So the shift is what is interesting, I guess. If it is a reliable model and 3 years later you have to adjust it 50 percent, it causes all of us to raise our hand and say, Why is th...
But it is a pretty significant input.
Did you set an actual date like that?
I would suggest those kind of dates are necessary so that every agency sees the deadlines that are coming.
So back to the 7 percent versus 5 percent decision on social cost of carbon, can you help us understand how that decision was made?
But the position has been that there has to be some kind of cost-benefit analysis.
But if the benefits are not for 20 years or for 30 years, I think that is the heart of Senator Enzi's question.
Right, but I am trying to get back to this 20-year amount that you say is what is typical.
It is an estimate, correct.
I have a company in Oklahoma that did not turn in their form to say they do not have any conflict minerals.
OIRA has a responsibility to be able to work with the agencies to say, This regulation that you are proposing has an effect or is connected ...