ML20059C993

Requests Partial Refund from NRC on License & Lists Full Details of Situation

ML20059C993
Person / Time
Site:	07100651
Issue date:	10/15/1993
From:	Lyon R SCIENTIFIC ECOLOGY GROUP, INC.
To:	Gerard Jackson NRC OFFICE OF THE CONTROLLER
Shared Package
ML20059C894	List: ML20059C890 ML20059C993
References
NUDOCS 9401060304
Download: ML20059C993 (5)

Text

(

l',

^\\

l l

i i

i L,

l SCIENTIFIC ECOLOGY GROUP, INC.

l Ci r

l October 15, 1993 c.,

t n

-s l

Gloria Jackson M

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the Controller O

License Fee and Debt Collection Branch m

l Washington, D. C. 20555 I

Subject:

Recovery of NRC Fee for FY9210 CFR, Part 71,CSDP QA Program License Attachments: (1) DOE Termination Letter (2) NRC Invoice dated 08/24/1992 (3) NRC License Exemptions 6. silon 171.11) dated July 23,1992 l

Dear Gloria:

L Thank you for discussing the above referenced NRC License' with me. The information you provided was enough to convince DOE-Idaho. that they were responsible for the FY92 fee associated with their terminated contract. But, as the Scientific Ecology Group (SEG) was unable to recover the full amount from DOE-Idaho, I am writing to request a partial refund from the NRC on this license. The full details of the situation are outlined as follows:

i A Notice of Termination was issued by DOE-Idaho on October 18, 1991 and received by l

o SEG on October 30, 1991 for DOE-Idaho contract #DE-AC07-881D12699 (attachment 1).

As part of this contract, SEG had acquired the NRC license for FY92. This was an allowable expense, and flowed through with no mark-up from SEG.

o SEG received the attached invoice from the NRC (attachment 2),' dated 8/24/92, and invoiced the customer, DOE-Id9ho, for this cost which was incurred prior to the termination for convenience date of 10/30/9$.

Initially, the customer refused to reimburse 'SEG, citing a July 1992 ruling by the NRC o

stating that the licensees that filed for termination oflicenses between October 1,1991 and December 31, 1991 would have their fees exempted (attachment 3). SEG's position was l

that as of October 1,1991, prior to termination, SEG was 100% liable for the NRC license fee in question. If SEG had tried to terminate this license on October 30, 1991, we would have been told by the NRC that the full fiscal year fee was due. It was for this reason that SEG did not attempt to terminate the license, as the cost was already ' incurred and termination would not affect that.

9401060304 931230 PDR TOPRP EPfVWEST C

PDR P.O. Box 2530 1560 Bear Creek Rd.

"P.O. Box 2308 1934 Columbia Dr. S.E.

Oah Ridge, Tennessee 37831-2530 Carlsbad, New Mexico 88220 Richland, washington 99352 (615)481-0222 (505) 887-1673 (509)7364626 E

t i

l i

I t

After my conversation with you on July 19th, DOE-Idaho agreed to pay half of the $62,950 o

fee. They still maintain that SEG should have filed for termination of this license. If the July ruling had been anticipated by SEG, we would certainly have terminated this license, as we received no value from it in FY92. It is for this reason that SEG is requesting to be considered for a partial refund of this fee by the NRC equal to one-half of the $62,950, l

or $31,475. SEG feels that this request is fair based on the circumstances and the fact that l

SEG received no value in maintaining this license.

i l

Thank you for your further assistance in this matter, if you should have any questions, please contact me at (615) 220-1278. I will be happy to work with you in resolving this matter.

Sincerely, Richard A. Lyon Manager, Goverrunent Accounting cc:

S. T. Pelchar, Controller 1

j

T 1

Department of Energy i

(

hl d

leano operabens othee Idaho Fal s da o 3t.02 October 18, 1991

,o [4 l

CERTIFIED Mall - RETURN RECE!PT RE0 VESTED NOTICE OF TERMINATION Westinghouse Electric Corp.

l Nuclear Waste Technology P. O. Box 598 ~

Pittsburgh^,' PA 15230-0598 7,,

./

ATTN:

R. M. Sain, Contract Manager l

k Westinchouse SEC

~

l C. R. Bolmgren, Project Manager l

Westinghouse NWT Gentlemen:

A.

You are hereby notified that Contract No. DE-AC07-881D12699 (referred to as "the contract") is terminated completely for the Government's convenience under the clause entitled "Part II,Section I.51, FAR 52.249-6. TERMINATION (C0ST-REIMBURSEMENT) IMAY 1986)." The termination j

is effective immediately upon receipt of t atice as set forth in t

Paragraph B.1 below. This action is precipit. w by unforeseen budget cuts and programmatic redirection.

We appreciate your fine efforts on this important project and regret the necessity for this action.

B.

Cessation of work and notification to immediate subcontractors 1.

Immediately stop all work, terminate subcontracts, and ' place no further orders except for:

(i) The work necessary to complete and deliver the items listed below:

1.,

Formal Meeting Report on presentation of Titanium h'

Dynamic Tear Testing Results to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on September 17, 1991.

2. y? material. Revised Topical Repor.t on Grade 9 Titanium as

(

ATTAtHerty"r (h

3 U.

5.

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION FY 92 Annual Materials Fee-Invoico 10 CFR 171.14 l

Invoice Date Invoice Number-

==========ss

=====zzas.c..a l

08/24/1992 AM0193?-92 i

-i WESTINCHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY ATTENTION:

RADIATION SAFETY OFFICER P.

O.

BOX 3912 PITTSBURCH PA 15230

.. t l

• • • • • Mark PAYMENT COPY with any billing address changos emm**

License / Approval /

Registration /

Code Annual Fee Surcharge Certificate Number AA905 Categoryts)

Fee Amount Amount y

==................

.........er

==

...m...'

i 0651 ANN 10BC1) 62,800.00 150.00

.i TOTALi 8

62,800.00 150.00 l

TOTAL INVOICES-42,950.00 Make Checks Payable To i

===========

j1 U.S.

Nucloer Regulatory Commission

<=== This PO Box address is License Fee & Debt Collection Branch

<=== for recelpt of psyments PO Box 954514

)

<=== only.

St. Louls, MO 63195-4514

~

i Terms and conditions are attached.

Nonpayment of your annual foo I

may result in the revocation of your li c ense t s ) in accorconce with-the enforcement provlslons of 10 CFR 171. 2 3 o-f ' t h e Commission's regulations.

I 4

g

....'....................aw...

M.

I R

R I

M NR C F I L E C 0 P.Y W

M MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMkMMMMMMMMMMMM l

1 1

(

I n+ 01 % i_ W usil t u. n'. W N h.

64

~

4.

e i

4

57. No.142 / Thunday. July 23.1992 / ""les and Regu!stions j

Part in payment will ensure avoidanc4 of j

{

Jh Section 2?;.5 Defin/tions nsf, amntstrutive, a nd pensity The definition of a nonprof!t g

gf,A l'

educational instituuon is added to The NRC notes that durtng the one i

month period from the pt.blication of the

., gg provide clanfication and to more i

W Q,

specifically identify those licenseca that y,t lost final rule on July 10. Im to g,

August S 1991, the effective date of the are exempt from the annual fees under i

@ J/~

l In.11(ak Since the final rule was rule. many licensess filed requests for i

published. many licensees have termmation with the NRC and were not I

M O

cornmented that NRC has not defined

@ct to N FY 1991 arml M l

hid tbc term and that the enteria used by Many other licensees have either called i s)RC, the NRC to classify licensees as or wnsten to the NRC since the final rule

,p, 4

nonprofit educanonalinstitutions em became effective requestmg further

rce.

N: mot me.

p a clear.ne NRC la definmf the term clarification and informetion conceming the annual fees asaened.The NRC is nonpront educaumalinsutudon as a crease m the professional hourly rata responding to these twquests as quickly

>ra $115 per hour in FY 1991 to 21::3 pub nap h

yi

• m is aa possible but it was oneble to respond I

r hour in FY 1992. After opp!! cation of don. Wee pmgrams am and taae appropriate action on s!! of k e seven percent txcrease to the (1st requests before the endpf_thellacal year.

stenals fees, the amounts were accredited by a nationally recognir.ed gg 7,,7,7g 39,3,3,,,g,,,, gg p

anded. as in FY 1991, by appiytng on the number of requeste filed. the NRC {

I andard rules of arithmetic so that the I I to as exasspring front the FY 1902 annual e

sounts rounded would be deminimi.s fees those beensees, and bolders of I

wh ca i

d convement to the user. Fees that are program for wh6ch it awards academic certificates, registrations. and approvals tater than s1.ma are rounded to the arest $100. Fees under $1.000 am degrees, and whose educational who etecs Bled for tennmatmo d their mded to the nearest 310.

programs are available to the public.

' licenses or approvals or filed for possese6cn only/ storage only licenses i

or example. an industrial Section 172.21 Exempdone q during the October 1.1991.

j liography licensee (Ca tegory 3a) will Paragrupb (a) of this section la (MS E" 31.1991.AH othq__J s revtsed licanas and inspecdon fees amanded to require that requesla for

- limnaees and approval holders wino follows:

exampoon from the annual fees be filed held a license or approval on Ocsober 1.

by b licensee within mnety (90) doys 1991. are subject to the FY 1992 annual 7

av iser from the effecttvo date of the final rule fees.

• c.,==

,,,,n.,,

a-o establiabing the annual feet. Beeed on Section 271.25 Annucifec:Recciar the NRC's expenenos with the filing of Operat/ngIlcaneer l

caean 33soo 7

s2.2co exemption requeste under the FY 1991 tae 7

t.soo final rule. a defmed time penod must be De annual fees in this section are m-r 20 7

estab11 abed for the prompt filing of revised to esfiect the FY 1992 budseted p.c.a troo r

taoo exemption requesta.The NRC la..

costa. Paragraphs (b)(3k Ic)(2L (dL and ou.no l

therefore. limiting the filing of (e) are revised to comply with the i

D' N 0 00 7

1700 exempdon roguests to the 90 day penod requirement of OBRA.00 to recover i

immediately followmg the affecave date approximately im percent of the NRC se increase is applicable to fee of the rule establhhing the annual feca.

budget for FY 1992. Table IV shows the l

genes 1.C and 1.D: 2.B and 1.C; 3.A Abent extraordinary cirousnotances, budgeted costa ht beve been allocated ugh 3.P. 4.2 thmugh 9.D.10 B and 18.

any exemption regnests filed beyond to operating power reactors. Dey have i

increased fees are assessed for ht date will not be considered.no been expressed in terms of the NRC's j

ications filed or inspeedons NRC. in making this change. la not '

FY 1992 progismo and program j

lueted on or aner the effective date intanrune to change 6ta exempoon elementa.De resulting total base j

is rule. Based on experienos to policy. As in FY1991 the NRC plans to annual fee amount for power reactors is I

smenting the troport and export cretinue a very high all 1 butty threshold. also shown. On the average. the power 6

se fees assessed under fee Category for avamprinal requests and reactor bene annual fees for FT 1932 te f'^**'*""

is * **** the' reemphasizes its totent to grant have increased aboot seven percent ing fee categorres to provide foe exampboom sparmgly.Therefore. the abeve the FY 1991'enntral fees. it is equitable flat leen by ava*M*==

NRC strongty discouruses the fdirm of noted that the power reactor annust fees umber of fee catesones exemption requests by Scenaces who beve decreased from the amount shown

• those licenamg. inspecilon, and have previously had exemption requests in the proposed rule.The dec: esse in w fees asse.aed that are beoed on.

denied unicas there are sigruficandy powerreector anneal fees. is the result est noovery (cost for professibsal changed circumstances.

of additional collections which are sours plus any contractuak Exeseption requeste.ior any requesto estimated from part 170 power tee ctor-l

ask the revised houriy rata of sm to clarify the bill. will not. per se. extend fae because of the rule change effec:ive 2wn in i 17tL"n, aprdles to tho the intercet.fr=.a-~4 for payment of May 18.192:. which parmits the NRC to

(

ininnat staff hours expendeden oc the b!!1.Billa are due an the effective billlicensees on a quarterfy rather than he m u..dat. a.aur a..

d a s. fnm.ar

. saan,ma! ueta.

j l

}

...r.

l j

.:/.:.

~

g

. = *

-~

1 1

_