Canadian Neutron Source and materials research back on national S&T priority list

The proposal to build a new Canadian Neutron Facility (CNF) for materials research is once again moving up the national science agenda. Backers of the proposal are biding their time until the new Paul Martin Cabinet is installed before mounting a serious push for $466 million in funding. That likely precludes it from consideration in the next federal Budget, expected in February or March of of 2004.

The CNF proposal and previous incarnations have been on the books for 10 years. But after a concerted effort to secure funding between 1998 and 2001 failed, the project was considered all but dead. Continued interest from the materials research community lead by the National Research Council (NRC) and Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd (AECL), feel the time may be right for another shot at the funding can.

“It’s got some life. We’re waiting to position it but there’s a little bit of flex time right now. We want to place it alongside the synchrotron light source and TRIUMF as part of the nation’s scientific infrastructure,” says Dr Walter Davidson, NRC’s director of national facilities. “We can do some preparation on the proposal but the action starts when the Martin government is installed and the new Cabinet is in place.”

Renewed interest in the facility comes at a time when AECL has applied to renew its operating licence for its NRU reactor for another two years until 2007. Sources tell RE$EARCH MONEY that AECL intends to continue reapplying for operating extensions until 2012, allowing for enough time to build the CNF. The extensions would also serve to avoid what’s been called a neutron gap — the time between the decommissioning of the NRU and construction a new facility. Any significant gap between the two will result in the suspension of ongoing research programs and the loss of valuable scientific expertise to jurisdictions with viable facilities.

The existing NRU reactor at AECL’s Chalk River Laboratories in Chalk River ON is 46 years old and is scheduled for decommissioning by the end of 2005. It’s estimated that it will take six years to complete construction of the CNF and receive the necessary operating approvals. In recent months, AECL has spent $33 million in hardware upgrades and safety analyses to maintain the NRU.

AECL’s interest in the CNF, which lagged in recent years, is now on the upswing as it is considered an essential ingredient for the testing of its next-generation advanced CANDU reactor. Earlier this year, Paul Fehrenbach, AECL ‘s chief operating officer for nuclear laboratories, outlined the importance of the CNF during public hearings of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) — formerly Atomic Energy Control Board — in Chalk River earlier this year.

“It is AECL’s intention to reach an agreement with the CNSC on the work scope to demonstrate that NRU is licensable beyond 2005. Continued operation of the NRu reactor is driven by the development requirements of the advanced CANDU reactor, public policies and specialty isotope production,” stated Fehrenbach. “Today is a very important day for AECL because our team has the opportunity to demonstrate clearly to the Commission that the Chalk River site and all its facilities have been operating remarkably well during the licensing period. We believe that this performance supports our request for renewal of our operating licence to October 2007.”

A CNSC ruling on the NRU extension is pending.

In the meantime, NRC will continue to argue for the CNF as a crucial component of Canadian materials research infrastructure. Materials research has been identified by Industry Canada as one of three building blocks for Canadian S&T, along with information technology and biotechnology.

“It’s a big ticket item, but if you commit to it, build it and operate it for 40 years, it will have operating costs of about $60-70 million a year,” says Davidson. “That’s about one per cent of federal S&T outlays and for that we get world-class, versatile, frontline materials research capability for the nation, coast to coast.”

CNF RAISED IN HOUSE

The CNF was recently the focus of debate in the House of Commons, when Canadian Alliance MP accused the government of spending $15 million to send Canadian materials researchers to use the US Spallation Neutron Source (SNS) in Oak Ridge TN. The money would not have been spent, she argued, if the CNF had been approved.

Research conducted on the SNS cannot be replicated on the NRU or proposed CNF. The SNS is a pulse neutron source whereas the NRU and CNF are steady state neutron sources. Gallant was referring to an award made under the Canada Foundation for Innovation’s International Access Fund to McMaster Univ to provide researchers beamline time on the SNS (R$, July 8/02). The CFI is an arm’s length agency and its funding decisions are made independent of the federal government.

Previous articles on the CNF can be found in: R$, November 18/98, October 2/00 and January 23/02).

R$