cost the most money on the back end and involves destructive testing, which sometimes takes the facility offline. that's a difficult thing to figure out how to plan for, but one thing we talked about internally, is develop ago risk matr matrix, that says if the following risk factors are present at a site, but may not know the answer, but you should increase the construction budget by a certain amount. the good example, you know there is a stream at the site, but do you know where it is? 10%. also soil conditions and mission pool, we had a lot of problems as we pulled back panels only to discover what was there. so that's another tool that i think we need to refine over the next year and hopefully the life cycle analysis will help us do that. i'm also just given the swings we've seen on project budgets from 2008 to 2012, to have a swing bidding market of 10% on a $5 million project, that's somewhat solvable. but when you get to the larger than $30 million projects, which we have a number, you want to be further down the road in terms of the design and the ceqa process so when the ballot passes,