I would tend to think that BC as an attorney licensed in Canada and the US is on top of this and has reviewed this as well and it is probably a non issue. This does not mean that opposing legal arguments can not be made but I have confidence that BC would not risk his intended growing operations on being wrong in an "adding value" regulation. IMO, this is not a real concern but could possibly be a political play raised by counsel as an opposing argument seeking clarification. I am not an attorney so If there are any attorneys on the board that would like to add to this your input is appreciated.