I think where I have some issue with the new amendment is that it's in the agency's opinion. Obviously they are going to be, I guess, biased; it's a wrong choice of words. However, they are involved in an investigation. How are they going to know that investigation hinders or compromises an investigation that's going on with one of the security agencies unless that security agency is the one that gives them that information?
It shouldn't be in the “opinion” of the review agency. If anything, it should be in the opinion of the national security agency that has an investigation that might be compromised. That's how I would interpret that, or how I think it makes better sense to me.