I haven't seen any such cases.
Some people believe that because it's labelled a science it's black and white, easy to understand, right or wrong. It isn't like that. If it were, we wouldn't have the MAPLE issue. The MAPLE problem was that they couldn't understand the physics inside the core. That's why we're having this particular difficulty.
The tribunal, the staff, the proponent, the interveners—all of them bring different scientific perspectives to the table. We have a tribunal to take all of this into account in making a decision. They are probabilistic issues. We are talking about things that have a probabilistic outcome, and one has to make some judgment calls. This is a very long-winded way of telling you that, wherever possible, we take our staff into account and try to base our decisions on science.