• 5. Heat transfer, problems of power generation.
• 6. Instrumentation; detectors, controllers, recorders.
• 7. Production of short-lived isotopes for tracer work.
• 8. Irradiation of biological specimens and materials.
• 9. Remote mechanical manipulation of chemicals.
• 10. Physics of radiations; diffraction in crystals; nuclear reactions,
  threshold energies, cross-sections.

It is recognized, of course, that adequate attack on many problems
in these fields can only be made with reactors providing much higher
levels of radiation. It is equally true, however, that there are many
problems in each of these categories which can be investigated with the
radiation available from the modest reactor proposed. Every effort
will be made to restrict the investigations and operation of the reactor
to unclassified problems. But despite the limitations to unclassified
problems and the relatively low radiation level available, the quantity
and potential importance, both academically and practically, of researches
available for investigation with the proposed reactor should not be under
estimated.

The proposed reactor consists of a few essential parts and a small
number of auxiliary systems. A diagrammatic sketch is rendn in
figure 1.

The bulk of the reactor assembly will consist of a single massive
block of concrete, cylindrical in shape, 30 feet high and 25 or 30 feet in
diameter, (depending on results of detailed shielding calculations). A
vertical, coaxial cylindrical hole, 4 feet in diameter, will be left in the
center of the concrete cylinder; and in the base of the concrete cylinder,
an opening 15 or 20 feet in diameter and 8 feet high will also be left.
The reactor proper, its reflector, some shielding if space permits, the
control and safety rods, and other auxiliary systems will be mounted in-
side the vertical cylindrical opening at the center of the concrete block.
The top of the cylindrical opening will be covered by slabs of concrete,
which can be added or removed by an overhead crane.

For physical security of the fuel system, the reinforced concrete
slabs on top will be held in position by concealed bolts extending verti-
cally through the shield and terminating in the room in the base of the
concrete structure. These slabs cannot be removed until the bolts are
unscrewed from the room below.

The room left in the base of the structure, called the Vault Room,
can be entered through only one opening. This is protected by a heavy
vault door, and a massive concrete plug which can be moved aside on a
motor driven track. The fuel system is built into the concrete in such
fashion that any access whatever is prohibited except through the Vault
Room in the base of the concrete and the 4-foot opening at the top. The
latter may be entered only after bolts holding the reinforced slab are
released from below. Hence, as security against theft, the fissionable
material is protected on all sides either by reinforced concrete or a
massive vault door behind a huge concrete plug.

1. The fuel system.

A totally enclosed solution-containing system is visualized.
The solution will normally be stored, when not in use in a large,
flat, inverted conical-shaped vessel of stainless steel imbedded
in the concrete shielding. A pipe will extend upward from the
storage vessel, through a valve, to the spherical reactor. Rub-
ber balloons inside a pneumatic pressure chamber, connected to
the storage vessel, will provide the mechanism for forcing the
solution up into the reactor.

Figure One: Schematic Diagram of the Reactor
Shield is cylinder of concrete, 30 feet in diameter, 30 feet high, with
vertical 4 foot coaxial hole and hollowed out base. Reactor, Reflector, control
mechanism, and auxiliary systems are housed in the central coaxial cylindri-
cal cavity. Base cavity, closed by heavy vault door, provides only access to
Reactor System; room used for solution processing, radiation exposure, and
Special experiments. Top covered by concrete slabs. Mobile (on wheels)
Concrete plugs in vault door, end of thermal column, and under reactor.

The reactor will be provided with a cooling coil and a one-
inch re-entrant passageway through which samples to be exposed
may be passed. From the reactor, a tube will extend up into an
overflow "bubble" trap and from this another tube will extend up-
ward to a large balloon which will expand and contract as fuel is
forced into or out of the reactor.

A short pipe, projecting from the lowest point of the flat,
conical storage vessel into the Vault Room in the base of the
assembly, provided with valves and connection flanges for at-
taching transportation fuel cylinders, sample tubes, refill
vessels, etc., will be used for addition or removal of solution.

The fuel system will be made entirely of stainless steel,
with all-welded connections. All tubes or vessels of the system
will be embedded in channels in the concrete shielding, except the
one tube extending into the Vault Room in the base of the assembly.

2. Reflector.

Around the reactor, a reflector of 20 inches or so in thick-
ness, composed of suitable neutron reflector materials will be
provided. A horizontal cylindrical passage through the reflec-
tor (and through the surrounding shielding), perhaps 3 inches in
diameter, tangent to the surface of the reactor, through which
exposure samples may be passed, will be arranged. Horizontal
passage for samples to the re-entrant hole in the reactor will
also be provided, as well as vertical passages near the reactor
in which control and safety rods will move. The nature
of the reflector material will be decided later.

3. Shielding.

The massive concrete block of the reactor assembly will
provide 10 to 12 feet of concrete around the sides of the reactor.
Slabs may be placed on top to any desired thickness. Underneath
the reactor, if desired, layers of concrete totaling 4-5 feet, may
be moved horizontally by motor-drives to close the central ver-
tical shaft immediately under the reflector, to provide shielding
for the room below, For certain experiments, it may be desirable
to withdraw the concrete layers to provide unshielded radiation
to the room below. The walls of the Vault Room will be 5 feet
thick, and a slab of reinforced concrete will serve as the floor.

Various channels and passages through the concrete will be
so arranged as to leave ample external shielding, and will be de-
signed to minimize the amount of scattered radiation.

4. Thermal column.

Adjacent to one side of the reflector and extending hori-
zontally outward for 5 or so feet, will be a column of graphite,
3 feet in diameter, for "thermalizing" neutrons. At the exterior
face of this column, a 3-foot beam of slow neutrons, about 106 or
107/cm2, will be available for experimental purposes. When not
in use, the column will be shielded by a 5-foot plug of concrete,
arranged to move in or out on a motor driven track.

5. Control and Safety Features.

Inasmuch as this reactor will be used on a university campus,
(even through at a somewhat remote point), extraordinary attention
will be given to safety and control mechanisms. Unusually thick
shielding will be provided. Several independent safety rods, ar-
ranged to fall by gravity under predetermined conditions, will be
provided. Rapid addition of solution or rapid removal of control
rods, resulting in fast increases in reactivity, will be made im-
possible by design of the mechanism, and will be further guarded
against by meters automatically set to release safety rods if pre-
set rates of increase are exceeded. Rapid automatic release of
the fuel from the reflector-enclosed reactor to the unreflected,
geometrically safe storage vessel, in case pre-set neutron levels
are exceeded, is being incorporated in the design.

6. Cooling system.

A small copper tube, e.g., 1/2 inch, forming a water-carrying
system extending from outside the concrete shielding through welded
junctions into the reactor and out again, will constitute the cooling
system. If further calculations rend that disposal of the cooling
water will become a problem because of induced radioactivity, a
recirculating system, with a small specially designed pump, may
need to be included in the design.

7. Fuel required: Power level.

According to Dr. Christy's estimates in MDDC-72, about
1 kilogram of enriched U-235, more or less depending on the reflec-
tor used, in water solution, as nitrate or sulfate, is needed for
operation of a water boiler. The proposed reactor is intended for
operation at a maximum power level of about 5 KW. This should
be easily amenable to control and operation, and should provide
adequate radiation levels for its anticipated use. A reactor of
this size should yield an internal flux of about 1011 , and a flux
of 107 thermal neutrons per cm2 per sec. at the face of the graphite
column (MDDC - 72).

The fission of 1 gram of U-235 should provide 1000 Kilowatt
days of power. With the reactor operating at 5 KW output, 1 gram
of U-235 should provide 200 days of continuous operation. The
reactor, on the average, probably will not operate at maximum
level more than five out of each twenty-four hours. Therefore,
fission of one gram should require several years.

This would mean that addition of fuel or re-processing of fuel
for removal of fission products should have to be done very
rarely. When this does become necessary, provisions are incor-
porated in the design for withdrawal of the fuel into shielded con-
tainers. The solution could then be shipped back to Oak Ridge and
there re-processed or exchanged for a new supply.

8. Instrumentation, Control panel.

It is intended that a clear area 15 to 30 feet wide be main-
tained on all sides of the reactor in order to provide maximum
accessibility and flexibility in use of auxiliary equipment. The
operating-control panel will be located to one side of the reactor,
and so arranged that all necessary instruments for operation
and control will be within easy reach of one operator. The op-
erator will have no other duties than those involved in operating
the control mechanism. Manipulation of auxiliary experimental
equipment, etc., will be the responsibility of other persons, and
controls, meters, etc., associated with experiments will be com-
pletely separate and removed from the reactor control panel.
The key instruments on the control panel will be equipped with
indicating meters, either audible or visual or both, and with
automatic recording mechanisms for providing permanent rec-
ords. At the rear of the control panel, on the side fartherest from
the reactor, a small demonstration classroom for 50 or so stu-
dents, with elevated tiers of seats, is intended.

9. A Building for the Reactor.

There is on the State College campus a building excellently
adaptable as the reactor site. (Fig. 2). This building, 52 feet
wide, 102 feet long and 55 feet high, was constructed during the
war by the Bureau of Mines for use in blast furnace research
investigation, but was not used for this purpose. The 20 feet
nearest the front of the building is arranged with four floors of
offices, work rooms, and laboratories. The remaining portion
of the interior at street level is in the form of a single huge
(52' x 82') work area, with no partitions, at 10 feet above base-
ment level. The terrain contour permits a truck driveway en-
trance to the first floor level on one side of the building, and to
the basement level on the other side.

Figure Two: Bureau of Mines Building, State College Campus

Figure Three: Interior of Bureau of Mines Building

Figure 2 rends a portion of the furnace area inside the
building. The steel-beam roof supports (not visible) are 45
feet above the floor. Provisions are incorporated for an over-
head crane in this area. Toward the right side of the floor area,
through an opening in the floor, a portion of the basement may
be seen.

At the rear center of the building a large stack, originally
intended for furnace exhaust, is located. (Figs. [1, 2,]). This
stack, extending some 40 feet above the roof of the building,
would provide an excellent means for dispersal into the atmos-
phere of small amounts of undesirable gases which might de-
velop in the reactor work.

The Bureau of Mines Building is located on one edge of the
engineering and agricultural quadrangle of the campus. The Sea-
board Railroad tracks lie 100 feet to the rear of the building.
Across the street on the east side of the building lies the site on
which is now being erected the new Mechanical Engineering Build-
ing. Next, beyond the Mechanical Engineering Building lies the
Zoology Building, then the new Engineering Research Building,
and the Physics Building.

In preliminary conferences, there have developed promising
indications that the Bureau of Mines will be willing to permit use
of their building for the reactor site. Bureau officials have, in
fact, expressed an interest in arranging a program of joint par-
ticipation with State College in nuclear researches in metallurgy
which might involve use of the reactor as a tool. Both the possi-
bilities of a joint program and use of the building as a reactor
site are being explored further.

The Bureau of Mines Building, though ideally suited to house
the reactor, cannot provide adequate space for the sample pre-
paration rooms, counting rooms, radio-chemical synthesis and
analysis laboratories, which should accompany the reactor. Some
of these, of course, could be located in the building, but more
space, in an added wing or in a separate, adjacent building should
be provided.

1. General.

North Carolina State College is located at Raleigh, North Caro-
lina, the capital of the state. The University of North Carolina, at
Chapel Hill, and Duke University at Durham, are 25 and 20 miles,
respectively, from Raleigh. The fast growing new University Medi-
cal School is at Chapel Hill, the famous Duke Medical School is at
Durham, and the widely-known medical school of Wake Forest is
at Winston-Salem. All these, as well as numerous other institu-
tions in the nearby area, would be expected to participate in the
benefits of the proposed reactor.

Broad technical curricula in three major divisions and
several smaller divisions of North Carolina State College are
offered the 5000 students. The major divisions are: School of
Textiles, recognized as one of the leading textile schools in the
nation; School of Agriculture, one of the largest and most pro-
gressive in the south; and the School of Engineering, which in
the last 4 years has experienced remarkable expansion and im-
provement in personnel and curriculum. The departments of
chemical, civil, electrical, ceramic, metallurgical and mechan-
ical engineering, which will participate directly in the Nuclear
Engineering and Reactor programs, are particularly strong.

The Physics Department, until recently, has had a staff of
some 18 - 20, engaged primarily in service instruction of students
in other fields on undergraduate levels, with little attention being
given to advanced instruction and research. The department is
now committed to a policy of expansion at advanced levels and to
an emphasis on research, with the double objective of (1) provid-
ing sound instructional support of advanced programs in other
fields and (2) offering a curriculum leading to Ph.D. training in
Engineering Physics and Nuclear Engineering. A number of men
with advanced training will be added to the staff as rapidly as
they can be procured.

The Chemistry Department, under a new department head, is
in sound condition, with staff and curriculum adequate for train-
ing of men to the Ph.D. level.

The Research Engineering Department of the School of Engi-
neering is a rather unique and quite successful venture into the
somewhat unstandardized field of relationship between a state's
technical college and the industries of the state, The department
devotes its attention solely to research and development projects,

most of which are directly involved in industrial or governmen-
tal activities and operations. The department is supported partly
by college subsidy and partly by the industries interested in the
research projects. Very close coordination and liaison is main-
tained between the work of the Research Department and the re-
searches of the other departments. Exchange of personnel and
joint usage of equipment is encouraged.

2. Coordination between departments.

One item worthy of particular mention is the usual extent
of coordination and mutual assistance between individual depart-
ments of the Engineering School, in furtherance of the over-all
goals of instruction and research. Whether or not the proposed
reactor is built, for example, a considerable portion of instruc-
tion in the Nuclear Engineering program, which will be the pri-
mary responsibility of the physics department, will be obtained
by the student from courses in the chemical, electrical, metal-
lurgical, and mechanical engineering departments. Much of the
research program to be instituted by the Physics Department
will have mutual interest for other departments and a number
of projects will be joint undertakings with other departments.

The combined interest, and the availability of equipment and
personnel from all departments concerned constitutes a tremen-
dous asset to the proposed reactor program, and greatly enhances
the prospects of success for the program. The reactor program,
in turn, would be expected to increase the coordination and co-
operation between the various departments.

3. Interests in radioactivity.

Numerous shipments of radioactive isotopes have been ob-
tained by State College research teams from the Atomic Energy
Commission. A number of experiments, principally in the School
of Agriculture, are now underway. Many more experiments are
under consideration, but are being hampered by the lack of
trained personnel. There is a large and growing demand for
training facilities in radioactive tracer technology. It is intend-
ed that instruction in this field be initiated as soon as possible,
whether the proposed reactor program is approved at once or
not.

Approval of the reactor proposal would lend enhanced in-
terest to this field, would permit the curriculum content and
laboratory location to crystallize in accord with requirements
which will exist when reactor operation begins, and would as-
sure availability for research purposes in the laboratories of

the area a variety of materials and facilities not now available.

4. Buildings.

A major expansion in physical facilities at State College is
in progress. Altogether, some 18 or 20 million dollars have
been allocated for new buildings. A number of departments will
have entirely new quarters, and others will have considerably
enlarged space. A large new building intended to house Chemi-
cal Engineering, Research Engineering, and a portion of the re-
search and advanced laboratory activities of other departments
will be completed about April, 1950. This will be followed by a
new Mechanical Engineering building and addition of two floors
onto the Civil Engineering building and a 4 story wing adjacent
to the Electrical Engineering building, A new library is author-
ized, as well as 4 to 6 new buildings for the School of Agricul-
ture.

Plans for adequate equipment for the new buildings (e.g.,
electron microscope, x-ray machines, etc.) are included in the
construction program.

5. Personnel.

A considerable list could be given of persons on the State
College staff with excellent training and ability who would be
available for assistance and participation in the reactor design,
construction, operation and research.

Dr. Arthur C. Menius, Jr., theoretical physicist, has
had extensive experience in electron microscopy, x-
ray research, and (during the war at the Applied Phys-
ics Laboratory of Johns Hopkins University) on proximity
fuse research. He has made significant contributions
to calculations and design study of the proposed reactor,
and will play an important role in the use of the reactor.

Dr. Arthur Waltner, experimental physicist, has ex-
cellent training and experience in nuclear physics and
design of electronic apparatus. His assistance in in-
strumentation for the reactor and his participation in
the subsequent nuclear research program should be
quite significant.

Dr. Nathan Hall, chemist, has now in process a number
of experiments involving use of isotopes from Oak
Ridge, He attended the training school in Radioactive
Tracer Techniques of the Oak Ridge Institute for Nuclear

Studies, and participated in research problems involv-
ing active materials at Beltsville, Maryland, and at other
places. Dr. Hall will be expected to participate strongly
in research projects involving the reactor.

Dr. Philip Pike, chemical engineer, has made significant
contributions in research on various chemical engineer-
ing problems at North Carolina State College. He is now
(spring and summer, 1950) at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, be-
ing indoctrinated in the practices and techniques relating
to radioactive materials. Upon his return he will continue
his researches on chemical engineering problems, with
the use of active ingredients as tools in the investigation.

Dr. J. H. Jensen, plant pathologist, is widely recognized
for his researches in plant pathology. He spent one and
one half years as chief of the Biology Branch of the Atomic
Energy Commission's Division of Biology and Medicine,
and still continues as a consultant to this division. He is
also serving as chairman of the subcommittee on Waste
Disposal and Decontamination in the Bureau of Standards.
In the fall of 1949 he returned to full time work as profes-
sor and head of the plant pathology department of State
College. He is extremely interested in the proposed re-
actor and will make extensive use of its radiation in his
researches.

Dr. A. G. Guy, metallurgist, had 3 years experience in
research with the General Electric Company, on Pre-
cipitation Hardening Studies and High Temperature Alloys,
before joining the mechanical engineering department of
North Carolina State College. He is now studying metallic
diffusion, and plans to use radioactive atoms in this study.
His use of the reactor is expected to be considerable.

Dr. E. M. Schoenborn, professor and head, chemical
engineering department, is keenly interested in the re-
search and educational possibilities of the reactor. He
is an unusually productive research scientist, with a val-
uable background of collaborating and consulting exper-
ience with such industrial organizations as Pratt and
Whitney, Synthetic Rubber, the Koppers Company, etc.,
on problems of fluid flow, distillation, heat transfer and
production of plastics. Dr. Schoenborn is interested in
continuing his researches, with the use of radiation and
radioactive materials as tools in securing information
which otherwise would not be accessible.

There are numerous other members of the college staff who
would participate significantly in the research program involving
the reactor. The above named constitute a fair sampling from
various departments of State College. No attempt can be made
here to list the various individuals at other institutions who
would make effective use of the reactor in their research pro-
jects. Leaders in several groups have expressed unusually keen
interest in the success of the effort to obtain a reactor at State
College. Among these are: Dr. Paul Shearin, professor and
chairman of the Physics Department of the University of North
Carolina; Dr. Walter M. Nielsen, professor and chairman of the
Physics Department of Duke University; Dr. Arthur Roe, direc-
tor of the radiochemical laboratory at the University of North
Carolina, and Dr. Van Cleave, who is the leader in the radioac-
tivity research program of the medical school of the University
of North Carolina.

In the final analysis, however, it is recognized that responsi-
bility for the reactor program and the safety and security of the
personnel (and the fissionable material) must be entrusted to per-
sons who have had training and experience in the actual operation
and behavior of nuclear reactors. Final approval of the design
and the safety of the reactor, of course, will be given by the Com-
mission experts, who it is hoped, will also be available during
subsequent operation for consultation and advice. But for oper-
ation and day to day decisions, there should be at least a few key
men who have had first-hand experience in reactor behavior.

The experienced persons who will be available to the re-
actor program at North Carolina State College are:

Dr. Clifford K. Beck, formerly Director of Research for
Carbide and Carbon Chemicals Corporation at the K-25
laboratories in Oak Ridge, and currently Head of the
Physics Department of State College. Dr. Beck has had
wide general contacts with the various reactors on the
commission, and in addition has had specific experience
in two fields directly related to the proposed reactor
program: (1) for 3 years he was chairman of the Special
Hazards Committee of the K-25 Plant, with primary re-
sponsibility for safety of the plant from inadvertent ac-
cumulations of fissionable material in reactive quantities.
(2) For 3 years, Dr. Beck was the leader and personally
responsible director of a uranium criticality research
team which brought to a chain-reacting condition more
individual assemblies of uranium than any other known
group. Dr. Beck and his team spent 3 months at Los

Alamos in 1946 being trained in this work, and from that
time to September 1949 was continuously engaged in
studies of critical accumulations of uranium under a
variety of conditions.

He is now an active consultant on criticality prob-
lems to the K-25 plant at Oak Ridge and to the Atomic
Energy Commission at Hanford, Washington, and is also
a Responsible Reviewer for the Commission, involved
in information declassification activities.

Dr. Raymond L. Murray, presently completing require-
ments for the Ph.D. degree in the University of Tennessee
program at Oak Ridge, will join the Physics staff at State
College in the summer of 1950. He has had three years of
direct experience in performing critical experiments on
uranium compounds, in theoretical calculations, and in
responsibility for the Special Hazards program at the
Electromagnetic Separation plant at Oak Ridge. His total
experience of 6 years at Oak Ridge includes a large amount
of theoretical and experimental research on ionization and
behavior of ions, mass-spectrographs, and cyclotron de-
sign.

At least one additional man with considerable experience in
criticality work, of at least Master's degree training, will be em-
ployed by State College to assist in the operation of the reactor.

Additional men in the vicinity of Raleigh possessing valuable
background experience in theoretical and experimental association
with reactor problems, who have expressed a willingness to render
assistance with the reactor as needed are, Dr. Eugene T. Greuling,
theoretical physicist, with experience at Los Alamos and Oak Ridge;
Dr. L. Nordheim, wartime director of the theoretical physics di-
vision at Oak Ridge, and Dr. Henry Newson, experimental physicist,
who engaged in critical experiments at Oak Ridge and Los Alamos.
These three are from Duke.

Tentative thought has been given to the possibility of organiz-
ing a Steering Committee of experienced reactor men in the vicinity
or Raleigh, for the purpose of periodic scrutiny and guidance of the
operation of the reactor and research program.

1. Physical Security of Fissionable Material.

By using a totally closed fuel system, with all-welded stain-
less steel construction, and totally enclosing the system inside
of reinforced concrete, with the only access to the system being
a massive vault door covered with a large plug of concrete, it
is hoped that a large portion of the security requirements of the
Commission can be met. Necessary alteration or supplementa-
tion of the watchman policy of the college, if needed can be worked
out in consultation with A. E. C. representatives.

2. Safety of Personnel

Research in the physics department of almost any modern
university involves use of high voltage, x-rays, highly com-
pressed gases, cyclotrons, etc. Hazards and potential hazards
are encountered in every increasing numbers. To these, which
have become somewhat familiar, one must now add the simul-
taneously glamorous but sinister hazard of radioactivity and re-
actor radiations. These hazards, however, like all others, can
be avoided by adequate safety training, insistence on approved
technique, and where possible, built-in, fool-proof automatic
safety features in the equipment itself.

Unusual attention will be given to safety features in the re-
actor design. Large margins of safety will be incorporated in
the design, to the extent that even possible accidents involving
uncontrolled increases in radiation, will not result in serious
exposure of personnel. In addition thereto, incorporating safety
consciousness in the basic techniques will be stressed as part
of the general training of all participants in nuclear engineering.

3. Classified Information.

It is intended that the operation and uses of the reactor be
kept entirely in the field of unclassified research. Part of the
design of the machine, certain features of its operation, and in-
advertent information encountered in its use, however, may
fall into classified categories. It is proposed, therefore, that
the staff directly concerned with the design and operation of
the machine,. and such others as later appears desirable, be
cleared by the Atomic Energy Commission for access to clas-
sified information. Training will be given these men as to the
boundaries of classified information, and those areas of know-
ledge which must be safeguarded. Should restricted information
of interest be encountered in reactor operation or use, such in-
formation will be processed through regular Atomic Energy

Commission channels.

Dr. Beck has been for several years a Responsible Re-
viewer for the Commission, with responsibility for rendering
decisions according to Commission policy on information
which may be released to the public, and he will continue to
serve in this capacity under consultant contract. Up-to-date
information, therefore, will be available at all time on Com-
mission policy on unclassified areas of research.

4. Safe Operation.

The Atomic Energy Commission and, of course, the ad-
ministration of State College will have vital concern that the
reactor should never exceed safe operating limits at any time.
On the project, numerous reactors have operated in safety for
several years. Two factors are essential: (1) sound design
of the equipment and (2) operation by dependable, experienced,
personnel. Before final approval of the reactor design or
initial operation, both the A. E. C. and State College should
be satisfied that both these requirements are adequately met.

5. Finances.

If approval is given by the Atomic Energy Commission for
the reactor to be constructed, it is believed that State College
will be able to supply the necessary financial support. It is
requested, however, that provision be made in the contract
for such instrumentation relating to the reactor as may be
available in Atomic Energy Commission surplus stocks, to be
made available to State College. The Commission may wish
to contribute a share of the cost of such projects as may be
specifically performed for the benefit of the Commission. It
is suggested that the Commission underwrite the cost of any
guard system considered necessary for the physical security
of the fissionable material, beyond that normally provided by
the College watchman system and the built-in safeguards of
the assembly.

If the overall idea, that a low-power nuclear reactor along the lines
described above can be built and operated on a university campus as a
tool for instruction and research in Nuclear Engineering, is compatible
with the policy of the Atomic Energy Commission, and if approval is
given the proposal to design and build such a reactor at North Carolina
State College, a rough time schedule of operations and an approximate
estimation of costs can be conjectured. The minimum time requirements
are listed below. Somewhat longer time schedules may actually be
realized.

April 1950 - Submission of initial proposal to the Commission,
followed by conferences, discussions, etc.

May 1950 - Approval by the Commission; establishment of
lines of contact between the A. E. C. and N. C.
State College; initiation of F.B.I. clearance of
staff.

June - August
1950 - Theoretical calculations, crystallization of re-
actor design, auxiliary systems, preparation of
blueprints. Close contact and coordination with
A. E. C. groups, Construction or alteration of
buildings.

September 1950 - Construction and assembly of the reactor;
to January 1951 "dry" runs.

January 1951 - Delivery of Fissionable material from A. E. C.

February 1, 1951 - Initial operation of the Reactor.

The cost involved in constructing and equipping the reactor are
difficult to estimate. The numbers quoted below are believed to be of
the correct order of magnitude,

• 1. Alteration of building, installation of overhead crane, excavation for reactor foundation, partitions, etc.	$30,000
  2. Reactor construction; 700 cu. yds. concrete @ $30., including foundation, forms for holes and channels	30,000
  3. Vault door and motor-driven carriages for concrete plugs	15,000
  4. Fuel solution system, control rods, fitting the re- flector, thermal column (4 cu. yds. graphite), etc.	20,000
  5. Instrumentation, control panel. detectors, ampli- fiers recorders, thermocouples, gauges, solution level indicators, (some of this may be available as surplus from A. E. C. Labs)	30,000
  6. Contingencies; travel, consultant fees, supervision	25,000
  	$150,000

(Auxiliary counting rooms, tracer laboratories, sample
preparation and purification facilities, etc., are not included).