webcor obayashi, skanska. what isn't in here what happens if that group doesn't necessarily agree with l.p.i.'s finding and wants to do additional testing. is that another threes to do additional testing. we go ahead without them doing the testing? >> that was what -- the peer review panel want some initial reports. we'll know next wednesday. we'll have a meeting. we're meet acing at the l.p.i. . we'll know at that point if requiring additional testing. we'll figure out if that's parallel or if that hold up the process. it depends on the type of testing. it maybe just clarifying testing more than anything. it depends on what the test is. >> i imagine the expectations. here we are and here's the report, not everyone may agree with the report's finding. we need to make sure it gets done right. >> let me clarify, we're not going to go into the findings phase until all the parties are satisfied and all the testing has been completed. that's what dennis was alluding to. our goal is to have consensus and also to hav

>> there's a number of internal issues between the seven and webcor working out. the first 10 are the two a i mentioned and they are truly at the point of handing to web webr to hand to the sub to sign on the line full final done gone. i'm anticipating that next report, we got those in the books. >> thank you. >> would you mind putting that slide back up? last time we talked about the scope of this m.t.c.-led peer review. could you confirm the very last slide that the m.t.c. peer review scope is not just to advise on the fix -- sorry, the one you had up earlier with the next steps. sorry. it says m.t.c. peer provincial o implement the fix. the last bullet should be flipped with the open of the facility. >> i think we're anticipating. it is safe now as it is with the temporary shoring. identified a core issue and the more broader investigation may -- we'll let the experts guide us whether it's before or after in terms of priority. trying to balance out opening versus what -- there will be some things that are looked at more for comfort without answering to caters.

some of them have webcor has advanced a couple in terms of request to draw down contingencies which is inappropriate drawdown and ahasbeen deny end. >> director sesay: i want to ensure a you have all the resources you need financially at least to get through this process. >> next board meeting, we're tallying up costs. this board meeting we present to you the impacts powering forward. i do want to clarify one item to director her point, we will not open the building until we ensure that the building is sound. we think we can do that in parallel. assure the board and director hursh as well, we will not open the facility. >> following up on director gee's question on the analysis and steps taken on the testing, i'm glad there's good collaboration in the process of everybody working together towards get to the right answer. you might get to the finger pointing stage. everybody on the same page to this point of a entire process? >> there have been an amazing amount of effort behind to get to this sampling and testing procedure. yes, we have 100% commitment on all sides now. that was a fina