ML19296C585

Summary of the Category 2 Public Meeting on Section 106 of the Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act

ML19296C585
Person / Time
Issue date:	10/24/2019
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Kennedy W
Shared Package
ML19296C500	List: ML19296C585
References
Download: ML19296C585 (6)

Text

October 24, 2019

SUMMARY

OF SEPTEMBER 26, 2019, CATEGORY 2 PUBLIC MEETING ON SECTION 106 OF THE NUCLEAR ENERGY INNOVATION AND MODERNIZATION ACT On September 26, 2019, a Category 2 public meeting was held between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff and members of the public at the Engineering Innovation Laboratory, 775 MK Simpson Blvd.102, Idaho Falls, Idaho. The purpose of this meeting was to obtain feedback from current holders of licenses for research reactors and other members of the public on the potential impact of changes made to Section 104c of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA), by Section 106, Encouraging Private Investment in Research and Test Reactors, of the Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act (NEIMA), which was signed into law on January 14, 2019. The purpose of collecting this feedback was to inform the NRC staffs consideration of the need for rulemaking to conform the regulations in Part 50, Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities, of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) with the new statutory requirements in Section 104c of the AEA.

In its presentation, the NRC staff explained the changes made to Section 104c of the AEA by NEIMA. The NRC staff explained that NEIMA changed the framework by which the NRC determines whether a utilization facility is licensed under Section 103 or Section 104c of the AEA. The new law amended Section 104c of the AEA to include cost recovery requirements to determine whether a utilization facility is licensed for research and development purposes or industrial or commercial purposes. Before NEIMA, the AEA did not limit how these utilization facilities recovered money from commercial activities.

The current requirement in 10 CFR 50.22, Class 103 licenses; for commercial and industrial facilities, considers the amount of money a production or utilization facility spends on commercial activities. Under the current 10 CFR 50.22, a production or utilization facility is licensed for industrial or commercial purposes under Section 103 of the AEA if the facility is to be used so that more than 50 percent of the annual cost of owning and operating the facility is devoted to the production of materials, products, or energy for sale or commercial distribution, or to the sale of services, other than research and development or education or training. If 50 percent or less of the annual cost of owning and operating the facility is devoted to commercial activities, then the facility is licensed under Section 104c of the AEA as a facility for research and development.

Section 106 of NEIMA changed Section 104c of the AEA to focus on how the facility's costs are recovered. Specifically, NEIMA added, The Commission is authorized to issue licenses under this section for utilization facilities useful in the conduct of research and development activities of the types specified in section 31 [of the AEA] in which the licensee sells research and testing services and energy to others, subject to the condition that the licensee shall recover not more than 75 percent of the annual costs to the licensee of owning and operating the facility through sales of nonenergy services, energy, or both, other than research and development or education and training, of which not more than 50 percent may be through sales of energy.

The NRC staff explained that, to implement this revised licensing authority, the NRC will apply the new cost recovery requirements in Section 104c of the AEA to research reactors that are currently in the license renewal process and any applicable new or renewed license applicants.

The changes made to Section 104c of the AEA by NEIMA did not address the applicability of the new cost recovery requirements to current utilization facility licensees that are not in the license renewal process and will not undergo license renewal in the future. The NRC could apply the new cost recovery requirements to these licensees or continue to apply the current requirements in 10 CFR 50.22 to these licensees.

The NRC staff presentation also provided 4 examples of how the requirements in 10 CFR 50.22 and Section 104c of the AEA would apply to facilities with different mixes of expenses and incomes from commercial activities and research and development activities. The NRC staff presentation concluded with a discussion of several potential impacts of the new cost recovery criteria in Section 104c of the AEA on existing research reactor licensees. The NRC staff made the presentation publicly available in advance of the meeting at Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML19263A651.

Members of the public provided feedback throughout the NRC staffs presentation and during a dedicated feedback session afterwards. The feedback focused on two main topics: 1) applicability of the new cost recovery criteria to existing research reactor licensees and 2) practical aspects of demonstrating compliance with the cost recovery criteria.

Regarding applicability of the new cost recovery criteria to existing licensees, there was not a consensus among the meeting attendees. Most of the feedback expressed the opinion that the new cost recovery criteria should only be applied to future licenses and not to existing licenses issued under 10 CFR 50.22. Some attendees stated that the new cost recovery criteria could negatively impact their research activities by limiting their ability to generate commercial income to cover the costs of the research programs. Other attendees stated that the new cost recovery criteria should be applied equally to all current and future research reactor licensees to avoid a double standard for different holders of the same types of licenses. Some attendees were indifferent because they conduct minimal commercial activities. Several attendees represented research reactors that are in the license renewal process and will therefore have the new cost recovery criteria applied to their renewed licenses, and they expressed frustration that they will be subject to the new cost recovery criteria and the existing regulations in 10 CFR 50.22 just because of the timing of their license renewal and the new law.

Regarding the practical aspects of demonstrating compliance with the new cost recovery criteria, most attendees favored the NRC issuing additional guidance. Several attendees requested that the NRC publish more detailed guidance about how a licensee should calculate the annual cost of owning and operating the facility, especially when it is a small part of a large university organization. Other licensees expressed a need for explicit guidance about what constitutes a commercial activity and what constitutes a research and development activity.

Intermixed in this feedback was a consistent message from the meeting attendees that the NRC should be mindful of the requirement in Section 104c of the AEA that the NRC apply the minimum necessary regulation to research reactor licensees to protect the health and safety of the public and permit the conduct of widespread and diverse research and development.

The meeting notice and agenda, dated May 23, 2019, are available at ADAMS Accession No. ML19254D050. A list of meeting attendees is provided as an enclosure to this summary.

Please direct any inquiries to William B. Kennedy at 301-415-2313 or William.Kennedy@nrc.gov.

ML19296C500 Pkg ML19254D050 Mtg. Notice ML19296C585, Mtg. Summary ML19263A651 Slides *concurred via email NRC-001 OFFICE NRR/DANU/UNPL/PM NRR/DANU/UNPL/LA NRR/DANU/UNPL/BC NAME WKennedy NParker* GCasto*

DATE 10/22/19 10/23/19 10/23/19 LIST OF ATTENDEES SEPTEMBER 26, 2019, CATEGORY 2 PUBLIC MEETING ON SECTION 106 OF NEIMA 10:30 A.M. - 12:30 P.M.

Name Organization In-Person Attendees:

Louise Lund U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Greg Casto U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Alexander Adams, Jr. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Patrick Boyle U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission William Kennedy U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Luke Gilde University of Maryland Amber Johnson University of Maryland C. Corey Hines Washington State University Hillary Bennett Washington State University Meagan Nydegger National Institute of Standards and Technology Scott Miller Texas A&M University Paul M. Whaley University of Texas Jeff Geuther Pennsylvania State University Robert Seymour Kansas State University David M. Slaughter Aerotest Operations Bruce Meffert University of Missouri - Columbia Christopher Farwell United States Geological Survey Marshall Wade Massachusetts Institute of Technology Sarah Don Massachusetts Institute of Technology Ashoak Nagarajan Idaho State University Eric Crapo Fluor Idaho Jay Kunze Idaho State University Les Foyto University of Missouri - Columbia Andrew Smolinski Idaho National Laboratory Michael Ruddell Idaho National Laboratory Leo Bobek University of Massachusetts - Lowell Thomas Regan University of Massachusetts - Lowell Jere Jenkins Idaho National Laboratory Andrew Kauffman Ohio State University Clive Townsend Purdue University Jonathan Wallick University of California - Irvine Melinda Krahenbuhl Reed College Rick Gunderson Idaho National Laboratory Edward Lau Massachusetts Institute of Technology Jordan Hill Atomic Alchemy Thomas Eiden Atomic Alchemy John Peterson Atomic Alchemy Ram Sharma International Atomic Energy Agency Telephone Conference

Participants:

Cynthia Montgomery U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Duane Hardesty U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Enclosure

Michael Balazik U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Gary Becker NuScale Andy Bell Oak Ridge National Laboratory Janet Bergman Curtiss-Wright Ken Brooks University of Missouri Mike Cannon Member of the Public Dan Cronin University of Florida John Foster Massachusetts Institute of Technology Chris Monetta Member of the Public Phil Oliver Atomic Alchemy Pete Robertson University of Missouri Siaka Yusuf Dow Chemical Joe LaPrad SHINE Medical Technologies