Page 198 - Neutrons for Sciences and Society

Neutrons for Science
The main object had been achieved; the renewal of the reactor was a success and had been completed strictly within the budget foreseen.
With hindsight one can pose questions on the length of the shutdown of the reactor. The cracks were observed in April 1991. It was not until November 1991 that the Steering Committee asked for a comparative study of the various options to resolve the problem. The replacement of the reactor vessel was decided in February 1992. By July 1994 the reassembly was finished and the reactor declared technically ready. A public inquiry necessary for the restart had begun during May, but the decree was only signed on 6 December. On 25 November 1993 the Steering Committee mentioned the slowness of administrative procedures, and expressed concern about subsequent delays for the restart. This has led to certain scientists thinking that the shutdown could have been reduced by a year. (I am aware of such criticisms from some ILL scientists.)
In reality things are not so simple. Even the idea of reconstruction was not obvious to the partners. The reactor shutdown had a destabilising effect when the partners were involved in developing the ESRF. Outside support for the ILL was severely affected. In Great Britain some (but not all) hoped to see the ILL closed, with the consequence of making ISIS, the spallation source in Britain, the only high flux source in Europe. The Germans had been stung by budget overruns of reactor work done at Jülich and Berlin. The means of the French partners were limited and they hesitated a while before supporting the renewal work demanded so urgently by the management. Finally
189