There were several adjudicative decisions that would have been taken by the commission in the context of overseeing the construction of that project. There were several decisions that would have been around leave to open, variances or various types of condition requirements that would have been met throughout not only the construction but ongoing into the operation of that pipeline. I might need a little more information into the specifics of the decision that you're speaking about.
In general, I believe what you're speaking about is the necessity for the regulator to be thinking about timely reviews and to ensure that those decisions are made transparently and openly.
I can assure you that the commission turns its attention to make those adjudicative decisions within its mandate. There were several that would have been associated with the oversight of construction on this project, as there are with the oversight of construction on any project. It's not just a matter of one. I would say that several decisions would have been taken. They would have all been made with a focus and a commitment to making them in a timely, accessible and transparent manner, as is our mandate.