The reactor itself was designed and built in 1957 and has incredible margins. It's a very robust, very strong design. I can't tell you why that was; it's too far back in time. So the reactor itself was designed to the standards at that time.
What's important is that it's not a power reactor. What's happening in some of the dialogues, which is probably just natural, is power reactor standards are being interchanged with research reactor standards. This is a research reactor. It operates at low pressure and low temperature. It still has to be operated safely, and you still have to ensure it has the proper margins, but we need to make sure we're talking about research reactor standards and not power reactor standards in some of these discussions.
To answer your question directly, would it meet today's standards for a research reactor if it were being constructed today? It would not, but that's not uncommon. During the life cycle of any nuclear facility, standards change.
Let me give you an example. I drive a vehicle that doesn't have side airbags. When I was a kid, I rode in a vehicle that didn't have seat belts, which probably gives you an indication of my age. So over the progression of the auto industry, we've gone to seat belts and then we went to driver side airbags and then we went to passenger side airbags as well, and now you can buy vehicles with side curtain airbags.
Safety standards are always being increased, but we don't retire vehicles that don't have side curtain airbags. I still drive one, and my guess is that many of us in the room do.
So that's the way to try to rationalize these safety system upgrades. The industry is always elevating the bar and always trying to take the technology to the safest possible level.