“Less costly” means that depending on the size of the vessel and depending on the type of operation—if they go very far offshore or if they are close to inshore—the requirements will be tailored to that type of risk. Therefore, if we have a vessel that doesn't go very far offshore, the requirement may be a simplified stability requirement that is not as costly.
Also, we are already doing some of this with the ship safety bulletin, which is like a directive. What we are trying to do is say that if an existing vessel, as opposed to new.... It's a lot easier to build a new vessel, because the cost is a lot lower when amortized over a certain amount of years. It's the existing vessels that actually give the fishermen the most problems. If your vessel was designed for a certain fishery, if you have been in that fishery, and if you don't have any of these risk factors—you don't go out when there is ice accretion, or you don't have tanks that you added have afterwards—then we are leaving your vessel alone. We're not asking you to do anything else.
There will be no cost for a lot of fishermen. There will be no cost whatsoever for existing vessels. If they build a new one, there may be an additional cost, but for new vessels it's usually a much lower cost.