Could you see a scenario, hypothetically, in which the committee says, “Okay, this is a lower threshold”? I'm speaking hypothetically here; I'm not signalling which way I would vote on an amendment.
Could it be that simply identifying a subscriber is a much lower threshold of intrusion, as you had put it, and that's why you could justify “reasonable grounds to suspect”, as in a crime has possibly been committed and we just want to know whether this person is a subscriber? Then once you get to an authorization to get more data about them—that is in the production order, which is judicially authorized—could you not say, “Well, now you're getting a lot more information and therefore it could be justified that it goes to a higher threshold?”