Thank you for the question.
I'd like to say the good news is that the fundamental processes we've had in place and we've refined over the years do not need to change.
The process itself is scalable. What I mean by that is that our validation efforts can adapt to the situation, just as they have throughout the validation of the design changes. Given the profile of these two particular accidents and the complexity of the issue, the validation process in this design change activity has been significantly higher than it normally would have been, but it is the same process. It still follows the same protocols. It still works the same way.
In the future, with other applicants, in future aircraft, we will continue to do what we've been doing. Obviously we have learned some lessons hereāso has the FAA. We're going to be applying those lessons, and those lessons become risk areas for the future that may result in our taking a greater depth of review in certain areas, which we might not have otherwise done. Because the process is scalable, it allows us to take the level of review that we deem necessary.