I think if we're going to wish to align with the international standard or the governmental standard, then everyone needs to do it within 60 days. I just don't know; if this standard is suddenly now the new thing that we are primarily concerned about, then everyone else will just to have to buckle up and get it done in 60 days. If we're allowing flexibility or if we're....
The standard should apply to everyone, or we should allow everyone to go outside the standard. I don't know how we have it as our logic for going.... The big ports can comply and the smaller ports can't, but it's still an international standard or still a government standard. I'm not sure how we can say that it's a very important standard, but here are the criteria for which it is no longer very important. It's either important or it's not. We can adjust around it, as has been said, so that the port authorities do not have to and they have more flexibility, but again, I think what we're getting down into is that the need for the two classes of reporting kind of evaporates if we're able to do it this way.
I think we should either abandon this collectively.... We can say about the international standard that the department was right and the legislation is correct: It must be 60 days; we've all heard from the ports, but they need to just deal with it. I think we need to either abandon all these attempts to give flexibility and stick to the international standard—or whatever standard we're saying is 60 days—or go to 90 days to allow simplicity and allow everyone the flexibility to report within 90 days.
That is my opinion.