ML20054D008

Advises of Costs Incurred in Review of Withdrawn Application

ML20054D008
Person / Time
Site:	05000471
Issue date:	04/15/1982
From:	Miller W NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
Shared Package
ML20054C996	List: ML20054C995 ML20054D006 ML20054D008
References
NUDOCS 8204220235
Download: ML20054D008 (2)

Text

.

s APii 151982 FEMORA?IDUM FOR: Files THRU:

William 0. Miller, Chief, License Fee Management Branch, ADM l

FROM:

C. James Holloway, Jr., Assistant Chief, License Fee Management Branch, A m

SUBJECT:

PILGRIM 2 C0:lSTRUCTIO?1 PERMIT REVIEW COSTS Boston Edison Company filed a construction permit (CP) application on June 7 1973 to build two nuclear power plants at the licensee's site in Plymouth County, Massachusetts. These plants were designated as the Pilgrim t{uclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3.

Boston Edison withdrew their application for Unit 3 on August 15, 1974.

On October 23, 1981, Ropes and Gray, counsel for Boston Edison Company and Boston Edison Company, jointly filed a " Motion to withdraw application and terminate proceedings" (Enclosure 1) for Pilgrim 2 with the Atomic Safety and Licensing Coard Panel (ASLBP). By Order (Enclosure 2) dated January 15, 1982, the ASLBP dismissed the proceedings.

In accordance with LFMB established guidelines concerning the assessment of fees for withdrawn applications, we have reviewed the actual costs incurred by the various program offices from the date the application was filed to the date of withdrawal of the application. is a sumary of the review costs as well as the supporting documentation from the program offices. Enclosure 3 i shows that $986,764 was expended for the review of Pilgrim 2.

The CP application was filed and reviewed as a custom design. Therefore, for purposes of assessing the costs of Pilgrim 2 review, we consider the CP fees in 10 CFR 170.21(a)A.1 as the maximum allowable for recovery. The maximum that can be assessed for the review of Unit 2 is $1,069,000 ($125,000 + $944,000).

Since the costs of the review for Unit 2 are less than the maximum allowed, then

$986,764 would be applicable. Since Boston Edison paid an application fee of 8204220235 820415 PDR ADOCK 05000471 A

PDR

F S/

Files Ippa,g g 19.,

$70,000, this amount has been deducted from the total cost leaving a balance due of $916,764 for review of the Pilgrim 2 application. We plan to notify the Office of the Controller to bill Boston Edison Company for the Commission's cost of reviewing the withdrawn construction permit application.

sigec,c. e $ " - n,J.

C. James Holloway, Jr.

Assistant Chief License Fee Management Branch Office of Administration

Enclosures:

1.

10/23/81 Motion to Terminate Proceedings 2.

1/15/82 ASLBP Termination of Proceedings 3.

Sumary of Costs and Supporting Documentation u

i DISTRIBUTION: w/ enclosures License Fee File Docket File 50-471 /

'N x

LFMB Manpower File CJHolloway, LFMB RMDiggs, LFMB j

KLKohler, LFMB LFMB R/F (2) 1

(

s i

1

\\

\\

'\\

\\~

i\\-

\\

\\\\,

g

\\

\\

LFMB:AD LFMB:AD LFMB:ADM omee >

. ~..........

SURNAME >

r : v..l. C.. H oway

...OM..i..l. l e. r.......

W

................a.

.........aa."

om>.4//

4#h82...

4g82....,..

......_.g....

. nne rORM 318 00-80) NRCM 0240

' OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usoeo. i9si-saiseo L

.~

C e

)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 4,

[{

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION CCI n 01981 > 4 before the l'

C..., -; m,:n:etarf 2

,q

s ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD E n.,..-'g,3 c) g Cn p

.r

)

In the Matter of

)

,, fO BOSTON EDISON COMPANY, et al.

Docket No. 50 471 M/

)

(Pilgrim Nuclear Generating

)

g Q,g

.W

-~

<f Station, Unit 2)

)

b 20\\i((b

'a.

O p, O. b MOTION TO WITHDRAW APPLICATION u.s. w,t AND TERMINATE ADJUDICATORY PROCEEDINGS

(

j.,

Q-

.//.

e,. :

Now come the Applicants and say as follows:

t#/~l'.'

l.

On September 24, 1981, the Applicants moved the Scard to continue generally all matters currently on this docket

/

A dyt pending the filing of a further motion with this Board respect-g jy ing the cancellation of the Pilgrim 2 project.

[/* )

s 2.

As a result of the allowance of that motion, matters pending in this docket have been continued generally.

///7 fp 3

On october 22, 1981, tihe cancellation of the Pilgrim 2 proj ect became final.

RC i'iN 071.F.?.m Q$0 5

=...Ih 1.7..8/...

.. ).L.

Ii

(.

.3.6.L....

l.:::= :r,..

z ucco.r m /

zo'E3

<~

e WHEREFORE, the Applicants move the Board to enter an order-allowing the withdrawal of the application herein and terminating I

the adjudicatory proceedings before this Board.

By their attorneys, Thomas G.

Dignan, Jr.

Thomas G.

Dignan, Jr.

Ropes & Gray 225 Franklin Street Boston, MA 02110 (617) 423-6100 1

W.

S.

Stowe W.

S.

Stowe Boston Edison Company 800 Boylston Street Boston, MA c2199 (617) 424-2544 October 23, 1981 h

i i

a 1

t

)

7 5

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY C01"41SSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD.E I113 E d5 Before Admir.istrative Judges:

Andrew C. Goodhope, Chainnan Dixon Callihan.

e Richard F. Cole C

)

In the Matter of

)

)

BOSTON EDISON COMPANY, et al.

)

Docket No. 50-471

)

(Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station,

)

January 15, 1982 p t ! i G, Unit 2)

)

Oy 4

Rt,%

iO

!!?C q.

OIS32x ORDER

=.-

(Granting Request To Withdraw Application and Closina Record) p<

dii o On December 10, 1981 this Board requested advice from the Applicant as to any pre-construction activities undertaken at the Pilgrim 2 site which might require cond'itions to be imposed in this order.

The Applicant has replied and informed the Board and parties as to pre-construction activities undertaken at the site which might require conditions to granting Applicant's request to withdraw its application.

The NRC Staff has reviewed the Applicant's reply and states that any activities are environmentally insignificant and no restorative con-ditions are necessary at this time. The Board concurs.

96 1

9 Q

s.~ c w m a

.R2.0+2400ta*-

G

[.,-

2 Accordingly, it is this 15th day of Janu:

1982 0'RDERED That Applicant's request to withdraw its tation and terminate proceedings in this case is granted and the r:

before this Board is closed.

FOR THE AT(

MFETY AND i

LICEN:

i3ARD 0ub

?,,.

Anarew C. t se, Chai man /f I

ADMINISTRA'.

'JDGE I

s a

q.

I e

r i

j l-r 9

I 4

-.4=..

._f

.,m-

BOSTON EDISON COMPANY Pilgrim 2 CP Application Withdrawn 1/15/82 Custom Design 170.21(a),A.l.

Program Office Professional Staff Cost Per Professional Cost Of Contractual Total Review Hours Expended Staff Hour Staff Effort Support Costs E

$39

$773,292

$174,400

$947,692 NRR 19,828 IE 464.5 36 16,722 16,722 NMSS 38 - ACRS 447 50 22,350 22,350 i

ASLBP Contested Case ASLAP None Total Incurred

$986,764 The total cost for Unit 2 is $986,764. 'Since this is less than the maximum fee as provided in 170.21, and since only an application fee of $70,000 has been paid, the balance due NRC is $916,764.

Unit 2

$986.764 Less Application Fee:

-70,000 Paid 8/13/73 Total:

$916,764 y We have not included 20,397 professional staff hours incurred by NRR for the contested hearings.

We have included 300 hours0.00347 days <br />0.0833 hours <br />4.960317e-4 weeks <br />1.1415e-4 months <br /> which represents the NRR normal effort for the required mandatory hearing phase of a CP review.

.__