like to address the issue of the it's an option and whether or not it's been defined in the record it's actually very well defined b a l j said that the claimant can sit for eight hours in a workday with a fit  stand option after one hour whereupon he could change position walk without leaving his workstation and then as far as the walking goes said two hours with a position change after twenty five to thirty minutes and that position change could last five to ten minutes so that's that's very detailed and they presented that to the vocational expert the point of it is claimant has the option to change position when he needs to which is what his doctors said he needed so that that's very detailed so it's an option and the v a who is the expert here testified that these three jobs can be performed with that that stand option no one challenge the v a on that particular issue and i think the court is and should be taking notice that that's the expert testimony expert is the one here who is charged with taking what the the d o t says about jobs and turning that into an identification of jobs that this person can do with those particular limitations so i don't think that there is any question about any of those three jobs which are all sedentary that they can be performed with a stand option given the experts testimony which is entitle so there is no it stand in the dots therefore our position is it's not a conflict which is not the same thing as saying in gutierrez there was an issue that got conflict was reaching  manipulation those things actually are in the dot descriptions so you can argue about whether or not the specifics control the general but here there is no sits down option in the dot everyone knows that so our position is that should not be a conflict and what you have here is the v understanding that's a limitation knowing as it's his job to know that it's not in the in the dictionary of occupational title so he found these jobs that he he acknowledges in the hearing that he's focusing on the sudden terri jobs because that's an option so i don't think there is any question here that the locational expert was well aware of this particular limitation and provided expert testimony that satisfies that particular limitation with an earlier case coleman but in that case this court and said that the the his testimony was uninformed speculation uninformed guesswork and in that case there was an issue between whether whether or not the job option is eight isn't a conflict because it doesn't exist in the end again i would say it's different then problems we have with reaching our manipulative or are the kinds of work related activities that actually are contained within a dot description this one is everyone knows it's not in there so it's true that they are they didn't ask whether or not the being east has the way it was consistent with the doc but again this is not a matter of assuming that you think that and i would just point out that substantial evidence review it means that even if you disagree with the l g s interpretation of the evidence it's reasonable in the or sixty four well that was the point that irrespective of what we know that to mean by sixty four percent to from forty percent to sixty four percent so this is on page three hundred and forty eight dollars in the administrative records page three hundred and seventy one dollars in the excerpts the audiologist specifically refers to that improvement as functional residual hearing so if the audiologist is saying after the state agency doctors made that contested finding about loud noise is an occasional communication subsequent to that you have a hearing experts has functional residual hearing that's the folly in fact in the case as far as the claimants hearing goes so again there's there is no i could come in as regional functional here you can hearing as prohibiting him from being in loud environments without protection and that he presented that to the vocational expert so we can all look at this record and come to different conclusions about what the claimant hearing limitations imposed but again the record shows he's functional and all of those jobs should be able to there's no reason he can't perform those jobs with functional residual hearing so if there's any other questions about that i'm happy to answer them but my opponent also brought up the balance thing and all three jobs have no balance thing so that is there's there's no reason for the court to find any conflict with the dot on that issue either so we have a very detailed residual functional capacity finding here that is supported by the medical evidence and very well detailed in terms of the  it doesn't have to prove the extent of say pain or you know particular limitations that can't be quantified but what you have here is the claimant is alleging that mostly that he can't work because of his right foot residuals from his cardiovascular accident and because he has fatigue so the right foot problem is you know he can still walk he can still drive he can still perform all of his activities of daily living and those are rather expensive and very consistent with the ability to perform sudden hard work and my opponent does not really address those things at all in the record we others like for instance you know claim it's admitting he's doing light chores he's grocery shopping he's cooking he's watering plants he's using the computer is using an elliptical machine is getting his girls ready for school picking them up playing fantasy football on his computer and on his and st of all the fatigue this art is very very limiting so even does have some amount of city he that is being accounted for with this lesson sedentary residual functional capacity and he would like to point out as is clement testified that if he has a fifteen because you have to take naps in the middle of the day but he also testified that he stays up until one or three in the morning and then gets up at seven so if that did that make sense that he would have to math if that's the amount of sleep he's getting particularly given the activities that he's doing throughout the day and details a address all of this they also pointed out how you know not withstanding clamens really incident he is his cardiac lee stable to the point where he has the ability under that met system m e t s that he can perform level six which means he can do yard work you can walk up stairs and he can walk uphill so who puts together puts my large heating on to circuit boards so they take a blueprint of whatever this mylar thing is and put it tape it onto the circuit board and it's actually the lowest level reasoning job out of all of those so it's apparently not very eight times during the day but he also has the problem with balancing how does that happen the record doesn't show it there's no explanation from the vehicle we don't even know if those limitations and are