I'm not sure we've actually done any analysis and I don't think I'm in a position to say exactly how many times it gets used. I think what I can say is that it would be used on an extremely regular basis. I think the use of identification by undercover officers is actually the foundation of having an undercover program--being able to use on a daily basis covert identification. Undercover operations take place extremely often in a very fast and robust fashion, with short timeframes, on a daily basis. I think the way we would look at it is that this is a tool that our undercover officers would use like many other law enforcement tools that they have in their possession. It would be a daily tool as opposed to section 25.1, which is crafted for when police officers are going to take part in a specific criminal activity with regards to an ongoing specific investigation. I think that's the big difference, and that's why we would be strong supporters of leaving the exemption in the act for law enforcement.
