ML20212K567
| ML20212K567 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/24/1999 |
| From: | Meyer D NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | Gerard Jackson NRC OFFICE OF THE CONTROLLER |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20138F537 | List:
|
| References | |
| FRN-64FR15876, RULE-PR-170, RULE-PR-171 AG08-1-017, NUDOCS 9910060311 | |
| Download: ML20212K567 (40) | |
Text
- - . _ ._- e m -
1 n-- A **hq gf-
. .. . . ~ . - . - . _ .
p k
- UNITED STATES y
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- WASHINGTON, D.C. 20086 0001 [h(
March 24,1999 MEMORANDUM TO: Glenda Jackson Office of the Chief Financial Officer FROM: David L. Meyer, Chief O- (#=i t Rules and Directives Branch Division of Administrative Services Officeof Administration
SUBJECT:
CONCURRENCE ON THE PROPOSED FY 1999 FEE RULE I
The Rules and Directives Branch concurs in the proposed rule that would establish the licensing, inspection, and annual fees necessary to recovery approximately 100 percent of the NRC's operating budget for FY 1999. We have attached a marked copy of the package that l presents our comments.
{
i If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact David L. Meyer, Chief, Rules '
and Directives Branch, ADM, at 415-1762 (DLM1) or Michael T. Lesar, ADM, at 415 7163 (MTL).
Attachment:
As stated I
i l
9910060311 991001 PDR PR 170 64FR15876 PDR kt\ .@ D(9 9) .l. .
- SUPPLEMENTARY lNFORMATION:
- 1. Background.
II. Proposed Action. # /
- -Hl. Environmentalimpact: Categorical Exclusion.
gj/
/// W . Plain Language.
V. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement.
J' VI. Regulatory Analysis.
Vll. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.
Vill. Backfit Analysis.
I. Background Public Law 101-508, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA-90),
enacted November 5,1990, requires that the NRC recover approximately 100 percent of its budget authority,less the amount appropriated from the Department of Energy (DOE) administered Nuclear Waste Fund (NWF), for FYs 1991 through 1995 by assessing fees.
OBRA-90 was amended in 1993 to extend the NRC's 100 percent fee recovery requirement through 1998. In 1998 OBRA-90 was amended to extend the NRC's 100 percent fee recovery i requirement through FY 1999. <
The NRC assesses two types of fees to recover its budget authority. First, license and inspection fees, established at 10 CFR Part 170 under the authority of the Independent Offices Appropriation Act of 1952 (IOAA),31 U.S.C. 9701, recover the NRC's costs of providing individually identifiable services to specific applicants and licensees. Examples of the services
. 3 I
J
associated with providing nuclear safety assistance to the countries of the former Soviet Union.
As a result, NRC iicensees are not required to pay for the costs of this activity in FY 1999.
These costs were previously included in NRC's budget authority and the costs were recovered through annual foes assessed to NRC licensees.
The NRC estimates that approximately $107.7 million will be recovered in FY 1999 from fees assessed under Part 170 and other receipts, compared to $94.6 million in FY 1998. The
{
increase from FY 1998 is primarily due to increased Part 170 collections largely attributable to changes in Commission policy included in the FY 1998 final fee rule, such as billing full cost under Part 170 for resident inspectors, and a $4.1 million carryover from additional collections in FY 1998 that were unanticipated at the time the final FY 1998 fee rule was pubNshed. In addition to the estimated Part 170 collections and other receipts, the NRC estimates a not adjustment of approximately.52.1 million for payments received in FY 1999 for FY 1998
- invoices. The remaining $339.8 million would be recovered in FY 1999 through the 10 CFR Part 171 annual fees, which is approximately $20.4 million less than in FY 1998.
Table I summarizes the budget and fee recovery amounts for FY 1999:
TABLE I .- Budget and Fee Recovery Amounts for FY 1999 (Dollars in Millions)
Total Budget $469.8 Less NWF -17.0 V
5
c
[gf l~//S4 Of/2 "A 31640),
f Yfrawfl@f Jed hpe/J<n - c))n4 aah/up4sar
- d. M BOW ~ re/ en }ff ppe
~ -__/
The NRC is also' soliciting public comment in this proposed rule on whether to include the development of orders, evaluation of responses to orders, development of Notices of Violation (NOVs) accompanying escalated enforcement actions, and evaluation of responses to NOVs in next year's proposed fee rule. The costs of these activities are currently recovered through Part 171 annual fees.
Orders and Related Activding, Currently, Part 170 fees are not assessed for the development of orders issued under 10 CFR 2.202, or for the issuance of amendments specifically resulting from these orders. The primary basis for the current policy is that fees could be perceived as additional fines to the licensee, or in some cases, such as when a licensee requests a hearing on an enforcement order, fees could be viewed as a penalty for the licensee exercising its rights to challenge the NRC action. In addition, depending on the licensees' responses, orders may also be withdrawn or modified. Moreover, in cases of misconduct, an order may be issued to the individual rather than the licensee. On the other hand, the development of orders and the review of responses to orders are activities performed for specifically identifiable recipients.
Escalated Enforcement Achons 12
Although costs of inspections forming the basis for enforcement actions, except those arising from an allegation, are currently recovered through Part 170 fees assessed to the i
affected licensee, the costs for escalated enforcement actions (i.e., the development and issuance of Notices of Violations and imposition of civil penalties) are not. Part 170 fees are not currently assessed for the escalated enforcement actions because they often serve generic purposes, in addition, some escalated enforcement actions are withdrawn. There also is concern that in some cases the fee could be much greater than the civil penalty, which is
- intended to encourage or force a licensee to comply with the NRC requirements. However,
- escalated enforcement actions are activities performed by the NRC for specific licensees.
- 2. Amendment Fees Based on Averaae Costs.
IM U
- [b }]/(y (B'Y ,
fevise 10 CFR 170.31 to eliminate the amendment fees for small ma that are based on the average time to complete the reviews (" flat" fees) and include the '
amendment processing costs in the Part 171 annual fees assessed to the small materials licensees. This proposal would continue the NRC's initiatives to streamline its fee program. In a similar action, the inspection and renewal fees for these licensees were eliminated in the FY l
1 1995 and FY 1996 fee rulemakings, respectively, and the costs included in the annual fess for these categories of licensees.
Although approximately 2500 requests for amendments to small materials licenses are received and processed each year for fee recovery purposes, less than $900,000 in Part 170 ,
fees is collected annually for these amendments. The number of amendments, as well as the i
+
13 ,
Part 170 fee collection 3, will decrease as more states become Agreement States.
The current approach for assessing materials license amendment fees is complex and labor intensive. Approximately 25 percent of the amendment requests are submitted with -
incorrect fee payments. In the case of underpayment, the licensee must be notified and the license amendment held in abeyance until the correct fee is received. In the case of overpayments, refunds must be authorized and processed through the Department of the Treasury (Treasury). Because of Treasury requirements that all Federal payments (other than payments made under the Intemal Revenue Code of 1986) made after January 1,1999, must be made by electronic funds transfer, information on the payee's financial institution and bank accounts must be collected. hese administrative burdens for flat amendment fees would be !
eliminated by including the amendment costs in the Part 171 annual fee assessed to these licensees. This would result in an estimated $900,000 being added to the annual fees assessed to approximately 5700 materials licensees mendment fees for these licensees currently range from $160 for an amendment to a custom sealed source evaluation (fee category 9D) to $1,100 for an amendment to a custom device evaluation (fee category 98).
The majority of the amendmwnts are filed by licensees in fee category 3P, which includes licenses for possession and use of byproduct material in industrial measuring systems and gas chromatographs, and licenses for in-vitro studies, and by licensees in fee category 7C, which covers most licenses for human use of byproduct, source, and special nuclear material. The current amendment fee for fee category 3P is $340; the current amendment fee for fee category 7C is $450. Although not all materials licensees request amendments during a gifen fiscal year, approximately 80 percent request at least one amendment over a five-year period, i and approximately 40 percent of these licensees request multiple amendments during a five-14
?
year period.
In addition to streamlining the NRC process, this proposed change would eliminate the steps licensees currently take to submit the payments for their amendment requests. It would also eliminate any delays in approving proposed amendments due to incorrect payments and would provide an efficient means of recovering these costs. The NRC believes that the efficiencies to be gained outweigh any inequities that may result because not all materials I
licenses are amended ecch fiscal year, if we do not adopt this approach, amendment fees set forth in the final fee rule would likely approximate those set forth in the FY 1998 fee schedule, although there may be some variance as a result of the biennial fee review required by the Chief Financial Officers Act and the increase in the hourly rate for the materials program described below.
- 3. liogrly Rates. J 6/ 9# h if f r 7he g {
L /evise the two professional hourly rates for NRC staff time established in 9170.20.
These proposed rates would be based on the number of FY 1999 direct FTEs and the FY 1999 1
NRC budget, excluding direct program support costs and NRC's appropriations from the NWF i 1
and the General Fund. These rates are used to determine the Part 170 fees. The proposed 1
hourly rate for the reactor program is $141 per hour (3250,403 per direct FTE). This rate would be applicable to all activities for which fees are based on full cost under $170.21 of the fee 1
regulations. The proposed hourly rate for the nuclear materials and nuclear waste program is i
$140 per hour ($248,728 per direct FTE). This rate would be applicable to all activities for 15 I l
j
which fees are based ort full cost under $170.31 of the fee regulations. In the FY 1998 final fee rule, these rates were $124 and $121, respectively. The FY 1998 rates represented a decrease from FY 1997 of $7 per hour for the reactor program from FY 1997, and $4 per hour for the materials program.
This proposed increase can be readily explained. In calculating the proposed FY 1999 hourly rates, the NRC staff discovered that a coding error in NRC's budget, which is used in the T))Lr codins et/*tt development of fees, occurred for FY 199 contributing to the hourly rate decreases for that year. The NRC budget is carefully scrutinized and costs allocated by class oflicensee. In addition, costs for direct FTEs and overhead are calculated for the reactor and materials programs and for the surcharge. Although the proposed FY 1999 hourly rates reflect an increase of $17 - $19 per hour compared to FY 1998, the error was in the reduced FY 1998 I i
hourly rate, not in the increased FY 1999 hourly rate. Specifically,134 FTE and approximately
$10 million in contract support for regional management and support were erroneously coded as direct resources for FY 1998 rather than as overhead. The correction of that error in FY 1999 results in substantial increases in the hourly rates compared to FY 1998, from $124 to
$141 for the reactor program, and from $121 to $140 materials program. This is the result of the increased overhead costs to be allocated to the two programs, with fewer
' direct FTE to divide the costs among. In addition, the proportion of direct resources has shifted.
The materials program now has a larger share. Therefore, the materials program must absorb more of the overhead and management and support costs.
Because of the error in FY 1998, the FY 1999 hourly rates are more appropriately compared to the FY 1997 hourly rates of $131 and $125 for the reactors and materials I
1 16
!- programs, respectively. Applying only the salary and benefit increases of 4.4 percent from FY t
1997 to FY 1998, and 3.68 percent from FY 1998 to FY 1999, would result in FY 1998 hourly rates of $137 for the reactor program and $131 for the materials program, and 1999 hourly l '
rates of $142 for the reactor program and $136 for the materials progr6m. This does not consider the shift that has occurred in the proportion of direct resources from the reactor 1
program to the materials progra results in the materials program having a larger share
(/
and therefore absorbing more of the overhead and management and support costs.
The method used to determine the two professional hourly rates is as follows:
l- s. Direct program FTE levels are identified for both the reactor program and the nuclear material and waste program.
- b. Direct contract support, which is the use of contract or other services in support of the line organization's direct program, is 3xcluded from the calculation of the hourly rate because the costs for direct contract support are charged directly through the various categories of fees. l l , 1 i
l l c.- All other direct program costs (i.e., Salaries and Berefits, Travel) represent "in-house" costs and are to be allocated by dividing them uniformly by the total number of direct E
FTEs for the program. In addition, salaries and benefits plus contracts for non-program direct 1
management and support, and the inspector General are allocated to each program based on that program's direct costs. ' This method results in the following costs which are included in the houity rates, l
17 I
h L
l TABLE II - FY 1999 Budget Authority to.be_ Included in Hourly Rates d k (Dollars in millions) .
M ty~
fh' .
n ~?
AH gt) 11b '
lC cI f i koW gj ch (ll. / Proaram Proaram ,
irect Program Salaries & Eenefits $ 99.2 $26,4 i Overhead Salaries & Benefits, $54.1 $15.0 Program Travel and Other Support Allocated Agency Management and Support $104.2 1211 Subtotal $257.5 $69.5 Less offsetting receipts .1 Total Budget included in Hourly Rate $257.4 $69.5 Program Direct FTEs , 1,028.0 279.7 , 9 %'
)
Rate per Direct FTE Y2 m/
8 Professional Hourly Rate (Rate per direct $141 $140 FTE divided by 1,776 hours0.00898 days <br />0.216 hours <br />0.00128 weeks <br />2.95268e-4 months <br />)
As shown in Table 11 above, dividing the $257.4 million (rounded) budget for the reactor program by the reactor program direct FTEs (1,028) results in a rate for the reactor program of
$250,403 per FTE for FY 1999. The Direct FTE Hourly Rate for the reactor program would be
$141 per hour (rounded to the nearest whole dollar). This rate is calculated by dividing the cost per direct FTE ($250,403) by the number of productive hours in one year (1,776 hours0.00898 days <br />0.216 hours <br />0.00128 weeks <br />2.95268e-4 months <br />) as set 18 1
forth in the revised OMB Circular A-76, " Performance of Commercial Activities." Dividing the
$69.5 million (rounded) budget for the nuclear materials and nuclear waste program by the program direct FTEs (279.7) results in a rate of $248,728 per FTE for FY 1999. The Direct FTE Hoerly Rate for the materials program would be $140 per hour (rounded to the - fest wtiole dollar).' Thic rate is calculated by dividing the cost per direct FTE ($248,726, by the number cf productive hours in one year (1,776 hours0.00898 days <br />0.216 hours <br />0.00128 weeks <br />2.95268e-4 months <br />).
Any professional hours expended on or after the effective date of the final rule would be assessed at the FY 1999 hourly rates.
- 4. Fee Adiustments. pd) f0 p g // M djust the current Part 170 fees in $$170.21 and 170.31 to reflect both the changes in the revised hourly rates and the results of the biennial review of Part 170 fees required by the Chief Financial O#icers (CFO) Act. To comply with the requirements of the CFO Act, the NRC has evaluated historical professional staff hours used to process a new license application for those materials licensees whose fees are based on the average cost method (flat fees). This review also included new license and amendment applications for import and export licenses.
Evaluation of the historical data shows that the fees based on the average number of professional staff hours needed to complete materia:s licensing actions should be increased in some categories and decreased in others to reflect the costs incurred in completing the licensing actions. The data for the average number of professional staff hours needed to complete licensing action were last updated in FY 1997 (62 FR 29194; May 29,1997). Thus, 19
f' f ilA p/f a. nd $170.2, Scope, and $170.3, Definitions, to specifically include Certificates I
of Compliance (Certificates) issued pursuant to Part 76. The NRC issued two Certificates
, pursuant to Part 76 to the United States Enrichment '.,orporation for operation of the two gaseous diffusion uranium enrichment plants located at Paducah, Kentucky, and Piketon, Ohio.
' This proposal would add Part 76 certificates to the definition of Materials License in $170.3 I
(Uranium enrichment facilities are already defined in $170.3). These proposed changes are -
ministrative changes to clarify the applicability of Part 170 fees to these Certificates.
b, eGse the definition of Inspection, to specifically include performance assessments, evaluations, and incident investigations. This change is needed to incorporate NRC's proposal to include these activities in Part 470.
- c. evise $170.5, Communications, to indicate that all communications conceming ;
Part 170 should be addressed to the Office of the Chief Financial Officer rather than the Executive Director for Operations. Effective with the January 5,1997, NRC reorganization, the Executive Director for Operations no longer serves as the Chief Financial Officer. The Chief Financial Officer has been delegated authority to exercise all authority vested in the Commission under 10 CFR Parts 170 and 171.
d.;. lete the current exemption in $170.11(a)(11) which eliminates amendrom ist, for amendments to change the name of the Radiation Safety Officer for portable gauge licenses issued in accordance with NUREG-1556', Volume 1. This proposed rule would eliminate the
' Copies of NUREGS may be purchased from the Reproduction and Distribution Section, Office of the Chief Information Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
.0001, Copies are also available from the National TechnicalInformation Service,5285 Port 21
requirement for amendment fees for these licenses and thus the exemption would no longer be needed.
h e. dd 170.11(a)(12) to provide an exemption from Part 170 fees for these licensee-
'4Cg $' jf)5 Y
/> pecific performance assessments or evaluations for which the licensee volunteers at NRC's
@ request. This change would accommodate NRC's proposal to include performance I
assessments and evaluations in Part 170, except those for which the licensee volunteers at NRC's request and which are accepted by the NRC..
- f. evise $170.12, Payment of Fees, to reflect the NRC's proposals to expand Part 170 to include performance assessments, evaluations, and incident investigations, and full cost recovery for project managers. This section would also be revised to delete references to amendment fees that are not based on full cost to reflect the NRC's proposal to eliminate these fees from Part 170 and include the costs in the Part 171 annual fee for these materials
" *"****- #)
4 g/g'[fet/W e
Section 170.12(h), Method of Payment, would WO revised to specify the information the NRC needs to issue refunds. This change is necessitated by new Treasury requirements that were effective January 1,1999.
In summary, the NRC is proposing to:
Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161. A co is also available for ins ction and/or co ing at the NRC Public Document Room,2120 L greet, NW. (Lower Level , Washington, D 22
l
_ 1. Assess Part 170 fees, for licenses subject to Part 170 full cost fees, to recover costs for all plant or licensee-specific inspections, including performance reviews, assessments,'
evaluations, and incident investigations, and all of the project managers time excluding time spent on generic activities and leave time;
- 2. Eliminate " flat" amendment fees for materials licenses and recover the amendment costs through Part 171 annual fees assessed to materials licensees;
- 3. Revise the two 10 CFR Part 170 hourly rates; and
- 4. Revise the licensing fees assessed under 10 CFR Part 170 to comply with the CFO Act's requirement that fees be revised to reflect the cost to the agency, and to reflect the revised hourly rates.
B. Amendments to 10 CFR Part 171: Annual Fees for Reactor Licenses. Fuel Qys[g Licenses and Materials Licenses. Includina Holders of Certificates of Come!Mnce.
Reaistrations. and Quality Assurance Procram Anorovals. and Govemment Acencies Licensed by the NRC.
The NRC proposes three major amendments to 10 CFR Part 171 and several [
administrative amendments to update information in certain sections and to incorporate the major proposed changes. These major changes would result in annual fees being assessed to licensees previously exempted from annual fees, increased annual fees for some licensees, and decreased annual fees for other licenseas. To address concems about potential significant 23 I
L
The major proposed changes to Part 171 are in the following areas.
- 1. Reactor Decommissionino/soant Fuel Stornoe.
/l})e fp;p fN jO 95>"}
/evise 10 CFR Part 171.15 to establish a spent fuel storage / reactor .
deccmmissioning annual fee to be assessed to all Part 50 power reactor licensees; regardless of their operating status, and to those Part 72 licensees who do not hold a Part 50 license. The full amount of the FY 1999 annual fee would be billed to those Part 50 licensees who are in a decommissioning or possession only status upon publication of the FY 1999 final rule.
Payment would be due on the effective date of the FY 1999 rule. For operating power reactors and those Part 72 licensees who do not hold a Part 50 license, the new fee would be added to
. the fourth quarter FY 1999 annual fee bill. Any adjustments for prior payments during FY 1999 would be made in accordance with $171.19(b). The current annual fees in 10 CFR 171.16 for Part 72 licenses for independent spent fuel storage would be eliminated.
This proposed change would affect two existing NRC annual fee policies:
(a) Costs for generic and other activities related to dry storage of spent fuel that are not recovered through Part 170 licensing and inspection fees are recovered through Part 171 annual fees assessed to all Part 72 licensees; and (b) Part 171 annual fees are not assessed to reactor licensees in decommissioning or
. possession-only status. Power reactor licensees who are in a decommissioning or possession only status would, for the first time, be subject to Part 171 annual fees for their Part 50 license.
25
Costs for generic activities associated with storage of spent fuel in the spent fuel pool (wet storage) are currently included in the annual fee assessed to operating power reactors because the Part 50 licenses cover this storage. Thus, if a Part 50 licensee is in decommissioning and stores spent fuel in the spent fuel pool, it is not assessed an annual fee.
On the other hand, if a Part 50 licensee is in decommissioning and stores spent fuel in an ISFSI, it is assessed an annual fee for each Part 72 ISFSI license used.
Section 171.15 would be revised to include the spent fuel storage / reactor decommissioning annual fee to be assessed to Part 50 power reactor licensees and those Part 72 specific licensees who do not hold a Part 50 license. The annual f6iss in $171.16 for fee categories 1B and 13B would be eliminated. This change would not affect the manner in which licensing and inspection costs are recovered (i.e., Part 170 fees would still be assessed to Part 72 licensees and to Part 50 licensees in decommissioning or possession only status for licensing and inspection services). The NRC would continue to include the costs for generic decommissioning / reclamation costs for nonpower reactors, fuel facilities, materials, and uranium recovery licensees in the surcharge assessed to o,.arating licensees, including operating power reactors.
- 2. Annual Fees pc P "I(M )v
/
f f))c stablish new baseline annual fees for FY 1539. The annual fees in $$171.15 and 171.16 would be revised for FY 1999 to recover approximately 100 percent of the FY 1999 budget authority, less fees collected under 10 CFR Part 170 and funds appropriated from the NWF and the General Fund. The total amount to be recovered through annual fees for FY 28
r 1
1999 is $339.8 million, compared to $360.2 million for FY 1998.
In the FY 1995 final fee rule (June 20,1995; 60 FR 32218), the NRC stated that it would stabilize annual fees as follows:
For FY 1996 through FY 1999, the NRC would adjust the annual fees only by the percsntage change (plus or r.1inus) in NRC's total budget authority unless there was a substantial change in the total NRC budget authority or the magnitude of the budget allocated
' to a specific cl.sss of licensees. If either condition occurr'd, the annual fee base would be recalculated. The percentage change would be adjusted based on changes in 10 CFR Part 170 fees and other adjustments as well as on the number of licensees paying the fees. This l
method of determining annual fees is the " percent change" method. The FY 1996, FY 1997 f
and FY 1998 annual fees were based on the percent change method.
Rebasehning The NRC believes that it is appropriate to establish new baseline fees for FY 1999 based on the program changes that have taken place since the baseline fees were established in FY 1995, including those resulting from the agency's strategic planning efforts, downsizing, reorganization of agency resources, and the proposed addition of a new annual fee class (spent fuel storage / reactor decommissioning) as previcusly described. In addition, there have been several fee policy changes since FY 1995. Fee policy changes include the elimination of renewal fees in FY 1996 for most materials licensees, the proposed elimination of amendment fees for these licensees in FY 1999, and the inclusion of these costs in the materials licensees' 29 1
hours to conduct inspections and to review new license applications for materials licenses l
increased for some fee categories and decreased for other fee categories. The average time to conduct inspections and the average time to review new license applications for the smaller materials license fee categories are used to allocate the materials budget for rebaselining the
[ annual fees because they refle complexity of the license. Increases in the average
- professional time for inspections and reviews of new license applications result in increased 1 annual fees for the affected fee categories if all else remains the same. In addition, rebaselining reflects the renewal and amendment costs that would be included in the annual fee i for thes s materials licensees, which were not included in FY 1995.
Option B would also result in annual fee decreases for FY 1999 for operating power
- [(- reactor licensees and certain materials licensees d increases for other licensees. However, the increases would be no more than 50 percent of the FY 1998 annual fee. The decreases for certain licensees under Option B would be slightly less than under Option A because the 50 i
percent cap on annual fee increases would result in approximately $700,000 being added to the annual fee surcharge assessed to other licensees who pay annual fees. Because approximately 80 percent of the FY 1999 surcharge would be assessed to operating power reactors, the not result of Option B would be a reduction of approximately 6.75 percent in annual fees for FY 1999 for operating power reactors compared to a reduction of approximately 6.95 percent under Option A, a difference of approximately $6,000 for each power reactor. The decreases under t,oth options include the new spent fuel storage and reactor decommissioning annual fee to be assessed to operating power reactor licensees. Other licensees whose rebaselined annual fees do not increase by 50 percent or more would also pay slightly more i
under Option B than they would under Option A.
31 j l
1 l
i i
)
- b. Agreement State oversight 6.4
- c. Low-level waste disposal generic 4.1 activit;es, and
- d. Site decommissioning management plan 4.6 activities not recovered under Part 170
- 2. Activities not assessed Part 170 licensing and inspection fees or Part 171 annual fees based on existing law or Commission policy;
- a. Fee exemption for nonprofit education institutions 6.9 i i
l
- b. Licensing and inspection activities associated with 2.8 other Federal agencies;
- c. Costs not recovered from small entities under 5.3 ff CM M 171./6 (6) l
- 3. ' Activities supporting NRC operating licensees and others ;
- a. Regulatory support to Agreement States 14.6 34
F . _ . _
in addition to comments on the rebaselining method for determining FY 1999 annual fees, public comments are also being sought on whether the NRC should, in future years, continue to use the percent change method and rebaseline fees every several years as established in the FY 1995 fee rule statement of considerations, or retum to a policy of rebaselining annual fees every year.
- 3. Revised Fuel Cvele and Uranium Recoverv Matrixes.
yjy }l M iS f h"/ W 'A
[se revised matrixes in the determination of annual fees for fuel facility and uranium recovery licensees. As part of the rebaselining efforts, the NRC is proposing to use a revised matrix depicting the categorization of fuel facility and uranium recovery licenses by authorized material and use/ activity and the relative programmatic effort associated with each category,
- a. Fuel Facility Matrix. j
/
The NRC is proposing to use a revised fuel facility matrix based on the commensurate level of regulatory effort related to the various fuel facility categories from both safety and safeguards perspectives. The revised matrix results in the anr cal fees more accurately reflecting the cost of providing generic and other regulatory services to each fuel facility type.
The FY 1999 budgeted costs of approximately $16.3 million class to be recovered in annual fees assessed to the fuel facility class is allocated to the individual fuel facility licensees based on the revised matrix. The revisions to the matrix take into account changes in process 37 I 1
p )
ad alp 1
M operations at certain fuel facilitga xplicitly recognize}he addition of the uranium enrichment plants to the fee base and a reduction of three licensees ( B&W Parks Township, j B&W Research and General Atomic) as the result of the termination oflicensed activities. In the revised matrix, licensees are grouped into five categories according to their licensed l
activities (i.e., nuclear material enrichment, processing operations and material form) and L
according to the level, scope, depth of coverage and rigor of generic regulatory programmatic effort applicable to each category from safety and safeguards perspectives. This methodology can be applied to determine fees for new licensees, current licensees, licensees in unique 4
q license situations, and certificate holders. '
l 1
' The methodology is amenable to changes in the number of licensees or certificate holders, licensed-certified material / activities, and total programmatic resources to be recovered through annual fees. When a license or certificate is modified, given that NRC recovers
. approximately 100 percent of its generic regulatory program costs through fee recovery, this fuel facility fee methodology may result in a change in fee category and may have an effect on the fees assessed to other licensees and certificate holders. For example, if a fuel facility licensee cmended its license / certificate in such a way that it resulted in them not being subject a to Part 171 fees applicable to fuel facilities, the budget for the safety and/or safeguards i component would be spread among those reme 9 licensees / certificate holders, resulting in a 1
[ higher fee for those remaining in the fee category. -
l l
s The methodology is applied as follows. First, a fee category is assigned based on the I. nuclear material and activity authorized by license or certificate. Although a licensee / certificate j i
holder may elect not to fully utilize a license / certificate, the license / certificate is still used as the
]
38
source for determining authorized nuclear material possession and use/ activity. Next, the category and license / certificate information are used to determine where the licensee / certificate holder fits into the matrix. The matrix depicts the categorization of licensees / certificate holders by authorized material types and use/ activities and the relative programmatic effort associated with each category. The programmatic effort (expressed as a value in the matrix) reflects the safety and safeguards risk significance associated with the nuclear material and use/ activity, f
and the commensurate generic regulatory program (i.e., scope, depth and rigor).
The effort factors for the various subclasses of fuel facility licensees are as follows:
i No. of Effort Factors Per Facility l 1
Facihties Safety Safeguards High Enriched Uranium Fuel 2 91 (33.1 %) 76 (54.7 %)
I Enrichment 2 70 (25.5 %) 34 (24.5 %)
Low Enriched Uranium Fuel 4 88 (32.0 %) 24 (17.3 %)
UF6 Conversion 1 8 (2.9%) 3 (2.2%)
Limited Operations Facility 1 12 (4/4%) 0(0%)
Others 1 6 (2.2%) 2 (1.4%)
5*
The rt factors are applied to the $16.3 million total annual fee amoungwhictr- g#
includes the low lesel waste (LLW) surcharge and other surcharges allocated to the fuel facility class.
B. Uranium Recovery Matrix.
39
Of the $2.1 million total budgeted costs allocated to the uranium recovery class to be recovered through annual fees, approximately $870,000 would be assessed to the DOE to recover the costs associated with DOE facilities under the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978 (UMTRCA). The remaining $1.3 million would be recovered through annual fees assessed to conventional mills, solution mming uranium mills, and mill tailings disposal facilities. Because the proposed FY 1999 annual fees would result in certain uranium recovery licensees going from an annual billing process based on the anniversary date of their license to quarterly billing, those licensees would be billed upon publication of the final FY 1999 rule for the balance of the full FY 1999 annual fee. . Payment of the balance of the FY 1999 annual fee would be due on the effective date of the FY 1999 rule.
The NRC is proposing to revise the matrix established in FY 1995 for establishing the annual fees for the conventional mills, solution mining uranium mills, and mill tailings disposal !
facilities. The revised matrix reflects NRC's significantly increased efforts related to
. groundwater concems for in-situ licenses d its somewhat increased efforts related to groundwater concerns for conventional mills. The revised matrix also reflects an increase in regulatory efforts related to waste operations for in-situ licenses. The matrix has also been updated to reflect the changes in the number of licensees within each fee category. The number of conventional mills has decreased from 4 in FY 1995 to 3 in FY 1999 and the number of licensees in the solution mining fee category has increased by 1.
l The methodology for establishing Part 171 annual fees for uranium recovery licensees has not changed 40
(1) The methodology identifies three categories of licenses: conventional uranium mills solution mining uranium mills, and mill tailings disposal facilitie ch of wdn}e}y.se fofc)*11 fit from the geneile uranium recovery program; (2) The matrix relates the category and the level of benefit, by program element and subelement; (3) The two major program elements of the generic uranium recovery program are activities related to facility operations and those related to facility closure; (4) Each of the major program elements was further divided into three subelements; (5) The three major subelements of generic activities related to uranium facility operations are activities related to the operation of the mill, activities related to the handling and
{
disposal of waste, and activities related to prevention of groundwater contamination. The three major subelements of generic activities related to uranium facility closure are activities related to decommissioning of facilities and cleanup of land, reclamation und closure of the tailings impoundment, and cleanup of contaminated groundwater. Weighted factors were assigned to each program element and subelement.
The applicability of the generic program h each subelement to each uranium recovery i l
category was qualitatively estimated as either significant, some, minor, or none.
The resulting relative weighted factor per facility for the various subclasses and the I
. 41 l
)
anniversary dates falling on or after the effective date of the FY 1999 final rule would b at the FY 1999 revised rates during the anniversary month of their license. Payment wou i
due on the date of the invoice.
The NRC reemphasizes that the annual fee will be assessed based on whether a il licensee holds a valid NRC license that authorizes possest.'on and use of radioactive mate 5 Ill. Plain Language s
The Presidential Memorandum dated June 1,1998, entitled, " Plain Language in Government Writing," directed that the Federal government's writing be in plain lan The NRC requests comments on this proposed rule specifically FR 31883; June 10,1998).
with respect to the clarity and effectiveness of the language used. Comments on th used should be sent to the NRC as indicated under the ADDRESSES heading.
' in summary, the NRC is proposing to:
1.
Establish a new spent fuel storage / reactor decommissioning annual fee in 10 171.15, and eliminate the current annual fee in 10 CFR 171.16 for independe fuel storage licenses. The proposed annual fee would be assessed to all Pa reactor licensees, including those in decommissioning or possession only those Part 72 licensees who do not hold a Part 50 license;
- 2. Establish new baseline annual fees for FY 1999. Because 50 N
h Vpt y l
'7 ' result in significant increases for some licensees, the NRC is seeking public comment on two potential methods for establishing the FY 1999 annual fees: 1) rebaseline the fees without a cap on fee increases, or 2) rebaseline the annual fees with a cap so that no licensees' annual fee increases more than 50 percent from FY 1998; and
- 3. Use revised matrixes for allocating the fuel facility and uranium recovery budgeted costs to licensees in those fee classes.
IV. Environmentallmpact: Categorical Exclusion The NRC has determined that this proposed rule is the type of action described in categorical exclusion 10 CFR 51,22(c)(1). Therefore, neither an environmentalimpact statement nor an environmentalimpact assessment has been prepared for the proposed ,
regulation. By its very nature, this regulatory action does not affect the environment, and therefore, no environmental justice issues are raised.
V. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement This proposed rule contains no information collection requirements and, therefore, is not subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
VI. Regulatory Analysis l
\
l With respect to 10 CFR Part 170, this proposed rule was developed pursuant to Title V l
51 I
i i
[.
_ .. .a ._ -. . . . . - . .
I PART 170 - FEES FOR FACILITIES, MATERIALS, IMPORT AND EXPORT LICENSES, AND OTHER REGULATORY SERVICES UNDER THE~ ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954, AS AMENDED
- 1. The authority citation for Part 170 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 31 U.S.C. 9701,96 Stat.1051; sec. 301, Pub. L.92-314,86 Stat. 222 (42 U.S.C. 2201w); sec. 201, Pub. L. 93-4381, 88 Stat.1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 205, Pub. L.101-576,104 Stat. 2842, (31 U.S.C. 901).
- 2. In $170.2, paragraph (r) is added to read as follows:
9170.2 Scope.
(r) An applicant for or a holder of a certificate of compliance issued under 10 CFR Part 76.-
- 3. In $170.3, the definition of the terms Insoections Materials license,are revised 1 A to read as follows:
L - p#j
$170.3 Definitions.
56-
Inspection means:
I (1) Routine inspections designed to evaluate the licensee's activities within the. I 1
context of the licensee having primary responsibility for protection of the public and )
environment; (2) Non-routine inspections in response or reaction to an incident, allegation, followup to inspection deficiencies or inspections to determine implementation of safety issues.
A non-routine or reactive inspection has the same purpose as the routine inspection; (3) Reviews and assessments of licensee performance; (4) Evaluations, such as those performed by Diagnostic Evaluation Teams; or (5) Incident investigations. !
l Materials License means a license, certificate, approval, registration, or other form of
- permission issued by the NRC under the regulations in 10 CFR parts 30,32 through 36,39,40, 61,' 70,71,72 and 76.
- 4. Section 170.5 is revised to read as follows:
57'
[pg u~ctf /do,ierf M e"ns " -- ~
, fY > F >
_ _ . -_. . . . y , . . , . . . - ~
6170.5 Communications.
' All communications conceming the regulations in this part should be addressed to the Chief Financial Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
Communications may be delivered in person at the Commission's offices at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD.
i
- 5. In $170.11, paragraph (a)(11)is removed and reserved and paragraph (a)(12)is added to read as follows:
6170.11 Exemotions.
1 (a) * *
- h (11) (Reserved).
(12) A performance assessment or evaluation for which the licensee volunteers at the NRC's request and which is selected by the NRC.
- 6. Section 170.12 is revised to read as follows:
6170.12 Pavmant of fees.
58
(a) Application fees. Each application for which a fee is prescribed must be l
accompanied by a remittance for the full amount of the fee. The NRC will not issue a new license or an amendment increasing the scope of an existing license to a higher fee category or adding a new fee category prior to receiving the prescribed application fee. The application fe0(s) is charged whether the Commission approves the application or not. The application fee (s) is also charged if the applicant withdraws the application.
(b) Licensing fees. (1) Licensing fees will be assessed to recover full costs for --
I (i) The review of applications for new licenses and approvals; (ii) The review of applications for amendments to and renewal of existing licenses or approvals; iii) The re 'ew of other docum ub tied to the NRC for review such s#
(A) Financialas rance submittals that do not re ' e a license amendment; (B) Responses to Confirm Action Letters; (C) Uranium very licensee's land-us urvey reports; and D) 10 CFR 50.71 final safety analysis reports;
. 59
s *s\
) Preapplication consultations and reviews, and
[ ) The full cost for project managers assigned to a specific plant or facility, excluding leave time and time spent on generic activities (such as rulemaking)/
(2) Full cost fees will be determined based on the professional staff time and appropriate contractual support services expended. The full cost fees for professional staff time will be determined at the professional hourly rates in effect the time the service was provided.~
The full cost fees are payable upon notification by the Commission.
(3) The NRC intends to bill each applicant or licensee at quarterly intervals for all accumulated costs for each application or document the applicant or licensee has on file for -
i NRC review, until the review is completed, except for costs that were deferred before August 9, 1991. The deferred costs will be billed as described in paragraphs (b)(5), (b)(6) and (b)(7) of this sectioni Each bill will identify the applications and documents submitted for review and the ,
costs related to each.
(4) ~ The NRC intends to bill each applicant or licensee for costs related to project manager time and preapplication consultations and reviews on a quarterly basis. Each bill will identify the costs related to project manager time and preapplication consultations and reviews.
'(5) Costs for review of an application for renewal of a standard design certification masr which have been deferred' prior to the effective date of this rule s be paid as follows: The full cost of review for a renewed standard design certification must be paid by the applicant for 60 i
l
?! ' <
l l
evaluations, and incident investigations. For inspections that result in the issuance of an I
- inspection report, fees will be assessed for costs incurred up to approximately 30 days after the !
inspection report is issued.- The costs for these inspections include preparation time, time on site, documentation time, and follow-up activities and any associated contractural service costs, l
but exclude the time involved in the processing and issuance of a notice of violation or civil penalty.'
(3) The NRC intends to bill for resident inspectors' time and for specific inspections subject to full cost recovery on a quarterly basis. The fees are payable upon notif n by the '
Commission. !
e f !
fi (d) Specia/ Project Fees.
AFees for/heh applications for special project if {}
{such asb >
I reporte, ancial assurance su i als wddo not require a license a
~}
dment' n es to Confirmatory Action Lettershranium recovery licensees' land-use survef' reports;anh10 CFR 50.7.1 final safety analysis re re based on the full cost of the review and are payable ification by the Commission e RC tends to bill each applicant at quarterly intervals until the review is completed. Each bill will identify the documents submitted for review ;
j and the costs related to each. The fees are payable upon notification by the Commission.
(e) Part 55 review fees. Fees for Part 55 review services are based on NRC time spent in administering the examinations and tests and any related contractural costs, The fees assessed will also include related activities such as preparing, reviewing, and grading of the i
examinations and tests. The NRC intends to bill the costs at quarterly intervals to the licensee I employing the operators, j 63 4
j
B:
' (b) Licensing fees Fees for reviews o' applications for new licenses and for renewals and amendments to existing licenses, for preapplication 4 consultations and for reviews of other documents su,bmitted to NRC for review, ;
and for project manager time for fee categories subject to full cost fees (fee Categories 1 A,18,1E, 2A,4A, 58,10A,11,' 12,13A, and 14) are due upon notification by the Commission in accordance with $170.12(b).
(c) Amendment / revision fees.
Applications for amendments to export and import licenses and revisions to reciprocity initial applications must be accompanied by the prescribed amendment / revision fee for each license / revision affected. An application for an l amendment to a license or approval classified in more thers one fee category must be accompanied by the prescribed amendment fee for the category affected by the amendment unless the amendment is applicable to two or more fee categories in which case the amendment fee for the highest fee category would apply.
v ) Inspection fees ' Inspections resulting from investigations conducted by the Office of Investigations and nonroutine inspections that result from third-party allegations are not subject to fees.- Inspection fees are due upon notification by the Commission in accordance with 5170.12(c).
8 Fees will not be charged for orders issued by the Commission under 10 CFR I
- l 88 l
3
or more will continue during the fiscal year and be based on the applicable annual fees as shown in $$171.15 and 171.16 until a notice conceming the revised amount of the fees for the fiscal year is published by the NRC. If the NRC is unable to publish a final fee rule that becomes effective during the current fiscal year, fees would be assessed based on the rates in effect for the previous fiscal year.
- 13. Section in4171.15 is revised to read as follows:
6171.15 Annual Fees: Reactor licenses and soent fuel storaae/ reactor decommissionina (a) Each person licensed to operate a power, test, or research reactor; each person holding a Part 50 power reactor license that is in decommissioning or possession only status; and each person holding a Part 72 license who does not hold a Part 50 license shall pay the annual fee for each unit for each license held at any time during the Federal FY in which the fee is due. This paragraph does not apply to test and research reactors exempted under in $171.11(a).
(b)(1) The FY 1999 annual fee for each operating power reactor would be the amount shown in Option A or Option B as presented in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section.
l (i) OMion A (Rebaselining without a cap): $2,769,000.
t 92
w (a)(1) The provisions of this section apply to person (s) who are authorized to conduct activities under --
,,S-
, . ei A b ) 10 CFR part 30 for byproduct material; (ii) 10 CFR part 40 for source material; (iii)~ 10 CFR part 70 for special nuclear material; -
- (iv) 10 CFR part 71 for packaging and transportation of radioactive material; and (v) 10 CFR part 76 for uranium enrichment.
4 (2) Each person identified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section shall pay an annual fee for each license the person holds at any time during the first six months of the Federal fiscal year (October 1 through March 31). Annual fees will be prorated for new licenses issued anJ for licenses for which termination is requested and activities permanently ceased during the period October 1
' through March 31 of the fiscal year as provided in $171.17 of this section, ifa single license authorizes more than one activity (e.g., human use and irradiator activities), annual fees will be assessed for each fee category applicable to the license. If you hold more than one license, the total annual fee you will be
! assessed will be the cumulative total of the annual fees applicable to the licenses you hold.
(b) The annual fee is comprised of a base annual fee and an additional charge (surcharge). The activities comprising the surcharge are shown in
. 97 l
l
paragraph (e) of this section. The activities comprising the base annual fee is the sum of the NRC budgeted costs for:
7 .,
(1) Generic and other research activities directly related to the regulation of materials licenses as defined in this part and
)
(2) Other safety, environmental, and safeguards activities for materials licenses, except costs for licensing and inspection activities that are recovered under Part 170 of this chapter.
(c) . A licensee who is required to pay an annual fee under this section
. may qualify as a small entity, if a licensee qualifies as a small entity and provides the Commission with the proper certification with the annual fee payment, the licensee may pay reduced annual fees for as shown below. Failure to file a small entity certification in a timely manner could result in the denial of I any refund that might otherwise be due.
Small Businesses Not Enamaad Maximum Annual Fee in Manufacturina and Small Per Licensed Cateaorv ,
Not-For-Profit Oraanizations (Gross Annual Receiott)
$350,000 to S5 million . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $1,800
. 98
"r) /d for shielding authorized ;"JNurat r.. Part l
40 of this chapter when included on the t.
same license. This catepcy does not apply to licenses issued to nonprofit educationalinstitutions whose processing or manufacturing is exempt l under 10 CFR 171.11(a)(1). These licenses are covered by fee Category ;
3 D........ .................... . .. ........... . ...... $15,300 $15,400 D. Licenses and approvals issued under 9632.72,32.73, and/or 32.74 of this chapter authorizing distribution or redistribution of radiopharmaceuticals, generators, reagent kits and/or sources )
or devices not involving processing of byproduct material. This category I
includes licenses issued under '
$$32.72,32.73 and 32.74 of this chapter to nonprofit educational institutions whose processing or manufacturing is exempt under 10 CFR 171.11(a)(1). This category also includes the possession and use of source material for shielding 107 4
l
under 10 CFP Part 71 Users and Fabricators.... .. . . . .. . . . . . ... . . $66,700 S66,800 U se rs . .. . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $2,2 00 $1,500
- 11. Standardized spent fuel facilities............ .... .. ...... N/A'
- 12. Special Projects........ ....... .. ................. .. ... .. ... .. N/A'
- 13. A. Spent fuel storage cask Certificate of Com pliance. . . . ... . . . ... . . . .. . . . . .. .. . .. . . .. ... . . . . N/A' B. Generallicenses for storage of spent fuel under 10 CFR 72.210... ..... ..... . .. N/A(See 10 CFR Part i 171.15(c)
- 14. Byproduct, source, or special nuclear material licenses and other approvals authorizing decommissioning, decontamination, reclamation, p
or site restoration activities pursunnMA 10 CFR
{
Parts 30,40,70,72, and 76 of this chapter.............N/A7
- 15. Import and Export licenses... ................. ..... .. ..... N/A' l 119 j
l
. of $5,000 or more should be paid via ACH through NRC's Lockbox Bank at the address indicated on the invoice. Credit card payments should be made up to the limit established by
. the credit card bank, in accordance with specific instructions provided with da invoices, to the Lockbox Bank designated for credit card payments. In accordance with Department of Treasury requirements, refunds will only be made upon receipt of information on the payee's financialinstitution and bank accounts.
I (b) Annual fees in the amount of $100,000 or more and described in the Federal 7-- irrent umleg Register notice =m"-". t6 9171.13 must be paid in quarterly installments of 25 percent as billed by the NRC. The quarters begin on October 1, January 1 April 1, and July 1 of each fiscal year. The NRC will adjust the fourth quarterly invoice to recover the full amount of the revised annual fee. If the amounts collected in the first three quarters exceed the amount of the revised annual fee, the overpayment will be refunded. Licensees whose annual fee for FY 1998 was less than $100,000 (billed on the anniversary date of the license), and whose revised annual fee for FY 1999 would be $100,000 (subject to quarterly billing), would be issued a bill upon publication of the final rule for the full amount of the FY 1999 annual fee, less any payments received for FY 1999 based on the anniverswy date billing process.
(c) Annual fees that are less than $100,000 are billed on the anniversary date of the license. For annual fee purposes, the anniversary date of the license is considered to be the first day of the' month in which the original license was issued by the NRC. Licensees that are billed on the license annivemary date will be assessed the annual fee in effect on the anniversary date of the license. Materials licenses subject to the annual fee that are terminated 123
during the fiscal year but prior to the anniversary month of the license will be billed upon termination for the fee in effect at the time of the billing. New materials licenses subject to the annual fee will be billed in the month the license is lj sued or in the next available monthly billing for the fee in effect on the anniversary date of the license. Thereafter, annual fees for new licenses will be assessed in the anniversary month of the license.
(d) Annual fees ofless than $100,000 must be paid as billed by the NRC. Materials )
license annual fees that are less than $100,000 are billed on the anniversary date of the license. The materials licensees that are billed on the anniversary date of the license are those covered by fee categories 1C,1.D,2(A)(2) other,2A(3),2A(4),28,2C,3A through 3P,48 through 9D,10A, and 10B.
1 l
(e) Payment is due on the invoice date and interest accrues from the date cf the j invoice. However, interest will be waived if payment is received within 30 days from the invoice date.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this day of 1999.
/
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jesse 1.. Funches, Chief Financial Officer.
124