Erin Kane
Analyst · CL King. Please go ahead
Sure. So one may ask us as you may be trying to potentially procure, is why couldn't we manage some of these programs within our sort of our base CapEx framework, right? And - and we could, but then we would then need to sacrifice the ongoing, I would say, sustaining replacement maintenance at some of our sites, right? Because these are larger projects in nature, they are lumpier in scale. And so when you think about enterprise risk, we think about supply chain risk, we think about climate risk, we think about cyber risk. We think of it - the totality of risk factors that we disclosed in our 10-K. Now when we think about these projects right now, we've got the dock, that dock at Frankfurt is the start of our entire value chain, right? And the length of service and its needs and it's a large project for the scale. And it's not a Frankfurt doc per se. It's an AdvanSix stock, right, that is necessary to maintain for the entirety of the system. Likewise, the boiler, this is a standard replacement maintenance boiler program that we would put into our base framework. And again, in our integrated value chain, this is a significant sort of switch to handling a critical utility at a key site that's moving forward. And again, because of the approach we took for adding rate redundancy and resiliency to a site, we put it in that category. But again, long-term compliance risk, one might think regulatory changes could fall into this. If you think back to when we spun, we did have a program that we would view as enterprise critical risk mitigation associated with our multiyear NOx reduction program, right? So these are the types of things that we feel are over and above what would be prudent to manage into and within our base $75 million sustaining maintenance CapEx for each - that manages the base of the business. Let me pause. I hope that helps a little bit.