ML20059F128
| ML20059F128 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07000398, National Bureau of Standards Reactor |
| Issue date: | 10/26/1993 |
| From: | Pevey L, Rowe J COMMERCE, DEPT. OF |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| References | |
| FRN-58FR50859, RULE-PR-171 58FR50859-00108, 58FR50859-108, NUDOCS 9311040141 | |
| Download: ML20059F128 (3) | |
Text
.
t "0; 3{ Up:M NLcliTmdk-,,,,.._.,-.,,.1.
arArms ommmwswr on counwance
. i o .
f",
r .9FBG6gStf
. a-
. m nmoow y y J
% so' 93 00 29 P 4 :13 i October 26,1993 -
Secretary U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Docketing and Service Branch Washington, D. C. 20555 i Gentlemen:
This letter is submitted in response to the request for public comment on the proposed generic exemption from annual licensing fees for nonprofit educational ,
institutions as published in the Federal Register, Vol. 55, No.187, Wednesday, September 29,1993. The NationalInstitute of Standards and Technology (NIST), .
U. S. Department of Commerce strongly supports the proposed exemption. Further, '
NIST maintains that the exemption should include all nonprofit license holders who contribute to educational programs providing " externalized benefits" through their licensed activities.
NIST provides exceptionally large "extemalized benefits" (as described in the decision ;. Allied-Sional. Inc. v. U.S. Nuclear Reoulatory Comm'n. 988 F.2d 146 [D. C.
Cir.1993]) in virtually all of the activities conducted under its NRC Materials License, number SNM-362, and its NRC Reactor License, number TR-5. In 1993 alone, more than 700 researchers, representing over 75 universities, forty-five corporations, twenty-five Federal agencies, and other national and international entities were directly served l through use of NIST licensed facilities, while countless other. researchers and -
institutions benefited from the dissamination of research results obtained at the '
facilities, in particular, many graduate students' received at least partial training through their use of unique national resources, enabling them to work at the forefront of research. Many others in the academic community, including faculty members, benefit from the post-doctorate, guest researcher and exchange programs. The impact . i of these benefits is extremely broad, covering fields such as physics, chemistry, materials science, biology and medicine, and materials engineering, in an equally- ,
diverse group of institutions in government, industry and academia. it is clearly impossible to identify and quantify all of the benefits which derive from the unique NIST capabilities, nor can the benefits be captured in tuition or other market prices.
However, these benefits are present, extensive and cover all segments of society. 'j l
The budget reduction which was the basis for the provision in the Omnibus !
Roconciliation Act, Pub. L. No. 101-508,104 Stat.1388 (1990), which required the 1
931104o141 931o26 PDR PR 171 5BFR50859 PDR I bSto
~
NRC to impose the fees at issue, certainly will not follow from assessing fees on the NIST licensed work. As noted in a recent court decision, "it is self-evident that a transfer of funds from one agency to another fails to increase federal revenue,"
(Florida Power and Light Co. v. United States,846 F.2d 765, 771 [D. C. Cir.1988]).
Forcing one Federal agency to pay costs of another Federal agency not only removes that money from the assessed agency's useable funds, but it imposes administrative costs that reduce available funds even further. The management of NIST and the .
Department of Commerce have recognized that recovery of costs through imposition :
of fees on facility users is not appropriate, since the benefits are so broadly beneficial to the nation.
The definition of "research reactor" given in the proposed regulation,10 CFR Part 171.11(a)(2), contains the artificial construct of a 10 megawatt thermai power limitation and other constricting characteristics. The NIST research reactor is the only Federal research reactor with a power level greater than that in the definition. The thermal power rating of 20 megawatts for the NIST research reactor would mean that NIST would be the only Federal agency assessed a fee for research reactor operation, which seems ludicrous. This becomes obvious when the discussion in the proposed regulation is read carefully. Instead of the term as found in the definition, the term "non power reactor" is employed, which would imply that the NIST reactor should be included. Non-power reactors should be classified by functions rather than by type or power level. This is consistent with the definition used in all national standards.
The national and international stature of NIST work and staff is unquestioned, as evidenced by the fact that public financing to NIST programs is made available from Federal agencies, from universities, and from State and local civic sources.
Private funding is made available from domestic and foreign sources for vital programs .
of particular need. Increased costs which lead to a diminution of the NIST programs can result in the loss of substantial benefits to the U. S. economy and to U. S. .
competitiveness around the world. A prime example of such a reduction in the national and international benefits to the nuclear field is the termination of funding by the Department of Energy for NIST work on plutonium and uranium standard reference materials (SRM). Those SRMs were produced under a cooperative !
agreement for many years; when the funding was withdrawn, NIST could not absorb the cost of the program and could not pass it on to the clients who purchased the samples. Therefore, the NIST SRM program was terminated and plutonium and uranium reference samples with NIST standards' certification are no longer available.
For these reasons, it is clear that the NRC would be acting in the national interest by not imposing annual fees for licensed activities at the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
6 1
We submit these comments for your consideration as you reconsider the issue of exemptions from fee assessments. We thank you for your attention to our concems.
- Since ely, l f- :
J,M.Rowe :
Chief, Reactor Radiation Division '
gn L. E. Pevey Chief, Occupational Health & Safety Division 4
9 9
h f
i 1
s
- -