ML20056H472
| ML20056H472 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/23/1993 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Pryce D HOUSE OF REP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20056H473 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-58FR21662, RULE-PR-170, RULE-PR-171 CCS, NUDOCS 9309090393 | |
| Download: ML20056H472 (3) | |
Text
.
j
./k-#." "%}t eQ E
UNITED STATES ib i
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
g% /
WASHINGTON, D.C. 2055MXmt August 23, 1993 l
l The Honorable Deborah Pryce l
United States House of Representatives Washington, D.C. 20515 j
Dear Congresswoman Pryce:
I am responding to your letter of August 6,1993, written on behalf of your i
constituent, Mr. Joseph W. Talnagi, of Ohio State University, regarding the Commission's recent decision to assess annual fees to nonprofit educational
-l institutions that hold NRC licenses or other approvals. This Commission decision was in response to a U.S. Court of Appeals' decision on the FY 1991 j
NRC fee regulations.
As you may be aware, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (0 BRA-90) requires that the Commission recover 100 percent of its budget authority, less appropriations from the Department of Energy (DOE) administered Nuclear Waste Fund. for Fiscal Years 1991 through 1995 by assessing license and annual fees.
The Commission was required to collect approximately $445 million for FY 1991; approximately $493 million for FY 1992; and approximately $519 million for FY 1993. To recover the budget, the Commission published rules in FY 1991, FY 1992, and recently published a rule for FY 1993.
In the FY 1991 and FY 1992 rules, nonprofit educational licenses, such as the one held by Ohio State University, were exempt from fees.
l On March 16, 1993, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia i
Circuit decided Allied-Sianal. Inc. v. U.S. Nuclear Reculatory Commission and the United States of America,.No. 91-1407 and Consolidated Cases.
In this decision the court remanded for reconsideration parts of the NRC's FY 1991 j
annual fee rule, codified at 10 CFR Part 171.
The court questioned the Commission's decision to exempt nonprofit educational institutions from l
Commission fees on the grounds (in part) that they are unable to pass through the costs of those fees to their customers, without attempting a similar "passthrough" analysis for other licensees.
l i
The Commission proposed a response to the Court decision In its FY 1993 fee rule that was published in the Federal Register on April 23, 1993.
Public comments were invited on whether to discontinue the educational exemption entirely.
Comments were received which supported both sides of the issue, that is, keeping the exemption and removing the exemption.
Upon review of the comments, the Commission found the choice before it on this issue a difficult one. The Commission reluctantly concluded that in view of the court decision and the administrative record developed during the comment period, it could not justify a generic " educational" exemption for FY 1993, nor could it adequately rationalize the generic exemption previously allowed in FY 1991 and FY 1992.
6 l
g90g373930823
$g 170 SBFR21662 PDR l
l Congresswoman Deborah Pryce l The Commission, however, is sympathetic to the problems this new course of action is likely to cause many formerly exempt nonprofit educational institutions. Thus, the Commission provided for individual exemptions under the "public interest" standard in s 171.11(b). A licensee seeking an exemption under the standard would be expected, as part of its showing that exceptional treatment is justified, to demonstrate severe financial hardship resulting from the newly imposed annual fees as well as significant
" externalized benefits," which could include benefits to other NRC licensees.
The Commission is currently developing guidelines for evaluating the requests and expects to act on exemption requests in the near future.
Fees may be deferred pending a decision on the exemption request.
As directed by the Energy Policy Act of 1992, the NRC is taking a broader look at our fee policies and the impact en licensees.
As a part of this review, the Commission will be examining the general issue of exempting nonprofit educational institutions.
The comment period was extended to provide sufficient time for comment on the recent decision regarding fees for nonprofit educational institutions. We expect his review to be complete by November 1993.
If I can be of further assistance, please let me know.
Sincerely, ps /
J es M. Ta or ecutive Director for Operations l
l
i August 23, 1993 Congresswoman Deborah Pryce DISTRIBUTION:
Congressional Correspondence FY 1993 GJackson JFunches DC-93-295 CRC-93-0711 OC R/F LFDCB R/F (2)
DDandois EBlack RScro99 ns i
ED0-9233 SECY-93-0711 DAF R/F EDO R/F i
l s
t 0FFICE:
LFD E DAFd D
OC, ' '
OC ED0 NAME:
DD ; e is EB ck Uer
) Fun es RS oqins JMTay or kg/93
/93
/
J/93 g!/j'f93
/ /93 8/?t/ 3 DATE:
Gert jmm:edo9233.ltr r[2hD
'