I'd just like to clarify that on the side of looking at negative assessments in other jurisdictions, we already have that in CEPA. Under section 75, when something is banned—I think “severely restricted” is the terminology—we already look at that and make it a priority for assessing. So we have one side of the coin already, but I'm suggesting that we should also have the other.
The precautionary principle cuts both ways on that. I don't really think that's a difference in either looking at negative assessments or positive assessments.