There were a whole multitude of questions in there, including what's an adequate rate of return. Without prejudicing how the members would deal with the case, we would look at any access movement in terms of what the average revenue gained on a particular line for a number of miles are and would try to apply something like that, so it would be fair and equitable. What are they earning on average? If we're adding this extra amount, less the penalty it might cost them to have, not less but in addition, there might be an operating penalty to having extra traffic that you don't want on a particular line. But it certainly would be done professionally, so that there would be fair treatment to both sides.
On your question related to rail whistling, I just want to point out, Mr. Bell, that that is a rail safety issue, and it's not us. We don't control the whistle blowing. It's a safety issue. It's not a noise issue from that point of view. You'd have to deal with the safety board on that. In response to a normal noise complaint, we will hear the case if it comes to us. We will hear both parties and we will decide what's reasonable and try to provide some solution to it if we can.