ML20206M067

Responds to 861107 Application Requesting Annual Fee Reduction.Evaluation Determined That Partial Exemption Appropriate.Refund from Annual Fee Will Be Transferred to Util within 1 Wk of Ltr Date.Addl Info Encl

ML20206M067
Person / Time
Site:	Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png
Issue date:	04/15/1987
From:	Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO)
To:	Berry K CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
References
NUDOCS 8704200010
Download: ML20206M067 (3)

Text

I>

y APRi.5 G87 Docket No. 50-155 Consumers Power Company ATTN: Mr. Kenneth W. Berry Director, Nuclear Licensing 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, MI 49201 Gentlemen:

By application dated November 7,1986, your Company requested a partial and permanent exemption from the annual fee requirements of 10 CFR 171 for your Big Rock Point Plant. Specifically, you requested that the annual fee be reduced from $950,000 per year to $27,000 per year. In your application, you stated that the Big Rock Point Plant is one of the oldest and smallest comercial nuclear power plants in the country. It is your conclusion that the impact of the annual fees on power produc-tion costs is substantially greater than larger reactors.

We have completed our evaluation of your application in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 171.11 and from this evaluation we have deter-mined that a partial exemption is appropriate for the Big Rock Point Plant. The $950,000 annual fee has been reduced to $81,000. This partial exemption is limited to FY 1987 only and, therefore, is not a permanent exemption from the fee requirements of 10 CFR 171.

To determine the most equitable method of adjusting the annual fee for your plant, various approaches were considered. These approaches are enclosed for your information. As you can see from the enclosure, the approaches were for fees based on the (1) thermal MW power rating (this adjustment approach could only be considered because it had been determined that the Big Rock Point Plant met the intent of 10 CFR 171.11),(2) impact on the licensee, (3) comparison of mill rate increases, and (4) licensed operating life of the reactor. Although the results were fairly close in dollar amounts, the amounts for items 1 and 2 were averaged to determine an equitable and fair adjustment of $81,000 for the Big Rock Point Plant.

Since your Company has made the first FY 1987 quarterly payment of

$237,500 and your annual fee for FY 1987 has been reduced to $81,000, we are taking the necessary steps to refund the sum of $156,500 to you by electronic transfer. We plan to complete this wire transfer within a week after your receipt of this letter.

9704200010 870415 PDR ADOCK 050001SS P PDR

p g .b.'

e e.

Consumers itwer Company '2 If there are questions regarding this matter, contact Mr. Ronald M.

Scroggins on 301/492-4750.

Sincerely,

-*eMed by JMor stollgj Victor Stello, Jr.

Executive Director for Operations

Enclosure:

Computation of Proposed Adjusted Annual Fees DISTRIBUT10Nad/csCI-MiH+1Ye a NRC PDR Local PDR RScroggins., RM m....ic , iv.

GJol.nson,RM/A TRothschild RFonner, OGC RSmith, 0GC VStello, EDO HDenton, NRR RVollmer, NRR LSolander, NRR RBernero, NRR JZwolinski, NRR TRotella, BWD-1 RBevan, BWD-1 CHinson, BWD-1 CJamerson, BWD-1 CJHolloway, LFMB Glear, PAD-1 EMcKenna, PAD-1 RMDiggs, LFMB LFMBR/F(2)

RM/A R/F DW/REJ Consumers Ebb R V

, q ~ /? d 0FFICE :RM/ :RM/Al RM/A e ' .RM :EDO  :

___ .....:.. A  : .... f.......::0GC 9A.......::

0

.r e

SURNAME :RM ggs:rej C oway :RSmith  :  ; l

.__....._:............:. . . . . _ _ .. : . . . . . . . . . . .. : G.J.0. _n_s_o_

_C.EE

_ . .j. L. . : . . 9.].].9. . . . . . :

.S.c.

DATE :4/.7/87 :4/ //87 :4987

/ / :V/1/87  : /lb/87  : / /87  :

'f

__-----o

L*

Enclosure C0!!PUTATION OF PROPOSE 0 ADJUSTED ANNUAL FEE TO BE ASSESSEDUSINGTHEAVERAGEOFTWOMETHODSSHOWNBEL0d/

Bin Rock Point Methods Used to Determine Adjusted Fee:

1. Thermal Megawatt 240 MWt Rating Ratio 2671 MWt Plant / Average Plant 2/

$84,000

2. Comparable impact of $78,000 Anr.ual Fee on Plant

Kilowatthourcosts3]

l l 3. Proposed Adjusted Annual $81,000 Fee - Average of riethods l 1 and 2 (f of Unadjusted Annual Fee) (9%)

l Other Itens For Comparison:

< Increase in mill rateb/ 2.5 mills per KWh Remaining years of 16/40 ,

operation 40% )

M 0nce the determination is made that a partial exemption, in the form of an adjusted fee, is appropriate and after applying the factors in 10 CFR 171.11, several possible

! methods may be used to determine the adjusted fee either singly or in combination. i Using these two methods, the resultant dollar amounts were averaged to arrive at the adjusted annual fee. The adjusted fee under Part 171 is collected in addition to fees collected under 10 CFR 170.

2/Under this method, the adjusted fee is determined by multiplying the unadjusted ,

annual fee ($940,000) by the thermal megawatt rating of the plant divided by the average thennal megawatt rating of the 101 licensed plants (2671 Mwt).

3/Under this method, the unadjusted annual fee ($940,000) is adjusted such that the incremental kilowatt-hour costs for the plant are similar to the incremental costs for larger modern plants.

1/ Th e amount of increase if the 10 CFR 171 annual fee of $950,000 were to be used.

1 l

l