ML100820439

Letter from Reed College Continue Funding of Decommissioning Activities for Triga Mark I Research Reactor

ML100820439
Person / Time
Site:	Reed College
Issue date:	03/11/2010
From:	Diver C Reed College
To:	Dimeglio A Research and Test Reactors Branch B
References
TAC ME1583
Download: ML100820439 (13)

Text

REED COLLEGE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT 3203 Southeast Woodstock Boulevard March 11, 2010 Portland, Oregon 97202-8199 telephone A. Francis DiMeglio, Project Manager Research and Test Reactors Branch A 503/777-7500 Division of Policy and Rulemaking fax Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 503/777-7701 Washington, D.C. 20555-0001

Dear Mr. DiMeglio:

The purpose of this letter is to provide the Nuclear Regulatory Commission with assurance that Reed College will fund and carry out the required decommissioning activities for its TRIGA Mark I Research Reactor if and when this reactor is decommissioned. The cost estimate in 2010 is approximately $1 million.

Currently, we have no plans to decommission the reactor. Therefore, for purposes of planning, we are assuming that the reactor will continue to operate under a renewed license that will not expire until at least October 3, 2027. The College will continue to provide adequate annual funding for the safe operation of the reactor.

Sincerely, Colin S. Diver President cc: Stephen Frantz Peter Steinberger Edwin 0. McFarlane

RESTATED ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF THE REED INSTITUTE ARTICLE I The name assumed by this corporation and by which it shall be known is THE REED INSTITUTE, and its duration shall be unlimited.

ARTICLES II The object, business and pursuit of this corporation shall be:

a. To establish and maintain at the City of Portland in the State of Oregon, an institution of learning wherein shall be taught the principles of scientific, literary and classical education, with such departments of learning, galleries of art, natural and technical museums, appliances for manual training, and such other departments and appliances as the Trustees thereof, and their successors, may -from time to time prescribe.

b. To promote intellectual and moral culture; the development of the fine arts, and the diffusion of practical knowledge among the citizens of the City of Portland and of the State of Oregon, and especially deserving young men and women earning their own livelihood.

c. To take, receive, have, own, hold and sell or otherwise dispose of all the property of whatever nature or description by the Last Will and Testament of Amanda W. Reed, devised and bequeathed to the Trustees therein named, and their successors in said trust, and to manage, invest, and apply the same, or the proceeds of the sale thereof and the income therefrom arising in the manner and for the purposes in and by the said Will provided and specifically directed and as hereinbefore expressed.

d. To receive, own and hold, by gift, bequest, devise, grant or purchase, any real or personal property, and to mortgage, sell or otherwise dispose of the same for the benefit, uses or purposes of the corporation.

e. To acquire, construct, equip and maintain buildings and appurtenances necessary or convenient for the purposes aforesaid, and to do all other lawful things necessary to carry into effect the objects and purposes before enumerated.

ARTICLE III No Trustee of this corporation shall receive compensation for his or her services as such Trustee.

ARTICLE IV The property and business of the corporation shall be managed and controlled by a Board of Trustees. Thenumber, qualifications, and terms of office of members of the Board of Trustees shall be as specified in the bylaws of the corporation.

ARTICLE V The said The Reed Institute is and shall be located at the City of Portland, Multnomah County, State of Oregon.

ARTICLE VI No trustee or uncompenlsated officer shall be liable to the corporation or any of its members for monetary damages for conduct as a Trustee or*dfficer, provided-..

that this provision shall not.limit the.liability of a Trustee or officer for any, of the.

following:

a. Any act or omission occurring prior to the date when this Article becomes effective;

b. Any breach of the Trugtee or officer's duty of loyalty to the corporation;

c. Any act or omission not in good faith or which involves intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law;

d. Any;uiilwful-distribution;*

e. Any transaction from.whi.ch the Trustee or officer derived an improper personal benefit or;

f. Any act or omission in violation of the Trustee's conflict of interest provisions of ORS 65.361, the prohibitions on loans and guarantees in ORS 565.364, or the prohibitio ns against unlawful distributions in ORS 651367.

.. ARTICLE VII This corporation'is a public benefit corporation as defined in the Oregon Nonprofit Corporation Act.

ARTICLE VIII The corporatibn shall have no members.

ARTICLE IX Upon dissolution of this corporation, any assets remaining after the payment of all debts, claims and obligations shall be distributed only to such organizations as have been granted exemption from federal income tax, pursuant to the provisions of Section 501(c) (3) of the. Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended.

Restated October 3, 2009

2009-10 Reed College Trustees:

Mr. Konrad S. Alt Dr. Sh'eldon Hochheiser 104 Pala Avenue 435 Va'lentine-Street.

Piedmont, California 94611-3740 Highland Park, New Jersey 08904-2649 Mr. Matthew P. Bergman Ms. Linda G. Howard PO Box 2010. 340 E 9 3rd Street, Apt. 24J Vashon, Washingfon 980708628 'New York, New York 10128 28604 9 7 1h Avenue, SW.

Vashon, Washington 98070-8659 Mr.:George M. James 451 Guards Road Mr. Timothy Boyle Greenwich, Connecticut 06831-2666 President & CEO Columbia Sportswear'Companr.y Mr. Jeffrey L. Kenner" 14375 NW Science Park Drive President Portland, Oregon 97229-5418 Kenner & Company Inc.

437_Madison Avenue Ms. M. Jane Buchan New York, New York 10022 Chief Executive Officer Pacific Alternative Asset Mr: E. Randolph Labbe "

Management Company President ' ' -,*' :

19540 Jamboree Road, Suite 400 Kerr Pacific Corporation Irvine, California 92612 81, SW Naito Parkway, Suite 620 Portland, Oregon 97204 Mr. Alberto Cribiore Vice Chairman MS.':AnnA Hayes Levin Institutional Clients Group 30 W 6 0 " Street, Apt. 2A Citigroup, Inc. New York, New York 10023 388 Greenwich Street, 39thFloor New York, New York 1.0013 Ms. Jan R. Liss 1033 California Road Ms. Martha A. Darling Eastchester, New York 10709-1602 3340 E Dobson Place Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105 Mr. Alex J. Martinez 5395 S Logan Drive Ms. Suzan K. DelBene Littleton, Colorado. 80121-1213 3621 Evergreen Point Road PO Box 438 Michael R. Mercy MD Medina, Washington 98039 5724 N Dalspring Avenue Boise, Idaho 83713 Dr. Donald M. Engelman

.227 Church Street, 2C ,Mrs. Sandra E., Mintz New Haven, Connecticut 06510 2-E 8 8 th Street 'I Z

.New York, New York 10128 Mr. Steven B. Falk City Manager Mr. Peter Norton City of Lafayette 65 West 13th 12B.

3675 Mt Diablo Blvd, Suite 210 New York, New York- 10011 Lafayette, California 94549-1968 Ms. Margaret Hill Noto Mr. David M. Gossett Partner.

Partner Stoel Rives LLP Mayer Brown LLP 900 SW 5th Avenue, Suite 2300 1999 K Street NW Portland, Oregon 97204-1229 Washington DC 20006 Mr. Marshall W. Pagon Mr.'Daniel B. Greenberg CEO Chairman of the Board & CEO Xanadoo Company Electro Rent Corp. 225 E City Line Avenue, Suite 100 6060 Sepulveda Blvd. Bala Cynwyd, Pennsylvania 19004-1724 Van Nuys, California 91411-2512

Dr. Roger M. Perlmutter Executive Vice President Research & Development ALL ARE UNITED STATES CITIZENS Amgen Inc. George James has dual citizenship: US/UK One Amgen Center Drive Thousand Oaks, California 91320 Mr. Gary E. Rieschel PO Box 321058 Los Gatos, California 95032 14583 Clearview Drive Los Gatos, California 95030 Mr. John P. Sheehy 7045 Toma Lane Penngrove, California 94951 Ms. Alice Larkin Steiner 69 S Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84103-4135 Mr. Peter C. Stockman ,

Consultant Deep River Group 138 Chestnut Hill Road Killingworth,, Connecticut 06419 Dr. Harriett Tee'Taggart Trustee &Director'; "

Investment Advisor .

Taggart Associates 93 Larch Road Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138 Mr. -Brett E. Wilcox 2727 NW Westover Road Portland, Oregon 97210-2823 Mr. Richard 1H. Wollenberg' 4450 Columbia Heights Longview; Washington 98632-3503 2009-10 Reed College Officers:

Colin Diver President -,

Reed. College 3203 SE Woodstock Blvd.

Portland, Oregon . 97202 Peter Steinberger Vice President/Dean of the Faculty Reed College Edwin 0. McFarlane Vice President/Treasurer Reed College Hugh Porter Vice President for College Relations Reed College Michael Brody Vice President/Dean of Student Services Reed College

S..THE REED INSTITUTE dba Reed College RESOLVED, that any one of the following, to wit:

Colin S. Diver, President Edwin 0. McFarlane, Vice President/Treasurer are and hereby authorized to sell, assign, transfer or dispose of any stocks, bonds, or other securities now or hereafter owned or held by the Corporation.

RESOLVED FURTHER that the aforesaid persons are authorized and empowered to execute necessary documents for the sale, assignment or transfer of real property owned by the Corporation.

RESOLVED FURTHER that the aforesaid persons are authorized and empowered to make, collect, discount, negotiate, endorse and assign in the corporate name, all checks, drafts, notes, and other paper payable to or by this Corporation; to make and enter into any and all agreements, including, but not limited to, Special Depository Agreements, and Arrangements with reference to the manner in which, the conditions under which, or th6 purposes for which funds, checks or other items of the Corporation may be deposited, collected or withdrawn;.to delegate to others such authority in connection with any Special Depository arrangemnrit that may be deemed appropriate, and to do and perform such other and further acts and things in connection with or pertaining to the establishment of any account or the transaction of any banking business with said Bank as they may consider proper.

RESOLVED FURTHER that the aforesaid persons are authorized and empowered to purchase or otherwise acquire real property and tangible personal property for and in the name of the Corporation; and" RESOLVED FURTHER that the aforesaid persons are authorized to.execute and deliver all such documents as they may deem necessary or appropriate to purchase or otherwise acquire real property or tangible personal property in accordance with the foregoing resolution and to take any other actions that they may deem necessary or appropriate to carry out the intent thereof.

I, Kathleen Rose, Assistant Secretary of The Reed Institute, hereby certify that the foregoing is a true copy of Resolutions duly adopted by the Executive Committee of the Board of Trustees of said Corporation on the 19th day of April, 2002, to be effective on the 1st day of July, 2002, and that the same has not been repealed or amended and remains in full force and effect.

I further certify that the authority thereby conferred is not inconsistent with the Charter or By-Laws of this Corporation.

Dated ,*-/-!O Seal Kathleen Rose, Assistant Secretary ot The Reed Institute

Douglas C. Bennett, Provost March 9. 1992 Reed College 3203 SE Woodstock Boulevard Portland, OR 97202-8199

Dear Dr Bennett:

We are pleased to provide this written report of our review of the Reed Reactor Facility (RRF) which was carried out on February 6 and 7. Our efforts were largely directed towards answering the questions posed in your letter to us of January 17 regarding the future of the facility. To that end we reviewed the draft Mission Statement, annual reports, and other documents provided us, inspected the physical facilities, and interviewed a number of Reed faculty and students involved with the facility as well as outside users and interested individuals. We are grateful to all those we talked with for their courtesy and frankness in responding to our questions.

The RRF is a potential*/ valuable educational, research, analytical, and radionuclide production resource that is currently at a crossroads with respect to its continued operation. Over the years, the facility has existed at a marginal subsistence level through the heroic efforts of a number of dedicated individuals, maintaining a low profile with Reed faculty, students and administrators through benign neglect. Recent events, including the unusual event of November 23. 1991. and the need to make more permanent staffing arrangements, have served to focus attention on the facility. Our opinion is that RRF should not be permitted to continue as an out-of-sight, out-of-mind, low prdfile stepchild, expected to make it on its own resources. We are pleased that the College administration has seen fit to seek external advice and to squarely face the issue of the future of the facility. While this report has been kept brief, we have attempted to provide details of our notions in a number of areas that we hope will be useful in your deliberations.

The decision facing the College is simple: eitlher continue operation of the facility under revised circumstances, or decommission the facility. The decision should be made swiftly and without equivocation and should be implemented rapidly. Should the decision be made to decommission, then a plan should be immediately drawn up to put in place the D necessary staffing and other financial resources to initiate and complete the task expeditiously and with as little fanfare as possible. We would estimate the decommissioning would take at least two years and an expenditure of at least $500,000. z If the decision is made to continue operation, which is our personal recommendation, a solid commitment from the administration must be made to guarantee the necessary funds, personnel, and administrative support to refurbish this long-neglected facility and ensure its operation as a first class educational facility and ancillary resource for at least the next 10 to 20 years. The situation that currently exists must not be allowed to occur again, where a severely understaffed and underfunded facility is having difficulty recovering from a situation that it should be able to take in its stride. We expand considerably on this recommendation in addressing the questions you raisedfor us below.

1. Mission Statement. The draft Mission Statement given us contains several excellent analyses and suggestions, and is very comprehensive in scope. From discussions during our visit, it was not clear that this has yet had extensive review and input from many Reed individuals, including faculty, students, alumni, or community advisors and thus mainly represents the view of one hard-working and enthusiastic individual. As such it is extremely commendable.

We would suggest, however, that it is absolutely vital for the continuation of successful operation at RRF that a Mission Statement be adopted both in the legal and philosophical sense by a broad constituency at Reed. This is not to say that everyofie at Reed should support the reactor, but to argue strongly that unless a substantial number of key

individuals are convinced that RRF has a kev role to plav in the overall mission of Reed College, the proper operation of the facility will never be assured. A facility such as RRF.

while started as the vision of a single inspired individual, Arthur F. Scott, cannot be sustained through decades of regulation and change by relying solely on the dedication of a single individul atany onie time.'

We propose that the Mission Statemenit could gamer support from a larger Reed constituency by being recast to provide a greater emphasis on the educational benefits that RRF can provide, both directly and in a s~upportive role, to the College and the surrounding coiitm'uiity I(through the Consortium). The Statement should be clear that ancillary apphicatlon s of RR-..SUCh-as in ,medicine, industry, law enforcement, and" environmental aiialnisis, while also ver 'impo0rtant, are secondary to' the primary educational mission..

To expand on the view expressed above, we §ee RRF as providing Reed College students with unique oppo iitunities provided at no olther liberal arts college. So far. this' has not" been fully exploited. Most science,cirricula should incorporate experiences based on'the' presence and availability ofRRF. Suclh experiences can vary from single laboratory exercises in Intrbductoi-y level: course:s to"eniire courses based around radiochemistry.

applications' fradoisotope's, or uses and eOffects of radiation. Futrther, all Reed students should be engaged'in some way in the" 'nuclear debat&" and its relationships with global concerns for enYvionimental damage ='theirisks of nuclear power on the one hand, but the, dangers ofglobal warniing through excessive use of fossil .fuels on'the other. This encompasses many smaller issues of benefit vý'risk analysis in applications of radiation' and radi6.1sbidpes in modern"mediline', for .example, -thatliberal arts students who will be future leaders should be 'learhing hbw to iaddres§. AtReed, they can have first'hand ' .

experience by examining the 'reactor~aldits operation both in theory and in practice. A study ofthe entire range of safety'issues of operation of RRF can form a positive and secure basis for scale-up to state, national or global concerns that will be far more educationally sound than usual reniote argumenits based only on literature, emotion, and lack of direct khowledge.

The few students we had a chance to talk with during our visit clearly left the impression that the RRF had made a differenrce'to them either in their initial decision to come to Reed, or in their subsequent experience at, Reed. We think this could become an expanded.

opportunity for Reed to provide a different;' bt: unparalleled experience. At no' other facility (possibly in the world!) do undergraduates have a chance to become so involved with the' daily management of a'highly technological, but safefacility such as RRF. While this has already had 'an impact on the career. and personal development of a significant number of' past Reed students, with more focus and resources this opportunity could be more widely available. ' '. -' '

"-' ", * "i , .' * '

• Reed College Reactor Facility Page 2 03/11/92 As part of the primary teaching mission. KRF provides unique opportunities for thesis research. With greater support, more Reed students could avail themselves of this opportunity. Secondarily, RRF can also serve the greater Portland educational community not only for similar student coursework and research, but as a resource for teacher

education and general public education. It should be possible for courses - inaited -a't Reed to be credited for students at other institutions to enhance these opportuniies and'the utilization of the Reed facility. With, more staff time {vide infra) available to developsuch relationships,, creative uses of RRF in education will increase...,,,,,,

2. Physical Plant Upgrading The radiochemistry laboratory adj'dent ' t the feator requires renovation and needs to be provided with suitable instrumentation to met the educational mission described above as well as to support ancilliar uses of the faclhty.

We were somewhat dismayed to observe that RRF is physicalry separated from the new Arthur F. Scott Chemistry Center, which has psychological and perhaps symbolic overtones as,*well.. Seriious, urgent pfanrning consideratiofr should be given 'o`-nhaking the-north entrance to0ihe facility into the main entrance to the facility, and connecting i't dothe new building by a covered walkway. If the 'old chemistryb6iilding is to becomen'th'e psychology department, we believe it will cause unacceprte bl.efriCtin betwýeen adýadniac units, and inhibit future uses of the facility (for tours;-stud9nts at all hou"rs, esco as .vell s raise real safety concerns, for the entrance to be through the psychoJogy ddepthdrit. The-present entrance can remain as an emergency exit.. Toour inexperienced.architect"alU ,

eyes, it would seem.that the north entranceculdrahr easilybeýe remo'delled.to, ina small entry, lobby to serve as the security and safety, checkpoint-. Visitors: and personnel responding toemergencies can thenview the reactorthrouggh the allway windowb]eore entering the facility itself; The purely experimental facilities will then be more towards, the':

"rear" and impact tour use less, for example. Consideration might be. given to renoyation of the smaller, laboratory rooms and office space to provideoffice space for, staff,, {vide dinfra)

The facility should :be-refurbished and future general maintenance, scheduled with the goal of maintaining a clean, smart, and professional appearance to, attract confidenace, from:

regulators and potential users and supporters. It is likely the proposed changes can be...

accomplished for less than the costs of decommissioning.

3. Instrumentation. The, process of upgrading theacility, control and safety systems..

which has begun under DOE sponsorship, should continue. t: as rap.id.a pace as possible with the College providing necessary matching support. It is possible that local industry might support radiological safety monitoring instrum entation (CAM,. ARM, Stack Monitor, etc) acquisition, or help to extend the life of gxisting instruments by providing resources for maintenance to keep ,such instruments in gqod: condition. Staff can be encouraged to pursue these and other funding opportunities: if not stretched to. the limit to maifitaintdaily*.

operations. In addition to the instrumentation needed for the renovated radiochemistry laboratory, the facility needs modem counting equipment for both gamma spectroscopy and beta spectroscopy to support the primary educational mission and to enable better service to ancillary users. Such a facility should expect to serve as a general facility for all departments employing radioisotopes. More useful service to the outside community can be given if the facility is able to maintain measurement traceability to NIST standards (achievable at modest cost), and develops a formalized quality assurance program. These features would enhance the ability of RRF to attract contract work from regional industry and government.

Reed College Reactor Facility Page 3 "" 03/11/92

4. Staffing. A major issue for the continuation of facility operations is staffing: this facility has. since its inception, been minimally staffed. Given increased regulatory requirements over several years, the need for greater public accountability, and the need to develop more effective utilization of the facility, basic level staffing must be increased.

Two professional FTE is the minimum recommended, with at least 1.5 FTE devoted directly to facility operations, while 0.5 FTE could be devoted to teaching responsibilities. Both individuals would be expected to hold Senior Reactor Operator Licenses for the facility.

We suggest that the one individual with a 0.5/0.5 assignment should be the facility Director with clear rýspoInsibi'iiy for 6*ýeifall: management of the facility. Th6 other -would serve as full time-Associate Director'for Operations and have responsibility for all day-to-day opeations' including supervisio'ni and training of operators and meeting regulatory requirements. ThieDirector woild hnave primary responsibility for building off carnpus (Consortium) anid dnicampus-ielations and would hold a regular faculty appointment (with, the 1/2 time teaching loaýd).' Assistadnce with maintenance of the Consortium would be provided by thei Associate Dire*&tr Who'iighlt also hold a faculty appoiniment, oriat the least an adjunct appointmentith'fwo0Uid' 6nable him or-her to participate'in'the-educationalprogram;for examiplebý,y siie'pising thesis research students, or by offering credit classesforteacherS. '*.

We strongry'suppoirt the -continuation of'th* student operator program. Even more training might be offered In the area of radiological health and safety. We might 'envision parallel programs leading to "reactor operator" or to "radiological safety associate" as better meeting the needs %fr the faciiity'atid'the- campus than a single-track program. However,';,

the facility mustclea~rly establish'responrsi'bilities for scheduling operations and maintenance:&Sdchi"respon0riiliiy'.slbild rmiii with the Associate Director in consultation wia student Reacti Supervlsorin order that reliable services can be' offered bi'yRRF' :Student 'c:an have pridrfitieYunrelated to their reactor position that do not always blend well with operation of the facility within the strict regulatory ehivironmeht -

or with offering reliable service to either on-campus. or off-campus users.

As noted' above,it is' important'thIat-the Reactor Facility Director be a full faculty member acceptable t6 an ekisting d6paiirmen. It is most'likely that the appropriate fit to'Reed and the RRiP hee'ds will be found with an individual with a background in radiochemistry or nuclear analytical chemistry, or' use of thesemethods in related areas such a6 geochemistry. Such individuals will have had some experience in regulatory issues' and in reactor utilization. Obviously, willingness to make a strong contribution to undergraduate education and some experience with internal and external development of resources are essential. ' '.

5. Financing. There area nfimnberof avenUesfor support for the operation of the RRF. It is important to appreciate that none can develop without adequate staff time to work on them. It is suggested' thatipast practices, which may have included expecting key staff to, "1raise a portion of their own salary" may not be fruitful in today's competitive environment.

It is important for the adrniisiti-afiin to recognize that the ability to compete for external ,

resources is. in many instares,_penderit on being able to offer routine and reliable' services from the RRF. It is also importantfor the College to accept that full self-support should not be a goal for RRF3 If the facility is' perceived to play a genuinely broad"-

educational role, it should receive basic support for that role, much as an interdisciplinary department might.

Reed College Reactor Facility Page 4 03/11 /92 Traditional sources of Income include charges and/or recharges for Isotope production or neutron activation analysis. Cost recovery may be possible for specialized courses'such 'as teacher education, and TAG. and Joint projects with other educational institutions where their students use facilities such as the radiochemistry laboratory at Reed. Consortium

V Y support in conjunctionwith PGE and other interested, industries can probabye...

increased. It. is Important to include all items In any cost-recover pprograni. wthe':

experience of one,0f the reviewers, it Is easy to overlook '.hiddehn" costs In cretlng4 cost recovery systemithat ends up putting a heavy burden on existing; staff, who0cI npensate by donating, time .to.the project, preventing them from having sufficient time fft for administrative needs. For example. If neutron activation analysis, >service, is to. be" performed, proper allowance must be made for all supplieshneiede .ihcluidinfg vials,'"

standards, rabbits, and liquid nitrogen, waste disposal, aid radiological control, a fair contribution to instrument maintenance, and for staff ahnd/r stud nt'tlabor intclidhihgtime for training, sample and standard preparation, and for dati processing including quality' control checks. As a related issue, RRF should make sure it commits to eStabliShing a reputation for high quality, reliable, service, rather than for sporadic,. cost-cutting, lower,..

quality performance designed simply: to raise funds.., .

Some support for instrumentation improvement will, likely,coptinue to be.,available through the Department of Energy. Grants for undergraduate resear*i' should be' ... "

possible through NSF and/,or DOE. It is possible to'look to 'these,` as well as regional agencies, as sources .of support for undergraduates from other institutions to do .work at RRF. All such utilization, if fully meeting its, fair cosýtshare,.wilcl co ., ' oeý; y..

fraction of cost recovery for the RRF budget..... . ,?.. . ,

It does not appear that the geneiral Reed College supporters'- ....lrni and suppirtiei* l6cal, community.,-. have yet:been asked to, support RJ,. If the reactor, canbe firmly placed as.a_,

showcase within the Reed.mission, support contributions might be frthe ' iin tosere rfi reactor operators appear to-have strong positive feelings about the reactor and w4 facilit it succeed. a program which would solicit~ ontributions t rs pecific, aspectsof needs (e.g: a fund to guarantee student operators a certain-amount of support). ight appeal to such individuals. i, , r' -

Clearly the potential income from private sources is limited. There are soml positive' signs within governmental agencies, based partly on manpower need projections £, that might result in increased support opportunities for smalltreactor facilities., Private foundations may also bemoving in directions more, favorable to. nuclear science, education:. In seeking support from outside, the unique aspects, of RRF should bep stressed;,such as:

Location of the reactor on the campus of one of the out~standing small liberal arts collegesin the U.S.

Genuine integration of the reactor into the educational mission ofthe College (vide supra).

Reactor operationsdesigned to heavily involve underiraduates in taining to fimanage.the facility.

RRF as a genuine community resource, proyidingunique education opportunities to the entire region . ' ., .

including teachers, and TAG programs.

. Location of the reactor in Portland and adjacent to the Seattle-Puget Sound area can 'serve specific-needs of the technical, educational and medical communities in this region.

• Genuine community acceptance as evidenced by the community response following the unusual occurrence ofNovember 23, 1991.

t. University Research Reactors in the United States - their Role and Value. Nýtional Academy Press. 19S8.

2. Training Requirements for Chemists in Nuclear Medicine, Nuclea'r Ind6try, and Related Areas. National Academy Press, .1988.

Reed College Reactor Facility Page 5 03/11/92

6. Administrative. The administrative structure at present includes two formal "oversight committees", one for operations and one for safety. This arrangement is

unusual and seems unnecessarily complex. There also seems to be a problem in having committee members who lack interest in their assignment. We recommend that there be a single oversight committee responsible to the College administration for assuring that the facility operates safely and meets its State and Federal (NRC) license commitments. To do this the Reactor Safety Committee needs at least one member who has expertise in nuclear engineering or nuclear science, one who has professional radiological safety qualifications, one who represents Reed's academic community, and one who represents the local off-campus community. The Campus RSO and the Facility Director should serve as ex officio members. The committee should have a charter which allows it to exercise its audit and policy and procedure review functions effectively to meet the Technical Specification requirements, but which assumes that daily operations are not its direct concern. Licensed student senior operators should be invited to. attend but will not vote......

To assist in education and training of student operators in management of the facility, an informal Operations Committee can meet to assist the Associate Director for Operations in his or her duties. This group, consisting of all student licensed operators,.with auditing attendance of operators in training, could assist with review and scheduling of operations and maintenance. It would be clear that final responsibility for organizing operations and.

maintenance rests with the Associate Director. Only in this way can regular routine operations at the facility be. assured.. .... , . .,

Conclusion. In conclusion we stress again the unique nature of the RRF, and its great potential as an educational tool, evidenced by the high Interest in and enthusiasm for the -

reactor expressed by at least one group of Reed students. The existence of the reactor does influence students to attend Reed. We note the high degree of community acceptance, and 7.

the opportunities for ancillary uses of the-RRF for research, isst'pe lro0dtiction, and -.

specialized analyses by neutron activation. Taken together with'the growing recognition that nuclear science education is important and deserving of support, we believe the future portends well. If the decision is made to continue operation of the reactor, the RRF should be incorporated as a full and valued part of the overall Reed College educational mission.

Finally we note the need to proceed with haste to make a final decision and to commit the resources needed to pursue either continued operation or decomrmissioning. The present acting Director; J. Michael Pollack has single-handedly kept the facility operational, maintained both on-campus and off-campus ?relations, and tried to plan for its future.

This task is simply too greai for, one person and he is at or near bum-out. His efforts are commendable and worthy of some recognition.

We thank all of those who assisted us with 6our eview, and the excellent hospitality shown by all connected with the College: Should you have. any questions or desire further amplification of our ideas, please do not hesitate to call on us.

Sincerely yours . ... ... ,,

Ronald L. Kathren George E. Miller Washington State University University of California, Irvine at Tri-Cities Reed College Reactor Facility Page 6 03111 /92

U.S. DEPARTMENT OFLABOR, BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS Western Information Office, 90 7th St., Suite 14-100, San Francisco, CA 94103 Information Staff (415) 625-2270 / Fax (415) 625-2351 **

PORTLAND-SALEM 02/18/10 Consumer Price Index, All Items, 1982-84=1.00 for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U)

SEMI-ANNUAL AVERAGE OVER-THE-YEAR PERCENT CHANGE

7 ,'ANNUAL ANNUAL YEAR 1st Half 2nd Half AVERAGE YEAR.- - 1st Half 2nd'Half -AVERAGE 1985 105.6 107.8 106.7 1985 1986 108.1 108.3 108.2 .198,6 2.4 0.5 1.4 1987 109.9 111.9 110.9 .1987 1.7 3.3 2.5 1988 113.6 115.9 114.7 1988 3.4 3.6. 3.4 1989 119.3 121.6 120.4 1989 5.0 4.9 5.0 1990 124.9 129.8 127.4 1990 4.7 6.7- 5.8 1991 132.8 135.1 133:9 1991 6.3 4.1 5.1 1992 138.8 140.9 139.8 1992 4.5 4.3 4.4 1993 143.6 145.8 144.7, 1993 3.5

• 3.5 3.5 1994 147.7 150.1 148.9. 1994 2.9 2.9 2.9 1995 152.5 153.9 '153.2 1995 - 3.2 2.5 2.9 1996 157.2 160.0 158.6 '_1996 3.1 4.0 3.5 1997 162.6  : 165.5 -164.0 _.1997. 3.4 .3.4 3.4 1998 166.1 168.1 167.1 1998 7-, 2.2 .. * .,1.6 1.9 1999 170.8 174.4 172.6,. 1999 28 3.7 3.3-2000 176.4 A179.5 .178.01 -:2000 . 3.3 2.9 7 3.1 181.2 *,25 2001 183.6 182.4 _2001 2.7 2002 183.5 184.0 183.8 2002'0-0 1.3 ' 02.

• -,0.2.: --- 0.8  :

2003 186.0 ,186.5 186.3,-- '_._2003. 1.4-.

1.4-? :)

2004 189.8 - :19Z.5 .191.1-. 2.0' .3.2 2.6 _

2005 194.5 197.5 :196.0 __-,20054 2.5' 2.6

• :.20i.1:

. 2.6' 2006 199.8 202.5 2.7- 2.5

... " ...2007 ,--

2007 206.653 _210.460 208.556 2008 - 3.4 3.7.

2008 214.619 216.159 21-5.389--- 3.9-- :2 :. 33.

2009 214.102 21-7.191 215.647 '2009 *.) -0.2. ...:0.5,-: " .. 0.1.*

2010  :-,2010, Table of over-the-year percent increases. An en6try for 2ndHalf 2005 indicates the percentage increase ifrom 2ndHalf 2004 to 2ndHalf 2005,(in this :exampie 2.6 percent).