Mr. Robert G. Stater
105 Pashley Road
Scotia, New York 12302

Dear Mr. Stater:

This letter acknowledges receipt of your letters dated October 23rd and October 25, 1996. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) takes safety and wrongdoing issues very seriously, and based on our initial review of issues you raised, we have decided to address your concerns in our allegation review process as allegation number NRR-96- A-0129. The first step in that process is to confirm with you the issues you wish to have evaluated by the NRC. Our understanding of your concerns is as follows:

Your October 23, 1996 letter is your response to our May 14, 1996 letter to you. You allege:

1. The NRC uses the INPO catalog with flawed items for GFE development and flaws might slip through and appear on the exams in spite of careful review.

2. The INPO catalog has flawed items which are used for training, leading to and causing student doubt and confusion in subject matter.

3. Flawed test items used in training lowers the quality of training.

1. Reactor Kinetics and Neutron Sources, number 20
   
2. Reactor Kinetics and Neutron Sources, number 21
   
3. Neutron Life Cycle, number 2
   
4. Neutron Life Cycle, number 11
   
5. Reactor Operational Physics, number 24

1. The reference General Electric, BWR Academic Series, Reactor Theory, 1994 that was used in part as a basis for the May 14, 1996 NRC response to you, contains inaccuracies. You cite 10 specific technical inaccuracies from Chapter 3 of the above document.

2. The above flawed document is the basis for the flawed INPO questions, resulting in training inaccuracies and the document should be removed from the program.

The next stop in our review process is to conduct a detailed review of the issues you raised. Resolution of your concerns has been assigned to the Operator Licensing Branch. Our goal is to complete the review within 180 days. Upon completion of our review, we will inform you in writing of the results.

For your information, the following is a discussion of our routine procedures for handling issues such as those you raised. Although you are not a confidential source unless a written confidentiality agreement has been issued, it is the policy of the NRC to take all reasonable efforts to prevent disclosure of your identity to any individuals or other organizations outside the NRC unless (a) you indicate no objection to being identified, (b) disclosure is necessary because of an overriding safety issue, (c) disclosure is necessary pursuant to an order of a court or NRC adjudicatory authority or to inform Congress or State or Federal agencies in furtherance of NRC responsibilities under law or public trust, (d) disclosure is necessary in furtherance of a wrongdoing investigation, including an investigation of harassment and intimidation (H&I) allegations, (e) disclosure is necessary to support a hearing on an enforcement matter, or (f) you have taken actions that are inconsistent with and override the purpose of protecting your identity. For allegations involving H&I, the NRC will normally disclose an alleger's identity during an NRC investigation if the alleger is the victim of the discrimination.

In some instances, we request licensees to address concerns. If we do so for the issues you raised, your identity will not be disclosed. The response by the licensee will be evaluated as a part of our review. If you object to this procedure, please inform us within two weeks of the date of this letter.

If a request is filed under the Freedom of Information Act related to your areas of concern, the information provided will, as allowed by that Act, be purged of your name and other potential identifiers.

Thank you for bringing these matters to our attention. If you have any questions concerning the above, please do not hesitate to contact us. You may write to the address indicated on this letter or you may contact me by telephone at 301-415-1031.