Natural Resources committee  Thank you for the question. As I mentioned earlier, the MAPLE reactors are awaiting approval from the CNSC to do what we're calling the “400 series” testing. That's intended to identify the contributors to the positive power coefficient of reactivity. We believe, based on our an

Natural Resources committee  There was no process that we went through. One of our concerns is that we weren't given an opportunity to table our case for why we still were within the licensing basis of the facility.

Natural Resources committee  In terms of the total operations of the site--so think of revenue in that respect--it's over a $300 million operation.

Natural Resources committee  It would be less than 10%. We can provide the committee with detailed information. We're pleased to do that, but it's over $300 million to operate the site.

Natural Resources committee  We believe this did not have to happen. It's a matter of record that CNSC staff have acknowledged the improvements that have been going on at the site. It's a matter of record that the facility was operated safely up until the time of this situation. We believe that if the CNSC h

Natural Resources committee  Thank you for the question, but you know, I'm in a position where I can't enlighten you because I don't fully understand it.

Natural Resources committee  No, the process was not followed. We were not given an opportunity to present our case, to properly research our case, and to put our case in front of the commission.

Natural Resources committee  Thank you for the question. I have said a number of times that the people who are part of my team are among the very best in this industry. I have great respect for them and try to give them strong leadership. On the MAPLE reactors, there is a lot of history there. We want to u

Natural Resources committee  Let me start with the question on the cost of the upgrades. I think it's important to note that the genesis of these upgrades was in the early 1990s. Through the 1990s these upgrades were being worked on. The site was chronically underfunded during that period of time--that's a m

Natural Resources committee  I really can't comment on why they wouldn't have noticed it earlier. We provide full open access. We work closely with CNSC staff. I really can't provide you with any insight into the time involved.

Natural Resources committee  The correspondence back and forth between us and the commission, as I've mentioned earlier, clearly articulated that the connections were not made. The discussions of concern, where they started to express concern, started in mid-November.

Natural Resources committee  Thank you for the question. It would be in the $30 million range for medical isotopes.

Natural Resources committee  It is a significant amount of money. As I said, there is a lot of history in terms of the relationship with MDS Nordion. I don't want to go into a lot of detail, because the relationship and AECL's role and relationship go back many years now.

Natural Resources committee  But what I would say to you is that if you're leading to the question of whether I was driven by money, the medical isotope stream for me, as it was set up, as I inherited it, is not a particularly profitable stream. So it was not a money-driven question.

Natural Resources committee  You've asked a number of questions there, so I may not be able to keep the answers short. The letter I believe you were referring to was not written by me; it was written by Dr. Torgerson. It was intended to try to move us toward a one-pump start-up solution. By the time we got