morning runner son matthew only represented massachusetts department of environmental protection in this action if you please the court i would like to start off with a very important distinction that addresses of many of the points of just been raised and that's the difference between the statutory language that requires an act within one year or a great for through that provision comes from the federal clean water act not from the natural gas act so we're talking about two different statutory schemes that have which needs to rely on states or vacation so that that state certification the waters are patient issue here can be incorporated into a federal permit it's to allow the federal agency each one corporation that decision and if you look at what happened again stepping aside from the natural gas contest which is a much more limited universe and what happens in the course is that even if a federal agency relies on that initial yes or no state action and here the federal agency can go ahead and incorporate or not incorporate as it seems that in effect leaves the party who wants to satisfied state certification but that also is incorporated into the federal permit if there is going to be a challenge to the federal court and that would be a separate action that would be challenging the other things in the federal part of the federal committee agency so we know what you're saying by by challenging me may open federal prison you have an opportunity to challenge in effect of the state action if incorporated there which did not have a chance to appeal before were because there was no jurisdiction gas act that can still come to this court for several purposes but again this court would benefit from the agency decision making process being finalized to this school if we were to hold it and means final action stated agencies were being opening their mail for more than a year when they had an application in other words didn't even work didn't do anything that could be described as an act is that what they were doing well i don't know who sourced and i think the concern was that  of the water quality certification i just want to start with the act so the states that this were states court of appeals and a jurisdiction where the pipeline is located has a regional and an exclusive jurisdiction over any or in under the courtrooms of the statute but one of the conditions is that it's a no no effect in terms of what anyone can do in the face of the earth if an appeal is filed and end until the time for different than any other final judgment with why should it be up to nasa to say it's its state agency to decide what procedures it wants to follow pretty internal presumptions how many people who wants to allocate pulmonary decisions discretion of the state song an entity to sadly have a two step process where some of my people make a tentative conditional recommendation and that will be the rule but if somebody objects to it the agency won't sign off on it until it's  because that you need to have the water quality certification effectively to get your four or four permit you need that to be going construction these projects get certified there's a demonstrated need for the natural gas in this case in connecticut