Skip to main content

2012 NRC Grant Program Winners

While the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is primarily known for its oversight functions, the agency, together with the Department of Energy, is also responsible for awarding a wide array of academic scholarships, fellowships and other institutional support that's designed to promote the development of the nuclear work force and educational advancement – something that also helps deliver a reliable flow of highly skilled employees to government agencies, national laboratories, universities and industry. We've recently been informed of the 2012 award winners in four areas, and wanted to share their names  with our readers. Please note that all program descriptions come from

Nuclear Education Grant Programs - Curricula Development

As part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) under the Nuclear Education Grant Program will begin funding up to $4.7 million in grants and other vehicles to institutions of higher education to support courses, studies, training, curricula, and disciplines pertaining to nuclear safety, security, or environmental protection, and any other fields that the Commission determines to be critical to the regulatory mission of the NRC.

Winners (Funding, Project Title)

Aiken Technical College: $192, 129. Nuclear Quality Systems Technical Education Project
Colorado State University: $171, 069. Statistical Methods of Health Physicists
Duke University: $198,865. New Course Development in Accelerator and Reactor Health Physics under the Duke University/NC State Health Physics Consortium 
Florence-Darlington Technical College: $22,992. Power Up: High-Tech Online
Georgia Institute of Technology: $158,727. Nuclear Engineering Capstone Design Course
San Diego State University: $199,661. Environmental Radiation Dose Measurement, Modeling, and Communication
Spartanburg Community College: $89,545. Radiation and Nuclear Technology Curricula Enhancement
The Pennsylvania State University: $194,023. Curriculum Development for Nuclear Fuel Chemistry, Reprocessing and Separation Chemistry, and Radioactive Waste Management
Tuskegee University: $38,438. Development of a Course on Nuclear Fuel Cycle
University of Idaho: $200,000. Course Modules on Management of Aging Power Plant Components and Systems for Enhancement of Nuclear Engineering Program
University of Kansas: $199,998. Curriculum Development for Nuclear Engineering: Corrosion and Radiation Effects on Electronic Materials
University of Pittsburgh: $200,000. Course Development to Support Masters of Science Degree Program in Nuclear Engineering
University of Tennessee: $167,417. Nuclear Reactor Instrumentation & Control (I&C) and Digital I&C Implementation
University of Texas at Austin: $50,624. Applications of Nuclear Science and Engineering
University of Wisconsin    $170,458: Curriculum Development for a Course in Detection and Remediation of Radioactive Contaminants in the Environment
Virginia Commonwealth University: $199,743. Enhancement of the Radiation Detection and Measurement Laboratory in Support of the Nuclear Engineering Curriculum
Wharton County Junior College: $199,280. Nuclear Studies Curriculum Project

Nuclear Education Program - Faculty Development

Funding under this opportunity includes support for education in nuclear science, engineering, and related trades to develop a workforce capable of the design, construction, operation, and regulation of nuclear facilities and the safe handling of nuclear materials. The Faculty Development Grants Program recognizes the need to attract and retain highly-qualified junior faculty in academic teaching careers.

Winners (Funding, Project Title)

University of Tennessee: $449,999. The Nuclear Engineering Faculty Development Program at the University of Tennessee
University of Pittsburgh: $385,000. Utilization of NRC Nuclear Regulatory Research Computer Codes in Research and Course Development
Jackson State University: $413,766. Development of Radiochemistry Education and Research Program at Jackson State University
University of Missouri S&T: $450,000. Missouri S&T Nuclear Engineering Faculty Development Program
North Carolina State University: $385,000. Academic Career Development for a Nuclear Engineering Junior Faculty at North Carolina State University
University of Iowa: $449,930. Faculty Development in Radiochemistry at the University of Iowa
University of New Mexico: $399,947. University of New Mexico Junior Faculty Development
Colorado State University: $450,000. Radiochemistry Faculty Development at Colorado State University
University of Toledo: $345,436. Joint Initiative in a New Type of Nuclear Radiation Detector Through Faculty Development Between the Departments of Radiation Oncology and Physics and Astronomy
Louisiana State University: $450,000. Faculty Development in Nuclear engineering at LSU
Southern Polytechnic State University: $434,480. Faculty Development Program for Nuclear Generation at Southern Polytechnic State University
City University of New York (CUNY): $353,191. Application of Microfluidic Electrochemistry to Understand Crud Formation and Materials Degradation in Nuclear Energy Applications

Nuclear Education Program - Scholarship and Fellowship

Funding under this program includes support for education in nuclear science and engineering, to develop a workforce capable of supporting the design, construction, operation, and regulation of nuclear facilities and the safe handling of nuclear materials.

Fellowship Winners (Funding)

University of Wisconsin- Madison: $371,317
City University of New York (CUNY): $400,000
University of Missouri -S&T: $400,000
Utah State University: $400,000
Clemson University: $391,077
University of Utah: $345,500
University of Puerto Rico - Mayaguez: $361,760
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University: $396,469
Georgia Institute of Technology: $400,000
Oregon State University: $385,395
Duke University: $399,249
University of Maryland: $390,275
University of Hartford: $340,805

Scholarship Winners (Funding)

University of Missouri-Columbia: $199,920
South Carolina State University:$199,992
Francis Marion University: $161,713
University of Houston - Downtown: $200,000
University of Illinois: $176,158
Southern Polytechnic State University: $200,000
University of Utah: $92,999

Nuclear Education Program - Trade School and Community College Scholarship

Funding under this program includes support for education in nuclear science and engineering, to develop a workforce capable of supporting the design, construction, operation, and regulation of nuclear facilities and the safe handling of nuclear materials. This announcement is just for trade school scholarships.

Scholarship Winners (Funding)

Brazosport College: $120,000
Wharton Junior College: $120,000
Columbia Basin Community College: $122,800
Florence Darlington Technical College: $150,000
Chattanooga State Community College: $149,100
Linn State Technical College: $150,000
Miami Dade College – Wolfson Campus: $122,500

Congratulations to all of the deserving award recipients. Taken together, these awards make a tremendous impact on the continued growth and development of the future nuclear work force while supporting higher education in the nuclear sciences.


Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.

Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …