ML17309A985

Requests That NRC Review Denial of Appeal from Assessment of Fees Assessed in 981101 Invoice RS0062-99 & Assessment of Fees in Invoice RS0182-99 Which Was Also Denied in 990305 Ltr.Both Invoices Are for Fees Re Inspector GG Warnick

ML17309A985
Person / Time
Site:	Saint Lucie
Issue date:	04/15/1999
From:	Plunkett T FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM), NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
Shared Package
ML17309A986	List: ML17309A985 ML17309A987
References
L-99-082, L-99-82, NUDOCS 9906030207
Download: ML17309A985 (6)

Text

CATFQORY REGULATvI~E INFORMATION DISTRIBUTIOh . STEM (RIDS)

ACCESSION NBR:9906030207 DOC.DATE: 99/04/15 NOTARIZED'. NO.. DOCKET FACIL:50-335 St. Lucie Plant, Unit 1, Florida Power &. Light Co. 05000335 50-389 St. Lucie Plant, Unit 2, Florida Power &. Light Co. 05000389 AUTH. NAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION PLUNKETT,T.F. Florida Power 6 Light Co.

RECIP.NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION Office of the Secretary of the Commission

SUBJECT:

Requests that NRC" review denial of appeal from assessment of fees assessed in 981101 invoice RS0062-99 & assessment of fees in invoice RS0182-99 which was also denied in 990305 ltr.Both invoices are for fees re inspector GG Warnick.

DISTRIBUTION CODE: MOOED COPIES RECEIVED:LTR I ENCL I SIZE: 4 4 Z TITLE: License Fees E NOTES:

RECIPIENT COPIES RECIPIENT COPIES ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL LPD2-2 LA 1 0 LPD2-2 PD 1 1 GLEAVES,W 1 1 INTERNAL: "BE CENTER 1 1 OC/LFDCB 1 1 EXTERNAL: NRC PDR 1 1 D

0 U

N NOTE TO ALL "RIDSU RECIPIENTS:

PLEASE HELP US TO REDUCE WASTE.'TO HAVE YOUR NAME OR ORGANIZATION REMOVED FROM DISTRIBUTION LISTS OR REDUCE THE NUMBER OF COPIES RECEIVED BY YOU OR YOUR ORGANIZATION, CONTACT THE DOCUMENT CONTROL DESK (DCD) ON EXTENSION 415-2083 TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED: LTTR 6 ENCL 5

L Florida Power 5 Light Company,6351 S. Ocean Drive. Jensen Beach, FL 34957 APR1 5 1999 L-99-082 10 CFR 15.31 10 CFR 170.51

.~EC'D BY SECY Secretary .

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 RE: St. Lucie Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-335 and 50-389 A eal of Fees - Invoice Nos. RS0062-99 and RS0182-99 Pursuant to 10 CFR 170.51 and 10 CFR 15.31, Florida Power & Light Company (FPL) requests the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's review of the denial of FPL's appeal from the assessment of fees assessed in the November 1, 1998, Invoice No. RS0062-99 for St.

Lucie Unit 1. FPL's initial appeal of this invoice (L-98-316, December 18, 1998, Attachment 1 hereto) was denied in part by the OAice of the Chief Financial Officer (NRC CFO) by letter dated March 5, 1999 (Attachment 2 hereto). FPL also appeals the assessment of fees in Invoice No. RS0182-99 that was also denied in the Attachment 2 letter. FPL had appealed this invoice by letter L-99-44, March 2, 1999 (Attachment 3 hereto).

In summary, FPL was improperly billed for fees for 232 hours0.00269 days <br />0.0644 hours <br />3.835979e-4 weeks <br />8.8276e-5 months <br /> totaling $ 28,768.00 for NRC inspector G. G. Warnick who was in training status during the billing period covered by Invoice RS0062-99. Additionally, FPL was improperly billed for fees for 461.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> totaling $ 57,226.00 for the same inspector who was in training status during the billing period covered by Invoice RS0182-99.

In support of its appeals, FPL stated that (1) the inspector was in training status for the periods in question and was not providing direct regulatory services to FPL; (2) the time that the inspector spent at St. Lucie in training that was not assigned to a specific inspection report should be included in the NRC overhead, general, and administrative costs defined under 10 CFR 171.5; and (3) FPL should not be billed for resident inspectors until they become qualified and provide regulatory services to the licensee.

The NRC CFO's letter denying FPL's appeal (Attachment 2) fails to address FPL's arguments. The letter merely asserts that 10 CFR 170.12(g)(1), amended in June 1998, requires full cost recovery for resident inspector's time, and that Part 170 fees are now assessed for all resident inspector time, excluding leave and time spent at another site to which they are not assigned. The letter further asserts, without explanation or basis, that

"[t]he costs associated with resident inspectors, includin time in trainin, are an identifiable service to specific licensees in providing regulatory oversight of their assigned plant or facility." [emphasis added]

fs f2 ii;4.

9906030207 9904%5 PDR ADOCK 05000335,'

PDR an FPL Group company

1 I'

St. Lucio Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-335 and 50-389 L-99482 Pago 2 With respect to the user fees in 10 CFR Part 170, Congress instructed in the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA) that "any person who receives a service or thing of value &om the Commission shall pay fees to cover the Commission's costs in providing any such service or thing of value." 42 USC 2214(b). Congress instructed the Commission to allocate the aggregate amount "fairly and equitably" among licensees. 42 USC 2214(c)(3). In enacting OBRA, the Conference Committee made clear that the annual fee provision was intended to require NRC to recover "administrative costs not inuring directly to the benefit of regulated parties." 136 Cong. Rec. at H12692. The conferees instructed the Commission to recover the costs of "individually identifiable services to applicants and holders of NRC licenses" through Part 170, "so that each licensee or applicant pays the full cost to the NRC of all identifiable regulatory services such licensee or applicant receives." Id. The remainder of NRC's budget, less appropriations from the Nuclear Waste Fund, is to be covered by annual fees under Part 171.

The assessment of fees for time spent in training under Part 170 is arbitrary and capricious and violates OBRA. The training and qualification of a resident inspector simply enables that inspector to provide regulatory services to a licensee at some later time. During the training process, the inspector is not providing regulatory services to a specific beneficiary.

The June 1998 amendment to 10 CFR 170.12(g)(1) does not end the inquiry. Until a resident inspector is fully trained and qualified, that inspector cannot be considered to be "assigned to a particular plant." It is also inappropriate to consider "all of the resident inspector's time" as including his time before he was qualified to serve as an inspector.

Training to qualify an inspector to inspect is simply not a "service" to the entity being inspected. Further, the statement of considerations accompanying the June 1998 amendments do not indicate that the costs of training and qualification will be recovered under Part 170.

Additionally, all resident inspectors are transferred to other facilities after a period of time at one facility. The next licensee that receives the services of that resident inspector is not assessed for the previous training and qualification of that inspector. In this case, when inspector Warnick is assigned to another licensee, FPL will have shouldered the entire burden to pay for the training of that inspector. Since the benefit of this training is spread to other licensees, the burden should also be spread, "fairly and equitably,"

through the annual Part 171 fee.

I i ~

<1 ~

St. Lucie Units 1 and 2 Docket'Nos. 50-335 and 50-389 L-99482 Page 3 In summary, NRC should issue a credit to FPL in the amounts of $ 28,768.00 for improperly billed time in Invoice RS0062-99 and $ 57,226.00 for improperly billed time in Invoice RS0182-99 for the reasons set forth above.

Please contact us should you have any questions about this appeal.

Very truly yours, Thomas F. Plunkett President Nuclear Division Attachments (3) cc: Regional Administrator, Region II, USNRC Senior Resident Inspector, USNRC, St. Lucie Plant

St. Lucio Units t and 2 Docket Nos. 50-335 and 50-389 I 99482 Attachment 1 FPL Letter L-98-316