I'm interested in what the results are for monitoring. The example I used with at least one reporter was the level of contaminants. If I take flame retardants in Canada's north, for example—many folks know them as PBDEs, polybrominated diphenyl ethers—we have monitored them and the curve goes up in the 1980s and 1990s when they were used. Concerns were raised. We took regulatory action and the level has come down is now very constant and steady. The science would say that you don't need to look at that month in and month out, because you've reached a steady state.
Those are the kinds of discussions you leave to the scientists and the statisticians to say how many times you need a certain data point for good monitoring.