Natural Resources committee  Theoretically I would say yes for somebody who uses the same fuel. The main driver fuel in the HANARO reactor is similar to that in MAPLE. It would not be a small matter: you'd have to do a complete new physics analysis, because you replace some of the normal fuel with this very specialized target fuel from which you harvest radioisotopes.

Natural Resources committee  I'm not quite sure I follow the question. Do you mean in terms of the degree of enrichment in the uranium?

Natural Resources committee  I can't speak for the CNSC, as they would make that decision. From a reactor safety point of view, you can operate a reactor with a small positive power coefficient. It's not the desirable method, but it can be done, and you can do it safely. What you have to do is slow down the way in which you move the rods so that you bring more control, or a very high level of control, into the system.

Natural Resources committee  That's correct.

Natural Resources committee  Yes, you can run it for quite some mileage. You know, the safety systems were upgraded in 2005 to meet modern standards. My understanding is that this morning CNSC and AECL were discussing what might be done to extend the life of the NRU reactor. My understanding is that the CNSC would follow the same route it follows in extending the lives of power reactors.

Natural Resources committee  In 2006 we considered the risk of not completing the job and not finding the problem. I don't think at that point we would have said it was a high risk, but it was definitely a risk. Thank you.

Natural Resources committee  Perhaps, Mr. Chairman, I could just—

Natural Resources committee  Even that, I would say, is not a complete guarantee. Obviously if you ensure with design of the fuel that you are well negative on your power coefficient, then you can stand quite a degree of uncertainty, because you're well negative—more than you can stand when you're just around the negative-positive boundary.

Natural Resources committee  One of the alternatives that are open to AECL is to redesign the fuel itself, as opposed to the targets, although the targets in fact contribute quite a bit to the power. When you design fuel, you can design it with certain power characteristics right up front, depending on how you make the fuel and what you put in it.

Natural Resources committee  Is it the last option? Yes, I would say it's probably the last option they have. The problem really is that even with new fuel there's still some combination of factors going on in that reactor that is not fully understood—which is a problem.

Natural Resources committee  Speaking for myself, sir, and the advisory panel of professors with whom I sit, who advise the board of directors of AECL, I think we came to the conclusion that there were some serious difficulties here probably around about 2006, when we did a detailed review of what had happened up till then and a detailed technical review of all that had gone on to that point.

Natural Resources committee  That's right. The tests that have been done have accounted for probably half the effect, but not the whole effect.

Natural Resources committee  To be precise, I said AECL wasn't satisfied. I suspect the CNSC wasn't satisfied either, but that's an assumption on my part. AECL themselves could clearly see from the tests that one of the factors they were assuming would be a cause of the problem has to do with the small amount of water around the outside of the core, between the fuel and the moderator.

Natural Resources committee  The problem has been that until you find the causes of the positive coefficient of reactivity, you will have a problem convincing the CNSC to give you a licence.

Natural Resources committee  I don't speak for AECL, but just for myself. It would seem to me that this was exactly the problem AECL had: how much money do we keep pouring in when we're not sure at this point, having seen the latest set of results, that we know what all the causes are? I guess that is indeed the problem that was faced by AECL's board of directors.