ML20058J239
| ML20058J239 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/12/1993 |
| From: | Taylor J NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Pressler L SENATE |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20058J243 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-58FR50859, RULE-PR-171 CCS, NUDOCS 9312140019 | |
| Download: ML20058J239 (10) | |
Text
i,,
'g ((
pa "y s
z
[
UNITED STATES Qg [/
f NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g-.j W ASHWGTON. D C M54M October 12, 1993 The Honorabla Larry Pressler United State Senate Washington,6.
20510-4101
)
Dear Senator Pressler:
i 1 am responding to your letter of September 22, 1993, written on behalf of your constituent, Mr. Leo H. Spinar, South Dakota State University, regarding NRC fees.
In accordance with the requirements of OBRA-90 to recover 100 percent of our budget authority, the NRC published a final rule on July 20, 1993, establishing annual fee schedules for its licensees for fiscal year 1993. The final rule also eliminated a generic exemption from annual fees previously applicable to nonprofit educational institutions.
The Comission's need to revisit the generic exemption for nonprofit educational institutions was occasioned by a March 14, 1993, decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (Allied Signal, Inc. v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission and the United States of America, No. 91-1407 and Consolidated Cases) which forced the Comission to acknowledge the weakness of, and abandon, the passthrough argument formerly made on behalf of these institutions.
Following the publication of the final rule, the Comission received a petition from Cornell and eleven other universities for reconsideration of the final rule and requesting reinstatement of the exemption for nonprofit educational institutions. The Comission has decided to grant the petition to reconsider this matter and is issuing a proposed rule to amend 10 CFR Part 171 to restore the generic enmption from annual fees for nonprofit educational institutions.
Enclosed is a copy of the proposed rule which was published in the Federal Register on September 29,1993, for a 30-day coment period.
Sincerely, l
aes M. T lor ecutive irector for Operations
Enclosure:
Proposed Rule 9312140019 931012
~
1 i
PDR PR 170 SOFR50859 P'. R ai
i 0
1
!~
Federal Register / Vol. 58. No.187 / Wedaesday, September 29, 1993 / Pmposed Rules 50859
~
Regulatory F1c.mibility Certification 938. 954. 955 as amended (42 U.S C 2132, 10 CFR Per1171 As required by the Regulatory 2133,2134.2135.2233.22391. Section 2.104 Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S C 605(b)). also issued under sec.193. Pub. L 101-575.
RW 3150-AE83 the Commission certifies that this rule, 104 Stat. 2835 (42 U.S C 2243). Section 2.105 if adopted, will not have a significant also issued under Pub. L 97-415. % Stat.
esto@n N Genedc Exempton i
economic irnpact on a substantial 2073 H2 U.S C 223% Sections 2 200-2.200 Fr m AanualFees for Nonprofit number of smell entities. The proposed aho issued under secs.161 b.1. o.182,186 rule sets forth the time frame within 234. 68 Stat. 946-.951. 955. 83 Stat. 444, as AGENCV: Nuclear Regulatory which a person other than an applicant amended I42 U S C 2201 (b). li). (oh 2236 Commission.
must file a request for a hearing in a 2282). sec. 206. 88 Stat.1246 (42 U.S C licensing pro < eedmg held under the Sn46) Sections 2 600-2.606 also issued Acnom Proposed mle.
mforrnal procedures set forth in 10 CFR under sec.102. Pub. L 91-190. 83 Stat. 853.
SUMMARY
- On July 20,1993, the Nuclear as amended (42 U.S C 4332). Sections Regulatory Commission ("NRC" or eart 2. subpart L. The proposed rule, by itself, does not impose any obligations 2.700s. 2.719 also issued under 5 U.SC 554.
" Commission") published a final rule Sutions 2.754, 2.760, 2.770. 2.780 also establishing annual fee schedules for its on regulated entities that may fall within the definition of"small entities" issued under 5 U.S C 557. Section 2.764 and licensees for fiscal year 1993. The final as set forth ir; section 601(3) of the table 1 A of appendix C also issued under rule eliminated a generic exemption
{
Regulatory Fiesibility Act, or within the sets 135.141. Pub. L 97-425. 96 Stat. 2232, from annual fees previously applicable 2241 (42 U S C 10155.10161). Section 2.790 to nonprofit educational institutions definition of "small business" as found also issued under sec.103.68 Stat. 938 as (educational exemption). Following in section 3 of the Small Business Act.
amended (42 U.S C 21331 and 5 U.S C 552, publication of this rule, the Commission 15 U.S.C. 632, or within the small Sections 2.800 and 2.808 also tssued under received a petition focreconsideration business size standards (ontained in 13 5 U S C 553. Section 2.809 also issued under requesting reinstatement of the CFR part 121.
5 U.S C 553 and sec. 29; Pub. L 85-U6. 71 educational exemption. The Ilackfit Anal sis Stat. 579, as amended (42 U.Sc 20391 I
Commission views the petition as a Subpart K also issued under sec.189. 68 Stat.
This proposed rule does not invo,ve 955 (42 U.S C 2239h sec.134. Pub. L 97-request to conduct a new rulemaking to impose backfits an defined in 10 CFR 425. 96 Stet. 2230 (42 U.Sn 10154). Subpart amend the final rule by restoring the any new provisions which would
- g. al,o issued under sec.189,68 Stat 955 (42 exemption. The Commission grants the 50109(a)(1). Accordingly. no backfit U.S C 2239) Appendix A also lasued under request for a new rulemaking. The new analysis pursuant to 10 CFR 50.109(c) is sec. 6. Pub. L 91-560. 84 Stat.1473 (42 rulemaking reconsiders whether required for this proposed rule.
U.S C 21351 nonprofit educational institutions List of Subjects to CFR Part 2 should receive a generic exemption
- 2. In $ 2.1205(c). Introductory text is from an mal fees. The Commission Administrative practice and republished and paragraph (c)(2)is requests pubbe comment on that prowdure. Antitrust. Byproduct revised to read as follows:
quntionme mlemaking proceeding material. Classified information, will address no other annual fee Environmental protection. Nuciear 5 2.1205 Rowest for a hearing; petmon for question.
materials. Nuclear power plants and naeve to 6nse'vene.
dam Comment period expires October reactors. Penalty. Sex discrimination.
29,1993. Comments received after this Souru material. Special nut. lear matenal. Waste treatment and dispos *l.
(c) A person other than an applicant fo#
do so b t the m issi i b o For the reasons set out in the Shall file a request for a hearing assure c'onsideration only for comments within-preamble and under the authority of the received on or before this date.
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
DDRESSES: Submit written comments the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 (2)If a Federal Register notice is not to: Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 553, the NRC published in accordance with paragra ph Commission. Washington. DC 20555, is P"Posin8 to adopt the following (c)(1) of this section, the, earliest of-Attn: Docketing and Service Branch.
amendments to 10 CFR part 2.
(i) Thirty (30) days after the requestor Deliver comruents to: 11555 Rockville PAR 1'2-RULES OF PRACTICE FOR
. actual notics of a pending Pike, Rockville. blaryland 20852
'*C" DOMESTIC UCENSING PROCEEDtNGS application, or between 7:45 a.m. and 4:15 p.m. Federal workdays. (Telephone 301-504-1966.)
- 1. The authority citation for part 2 (ii) Thir'y (30) days after the requestor Copies of comments received may be continues to read as follows:
rece ves actual notice of an egency examined and copied for a fee at the action granting an application in whole NRC Public Document Room,2120 L Authonty: Sets.181.181.68 Stat. 948, 953, as amended (42 U.Sc 2201. 2231h sec.
or in part, or Street NW., (Lower Level) Washington, 191. as amended. Puh. L 87-615. 78 Stat. 409 (iii) One hundred and eighty (180)
DC 20555.
142 U.SE 224th sec. 201. 88 Stat.1242, as days after agency action granting an
,g,,,pg, gn,,g.n amended (42 U.S C 584 th 5 U.Sc 552.
appFcation in whole or in part.
L. Michau Rfky, Office of the General Semon 2.101 also assued under secs. 53, Courisel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory MAOmW'St/e'&*2
~ d i =t *d **i =d 4 7 teterhoao sa2-so+-2soe-Commission. Washington, DC 20555, U.S C 2073. 2092. 2093. 2111. 2133,2134, p September.1W3.
2135h sec.114(fl. Pub. L 97-425. 96 Stat.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
SUPPtressM ARY# OmiADON:
2213. as amended (42 U.SE 10134(fjh sec.
Sanneal J. Qhilk, L U*CE f*""d*
3 1C2. Pub. L 91-190. 83 Stat. 853, es amended (42 U.S C 43J2k sec. 301. 88 Stat.1248 (42 38C'F88'Y */g,,,,,,,,,
IL Section.by-section analysts.
U.S C 58711. Sections 2.102,2.103,2.104 IFR Doc. 93-23835 Filed 9-28-93; 8.45 ami 111.Environmentalimpact categorical excJusion.
2.105. 2.721. e'.no issued under secs.102.
suses coom nes.es-e IV. Paperwork reduction act statement.
103,104.105.183.189. 68 Stat. 936,937, V. Regiatory analysis.
1 seed G Federal Ergister / Vc3. 58. No.107 / Wednesda; September 2Q 1973 / Proposedt Ruses VI. Pegulatory fleubthty analysis.
institutwns mrght be aMe 40 usake letter argues Gret a is"ioelacited" and VII B.< krit analysis-individuahzed showmgs of financial
" socially and economacally I. Background hardship and externalised benellis undesirable" to charge people for accesa sufficsent to justify a "public interest" ta pure knowfedge, because the benefits-On July 20.1993 the Commtssion exemption under 10 CFR 171.11(b)(58 of that knowledge "are largely pubhshed its final annual fue rule for FR 3%m The two dissenticg unpredictable." Letter from Alfred Kahn FY 1993 (58 FR 38666L The final rule Comrnissioners took the view that the to Shirley Egan. Associate University prmcipally set out the Commissmn s fee Commission should continue m force Counsel. Camell University Guly 15.
schedules for FY 1993, but it also the genenc educational exemption (58 1993),
discussed in some detail the 3-2 FR w5l.
The petitioners also stressed the hamt Commission decision ta revoke a Almost immediately the Commission to univerinty nuclear programs as a generic exemption previously bexan reu mng letters from many result of the newiv imposed annual fees applicable to nonprofit educational colleges and uruversities protestmg the (petition at 8-4). Using Cornell msututtons. A court of appeals decision. change m its longstandmg pohcy. Many Universrty's nuc cer prtyam as an a
issued in March 1993. had necessitated of these letters were sent as comments example, thev a uerted that Federal the Commission's rethinkmg of the rwarding the Commission's concurrent grants (in edifition to those already educational exemption. See A#ied.
rg obov study now being conducted provided! might be necessary to meet p
Signal. Inc v. NRC. 988 F 2d 146 (U C.
as requirW by the Energy Policy Act of 1he additional costs of NRC annual fees Cir 1o93). That decision cast doubt on 1992 (58 FR 21116L In these letters and (petition at 9-10). Finally. the the NRC's stated rationale-which comments (avadable in the NRC Public petitioners argued that the included a purported inabihty to " pass Document Room ("FDR"l), educational Commission's longstanding exemphon ihrough" costs-for exempting institution 6 descnbed the "extemalized for nonprofit educational institutions nonpmf:t educationalinstitutwns fmm bene fits" derived ITom their programs was rooted in sound pohcy. and that annual fen and the problems c. rested by the new reinstating the exemption would be in reaction to the court decision, the annual fees, mduding the prospect of consistent with the already extensive Commission initially proposed to retain maior cuttecks in nuclear educaton.
direct Federal funding provided many the cdocational exemption, but with a Some hcenes also pointed out that cIollege and untversity licensees hesh rationale. In its proposed FY 1993 their programs were already heavily (petit' ion at 12-131 annual fee rule the Commmwn subsidized by the Federal govemment In August, while the petition for requested comments on retaining ihe (in panicular by the Departsnent of reconsidersoon was under exemption, and asLed specifically for Energy), precisely because the programs constdemtion, the Commrasion comments on the court's suggestion that were not sustainable absent pubhc undertook an effort of its own to perhaps the exemption could be sector support.
develop guidancs for considering
)
justified if " education yicids The Commission also received a individual "public interest" exemption j
eueptionally large extematized benefits formal petition for reconsideration of requests by cn!!eges and universties. As i
that cannot be captured in tuition or the FY 1993 finst rule with the aim of part of thts effort.the NRC staff visited other market pnces." 968 F.2d at 151.
restoring the nonprofit educational a number of colleges and universities to The Commission also requested exempnon.See Petition fbr team more almut their educational conunents on whether the exemption Reconsideration of Finel Rule (July 30 activities and the bene fits of non-power should be revoked.
1993). In this petik a for reactors and the use of nuclasr cuterials Following the close of the cornment reconsideration (which is being in education pmgrams.N Commission penod, the Commission faced a pubtfshed as an appendix to this conchtded that the new annual fees ddemma. It remained commstted to the proposed rule), a number of formerly
($62.100 for each m9 march resetor value of nuclear eduation and related exempt colleges and universities license; Lessar amounts for sech research as a policy matter but it had asserted with mme specificity a number matsnals license) would jeopardize the received only a few comrnents. and of benefits that educatsonalinstitution educananal and related research cursory ones at that, supporting a research res.ctors provide to both the benefits provided by a number of continued genenc exemption.
nuclear industry and the public et large., collegesand universitsas.
Additions 11y. some NRC licensees had Prominent was the continued training of As a result of the new and mora submitted (pmments requesting nuclear scientists and engineers detailed information and arguments abandonment of the exemption (petition et 3-4). h petitioners also developed in the petition be altogether or a more equitable sprud of stated that nuclear technology wee used - - -
"cm and in the other sources it s cost; to all licensees. Still other in falds as vaned as medicine, geology, descnbed above. and after careful commenters urged that the-axamption archaeology, food scumca and textiles reflection, the Comrmssion now is be retained, but that it be arpandod to and that the publicw m - 11y inclined to return to i*s previous include vanous other licensed activities. benefitted from people who could practics of exempting nonprefit A fier considenng the materft.l before provide knowledgeable opinions on educationslinstrutions from anmaal it. a spht Commission. by a 3-2 vote.
nuclear topics, es well as fmm tours of fees. The Commission therefore gants
" reluctantly concluded that in view cf research reactors (peutton et 4-51 the petition for reconsxierstion of the the court decision and the The petittoasts went on to argue that FY 1993 final rule and now proposes to administrative reconi developed during education provides significant exempt nonprofit educational the comment period it cannot justify a "externalued benellis" weaanting.
institutions from annual bat.The generic educattorial' exemption for FY pubhc subsidy.Ny cited a haans from Comminion does notintend to creene 1993" (58 FR 38066-691. Therehrs, the economist Alfred Kahn (also available any othes generic exetaptises categorise Commission informed formerly exempt in the attached appendix) stating that ir this rules aking; does not propondr nonprofit educational institutions that the knowledge generated by unfversi.
h Comnnssiest they would have to pay ams! fees related rewarch is itself a pubife..
lightly this fundser shift is a pokcy that beimning in FY 1993. The Commenn that cannot be quanetfk! ceing marketr has streedy spae throegh a ma4er did point out that ranay of these indices (petition at 6-M. Mr. Kaws changs in a short thso. & Commission
Federal Register / Vol. 58, No.187 / Wednesday, Septrmber 29. 1993 / Proposed Rules 50861 was sharply divided from the outset on This notice, of course, does not licensees the shortfall resulting from the the wisdom of eliminating the Beneric represent a final Commission decision educational exemption. pursuant to its educational exemption. New to reinstate the educational exemption.
current statutory mandate io recover 100 information and fresh thinking have but simply the Commission's proposed pert.ent of its budget.
persuaded the entire Commission that resolution of the question based on its restoration of the exemption refterts a current best information and best II. Section-by Section Analysis snund policy choice that avoids placing thinking. But, with the Commission Section 172.1 Exemptions in jeopardy valuable educational proposing to restore a genenc p
g og g resources that are indispensable to the exemption,it is not necessary for amended b addin non rofit nuclear industry, to numerous other formerly exempted educational educational activities, to the NRC stself licensees to apply for individual public dyj',ona ~ tu sjs defined m~
ati j
and to the public at large.
interest exemptions. Therefore, the The Commission solicits public Commission requests nonprofit exempted from annual fees b the Y.
t.omrdnt on its proposed rule that educational licensees not to seek such g
^ is ussion fthis aange in fee po 'c is found in Section would restore the exemption. Commer.ts exemptions at this time. If after i
on other annual im issues will not be reconsideration, the Commission
, 12i5 propose e.
entertained in connection with this decides that it cannot justify a generic III. Environmental Impact: Categorical roposed rule. The Commission already exemption it will provide educational Exclusion as received some information on the hcensees ample time to seek individual "extematized benefits" of non-power exemptions. The Commission will hold The NRC. es determined that this reactors and the use of licensed nudear
'n abeyance allindividual exem tion proposed s ib s the t' N of action described i egoriud endusion to matenals in various educational mquests it already has received rom CFR n a h%&m activities and related research at ed on j of refuNs to ncnprofit
,,u environmental assessment not an colleges and universities. Ilowever, the Commission is mterested m more data educational licensees who may have environmental impact statement has on the benefits of non. power reactors paid the FY 1993 annual fee will be been prepared for the proposed and the use of hcensed nuclear addressed. if applicable. in the final regulation.
materials in eduantion in its broadest rule. Nonprofit educational licensees IV. Paperwork Reduction Ac1 wnse, in the expectatior that more data who have requested termmation.
Statement may well substantiate 11.. argument iri downgrade, possession-e 'ly or the 2tition for reconsideration that combined licenses to avoid the FY 1993 This proposed rule contains no
,.,.. tower reactors and the use of annual fee will be advised aaordingly information collection requirements.
hcensed nuclear materials in what action,if any,is needed if they and, therefore, is not subject to the educational ac:ivities are prime choose to rescind those applications as requinments of the Paperwork
]
a msult of this to rulemaking.
Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S C. 3501 i
examples of activities that provide There is one n point w'arranting et 589 I-
" externalized benefits" warrantmg clanfication. The FY 1993 final rule public support.
V. Regulatory Analysis eliminating the educational exemption The Commission expects commenters indicated that, because of the remand With respect to 10 CFR part 171, on to addmss the "extemalized benefits" from the court of appeals, the November 5,1990, the Congress passed question by providing data on (but not Commission would issue new fee Pub. L 101-508, the Omnibus Budget limited to) the size and subject areas of schedules retracting the exemption for fleconciliet.u Act of 1990 (OBRA-901 l
classes using licensed materialin FY 1991-92 and offer appropriate For FYs 1991 through 1995, OBRA-90 studies or research, the number of refunds. The Commission now proposes requires that approximately 100 percent faculty and students using licensed not to issue revised fee schedules of the NRC budget authority be matenal in their studies or researth, the reflecting retraction of the educational recovered throu the assessment of 1
ype and avadability of work for exemption because of its inclination to fees. To accomp ish this statutory graduates of nuclear programs and other restore the exemption. Commenters, if requirement, on July 20,1993 (58 FR programs in which licensed nuclear they choose, may addrest this point.
38666), the NRC,in accordance with materyals are used, and the relation As the final rule made clear 658 FR 5171.13. ublished in the Federal between edocation and research in 38669), the Commission did not intend Register e final amount of the FY 1993 institutions of higher teaming. ne retroactively to charge fees to nonprofit annual fees for operating reactor Commission has particular intemst in educational institutions for FYs 1991-licensees, fuel cycle licensees, materials 1
comments on the extent to which the 92, but did intend to make refunds to licenseen. and holders of Cemficates of benefits of nuclear education and other those licensees (power reactors) that Compliance, registrations of sealed programs using licensed nuclear made up the shortfall in 100 percent fee source and devices and QA program materials (not simply education in recovery created by the educational approvals, and Govemment agencies.
general) are "extemalized" and would exemption. Should the Commission OBRA-90 and the Conference not be produced by market forces. The restore the exemption, however, no new Committee Repe specifically state Commission would appreciate detailed fee schedule for FYs 1991-92 will be that-information on the many non. nuclear necessary and no refunds will be made.
(1)The annual fees be based on the ficids of study that use licensed nuclear On the other hand, because of the Commission's FY 1993 budget of 3540.0 material in the course of educating their timing of this reconsideration million less the amounts collected from students. ne Commission has received proceeding and if the Commission part 170 feea rnd the funds directly some information in letters addressing reinstates the educational exemption, no appropriated from the NWF to cover the the fee policy study requimd by the licensee will be assessed additional fees NRC's high level weste program.
Energy Policy Act of 1992 described to mak e up any shortfall created for FY (2) The annual fees shiell, to the above. but more data is needed for the 1993. For futum fiscal years, however, maximum extent practicable, have a Commission's deliberations.
the Commission will recover from other reasonable relationship to the cost of I
- e. -
Fodsear Esgiares / Vol. 5#,.'9a 107 / C. k September 39,1995 / !%pned RefL=s 58052 f
i regulatory enrvsces provided by the List of Sehrwty in toCFlf Part 171 Commissmn: and 104 c. of the Atomte Energy Act of 1954 Annual chart,es. Hyprodud rnatnial.
(42 U.S C.27'Pe4c)/ be operst'on at a (3) % annual fees be assessed to lloiders of certificates, n gistzations, anr'. thermal werlevef of te megewstts or those licensees that the Commission, in a pprov als. Intergovern mental. elations, less; an its discretion. determmes can fairly.
Non payment penalties. Nuclear (iiMso licensed for operation at a equitably, and practicably cantnbute to materials. Nucear power plants and thermal powerlevel ofmere than 1 their payment.
reactors. Sot rce material. Specid megawatt, does not corrtain-i Therefore. when developing the nuclear material (A) A circulatin loop threugh the annual fees for operating power reactors For the reasons set dut in the core in which the,,icensee condocts fuel the NRC continued to consider the preamble and under the authority of the expenments:
s anous reactor vendors, the types of Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended.
(B) A hquid fuelloading or (ontainment, and the location of the and 5 U.S C. 553, the NRC is proprmrq (C) An expenmental faality m, the operating power tractors. The annual to adopt the tullowing annendments to c re m excess of to sqtrare mches m 3
fees for fuel cycle Ikensees, materials to CFR pan 171.
cross-section.
bcensees, and holders of certificates.
regtstratmns and appmvals and for PART 171-ANNUAL FEES FOR Dated at Rochille.MIT (fus 23d day of bcenses issued to Govemrnent agenoes REACTOR OPERATING UCENSES, Septemter 1993.
take into account the type of fachty o' AND FUEL CYCLE UCEN5ES AND For the Nuclear Regulatory Commns.on.
approval and the darses of the MATERIALS UCENSES, INCLUDING Samuel f. Oti!k.
hanwes.
HOLDERS OF CERTIFICATES OF 5,cn,m @e Corn-COMPT.1ANCE REGISTRATIONS, AND 10 CFR pan 171, which established QUAUTY ASSURANCE PROGRAM APPendia Te Proposed Rule-htition of annual fees for operstmg power reactors APPROVALS AND GOVERNMEET Reconsiderstaan d rmal ash, effect:we October 20.1966 (51 FR 33224: AGENC1ES UCENSED BY THE NAC L Intmderfon September 18.1986), was challenged m
W g gp The Nudear Regulatory Commission and rheld m its entirety in Florida Power and Light Company v. United is revised to read as follows-("NHC or" Commission 7 has long exempted nonprofit educational institutions States. 846 F.2d 765 (D C Cir.1988).
Authority:Sec 7601. Pub.L 94-272.100 from paying anmsaf ima Although the een denied. 490 U.S.1045 (1989).
Stat.146. as amended by sec. 5001. Pub. L Commissmo tredrtionalty fuserSed thie 100-203.101 Stat.1330, as amended by Sec.
exemptme on the grmmds that collegar and 10 CFR pan 171. which established 32tn. Pub. L 101-739. t03 Stat. 7106 as h+s based on the FY 1989 budget, were amemh-d by sec. 6101. Puh L 101-508.104 universmes could aus readdy pass the east of also legally challenged. As a result of Stat.1388. (42 UE 77131: sec. 3tn. Putx L the fees on as armems through tuitmo and other charnes. o recane tederal coun decismo the Supreme Coun decision in Skinner 92-314. so Star. 2:2 !s2 UE 22011w H; sec. questionedthetauomal.. Thecoun
- v. Afid Amencon Pipeline Co.,109 S. Ct. 201, sa Stat.1242.s ausseded (42 UE explained. however.that the externaliaed 1726 (1989), and the denial of ceniorar m t h sec. 29m. Pub. L 102-446.1DS Stat.
in Florida Power and Light, all of the 3125. (42 UE 2214 nore).
tenefits of education pueantially supponed such en exemption.s lawsuits were withdrawn.
- 2. In 5171.11, paregmpMa) is reeised
^1though the Commission at first defended i
The NRC's FY 1991 annual ft, rule to reed as follow its educeeonal a lo e rolerceking proceedirsi pmm;w by the coun's decision, was largely upheld nscently by the D.C
$ 171.11 Ex== Pena==
it at-danad he emermptiae in the Saal t
Circuit Court of Appeals in AUied (a) An annual ine is not required for; versene ed sts annual fue rnia* Patttamen Signal v. NRC (1) A construction permit orlicens, e ned thatla no doing the Carammason 4
VI. Regulatory flesibility Analysis ap lied for by orissued to, a non refit erred and respectfully request than the ed cationalInstituanon for a Prod ion Cornmisson ramnsMis ruhag and As required by the Regulatory or utilizaties iscility, other than a reinatet, the em.mption for nonpsos educational !Iconsees.s F'exibihty Act 5 U S C 605(b) the Power reactor, or for the son and Commission cenifies that this proposed use of product m sonarce QAn%s Conn tire rule, if adopted, will not have a materna or sysoal madeur stasenal EducarmaalInsursonas u t al um o
al les.
as 7[,
d The proposed rule affects about 110 mateeialitenses which authorize:
9,,
operntmg power reactors which are not (i)Haman ase:
F.2d 144 (D.C Cis.19ul, compelled the (onsidered to be small entitfes.
(ii) Remunerated services to other g,
g g
nonprofit educational facilities, the coun Vll.Backfit Analysis i ) D'istnbation of bypenduct, suggested a valid reamo for exempting The NRC has determined that the material, source matmai.orspecial
,see ta cra tri meIuorn nuclear material a psoducts "-a**
backfit rule.10 CFR 50.109, does not byproduct matenal, source material, or 3,,ggg3;,not 3e,. us wcfar FerukserrC=a==*. 8 s F.2d us to c CIr. tassi, apply Io this proposed rule and that a sp(ecial sudear massrtud: au-disc d se anan a'sabe.
backfit analysis is not required for this i,) Activities periassmed mamaara
' M **1 R==ar* 8 =6a pmposed rula.N badfit analysia is Governrnant ces trad.
m m and sea naalR=W m it=
s not required because the6e amsadments (2) Federally owned moneards rescaees C'"g"QP,I'
, M"MI'*
do not require the modification of or used primanly for e mmenal training a
sneer, suses.e #4ecteur usestriory cenenw. leer additions to sys6 ems, sin. cures, and eradamic aneensch purposen. For zo.tessit FinstamW1 components, or design of a lacihty or purposee ei this====fanan, the eerse
- Pounaam Ccessti um6seus, he atuwmed thedesignappmvalormanufan ring researth reacsor reeens a nuclear reactor g*fPPufa u
o license for a facility or the proceduru that-p or orgaruzation :=quised to design.
(il ns I-=.edby time Nudoes g,n,,g,,n,y sco,,,, %,mr commi 6 nors i.,,,p suas sisusse fhty construct or operate a facility.
Regulatory Commission under section 1s. isen
O I
redsat madener / vol. se. m. m / wedmender, september a. m3 / Prop
.d RnN
$9983 educational reactor licensees frurs as nual research provides en important benent to the
===icatty undchable for tte m do so."
lees. The court merely asked the NRC to nucWer mdustry and the pub 6c et lame and Id. insteed, he mesons. "o Get charge on manhal a rationale based on " externalized abould not be discouraged."r A " vibrant benefits" of educedon "that cannot be nuclear educat2on sector also is important as busmess beneficiaries rs supenor to a specinc captured in tutt6on or other market prices."
e sourte of talent and ideas for the NRC itsed charge by the Univenity for particular pieces Id. et 151. Indeed, the Allied-Signal court and for the w bole government," the of knowledge."Id.The Commission's explained that "there is et leest e eenous Commisrion avowed in the course ofits relatively small costs assoc 2ated with possibihty" that the Commission ran rulemaking process. Id. The wide array of lic.ensing educational reactors ma7 easil be Y
"substannate" such en exernptwn. /d.
externalized benefits generated by nuclear revered imm those lacaneses who benefit in its Final Roe. however, the Commission reactor pmgrams et nonprofit educational imrneaturably from the acovities of the
" missed an opportuu *y to consider seriously institutions is thus apparent imm the distmguished tendung and research the dessic *externehzad benefits' argument" Commission's statements and fmm the many comrnunity et our nation's univemues, and proposed by the court.* While Petitionen comments sutwnstted in support of the those wbo. tn the Commission's disernos, bel eve that the Comruission should beve contested exempoon.e can fatriy. equitably, and practically make decided to continue the exemption at usue and sbould have based its deusion on the IV Economic Theory Supports the h,onprofit such payments.
court's dsscussion and on the many Educational Exemptwn V. The Pmposed AnnualFees Threaten comments supportmg the e temption. they N Commissaon's long4tanding Serrous injury to Uruversary Nuclear seek in this peution to pmvide the exernpuoe for nonpro6t educational fec lines Programs j
Commission with addiuonalinformation is wholly consistent with "externalmd Not only is it econonucally inefficient to I
about the considerable extemalued benefits tenefits" economic theory. As levy annu'al fees on nivenity researth of nuclear reactor programs at nonproSt Commissioners Remick and DePhaque educational institutions.
explained m har opinion. "educauoa like reactors, it also places an undue financial Ill. Nuclear Reactors of Nonpmfit nati nal defense. [andl the administrataos of burdu on ch niena hh M pm aM thmetus to chn! nuckar reseech vital m EducoconalInstitucons Provide-Significant
$s ce industry and the general public ahke.ie &
,og,7, Denefits to the Commeraal Nucleor Industry and the General Publac g
Final Rule. 58 FR et situation at Cornellis illustrative of these Pu'anta*I roblems.n Cornell unes two 38675. Indeed. the " exceptionally large" P
Univenities, including the Petitioners, benefits of nuclear reactor programs et twectors fas teaching and research. The larger, I
train scientists and engmeers wbo enter the universities are recounted in section III above a 50>kilowett TRIGA is used roomt mmmerciel nuclear todustry and powrnment and in the many mmmarits submitted to the frequently. A staff of four--two engineers and i
reguketory >ganche such as tre MC tteetf.
Commisrion daring its rulemaling pmmes.s two lab techniciano-maintains the readers.
I Distmguished faculty, many of whom beve From gmund-breaking dismvers to vital
%e annual operating budget runs worked in the Seld stoce its talency, instruct mre deta univerrity nuclear research is a,,,,,u;dy $2340003:The proposed the students in basic research and new op,nly published and fmery debetod to NRC annual fee for Cornell's r=cerm-technologies. Without study at eduantional ensure the h academic standards and reactors, these students would lack the
$124.20thstrus MPNts N haHof the widest evail ility. Such 7plure knowhrdge bowledge and skill neansaary to edequately is & archetypal *pubhc
'" once e um room budge maintain the etnciency and safety of the pr*M. A con be estri ed wndefy M no ladeed. the federal government is the sole nucieer industry, incremental cost. Letter fmre Affred E. Kahn source dgrant monin supporting ComeWs
{
Nuclear engineering psugnema, wh6ch can sonem a@ugmeerms pmgmms, to Shtriey K. Egna Ouly 15,11Mr3l("Kahm n
thrive only try induding hando-os laboretary betesq at t As Camrmise60 sees n=maand and federal reeaerch dellers n=pnee meerly study at a working seactor, assist the DePlanqiise reasood, the free snarlset uney lang half of the suclear science and engineersag
{
commercial nuc. lear industry directly thmu6h pum and appued science. Cornell
..to suppdy time asammary omnoemt of G-ds===-I ressed budget. The researchers, for example, have analysed e r Mim:muso" and other puhnc gods boomisse Departmoun of Energy am ordy rsertritsetos behavior of reactors under severe accident g..wy,,,
or students nach talarmarten substantamil grant monies but also duneses all conditloos. Univoretties contribute to the sufBcient to set the "ri ht price" or are shbe fast or the roectors. Ornell nuclear 6
unable to pay that price. Final Rule,58 FR i
power reactor industry by developing concepts for better cooling rystems, at 38675. The inefficiency of charging for
- N Cornmission has ak sugwed he it uwy 1
ocess se mary ressed and m % % % w wp w moderators, and other mmpameans of power edah thus supports whos mited am emn d%@w mact n rystema.
University rescartbers also use reactors to econommt Alfred Kahn calls "the stsong and OfScus Appropristime Ad r OAA7.an menpmne develop new applications of eucker universally recogassed cnse for pubhcr eduandemed locassume. Ese Plaal Rulat to F1t at technology in ficids es vuried as meMne.
financing of pure reseenh." Kahn Latter et t seeses tomt 17ustan) hoes) -
ga W adosolog, food soccos, and Kahn expiatas that it would be " futile for
- "5"' *""d'*d I"'"*"'s he m f.ent universities to try to recover the coct by Because these Ims wy wah b ma ohmanctus charging potential users" for reeeerth and an$ unie pm P
is education as well as "sociaDy and natimeta. The scenarmic and puthe puncy D OP"#***E 8
""I "" # ** a % g rettameise fnr exempting colleges and antversities institutions assist ind and W r FT 1998 and 1982 PrW haie bue tram NRC annual lume egy with equel larce to in other important wrys.
prodde a the U.S. Conn es As peels Docsmeen and hestehen IOAA fees, bouww rw of mspected,i and Pn Schedules; 100% Pee Recovery. FY 1983. Se FR
- See Nuclear Reactar Budgeta Use, and rederni 8'
tudependent opinion on the benente end 21e&2. 21664 (Nucleos Ragulesary Casann's.
Pandaag as Paubaner laausussuna enschd as
- 22. tossi rProposed ReAe7 octissamme De A.
burdens of nuclear technology for e eccle*y
.see ok descnposen of Putrwasus mache inne naamass are om.d premarey by dess l
addressing its implications. Students and re csar programs ansched as Enhibit 3.
nuctuar somuce and omgumering incehy and members of the pubhc who tour the
.s.r.o.m the Afhms $gnol episi save no ePPr**"e*F t"*he 8'"d"*8 F*r ?-
educational reactor facihuss insight into explanetton of wt at **= ark emnernalland with addit 6ameJ line nas by as miasy as ese the vaned uses of nuclear t '
logy and benefHs should be measurd by. It is enc. lear whar fenhy and ILbeen pudosse eredasse km M asue to op raciste h coninbunon of the court mment by "suo,p.ny 1.,g " gi e4 sech as s% shammary, ausneus, and nuclear ustries to &9maltty d thotr NEF'al see P.2d at 151. Furtherimore. at is m anchugmed U""
practicaDy impaadMa to queasspy the emN **""'""'"" Puhuc enum east emme its cont 9-illef the, as=ahal pmymms make no comumiercial names oIsod-acumust Amr shout a viesreurof she rescases ment est that ancient acasmse and The Commtasion itselfp W
A test seedy chmered by Dr. houscan it. Web anarry. ** Pmition, topother wt:h the enemy found that of the at amesursey rentzere tbse cununants subnuned try educat6 anal %censees, doce opesettes,is tucasred ensual emuts tietow sesmoe.
- D.
A rs of ri
~ m Rasueckand bcrwever titustroie the extent and wer$ery of sucts Lauer frcan Marns Desh arid Edward it Rheuens Dar, '. 1 Ruis. 5,e PR st 3864 bensftta no S*trieel I Odik (July 12. sets) at 2.
50884 FedernL Repster / Vol 58. No.187 / Wednesday. Sapenmber 29,1997 /~ Proposed Rules i.
rescartkrassaave grants from the National W TheEdumtronelEaupuoefieflects-Manhenee Collegs.
Scierece Foundation as wellu Sound Pubine Ibhry and o Trodttma of Walter Matystik, a
Iiihe Commiasson abandons tbs Support for Educat>on educational exemption. Cornell will be p,,
y forted to seek invecsed federal grants to Given the significant benefits twalir.ed by Monharton College P&wy.. Brostr. N Y 3047s' cover the NRC charges. Rather than the nuclear industry frorn university rescarth accomphshing the budgetary goa e of the and education, any additional fees imposed I
' ' " "EY' Omnibus Reconcshation Act. Public law No.
on commercial hcensees to cover costs 101-50s.104 Stat.1388 (l990), tte associated with nonprofit educational Ge rge H. Dumrner.
reactors are a ba gam not a burden.
Duwror. Office o/ Sponsored Programs.
i on f cral ket o other Cornmertial power reactors have histoncally M ssachusettsinsterute of Technology 77 As a federal court has lintically noted. "Idt tren the only NRC hcensees asked to absorb fassach setts Awnue, mom 4-110.
is selinident that a transfer of funds from the cast of supporting educational reactors.
g-one ageracy to another fails to increase federal The $7.1 milhon in fiscal year 1993 costs By:
revenue." flonda Power & lsght Co. v.
associated with licensing nonprofit North Carohna State University.
United States. 846 F 2d 765. 771 (D C Cir.
educational tenctors. if divided equally Igso.
among the 109 commercial power reactors Dr. Larry Monteith.
Il Cornell attempted to recoup the NRC fees now m operstmn. amounts to only 56L000 Chancellor. North Comhno State Universsty~
through general tuition increases rather than per commercial reactor and adds a mere 2*6 A Holloday Hall. Bom 700t. Raleigh. NC ~
thmugh grants. all students, many of wh9m to the proposed average fee for commercial 27695-7002' racive extensive financial aid from the reactors. See Pmposad Rule. 58 FR st 21674.
By:
government and pnvate funds. would be ne costs borne try power reactor licensees Reed College.
torted to subsidize a relatively small could, in the Commission's discretion, be Stesen Koblik, department at the university. Alternatively, a decreased somew hat by spreading them President. Reed College. J203 Southeast ma,or increase in laboratory fees troposed on equitably among all commercial hcensees.
woodstock Blvd. Portland. OR 97202.
nudcar smence and engineenng students alone would place the prt$ ram utterly That federal sources already support beyond their financial reach. Cost increases extenswe nuclear researth and education at D
of such magnitude would make anY both pnvate and public institutions speaks to University i Rhode Island, insutution's nuclear program a pnrne target the national importance of this dlscipline.
Louis L Saccario.
for chmmation.
The Commission's traditional exemption for Assistant ligal Counsel. Carforti i
Since the Commisdon's Fm.al Rule seeks t nonprofit educational facihties redocts a Admmastrorson Bldg.. Offsce of the Censrol coifcct annual charges for fiscal year 1993. it history of federal support for higher Counsel. Uniwesity of Rhode hland.
also threatens to disru university budgets.
education reDected in universities' nonprofit Kmgston R1028st.
tax status and exemphfied by the Mc nll Act Br which first estabhshed land-grant colleges The' Board of Trustees of The University of es u for thi yes D se o e significant lag time required for approval of such as ruany of the Petitioners. The efforts Illmois.
grant pmposals,it may take as long as two f Congress and the NRC to reduce the Donald A. Henas, years for umwrnties to learn whether federal budget defical are praiseworthy. but monics necessary to cover the maior expense only nf thse efbr1 mnuraen gmwth by Associate University Counsel Uniwisity of of NRC fees will even he available. This s'amgthmng the nation's long-standmg lihnois. Suste 258. Henry Admarustration financial stress cornes as a shock to the supenonty in ecsena and technology. In the Bldg. 506 South Wnght Street. Urbana. ll
- g3g, educatsonal community in the wake of the long term. the loss of the Commission's Commission's vigomus argument supportmg educational exempoon will hinder the By-the exemption in its Pmposed Rule.*:
advancement of nuclear science the nuclear The Curators of the Universary of Missouri.
Although the Commsssion proposes to industry, the NRC itself, and the national Phillip J. Hoskins, aMeviste the financial burden on colleges and interest.
Counsel. Uniwrsi y of Missouri Systern.127 t
umversities by considertng individual requests for exemption from annual fees and 1H Conclusion Universsty Hall. C tumbia, MO 65212.
for installment payments. these suggestions For the foreguirig reasons. Petitioners g
provide small consolation. Installment request that the Comtrussion reconsider its Un versity of New Menco*
payment plans fail to address the rest Final Rule and reinstate Ita annual fee Charles N. Estes. Jr.
problem confronting universitice-how to esemption for nonpmfit educatnonal University Counsel. University of New pay for such annual fees at all. Furthermore insnturions.
Meuco.150 Scholes Hall. Albuquerque. NM any attemp,6 by the Commission to en. amine numemus individual esemption requests Respectfully submitte,d.
could consume more NRC administrative By:
By-resources than a blanket educational Cornell Univeruty, The Umversity of Texas System.
ciemption. The sheer number of univentties Shirley K. Egan.
P.obert Giddings, ioming in this petitaan underscxtres this A "**'Y'b'""'^ O'" ^""** ""*'Y *U"** W"*
Assocate Counsel. Comell Uniwrsity. 500 t oncein-Day Hall. fthaca. NY 14853-2001 By:
" Grants trom the Alcmac Energy Comrnission and the tenonal Scwnce Foundanon first enobied Gunsel b M UnMay, Universtry of Utah.
Comell to otsala 6ts two reactorn. See Dend IL Joseph C Bell. Melissa R. Jones.
Williams T. Evans.
Da e A I 5prmg ie93, at L e Lag Q
' Ge s
le T nr Ith W
fL 36 South Skne Street. SalLloke City, u See Mnal Rule. Sa F1t et 3aa75. Proposed Ruie.
By' UT843!!.
Se nt at 2 test ("The Commasanon proposes to Kansas State University.
S% maY e me uP
- contmue to exempt ihm e Inonpront edumthonell b
wense imm s sor na ast. toes and tses.
knnif*' '"" '
loseph C Bell Melissa R. Jones.
as it has be many years in the pass * * * (andl Assktant University Artomey. Kansas State Hogen & Hartson. 555 Dirteenth Street.NW.,
contcnues to tnelsove tkat 'educatsonal e. earth Unnersity.111 AnersosiHall. Manhattan,Ks 665064f!$.
Washington. DC20004-1109. Counselfor provides an importana benant to the nuclear industry and the pubibc at large and should not be ComellUniwrsirI dacourageC'mtanons anuttedk By-Deted: July 39. t991.
a.
f4deral Emgester / Vol 58, th.187 / Wednessday. Septesrher 29.1993 / %._i Rides 59965 l'
EnMt 3 pmdurmd at can tie nonde evedutAoinuve end I hace amthing to odd to yow siesemene.
July 111993.
m re widely at wro mcmmental cost. Thes except to pmnt out ettet rmovery in the form Ms. Shirley K. Egan, means rhet it is inefficient to cberge penple of a flat charge on busmens beneficiaries rs fw act ns t it.
Associate Umwrsity Coimsel. 500 Day Hoff, supenor to a speafic charge by the Cornell Unawrsary, fthoco. NY f 4853 at fed taken together with the difficulty University for partrcular p.eus of Dner Ms. Egan: Your draft of a possible of the producer of pure knowledge knowledge.
submasion to tbc NPC capruren most of the appropriating the benefits of it in charges to I urge you to consider expending the a gument umt I and.1 am sure, the Circuit potennel mWee the bendits are argurnent slightly along these lines, mamly Court had m mind.
largely unpredictable-together rnake the inause I think I can assure you that anyone There is one obwrvenun you make, steg and universally rwxn6mzed case for who raises th possMe cansaderation of howe er. that I think can usefully !*,
pubhc financmt of pure research. The enternalitme will be rkeptive to such an espanded. and it is an argument that anyone Umwrsity a policy, which you do correctly lamehat with the hierature on entemahnes emphasize of conducting resesrch on a non-espansion te embrace the conupt of pubhc would quakly a precate. It has do with ti, propractary basis is therefore-es you cleerly Eg,M h 1 g.
mmc 4ah scw sai benefits o the non.propnetary pure imply but do not. I think. stress adequately-gg runrt h to which you allude, and of the so(ially highly desirsble, and it would be assooated practice of not charymg possMe both futile for universities to try to recover raising me w two amnor specir.c questons.
users for octms to the knowledge that it the cost by c.hargmg potential users and Nese cad on me if y u Ank I can be cif pmd uces.
sooally and economically undesirable for any additional assistanu.
Pure knowledge is the art.betypal "public them to do so.
With best rewards.
g%d." in econormc terms, the essential This does not answer the question of who
.,incerely.
( haractenstic of =hath is that, ocu should pay the charges in queetion; on this Alfred Kahn.
ExHeelT A-NUCLEAR REACTOR BUDGETS. USE. AND FEDERAt. FUHorNG AT PETmONER INShTUTIONS Arruel remesnr NA pnrsons usrq reactor Percentage of dept. W tratreution oper Dudg-
%#pgmi studentsNrder trom teoeral sources (per-et (
)
graduates) cert) 4 ComesUrr#.
'240.000 124.200 3Rt2G 52.
i Kansas Staes Urvv 134,462 62.100 aFRGOSU 67.
Martietsen Coasge 16.000 R100 3R20GODU Not Avedaba.*
nLLT
- 1.270.uos nice 35FmSG 630 61 N, Carohne Sasse Urav 435.0G3 62.100 6R50G47U 25.
Reed Conege 60.000 62.100 8&OGr130 31 I
Urev. Uhnous-Umane s200.000 124.23) 4H14G 75.
Urav. BAssoun-Rcea
- 108.350 62.100 6F/12Gr300 the AvaanNm Urev. New Menco.
27.000 E 100 8F42Gt25U 89.
Unrv. Rhode tsiare....
533.769 E100 22F/12G 85.
i Urrv. TexaoAusan.
267.183 62.100 4F/11G 100.
I Urev. Utah AX)0 62.100 SFt16Gr7U 48.
' Cosrtuned hgure lor the too readors at Comes n Facapty operates at a de6 cit of $650.00(L s Corrtuned flgurs tar the two reactors at Isrions-Urt>ana.
- Dets imm sw Rote camus ressor orey.
s Total 1992 tederaf grwas tar see Deparamart owe 8ed $40.000.
j Lthalma 5 studied by determiniog restdues of labeled Nut.ional Transportataan Safety Board. Within Nuclear Reucts hugrams at Petitmaner oils on treated specinwns. ffadeer rnrthods the Universary, the reactor is used mostly by Institutions of charactertrutmn for trece elements have chemistry students, followed by nudear been a key to renobring many tnotertals engineenng students. Research is conducted CM Umwrsity quattty 1: sues for salimn semiconducor in a wede sange of Sands including geoiogy, in its 30 years of oparaticm. the Cornen device febncation.
biolog, anima) scm, textiles, and rain 6
TRICA has been uend extenstwely in Cornell has the only mld neutron beam sciences.
undergraduore and graduate courves and prugram et a univerwty reactor in the United research try port spedshets. In one pmtect.
States.
Monharton Call #8a neutrem-induced su- _ __ _phy is uend to Add!Yional nuclear methods that wi!!
The college's toothinst and research teactor map the locat on of spr*Aad ' messe to shcutly come into use et Cornell include prugram as pnvate and pnamartly reveal images en the seasoestre a
prompt gamma-ray neutron activation undergraduaan. k is very small but pamted by artists as a painting evolves trous analysis and rmutron depth peo6lingg bened economnally run. As the only teochang and prelimmary sketch to rinal versmn. This non-on monoenegrtsc conversion electrums research reactor in the metropohten New destructive technique allows the art histories produced by neutma reactions as well as the York area available to =<t==l to infer the artist's developing intentions,la lamdiu method bassi en alpha partda or institutions, it peovides a sierunennt resource another, neutron radiography is used to study proron M h.
for the eree. Three to four ares instst4ons of the distnbution of water between scnis end higher learnang regularly use it for teaching the roots of living plants. Neutron activation Kansas M Unhs#y and research. Colleges such as New York analysis 6s widefy used in erthecology to The program at Kr==a State la valuable to Maritime College would otherwise have no characterine elemental compositions of institutions without research and teaching access to each a facility. In addition.
articles such as portery sherds and obsidien nsectors. The school's reactor, unda the bundreds of ane high school and middle and metallic artifacta. Sudricient differwooms Department of Energv Reactor Sharing school students enpy tours and in elemental compositwn among clay sources program, is used by 13 dI!1erent inst!tutions, demonstrations at the re=rtnr sech year as disttriguish local wares from imported ones.
including Stanford. louisiana State, the part of their 9ctance exmculura. 'ne school The effectiveness of deteqp+ets has been University of Southern Cahfornia, and the distritz in which the college is located has 9
4 50866 Federal Regisu / Vol. 58. Ns.187 / Wednesd:y, September 29, 1993 / Proposed Rules the highest pmportaon of minonty students (2) Synergistse Effects on Carbon Umiters water content. This work has appliution in c.f any communtry school district in New Profect to assess synergistic effects of both both the oil well core logging industry and York Gty. and among the highest in the neutron exposure and son bombardment to nat2on carbon hmiters m fusion reactors by in the waste disposal area. In a third propct, providing long term irradiation of carbon foils of different materials are activated to Massachusetts institute of Technology samples;(31 Neutron Attwation Analaisin d' '*'"* th
"'P***"'*
*I A lame rnearch procam is carned on at rnany quantitative analysis needs sucis as neutrons and to analyze content particularly the MIT Fesearth Crnter. In Nuclear environmental monitoring. forensic and with respect to impunties that may be Encr:eenna there are studaes in (1) Dose cnminal work. certification of matenal Present. A recent doctoral research protect Fedaction in which pressunzed loops that purity. ramarth tagging for study of marme examined the role of funy logic controllers stimutate both PWR and BWR ennronments larval dispersion, analysis of mercury in fish in nuclear reactor control: The conclusion be t en constructed and cperated in the tissue. analysis of fossil power plant was that fuzzy logic contmllers appear to be core of the reactor for the purpose of reservoirs for selenium. and industnal feasible and useful w hen applied to rod
.dentifymg coolant chemistnes that wdi tas;gmg. and (41 Neutmn Depth Profdins positioning and timicg mmimize corrosion: (21 Irmdiarson-Assisted Prefect consisteg of charactenzation studies Stress Cormsson Cmding to insestigate the of borosilicate glass Elms on sibcon wafers Uniwrsity of Rhode Is/ce f formation and growth of cracks in reactor structural alloys;(31 testmg the efficacy of m^
Reed College Rhode Island Nuclear Science Center has a core sensors. known as the SENSOR Prorct.
Reed College is the only educational long history of conducting environmental involving in-core sensors that detect c. hang,,
institution in the United States to operate a research. The University of Rhode Island in electmdemical potential (L' cpl and the reactor without a graduate or engineenng Graduate School of Oceanography uses the effect of water chemistry additives on the program. Although under the Chernistry reactor to perform neutmn activation analysis haltmg of crack gmwth. and (4) Dwral Department. the reactor is used by six faculty on environmectal samples collected from Control to develoo and experimentally venfy for classes in physics. natural science, and art locations all over the globe. Important a genenc rnethodology for the closed loop history, as well as chemistry. Uttjergraduate resean.h discovenes in acid rain, geology.
agital contml of neutronic power. core and faculty reseanh involves about 5 and environmental pollution have been temperature. and oiber plant parameters. In students each year. bowever, in the last.
over a decade of work. results have included years approximately 20 facuhy members achieved over the years bacause of the demonstration of signaI validetion, the from 11 edditional colleges and universities avadability of the reactor. The URI ph sics Y
development of a supervisory controller und de reor Mhty for classes m, department conducts extensive neutmo rnearch in b Sdds of biology, chemistry, scat *ering expenments at the reactor and
[d Physics. envaronmental science. forensic usually has several post-doctoral researchers i
!w fo e me.
optunal tra#ectory trading of reactor power, science and art history. Each year as many as at the facility on a full time basis. As the only the on line reconfiguration of control laws.
20 high school students use the facility for nuclear facility in the state. RINSC provides automated power increases from subcntical.
classes and research. A non<:rsdit. semester a significant numHr of tours to students fmm seminar soms and the use of various forms of feedback.
environment",on " reactor, radiation and the high schools and univers ties. The positive Pamllels ietween contml strat ses for is offered to the public.
uses of nuclear technology in environmental reactors charactenred by : ti dynamics Between 30 and 50 ple attend it each and matenah research can be observed on a and controlof multi modu ar reactors have year, wthirds M em not asisted we first hand bas 2s.
also been ;tudied.
Reed College.
Space Sciona also benebts imm the Uniwrury oflilinois-Urbana Uniwissty l Texas Researth Center with studin to determine the feasibihty of low-temperature annealmg The University ofIllinois Nudeer Reactor Researth currently under way at the bboratohTRIGA and UDPRA reactors.is a two-reactor facihty, using the Nuclear Engin of radiation mduced defccts in electmnic Advance the (1) Texas Cold Neutron Source Profed for components such as will be used on
- spacecraft for interplanetary missions of Neutron Activation Analysis, materials the development of a neutron source with several years duration sad an upmming damage studies and nuclear purnped laser low nautron energies for research in prompt research are the research foci of the facihty, pmm activation and scattenng;(2) Neutron in addition to its teaching goals.
Depth Pmfiling Project for the measurement nvc n
ra rs Neutron activation analpis and track-etch UniwerityofMissouri-Rolla of boron and other (n.s) reactions to tn bniques are being used in Eartli Sciences-The primary uses of the reactor at the Rolla determine depth mocentrstions in various to investigate fundamental questions about campus of the Univmity of Missoud are materials such as glass and silimn:(3) the earth imm metsonte composition lava education and training of graduate and Neutron Capture Thempy Prorset for characteristigs. and crack gmwth in granitic undergraduate students and nudear-related measurements of the dose to head phantoms rm k to conttnental dnft. Neutron activation research. The reactor is used mostly by from the neutron activation of gadolinium; is also bemg used to study the movements students from the Selds of nuclear (4) various Neutmn Activation Projects in and trace the ongins of atmospheric engineering, chemistry, life science. and support of investigators. including irradiation pollutants physics la addition. ebout 540 students and of biolo61ca! Quids, geologial samples. and North Carolma State Univwaity instructors fran oder insutuuons use the reactor through the University Reactor others; and (5) Drpfal Beoctor Control Profect Since 1973 the university's teactor has Shanng Program.
gg4 g""'F"*""
g "" "# gc3,3 inn used to support "Research Rasctor intelligence software tool to provide sof' ware Training" for local unlities' training of Uniersity of NewMerim functional diversity licensed reactor operstors. Newly available in Four rwsearch pro}ects have been arded 1990 are training pmgrams for individuals in out usingthe AGN-201M reactor over the gggpig the industrial community, such as engineers. past seven years. One of the ma)or resserch h program et the University of Utah is supemsors and maintenana personnel,to protects involves measurement of beste multidisciplinary in nature. allowing strengthen their understanding of how a physics parameters in a ble.hly thermal researchere in a vanety of fields to discover power reactor operates. Representative of the system. No other thermal faciuty rystem has the potendal of roector use. N reactor is researth uses of the university's reactor are the Dexibility and low intrinsic source used mostly by nudeer engineers.
the (1)Irmdiction ofRmetor VesselSteels strtmgth requised fur this ree. orth. This Prorct for long term irradiation performed in feature is unique to the university facilities, merhM enginem, chemical enyneers.
specially designed baskets in the reactor, a A somnd project is a small sample reactivity and halc e"E noers.
i propect seeking a better understanding of meuurement technique thst is being applied (FR Doc. 93-23836 Filed S-26-93; 8 45 ami degradsuon of the physial properbes of steel to geologic samples to determine their aaw in the reactor wesels at nudear power plants; thermal neutron cross sections and relative
?
l.
October 12, 1993 I
i The Honorable Larry Pressler United States Senate Washington, DC 20515-3502
Dear Senator Pressler:
I am responding to your letter of September 22, 1993, written on behalf of your constituent, Mr. Leo H. Spinar, South Dakota State University, regarding NRC fees.
In accordance with the requirements of OBRA-90 to recover 100 percent of our budget authority, the NRC published a final rule on July 20, 1993, establishing annual fee schedules for its licensees for fiscal year 1993. The final rule also eliminated a generic exemption from annual fees previously applicable to nonprofit educational institutions. The Commission's need to revisit the generic exemption for nonprofit educational institutions was occasioned by a March 14, 1993, decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (Allied Signal, Inc. v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the United States of America, No. 91-1407 and Consolidateo Cases) which forced the Commission to acknowledge the weakness of, and abandon, the passthrough argument formerly made on behalf of these institutions.
Following the publication of the final rule, the Commission received a petition from Cornell and eleven other universities for reconsideration of the final rule and requesting reinstatement of the exemption for nonprofit educational institutions. The Commission has decided to grant the petition to reconsider this matter and is issuing a proposed rule to amend 10 CFR Part 171 l
to restore the generic exemption from annual fees for nonprofit educational institutions.
Enclosed is a copy of the proposed rule which was published in the Federal Register on September 29, 1993, for a 30-day comment period.
Sincerely, Originalsigned by Janas M. Taylor James M. Taylo.-
Executive Director i
for Operations
Enclosure:
Proposed Rule p r
OFFICE:
LFP DAF y DAFgy)
OC '
Ch EDO NAME:
DB dois EBlack Ll4 Der JFun hes RScroggins JTay or
( yl, 93 lrf[ /93 j'ffV /93
/d /6 /93
/d /6 /93
/:./f/93 DATE:
Odd A
- 4
)
-