ML13317A237
| ML13317A237 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 07/16/1982 |
| From: | Diggs R Office of Administration |
| To: | Baskin K Southern California Edison Co |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8207280045 | |
| Download: ML13317A237 (1) | |
Text
DISTRIBUTION:
PDR LPDR JUL 1 6 1982 Reg. Docket Files (016 Record Cy.)
W. Paulson, ORB-5 H. Smith, ORB-5 Docket No. 50-206 LFMB Reactor File LFMB R/F (2)
R. M. Diggs Southern California Edison Company ATTi4:
Mr. K. P. Baskin Manager of Nuclear Engineering, Safety and Licensing P. 0. Box 800 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California 91770 Gentlemen:
Thank you for your June 10, 1982 letter which responded to our letters dated February 22 and May 20, 1982, regarding an additional sum in fees for your Proposed Change No. 110 dated December 18, 1981, for organizational changes for San Onofre Unit No. 1. With Proposed Change No. 110, your Company remitted a Class II fee of $1,200 pursuant to 10 CFR 170.22. Our letters requested an additional sum of $2,800 for this application because the review staff of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (ONRR) had determined that the requested changes were considered to be more than administrative in nature and, therefore, required a Class III fee of
$4,000. Your letter stated that a duplicate Class I fee of $400 is appropriate for this application because these proposed changes for Unit No. I were incorporated in the low power operating license for Unit No. 2 that was issued on February 16, 1982, as well as in the May 14, 1982 Proposed Change No. NPF-10-11 for Unit No. 2.
When applications meet the criteria of Class I ("...are received, processed....at the same time"), the duplicate fee is appropriate. Based on information provided by the ONRR staff, the December 18, 1981 applica tion for Unit No. 1 was initially reviewed in advance of, and separate from, the Technical Specifications proposed for Unit No. 2. Therefore, the duplicate Class I fee of $400 is not appropriate for the December 18 nor the May 14 applications. However, it has now been determined by the ONRR staff that the Class I fee that your Company paid is appropriate for the December 18 application in lieu of a Class III fee because final action will be administrative in nature since the Technical Specifications will be consistent with those already included in the operating license for Unit No. 2. Therefore, the previously requested $2,800 is no longer due.
Sincerely, Original Signed by:
Peba M. Diggs Reba M. Diggs 820726045 _2807fW Facilities Program Coordinator PDR ADOCK 05000206 Frnato P
PDR License Fee Management Branch Office of Administration OFFICEP L 1 F B....
SURNAME)
R 0, W
D.
ATE1 ///82 7//
/82 NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY