ML20059M452

Urges NRC Approval of Kansas State Univ Request for Exemption from Payment of Licensing Fees,Per 10CFR171.11(b)

ML20059M452
Person / Time
Site:	Kansas State University
Issue date:	08/17/1993
From:	Slattery J HOUSE OF REP.
To:	Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
Shared Package
ML20059M421	List: ML20059M419 ML20059M452
References
FRN-58FR21662, RULE-PR-171 CCS, NUDOCS 9311190100
Download: ML20059M452 (1)

Text

.

4 WASHINGTON OFFICE

'F o'

• COMMITTEE ON g 2243 RAYBURN HOUSE g Omet BUILDING ENERGY & COMMERCE } WASHINGTON, DC 20515-1602 COMMITTEE ON [

VE,TERANS' AFFAIRS ' (202)225-6601 IC AN$As OFFICES CHAIRMAN.

700 SW JAcasoN SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMPENSATION. OHgrEnd Of IIJE EnitCD htattg S m 803 TOPEKA KS 66603 PENSION, AND INSURANCE M)0115C Of MCprC5tutatibtg (913)233-2503 1001 NonTH BROADW AY August 17, 1993 JIM SLATTERY SuiTi C SECONO DISTRICT, K ANSAS P.O. Box 1306 PITTSBURG, KS 66762 (3 m 231-6040 Samue1 Chilk Secretary Office of the Secretariat Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Secretary Chilk:

My office has been contacted by Donald E. Rathbone, Dean of Engineering at Kansas State University (KSU), regarding the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's recent decision to impose licensing fees on university-based reactors.

KSU has requested an individual exemption from the payment of licensing fees. Please refer to Invoice No. AT-0464-93, Docket 50-188. An invoice in the amount of $62,100 fur fiscal year 1993 fees was received by KSU officials in late July. I understand that this could double the annual operating costs for the KSU reactor. This will cause an extreme financial hardship if the exemption is not approved. The reactor is used for demonstrative and educational purposes within the university, but also provides many benefits to the public. As you will note in the attached correspondence from Richard E. Faw, the Director of the KSU Nuclear Reactor Facility, the reactor has benefited several other universities as well as the U.S.

Geological Survey, Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, and Cooper Nuclear Station. Thousands of civic group members, school children, 4-H groups, and scouts visit the KSU reactor yearly to learn ,

more about nuclear energy. The external benefits are clearly evident.

KSU has also joined other universities in petitioning the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to reconsider the licensing fee decision.

Your thorough and serious consideration of KSU's request for exemption is greatly appreciated. I urge your approval.

w 9311190100 930917 g PDR P 50hg21662 PDR LJ 171 ms s1ArioNear ea>NTto oN eiesa uAos or Recyctro F,atas

Department of Nuclear Engineering N  ?!afd Hall

-t:N2vrasrIT SWE Manhattan. Kansas 66506-2503 '

913 532 5624 27 July 1993 '

Office of the Controller Attn: Ronald M. Scroggins Deputy Chief Financial Officer / Controller U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Fe: Invoice No. AT-0464-93 License R 88, Docket 50-188 . l

Dear Sirs:

Pursuant to 10 CFR Part 171.11(b), this is a request for an individual  ;

exemption from payment of annual fees for the Kansas State University TRIGA Mark II Nuclear Reactor, a teaching and research reactor operated by a nonprofit educational institution.

The exceptional treatment requested is in the public interest and is justified "

' (1) because payment of the annual fee, namely, 562,100 for federal fiscal year 1993, w~ o uld impose severe financial hardship, and (2) because the training -

and research reactor provides significant externalized benefits to other-licensees and to the public in gen'e'ral. .L As to the financial hardship, the total staff for the reactor consists of one full-time technician, two half-time technicians, and one faculty member,30 -  :

percent of whose time is allocated to reactor management. The reactor staff budget for salaries, including benefits, amounts to only S96,789 (fiscal year 1994). Other expenditures are paid from very limited state appropriations.-  !

The total non-salary budget (fiscal year 1994) for the Department of Nuclear Engineering, which includes the nuclear reactor, amounts to only $39,937 for -

equipment, services, and supplies used in education and research. -Because.

our nuclear fuel is owned by the government, we have no income from -

commercial irradiations. We do receive from the Department of Energy, irregular and modest grants for upgrade of reactor instrumentation and annual-grants of about $7000 to underwrite reactor sharing operations. ,

I W/ifd/SI ~

o s

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - 27 July 1993 Page 2 As to extemalized educational and research benefits, the charter of the reactor calls for its use not only for research and education in nuclear engineering, ,

but also as a demonstration facility and as a reactor sharing facility providing.

educational and research support not only for units within Kansas State University, but also for other educational and research institutions. For example, in recent years, the reactor has provided research support services to' other Commission licensees, namely, Cooper Nuclear Station (Nebraska Public Fower District), Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation, and U.S.

Geological Survey in Denver, Colorado, and to other educational institutions ranging from the Umversity of Kansas, south to Louisiana State University, west to the University of Southern California, and east to the University of -

Georgia.

As to externalized benefits to the public in general, the reactor hosts thousands of visitors annually. Special educational programs are arranged for scouting and 4-H groups. Civic organizations and special interest groups are .;

accorded specially tailored programs. Primary and secondary schools throughout Kansas send their students for tours. j We are prepared to provide more detailed information and, if necessary, to meet with Commission staff to support our plea for exceptional relief from payment of licensing fees.

9 Very sincerely yours,

{ b. h W Richard E. Faw, Director Nuclear Reactor Facility

. m

,- - . - , .c - q

6 y' ' *.

{ College of Engineering Office of the Dean s N Durland Hall SWE t.*,mvrasrTr Manhattan, Kansas 66506 913 532 5590 9

28 June 1993 Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Docketing and Senice Branch Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

Exemption of Non-Profit EducationalInstitutions from License Fees This is to appeal that non-profit educational institutions operating research and trauung reactors continue to be exempted from payment oflicensing fees.

1*=not Stae Univenity h amcog the uMursities that operate nuc!ca. reactc,r We hve done .;

so since 1962. There are four missions being met by our reactor facility: education of nuclear.

engineers and health physicists, support of research and extension across the entire spectrum of activities of land-grant institutions, support of research and education at other U.S. institutions through the Department of Energy Reactor Sharing Program, and public education through toun and demonstrations. We submit that, in all of these missions, we contribute significantly to the ,

general good of the public.

Imposition of licensing fees on Kanut State University.would present an intolerable and, we believe, unjustified burden on reactor operations. Your records will show that our reactor facility is operated safely. with' minimal regulatory burden. Operator licensing exam *mations are iAminictered on a cycle of one to two years. Compliance inspections are conducted on a cycle of two to three years. We operate our reactor facility with a very small sta#- one person full time, three part time. The annual operating budget for our facility is only about $75,000, which is obtained through legislative appropriations. The appropriations cycles for Kansas fiscal years 1993 and 1994 are long past.

The reactor facility at Kanut State University was built as a federal-government investment for the public good. For more than thirty years fuel-eycle support has been provided by the federal government and federal licensing fees have been waived because of the public good accorded by operation of the reactor facility. We submit that there is no reason for an abrupt reversal of the i cooperation of the v. ate and federa! governments in operztion and regulation ofunivedty research 1 and trauung reactors.  !

Sincerely, j I

~l Donald E. Rathbone Dean of Engineering cc: NRC Commissioners Ivan Selin (Chair) '

James R. Curtiss Kenneth C. Rogers Gail de Planque Forrest J. Remick p i le .

.Y

i

,c ,- l l

l 1

CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENCE SYSTEM DOCUMENT PREPARATION CHECKLIST This checklist is be submitted with each document (or group of Q3/As) sent for

• ing into the CCS., .3

1. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DOCUMENT (S)

/ -= I

\/ i,

2. TTPE or- DOCUMENT" /\Correspondence Hearingse(QshfM

3. DOCUMENT CONTROL 8ensitive (NRC only) - Non-Sensitive

4. CONGRESSIONAL CCXMITTEE and SUBCOMMITTEEE (if applicable)

Congressional Committee Subcommittaa i

5. SUBJECT CODES (a)

(b) _

(c)

6. SOURCE Cr DOCUMENTS ,

(a) 5520 (document name (b)

Scan. (c) AtT,achments (d) Rekey (a) Other

7. SYSTEM LOG DATES (a) [ [3 Date OCA seat. document to CCS (b) Date CCS. receives dooument

-)

(c) Data returned to OCK for additional information j ,

Data resubmitted by-CCA to CCS <

(d)

(e) Data entered into CCS by (f) Date OCA notified that document is in CCS

8. COMMENTS 1800'd ,

,