ML23255A036
| ML23255A036 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Aerotest |
| Issue date: | 09/09/2023 |
| From: | Slaughter D Aerotest |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| IR 2023001 | |
| Download: ML23255A036 (1) | |
Text
AEROTEST OPERATIONS, INC.
3455 FOSTORIA WAY
- SAN RAMON, CA 94583 * (925) 866-1212
- FAX (925) 866-1716 9/9/2023 ATTENTION: Document Control.Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission White Elint North 11555 Rockville ike
- Rockwe, D 20852-2738 AEROTEST RADIOGRAPHY AND RESEARCH REACTOR DOCKET NO. 50-228/LICENSE NO. R-98.
Subject:
AO Response to Inspection Report 050-00228/2023-001 Sir/Madam, I have concerns about some of the findings from the recent July 27, 2023, Inspection performed by NRC staff and the upper staff review ( or concurrence process).
- 1. Aerotest Operations (AO) denies the Violation 050-00228/2023-001-00lA. AO did not violate any Technical Specifications or the "ARRR CFH Training/Requalification Program," dated March 30, 2021, between December 6, 2021, to June 27, 2023. The rebuttal is provided in separate letter to the Director, Office of Enforcement, USNRC.
Requested Action: Violation 050-00228/2023-001-00lA should be rescinded.
- 2. No minor violation of TS 12.6.1 occurred as described by NRC Staff in the inspection report. Requested Action: The minor violation should be rescinded.
Aerotest Operation followed the annual meeting requirement. 10 CFR 36.2 defines Annually to mean either (1) at intervals not to exceed 1 year or (2) once per year, at about the same time each year (plus or minus 1 month). The language "about the same time each year" suggests that there is some leeway in the meeting timing. The definition also suggests a time variation as shown in parenthesis of "plus or minus one month." Given this definition, it is possible to have a meeting in 2022 covering the activities of 2021. The NRC lead inspector and inspector's supervisor (as reported in the 8/13/2023 exit meeting) were unaware of the second part of the definition which contributed to their erroneous conclusion.
- 3. As for 050-00228/2023-001-003 URI, there are no legal or regulatory grounds for suspicion of failure given the measured data that AO possesses. AO remains open to your guidance when your NRC staff complete their review, however AO will challenge your findings, if that guidance is not supported by science and measured results.
In response to annual recertification of check sources, the audit report cited a recommendation not a requirement provided by a commercial vendor. These sources continue to be stored in original containers without damage. The RSO a) Visually inspects the sources multiple times a year, b) Possesses historical documentation that counting results of these sources which have remained constant/consistent, c) Decay corrects the sources annually, d) Uses the sources for consistency/efficiency only.
For further information, according to studies conducted by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), under contract by the U.S. Department of Energy," Studied electroplated sources fell within the source manufacturers reported error over a multi-year period. The results also indicate their use to response check, calibrated instruments in the field are similarly accurate. Finally, the data show the sources evaluated have withstood years of wear and tear from consecutive use while remaining dependable for continued use.
Should you have any questions or require additional information regarding this submission, please contact AO President David M. Slaughter, Ph.D. at (801) 631 5919 or dmsraven@gmail.com.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the statements above are correct and truthful.
terely yours,
~ ~
id M. Slaughter, Ph.D.
President, Reactor Administrator, Manager Aerotest Operations, Inc.