Mr. Chair, one could actually argue and consider that what would be fair to interest-holders would be to have no period at all following conformation from the regulator that their well or works have been successfully abandoned or decommissioned. In trusting one's regulator, if a regulator says something has been successfully abandoned or decommissioned, one would think that an interest-holder should have a deposit returned to them because, as anyone knows, a company needs that cash flow desperately to continue their business.

With that said, then the question becomes: how long after something has been successfully abandoned or decommissioned should that be held? Certainly, any extensive period of time would be unfair because they have already successfully completed their work, and for any government to hold that or any regulator to hold that money for an extended period of time jeopardizes a company's ability to conduct their business. With that said, a one-year period seems reasonable based on other legislations at the federal level and can ensure that there is at least a little bit of time should there prove to be anything that did not go right with the abandonment. That is typically in the industry, if anything did not go right with the abandonment and was not picked up by the regulator at that time, it would happen sooner rather than later to catch any issues, and so that one year is sufficient. Thank you, Mr. Chair.