The future of our industry is in your hands

If you think the election tomorrow is important, there is another election that is right under out nose that has more potential to destroy your business than any outcome tomorrow.

What election is this that is so important? It is your election whether or not to joing the PWNA and provide more funds with your dues so that they can continue their assault on you.

I will summarize the Jim Gamble section of the latest cleaner times article on "Government Regulations and provide snippets of his interview for clarification.

The PWNA reports that they have spoken to near 500 regulators in the past twelve months presenting Robert Hinderliter's one-man BMP's that he authored alone while rejecting suggestions from the industry as a whole. These are the same BMP's that he promised on multiple boards would not be "shopped" to the regulators. Now they are apparently proud that they have "presented" to 500 regulators without......."shopping"....as if there is a difference.

It wasn't good enough that Robert was the originator or the myth of "nothing down the dr$in but rain". A couple of years ago the oldest reference to that phrase on the entire internet was from Robert's writings in the early 1990's. ...No apparently that assault on our industry wasn't enough to open up the floodgates of sales of reclaim equipment. Another step was needed.

Step two, the PWNA "BMP's" that are now being pushed on regulators around the country. The EPA, on it's own website to this day promote bmp's that allow for cleaning water that has no soap introduced to go in the storm drain after a sediment filter. But that will not sell enough equipment, nor shore up the accounts of those who have chosen to bet the farm on that equipment by going deep into debt buying it. So Robert came in with step 2, where, in spite of our pleas to remove any reference to hot water, Robert got around the EPA's opening that allowed us to put sediment filtered cleaning water without soap down the storm drain by introducing a foreign concept to the regulators, that being the concept that water that is "hot" is an emulsifier and is just as bad or worse than soap. This was a concept the EPA never envisioned till our fearless leader, Robert Hinderliter got in front of them and powerpointed them into a coma till they accepted it.

You'd think that would be enough. How much more could one man do to heap regulations on us that previously didn't exist? Well, that brings us to step three. Robert brings in a newcomer in Jim Gamble. The same man who told us "one drop of caustic will kill all the wildlife in the sewer" ......wildlife? .....in the sewer??..... I don't need to go on with the past to show what step three is about, I'll let Jim tell you in his own words from the latest issue of cleaner times.

"Protecting water could not be more important, says Gamble, And it's just as important to protect water underground as above ground."

What is Mr. Gamble, the western environmental chair of the PWNA saying here? He is clearly stating that the next attack on this industry is going to be convincing the EPA that the ground they have considered as adequate filtration in the past is no longer adequate and the water must be vacuumed and removed. Get ready Wood guys, Get Ready house washers, roof washers. Step three is coming after you. Jim already stated this on other boards, but it must have gone right over a lot of heads because you wood guys are sitting on your hands and letting him destroy your industry right out from under you. Are you ready to reclaim your water from decks? Are you ready to tote water and spend hundreds of dollars transporting and disposing of it from a roof wash????? You are being attacked and you don't even know it.

Next step:

Gamble goes on to say (in regard to general concrete cleaning)

"The idea is to get the runoff cited by Gamble under the umbrella of Publicly Owned Treatment works (POTW) The POTW will determine if a filtration unit is needed, which in most cases I believe it would be."

Now, I wonder why that is? Is it just a coincidence that Robert and Jim have been working together to build filtration units that are now being promoted and sold on Michael's forum? What POTW's have been requiring filtration? Where? Not here. Not in 99.9 percent of the country. But the POTW in Jim's area of California is a shared office with the stormwater authority and they have some of the most restrictive regulations in the country. Jim and Robert are bound and determined to introduce these draconian rules to the regulators in YOUR town. And they are doing it day by day with the money you put in their pockets via your PWNA dues.

We are being assaulted by our own peers.

You are voting with your membership. Please pass this information on to every PWNA member you know so they can see the destruction that is being wrought with their own dues.

Tomorrow is an important day for our country. But no matter who wins the election, nothing can be done about saving your business as you now know it unless these guys are stopped in their tracks.

The UAMCC is working hard to bring common sense and practical solutions so that our industry can be recognized as for the environmental benefits we provide utilizing frequent cleaning and true best management practices.

Please consider what direction you are voting for your industry to go when you get ready to support an industry org.

To see the cleaner times article in question, just do a search for cleaner times and click on their latest issue. Page 8.


PAGE SIX STARTS THIS ARTICLE...CLICK HERE

Tony....Thank you leading the fight for us.

http://www.powerwashcommunity.com/t...Article-Special-Report-Government-Regulations

I consider Carlos a Changed Man, here he is Asking the tough questions. This affects his Living, different ball game now.

Now will see where this goes as usual Dance around the intentions will Jim Gamble.

If Jim dances around the questions will we ask CT for a Retraction on Article? Based on the Way this is answered

I would be interested to hear (read) the candid answer...

In conversations with contractors outside the BBS community there appears to be a lot of misunderstanding of what is, and is not permissible as it relates to the CWA. More troubling though is the sentiment that over-regulation in this area is to be expected.

Steven Button said:

I would be interested to hear (read) the candid answer...

In conversations with contractors outside the BBS community there appears to be a lot of misunderstanding of what is, and is not permissible as it relates to the CWA. More troubling though is the sentiment that over-regulation in this area is to be expected.

Click to expand...

Fortunately your State has a Coalition amongst all counties thats pretty Decent. The issue is that someone like this Never Gets in front of them to persuade them on the wrong path.

I think it would be a great idea to put a copy or link to the CWA here on PWI so that anyone on the planet trying to find the CWA or wanting to see what it says can find it easily.

Maybe Make a permanent sticky or thread titled The CWA and have a copy of it there or a link to it. I think a copy would be better, maybe a pdf of it so if they ever change their website, if the website goes down or anything else happens, we will always have a copy of it for the whole world to see for their benefit.

Ron Musgraves said:

http://www.powerwashcommunity.com/t...Article-Special-Report-Government-Regulations

I consider Carlos a Changed Man, here he is Asking the tough questions. This affects his Living, different ball game now.

Now will see where this goes as usual Dance around the intentions will Jim Gamble.

Click to expand...

Carlos asks a good question here but the word "cited" is used to refer to the list Jim made and not in the sense of "cited" as in fined.

At least Carlos is reading it and taking it seriously.

A better question would be "Why are you taking perfectly good, tried and true, practices like diverting to the landscaping, and fighting to make them illegal?"

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

I'd like everyone to let this sink in.

In cities around the country it is perfectly legal and responsible for us to filter for debris and let the runoff run down the storm drain when cleaning plazas and sidewalk without soap. This is good for our industry because it promotes more frequent cleaning! The BMP's for the San Francisco Bay area are clear about what is ALLOWS to drain into the storm drain:

To the street or storm drain

Wash water from cleaning sidewalks, plazas, and building exteriors, if:
• You have successfully used dry cleanup methods (described in the “tips” section of this folder to remove fresh oil stains, debris, and similar pollutants—before
using water
AND
• Cleaning is done with water only—no soap or other cleaning chemicals
AND
• Water has not removed paint

This can be found on page 4 here: http://www.basmaa.org/Portals/0/documents/pdf/Pollution from Surface Cleaning.pdf


Yet Robert Hinderliter's BMP's outlaw this perfectly accepted practice:

Discharge to Storm Drains - not recommended
• Never discharge detergents, chemicals, or hot water to Storm Drains.
• Washing with cold water (less than 110°F) and no chemicals is considered no worse than a rain event and may be discharged to Storm Drains for surfaces that do not have oil and grease or other contaminants.
• Water that is greater than 110°F is considered hot water and considered the same as using soap.
- Hot water is an emulsifier and similar to using a detergent.

Robert Hinderliter and the PWNA have taken this concept regarding hot water and "shopped" it to the municipalities. Once again a perfectly accepted practice has been sabotaged by our own org. Much like they did with the "nothing down the drain but rain" lie.

While other industries like the construction industry and street sweepers have strong supporters of their industry on the battlefront working hard against over regulation, we now have the PWNA piling more regulation on us than ever before.

More to come later.

Good stuff Tony, and I could not agree more with your (and others) view on this.

Had it not been for fact that the PWNA flat out lied about shopping this BMP around some might have though that this was a good idea.......glad it was brought into the light.

Here is an excerpt from the cleaner times article:


Members of the PWNA environmental Committee have met with, given presentations too and represented individual contract cleaners with about 400-500 regulators in the last 12 months - including the implementation of some regulations, says Hinderliter.


Contrast that with the official statement of the PWNA Executive director when they put the BMP's out to us for a few days to evaluate before implementation:

Let me tell you what the BMPs are not (based on some of the points I read on the bulletin boards):

· The PWNA is not going to bring, or shop, the BMPs to municipalities, city leaders or roll them out across the country. That was never mentioned as our plan and I don't know where that came from. Second, we don't have the money or resources for such an undertaking.

· These BMPs aren't designed to be the answer for every power washer, in every part of the country, for every possible cleaning situation or challenge. They are a guide. They are a resource to develop BMPs specific to your operation.

Within days of making the claim that the BMP's were not going to be "brought" or "shopped" to municipalities I personally viewed correspondence to the PWNA board from Robert Hinderliter informing them of which municipalities he was going to "present" the BMP's to first!!!!!

It's time to call a spade a spade.

And a liar a liar.

If they will lie to us, they will lie to the very municipalities who have the ability to put us out of business.

It's time to face the reality that contractors who we've looked up to as leaders and icons have stabbed us in the back.

Now a new generation of leaders need to arise to get involved and try to reverse the damage.

It starts with getting to know your own laws and regulations in your own backyard. Then get with someone at the UAMCC and work with them to find out where you need to go next to build relationships that can withstand this onslaught against us.

After reading this Tony I'm very glad that you have brought this up to everyone. I have not got my issue of the cleaner times yet. Even though we are a cleaning contractor with reclaim I have set out to talk to some of the cleaning contractors in my area letting them know that we didn't buy the equipment to start any problems around here with the epa breathing down there necks, what they have done is very bad for this industry. I will stand behind who ever stands up against them! I'm very glad that I didn't send money into the PWNA! If there is any business that stands behind what jim and the others are doing I hope that no one does business with them anymore, there is plenty of suppliers on the net to get things from

I have been asked to comment on this thread which is full of misinformation and lack of knowledge, which I will do this once.

1. The industry’s biggest threat (or impact) now is the implementation of the Second Five Year Plan for Phase II Jurisdictions. All of the reasons will be posted on www.pwna.org shortly.
2. The second biggest threat will be from the Coin-op Carwash Association, which has budgeted funds to eliminate home owner and charity car washing (because of the effect on their Economic Revenue Stream).
3. I only coined three things: the term “Cosmetic Cleaning” & “Reasonable, Rational, & Logical”, and established over 110F as being Hot Water (a negotiated temperature with the EPA), otherwise Hot Water was any water that was elevated in temperature out of the tap! Everything else was already established by EPA Regulators. Any one that believes I established all of that stuff is just day dreaming and if you think about it not a logical or reasonable conclusion.
4. I never knew what the term “shopping” was the way you guys are using it. Lobbyists are a part of the America Political Process and one of the purposes of Trade Associations. PWNA was formed at the request of an EPA Regulator so that the Industry would have a National Trade Association because the Coin-op Car Wash Association and Liquid Waste Haulers were writing the BMPs for our industry to benefit their Economic Revenue Stream. He explained that he could not talk to me as owner of a company but could as a representative of a National Trade Association. The same reason that Ron worked so hard to take over UAMCC.
5. Before I got involved Cosmetic Cleaning Environmental Power Washing was recycling! Only after PWNA was formed were all of the inexpensive options you enjoy today accepted. All of the early pioneers had some type of recycle equipment which the Manufacturers were pushing to benefit their economic revenue stream.
6. The Residential Enforcement of Cosmetic Cleaning is not an issue at the present time in over 99% of the jurisdictions. Only is a problem if Residential Work is a “Significant Contributor of Pollutants to the MS4”, which, it is not at the present time. This will probably be address in about 20 years. It may come into focus sooner because of HIP (Herbicides, Insecticides, and Pesticides), which are “Significant Contributor of Pollutants to the MS4”.
7. The CWA is a series of regulations that were developed over about 10 years initially, and are continually changing over time. This series of laws and regulations are generally referred to as the Clean Water Act passed in 1972 for simplicity. It is not a single document of legislation, therefore cannot be linked to a single document.
8. From the statements being made it is obvious that the PWNA BMPs are not being read and little effort put into understand them; way too many misstatements.

Hey Robert great post. I give you credit for putting your neck on the line in here because guys don't want to really look into what you have done. Their easier route instead of expounding on your hard work is to tear it down and flipping it to their benefit without them doing there due diligence as you have done. Most hard working individuals in this industry aren't about tearing down people like yourself who has given this industry so much including 2 orgs the www.PWNA.org and www.UAMCC.org so contractors can have a voice.

Your a brave man to come in here to voice your opinion and personally I admire your passion and will to succeed to help us contractors not only unite but to also be educated enough if they happened to be so unlucky and have to deal with possibly being cited for possibly harming the environment because of what the codes are in the citation book.

Just a hunch-your going to get negative responses here along the lines the way cops and fireman get mutilated in here. Theirs a ton of good info on PWI but when it comes to authoritative personal who do a job for the protection of the people theirs individuals who parley that over to there constitutional rights have been violated. Your going to most likely fall into that category by some posters in here who don't really want to study what you have done because they want to do whatever they want to do.

Others that lurk though will benefit from your post by given them the proper knowledge to get them on the right track and for that and myself personally I can't thank you enough for laying the groundwork for us to succeed.

Good luck with the rest of the responses your going to get here but knowing you like I do your able to take it because your a visionary.

Robert I hope you are here for serious dialogue and not just to put out talking points.

I would like to address each issue or point you've made and would like to start with the one that should be the easiest since it has little to do with EPA regulations.

On point 4 you stated:

I never knew what the term “shopping” was the way you guys are using it. Lobbyists are a part of the America Political Process and one of the purposes of Trade Associations. PWNA was formed at the request of an EPA Regulator so that the Industry would have a National Trade Association because the Coin-op Car Wash Association and Liquid Waste Haulers were writing the BMPs for our industry to benefit their Economic Revenue Stream. He explained that he could not talk to me as owner of a company but could as a representative of a National Trade Association. The same reason that Ron worked so hard to take over UAMCC.

Robert would you explain what the word "shopping" means in this context:

The PWNA is not going to bring, or shop, the BMPs to municipalities, city leaders or roll them out across the country. That was never mentioned as our plan and I don't know where that came from. Second, we don't have the money or resources for such an undertaking. These BMPs aren't designed to be the answer for every power washer, in every part of the country, for every possible cleaning situation or challenge. They are a guide. They are a resource to develop BMPs specific to your operation.

Those were the words written by the Executive Director of the PWNA at the time you were trying to garner support for the BMPs and were asking for suggestions and input.

These very words were used to sway the opinion of some PWNA members and non members alike in favor of the BMPs. As a matter of fact, arguments for the acceptance of the BMPs were presented on some of the boards based solely on that precept.

Robert, what does "shopping" mean?

I didn't notice that Robert started his post with:

I have been asked to comment on this thread which is full of misinformation and lack of knowledge, which I will do this once.

Apparently the "ship has sailed" on this and someone at the PWNA has demanded he address it and he has fulfilled that request and is done with us.


I will go ahead and address the issues in separate posts so that if someone at the PWNA decides more is needed than a "drive-by" post, he will be able to address each issue individually.


On Point #1:

This summer spent about six weeks on the road meeting with regulators from Reno, NV to Coeur d'Alene, ID, and Seattle, WA to to San Diego, CA. These are the people we, as contractors have to deal with on a regular basis, not the Federal EPA.

I asked them lots of questions. To most of them, powerwashers were of no concern at all. They don't have the time, nor the money to deal with contractors who's job is to clean things when they are dealing with industries that manufacture products that produce illicit discharges.

Most were up to date on PHASE II. PHASE II is not some brand new set of regulations that are going to change anything. According to most of them their only concern with changes in Phase II was how to deal with the upcoming TDML method of compliance measurement. Granted, most of the municipalities I spoke with have been dealing with the EPA for years and I didn't spend much time dealing with the smaller cities of 100,000 or more that will be most impacted by Phase II.

PHASE II will most certainly impact many powerwashers in the smaller cities of around 100,000. But it will mostly impact them in that they will now be subject to the same NPDES permitting that the larger cities have faced for years.

None of this should be a problem in our industry because we should already know what to expect and have a game plan to help educate these new NPDES permit holders.

There are other implications of Phase II such as the movement to eliminate all illicit discharges. But NONE of the jurisdictions I spoke with thought this was going to be a great concern because zero discharge is a completely impossible feat. They know it and the EPA knows it. PHASE II still leaves it up to the NPDES holder to implement the best management practices themselves.

Robert is trying to get the EPA to accept his BMPs as law for our industry. His claim from Cleaner Times is very clear:

Members of the PWNA environmental Committee have met with, given presentations too and represented individual contract cleaners with about 400-500 regulators in the last 12 months - including the implementation of some regulations, says Hinderliter.

The Pwna is working hard to make law where there is no law. It is much more beneficial to our industry to work with contractors in regional areas to deal with the laws already present, such as in Houston.....while at the same time presenting our industry to the regulators nationwide in an accurate manner......WE ARE NOT POLLUTERS, WE ARE CLEANERS.

So to correct point #1, the biggest threat (or impact) now is the implementation of a the one-size fits all BMP that is being "shopped" and pushed as a new "LAW" for us to be held to.

Ok then, I'll move on to Point #2:

Robert Hinderliter states:

The second biggest threat will be from the Coin-op Carwash Association, which has budgeted funds to eliminate home owner and charity car washing (because of the effect on their Economic Revenue Stream).

This was a GOLDEN missed opportunity for our industry. Very few professionals clean cars on the side of the road, sitting around next to their truck with a hand written white sign like we see here out in the southwest trying to clean cars for $5-10 out of the back of an old Toyota. This and the homeowner are the primary targets for the car wash associations. I have tried to keep up with this with one of my high school friends who owns car washes and participates in the process.

As an industry we should be working with other similar industries instead of sitting back and trying to work around them.

The International Carwash Association and the other car washing associations know that most of us are not their competition.

The car lots who hire our professionals to wash dirt off the cars weekly aren't going to all the sudden start moving 300 cars through the car washes if we are regulated out of business.

However, the segment of our industry that may be considered competition with the car washes are Fleet washers such as Michael Hinderliter. So it appears they have sold out the remaining industry and neglected a golden opportunity to work WITH the other associations just to preserve their own little niche.

It is a shame.

And on the issue of car washing, this all started when Robert Hinderliter and Michael Hinderliter were forced to comply with reclamation ordinances in Texas about 20 years ago.

During the next twenty years - instead of separating the non-polluting and low impact cleaning most of us do - from the higher contaminant laden Fleet washing niche, Robert Hinderliter has lumped us all into the same category. Instead of working towards better methods and lesser restrictions for Fleet washers, he has decided that if he is going to be forced to reclaim, then by george, we all are.

And he's done a bang up job of leading us in that direction for 20 years with little to no opposition. He has been helped along by the lack of critical thinking and evaluation as demonstrated by John Tornebene above where he clearly shows that the worship of an "icon of the industry" is preferred over the hard work of dissecting the facts and working towards providing for his family in the future in a profitable and responsible way.

Robert Hinderliter claims he knows the direction we need to go. For over 15 years he has claimed that stricter regulations requiring reclaim everywhere is around the corner. And if you will go back and read the presentations he has been presenting to regulators you can over the past ten years you can easily see that he has been working hard towards that end.

The result has been hundreds if not thousands of industry speculators (including distributors) to buy millions in equipment only to find the claim is not true, the technology is not practical and it produces a net income loss. Many end up selling the systems for pennies.

It's time for a different approach. It's time to stop throwing good money after bad.

Summarizing point #2 - Yes, there is potential for the carwash associations to cause harm to our industry. But if they do, it is only because we haven't worked WITH them.

This is something the president of the UAMCC, Ron Musgraves has been working on for the past few years. This is why Ron is involved in car wash groups, window cleaning, roof cleaning, fleet washing, street sweeping and anything else that might even remotely affect our industry.

I stand with Ron and will, of course work towards keeping regulations reasonable for my own niche in the industry, but not at the expense of the rest of the industry.

And the second largest threat to our industry, in my opinion, is coming later in the way of the clean air act an tightening regulations there.

Regarding Point #3.

Google used to offer the search capability to make a timeline of when a phrase was used. Apparently they no longer offer that option. I tried it tonight and can't find it. But a while back, well over a year ago I did a timeline search for the phrase "nothing down the drain but rain" and found the earliest instance of this phrase was in the 1990's at a Delco website. I bookmarked it and even six months ago the link is gone as is everything to do with that website. I wish I had the capability to do screenshots back then.

Robert, even if you weren't the first person to use the phrase in relation to storm drains, you were the first one to put it on the internet.

Regarding the hot water issue:

Here is FAQ for the Mobile cleaning permit (yes, a PERMIT) for mobile cleaners to work in Fort Worth, Texas, the home town and the "MODEL" for the rest of the country according to Robert Hinderliter.

http://fortworthtexas.gov/uploadedF...uality/Power_Washer_Permit/PowerWasherFAQ.pdf

If you will notice, FT Worth mentions nothing whatsoever about ANY restrictions on hot water.

May I wash a parking lot or gas station with cold (or hot) water only and discharge it to the storm drain?
Probably not. Even though the ordinance states that you can discharge to the storm drain if you don’t use detergents, degreasers, etc., you will probably be washing oil, grease, metals and dirt off property which will violate the ordinance. This exemption was designed for cosmetic cleaners washing objects such as sidewalks, headstones, walls and other things that are unlikely to be affected by the normal pollutants. Remember, it is not just the chemicals you use; it is also the pollutants you wash off that are banned from the storm drain system.

Nowhere does it state that "using hot water is considered the same as using detergent" as Robert Hinderliter as used as verbiage in the Pwna's Bmp's that we overwhelmingly rejected as an industry. This is a concept that Robert is pushing or SHOPPING to the EPA.

In my travels on the west coast I asked EVERY SINGLE regulator "Using mesh filtered water from sidewalk cleaning, is there a temperature limit to runoff without soap as it ENTERS the storm drain system".

One said "150 degrees".

One said "108 degrees".

Another said "Unless your runoff is going directly into the body of water it will reach ambient temperature soon enough" SMART!!

More than one said "We don't have any written guidelines for that."

I then asked them all, "Are there any issues with emulsification when using hot water?"

NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM HAD EVER EVEN HEARD OF IT BEFORE. NOT ONE.

Once again, just like the "nothing down the drain but rain" assault on our industry, Robert has taken another completely foreign concept into the minds of the regulators as a hammer with which to crush our industry again. This "emulsification" issue was not in Robert's earlier BMPs and is a recent invention.

As far as the cities go, even where there are vague mentions of hot water they speak nothing of "emulsification".

Here is just one example from the Bay Area:

http://www.cityoflivermore.net/civicax/filebank/documents/5360/



WHY ARE WE PLANTING NEW WAYS TO REGULATE US INTO THE HEADS OF THE REGULATORS?????

IS THIS HOW WE REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF OUR ORG MEMBERS AND OUR INDUSTRY???????



Further, Robert Hinderliter and Jim Gamble, according to their article in cleaner times, are trying to make it where we MUST discharge all cleaning water into the POTW.

This, of course will require sophisticated filtration units that, coincidentally Robert Hinderliter, with design help from Jim Gamble, is now offering for sale starting at over $1000.00 and going up from there.

As a side note, regarding the hot water issue --- In Contra Costa County, where Jim Gamble has stated that all his waste, after filtration, is dumped into the sanitary sewer they have temperature maximums.

He states he uses 300 degree water to clean.

If 300 degree water can go directly in to a filter, then directly into the sanitary sewer and naturally reduce from 300 degrees to the mandated maximum of 150 degrees in the few feet from the filter to the drain, (assuming, of course that Gamble is following the law) then why in the world can't 190 degree sidewalk cleaning water get down below 110 degrees by the time it gets to the drain??????

Why didn't anyone ever even consider the fact that hot water, moving through a storm drain would reach ambient temperature very quickly before it ever gets to any wildlife or plants at the LOW IMPACT levels we produce runoff? The reason is because NO ONE HAS BEEN LOOKING OUT FOR THE INTEREST OF THE CONTRACTORS!

They only contractor I know producing huge levels of runoff is Jim Gamble who claims he rinses garages with a fire hose at up to 90 gallons per minute! That's not the normal way we contractors clean!

I submit to you the regulations for Contra Costa County POTW that Jim works under the authority of, regarding the 150 degree limit:

http://www.centralsan.org/documents/BMP_Storm_Drains_and_Sanitary_Sewers.pdf

As a newcomer to the industry, all I can say is ... "What have I gotten myself into?"

"Red" said:

As a newcomer to the industry, all I can say is ... "What have I gotten myself into?"

Click to expand...

It is the beginning of the most exciting era for our industry. It is when we finally begin to present ourselves as beneficial to society.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2