various organizations label them differently. So the EPA calls it as a probable human carcinogen, which is a pretty high level for them. The IARC just comes out and says it is carcinogenic. The National Toxicology Program says that it's reasonable to conclude that these are carcinogens in humans. And the weakest one is NIOSH, which says potential occupational carcinogens. But we also really dwell on the non-cancer effects of these substances. And that's in the immune, reproductive, endocrine, and neurologic systems. So the immune systems, obviously, how do we fight foreign invaders into our body?  I'm not going to go into detail except to say that these do act as suppressants of your immune system. And if you remember from COVID, anytime you're somewhat suppressed in your immune system, you're at risk. And so we think this is possibly linked to why cancer is also impacted because of the impact on the immune system. Looking at the reproductive system, the take-home messages are that there have been studies showing decrease in birth weight and increase in the amount of premature. The next two are more developmental, meaning they can be in the fetus or the infant. So let's start with the central nervous system.  The PCBs have been associated with problems in those arenas. And again, an interrelation from other effects. And then I want to get too heavy into thyroid hormone and endocrinology, but suffice it to say that especially with regards to normal development in the fetus and in the infant, thyroid hormone can be involved. And if this impacts the level of thyroid hormone, it can adversely affect those things. Because the thyroid hormone is sort of metabolic hormone and it involves growth and development. So that's the health part, just to give us some of the same foundation. Does anyone have any questions about the health part, concerns, disagreements? I think we'll just pause here right now and see if Senator, we should get a question. That's weird. Senator, Senator, it's fine. It's fine. It's fine. I'm not seeing any questions. Good.  PCVs are throughout our environment, even though they have been banned since 1979. They do last a long time. We get them often through our diet, fanny foods, so fanny fish, meats, and unfortunately, Vermont dairy products. Normally, that creates a background level for everyone so that we have to be careful in looking at levels of exposure and levels of screening to make sure we account for the fact that the background level was not zero throughout the country. But here I want to get you focused on air because the biggest source of exposure for students and staff in buildings that have older construction, which is the majority of our school system unfortunately, meaning before 1980, it's through the air leaching from materials that were used in construction, whether they're caulking materials, whether they're paints, whether they're in the fluorescent ballasts, which hopefully they're not so much in our schools because there was a whole project years back to deal with that. So air is really the thing that is where the biggest exposure is. So like anything else, it's a matter of how often, how much, how long to determine an individual's risk. Sir, if I could just add a curiosity. So can you comment, though, on PCB presence and water and soil? Is it an item of concern? Yes, it is. That's probably where the fish are getting. However, that's not the way humans are getting to the level where these health effects will be seen usually through the air. Thank you. Anything from the waste stream, like the sewage treatment facilities? In terms of PCBs getting into the water. Getting into the water. My colleague here from DC. I'm sure there is some. It's just more of a PFAS concern. I mean PCBs are a pretty ubiquitous environment. So I wouldn't be surprised if I could find out what they're showing up in that type of waste stream. But they're not unusual. You find them in soils throughout the state. Thank you. Senator? Just probably another question for you. So PCBs, are they at all naturally occurring? Or are they ubiquitous in soil and water just because they've been factored in some of the stuff that's been discussed? I should say for the record, John, the only department by the conservation commissioner, they're manufactured. I thought so, but I just wanted to make sure. So this, what I'm going to present to you now doesn't make it into the media very often. Usually it's sort of like, why is Romance so unique? Why are we different than EPA? All of that kind of stuff. But as you can see in the title to the slide, Vermont levels are based on EPA levels and the framework that EPA set out. The difference is it's using current research. The EPA findings were set in 1994. It doesn't mean they haven't looked at them since. It's just they haven't revised their framework since. And that's an important point. The team at my environmental health division and health department that helped work on these along with colleagues across the government also worked with EPA in the development of these and with consultants and very knowledgeable experts around the country. For which there are not very many, I might add, because this is a fairly specialized field in toxicology. So we've got a screening level of 15. That's just sort of that raises our high ground level. It's really the action levels that are where we need to focus. And we have two sets of levels. We have school action levels and media action levels. School action levels, as you might imagine, are higher than the screening level but lower than the immediate action level. The immediate action level is get out of that room. You can't use that room because it's a toxic environment. I would say that, yes, our action levels, as the slide illustrates, are lower than that of EPA. That shouldn't be a cause for concern or alarm. And I'll bring you back to the PFAS set of compounds once again. In 2016, when Bennington learned that they had the misfortune of this problem, the EPA level was 400 parts per trillion. That was all that existed. We took a different approach and said, well, that isn't going to be very health protective. So to be health protective, we went down to a level of 20. And within a few months of us going to 20, EPA went from 400 to 70. And within a few months of that, I don't know how many states, but many other states, adopted levels that were equal to Vermont were actually stricter than Vermont. So we're often pioneers, and I'd like you to look at us as looking at science being driven by the science and not sort of being cowboys and seeing here's what we're doing, because it's a very informed process. EPA regulates a number of chemicals under a program called TASCA, which is the Toxic Substances Control Act. And the partner chemicals, it's not good company to be. It's formaldehyde, it's lead, it's asbestos, it's mercury, and it's the PFAS set of compounds. In many of these, there are easier ways to avoid exposure. We talked about don't drink the water, use bottled water, whatever. It's hard to tell children don't breathe while you're in class. So this made us have to be even more serious about the TASCA hand. We used some of that information that I showed you about developmental neurotoxicity that I just referred to, to really use the current science to develop in our levels, and that is why they are leveled in the EPAs. Most of the time, we set a level of the cancer risk of one in a million. That's kind of a standard in the field. And that was where we came from when we were starting to develop our action levels. Our colleagues in DEC helped us determine that even a level of 22.5 might be something that you might mix up with a background level because of the trashing of the environment and the contributions of food and what have you. And if you regulate down to that level, you're going to be chasing your tail a lot because you're never going to find a source of PCBs in the environment because it may not be the environment and maybe the background level that's actually been a problem. So that's why our action levels are a little bit higher than the level you saw in the slide. The immediate action level is almost by definition three times the lower action level. So that's where that comes from. Keep in mind we're not just using cancer, we're using the non-cancer effects in development. This is a pretty key slide. Thank you for offering this. Just curious, so the 1994 levels established in your professional opinion, do those need to be revisited? By the EPA? By the EPA, yes. For sure. It's not that they're asleep at the wheel. They have a team of scientists, in fact, that we use as consultants who are much up to date. It's just the process of changing the regulatory structures and the policies Okay, given the cost, the potential cost of school renovations and then potentially following on to workplace renovations and home renovations, do you feel that the EPA is motivated enough to... I can tell you they're watching Vermont very closely because they were very involved with the Burlington High School decision and with the work site. They were consulting on the site because of all the findings there. So they're very focused on this. At the same time, some of their setting of levels involved residential and how much time you're asleep in a home. Ours are actually much more focused on school and how much time a staff member or a student is present in a given room or in a given building. Which is where that is going now. Okay, good. And just curious, these thresholds, are these adult thresholds? No, they are age dependent. So 30 would be for preschool, 100 would be for high school or adult. The reason for that has to do with the contribution of the nutritional factors to the underlying baseline in those groups and the amount of weight each has. So I'm a very, very young person. The impact per gram of body weight is going to be different. And as you'll see when we make decisions about who can be in a room, we use the age-specific levels. So this slide doesn't tell you anything. Don't state things or testing. What was Act 74, I believe? That legislature came up with. And in that, we test about a third of the rooms in a school. Because of that, you need to develop grouping strategies because many rooms in the school have the same risk. Same building materials, same essential. One classroom looks like another in many cases, but that may look very different than the auditorium or the gym or the kitchen. So you need to be able to group like with like because that's part of the strategy for what are you going to do if a room is found that exceeds the thresholds and can you still put students in other rooms. So we'll show that in the next couple of slides, which I think will illustrate for you what happens. Keep in mind, because questions always come up, this is the strategy developed and the law developed long after the Burlington High School this year. And it's hard to make comparisons between what happened there and what happens in current testing because there was no grouping strategy, there was no protocol for testing, there wasn't even a percentage of rooms tested. It was not done in that manner because it was done with the interest of getting to a new construction. And just doing the testing that was required to move them to new construction or renovation. Renovations are probably more appropriate. So this picture, just imagine, and it's not imaginary made up, it's consultants developed. All the green rooms are the same. The green rooms are the same. They're all similar building materials, similar sort of like this committee room looking like the one that's stored in it. And there are no extraneous factors that would make one a higher risk one than another. Same for the yellow, the blue, the red.  And it's not every green room so that if green rooms all end up looking pretty similar on the testing, it means that the rooms that were tested are probably going to have looked that way too. Whereas obviously there's only two red rooms, they're both tested and you can't extrapolate beyond that for anything. So that's how we sort of set that up. When you do the testing, you get results back. Obviously any result over that immediate action level means that room can't be used. Period. Since that doesn't happen the majority of the time, if there are exceedances, they're in the school action level of 30 to 100 range, we've been able to create a protocol with our colleagues that allows several options. The options basically either provide restricted or unrestricted use of the rooms and they do it for a specific number of hours per week. The goal is, and this is important, especially coming off the pandemic, it allows students and faculty to continue to be housed in the school building knowing that the whole building is not at risk but there are portions of the building that are. And so the goal is keep students in in-person learning, don't close schools and arrive at an accommodation that allows the school and the consultants to figure out the sources, start with the mitigation strategies and move on from there. So I'm not going to go through these in great detail, but basically the lowest risk option restricts the use of the rooms to certain numbers of hours, depending on what age student is in the room and what number of hours they're there, but they have a year to actually fix things without any undue excess exposure to them. Whereas if you go to the higher risk on the right side of the slide, basically the rooms can be used in an unrestricted way, but there's a very limited time frame, usually like six weeks, and you need to basically have mitigation underway and do retesting and all of that in a very rapid fashion. So we try to meet the school where they are and what level that community is willing to accept risk while mitigation will be ongoing. So while we're on that slide, just so we all know, if a test would come back in a certain school, it doesn't mean the school closes tomorrow. It hasn't yet today. And those decisions are being left to home. So one room is tested and it's at a low risk. The school beside the school then, in conjunction with its board, superintendent would make a decision, I'm assuming, to say, this is low risk. We're going to continue to operate, but this classroom, for obvious reasons, will now be used at this point. Okay. Because there's mitigation, I don't know if you're going to get into mitigation versus remediation, but there's mitigation strategies that can be immediately implemented that might really be game changers and then there's ultimate remediation strategies that they come along at a time when the school's not in session, like in the summertime, or what happened that can be implemented. The school sees this report, which basically tells them what the result was in every room and what rooms were tested, what rooms were tested, and then based on those results, here are their options. So you can see that for room 203, there's basically no use of that room because the level was so high in option one. However, it wasn't so high that it caused an immediate action level threshold so that some of the other options can be still used, but there's a six-week timeline on them and there's a strategy that has to be implemented concurrently. So this report is, does this public information once it comes up? Oh, yeah. There's a letter that goes to the school and the community, but then beyond that, there are meetings that are actually held with members of DEC, members of the health department, and the school. I'm not sure we've had them publicly yet because we've offered them that they haven't necessarily been taken advantage of. But there's a clear set of guidelines. Just wanted to bring back in the last two slides the perspective that, number one, everybody knows these are our problem, but not everyone's paying as much attention as we are. And there are countries like Sweden where all public buildings have to remove PCBs. That's sort of on that extreme. On the other extreme are some of the headlines that are in the slide showing that problems are being found but they're not necessarily being addressed and putting communities at risk, if you will. But in that role of being the only state addressing it and being the pioneers, you might imagine we come under a bit of fire now and then, and you might imagine people are like, well, you know, looking very closely at the way we do things, and that's why I've taken some pains to show you that, but it's not been done before. So we hope we're getting it right. Perhaps getting it right means even doing more than we're doing. We'll find that along the way. But certainly we think we have a very well-designed and thoughtful design to addressing the problem, which brings me to my last slide, which basically says, that's again, I want to reinforce PCBs are harmful. We want to keep our schools and our communities healthy and that's a priority. And avoid any of those cancer or non-cancer related risks that we talked about. There are schools that have already been tested. If we did create a pause, as I know is under discussion in the legislature, that would be an equitable thing because the schools that have been tested are already embarked on their path of trying to remediate and improve the situation. And we've identified problems in enough schools that why would we not allow the others to benefit in the same way. I think I've shown you that this is a program that is protective for students and has been thoughtful. And I would hate to see us spend time and resources on re-evaluating the program and redesigning it once again. But the most important point, of course, is bolded, which is if you pause testing, people will still be exposed to harmful chemicals and be at risk for the serious health effects that we've discussed. To further illustrate this, I can tell you that we just informed the school this week of their results. And they had a decent number of rooms that went over the school action level, three particular rooms that went over the immediate action level. So we are today is Wednesday. We are meeting with them tomorrow. They've already gotten letters about that grid that I showed you ways to utilize the rooms they have so that all their students can still learn in their school without vacating the school by any means. But it's happening real time right now that we're protecting students from their work there. So this is not some hypothetical happening as we speak. So I will stop there. I think everybody has a question, so let's go around the room. Senator Gullick, do you want to start? I have a series of questions, so if you can only have one. Senator, I have a comment for your question for you, Chair. Can we find out from the House what their justification is I mean I'll just say I don't want to pause PCV testing but I'd like to understand what background they have. I feel like maybe you might know. Sure, we can have them in. So this is coming from the House to pause. I had a meeting with the Pro Tem's office who is not interested in pausing in terms of sound leadership. I just want that. It doesn't mean that it won't happen but Senate leadership isn't interested in having it paused. He's known what we would benefit out of a sixth month carry. It's a logical question and people would continue to be exposed. Thank you, Dr. Levine and we can go around and take additional questions. This has been very helpful. We would like to know if everybody has questions. Are you sure? Would you mind if I spoke to the question first? I believe the genesis of this idea in House education is that given that we are looking at a more comprehensive school construction program it is worrisome that we might be putting funds, a lot of money and taxpayer money into remediating PCBs, mitigating PCBs potentially renovating a room or a part of the building only to then find when we do this broader project that perhaps a whole wing of a school needs to be renovated or a school needs to be completely demolished and rebuilt and so that could be wasteful. So isn't just part of the school construction study to take into consideration how to also look at PCB remediation at the same time because we don't want to keep them separate because of what you're describing. But I mean they are separate. My response is that this testing protocol informs the schools that want to do renovation. And in fact one thing I didn't mention is we prioritized certain schools to be tested first. A lot of it had to do with if they had renovation in the recent past or if they were planning it for the near future if they had construction in certain years if they had a whole host of different criteria. But the bottom line was renovation was on the list. So I look at it in reverse that this process informs renovation as opposed to why not wait to see what schools are doing and then do the testing. And I don't want to get too much in the house position we'll let them come in. So I would say just represent your question. Same question. This is part of this so based on the lag in the testing roll out that we won't have enough information to inform the construction study. Well if they want to have as many information in two months yes. That's part of the point. The current program is lagging and the expanded program puts it out years out to the future. And there may be schools we weren't aware of that have renovation plans in the near future but we did use that as a criteria so we think they told us what they told us. So I'll just stick with this theme for now but then I have other themes. So and it's nice to see you again Dr. Lee spoke to us and helped me well file back. So to Senator Lee's point if we have a school that urgently needs some work because it's got a sewer system that is not working a roof that is not insulated these are examples that we were given at one point and needs some fairly substantial upgrades but again this program we're looking years out this isn't like instantaneous so what happens to a school that has high levels of PCBs in a gym let's say or an auditorium do their students for the next five six seven years they can't use the gym they don't get the exercise that they need on a regular basis they don't have theater and music in band because they can't access those spaces they don't have the money to remediate so what part of that gets into the next part of the conversation with the EEC because it's really what mitigation can be put into place based on what the findings are what the consultants then come in and say is adequate versus no you need to do this in addition and that's a bit of unknown so it's challenging you're right if a school has a multifunction room and they can't find a substitute room for all of those activities that's a big challenge our hope is that isn't true most of the time and that there are other ways to get around that I have to also mention though it's not plausible in every community that part of the strategy is also to look within the community so that if there's something that could be done in another building that's not the actual school building the community know that that's available to them it's safe for that use okay just to follow up we I think we mentioned in here we touch upon the various crises that our school system our public school system and probably some of our independent schools as well are facing a round of variety of issues funding staffing mental health vaping one that near and dear my heart at this moment but all of these are huge issues I am so I am concerned when we have this discussion that you know dealing with this problem is going to require staffing it's going to require money it's going to require tax payer participation and jumping on board and so these are all things you know when you when you mentioned that that we have a clear set of guidelines okay fair enough but in terms of like the program itself how robust is it and how helpful is it going to be to our communities because as of right now the testimony that I've heard from Cabot School what I've lived in Burlington which I know is pre-program but Cabot School etc is that this program it's not robust and folks are really struggling so I can we can leave that on the table for now I did have some other questions I was hoping to No I would just say that I think everything was not problems often more than communication and communication may have been an issue at the time with Cabot in a bi-directional way and an orderly progression of things didn't occur there which caused I think significant anxiety problematic not to minimize Cabot's problems but that's what I'm looking for is the results in Cabot were actually things that can be done here it is they did not have any immediate action level findings they were all SAO school action level findings and they were in classrooms so that's obviously a concern making sure you can still put students into classrooms that are safe and the last I knew they're still working on mitigation kind of strategies but I look at that as maybe something earlier in the whole process that we just needed to get the order of communications set better and the way the public gets informed so that's great so you feel those approving thank you for that around PCBs and this might be something that will be answered after your testimony so we've been told that PCBs are ubiquitous we all have them in our bodies we in health and welfare have been taking a lot of testimony from various chemicals that are put in our bodies female products for one on our faces makeup clothing on our lawns you mentioned food they're everywhere the healthcare issues that you bring up in here are so incredibly triggering cancer endocrine reproduction etc etc we immediately sort of jump into this fight or flight for sure what I didn't see in this packet was a slide that shows the amount of time one has to spend in the exposure and again maybe that's coming in an exposed space to get to have the effects what science tells us about this air quality the testing is going in and it's getting a test moment in time tell me about air quality fluctuation in the course of an hour a day a week when kids are coming in and out of the classroom windows might be going open and closed doors are opening and shutting we might have a ventilation system that's working those are my two questions for now so cancer effects generally have a fair delay in the pregnancy period that goes on perhaps for decades with the substances within you but the cancer is not but it can develop over time the non-cancer effects we specifically use a one year period for calculating what's called reasonable exposure and that's different than what the EPA did which was used more of an average exposure level we usually factor in the age the amount of time spent in the setting time per day time over a month, time over a year so these non-cancer effects are really a one year kind of issue much more so than it could take forever to develop this the air quality business it's well known that at least at the levels closer to detection so the lower levels things are being absorbed and emitted all the time in terms of the source of the PCBs within a room so those may fluctuate which is why we have to give a fair amount of cushion to that detection level at the bottom but as you get into these higher levels while they probably will fluctuate and change they're starting out as higher levels and so I think that unless a new ventilation system occurred the day after the testing was done and it would perhaps radically alter the results it's probably not going to be a difference in saying this is a bad level even though the magnitude of it may have changed okay thank you I just want to make sure we get Senator Williams we can always come back do you want to follow up directly on this? it would if you could send us the exposure times that are scientifically based around cancer and all the other issues that you brought up that would be great but my understanding for example is at least for the cancer it's something like I think I'm in the ballpark you know seven hours a day six days a week 235 days a year for 30 years gives you a six in one million possibility and some of our a lot of our spaces at least that I've been seeing that have high levels of PCBs or spaces like gyms auditoriums I know that the there's a kitchen at the Charlotte Elementary School that's closed right now but the kids aren't in the kitchen and even the folks who work in there are not in there preparing long so I just really think we need to start talking more about the exposure I think it's really really important because my ultimate question is and I know you this is you keep your mind exposed to time to the age of the kid too so the preschool kid is going to be very different than the 12th grade and my last question which is kind of a big one and it's hard to quantify and I understand this but I do have to ask it and to Senator Campion's point I know that the chances of us closing down a school at this point is probably very slim but I did I did live it it caused many deleterious effects in my community and I'm wondering if you can at all speak to you know the potential deleterious effects that closing schools closing parts of schools requiring more taxpayer funding staffing in a school district that's already strapped what kind of effects can this have on our children because in an extreme case given our current mental health crisis we could be talking about suicide we could be talking about dropping out of school in Burlington it was kids not getting food but they get a school so big picture this is a complicated system what's that about I agree with what you're saying there are obviously in the category of unanticipated consequences fall out from anything the fact that I think it's very very very unlikely that school would close really helps that a lot because then you're dealing with shuffling rooms or at worst finding another location in the community for certain school activities that would be disruptive but wouldn't be as disruptive as stay home, stay safe or anything like that so I think most of this what year was the act passed it was about two years ago for PCB testing 2021 yeah so I mean we were still reeling with things but we hadn't had the whole fall out from what was going on with COVID and we've seen what that's done so we have to be considerate of those things for sure I don't think that's a deal breaker in this case because I do think the whole thesis of this protocol I presented is meeting schools and communities where they are and try to be as accommodating as possible as opposed to as restrictive as possible it's really airing on the side of being accommodating as long as we don't get into the duration of exposure that would be hard to do Senator Lewis it goes right in with what Senator Lewis said you've established a point in time you have the protocol and we're looking at what we know right now that school was built in 1970 and do we have any way that we can gauge when construction was done for a particular if they find it in the gym you know when was the last construction done in the gym that could have caused that probably don't have those records well I think the schools do and consultants that are involved in the prioritization of schools are aware of that and I was the town health officer in my town and I got a call from a VEPR that wanted to know why there are so many cancer cases and you might be able to use some of this data like particularly if it was all the basketball team they all had got cancer and they were all playing in that same gymnasium it might be good data to try break it down a little bit and keep it separate any other questions before we sort of shift to our commissioner anything for our commissioner of health let's talk about being sort of you remaining so I do have a question but I'd like to hear the next question commissioner stop sharing I'll do that I really do think that Dr. Levine's last slide it says just not stop exposure to harmful chemicals that kind of is our position we share that view with them one thing I would also tell you another reason not to pause it's working there were definitely some pickups the first time anyone has ever done this as far as I know in the country and I'm not sure elsewhere where but this is the first time anyone ever tried so we definitely had some fits and starts we're doing really well we're on target to meet the July 2025 deadline to test all schools over 320 schools so I feel like we're doing a good job the results, I don't want to say alarming but they're informing we're finding PCBs and number of schools we've done we've been doing testing since June 2022 we've got test results available and that means a lot it means you haven't just collected and you've gone through the whole process of getting the lab to validate et cetera so out of 31 samples 10 have exceeded the school action that's not insignificant as Dr. Levine just mentioned we just had one last week we're continuing to test we're continuing to find so from what we said we're doing what we were told to do and I think we're doing a good job of it we're working very hard in schools to try to keep them open that was always part of the mission here I want to recognize that coming out of COVID reflects the thing you can say it's in a school shut it down right I don't think even Preco wouldn't have gone over great now with the impacts of school closings we don't want to do that it's going to take something very extreme which we haven't even come close to seeing to get us there we can do this and we can keep kids safe and not just kids there's lots of people working in schools for a long long time so we have to worry about that granted the levels are higher for adults but they also work there a lot longer they're there a lot longer so we need to be protective we do feel like we're making the progress that we've been asked to make one thing I'll mention you mentioned the school of Charlotte where the kitchen had to close well they installed a carbon filtration system and they were able to get the levels down to non-detect so they were able to reopen that kitchen so that's an example so Dr. Lee mentioned mitigation versus remediation there's a lot of things you can do to mitigate this problem you don't have to get the source out right away eventually we always want to get the source out but you can prevent these exposures and allow for time frames that make sense for schools to work within that time frame we're not sitting there saying I've got to do this next week so get all the kids out of here so there's time you can move them to different places you can use either filtration systems there's certain types of paint that are effective so there's a lot of methodologies that can be used to keep people in the building safe until we get to the point where we get out that's always our goal our goal is to get these things out of the environment but in the interim we recognize this is a sensitive population and a sensitive issue and we plan we built this thing with the health department and with the education to come up with a way that we can try to balance all these challenges and there's always people who are going to be unhappy and frustrated and I understand that no one likes to hear that there's poison at their school that's not a good news so we try to work with them and help them understand what it means, what the risks are so we get health helps us understand the effects we manage the risk, that's our job and so we eventually our job is eventually to eliminate the risk but in the interim we're very willing and able to work with schools to make these things work Questions for the commissioner? Yes, senator So just out of curiosity to address senator Gulick's question so I just completed a radon test in my home which I think came from one of your departments that was a year long test and to your point it just sat there and you know come and go and what have you but for the PCB test is it a one hour test like a sniffer or is it a long term test just to kind of give us a sense of the roll out and how long this roll out takes so I'm just the commissioner I don't do the testing but I have my expert who actually knows all these things on teams chat right now so I'm hoping to see a little typing simple but I will be able to tell you that Thank you Can I also say to you that there was I think WCAX did a little expose on the testing they actually showed some of the folks who do the testing in the rooms with their machine that they use and I can try to find that and send it to you that's really actually kind of interesting So you know what I'm talking about I remember because I used to help the janitor that's kind of my detention help oh yeah they used to put down a compound on the floors you go and spread it around then you use the big dust mop that kind of cleaned the floor that might be something that had PCBs there and it smelled good yeah that's poison it's 24 hours 24 hours they use a pump attached to a PUF filter don't ask me what a PUF filter but the sample is collected for 24 hours that's okay thank you thank you so much Dr. Levine both of you for your work and we all want to keep our kids safe that is so incredibly important but again I can't say enough how much our schools are already struggling and I just hate to make things harder for them we have fewer teachers going into the profession than ever before and I feel like every time we make their job harder it is it is harmful I can't believe that I want to get back to the action levels and the immediate action levels I'm so happy to hear about Charlotte by the way thank you for letting me know that's fantastic yeah that's great so I I assume when you make come up with these levels 30 to 100 excuse me for action level 90 for 300 for the immediate action level taking in to account the space and how much it's being used or accessed is that correct that's really more for so immediate action level if a school has a 95 in their gym for example and the gym is only used by kids maybe three times a week for an hour for 180 days a year is that part of the equation when you came up with this 90 it's not part of the equation it's part of the grid which option do you take so I can see that school taking the option that gives them a whole year and lets the gym be occupied as long as the students are at the right age because I would think a preschool student would not be able to imagine they would be anyways but sure it was for the right age population but it didn't determine how the level it's not in reverse okay great thanks that actually brings to mind a real life example we have a school where it was an elementary school classroom red levels where they couldn't be in the classroom but they were long enough their older kids could be and so we basically just had them switch classrooms they were still able to keep the kids safe keep them in school I'll be in little different rooms but hopefully definitely not as disruptive as having them have to do with some place in a completely different classroom okay thank you so do you advise Charlotte for example on that air filtration system who was the entity that did that who most likely was their consultant I'm sure we were involved with the consulting firm to help them with that we worked very closely my staff worked very closely with the school's consultants and they kind of problem solved wonderful because it does seem as though with the air levels there can be mitigation can be probably fairly simple and also very on target it really depends but that's a good example that's relatively easy but some spaces are bigger it's harder to identify it also sounds like I forgot to mention they found a capacitor in that room and they took it out so they're going to go back and do some sampling everyone is a little different every scenario a little bit different there are potential scenarios where the mitigation is pretty straightforward and we can keep everybody safe and not have to do anything too disruptive great can I ask either of you two to comment on the amount that is currently set aside for funding is it adequate and the second question is how do you how do you feel about the 80-20 split on the funding all I can really tell you is I'm not aware of anyone seeking additional funds at this time I will tell you I would be very surprised that 30 million ends up being sufficient based upon what we've seen today but I'm not aware of any specific asks at this point in time in terms of the 80-20 split it's really based upon our approach to brown fields if you're familiar with brown fields so when we have brown fields projects that's the typical split between not the schools in private for non-state entities paid 20% and the state fees 80 so that's that was really where it originated so that's where we're at yes so certainly drawbacks and benefits to being the first in the nation to pursue any kind of program certainly a program that's affecting students and the staff and the schools but given the cost of remediation of the problem I'm just still trying I'm still struggling to justify to constituents the difference between Vermont's levels of acceptable exclosures and EPA's levels how can we bring the two together so what we do here is essentially it can be mirrored by other states but not to drain the treasury of the state at a time when it's difficult to afford and I'll let Dr. Levine talk to the more technical aspects I can type from a regulatory perspective so I did work with EPA for over a year so I have a sense of how their system works it's much slower than ours probably not surprised I'll just give an example Dr. Levine mentioned in 2016 when we found PFAS in Bennington the EPA was at 400ppt we did a lot of work we got the emergency rule passed just this month two primary PFAS compounds and we found in our state PFOA and PFAS is four parts of the trip just to give you a sense of the dynamic in 70 years 100 for a month now so I think they're a little bit behind us is my sense we're just on top of this this has been known since 2013 is the first publication I could find from EPA indicating that PCBs or emissions from PCBs are dangerous the state set its first levels in 2014 so I just feel like I want and if you look at Dr. Levine has a slide indicating various lawsuits there's a lot going on out there and I feel like it's a good reflection on us we're getting on ahead of it there's people getting sick and so I'm comfortable with these folks setting levels that I believe are protected so Dr. Levine you did a wonderful job thanks for that question if you just look at the PFAS compounds you look at the lead I mean it's good to be ahead of the game when you're science based again when our cowboys just really really doing things these are very science based decisions these are well accepted in the toxicology community but it takes a lot of effort to move policy at the national level and regulations at the national level and I think we're a little more facile than we do now but again I hate to give the answer to you to tell you constituents just have faith but look at experience and look at the track record and look at the fact that we actually can justify every decision we've made why we included the number of hours number of days, number of years all of those factors going into the formulas to decide where a level should be and again what level of risk is a constituent willing to assume you know most people would look at one in a million or six in a million and go well I don't want to be that one or that six but that doesn't sound so bad but that's really where the field of toxicology is in looking at things and we don't want to make a departure from that and say we'll go in order of magnitude of difference so 60 people per million is acceptable in the month that would not be acceptable so we have to really be data and science driven are there any levers that our federal delegation can pull to get the EPA to you know to have them have a conversation I mean it just seems like there's a very expensive discount every state is watching closely what happens here we want us to share our findings with them so just the findings alone never mind what's done with the findings just the findings alone I think we're going to have an impact so your question may be a little premature we need to let our data accumulate and then show into the world and get them to see what they think and they can critically appraise it just like anything else that's scientific to accomplish can we just give you a little more regulatory context as opposed to more science based context if you call the EPA they have some common removals program which deals with kind of imminent hazards like bad stuff right you call them in if they went to a school in Vermont and found levels at 5 5 they would consider that imminent hazard and they would take immediate action that would give you a sense they're not saying that we're too high it's just they have a different cost from what we do I think ours is probably more thought out than theirs thank you and this committee frankly we have the chief health officer and environmental officer and the governor saying don't pause so this committee has to decide whether or not it wants to fight that get a possible veto and say six months again to me at least from what I've heard six months isn't just going to pick back up again so what I would hate to see happen just as the chair is testimony testimony testimony testimony and we all end up still having a majority of the committee saying hey we're not going to pause so I just want us to keep that in mind given that April 1st is soon and we have got a lot of work to do I would just like to end with I'm not necessarily in favor of pausing I would like to hear more from the folks in the know how this program is going to play with our school construction bill because that's a really, really critical conversation so any advice you have thoughts and if I may, I think one of the things I was rightfully focused on also is the funding piece how is there something that we did write to our federal delegation we're kind of hammering it home as much as we can with them we know Vermont's starting this but everybody's going to do it how can we do it and then I also center I mean my personal life I defer to my doctor when he gives me medical advice when it comes to psychology most of the time I want to defer to the commissioner here but then there's also the piece of just trying to put myself while I am a dad thinking about the other parents who are sending their kids to school and then seeing that this testing is going to be potentially paused that makes me uncomfortable and I imagine it would also make other parents uncomfortable but also the piece that was mentioned earlier this PCD testing can inform the school construction process and my opinion is that these aren't two separate things and lastly, oh, the 80-20 situation the funding for this I mean when I talked to my superintendent in William County that was one of his concerns as well and it's and I think that's going to be the challenge at least in my opinion the funding part is going to be the challenge for this I do have a slide that I'll just send it to the committee assistant just to talk you through it one of the key factors here is when I talk about mitigation if we can prevent these exposures there's a fair amount of flexibility within that timeframe as long as the kids and the staff are not being exposed the actual remediation which is one of the construction piece comes in you can do mitigation measures like air filters or just paint and stuff that's not going to disrupt the construction schedule there are ways to try to make things more aligned you may not be perfect if they're talking 10 years from now but I would never be comfortable waiting 10 years to fix the problem but if it's within reason there's something called the corrective action plan that can kind of set things up if the exposure is under control there should be ways to mitigate some of that effort I get this, well it doesn't want to go out and renovate a wing because of PCBs they come back a year later and the same thing so there is some flexibility within reason built in here as long as we make sure that the people want to build the intersection but I'll shoot that over to the staff any other questions or comments for either witnesses it's been very helpful thank you both for everything you're doing great, thank you okay any other final one a little over looks like tomorrow the floor is kind of also running another couple hours so yeah, 1 to 3 so we'll be in here from 3 about 4.30 I know you've got to build the floor I can do that thank you both, I really appreciate it 5 pages tough questions okay I think we will close it thanks everybody he's taking notes thank you


In the module Human and Organizational Factors, we are talking about risk communication more precisely. We are talking about models of risk communication. In the next few slides, we'll be talking about one peculiar model of communication and we will see how it can be applied to risk. We will be talking about the Laswell model in particular. The model of Harold Laswell dating back to 1964 is based on a definition of an act of communication. For Laswell, an act of communication is the answer to five questions. That's why it is also called the 5W question. The first question to be answered is who. Who is initiating and guiding the communication? The who is also called the transmitter or the communicator. The second question that has to be answered to the second W is what. What is the content that has to be communicated? And the third question to be answered is via which channel? The channel here is the medium, for example, press, television, radio, internet and so forth. The fourth question that has to be answered is the whom. Whom here is intended to be the receiver, which means the person that is receiving the communication. And finally, fifth question to be answered to is to what effect? Which means that you have to assess the impact or the effect that the communication has on the receiver. In Laswell's model of communication, which is also called the emitter receiver model, if we study who is initiating and guiding the communication, we are doing what is called the control analysis, the analysis of the emitter. If we are studying what, which means that we are studying the content of the communication, we are performing what is called the content analysis. If we study the channel through which the communication is diffused, we are doing what is called the television radio or press or internet study, which means that we are doing media analysis. If we study the receiver of the communication, the person or the group of people or the institution, for example, that is receiving the communication, the people reached by the communicator in general, we are doing what is called the audience analysis. If we study the effect, the impact upon the audience, we are then studying what is called the effect analysis. The model of Laswell has many advantages and some disadvantages. There are many advantages on one side, and there are a couple of critics that have been admitted upon this model. On the side of the advantages, we can say that the model is a suitable description of communication. It describes well the different elements of the communication that are of the communication acts, especially if we use a technological way of communicating. Advantage number two, the model is quite easy to understand because it is clear. There are also some disadvantages. For example, the model is considered sometimes to shrink the communication to a one-way process. And number two, it neglects the complexity of everyday communication in the real world, and it is therefore just a unilateral way of communication, neglecting the polyphonic way of communication that individuals have in the real world. We have now defined what the model of communication by Laswell is, and we will now try to understand how it can be applied to a given risk. Historically, risk communication was initially conceived to convey to a general audience, individuals, citizens, a given population, for example, a rational knowledge content for risk assessment that has been performed previously by experts, generally speaking, scientists. So risk communication was initially conceived in general to convey from the emitter, the expert, the scientific content to the general public, considered to be sometimes not really aware of what was going on. The communication model applied to risk communication, generally speaking, is grounded on two assumptions. Assumption number one, lay people, which means ordinary people, are not able to grasp the very nature of risk, or they do not want to catch the nature of a given risk because they are irrational. Assumption number two is that if the content of a technical risk is conveyed more effectively, more efficiently, then the resistance of people to the calculation and to the assessment made by experts disappear. We have defined what a model of communication is and how it can be applied to a given risk. In the next presentation, we will see in a peculiar way what this means in the real world through an example based on base station transmitters for mobile phones and the risks that are related to this technology.


Did you talk about how you navigated that fifth inning bullpen-wise, and what do you thought of Sevy's performance up to then? Yeah. I thought Sevy just he made so many big pitches. It wasn't perfect there. And he obviously got into some big trouble there in the second inning, but just so proud of how he navigated. Bases loaded no outs. And he just locked it in and made pitches. And I think that really embodied the whole night as far as how our guys played. I thought they just played such a clean game. They made so many big plays and big spots, because I really thought the twins brought it tonight. They made it difficult. They had traffic. It seemed like all night.  And Sevy, to work as hard as he did the first few innings, obviously to make some huge pitches. And then in the fourth, I thought, kind of settled in. It looked like he started to get into a rhythm there. But once he was up over 80, I wasn't going to push him beyond that and felt like we were set up to roll the guys out how we wanted to. It wasn't perfect. But again, the guys just kept making pitches. Up to you, in the third row. Moving forward with Severino, do you think he's going to get to the point where he can start five or six innings, or is that important? Yeah, I think he could. And I think he's probably kind of there now. So it'll just be, each time out, it'll be a little bit different. But I certainly think he's capable of kind of getting to that point. But some nights, we may not need that when we're set up how we are. We'll just kind of watch him and see how hard it is for him to navigate through some innings. But I feel like he's close to being there anyway. First row on your left. Aaron, Britton looked like he had some discovery there when he came out in the seventh, but he went back out for the eighth. And then obviously, Araldus with the five out save. Can you talk about their performances tonight? Yeah. Britt made a great defensive play, too, getting over there to get a big out there on the cover in the bag. And kind of, I think, jammed his ankle a little bit. So he came in and kind of got stretched out and felt good enough to go back out. We're obviously going to, at that point, try and split it up as best we could between him and Chappie. And he was just, he was a little tender, a little kind of gingerly and really finishing his pitches. So we just felt like we needed to get him out of there. Chappie was up and ready to go. And it was probably a hitter earlier than we wanted, but obviously Chappie was able to finish it off. Other questions for Aaron? Nothing else? Anthony? What do you want to play? You know, we'll enjoy watching the series unfold and we'll get ready for whoever it is. TR? Torres, Homer and Seconding, how much did that give you guys a lift here on the road? Well, yeah, I mean, certainly got us started. Gosh, he played so well in this series. And then today, I think just continued to show the world just how good a player he is on both sides of the ball. I mean, big defensive plays, extra base hits, stole a base that helped Lee do a nice insurance run. But that definitely, I think, at least offensively gave us a little jolt there early and maybe settled the crowd a little bit as they were, I think, ready to explode. So, you know, what more can you say about Glaber? He's just, he's been great.


Hey, what's going on coach? Hope you're having a great day in today's video. I want to talk about running your own camps This way you can have camps clinics Even with small group training. This will apply to you But this is the time of year right now. It's the end of October start of November This is the time of year when kids Have a lot of free time going to the Christmas holidays And this is the time for you where you should be setting up your own camps and clinics And I've identified a couple of problems that I know coaches have when they try Setting up their camps or clinics and this whole week I will be talking about Overcoming these problems and how you can set this up better for yourself and today I really want to dig into Promoting your camps. This is the number one problem that I know coaches have When they try to set up a camp and this is my method This is my way of doing it and this is something you should copy and paste so let's say I have a camp and It's on let's say it's on December 21st I know that is a time that kids are out of school. It's right before Christmas And that's a good time that time period or after Christmas on the 27th 28th of December that also be a really good time to to run a camp and if I'm running a camp at That time of the year. I do not wait until December 1st or December 10th to promote that I start promoting that immediately right now and here's a couple of ways you can promote your camp Number one. This is my favorite way of doing it is I go to my current customers who are in my academy And I will tell them Exactly, you know when my camp is why I want them to be there and I want them to invite their friends And I will send them a registration page online So they can sign up they can claim their spot I will do that if I was running a camp then I would start doing that today This way I'm getting numbers to my camps way in advance and as a coach That allows me to better prepare for my camp And the more organized I am with that the the more persistent I am with with Marketing and promoting my camp early on the better my camp is going to be I see too many coaches They wait and they procrastinate and then they don't get as many numbers there to their camps and that's their fault It's no one else's fault except for yours. That's what you do. So the key is promoting And based on the timeline, I just gave you that's that's promoting almost two months out So eight weeks out and if you go to your current customers, great If you don't have any current customers, don't worry. I would go network and Build partnerships with local organizations that have kids that play the sport that you coach For example the YMCA or the CYO Any high school coach depending on the ages of the kids that you train build partnerships with people of influence and Have them promote the camp for you so you can leverage them. That's a very easy way of doing it If you have that set up great, you can build an email list So now you can email parents about your camp or clinic. You don't have that go use Facebook Start doing Facebook videos pull out your phone Do selfie videos of you talking about your camp talk about the benefits of your camp who it's for Have parents share that there's so many different ways of promoting especially now with social media But the key is start early. You have to start early with this if you don't start early, you're never going to Really meet your goal of how many kids that that are signing up every time and that really just comes down to like I said Promoting so promoting your camps is very important But you have to do it early if you wait till the last second It's gonna be too late and if you need my help as far as building relationships with other coaches Building out an email list building out a registration page. So you can actually effectively sell your clinics online Anything that that I talked about in this video if you need help with that shoot me a comment below I want to help you. This is something I help coaches with basically every single day now as far as creating camps promoting camps Having registration set up to where you can sell other types of training after parents pay I this is something I do all the time. So if you want my help comment below this video And hit that subscribe button so you can stay up to all of our newest videos here and like I said this week It's all about camps. I'm gonna have a video every single day about how you can improve your camps and how to get this set I'll talk to you soon


That's into talk and then this is how terrible the names of the telescopes are and it goes up It goes up, right? But you'll notice that it starts in the negatives That's because I wanted to tell you about my absolute favorite telescope So I want you guys this is you have to guess okay, and maybe not the astronomers because you guys are way too smart But what do you think this is what telescope is this? And why does that look like there are windows that look like this? It's an aircraft. It's an aircraft. Yeah, this is Sophia Okay, so we take a telescope and we stick it in the back of a bone 747 and then we observe while flying around the earth Okay, why would we do that though like that kind of seems like a lot of work, right? Okay, so Hawaii, I'm on a camera. This is we're looking at different colors, right? And we're looking at how much light we can see because the atmosphere is a bitch and From okay, I was like, okay That's visible, right? And then everything you kind of all not so good. We can't really see as much, right? This is Sophia. We go above the atmosphere so we can see infrared light. So that's beyond red, right? Which is brilliant. I think it's brilliant. What's funny though is you have to stick an entire telescope in the back of a plane So they completely changed the design of the telescope So the back of the plane, they basically brought the back of it forward so that the entire back portion could feel the atmosphere and be completely out to the atmosphere and only that but they had to adjust the edge of the telescope so that air could like freely fly over so that you didn't get turbulent air It's brilliant. I'm so obsessed with this telescope So this this is okay, so how would you fly around so that you keep pointing at a specific object, right? So you have a specific point in the sky that you're trying to look at and each one of these portions here is where Sophia has Oriented itself to fly in the correct direction so that one side of it is pointing at the correct object constantly while the earth rotates And we just like take it around applause for that. That's insane Even more they have to get flight control to agree to these They literally they the way that they tell flight control of this is totally all right is they give it little like okay We're gonna be in this little hoop and we're gonna jump to this and then we're gonna jump to another hoop and another hoop And they basically have to be like we promise we're gonna get where we told just with approximations With a couple of approximations. What are the advantages though is that instead of spending up like sending? space craft or some form of Instrument into space we can actually adjust our instruments So it comes back down on the earth we get to this is the instrument bay on Sophia right here and we get to adjust that every single time It's really really beautiful Okay, this is the final portion. I promise this last part, but look at this right here is constantly moving So you're sitting in a plane and you're watching a telescope shake with all the turbulence and it's the one staying still You're the one moving Right. It's beautiful and just for a really quick reminder. Okay So here's our light and it comes down and it's landed across our primary mirror And then it bounces back up and then it bounces here and then it goes into our instruments. Does that make sense? All right, and if I haven't convinced you that it's amazing Five you can actually steal this telescope Okay, this is the next gas any guesses on this one I'll give you one hint, which is that it has been mentioned tonight Does anyone remember this one? It's Subaru So look that right there is like little places where people can walk this thing is ginormous, this is huge like this is huge But do you see it? Okay, so I told you that the names are getting slightly worse I think it's super was like not amazing But it turns out that this is a Japanese funded telescope and that in Japanese it means the pleaties So it's actually kind of beautiful. So I had to get to like slightly worse named telescopes eventually we'll get there Okay, so this is what the primary mirror looks like And I want you all to just kind of get prepared for what this is about to happen okay, so What it should look like and then one morning when some instruments go wrong What it does look like the next morning So at the very top of the telescope so like way up here You would see one of the main instruments and it has to be cool, right the same way that a radiator were pulling your car that same liquid Weaked and fell onto the main mirror and that's what this red stuff is and Not only that but it fell into the main hole So the light will actually come from above bounce bounce and then go into the center There's a hole in the mirror and hit our instruments. That's also where we've been to our instruments will be hurt But what I'm really proud of about this is that it only took them a month to complete me Basically rebuild the telescope that was completely fine. The mirror surprised.  This right here is an Astronomers telegram, so this is where it used to actually be real telegrams because astronomers have been around for a while But this is the telegram where it says in view of highly exaggerated and incorrect news stories of great damage to the 2.7 meter McDonald's observatory refractor a prompt summary of the facts may be an incident to the historical community So so this is like the fake news of back then Right This this is what happened. So primary here Any guesses as to what those are? Not birds Bullets that's that's true So one of the people who they hired when they were going to the telescope They actually decided to shoot the main primary here and then they took a hammer and tried to put the mirror as well Which just like her seat Oh What's funny though is that they they called the cops after this and the cop not really knowing anything much about the Mirror should look like saw the hole in the middle and thought that the hole in the middle was the damage from the shots But what's amazing is that So each one of these they they took out the bullet holes They covered them up with black so that basically no reflection Would kind of skewer around your light when it was moving through the telescope and you'll see in the bottom of the atl But it basically had like a 1% reduction in efficiency. So that they was totally fine, which is mad How was that fine? I don't understand. There are five six bullet holes in your telescope, but it's good. It worked Okay, so any guesses on this one Yes, this is the very large telescope It's actually four telescopes unit telescope one unit telescope to can you guess the exit? And if you may Necessarily recognize this but you may know what this is Bomb things on yeah, yeah So when you're at an observatory, you need a place to stay right when you're doing many many some types of observing and This is the layer in one of Bonn's films And what's funny is so this is this is not what it looks like like a star is not normally this Setup like usually it's like you have a bed and you carry on food and you have a house But this is a beautiful set up and they actually use it as the evil layer in the films What's funny to me is that this these are the telescopes right in the film They hid them Like all of the shops, it's like you can't see the top of the hill Which is like a hole That's the fun part. No, it's great. That's great. It's in Chile. Yes, I have a comment Okay, this is my my top pride. This is the one that has the worst name any guesses It's the a hundred inch, but it's also called the booker telescope And you might yeah, you might laugh a little bit, but This is one of my favorite telescopes. It's actually extraordinarily Formative in terms of what we've discovered about the universe. Thanks to it So I just want to give you a little bit of the journey So this is the primary mirror. It was made out of green wine glass Like the same stuff that we make like a wine glass and they tried two times to make it and then let us these bubbles weren't supposed to be there that happened but it wasn't supposed to happen and they tried a third time with a thinner telescope mirror and That time it didn't work the problem with that is that when you move the telescope the mirror moves as well and gravity pulls on it And bends it so that it actually doesn't move the light the same way that you'd like it to So they took the second one that they had a shot with and they're like, all right We're gonna give this a shot and they spent seven years protecting it so that was within a millionth of an inch on the surface Beautiful and then if that wasn't the only journey though They were trying to make it up the actual mountain to bring it up to the telescope There were threats of bombs so people are gonna try and blow it up on the way up So this poor telescope trying to make it through but it made some amazing results. So anybody know who this is This is a hint for the astronomers Oh, this is Edwin Huffle and This is him looking into the hooker telescope and a couple things that was figured out from this telescope So first of all what I love I just love this Before they knew that galaxies there were multiple galaxies they called them island universes and he proved that Andromeda galaxy, which is a local island universe was actually not part of the Milky Way that it was separate and This right here later like 20 years later. We ended up discovering that not only was Our galaxy not the only galaxy, but our entire universe was expanding So this is the sound the scope is incredibly important which and it's the worst name tells it in my opinion So I've got both equally important and I'll just shout this out for this morning Gaia, which is one of our space-based Telescopes came out and it's giving the velocities and the distances to a whole bunch of local of local stars and galaxy and This right here is the Enromeda We're seeing the velocity from Enromeda the same exact thing just from this morning like fresh release And I'll just I'll just note that it's very worth being on Twitter because you get to see things like this So follow son of their wonderful All right, I just want to say that the future is very bright for astronomy, but it's pretty terrible for names So we have the extremely large telescope. Oh, yeah, great great and the 30 meter telescope I wonder how big the primary mirror is on that any guess All right, so just to give you perspective this right here is Hubble. That's the size of the primary mirror of Hubble This right here is the 30 meter telescope and this is the extremely large telescope. So these are these are All right, so I'll just leave it with that. I wanted to give a couple last shout outs the The multi-mirror telescope was originally going to be four mirrors. It's one I also wanted to give a shout out to the 30 millimeter telescope because that's actually pretty tiny Things that look like a like a soccer ball size and they're looking for supernova But they want to get up on the level of the 30 minute telescopes are also And speaking of TNT the Titan monitoring telescope has the same affidavit so great choice But although we suck at naming things like I was saying it's wonderful science. Let's stick around All right. Thank you very much. I'll take the question It's named okay, so why is that the telescope we're talking about the perfect telescope Why is it named that so the primary mirror was actually funded by hooker before they were funding for the entire telescope So it's named after him Way back there Yeah, you go on the ground. How long is the James Webb style so so This right here is James Webb compared to Hubble right there. Yeah VLT to the right. I see somebody found it It's right next to Thank you any other questions I Figure that I have to go in the tradition of terrible names, so whatever it is. I don't know what it'll be yet But it has to be terrible Why were they trying to bomb the mirror so I learned a lot about it, but that was lost to history Soon 24 So I that was also lost to history nobody knows why the telescope was shot And you have a question So the question is can the smaller telescopes will be useful given the larger ones and the answer is yes, definitely So a lot I'll mention really quick. I was talking about the 30 millimeter telescope This is used for catching really bright transients So when the light suddenly changes for instance one of stars blowing up like with a supernova And they are really really important for follow-up observations We use the entire fleet of telescopes just because we have the biggest ones We're doing unique science that can only be done with those telescopes and the surrounding ones can be using used for Developing other instruments and all the other science that's still necessary for follow Other questions Go He was in charge of NASA during the Apollo program, that's wonderful Okay I Already forgotten 23rd, right? Is that right the 23rd on a Wednesday? We're keeping this time slot so that we have darkness so that you can see the beautiful stars on the screen So remember to come at eight instead of seven and I'll see you next month. Thanks for coming out


Conditional access is an important tool in keeping your organization secure. As your organization's administrator, you are able to define where users can log in and where data can be accessed. In this demonstration, I will show you how to set up a conditional access policy so that users can only sign in from the United States. To start, sign in to the admin portal at portal.office.com and choose the admin icon. From the admin portal, hover your mouse over the admin icon to see the full list of administrative portals. Find and select Azure Active Directory. This will open a new tab or window. Select Azure Active Directory from the left-hand menu and scroll down to the security section and choose conditional access. The first thing we will do is establish a location where we want users to be able to log in. Click on the name locations and click the new location button. Give your location a name and select country slash region and select United States. Click create to finish. Now we will set up the actual policy. Select policies just above the name location menu and select new policy. Now we will click on each assignment to populate our policy. You can edit your policy to your own specifications, but for this example, we will create one that affects all users and all ads. You may wish to add an admin account to the exclude list in case you lock everyone out while testing. Since we already added an admin to the exclude list, we can ignore this message. Since we want the policy to block all countries except the United States, we will choose all locations in the include section, but we will select the United States in the exclude section. Remember, the first thing we did was create United States as a location. We will now choose that location from the list. Now in the access control section in the grant control, choose block access. Under enable policy, choose on. Don't forget to give your policy a name and then choose create. The policy should go into effect immediately, but allow yourself 15 minutes before testing. I'm Steve with the Protector Trust train department and we'll see you next time.