I don't have a problem with the concurrency, but I would like the priority to be on the CEPA side. I'd rather not say one day is one and one day is the other. I'd like the CEPA witnesses to be contacted first and then move concurrently with the other one. When we did this, that was just the first one that was written. It wasn't a priority when we were writing this out. It just happened when we got to sitting down and writing out the motion. I apologize for that misunderstanding. If we park the third one, that's fine. I can live with that. But I really want CEPA to be the one that is prioritized in that concurrency.
On February 25th, 2016. See this statement in context.