L-2003-115, Comment (14) Submitted by Florida Power & Light Co., J. A. Stall, on Proposed Rules PR-170 & 171 Re Revision of Fee Schedules; Fee Recovery for Fy 2003

Comment (14) Submitted by Florida Power & Light Co., J. A. Stall, on Proposed Rules PR-170 & 171 Re Revision of Fee Schedules; Fee Recovery for Fy 2003

ML031280026
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie, Seabrook, Turkey Point
Issue date:	05/02/2003
From:	Stall J Florida Power & Light Co
To:	NRC/SECY/RAS
Ngbea E S
References
+adjud/ruledam200505, 68FR16374 00014, L-2003-115, PR-170, PR-171
Download: ML031280026 (2)

Text

Aa@ Florida Power & Light Company, P.O. Box 14000, Juno Beach, FL 33400-0420 FPL I}o M7 L-2003-115

' . A MAY -2 2003

(& R /6~' 3 9DOCKETED USNRC Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 May 7,2003 (8:39AM)

OFFICE OF SECRETARY ATTENTION: Rulemakings and Adjudication Staff RULEMAKINGS AND ADJUDICATIONS STAFF

SUBJECT:

Florida Power & Light Company and FPL Energy Seabrook, LLC Comments Proposed Rule: Revision of Fee Schedules; Fee Recovery for FY 2003 (68 Fed.

Reg. 16374, April 3, 2003)

Units I and Florida Power & Light Company (FPL), the licensee for the St. Lucie Nuclear Plant, LLC the 2, and the Turkey Point Nuclear Plant, Units 3 and 4, and FPL Energy Seabrook, licensee for Seabrook Station, hereby submit the following comments on the above-referenced notice of proposed rulemaking.

(NEI),

As explained in the comments on this rulemaking filed by the Nuclear Energy Institute of promulgation of a proposed NRC fee rule occasions the industry's annual close evaluation NRC's expenditures. In particular, through this rulemaking, the industry seeks to determine in a whether the agency is (1)seeking funds from licensees only where warranted; (2)operating and (3) maximally efficient manner, e.g., allocating its resources based on appropriate priorities; clearly identifying and explaining its fees to allow the industry to provide comprehensive comments on the proposed rule.

FPL and FPL Energy Seabrook fully endorse the NEI comments developed for the topics that presented under each category. In addition, FPL and FPL Energy Seabrook reiterate licensees should only be charged for expenditures related to licensee activities.

of For years power reactor licensees have expressed concerns regarding the payment that are not surcharges that comprised approximately ten per cent of the fee base for activities directly attributable to this class of licensees. This practice was addressed by theNRC's FY 2001 fee Energy and Water Appropriations Act which amended OBRA-90 to decrease the amount is recovery amount by two percent per year beginning in FY 2001, until the fee recovery homeland 90 percent in FY 2005. However, the FY 2003 NRC budget includes $29.3 million for that security activities that the industry views as another category of a surcharge for activities solely to benefit society as a whole by protecting critical infrastructure and are not intended fee charges benefit licensees. We believe that inclusion of homeland security activities in user effectively negates the relief provided to the industry in the FY 2001 Energy and Water Appropriations Act.

in FPL and FPL Energy Seabrook strongly object to the inclusion of homeland security activitiesfor the NRC fee structure. The President's FY 2003 budget requested that NRC's funding homeland security activities continue to be excluded from the fees assessed to power reactor activities should be funded licensees, as it was in 2002. The costs to support homeland security critical through the general treasury-not user fees-as part of the protection of our nation's dollars infrastructure. Nuclear power plant licensees alone have expended almost $400 million and FPL in additional security costs since the events of September 11, 2001. While FPL and significantly enhanced an Energy Seabrook believe these expenditures were appropriate already strong security posture at our facilities, we believe that the costs required to support homeland security should be paid from general funds.

an FPL Group company

Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission L-2003-1 15 Page 2 of The proposed fee rule does not provide a detailed breakdown of the NRC's allocation fee increase homeland security costs. Nonetheless, we understand that a large fraction of thethat significant is for vulnerability assessments. FPL and FPL Energy Seabrook are concerned due consideration of the likelihood of costs are being incurred for vulnerability studies without Ignoring evaluated threats or the rigor of the methodology for conducting these assessments.

that do the likelihood of threats can easily result in the performance of "worst case" evaluations defending not assist public policymakers in deciding where to allocate the nation's resources in this area against potential terrorist attacks. We believe that funds should not be expended inof threats without direction from the Department of Homeland Security on both the likelihood evaluation that should be considered across the critical infrastructure, and until a common methodology is developed for evaluating vulnerabilities. This recommendation is consistent with and Key Assets The National Strategy for the Physical Protection of Critical Infrastructures once issued in February 2003 by the President. Expenses for conducting vulnerability studies, the process is better defined, should be paid for from general funds.

Incident We are also concerned that functions in the NRC's Office of Nuclear Security and assessment Response duplicate and overlap with those of other federal agencies in the threat Department of and evaluation area. We believe these functions should be transferred to the creation of the Homeland Security to provide the continuity and integration intended by the Department of Homeland Security.

consider FPL and FPL Energy Seabrook respectfully request that the Commission carefully FPL's comments as well as NEI's comments on this subject.

us if We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the proposed rulemaking. Please contact there are questions concerning this letter.

Sincerely yours, J. A. Stall Senior Vice President, Nuclear and Chief Nuclear Officer cc: Stephen Floyd, Vice President, Regulatory Affairs, NEI Michael Wilson, Vice President, Governmental Affairs - Federal, FPL U.S. Senator Bob Graham, Florida U.S. Senator Bill Nelson, Florida U.S. Senator Judd Gregg, New Hampshire U.S. Senator John Sununu, New Hampshire