ML20247L553

Comments on Proposed Rulemaking Entitled Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel in NRC-Approved Storage Casks at Civilian Nuclear Power Reactor Sites. Question Arises Re Whether or Not Commission Should Change Policy on Fees for Svcs

ML20247L553
Person / Time
Issue date:	04/11/1988
From:	Johnson G NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
To:	Morris B NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES)
Shared Package
ML20245D207	List: ML20245D205 ML20245D472 ML20245D561 ML20245D566 ML20245D977 ML20245E125 ML20245E904 ML20247K937 ML20247L030 ML20247L067 ML20247L214 ML20247L223 ML20247L235 ML20247L283 ML20247L319 ML20247L363 ML20247L441 ML20247L464 ML20247L482 ML20247L502 ML20247L540 ML20247L553 ML20247L585 ML20247L615 ML20247L703 ML20247L716 ML20247L762 ML20247L768 ML20247L784 ML20247L795 ML20247L820
References
FRN-54FR19379, RULE-PR-170, RULE-PR-50, RULE-PR-72 AC76-1-16, NUDOCS 8906020201
Download: ML20247L553 (2)

Text

___ - - _ - - -- - - -

((, y3 ,c

/ YPn t Ly o UNITED STATES 3M F' h F ,,

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION rn , dm

! $ WASHINGTON, D. C. 20655 -

APR 1 1 1000 Mi MEMORANDUM FOR: Bill M. Morris, Director Pb.2 Division of Regulatory Applications Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research FROM: Graham D. Johnson, Director Division of Accounting and Finance Office of Administration and Resources Management

SUBJECT:

PROPOSED RULEMAKING - STORAGE OF SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL IN NRC APPROVED STORAGE CASKS AT CIVILIAN NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR SITES The following are our comments relating to the subject staff paper:

1. The current Commission policy under 10 CFR 170 is to charge fees for services rendered to specific licensees. No fees are assessed for services rendered to general licensees. The proposed rule (p 30) would revise the definition in 170.2(e) to pennit the assessment of fees for these Part 72.6(b)(2) general licenses. The broad policy question of whether or not to assess fees to general licensees would have to be addressed with the Connission. For example, under 10 CFR 150.20 any person holding a specific license from an Agreement State is granted a general license to conduct the same activity in non-Agreement states. When the Regional offices conduct inspections of these general licences there are no inspection fees assessed. Similarly, the general licensees using the 3M Company polonium 210 static elimators were not assessed inspection fees for the hundreds of inspections conducted recently because of the leakage problem. The Commission has thousands of general licensees. The question becomes whether or not the  !

Commission should change its present policy to allow for the assessment of fees for services rendered to all general licensees or to those general licensees as proposed.

2. As the proposed rule indicates, VEPC0 and Carolina Power have applied for and been granted specific licenses for their Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) located at Surry and HB Robinson 2 nuclear stations. Both companies pay license and inspection fees in accordance with Part 170.31 and 170.32 category 1H(2). If the proposed regulation is adopted is it the intent to convert these two licenses to general licenses? If not, then VEPC0 and Carolina Power will continue to pay amendment fees while other utilities will not, under the current fee regulations, since they would be generally licensed and amendments would not be required. The major policy implications should be addressed in the staff paper.

3. It is not clear whether the reactor licensees who would be generally licensed to construct and operate an ISFSI would be g60g201890526 50 54FR19379 PDR

,j i !

i~

M

^'

APR 11 1988

' required to submf t their quality assurance plans, emergency plans,

.. decomisioning plans, physical security plans, etc. to the l

Commission for approval. If so, the question of whether to recover the Comission's costs'through fees should be addressed.

4. Fees are currently assessed for the manufacturers of spent fuel storage casks under 10 CFR 170.31, Category 12, Special Projects.

The proposed rule indicates that inspections will be conducted of the manufacturers of the spent fuel casks. If so, we will'need to make provisons in Part 170 for the inspections conducted.

5. Since the proposed rule would allow transportation casks which have been certified for use to also be used for the storage of spent fuel at an ISFSI, will a separate NMSS review be required and a specific approval issued?

' If you have any questions relative to the above comments, please contact C. James Holloway, Jr. on ext. 27225.

Graham D. Johnso irector Division of Accounting and Finance Office of Administration.and Resources Management p

p i

l l

I L. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____ ________________ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _