First of all, I think we need to clarify what was the purpose of that report. I know you were told by the Farmer Rail Car Coalition that the report was a validation of their business case. This was not the case of that report. That report was meant.... We asked the agency, at the request of both the FRCC and the railways, to determine a preliminary methodology in terms of if ever we got the law changed to make an adjustment to the revenue cap, what would be that methodology? When we asked the agency to do that, they consulted with the railways, they consulted with the FRCC, and they consulted with all the members of the grain community with whom they consult in the determination of the revenue caps as well as determination of the index. All parties were asked to sign a confidentiality agreement with the agency. All parties did so.
Given this, we have to make sure that all parties that signed the confidentiality agreement, and the agency, which is the one that got the confidentiality agreement signed, are prepared to release that information. We are in discussions with the agency. We are looking at whether there is commercial damage that will be caused, because that is the concern to the railways of releasing the report.
Ultimately, the agency will have to make the decision; it is their report. But those discussions are ongoing. I wanted you to have the context of why this information hasn't been provided yet, and what the purpose of it was.