open

Ontario Pool Regulations Consultation Webinar

I'm good morning and thank you for

joining us today on the Ontario

modernization of safe food and water

regulation under the health and

promotion Act webinar your feedback is

really important to us and like jennifer

has indicated if you have questions

please enter them into the chat and

we'll work on answering those as we go

through the process this is the first

opportunity of three of a minimum of

three that you'll have to input into the

changes that are going on as we walk

through this we're going to walk through

each section and after each section

there's an opportunity to ask questions

and then we'll be an opportunity to

participate in the pole where the

responses will be yes no or no vote and

a section for you to answer any question

or any comments name okay so we're going

to get started so thank you very much

and lat yesterday I forgot an occasion

to click the slides on my apologies we

won't try that again so the introduction

the Ministry of Health and long-term

care is undertaking a comprehensive

review to inform the modernization of

regulations made under the health

protection and promotion Act that

governed food and water safety and

Ontario so that's from the Ministry of

Health so the the next few slides are

going to take you through or what the

ministry has health has defined and is

working on this review and consultation

is phase one prior to releasing the new

regulations for public consultation so

the Ministry of Health and long-term

care has identified their overarching

goal is to modernize Ontario's safe food

and water regulations by undertaking a

comprehensive review focused on

strengthening the overall effectiveness

and efficiency of environmental health

practices that was directly from the

Ministry of Health documentation that

they provided to us they've identified

some guiding principles and there on

your screen now flexible and responsive

evidence-based and supporting innovation

ensuring ensure public health benefit is

the overarching consideration

streamlined concise and user-friendly

comprehensive regulations with clear

expectations and optimal use of obtunded

of approaches in addition the Ministry

of Health and long-term care has

identified some key questions that are

guiding their review and now they're on

your screen as well are there redundant

requirements that serve no additional

benefit is one of the pieces that they

want to identify and fix our current

science and technological advancements

reflected in the regulatory requirements

and if not should they be considered and

then where are the gaps and what

regulatory provisions and policy tools

are needed to address that identified

gaps and again the second the next piece

of us and their guiding questions is

what clarification is necessary to avoid

and address inconsistencies in the

application across the province are

there alternative approaches that may be

better suited and what are the expected

financial or economic impacts of any

proposed changes so if there's any

questions regarding no you can type them

into the chat but that information was

provided to us by the Ministry of Health

and long-term care the next piece is the

process that the that they are going

through this is not art Parks and

Recreation Ontario's processes as the

ministry's process they've identified

three working groups the working groups

are internal working groups to the

Ministry of Health and long-term care

they consist of members from public

health units and the ministry team

itself these are not open to owner

operators and to stakeholders such as

yourself this point in time in addition

there are four stakeholder groups that

the ministry has put together food pool

camps and camps and unorganized

territories and for those of you who are

wondering what camps and unorganized

territories are there logging camps

mining camps etc so probably not

relevant to your day-to-day pool

operations

the working group consoles so Parks and

Recreation Ontario has has been engaged

in the stakeholder working groups on

your behalf but we believe also that

it's important that you are engaged

directly in the process and we're

working to make sure that that happens

the Ministry of Health and long-term

care process is a really short tight

timelines process so when I've got that

on the screen right now the working

group consultation and engagement is

from January to June that's the internal

groups the stakeholder group

consultation so the four groups that

have been identified is from january to

march first so that's why we're running

the webinars this week and we'll be

asking for your surveys back to

SurveyMonkey starting next week you need

to have all of that feedback

consolidated and back to the ministry by

march first there then going to work on

the inclusion of the feedback and input

from march through may and they've

identified that their timeline to get

information back out to the stakeholder

groups is in May of 2016 then after

they've received a text round of

feedback they'll be posting the proposed

regulations on the regulatory review

board this is where all new regulations

get posted and it's for a period of 45

days typically that those get posted for

input from the field or input regarding

the proposed regulations so they want to

walk through where you're going to have

feedback opportunities now the

SurveyMonkey that will be coming out

again a will attempt to soon as we have

information back from them will attempt

to get that back code and look for

feedback and then again when it's posted

on the regulatory review board the

targeted implementation for the

regulatory changes is 2017 so again a

very tight process

Parks and Recreation is represented by

the following individuals on in this

process and advisors Embry's law from

Ottawa Darrell McWilliams is on the

Parks and Recreation Ontario board of

directors and from the town of Oakville

myself Juanita Bush up I'm on the pro

board of directors and from the City of

Brampton and died in English pro

director of research and policy policy

and communication the to note the other

stakeholder groups were allowed one

player at the table we had three at the

at the meetings at the table that were

invited and we worked hard to make sure

that that was was the case to ensure

that owner-operator participation was in

the forefront of the review but

recognizing again that that isn't enough

and again as a consultation process that

we're going through excuse me so again

just walk through three webinars for

stakeholders that's what's happening

this week we had one yesterday one today

and went on Friday we're gathering

feedback from the pro membership and

stakeholders to an electronic survey

that will follow these webinars and then

we'll create a submission for the

Ministry of Health and long-term care

based on the survey results for

consideration in the review and will

continue with communication with the

membership and stakeholders throughout

the process today's outcome we're

looking at pool spas wading pools splash

pads and spray pads specifically so

that's the area that we're focusing on

today how this works the Ministry of

Health and long-term care provided us

with five areas and questions within

that in those five areas so the first

screen as we walk through this will be

the Ministry of Health area focus and

their questions that they pose to us or

the area that they did for

and then the second one will be the

proposed pro position and then the

rationale for our proposed position

after we get through those three slides

and we'll be putting out the poll asking

for your input and also an opportunity

for you to type any questions to us okay

here we go so the first area was

consolidation and minimum requirements

you're looking the streamlining and

consolidating of the recreational water

regulations and adding minimum required

for the currently non-regulated

recreational water so they're looking at

pools wading pools that should say

wading pools not water pools spray pads

and splash pads and water slide

receiving basins and in the discussion

it was looking to roll those regulations

into one regulation the probe draft

position on this is that we support the

streamline and consolidation however the

modernization exercise must improve the

clarity and consistency of regulations

and standards being applied in the

aquatic environment and coordination and

consistency beyond the Ministry of

Health and long-term care regulations

and standards and act should be done to

ensure consistency of application marek

water slides without catch basins we

will ask the question of the ministry

but thank you for asking that question

our rationale is currently multiple

there are multiple locations that an

owner operator must look to run an

aquatic facility and these can be

inconsistent or in conflict within each

other and clarity and consistency will

improve the aquatic operation right now

and where we'd like to focus on things

like inside the building code there's a

requirement for an indoor pool lighting

to be at 200 lux however that's only a

requirement at the time of opening under

the building code and once the building

inspector has left the building then

there's no other methodology to check

that an insurer that that's being

maintained so we're asking the

street and there was some agreement

there's agreement from them that yes

they would build in how to rap looking

at the critical items in the building

code into the inspection process but

that's the type of thing that we're

talking about also inconsistencies

around first aid kits exception will

talk about those a little bit later okay

the post the if there's any questions if

you could type in any of your questions

and as the questions are coming in and

also asked Jennifer to post the pole

there's again three options on the pole

yes no or no vote you just click on your

option it will automatically show on our

results we're not displaying the results

as you go through but we're tracking

that information and again I'd invite

you to type in any questions so Chris

thank you for your question what did the

statement clarity and consistency be on

the regulations mean so the Ministry of

Health and long-term care only looks at

a certain portion of the regulations

we're talking about consistency and

lining with building code requirements

with fire requirements etc where they're

inconsistent another good example would

be change room doors and in the pub in

the public pool regulations that says

that the pool area must be secured when

not supervised in a class a facility

however in the fire regulations you need

to provide to eat grasses from a change

room and often that second egress is on

to the pool deck and people have been

fined for under the fire code for not

having the second egress open so there

needs to be consistency on how those

pieces are managed hope that answers the

question if it hasn't please let me know

okay i'll give you nothing longer yep oh

it's Connie money hi this would not also

look at ASHRAE those types of mm-hmm

lets me ask them to look at everything

that touched the aquatic environment

yeah perfect thank you okay thank you

for the question Connie

yeah so in the in the input for

consideration there was a question

around phasing in and that the costing

yes they would have to be a phase and

then there's probably going to be grant

and father components inside of it as

well but we don't know the exact answer

from the Ministry on that but yes it did

come up and can in conversation okay

thank you very much and with your

permission I'll move on to the next one

public disclosure Marek waterfront

environments is not covered in this one

there's a separate piece that's covered

for waterfront environments under the

camp regulations and that was a big

conversation and Diane and I are having

another conversation regarding that and

how to engage the membership in the camp

regulation component okay issue 2 is

public disclosure public disclosure of

public health inspection results of the

area focus from the Ministry our

position is that Pro supports the public

dissemination of inspection report as

long as there is consistency in the

application of the standards and our

rationale is open data and public

disclosure will strength in the industry

however there's a need to ensure that

variations in interpretation of the

standards will be reduced through

consistent language okay so this would

would be exploited about the side

effects however you should consider such

things as the green yellow and red

disclosures for food premises

okay i'm going to post any questions if

you have any questions regarding this

item please type them into the chat and

i'd ask jennifer to post the pole at

this time

for those of you who are posting that

you're interested in the waterfront and

public beaches we're actually the whole

chat is recorded so we will make sure

that any additional information that may

come out gets to you in this and Shelia

given that health inspectors are only

human how do we propose an increasing

consistency most of it is an increase in

the consistency in the language of the

regulations is what we'd be pushing for

in addition we heard from the Ministry

that they're undergoing some training

changes for the health and public health

inspectors that's a great step 18 it

would that also take a look at if

they're posting green yellow red let's

say it's a band-aid that's missing is

that you know Ryan you could actually

correct that will it take a look at some

of those things that are really not

critical and then not include the door

yeah so we that conversation occurred as

well around under disorient that there

was don't don't close somebody for a

band-aid yeah okay and then there would

we agree that you right and we agree

that there's consistency issues with

health inspectors from unit to unit and

from inspector to inspector and that was

brought up in the conversations in the

stakeholder group and the necessity to

have clear communication etc okay okay

so with your permission we'll move on to

the next slide thank you again for for

those of you who are participating in

the polling we really appreciate your

feedback if you're choosing not to

participate in the poll that's fine as

well you will be provided an opportunity

to the SurveyMonkey survey that's going

out after a clarification of operational

processes the ministry identified that

stakeholders have identified several

gaps or requirements that may conflict

with industry best practices

again our position is coordination and

consistency beyond the Ministry of

Health and long-term care regulation

standards and actually ensure

consistency of application across

Building Code tssa Ministry of Labour

WSIB etc and then our next

recommendation is that a stakeholder

group of experts in the area of pool

physical plant and chemistry should be

convened to gather industry best

practices for inclusion and that there's

a need to ensure flexibility in the

regulations to support advancements in

the field the regulations were written

longer than a lot of you have been alive

and have not changed the the technology

that's in place now was not in place

when the regulations were written and

when asked simple questions like the

value of the of the makeup water volume

there's lack of clarity on where that

came from the value of that in our

current in our current environment there

is also inconsistency between the

various regulations that leads to

conflict and lack of clarity turnover

rates are different inside of the

building code then they are inside of

the public health regulation and

regulations have failed to keep pace

with industry advancements around

technology and environmental

considerations I'm just reading some of

the questions how do you propose that we

have flexibility and yet consistency and

enforcement I think it goes back to how

is or how is a regulation written that

provides options or the minimum standard

but allows for the advancement of

Technology I hope that answers the

question Shelley and unfortunately we

don't have a really there was a healthy

discussion around it without a clear

answer yet from the Ministry but if you

have recommendations that would be

valued as well and with your permission

we will oh you have any questions

regarding this area and I'll ask

Jennifer to propose the pool

thank you i will add AODA to the reason

as a resource it was a conversation

piece but we'll make sure that that's

tracked as well we are continuing to

who's ensuring that these encouraged

stakeholders are actually be invited to

the table for discussion we've been

digging the Ministry of Health and

long-term care might be sick of hearing

from me through email but we're

continuing to follow up with them on our

recommendations

okay and with your permission I'll move

on to the next slide I know a couple of

people are are typing so I'll try and

follow up with those ones as well the

issue for that was identified is around

operator training stakeholders have

raised the issue of mandatory training

and recreation water operations for

public pools and spa owner operators

well regulation 428 which is the small

regulation currently includes some

training requirements for small

operators there's no provincially

standardized training resources for the

operation of public spas and pool our

position in this area would pro supports

the implementation of a safe pool water

operational training standards and that

this needs to be responsibilities driven

they're not all people who are in

supervisory capacity or running aquatic

facilities are doing the same functions

there needs to be greater clarification

or definition on the roles and

responsibilities within the pool and spa

operation so when the Ministry talks

about an operator that is who operates

the entire facility in most municipal

operations at least an operator refers

to those who take care of physical plant

and chemistry then the supervisors

management owners etc so our request is

that the ministry look at defining the

rules so that there's clarity around the

roles and then look at what are the

required training standards that need to

be implemented based on each of those

roles / responsibilities driven

brian femdom the last question as to who

would the industry leaders be in

physical plant there were some players

at the table around pool pool and spa

Canada etc that we're at the table Oh

RFA is at the table and those people we

assume would be invited and also looking

at other industry experts but they have

not been identified yet Laura would this

remove lifeguards from doing some

operational duties and in small

operations I think that's impossible to

do but again that clarification of roles

and responsibilities under the

regulation and then what training needs

to be provided at each of those levels

to ensure safe operation our rationale

is is lack of clarity around the rules

again and there's no consistently

defined standard that we can be applied

to support the delivery of aquatic

programming in physical plant chemistry

requirements adding acid we're really

referring to training and certification

it's a combination of both then if you

can't track it it's really hard to say

that it's been done okay I would invite

you to type any questions at this time

and then Jennifer to post the poll

and again I think those who are

participating in the polling it is

really helpful for us

I know that some people are typing

Jennifer ddc Shelley's a question Shelly

um if we can't do it in this section

definitely in the survey monkey that's

going out those will be separated so

that you can make statements on both if

that's okay yes for all the questions

will do

okay I'm going to move on to the next

slide and thank you again for

participating in the pool the next area

there is issued label this 55 is broken

into several categories so we'll start

with 5a which is emergency telephones

and the Ministry of Health and long-term

care is looking at emergency telephones

in aquatic environment our position is

there's need for clarification and

consistency between the regulations

regarding the application of emergency

telephones and there's a need to include

provision of cell phones and other

related technology as backup within the

regulations an example of what we're

talking about here is that you need in

the spa regulation you need a phone

within a certain distance at rest time

and need to be placed in the middle of

your main tank based on a strict

interpretation of the regulations that

doesn't make sense so we're asking that

the Ministry look at this and say that

there's clarity around that and also

because the regulations were written so

long ago the lack of clarity regarding

the cell phone use technology is there's

nothing written into there so we're

looking at using it for backups where

applicable and ensuring this consistency

across a regulation and what to do when

you hold a facility that has multiple

components and we believe that part of

that will be covered off when they roll

the regulation into one if there's any

questions we invite you to type your

questions now and for Jennifer to post

the pool

Lisa ask a question in consideration for

having a phone directly connected to EMS

or nodding yes that was part of the

conversation around the testing of that

item as well obviously that provides it

provides an opportunity to go directly

to the EMS system which is good however

we know that in some areas the testing

has been problematic clarification will

wait for people to answer this question

in the pool

and we'll move on to the next one thank

you very much again for inputting the 5b

is aligning of certifications and it's

the definition of a current first aid

certificate differs between on

regulation and 565 which is the pool

regulation of requirements pro supports

consistency across the regulations but

we need to ensure that the public safety

the needs of Public Safety not just

worker safety are identified into

addressed and our rationale is not all

standard first aid certifications our

base are the same based on the wsib

module delivery system and standard

first aid in aquatic environments must

ensure that situations and incidents

that commonly occur are addressed in the

training and certification under the

wsib model a module model a certain

ramada collective voice text a call as a

standard first aid then there's a whole

bunch of modules that are optional

models because WSI be is focused on

workplace safety and not overall

community safety that means that some

standard first days do not include such

items is child and infant resuscitation

standards in our aquatic environment

where we recognize that a large number

of users are in that age category

there's a need to ensure that they're

included also so they're not all created

equal we need to ensure that the needs

of our community are identified in any

standard first aid certifications that

are accepted under the regulation pool

regulations

I'd invite any questions at this time on

this topic and for you to join the pool

you

okay and with your permission I'll move

on to the next slide which is a first

aid box quiet just wait for the whole

deck and thank you thank you for your

comments and input on to that last one

first day box requirements prescriptive

approach and no slides list of minimum

of first aid box requirements across

three and regulation so there's great

inconsistency across the regulation but

it's included in a standard first aid

box our the pro draft position is that

relevant firs be identified related to

the training standards for Baden

lifeguarding so I you know is the need

for 12 safety pins required in the pool

regulation and specific quantities

should be replaced with quantities with

the term the wording such as quantities

that support the specific environment

and volume of participation again the

regulations were written a long time ago

and therefore sometimes don't reflect

the changes that innocent in training

and certification standards so a rush to

opposite inconsistent prosecution and

the content lists are not reflective of

the needs of the aquatic environment and

changes to first aid standards and we

were pretty open with them about the

fact that multiple facilities have have

have first aid kits that are taped you

know the health inspector in addition

there was a positive conversation around

the use of inclement PBS and gloves in

first dates that currently doesn't sit

inside the regulation

and I would invite you to ask any

question type any of your question time

and for Jennifer to open the poll a unit

me collapse occurs regarding AED nets in

aquatic environments in the new

regulation and yes I was the

conversation inside of the atom

stakeholder meetings

America will we didn't adjust oxygen but

we can bring that up as well okay and

we're on to the next question again

thank you for participating in the

polling and adding your comments it's

very important consistent the

acidification is 5d the titles of

certificates listed in the regulation

may have changed and or are there may

only be a parent partial list of current

providers pro supports our draft

position is pro supports a single

lifeguard supervision standard and that

that single lifeguard supervision

standard be the Life Saving Society

national Lifeguard program our rationale

this issue has been addressed the

question has been asked multiple times

by the Ministry of Health and long-term

care and adjust by stakeholders in

Ontario in 1996 2010 in 2012

consistently stakeholders have supported

a single lifeguard standard and that

that standard be the National lifeguard

license at a national lifeguard standard

pro supported the CPR a position

regarding a single lifeguard standard

for Canada and that that standard be the

National Life Saving Society National

Lifeguard program in a unanimous

decision I just wanted to give a bit of

background because I know that there's a

lot of questions that will come up

around this the standard is not owned by

the Life Saving Society it is fostered

or supported by the laces in society on

behalf of a group of organizations that

came together national lifeguard was

formed by a conglomerate or an advisory

group that came together to build the

standard 50 years ago

a nerd each municipality owned their own

standard at the request of employers at

that time the they asked that a single

standard be brought together that

advisory group included CPRA The Life

Saving Society Red Cross YMCA Canada the

Armed Forces etc that standing advisory

group is still in existence and every

time a change is on

our program that group comes together

and that group comes together also

pragnent Lee every two years to look at

the standard and ensure the fans in

place this standard is not the Life

Saving Society delivers no national

lifeguard programs directly it's open to

all to deliver across Canada is the

standard is maintained by the

life-saving society using using

resources from the life-saving society

an inclusion of all affiliates that run

the program the standard is the standard

set as well as the delivery standard

attendant and instructor training and

for tracking and quality assurance but

again the standard is not delivered no

courses are run by the life-saving

society they own the standard and they

maintain the standard so the question

yesterday was around it's a monopoly

it's not a monopoly because individual

providers of the National Lifeguard

program actually set the price timing

etc for the program and all are welcome

to excuse me all are welcome to offer

the standard ok I would have met any

questions to be typed in at this time

and at the same time for the pull to

open

my guess there was a discussion

regarding the newer Red Cross Lifeguard

program that came up at it i'm at the

stakeholder groups and why we believe

this is also what you believe it's

important that we pose the question to

our membership to ensure that what we've

spoken about in the three previous times

end on the cpr a standard is what our

membership wants in particular what our

owner operators want shelly the national

lifeguard is is a single standard you

can there's two ways to manage this

question manage this if the ministry was

willing to take over the management of

the standard and the training standards

and delivery standards that would be one

thing we did not get a sense in the

meeting that they were willing to do

that though and to or have the resources

to do that the other pieces around the

when we look at the model around first

aid and could that model be applied the

ministry manages that model and sets the

standard but as we spoke about in the

last time the all standard first aids

are not created equal and therefore

owner-operators need to make a decision

regarding which standard first aid they

are delivering to ensure that needs of

their clientele are being met I hope

that answers the question there will be

more opportunity to participate in

providing input as we move into the

SurveyMonkey survey as well

okay and we're going to move on to the

next one okay the next area is around

admission standards so the ministry the

Ontario chief coroner has recommended

that regulation 565 our pool regulation

be omitted amended to include pool Bay

their admissions Pro supports the

recommendation of the Ontario Chief

Coroner regarding the application of a

bather admission standard and it through

the conversation we recognize that the

recommended admission standard is being

implemented in the majority of locations

already and that when the ministry also

brought did an education piece through

their public health offices and going

out through the public inspections and

disseminating that information there was

a really positive pick up on that and we

also believe that the supervision of

children is important and the

responsibility of all that a single

standard with assistant in providing

that I would invite any questions at

this time and for the poll to be posted

marek ask a question whether the

responsible Guardian of 12 years of age

be increased to an older age it's all

open for consideration so I'm not sure

at this time Eric sorry and thank you

again that for the people that are

participating in the pool we appreciate

your input

you

Mike the implementation of the admission

standard may it probably won't be part

of the standard will be the standard and

leaving it open for four options on how

that's implemented on the admission

standard okay so thank you and I'm we

are reading the chat as it comes in and

keeping track of it and remember that

the chat all of your chat comments will

be recorded and and trapped so we're not

losing those if I hadn't gotten to them

so now we open it up so those the end of

the the question areas that the ministry

posed to us I recognize that they're

very high level as this is the first

round of their input gathering as we get

more information and as we sustain the

regulation is shaped there'll be other

opportunities we hope to allow you to

provide input into it I would invite you

at this time to if there's any other

questions or considerations on any other

topic to type them type them into the

chat box question let me just call me

yep um chemical minimums or maximum why

not come under the first area of focus

under minimum requirements that would be

apart oh that's where we actually stated

Connie that there was a need for a fifth

this stakeholder group to come together

to look at those specific requirements

that the table that was put together by

the ministry did not allow for enough

time or expertise at that table to dive

into that level of review and what time

was needed okay more time was needed on

it you've asked you the ministry for

that to happen the whole table the

stakeholder group asked for that to

happen and we have not heard back from

the ministry as to whether or not

they've them they're going to do that

yet we hope they are you have

ok

thank you for the comments yes press the

has anyone considered looking into the

experience and other provinces where

there's more than one lifeguard program

provider yes the ministry has been

looking at that as well and we're

monitoring that I'm just looking

okay again we're tracking the questions

that are coming in in your input that's

coming in okay fair number of people

typing which is helpful thank you very

much the dry Prevention Research Center

of Canada was also in the stakeholder

groups providing input into drownings in

supervised settings and non supervised

settings okay okay so just to go on to

the next step you'll be receiving a

survey from us outlining the same

questions will be presented in the

survey as we're presented today and with

an opportunity to spend more time

providing comments which would be

extremely helpful we request that one

survey / organization be completed if at

all possible we recognize that times

that coordination may be challenging but

we would prefer that if possible there

is no anonymous survey participation all

users all surveys will need to identify

themselves an email address and the

organization that they're participating

in we believe this is really important

as we provide feedback to the Ministry

so that we can acknowledge and provide

information regarding the number of

people that participated the

organization's the size of those

organizations and the population is that

they serve so anonymous feedback will

not be allowed in the survey it is a

very tight timeline for you to complete

the surveys you'll be coming out after

the 12th so recognizing that monday is

family day you'll have from the

sixteenth to the 19th to complete the

survey so we need your feedback this is

the first of the opportunities to

participate but we believe this is the

most important

to participate and then once the draft

regulations are released we'll be

providing sex another consultation

period and providing you an opportunity

participate Shelley will people who

aren't able to participate in the calls

be given an additional opportunity to

provide feedback yes the survey will be

posted and available are there any other

questions we've got lots of people

typing we'll just wait a few minutes

will people to type in their questions

Kristen uniform identification yet will

show up and it wasn't a specific

question from the Ministry again we'll

be looking for what do they write into

the regulation as it comes out into the

draft regulation and then provide the

opportunity and Diane's identified that

all the cert the survey will be

circulated to all pro members and people

who have attended the pro aquatics

conference and the webinar is also being

recorded so anyone who missed it can

listen in okay if you have specific

questions technical questions or

comments please feel free to contact me

at my email address and it's up on the

screen now so we need a dot bush lip at

Brampton CA or if you have general

questions regarding the webinar or the

process that we're undertaking you can

also contact diet in English we'll leave

the screen up for a little while

recognizing that my name is not the

easiest stuff

and again we'll leave it opens if you

want to type some additional questions

that would be fabulous the presentation

the whole webinar will be posted start

and then that will include the slide

deck okay and not seeing any more

questions coming up and like to thank

you for participating today your input

is really really important if you know

colleagues or people from other

organizations that have not

you