b'P ROVING THE P RINCIPLEgressed on Shaws quality initiative Wilfrid E. Johnson, one of the AEC United States. The beam hole featureperhaps more than other AEC labs. Later, commissioners, came to Idaho Falls of the MTR had been underexploited,the AEC awarded Ginkel a Distinguished and explained the AEC position to the said the brochure, compared to the in-Service Award, and Ginkel credited the Rotary Club: pile materials testing function of therecognition partly to the exposure reactor. Universities and industries ofbrought by the presidents visit. In the We are having extreme difficulty these the West might now use the reactor forcircle of towns surrounding the NRTSdays in obtaining funding for many of basic, applied, and developmental,the event affirmed the value of the NRTSour programs and I can give no assur -research. The tradition of the MTR atmission to the nation and placed it under ance or even encouragement at this the frontier of knowledge could contin-a warm and welcome spotlight. 5 point in time that we will be able to ue to benefit western states. 8keep the MTR operating.7The potential demise of the MTR was an The entire Idaho nuclear networkentirely different proposition embraced the We s t er n than the end of EBR-I. A l l Beam Research Reactoragreed that the EBR-I had ful- (WBRR). The governorfilled its useful life, but there went on television express-was no such consensus regard- ing the states support.ing the MTR. Some of the Editorials and news articlesHPs thought the machine was explained the idea to thedecrepit, too aged and bat- public. NRTS scientiststered to protect its operators warned that without thefrom radiation hazards. MTR, its team of fifty C e rt a i n l y, the large test loops skilled scientists wouldof the ETR and ATR attested break up and perhaps beto its obsolescence in the lost to Idaho. INEC satu-Nuclear Navy program. But rated the service club cir-the MTR had beam holes. Thcuit with the MTReETR and ATR did not. No message. More letters wentother reactor west of the from the congressional del-Mississippi River had this fea- egation to the AEC admin-ture, and if the MTR shut INEEL 4383 isr a t o r, the commissioners, tdown, it would foreclose a The view toward the core of the MTR through aand the White House. In itswhole class of research potential in beam hole. 1969 session, the Idaho legislatureIdaho, and indeed anywhere else in the raised its level of appropriations forwestern United States. At least, that was n u c l e a r-oriented research to $200,000,how NRTS supporters saw it. The next phase of the campaign saw hoping it would help retain the MTR.Rutledge collecting testimonials and The lieutenant governor led a delega-So the MTR had to be saved. INECs ideas from MTR scientists and the tion to Washington, D.C., for an audi-first salvo was a round of appeals to the regions universities about how the ence with the JCAE. RemarksAEC to change its mind. Samuelson, MTR might be reborn. A vision took celebrating the MTR and its potentialten other western governors, the con- shape, and in no time, INEC encapsu- as the WBRR went into thegressional delegation, and INEC all lated it in a brochure: MTR, Today an C o n g ressional Record . 9failed to get the AEC to reconsider. Irradiation Facility, Tomorrow.WesternSamuelson offered state funds to help Beam Research Reactor, The Hub forretain the MTR. 6 Neutron Research in the Western1 9 4'