One of the recommendations dealt with this issue in terms of how to make our process faster. This was a considerable focus of attention in 2012, for example. We looked at how the consultation process had become, as you say, somewhat formalized and process heavy, if you will. You typically have more than 500 participants, particularly at a plenary session, and the question is whether all of those participants actually have a key interest in the issue. We were trying to make sure that everybody who was possibly going to be affected could make sure to contribute so that we didn't have regulations going forward with unintended consequences. But the process was heavy.
Particularly in light of a couple of Transportation Safety Board recommendations regarding Cougar Helicopters' offshore operations or float plane operations, areas in which there's a very specific and fairly limited user community that would be affected by these recommendations, we developed a way of triaging the incoming recommendation or issue that we'd be moving on—it might come from our own observations of a safety concern—and determining how it could be looked at in terms of moving through the broader process in a more targeted way.
Something called a PICA, procedures for inventory control afloat, was developed, a process, which I won't go into, that also uses a workshop approach. We bring together those key core people on certainly a very focused area of safety and we have that workshop to say, “Here's the safety issue. Here's the Transportation Safety Board recommendation. Here's our technical information. You give us what your operational experiences are. If we proposed to do this, how would that work? What problems would it cause?” Then we can take that and we can move it through an accelerated review process of the broader community instead of spending a length of time at that big committee on an issue that really has little relevance.