[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 111 (Thursday, June 10, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31448-31483]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-14697]
[[Page 31447]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part IV
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
_______________________________________________________________________
10 CFR Parts 170 and 171
Revision of Fee Schedules; 100% Fee Recovery, FY 1999; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 111 / Thursday, June 10, 1999 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 31448]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Parts 170 and 171
RIN 3150-AG08
Revision of Fee Schedules; 100% Fee Recovery, FY 1999
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending the
licensing, inspection, and annual fees charged to its applicants and
licensees. The amendments are necessary to implement the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA-90), as amended, which mandates that
the NRC recover approximately 100 percent of its budget authority in
Fiscal Year (FY) 1999, less amounts appropriated from the Nuclear Waste
Fund (NWF). The amount to be recovered for FY 1999 is approximately
$449.6 million.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 9, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Copies of comments received and the agency work papers that
support these final changes to 10 CFR Parts 170 and 171 may be examined
at the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW (Lower Level),
Washington, DC 20555-0001.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Glenda Jackson, Office of the Chief
Financial Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001, Telephone 301-415-6057.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background.
II. Responses to Comments.
III. Final Action.
IV. Voluntary Consensus Standards.
V. Environmental Impact: Categorical Exclusion.
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement.
VII. Regulatory Analysis.
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis.
IX. Backfit Analysis.
X. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.
I. Background
OBRA-90, as amended, 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).
Certain NRC costs related to reviews and other assistance provided to
the Department of Energy were excluded from the fee recovery
requirement for FY 1999 by the FY 1999 Energy and Water Development
Appropriations Act.
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 provided by the NRC for which these
fees are assessed are the review of applications for the issuance of
new licenses, approvals or renewals, and amendments to licenses or
approvals. Second, annual fees, established at 10 CFR Part 171 under
the authority of OBRA-90, recover generic and other regulatory costs
not recovered through 10 CFR part 170 fees. The NRC published a
proposed rule that presented the amendments to parts 170 and 171
necessary to comply with OBRA-90 for FY 1999 on April 1, 1999 (64 FR
15876).
II. Responses to Comments
A total of thirty-four comments were received on the proposed rule.
Although the comment period ended on May 3, 1999, the NRC evaluated the
26 comments which were received by the close of business on May 5,
1999. The NRC was unable to consider the eight comments received after
May 5, 1999, as they were not received in sufficient time for the NRC
staff and the Commission to evaluate them fully in the limited period
available for preparing a final rule in this expedited rulemaking
proceeding. In any event, a cursory review of those late comments did
not reveal any substantive new issues.
Many of the comments were similar. These comments have been
grouped, as appropriate, and addressed as single issues in this final
rule.
The comments are as follows:
A. Legal Issues
Several commenters raised questions about NRC's legal
interpretation of OBRA-90 and the IOAA. These comments are addressed
first because their resolution establishes the framework for addressing
subsequent issues raised by commenters.
The commenters attempted to present a balanced view of the proposed
fee schedule, and even applauded the NRC's ``considerable effort over
the past year to reduce inefficiencies through strategic planning and
reorganizations.'' Nonetheless, it is abundantly clear that most
commenters believe that the NRC has a long way to go to reach a truly
fair and equitable system of fee allocation. Several commenters
asserted that the NRC lacks the legal authority to set fees in
accordance with the proposed fee schedule. These commenters challenged
the agency's interpretation of the statutes underpinning NRC's fee
collection proposal. These same questions have been raised since the
inception of the 100 percent fee collection requirement in 1991. The
Commission has consistently interpreted its statutory mandate, but in
the face of continuing complaints, the Commission will again address
the concerns raised by commenters.
1. Comment. Comments submitted by or on behalf of commercial
nuclear power reactors, the uranium recovery industry, and a materials
licensee expressed serious concern over inequities caused by the
statutory mandate that NRC collect an annual charge from licensees
aggregating approximately 100 percent of the budget authority for the
fiscal year, less fees collected under Part 170 and any amount
appropriated from the Nuclear Waste Fund or the General Fund. These
commenters are particularly distressed at having to absorb charges in
their annual fees for activities that do not directly benefit them,
such as international activities, Agreement State oversight and
regulatory support, activities for other Federal agencies, and fee
reductions or exemptions for small entities and nonprofit educational
institutions. One commenter, speaking on behalf of several commercial
power reactors, questioned the NRC's legal and constitutional authority
to impose these charges. The commenter did not believe the 100 percent
budget recovery requirement could be reconciled with OBRA-90, which
requires that annual fees bear a reasonable relationship to the cost of
regulatory services and to be fairly and equitably allocated among
licensees.
Commenters concluded that the desired relief for this problem can
come only by legislative changes to OBRA-90 to relax the 100 percent
budget recovery requirement so that certain costs can be removed from
the fee base. They remained hopeful that the desired relief may be
forthcoming in spite of their awareness that the Administration has not
supported such a relaxation. In some cases, however, commenters
perceived that the NRC has alternatives it is not using, such as
charging Agreement States for services provided. In addition, they
insisted that the NRC should recover these types of costs through
General Funds appropriations from the Congress. In their view, when all
else fails, the NRC must simply discontinue the ``unfunded'' program
rather than pass along these costs to the licensees. These commenters
asserted
[[Page 31449]]
that this becomes particularly necessary in today's era of utility
deregulation because reactor licensees' ability to pass through costs
to their customers has been reduced.
One commenter maintained that the NRC has the authority to charge
other Federal agencies part 170 fees. Another commenter went so far as
to say that the NRC is not at liberty to relieve anyone from paying
fees for associated services, i.e., to grant exemptions from user fees
because, under OBRA-90, Congress directed NRC to recover its costs by
collecting fees from ``any person who receives a service or thing of
value.'' This commenter maintained that there was no exemption
authority for this requirement, relying on the definition of ``person''
under the Atomic Energy Act to argue not only that the NRC has
authority to impose charges for these types of activities, but also
that it is compelled to charge the recipients for them. Thus, it would
have the NRC recover Agreement State oversight and support costs
through fees assessed on the Agreement States or their licensees. The
commenter also stated that costs of international activities should be
recovered through fees imposed on the Department of State; that other
Federal agency licensing and inspection charges should be assessed
against the regulated Federal agency; that small entities and nonprofit
educational institutions should not be relieved of fees for the costs
associated with them; and that either a General Fund appropriation
should be sought to recover those expenses or they should pay their own
costs. Other commenters also advocated these proposals.
In support of these arguments, commenters charged that OBRA-90 does
not permit charging licensees for programs not directly related to the
licensees charged, that the surcharge imposed to recover these costs is
unlawful, unfair, arbitrary, and discriminatory. These commenters
charged that OBRA-90 is unconstitutional in that it denies reactor
licensees equal protection under the due process clause of the
Constitution and constitutes an unfair taking of property without just
compensation. They believed, uniformly, that the surcharge bears no
relation to services or benefits to the licensees against whom it is
assessed and that these costs should be recovered from the
beneficiaries. Commenters cited the reduced ability of reactor
licensees to pass through costs to their ultimate customers in an era
of utility deregulation and reasserted their view that power reactor
licensees should only be assessed for programs of direct relevance to
them.
Response. OBRA-90 requires that the sum total of annual charges NRC
collects from its licensees equal approximately 100 percent of NRC
total budget authority for each fiscal year, less fees assessed under
the IOAA and amounts appropriated to NRC from the Nuclear Waste Fund.
The NRC is expected to establish a schedule of annual charges that
fairly and equitably allocates this amount among licensees and
reasonably reflects the costs of providing services to licensees or
classes of licensees, to the maximum extent practicable. This means
that the NRC must promulgate each fiscal year a fee schedule that is as
fair and equitable as can be achieved, given the other constraints with
which it is faced. The NRC does not have discretion to assess less than
this amount, as several commenters suggested. The costs of services
that do not directly benefit licensees must be recovered under our
current statutory mandate.
In the Statement of Considerations for the 1991 final fee rule the
Commission concluded that the Congressional intent behind the
requirement to collect ``approximately 100 percent'' of its budget was
for the NRC to identify and allocate as close as possible to 100
percent of its budget authority to the various classes of NRC
licensees. The NRC has historically interpreted this requirement as
referring to the inherent uncertainties in estimating and collecting
fees, such that additional fees would not need to be collected in case
of shortfall, nor refunds necessarily made in case of over collection.
(See 56 FR 31472, 31473; July 10, 1991).
Moreover, the Conference Report for OBRA-90 specifically
acknowledged the fact that there would be certain ``expenses that
cannot be attributed either to an individual licensee or a class of
licensees.'' The NRC is expected to
fairly and equitably recover these expenses from its licensees
through the annual charge even though these expenses cannot be
attributable to individual licensees or classes of licensees. These
expenses may be recovered from such licensees as the Commission, in
its discretion, determines can fairly, equitably, and practicably
contribute to their payment.
H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 101-964, at 963, reprinted in 1990 U.S.C.C.A.N.
2374, 2668. Thus, Congress has directed that licensees, of necessity,
will have to pay for some of the expenses that are not generated by
efforts directly on their behalf, regrettable as that may be. While
every effort is made to impose such costs equitably, there is one
controlling requirement which is inflexible: the NRC must set its
schedule so that it can recoup approximately 100 percent of its budget
authority, less the amounts it properly may recover from other areas,
such as charges for services (IOAA fees) and Nuclear Waste Fund
Appropriations. In order to meet that mandate, the NRC has been forced
to assess fees to licensees to recover the costs of certain types of
activities that, while not necessarily directly benefitting the
licensees charged, leave no other means to be recovered. This includes
functions such as services provided to other Federal agencies,
Agreement State oversight and international activities. It is
understandable that licensees who absorb the impact of these charges
will object to them and wish to be relieved of them. However, their
arguments overlook an important qualifier in the standard: namely, ``to
the maximum extent practicable.'' That is, when Congress enacted this
admittedly rigorous requirement, it was aware of the fact that there
would be certain costs that would not be susceptible to recovery as
others were. The Congress still has not relieved the NRC from the onus
of the collection requirement. Certain expenses cannot be attributed to
an individual licensee or class of licensees but may be recovered from
licensees who can fairly, equitably, and practicably contribute to
payment.
The NRC can readily explain why these costs are spread to agency
licensees as part of a fee ``surcharge.'' The NRC lacks the legal
authority to assess IOAA charges against Federal agencies (other than
the Tennessee Valley Authority). The IOAA states, in pertinent part,
``[E]ach service or thing of value provided by an agency . . . to a
person (except a person on official business of the United States
Government) is to be self-sustaining to the extent possible.'' A
``person on official business of the United States Government'' has
long been construed to mean a Federal agency. This construction
indicates that the NRC requires separate Congressional authorization in
order to override this provision and lawfully impose fees on other
Federal agencies. For example, in light of this language, section 161w.
of the Atomic Energy Act was enacted in 1972 to allow the NRC to impose
Part 170 fees on the Tennessee Valley Authority. Section 161w. was
further amended in 1992 to include the United States Enrichment
Corporation, prior to its privatization. Had the NRC's statutory
mandate included the authority to impose fees on all Federal agencies,
this legislation would have been unnecessary. The NRC believes it
[[Page 31450]]
should be granted the authority to charge other Federal agencies for
services rendered and recently submitted to Congress, as a provision in
its proposed FY 2000 authorization bill, an amendment to section 161w.
which would provide the authority to impose Part 170 fees on all
Federal agencies.
Similarly, the NRC lacks the authority to impose annual fees on the
Agreement States and their licensees because OBRA-90 permits the
assessment of annual fees only on NRC licensees. The Agreement States
and their licensees are not ``NRC licensees.'' The NRC also has made
policy decisions not to assess fees on nonprofit educational
institutions in order to further the public good and to limit the fees
assessed on small businesses in accordance with the policies underlying
the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Under the circumstances, it is
understandable that a substantial portion of these costs are recovered
through annual fees imposed on power reactors. A large percentage of
the NRC's budget is devoted to the regulation of power reactors.
Accordingly, a large portion of the annual fee must be borne by these
licensees.
The commenters suggested that, in the absence of such legislation,
the NRC should not perform the activities encompassed within the annual
fee surcharge. The Commission is not prepared to eliminate these
important functions that help assure the public health and safety and
the common defense and security without a clear statutory directive
from the Congress. Thus, a legislative solution to the fee recovery
requirement is required to eliminate the concerns raised by the
commenters. Over the years, the NRC has had limited success in
obtaining fee legislation that would reduce the burdens on its
licensees by having some or all of NRC expenses in these areas obtained
through appropriations from the General Fund.
While the Commission continues to support legislative relief,
absent such relief the Commission has limited ability to remedy any
inequities in its fee structure because it is required to collect
approximately 100 percent of its budget in fees. The NRC has taken
several actions within existing fee laws to address concerns regarding
its fee structure:
1. The NRC identified fairness and equity concern categories in its
February 1994 Report to Congress on NRC Fee Policy and indicated that
legislation was necessary to address these concerns. The recommended
legislation has not been enacted.
2. In FY 1995, the NRC acted under existing fee laws to help to
mitigate the fairness and equity concerns by treating costs for
activities that do not directly benefit NRC licensees similar to
overhead and distributing the costs to the broadest base of NRC
licensees.
3. The NRC established a policy to obtain reimbursement for
services provided to other Federal agencies when such reimbursements
are authorized by law.
4. The NRC obtained appropriation legislation that removed from the
fee base certain costs incurred as a result of regulatory reviews and
other assistance provided to the Department of Energy.
5. The NRC took actions to shift cost recovery for certain
activities from Part 171 annual fees to Part 170 specific fees for
services.
6. As part of its FY 2000 authorization bill, the NRC is seeking an
amendment to section 161w. of the Atomic Energy Act to provide the
authority to impose Part 170 fees on all other Federal agencies.
In sum, the Commission believes that the fee schedules it is
promulgating in this final rule satisfy all legal requirements and do
not deprive any licensee of its constitutional rights.
2. Comment. One commenter said that the basis for annual fees for
operating reactors should be megawatt generation capability instead of
the proposed fixed flat annual fee. This commenter argued that the
proposed fee structure placed a disproportionate burden on the
ratepayers of utilities with small reactors and resulted in a
competitive disadvantage to those reactors.
Response. OBRA-90 requires that annual fees have a reasonable
relationship to the expenditure of Commission resources. No available
data demonstrates that the Commission expends fewer resources on
reactors with lower generation capacity than it does on facilities with
greater generation capability. Furthermore, Commission services are not
allocated on the basis of megawatt generation capability. Because there
is no relationship between generic costs and generation capacity, there
is no legal basis for charging annual fees based on megawatt generation
capability.
3. Comment. One commenter said that the NRC should designate as
small entities, for reduced fee purposes, all those companies with
small business certification under the U.S. Small Business
Administration's (SBA) Small Disadvantaged Business Program, commonly
known as the 8(a) Program. The NRC should then refund the higher fees
collected for the last two years from all 8(a) firms. The commenter
further requested that the NRC change its definition of small entity
for environmental remediation service companies to conform to the SBA's
revised size standards, which now categorize such companies with fewer
than 500 employees as ``small entities.''
Response. On April 11, 1995 (60 FR 18344), the NRC promulgated a
final rule, after notice and comment rulemaking, that revised its size
standards. The final rule established the small entity classification
applicable to small businesses as follows. Those companies providing
services having no more than $5 million in average annual gross
revenues over its last three completed fiscal years, or, for
manufacturing concerns, having an average of 500 or fewer employees
during the preceding 12-month period would qualify as small entities
(10 CFR 2.810). The NRC promulgated this rule pursuant to Section
3(a)(2) of the Small Business Act, which permits Federal agencies to
establish size standards via notice and comment rulemaking, subject to
the approval of the SBA Administrator. The NRC rule, which the SBA
approved, established generic size standards for small businesses
because NRC's regulatory scheme is not well suited to setting standards
for each component of the regulated nuclear industry. Unlike the NRC,
the SBA's Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) System establishes
size standards based on types of economic activity or industry.
The Commission will further consider the issue raised by this
commenter regarding its designation of small entities for reduced fee
purposes, and will separately address the commenter's request for a
partial annual fee exemption.
4. Comment. A few commenters indicated that the NRC has not
provided sufficient information on which to evaluate the fees to be
assessed for FY 1999. One commenter stated that the NRC violated the
Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by failing to provide an explanation
of how it arrived at its proposed fee schedules.
Response. The NRC believes it has provided sufficient information
concerning its proposed fee schedule to allow effective evaluation and
constructive comment on the proposed rule. In Part II of the Statement
of Considerations supporting the proposed rule, the NRC provided a
detailed explanation of the FY 1999 budgeted costs for the various
classes of licensees being assessed fees. In addition, the NRC work
papers pertinent to the development of the fees to be assessed were
placed in the Public Document
[[Page 31451]]
Room (PDR) on April 1, 1999, on the first day of the public comment
period. These work papers provide additional information concerning the
development and calculation of the fees, including NRC's FY 1999
budgeted resources at the subactivity level for the agency's major
programs. The NRC has also made NUREG-1100, Vol. 14, ``Budget
Estimates, Fiscal Year 1999'' (Feb. 1998), which discusses in detail
NRC's budget for FY 1999 available in the PDR. In addition, NRC staff
always makes itself available either to meet with interested parties in
person, or to respond to telephone inquiries to explain its fee
schedules.
B. Specific Comments--Part 170
1. Expand the Scope of Part 170
Comment. The NRC received twelve comments on the proposal to expand
the scope of Part 170 to include incident investigations, performance
assessments and evaluations (except those for which the licensee
volunteers at NRC's request and which NRC accepts), reviews of reports
and other submittals, and full cost recovery for time expended by
Project Managers (PMs), except leave time and time spent on generic
activities such as rulemaking.
Many of those commenting on this issue opposed full cost recovery
for PMs. Several uranium recovery licensees commented that, coupled
with the proposed increase in the hourly rate to be assessed for NRC
staff review time, the proposed change could double Part 170 fee
assessments, an increase that would be extremely burdensome to
licensees. One commenter indicated that billing for all of a PM's time
would reduce necessary communication, such as phone calls, between the
NRC and the licensees. This commenter also objected to licensees being
required to pay for the time a PM spends to become familiar with a
site. A similar comment was received from a reactor licensee who,
although not specifically indicating opposition to the proposal, stated
that Part 170 fees should not be assessed for PM or resident inspector
time spent in training or other administrative tasks not directly
associated with the licensee. One commenter indicated that the
licensees paying for the PM time have little or no input over what the
PM is reviewing. A power reactor commenter supported full cost recovery
for PMs only if work priorities were mutually agreed upon by NRC and
the licensee.
Several of the uranium recovery commenters also questioned the
amount of time spent by PMs and other NRC staff in reviewing licensee
submittals. They indicated that, in many cases, the amount of time
spent on uranium recovery issues appears to be excessive in light of
what they characterize as the low level of risk posed by uranium
recovery operations. One uranium recovery commenter stated that the
proposal presents the potential for an open-ended escalation of fees
that do not directly benefit the licensees.
Other commenters partially or fully supported the proposed
expansion of Part 170. The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), which
primarily represents the commercial nuclear reactor industry, urged the
NRC to continue to separate out fees related to a given licensee and
assess those fees to the licensee under Part 170. NEI stated that it is
inappropriate for one licensee to subsidize, through annual fees,
additional agency oversight incurred by another licensee because it is
not performing well. Another commenter who supported the proposal
recommended that the NRC demonstrate how the expanded Part 170 costs
are removed from the Part 171 fee schedule. One power reactor commenter
agreed, in part, with shifting cost recovery from annual fees to fees
for services. However, the commenter stated, that as more services are
billed by the hour, the opportunity for inefficiencies in reviews and
billing abuse becomes greater. This commenter suggested that hourly
fees be capped to allow licensees to make budget forecasts.
Another commenter supported the assessment of Part 170 fees for all
inspections, stating that the change is expected to lower the costs of
inspections for good performers. However, this commenter opposed the
proposal to expand Part 170 to include reviews of documents that do not
require formal approval. This commenter stated that these documents are
submitted in compliance with regulations without an expectation of NRC
assistance in assuring compliance, and that licensees should have
control over Part 170 charges.
A materials licensee questioned how the proposed additional Part
170 fees would be billed, indicating that if NRC has truly downsized,
the expanded scope of Part 170 is not justified.
Response. The NRC is expanding the scope of Part 170 to include
incident investigations, performance assessments and evaluations
(except those for which the licensee volunteers at NRC's request and
which NRC accepts), reviews of reports and other submittals such as
responses to Confirmatory Action Letters, and full cost recovery for
Project Manager time, except leave time and time spent on generic
activities such as rulemaking. Expanding the scope of Part 170 is
consistent with Title V of the IOAA, interpretations of that
legislation by the Federal courts, and Commission guidance. These
guidelines provide that Part 170 fees may be assessed to persons who
are identifiable recipients of ``special benefits'' conferred by
specifically identified activities of the NRC. These special benefits
include services rendered at the request of a recipient and all
services necessary to the issuance of a required permit, license,
certificate, approval, or amendment, or other services necessary to
assist a recipient in complying with statutory obligations under the
Commission's regulations. Incident investigations, performance
assessments and evaluations, reviews of reports and other documents,
and PM activities are services which the NRC provides to specific,
identifiable recipients. Thus, it is more appropriate that the costs of
these activities be recovered through Part 170 fees assessed to the
recipient of the service than through annual fees assessed to all of
the licensees in the class.
Based on the requirement of OBRA-90 that the NRC recover
approximately 100 percent of its budget authority through fees, the
costs of these services must be paid either by applicants and licensees
under Part 170 as fees for services rendered to them or by licensees
under Part 171 as annual fees. To calculate the total amount to be
assessed in Part 171 annual fees, the estimated amount to be recovered
through Part 170 fees in a given fiscal year is subtracted from the
total budget authority for that fiscal year. Therefore, if all other
things remain equal, increasing the costs to be recovered under Part
170 would shift these costs away from Part 171 annual fees. Although
this change may result in increased Part 170 fees assessed to the
individual licensees receiving the specific services, the overall fee
burden for licensees in that fee class is not increased. It should be
noted that because this final rule will become effective after the last
quarterly part 170 billing in FY 1999, the changes will not have an
effect on the estimated part 170 collections for FY 1999 and thus do
not affect the FY 1999 annual fees.
As described in the proposed rule, this change will result in the
assessment of Part 170 fees to individual licensees to recover the full
costs for PMs assigned to their sites, except for PM activities that
are of a generic nature, such as rulemaking and preparation of generic
guidance documents, and leave time. If a PM is assigned multiple sites,
the PM's time that is not site-specific
[[Page 31452]]
will be prorated to all of the sites to which he or she is assigned.
The NRC acknowledges some commenters' concerns about individual
licensees being charged for the time a PM is in training or performing
administrative tasks and time for a newly-appointed PM to become
familiar with a particular site. However, these types of activities are
necessary for the PMs to provide effective oversight for the operation
of an assigned site or sites. Therefore, the cost of these activities
should be borne by those licensees receiving the benefit of PM
services, whether the services are specific licensing and inspection
actions, or other duties associated with serving as the agency focal
point for oversight of a site or sites. Examples of PM activities that
will be billed to the specific site or sites include: discussions with
NRC regional employees on specific plant issues; visits to the site(s);
scheduling, planning and coordinating work with the technical staff;
and answering technical questions.
The NRC disagrees with the suggestion that PM time should be billed
only if the work priorities are mutually agreed upon by NRC and the
licensee. It would be inappropriate to have entities regulated by the
NRC concur in how the agency carries out its regulatory functions
related to that specific entity. The agency's work priorities,
including those of PMs, are carefully reviewed by NRC management to
assure that the appropriate resources are spent to accomplish the
agency's health and safety mission. Assessing Part 170 fees to recover
the cost of a particular service provided to an individual applicant or
licensee does not diminish the requirement for NRC management to
carefully balance workload and assigned resources in an efficient and
effective manner. This also applies to the suggestions that the NRC
staff spends excessive time on reviews and that increasing the scope of
Part 170, as proposed, would open the door for inefficiencies in
reviews and billing abuses.
The NRC is committed to performing all of its activities as
expeditiously and efficiently as possible. This commitment is evidenced
by the streamlining and downsizing the agency has accomplished and the
resulting budget reductions. In addition, billing for activities under
Part 170 provides licensees a greater opportunity to review and
challenge specific costs because the charges are individually itemized
on the Part 170 bills.
Part 170 fees for these additional activities will be applicable
only to those applicants and licensees subject to full cost billing
under Part 170. Those materials licensees who hold licenses for which
amendment and inspection fees have been eliminated from part 170 will
not be subject to Part 170 fees for these additional activities as they
are included in their part 171 annual fees.
2. Including Orders and Escalated Enforcement Actions in Part 170 in FY
2000
The NRC solicited public comment 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.
Comment. Four comments were received on this issue. Two commenters
opposed adding these activities to Part 170; one commenter supported
their inclusion. The fourth commenter indicated that the direct
allocation of these costs to those who receive the services warrants
further evaluation and that it would welcome the opportunity to comment
on a definitive proposal in the FY 2000 fee rule. This commenter stated
that, in addition to being viewed as a penalty upon licensees who
exercise their rights to challenge the NRC action, there are additional
implications in situations where the licensee is successful in such a
challenge. Another commenter stated that the assessment of Part 170
fees for these actions would result in a ``de facto additional civil
penalty, and further challenge the economics of operation for that
facility.'' NEI, on the other hand, urged the NRC to continue to assess
fees under Part 170 for activities related to a given licensee, and
stated that ``application of this principle dictates that the industry
support assessing fees for escalated enforcement actions under Part
170.'' NEI went on to say that the perception that these enforcement
actions serve as an industry-wide deterrent has not been borne out. One
commenter who opposed the assessment of Part 170 fees for these
activities stated that the licensees would have to pay fees for
pursuing any enforcement action they disagreed with, which could result
in a ``chilling effect'' on challenges to enforcement actions. The
commenter also stated that licensees would be required to pay for the
review of a violation and corrective actions even if the NRC concludes
that full mitigation of a possible civil penalty is appropriate, and
potentially would be charged fees when NRC withdraws an enforcement
action.
Response. The NRC agrees that there are arguments for and against
assessing Part 170 fees for the development of, and evaluation of
response to, orders and NOVs accompanying escalated enforcement
actions. This issue will be further evaluated prior to promulgation of
the FY 2000 fee rule.
3. Eliminate Part 170 Average-cost (``Flat'') Amendment Fees
Comment. The NRC received one comment on its proposal to eliminate
the Part 170 fees that are based on the average costs to review
amendments (``flat'' fees). The commenter supported the proposed
change, stating that it simplifies budgeting and increases efficiency
for both the NRC and licensees.
Response. The NRC is amending 10 CFR 170.31 to eliminate the flat
amendment fees for materials licensees. This change streamlines the NRC
process and eliminates any delays in processing these amendments due to
incorrect payments. The NRC believes that, as the commenter indicated,
this change will also be more efficient for licensees. This change will
result in an estimated $900,000 being added to the annual fees assessed
to approximately 5700 materials licensees.
4. Hourly Rates
Comment. The NRC received eight comments that specifically
addressed the proposed increases in the professional hourly rates.
Those commenting indicated that the increases would create a
substantial financial burden for the licensees, particularly when added
to the proposal to expand the scope of Part 170. Several commenters
stated that the proposed hourly rates exceed the hourly charges of
senior consultants or principals at major consulting firms, and exceed
the generally accepted rate for similar work in private industry. Some
commenters stated that the rate is unjustifiably high and does not
reflect the actual cost of providing regulatory services to licensees.
One commenter said that the increase does not coincide with actual cost
of living increases. This commenter stated that the increases cannot be
justified based on inflation indicators over the period which have
increased on the order of 3 percent or less per year. Uranium recovery
commenters stated that the hourly charges should be predictable to
permit licensees to budget and plan accordingly. An individual uranium
recovery licensee and The National Mining Association (NMA), whose
members include owners and operators of uranium mills, mill tailings
sites and in situ uranium production facilities, added that, to the
extent such hourly rates are a result of the 100 percent budget
recovery requirement of OBRA-90, the NRC should work with
[[Page 31453]]
Congress to make the fee system more equitable. One commenter suggested
that support staff be reduced parallel with FTE reductions and
questioned whether materials program support staff could be shared with
other programs to lessen what the commenter termed the ``support
imbalance and consequent licensee load.''
Response. As stated in the proposed rule, due to a budget coding
error that occurred in FY 1998, the FY 1999 hourly rates are more
appropriately compared to the FY 1997 hourly rates plus salary and
benefit increases since that time. The FY 1997 hourly rate for the
reactor program was $131, and the FY 1997 hourly rate for the nuclear
materials and nuclear waste program was $125. The NRC salaries and
benefits increased 4.4 percent from FY 1997 to FY 1998, and 3.68
percent from FY 1998 to FY 1999. Considering only these increases, the
FY 1999 hourly rates would be $142 for the reactor program and $136 for
the materials program. However, there has also been a shift in the
proportion of direct resources between the reactor program and the
materials program. As a result, the materials program has a larger
share of the direct resources than in the past and consequently must
absorb more of the overhead and management and support costs. The
professional hourly rates are based on budgeted costs. Because overhead
resources are budgeted separately for the materials and reactor
programs, they cannot be ``shared'' for purposes of the hourly rate
calculations as suggested by one commenter. Agency management and
support costs, on the other hand, are not budgeted separately for the
reactor and materials programs. Instead, these costs are allocated to
the programs based on their share of the budgeted direct resources.
Because the materials program now has a larger share of the direct
resources than in the past, more of the management and support costs
have been allocated to the materials program.
As indicated in previous final rules, the NRC professional hourly
rates must be established at levels to meet the statutory requirement
of OBRA-90 to recover through fees approximately 100 percent of the
budget authority, less the appropriation from the Nuclear Waste Fund.
The NRC is not able to use inflation or other indices as the basis for
the development of the hourly rates charged under 10 CFR 170 and 171
because these factors may not allow the NRC to meet the 100 percent fee
recovery requirement.
Given the budgeted costs that must be recovered through the hourly
rates, it is necessary to increase the FY 1999 hourly rates to $141 for
the reactor program and $140 for the materials program. The method and
budgeted costs used in the calculation of the hourly rates are
discussed in Section III of this final rule. In addition, the agency
work papers supporting each proposed and final rule include details of
the hourly rate calculations. These work papers also contain details of
the agency's budget used in the development of the FY 1999 hourly rates
and fees. The work papers supporting the fee rules are available for
inspection in the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L Street, NW (Lower
Level), Washington DC 20555-001. The specific details regarding the
NRC's FY 1999 budget are documented in the NUREG-1100, Vol. 14,
``Budget Estimates, Fiscal Year 1999'' (February 1998). Copies of
NUREG-1100 may be purchased from the Reproduction and Distribution
Services Section, OCIO, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, and from the National Technical Information
Service, Springfield, VA 22161-0002. A copy is also available for
inspection, and copying for a fee, in the NRC Public Document Room.
5. Fee Adjustments
Comment. Five comments were received on the proposed fee
adjustments to the fee schedules for specific classes of licensees set
forth in Secs. 170.21 and 170.31. NEI specifically commented on the
NRC's proposal to revise Secs. 170.21 and 170.31 to reflect the
increased hourly rates and the results of the biennial review of Part
170 fees required by the Chief Financial Officers (CFO) Act. NEI
questioned the statement in the proposed rule that the average number
of professional hours required to conduct inspections and to review and
approve new license applications increased for 20 of 33 fee categories.
NEI stated that license applications have become more uniform and
inspection frequency is expected to decline as a result of
implementation of the NRC's new risk-informed, performance-based
regulatory philosophy. Four other commenters expressed opposition to
the increased fees for materials licensees, which include increases in
Part 170 fees for certain categories. These commenters indicated that
the proposed changes would have adverse affects on licensees. A
manufacturer of portable density and moisture testing gauges stated
that economic hardship on licensees will lead to the sale and disposal
or abandonment of gauges and subsequent license termination. The
commenter stated that use of a valuable tool will be diminished as a
result of the fee increases and referred to the low cost of regulating
this category of radioactive materials devices, the low activity of
material in the devices, and the safety record of these devices. Other
commenters indicated that the increases were unjustified, pointing to
the safety record of devices covered by fee category 3P (all other
byproduct material) and the time span between inspections for these
types of licenses. One commenter stated that, in light of NRC's efforts
to streamline its licensing, inspection and enforcement programs, costs
should be reduced commensurate with a reduction in resources and
activity.
Response. The results of the biennial review of fees were based on
actual staff hours reported for the various license categories over a
5-year period. During the 5-year period, almost 700 new license
applications and almost 4000 amendment requests were processed for fee
category 3P, ``All other byproduct material'', and approximately 2300
inspections were conducted. Similar numbers of actions were reported
for nuclear medicine licenses. Although fewer actions were reported for
certain other categories, the volume of data is sufficient to support
the increases in the average time spent on these categories. Based on
the volume analyzed in the biennial review, the NRC has no basis to
modify the average time results for processing these applications and
inspections. The NRC is streamlining its licensing and inspection
efforts and is working on a series of guidance documents related to
about 20 categories of materials licenses. Because these initiatives
are still under development, the full efficiencies have yet to be
realized. Based on the requirement for NRC to recover approximately 100
percent of its budget authority through fees each fiscal year and the
requirement to biennially review and revise charges to recover the
costs of providing the services, the NRC is unable to establish fees
based on cost reductions that may occur in future fiscal years. Part
170 fees must approximate current costs. The NRC is adopting the
results of the biennial review in this final rule for those fee
categories subject to flat fees based on the average professional time
to complete the actions. These revised flat fees also reflect the
increased hourly rates for FY 1999.
C. Specific Comments--Part 171
1. Rebaseline With a 50 Percent Cap
Comment. Nine commenters specifically addressed the two options
[[Page 31454]]
presented by the NRC for rebaselining the FY 1999 annual fees: Option
A, rebaseline without a cap, or Option B, rebaseline with a 50 percent
cap on FY 1999 annual fee increases. Five commenters, uranium recovery
licensees or persons representing the uranium recovery class, preferred
the 50 percent cap, ``if forced to choose.'' These commenters indicated
that the cap would at least spread the annual fee increases for uranium
recovery licensees over two years to lessen the drastic impact to their
budgets for a given year. One uranium recovery commenter indicated that
even the 50 percent increase is excessive when governmental inflation
indexes indicate an inflation rate of 3 percent or less. The National
Mining Association (NMA) stated that the uranium recovery licensees had
no warning of how significant the increase in fees would be for FY
1999. Another commenter, a materials licensee, supported the cap, but
stated that 50 percent was too high. This commenter recommended that
all fee increases be capped at a level commensurate with the inflation
rate. Three commenters, NEI, a reactor licensee, and a materials
licensee, supported rebaselining without a cap. These commenters stated
that rebaselining without a cap is more fair because it allows NRC to
determine the amount of resources devoted to regulation of certain
licensees and allocate the costs to those licensees. One commenter
stated that the cap could result in an unfair allocation to some
licensees of costs over the cap amount incurred for other licensees.
NEI stated that it is inappropriate given the developing competitive
environment in which nuclear licensees will operate or are already
operating, to require all licensees to subsidize any licensee who
received services costing more than the cap amount.
Response. The Commission is establishing rebaselined FY 1999 annual
fees without a cap, after comparing the allocation of its FY 1999
budgeted costs with those of FY 1995. The Commission concluded that
there have been significant changes in the allocation of agency
resources among the various classes of NRC licensees. This fulfills the
Commission's policy commitment made in the Statement of Considerations
accompanying the FY 1995 fee rule (60 FR 32225) that base annual fees
would be re-established (rebaselined) if there is a substantial change
in the total NRC budget or the magnitude of the budget allocated to a
specific class of licensees. Although the NRC is sensitive to the
effects the rebaselined fees will have on those licensees with
significant fee increases, establishing new baseline annual fees
without a cap results in a fair and equitable allocation of costs among
licensees.
The major purpose for the option to establish the FY 1999
rebaselined annual fees with a 50 percent cap was to provide greater
fee stability than would be provided by rebaselining without a cap, and
to provide advance notice to licensees of the full annual fees for
their future budget planning purposes. There was, however, a lack of
overwhelming support for the cap. Some commenters who chose the cap
were in fact reluctant to support either option. Capping fee increases
for a class or classes of licensees necessarily results in additional
fees being assessed to other classes of licensees in order to recover
approximately 100 percent of the budget as required by statute. A cap
on FY 1999 fee increases has the potential to exacerbate concerns about
the fairness and equity of licensees being charged for activities that
do not directly benefit them. Based on these concerns, an evaluation of
NRC budget allocation data, and the lack of overwhelming support from
commenters, the Commission has decided against adopting a cap on fee
increases for FY 1999.
2. Rebaselining Frequency
Comment. Eight comments were received in response to the NRC's
solicitation of public comment 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 statements
of consideration, or return to a policy of rebaselining annual fees
every year. Five commenters were in favor of rebaselining every several
years, three were in favor of rebaselining annually. In support of
annual rebaselining, NEI stated that the percentage change method does
not promote the in-depth review, revision, and streamlining of programs
it believes is necessary to ensure maximum agency efficiency. In a
similar comment, Duke Energy Corporation (Duke) stated it believes that
annual rebaselining would enable the NRC to better monitor its programs
and ensure that costs are accurately assessed to licensees who benefit
from the associated services and would ensure that licensees would not
unjustly subsidize the costs of services provided to other licensees.
The NMA and several uranium recovery licensees commented that the fees
should only be rebaselined every several years so that the fees remain
reasonably predictable from year to year. These commenters stated that
a reasonable degree of predictability of the fees is needed to enable
licensees to plan, forecast, and budget accurately. The United States
Enrichment Corporation (USEC) also supported rebaselining every several
years as appropriate, such as when there is significant downsizing,
agency reorganization, or additions of new fee classes. USEC stated
that although rebaselining provides for a more in-depth review of the
NRC's programmatic efforts, it also has the potential to reintroduce
into the fee process an instability that the percentage change method
was created to address. USEC referred to the methodology for
stabilizing fees described by the NRC in the FY 1996 fee rule, stating
that consistent and appropriate application of that methodology should
result in rebaselining when warranted, but not necessarily annually.
USEC stated that the methodology will result in a fair allocation of
fees while maintaining some stabilization and fee predictability.
Response. The majority of those commenting on the frequency for
rebaselining annual fees supported rebaselining every several years as
warranted. The current policy of adjusting the annual fees only by the
percent change in NRC's total budget unless there is a substantial
change in the total NRC budget or the magnitude of the budget allocated
to a specific class of licensees provides for fee stabilization, which
is a continuing issue of concern for licensees as evidenced by the
comments received. The commenters did not provide overwhelming support
for reversing the current policy. Therefore, the Commission is
continuing the policy as described in the Statement of Considerations
for the FY 1995 final fee rule (60 FR 32218; June 20, 1995) to
stabilize fees by adjusting the annual fees only by the percent change
in NRC's total budget, with additional adjustments for the numbers of
licensees paying fees, changes in Part 170 fees, and other adjustments
that may be required, unless there is a substantial change in the total
NRC budget or the magnitude of the budget allocated to a specific class
of licensees, in which case the annual fee base would be reestablished.
The Commission stated in the FY 1995 rule that the percent change
method would be used for a maximum of four years. Annual fees for FYs
1996, 1997, and 1998 were established based on the percent change
method. The Commission determined
[[Page 31455]]
that it is appropriate to establish new baseline fees for FY 1999 based
on the program and fee policy changes that have taken place since FY
1995, and the addition of a new fee class for spent fuel storage/
reactor decommissioning. Based on the experience gained as a result of
applying the criteria for rebaselining over the past four years, the
Commission has determined that in the future annual fees should be
rebaselined every three years, or earlier if warranted. The decision on
the appropriate method for establishing annual fees for the intervening
two years will be made each year.
3. Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor Decommissioning Annual Fee
Comment. Four comments were received on NRC's proposal to establish
a spent fuel/storage decommissioning annual fee to be assessed to all
reactor licensees, regardless of their operating status, and to Part 72
licensees who do not hold a Part 50 license. Duke supported the
proposed change, stating that the current fee regulation would impose
duplicative fees on licensees for use of a part 72 general license if
they already perform the same activities under a specific Part 72
license. Duke contends that imposition of such substantial and
duplicative fees is inconsistent with Congress' direction in the
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as amended, that NRC eliminate the
need for specific NRC authorization for onsite storage of spent fuel to
the maximum extent practicable. Duke stated that the duplicate annual
fees for both types of licenses would deny licensees the reasonable
opportunity to use the general licenses, and supports the removal of
such disincentive by revising the fee regulations as proposed. South
Carolina Electric and Gas Company objected to the proposed fee because
it does not maintain an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation
(ISFSI), has adequate storage capacity in its Spent Fuel Pool (SFP),
and does not plan to build an ISFSI for at least 15 years. The
commenter stated that, under the proposal, it would pay fees for
continuing to store spent fuel in the SFP until an ISFSI is needed, but
would not realize services or benefits for those fees. The commenter
stated that it is not appropriate for its customers to pay the ISFSI
fees of other licensees and, had DOE honored its obligation to take
possession of spent fuel by January 1998, the fee would not be an
issue. Two other commenters, reactor licensees who have permanently
ceased operations, opposed the imposition of the proposed fee for their
licenses because they have no fuel onsite. These commenters argued that
because they have no fuel onsite they derive no benefit from NRC
activities related to spent fuel storage. GE Nuclear stated that its
Vallecitos Boiling Water Reactor (VBWR) derives no comparable benefit
from the NRC's decommissioning activities because essentially all of
the facilities, structures, and systems, external to the containment
vessel associated with VBWR operations have been removed, leaving a
very small containment structure and internal components subject to
future decommissioning. PECO Energy Company (PECO) stated that the
Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Unit 1 (PBAPS) spent fuel pool has
been off-loaded, drained, and decontaminated. PECO stated that it plans
to keep PBAPS Unit 1 in a SAFSTOR and the only activity being performed
is required Technical Specifications Surveillance through December
2015.
Response. The NRC is establishing a spent fuel storage/reactor
decommissioning annual fee in this final rule. However, this new annual
fee will not be assessed to those reactors that have permanently ceased
operations and have no spent fuel onsite. The NRC agrees with the
commenters that NRC's generic spent fuel storage activities are not
applicable to reactors that have ceased operations and have removed all
fuel from the site. However, the new fee will be assessed to all
reactors who have fuel onsite regardless of the storage option the
licensee elects to use. The NRC recognizes that sites will be required
to continue to store spent fuel onsite until another solution becomes
available. The fact that DOE has not taken possession of the spent fuel
does not relieve NRC of the OBRA-90 requirement to recover
approximately 100 percent of its budget authority through fees,
including those costs associated with generic spent fuel storage
activities. The NRC believes that assessing a spent fuel storage/
reactor decommissioning annual fee to all reactor licensees who have
spent fuel onsite and all Part 72 licensees who do not hold a Part 50
license is a reasonable approach for recovering NRC costs for generic
spent fuel storage and reactor decommissioning activities. The current
policy has raised concerns that the fee structure could create a
disincentive for licensees to pursue dry storage. The spent fuel
storage/reactor decommissioning annual fee will give equivalent fee
treatment to both storage options. The annual fee also addresses
concerns about the fairness of assessing multiple annual fees if a
licensee holds multiple Part 72 licenses for different designs.
Further, the annual fee will result in most reactor licensees being
assessed the costs of NRC's generic reactor decommissioning activities.
This annual fee includes the costs of NRC's generic and other research
activities directly related to reactor decommissioning and spent fuel
storage (both storage options), and other safety, environmental, and
safeguards activities related to reactor decommissioning and spent fuel
storage, except those activities which are subject Part 170 fees. The
final FY 1999 spent fuel storage/reactor decommissioning annual fee is
$206,000. This reflects that an annual fee is not being imposed on
those six reactors which have permanently ceased operations and have no
fuel onsite. This also takes into account the prorated FY 1999 annual
fee to be assessed to DOE for the Part 72 license issued on March 19,
1999, for the storage of fuel and fuel debris resulting from the Three
Mile Island Unit 2 accident.
4. Revised Fuel Cycle Matrix
Comment. USEC, although supportive of the decreased FY 1999 annual
fees for the Paducah, Kentucky and Portsmouth, Ohio Gaseous Diffusion
Plants (GDPs), requested that the NRC revise the fee rule to recognize
that the GDPs are the operational equivalent of a single plant and
assess a single fee for the complex. USEC argued that a double
assessment on the two certificates of compliance results in a
significantly disproportionate allocation of costs to USEC. USEC also
requested that NRC revise the Effort Factor rating in the fuel facility
matrix used by NRC to assess relative effort for a facility.
Specifically, USEC took issue with NRC's matrix evaluation of the
relative weight and, hence, NRC's regulatory effort for GDP activities.
USEC stated that NRC counted the risk for UF6 twice, once as solid and
once as liquid. USEC argues that the risk is less, and that the Effort
Factor for UF6 should be reduced from 10 to 5 for the GDPs.
Response. The NRC has rejected previous requests from USEC that a
single fee be assessed for the two GDPs. For the reasons stated in
response to USEC's comments on the proposed FYs 1997 and 1998 fee rules
(62 FR 29197; May 29, 1997, and 63 FR 31843; June 10, 1998), and in
NRC's March 23, 1998, denial of USEC's annual fee exemption request,
the NRC believes that USEC must pay a full annual fee for each of its
enrichment facilities. USEC has recently appealed the FY 1998 annual
fee assessments for the two GDPs. Because USEC raised these same
specific issues in its current exemption
[[Page 31456]]
request, we will address those issues in our forthcoming response to
the exemption request. In the fuel facility matrix, the NRC assessed
the risk based on the total relative amounts of UF6 and the number and
complexity of the processes involved with UF6. These factors merit
weighting the value as 10 for the GDPs when compared to other fuel
cycle facilities.
D. Other Comments
1. Inconsistency in Hourly Rate and Annual Fee Calculation Tables
Comment. One commenter stated that there is an inconsistency in the
proposed rule between the table showing the calculation of the
professional hourly rates and the table showing the amount to be
recovered through annual fees. Specifically, the commenter stated that
Table I, ``Budget and Fee Recovery Amounts for FY 1999'', indicates
that $103.5 million is expected to be recovered through Part 170 fees
in FY 1999, while Table II, ``FY 1999 Budget Authority to be Included
in Hourly Rates'' indicates that $257.4 million is to be recovered
through Part 170 fees in FY 1999.
Response. The amounts shown in Tables I and II are correct. In the
proposed rule, Table I, ``Budget and Fee Recovery Amounts for FY
1999,'' shows that the estimated amount for recovery under Part 170
totals $103.5 million. Table II, ``FY 1999 Budget Authority to be
Included in Hourly Rates,'' shows that the total budgeted costs for the
reactor program excluding direct contract support, plus the management
and support costs allocated to the reactor program, totals $257.4
million. This sum, which is used to develop the reactor program hourly
rate, is recovered through the imposition of fees under both Parts 170
and Parts 171.
2. Adverse Effects of Fee Increases
Comment. Many commenters opposed the fee increases in general,
indicating that the increases are not justified and would have adverse
economic impacts on NRC licensees. Several commenters expressed
concerns that with the decline in the number of licensees, the
remaining licensees are required to pay a greater share of NRC's costs
with no increase in benefits. Some commenters stated that NRC's budget
should be reduced in a manner that is consistent with the reduction in
the number of licensees. Others specifically requested that the NRC
consider options to address the effects of increased license fees and a
declining number of licensees. Commenters also indicated that there
should be a reduction in NRC costs as the agency moves towards a
performance-based regulatory structure, translating to lower fees.
Although some commenters recognized NRC's efforts to downsize and
streamline its programs, they indicated that the NRC should find ways
to further streamline and operate more efficiently. Some commenters
requested that the increased fees be reconsidered based on the low risk
and safety records associated with the licensed activities. NEI cited
several reasons why the NRC should consider decreasing its future
budget requests, including: NRC's revised oversight process which
should result in decreased inspection hours; a declining number of
industry events that should lead to fewer inspections; and the NRC's
revised enforcement process which should require fewer agency
resources. NEI also suggested that the NRC consider additional changes
to its organizational structure, such as eliminating the regional
offices and reducing the resources related to research activities.
Response. The NRC's budget, which is carefully scrutinized and
reviewed by OMB and Congress prior to approval, reflects the resources
necessary to carry out its health and safety mission. The NRC is
continuing its streamlining efforts and constantly looks for ways to
further improve its operations. However, some of the NRC's streamlining
initiatives and the activities required to transition to performance-
based licensing require an initial expenditure of resources before the
results of those actions are realized. The rebaselined annual fees,
which increased for some classes and decreased for other classes,
reflect the budgeted costs for each class of licensee. The NRC
recognizes that there may be adverse economic impacts on those classes
of licensees with fee increases for FY 1999. However, as the NRC has
stated in response to similar comments received on previous fee rules,
because OBRA-90, as amended, requires the NRC to recover approximately
100 percent of its budget authority through fees, the NRC cannot
mitigate the adverse economic impacts by eliminating or reducing the
fee increases for one class of licensee without increasing the fees,
and thus creating adverse economic impacts, for another class of
licensees. Therefore the NRC has considered only the impacts it is
required to consider by law. As required by the Regulatory Flexibility
Act of 1980, the NRC has considered the impact of its fee regulations
on small entities and evaluated alternatives to minimize those impacts.
This evaluation is included in the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
which is Appendix A to this final rule. As a result of this analysis,
the NRC is continuing the maximum annual fee of $1,800 established in
FY 1991 for certain small entities, and the lower-tier small entity fee
of $400 established in FY 1992 for small entities with relatively low
gross annual receipts and for manufacturing concerns with relatively
few employees.
As explained in the proposed rule, the rebaselined FY 1999 annual
fees reflect program changes that have occurred since the last
rebaselining in FY 1995. These changes include the NRC's successful
downsizing and streamlining efforts. The NRC's budget to be recovered
through fees has decreased from approximately $504.0 million in FY 1995
to approximately $449.6 million in FY 1999, a reduction of more than 10
percent. In constant 1993 dollars, the NRC's budget has decreased by
$127.5 million, or approximately 24 percent, since FY 1993, as shown in
the following table:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal year (FY) 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget ($ millions, constant 1993 dollars)................... 540.0 522.4 498.7 439.7 434.1 427.0 412.5
Difference from FY1993 ($ millions).......................... ........... 17.6 41.3 100.3 105.9 113.0 127.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The rebaselined FY 1999 annual fees reflect the budgeted costs for
each class of licensee, less the estimated Part 170 collections for
that class for FY 1999. The FY 1999 annual fees for materials licenses
subject to ``flat'' Part 170 fees also reflect the results of the
biennial review of fees as required by the CFO Act, as well as the
inclusion of the budgeted costs for license amendments, renewals, and
inspections. The FY 1999 annual fees increased for certain categories
of these materials licensees. However, these licensees are no longer
required to pay Part 170 fees for amendments, renewals, and
inspections.
Although fewer resources may be needed to complete licensing
reviews
[[Page 31457]]
and conduct inspections for a particular class of licensees as the
number of licensees in the class declines, there is not necessarily a
correlation between the number of licensees and the agency's regulatory
oversight mission. For instance, the need for rulemaking is not
diminished as the number of licensees decrease. However, a portion of
the costs associated with certain rulemaking and other generic
activities is allocated to the annual fee surcharge based on the ratio
of Agreement States licenses to NRC licenses in the affected class of
licensees. The surcharge costs are then assessed to all classes of
licensees based on their share of the budget. As a result, the full
economic impact of additional Agreement States and the resulting loss
of NRC licensees is not borne entirely by the affected class.
The NRC's budgets are outside the scope of this rulemaking and
therefore commenters' suggestions regarding future NRC budgets are not
addressed in this final rule. The NRC's budget is public information
and undergoes Office of Management and Budget and Congressional review
annually. The NRC is establishing the rebaselined FY 1999 annual fees
at the levels necessary to recover the budgeted costs for each class of
licensee from that class to the extent practicable, and to recover the
surcharge costs from all classes of licensees based on their share of
the budget.
3. Uranium Recovery Issues
Comment. Several comments relating to specific uranium recovery
issues were received from uranium recovery licensees and their
representatives. The commenters claimed that the uranium recovery
industry has been targeted for especially large fee increases and gave
several reasons why they believe their treatment under the proposed
rule is especially harsh and unfair. The commenters stated that the
increases in hourly rates and license fees place an undue burden on the
uranium recovery industry, which is suffering from a depressed market.
The commenters expressed concern that they cannot ``pass through'' such
costs, and the fee increases directly affect the profitability and
viability of an operation. The commenters also indicated that the
imposition of such high fees and hourly rates on the uranium recovery
industry discourages current uranium production and discourages
companies from maintaining facilities in a standby status until market
conditions improve. This, commenters claimed, is against the national
interest of preserving the domestic energy production infrastructure.
Commenters stated that NRC efforts to promote performance-based
licenses for uranium recovery licensees should result in lower, not
higher, licenses fees for the uranium recovery class. Commenters
pointed to areas where they believe NRC engages in excessive regulatory
oversight of the uranium recovery licensees: conducting two inspections
each year of uranium in-situ leach (ISL) operations, compared to the
one inspection conducted per year before the NRC's closed the Uranium
Recovery Field Office, and requiring excessively detailed studies and
analysis of surface water drainage issues at sites with uranium mill
tailings impoundments. The commenters also questioned the need for
increased NRC efforts related to groundwater concerns for in-situ
facilities when it is questionable if NRC should be regulating in-situ
leach wellfields and associated groundwater concerns.
Response. The NRC does not select, or ``target,'' any class of
licensees for fee increases or fee reductions. Instead, rebaselined
annual fees are established to recover the budgeted costs of NRC's
regulatory programs for each class of licensee, plus a percentage of
the surcharge costs allocated to that class based on their share of the
budget. The NRC has addressed similar comments in previous fee rules
concerning the market condition of the uranium recovery industry and
the national interest of preserving the energy production
infrastructure. The Commission continues to conclude that it cannot set
fees based on passthrough considerations. As stated in response to
comments on this issue in the FY 1993 fee rule (58 FR 38667; July 20,
1993), the Commission lacks the expertise or information needed to
determine whether, in a market economy, particular licensees can or
cannot recapture the costs of annual fees from their customers. The
Commission is not a financial regulatory agency and does not have the
resources necessary to evaluate continuously purely business factors.
The annual fees must have, to the maximum extent practicable, a
reasonable relationship to the cost of providing regulatory services in
order to meet the requirements of OBRA-90. Therefore, the Commission is
not changing its previous decisions against basing fees on licensees'
economic status.
The NRC has examined ways to reduce or eliminate inspections. In
establishing inspection frequencies, the NRC considers the risk to
public health and safety and the environment. Sites under reclamation
are to be inspected once every three years unless a specific request is
received from a licensee for the NRC staff to review elements of
construction. Sites on standby status are to be inspected every two to
three years. Facilities that are currently in operational status are to
be inspected twice a year, with the option for a reduction to once a
year, depending on the inspection record. If an operating uranium
recovery licensee has a good inspection record and the NRC determines
that a reduced number of inspections is warranted, the NRC will
eliminate one annual inspection.
The NRC agrees that performance-based licensing should result in
reduced Part 170 fees for uranium recovery licensees. Under a
performance-based license, a licensee is allowed flexibility to make
certain changes at the site without the need for a license amendment.
This streamlined form of license, when implemented properly by the
licensee, should result in less hours spent on staff reviews of
licensee submittals.
The NRC staff's experience in the area of erosion protection has
shown that this is an area where impacts to the impoundment may be the
greatest. To provide additional guidance for the licensees in this and
other technical areas, the NRC developed a Standard Review Plan for
Reclamation of Title II Sites and an erosion report that discusses
acceptable design methods and analyses for erosion control. These two
documents were released for public comment in February 1999. The NRC
staff is reviewing and will be responding to the comments received. The
final versions of these documents should provide more clearly the types
of design methods and analyses that would serve as acceptable bases for
the NRC's staff's conclusions about the stability of the site.
In late 1997, the NRC began examining its role in the regulation of
ISL wellfields and the associated groundwater. To assist the NRC in
this endeavor, in April 1998, the National Mining Association (NMA)
provided the Commission with a White Paper in which it discussed four
major concerns, including one related to in-situ facility regulation.
Based on the NRC staff's and NMA's concerns, the NRC staff prepared a
paper which is now before the Commission which outlines options for NRC
regulation of groundwater and wastes at ISL facilities. The
Commission's decision will shape NRC's future regulatory program in
this area.
[[Page 31458]]
4. NRC's Fee Billing Systems and Practices
Comment. Two commenters requested that NRC modify its billing
systems and practices. NEI requested that NRC allocate the costs of
services to individual units at multi-unit sites. NEI complained that
under current practice the agency ``arbitrarily'' allocates site-wide
inspection fees to one unit. NEI stated that due to varying ownership
percentages in each unit, it is critically important in a competitive
environment for site-wide fees to be allocated to the individual units.
The NMA requested that NRC continue its efforts to provide bills that
contain more meaningful descriptions of the work done. The NMA stated
that in the private sector, adequate explanations are provided for
clients to fully understand what was done, when it was done, and how
much time was spent on each discreet activity. The NMA indicated that
such a system could help identify problems, such as excessive time
spent on reviews of licensee submittals.
Response. Beginning with the FY 1998 fee rule, which became
effective August 10, 1998, the NRC is assessing Part 170 fees to
recover all of the resident inspector's time, except leave time and
time spent in support of another facility. For resident inspectors, all
non-inspection time is charged to the docket to which they are
assigned. However, a senior resident inspector may be assigned to the
site rather than to a specific unit at a multi-unit site. In these
cases, the senior resident inspector's non-inspection time is currently
billed to the lowest docket number for the site. Due to billing system
limitations, the NRC is not able at this time to provide separate
billings for each unit for the non-inspection senior resident inspector
time. The NRC will pursue modification of its billing system in the
future to allocate this senior resident time to each docket on a
prorated basis, e.g, if there are three dockets and one senior resident
inspector at the site, each docket will be billed for one-third of the
senior resident inspector's time that is not related to a specific
inspection.
With respect to the request from materials licensees that more
detailed information be provided on their bills, the NRC converted to a
new billing format in October 1998 for materials licensing actions
subject to full cost recovery under Part 170. These bills now provide
more detailed information on the charges to support the licensing
review costs. A supporting document is included with these bills which
provides information on the date of the application, the control number
for the application, the name of the NRC reviewer and/or contractor,
the number of regular and non-regular hours expended by the reviewer,
and the NRC reviewer's title. In FY 2000 the NRC plans to convert to a
new inspection fee billing system for materials licensees that will
provide more detailed information for inspections.
III. Final Action
The NRC is amending its licensing, inspection, and annual fees to
recover approximately 100 percent of its FY 1999 budget authority,
including the budget authority for its Office of the Inspector General,
less the appropriations received from the NWF and the General Fund. For
FY 1999, the NRC's budget authority is $469.8 million, of which $17.0
million has been appropriated from the NWF. In addition, $3.2 million
has been appropriated from the General Fund for activities related to
regulatory reviews and other assistance provided to the DOE and other
Federal agencies. The NRC's FY 1999 Appropriations Act states that this
$3.2 million appropriation shall be excluded from license fee revenues.
Therefore, the NRC is required to collect approximately $449.6 million
in FY 1999 through 10 CFR Part 170 licensing and inspection fees and 10
CFR Part 171 annual fees. The total amount to be recovered in fees for
FY 1999 is $5.2 million less than the amount estimated for recovery in
the NRC's FY 1998 fee rule.
The reduced budgeted costs to be recovered through fees for FY 1999
reflect several actions taken by the NRC. These actions include
strategic planning, downsizing, and a more aggressive policy on seeking
reimbursement from Federal agencies for performing services that are
not a required part of the agency's statutory mission. For example, for
FY 1999, the NRC entered into an agreement with the U.S. Agency for
International Development to fund NRC's staff costs associated with
providing nuclear safety assistance to the countries of the former
Soviet Union. As a result, NRC licensees 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 fees 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 published. In addition to the estimated Part 170 collections and
other receipts, the NRC estimates a net adjustment of approximately
$2.1 million for payments received in FY 1999 for FY 1998 invoices. The
remaining $339.8 million will 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
Less General Fund (Reviews for DOE and other -3.2
Federal agencies)..................................
Total Fee Base.......................................... $449.6
Less estimated Part 170 fees........................ -103.5
Less other receipts (estimated)..................... -4.2
---------------
Part 171 Fee Collections Required....................... 341.9
Part 171 Billing Adjustment \1\.........................
Unpaid FY 1999 invoices (estimated)..................... 3.4
Less estimated payments received in FY 1999 for prior -5.5
year invoices..........................................
---------------
Subtotal............................................ -2.1
[[Page 31459]]
Adjusted Part 171 Collections Required.................. $339.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ These adjustments are necessary to ensure that the ``billed'' amount
results in the required collections. Positive amounts indicate amounts
billed that will not be collected in FY 1999.
Because the final FY 1999 fee rule is a ``major'' final action as
defined by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996, the NRC's fees for FY 1999 will become effective 60 days after
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register.
The NRC announced in the FY 1998 proposed rule that the final rule
would no longer be mailed to all licensees. However, because the NRC
solicited public comments on two potential annual fee schedules for FY
1999, the FY 1999 final rule is being mailed to all licensees. As a
cost-saving measure, the NRC does not plan to routinely mail future
final fee rules to all licensees, but will send the final rules to any
licensee or other person upon request. As a matter of courtesy, the NRC
will continue to send the proposed fee rules to all licensees.
In addition to publication in the Federal Register, the final rule
is available on the Internet at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov/. Copies of
the final rule will also be mailed upon request. To request a copy,
contact the License Fee and Accounts Receivable Branch, Division of
Accounting and Finance, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, at 301-
415-7554, or e-mail us at fees@nrc.gov.
The NRC is amending 10 CFR Parts 170 and 171 as discussed in
Sections A. and B. below:
A. Amendments to 10 CFR Part 170: Fees for Facilities, Materials,
Import and Export Licenses, and Other Regulatory Services Under the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as Amended
Four major amendments have been made to 10 CFR Part 170 as well as
several administrative amendments to update information in certain
sections and to accommodate the major changes. These amendments further
the underlying basis for the regulation--that fees be assessed to
applicants, persons, and licensees for specific identifiable services
rendered. The amendments also comply with the guidance in the
Conference Committee Report on OBRA-90 that fees assessed under the
IOAA recover the full cost to the NRC of identifiable regulatory
services that each applicant or licensee receives.
The major changes to 10 CFR Part 170 are:
1. Expanded Part 170 Cost Recovery
The NRC is expanding the scope of Part 170 to include incident
investigations, performance assessments and evaluations (except those
for which the licensee volunteers at NRC's request and which NRC
accepts), reviews of reports and other submittals such as responses to
Confirmatory Action Letters, and full cost recovery for time expended
by Project Managers.
Part 170 fees are based on Title V of the IOAA, interpretations of
that legislation by the Federal courts, and Commission guidance. These
guidelines provide that Part 170 fees may be assessed to persons who
are identifiable recipients of ``special benefits'' conferred by
specifically identified activities of the NRC. The term ``special
benefits'' includes services rendered at the request of a recipient and
all services necessary to the issuance of a required permit, license,
certificate, approval, or amendment, or other services necessary to
assist a recipient in complying with statutory obligations under the
Commission's regulations.
In the NRC's FY 1998 fee rulemaking, steps were taken to more
appropriately recover costs for certain activities through Part 170
fees rather than through Part 171 fees. This further expansion of the
scope of Part 170 for FY 1999 will result in cost recovery for
additional activities through Part 170 fees rather than through Part
171 fees.
a. Inspections.
Part 170 fees will be assessed for all inspections, including
licensee-specific performance reviews, assessments, evaluations, and
incident investigations. Examples of activities that will be billable
under Part 170 are performance assessments of fuel facilities,
Diagnostic Evaluation Team assessments, and Incident Investigation Team
investigations. Licensees who volunteer to participate in a performance
review or assessment at NRC's request and which the NRC accepts will be
exempted from these Part 170 fees. The inspections that are being
included in Part 170 are ``special benefits'' provided to identifiable
recipients, whether or not an inspection report is issued. For example,
incident investigations are investigations of significant operational
events involving power reactors and other facilities. Causes of the
events are determined and corrective actions taken. Incident
Investigation Teams investigate events of potentially major
significance. Although the investigations may result in some generic
lessons, the investigations are primarily a direct service provided to
the specific licensee and assist the licensee in complying with NRC
regulations. The costs of any generic efforts that may result from the
investigations, such as the development of new regulatory requirements
and guidance, will continue to be recovered through Part 171 annual
fees, not through Part 170 fees assessed to the licensee. In addition,
any time expended by NRC's Office of Investigations on these activities
will be recovered through Part 171 fees. These Part 170 fees will not
apply to materials licenses for which no inspection fee is specified in
Part 170 because the inspection costs are included in the Part 171
annual fee for those fee categories.
b. Additional Document Reviews.
Part 170 is also expanded to include reviews of documents submitted
to the NRC that do not require formal or legal approvals or amendments
to the technical specifications or license. Examples are certain
financial assurance reviews, reviews of responses to Confirmatory
Action Letters, reviews of uranium recovery licensees' land-use survey
reports, and reviews of 10 CFR 50.71(e) Final Safety Analysis Reports
(FSARs). Although no specific approval is issued, reviews of these
submittals are services provided by the NRC to identifiable recipients
that assist them in complying with NRC regulations.
c. Project Manager Time.
All Project Manager's (PM) time, excluding leave and time spent on
generic activities such as rulemaking, will be recovered through Part
170 fees assessed to the specific applicant or licensee to which the PM
is assigned. This change is applicable to all licensees subject to full
cost fees under Part 170 and to which PMs are assigned.
Examples of PM activities which will be subject to Part 170 cost
recovery are those associated with oversight of the assigned license or
plant (e.g., setting work priorities, planning and scheduling review
efforts, preparation and presentations of briefings for visits to NRC
by utility officials, interfacing with other NRC offices, the public,
and
[[Page 31460]]
other Federal and state and local government agencies, and visits to
the assigned site for purposes other than a specific inspection), and
training. Examples of PM generic activities that will not be subject to
fee recovery under Part 170 are rulemaking and the development of
regulatory guides, generic licensing guides, standard review plans, and
generic letters and bulletins. If a PM is assigned to more than one
license or site, costs for activities other than licensee-specific
licensing or inspection activities will be prorated to each of the
licenses or sites to which the PM is assigned. The concept of full cost
recovery for PMs is similar to the concept of full cost recovery for
Resident Inspectors, which was added to Part 170 in the FY 1998 final
fee rule (June 10, 1998; 63 FR 31840).
d. Other.
The NRC also solicited public comment in the 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. The Commission will
further evaluate this issue prior to promulgating the FY 2000 fee rule.
2. Amendment Fees Based on Average Costs
The NRC is revising 10 CFR 170.31 to eliminate the amendment fees
for small materials licensees 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 change continues 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 1995 and FY
1996 fee rulemakings, respectively, and the costs included in the
annual fees for these categories of licensees.
Although not all materials licensees request amendments during a
given fiscal year, approximately 80 percent request at least one
amendment over a five-year period and approximately 40 percent of these
licensees request multiple amendments during a five-year period.
In addition to streamlining the NRC process, this change eliminates
the steps licensees currently take to submit the payments for their
amendment requests. It also eliminates any delays in approving proposed
amendments due to incorrect payments and provides 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 licenses are amended each fiscal year.
This change results in an estimated $900,000 being added to the
annual fees assessed to approximately 5700 materials licensees.
3. Hourly Rates
The NRC is revising the two professional hourly rates for NRC staff
time established in Sec. 170.20. These revised rates are based on the
number of FY 1999 direct FTEs and the FY 1999 NRC budget, excluding
direct program support costs and NRC's appropriations from the NWF and
the General Fund. These rates are used to determine the Part 170 fees.
The hourly rate for the reactor program is $141 per hour ($250,403 per
direct FTE). This rate is applicable to all activities for which fees
are based on full cost under Sec. 170.21 of the fee regulations. The
hourly rate for the nuclear materials and nuclear waste program is $140
per hour ($248,728 per direct FTE). This rate is applicable to all
activities for which fees are based on full cost under Sec. 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 increase can be readily explained. In calculating the FY 1999
hourly rates, the NRC staff discovered that a coding error in NRC's
budget, which is used in the development of fees, occurred for FY 1998.
This coding error contributed to the hourly rate decreases for that
year. In addition, costs for direct FTEs and overhead are calculated
for the reactor and materials programs and for the surcharge. Although
the FY 1999 hourly rates reflect an increase of $17-$19 per hour
compared to FY 1998, the error was in the reduced FY 1998 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
for the 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 programs, respectively. Applying only the
salary and benefit increases of 4.4 percent from FY 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 rates of $142 for the reactor program and $136
for the materials program. This does not consider the shift that has
occurred in the proportion of direct resources from the reactor program
to the materials program that 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:
a. 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
excluded from the calculation of the hourly rate because the costs for
direct contract support are charged directly through the various
categories of fees.
c. All other direct program costs (i.e., Salaries and Benefits,
Travel) represent ``in-house'' costs and are to be allocated by
dividing them uniformly by the total number of direct FTEs for the
program. In addition, salaries and benefits plus contracts for non-
program direct management and support, and the Office of 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 hourly rates.
[[Page 31461]]
Table II.--FY 1999 Budget Authority to be Included in Hourly Rates
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Materials
Reactor program program
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Direct Program Salaries and $99.2m................ $26.4m
Benefits.
Overhead Salaries and Benefits, $54.1m................ $15.0m
Program Travel and Other
Support.
Allocated Agency Management and $104.2m............... $28.1m
Support.
----------------------------------------
Subtotal................... $257.5m............... $69.5m
Less offsetting receipts....... -.1m.................. ...............
========================================
Total Budget Included in $257.4m............... $69.5m
Hourly Rate.
Program Direct FTEs............ 1,028.0............... 279.7.
Rate per Direct FTE............ $250,403.............. $248,728.
Professional Hourly Rate (Rate $141.................. $140.
per direct FTE divided by
1,776 hours).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
As shown in Table II 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 is $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 hours) as set 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 Hourly Rate for
the materials program is $140 per hour (rounded to the nearest whole
dollar). This rate is calculated by dividing the cost per direct FTE
($248,728) by the number of productive hours in one year (1,776 hours).
Any professional hours expended on or after the effective date of
the final rule will be assessed at the FY 1999 hourly rates.
4. Fee Adjustments
The NRC is adjusting the Part 170 fees in Secs. 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
Officers (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 materials
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, the revised average professional staff
hours reflect the changes in the NRC licensing review program that have
occurred since FY 1997. The licensing fees are based on the revised
average professional staff hours needed to process the licensing
actions multiplied by the professional hourly rate for FY 1999 of $140
per hour.
The licensing fees reflect an increase in average time for new
license applications for 20 of the 33 materials fee categories included
in the biennial review, a decrease in average time for 8 fee
categories, and the same average time for the remaining 5 fee
categories. The average time for export and import new license
applications and amendments remained the same for 6 fee categories in
Secs. 170.21 and 170.31, and decreased for 4 fee categories.
The amounts of the materials licensing ``flat'' fees were rounded
so that the amounts would be de minimis and the resulting flat fee
would be convenient to the user. Fees under $1,000 are rounded to the
nearest $10. Fees that are greater than $1,000 but less than $100,000
are rounded to the nearest $100. Fees that are greater than $100,000
are rounded to the nearest $1,000.
The licensing ``flat'' fees are applicable to fee categories K.1
through K.5 of Sec. 171.21, and fee categories 1.C, 1.D, 2.B, 2.C, 3.A
through 3.P, 4.B through 9.D, 10.B, 15.A through 15.E, and 16 of
Sec. 171.16. Applications filed on or after the effective date of the
final rule will be subject to the revised fees in this final rule.
5. Administrative Amendments
a. The NRC is amending Sec. 170.2, Scope, and Sec. 170.3,
Definitions, to specifically include Certificates of Compliance
(Certificates) issued pursuant to Part 76. The NRC issued two
Certificates pursuant to Part 76 to the United States Enrichment
Corporation for operation of the two gaseous diffusion uranium
enrichment plants located at Paducah, Kentucky, and Piketon, Ohio. Part
76 certificates are added to the definition of Materials License in
Sec. 170.3 (Uranium enrichment facilities are already defined in
Sec. 170.3). These changes are administrative changes to clarify the
applicability of Part 170 fees to these Certificates.
b. The NRC is revising the definition of ``Inspection'' to
specifically include performance assessments, evaluations, and incident
investigations. This change is being made to incorporate the expansion
of Part 170 in this final rule to include these activities.
c. The NRC is revising the definition of ``Special projects'' to
include financial assurance submittals, responses to Confirmatory
Action Letters, uranium recovery licensees' land-use survey reports,
and 10 CFR 50.71 Final Safety Analysis Reports in the list of examples
of documents submitted for review that would be subject to special
project fees. This revision is needed to incorporate the change in this
final rule to include the review of these documents in Part 170.
d. The NRC is revising Sec. 170.5, Communications, to indicate that
all communications concerning 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.
e. The NRC is deleting the current exemption in Sec. 170.11(a)(11),
which eliminates fees for amendments to
[[Page 31462]]
change the name of the Radiation Safety Officer for portable gauge
licenses issued in accordance with NUREG-1556,1 Volume 1.
This final rule eliminates the requirement for amendment fees for these
licenses and thus the exemption is no longer needed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 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 Technical Information Service, 5285
Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161. A copy is also available for
inspection and/or copying at the NRC Public Document Room, 2120 L
Street, NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
f. The NRC is adding Sec. 170.11(a)(12) to provide an exemption
from Part 170 fees for those licensee-specific performance assessments
or evaluations for which the licensee volunteers at NRC's request. This
change accommodates action in this final rule to include performance
assessments and evaluations in Part 170, except those for which the
licensee volunteers at NRC's request and which are accepted by the NRC.
g. The NRC is revising Sec. 170.12, Payment of Fees, to reflect the
revision to Part 170 to include performance assessments, evaluations,
and incident investigations, reviews of reports and other documents,
and full cost recovery for project managers. This section is also
revised to delete references to amendment fees for materials licenses
that are not based on full cost to reflect the elimination of these
fees in this final rule. The costs for these activities will be
included in the Part 171 annual fee for these materials licensees.
Section 170.12(h), Method of Payment, is redesignated as
Sec. 170.12(f) and 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 has:
1. Revised Part 170 to include full cost recovery for all plant or
licensee-specific inspections, including performance reviews,
assessments, evaluations, and incident investigations, reviews of
reports and other documents, and all of the Project Managers' time
excluding time spent on generic activities and leave time;
2. Eliminated Part 170 ``flat'' amendment fees for materials
licenses. The amendment costs will be recovered through Part 171 annual
fees assessed to materials licensees;
3. Revised the two 10 CFR Part 170 hourly rates; and
4. Revised 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 Cycle Licenses and Materials Licenses, Including Holders of
Certificates of Compliance, Registrations, and Quality Assurance
Program Approvals, and Government Agencies Licensed by the NRC
The NRC has made three major amendments to 10 CFR Part 171 and
several administrative amendments to update information in certain
sections and to incorporate the major changes. These major changes
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 licensees.
The changes are consistent with our statutory mandate; that is,
charging a class of licensees for NRC costs attributable to that class
of licensees. The changes are consistent with the Congressional
guidance in the Conference Committee Report on OBRA-90, which states
that the ``conferees contemplate that the NRC will continue to allocate
generic costs that are attributable to a given class of licensees to
such class' and the ``conferees intend that the NRC assess the annual
charge under the principle that licensees who require the greatest
expenditures of the agency's resources should pay the greatest annual
fee'' (136 Cong. Rec. at H12692-93). Costs not attributable to a class
of licensees are allocated following the conferees' guidance that ``the
Commission should assess the charges for these costs as broadly as
practicable in order to minimize the burden for these costs on any
licensee or class of licensees so as to establish as fair and equitable
a system as is feasible.'' (136 Cong. Rec. at H12692-3). The Conference
Report guidance also provides that: ``these expenses may be recovered
from such licensees as the Commission, in its discretion, determines
can fairly, equitably and practicably contribute to their payment.'' As
in the past, these costs are allocated to the entire population of NRC
licensees that pays annual fees, based on the amount of the budget
directly attributable to a class of licensees. This results in a higher
percentage of these costs being allocated to operating power reactor
licensees as opposed to other classes of licensees.
The major changes to Part 171 are in the following areas.
1. Reactor Decommissioning/Spent Fuel Storage
The NRC is revising 10 CFR Part 171.15 to establish a spent fuel
storage/reactor decommissioning annual fee. This annual fee will be
assessed to those Part 72 licensees who do not hold a Part 50 license
and to all operating and non-operating Part 50 power reactor licensees,
except those power reactor licensees who have permanently ceased
operations and have no fuel onsite. The full amount of the FY 1999
annual fee will 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 will 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 will be reflected in the
fourth quarter FY 1999 annual fee bill. Any adjustments for prior
payments during FY 1999 will be made in accordance with Sec. 171.19(b).
The annual fees in 10 CFR 171.16 for Part 72 licenses for independent
spent fuel storage have been eliminated. This change assures equivalent
fee treatment for both wet (spent fuel pool) and dry (Independent Spent
Fuel Storage Installation) storage of spent fuel. This change will also
ensure that power reactor licensees who benefit from NRC's generic
activities bear a fair portion of these costs relating to
decommissioning of reactors.
This change does not affect the manner in which licensing and
inspection costs are recovered (i.e., Part 170 fees will 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 will 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 operating licensees, including operating power reactors.
2. Annual Fees
The NRC is establishing new baseline annual fees for FY 1999. The
annual fees in Secs. 171.15 and 171.16 are 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 1999 is $339.8 million, compared to $360.2 million
for FY 1998.
In the FY 1995 final fee rule (60 FR 32218, 32225; June 20, 1995),
the NRC
[[Page 31463]]
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 percentage change (plus or minus) 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 class
of licensees. If either condition occurred, 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 method of determining annual
fees is the ``percent change'' method. The FY 1996, FY 1997, and FY
1998 annual fees were based on the percent change method.
New baseline fees are established 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 addition of a new annual fee class (spent fuel storage/reactor
decommissioning) as previously 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 elimination of amendment fees for these licensees in FY
1999, and the inclusion of these costs in the materials licensees'
annual fees.
Table III below shows the FY 1999 rebaselined annual fees for
representative categories of licensees.
Table III
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 1999 annual
Class of licensees fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Power Reactors (including spent fuel storage/reactor $2,776,000
decommissioning annual fee)............................
Spent fuel storage/reactor decommissioning.............. 206,000
Nonpower Reactors....................................... 85,900
High Enriched Uranium Fuel Facility..................... 3,281,000
Low Enriched Uranium Fuel Facility...................... 1,100,000
UF6 Conversion Facility................................. 472,000
Uranium Mills........................................... 131,000
Solution Mining......................................... 109,000
Transportation:
Users and Fabricators............................... 66,700
Users only.......................................... 2,200
Typical Materials Licenses:
Radiographers....................................... 14,700
Well loggers........................................ 9,900
Gauge users......................................... 2,600
Broad scope medical................................. 27,800
Broad scope manufacturers........................... 26,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The annual fees assessed to each class of licensees include a
surcharge to recover those NRC budgeted costs that are not directly or
solely attributable to the classes of licensees but must be recovered
from the licensees to comply with the requirements of OBRA-90. The FY
1999 budgeted costs that will be recovered in the surcharge from all
licensees are shown in Table IV.
Table IV.--Surcharge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 1999
Category of costs budgeted costs
($, M)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Activities not directly attributable to an existing
NRC licensee or class of licensee:
a. International activities......................... 6.3
b. Agreement State oversight........................ 6.4
c. Low-level waste disposal generic activities...... 4.1
d. Site decommissioning management plan activities 4.6
not recovered under Part 170.......................
2. Activities not assessed Part 170 licensing and
inspection fees or Part 171 annual fees based on legal
constraints or Commission policy:
a. Fee exemption for nonprofit educational 6.9
institutions.......................................
b. Licensing and inspection activities associated 2.8
with other Federal agencies........................
c. Costs not recovered from small entities under 10 5.3
CFR 171.16(c)......................................
3. Activities supporting NRC operating licensees and
others:
a. Regulatory support to Agreement States........... 14.6
b. Generic decommissioning/reclamation, except those 4.2
related to power reactors..........................
---------------
Total Budgeted Costs............................ 55.2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NRC has continued to allocate the surcharge costs, except LLW
surcharge costs, to each class of licensees based on the percent of
budget for that class. The NRC has continued to allocate the LLW
surcharge costs based on the volume disposed by the certain classes of
licensees. The surcharge costs allocated to each class are included in
the annual fee to be assessed to each licensee. The FY 1999 surcharge
costs that are allocated to each class of licensee are shown in Table
V.
[[Page 31464]]
Table V.--Allocation of Surcharge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
LLW surcharge Non-LLW surcharge
---------------------------------------------------------------- Total
Percent $,M Percent $,M surcharge $,M
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating power reactors........ 74 3.0 80.3 41.0 44.0
Spent fuel storage/reactor .............. .............. 6.3 3.2 3.2
decommissioning................
Nonpower reactors............... .............. .............. 0.1 0.0 0.0
Fuel facilities................. 8 0.4 5.0 2.6 2.9
Materials users................. 18 0.7 5.9 3.1 3.8
Transportation.................. .............. .............. 1.0 0.5 0.5
Rare earth facilities........... .............. .............. 0.1 0.0 0.0
Uranium recovery................ .............. .............. 1.3 0.7 0.7
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Surcharge............. .............. 4.1 .............. 51.1 55.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The budgeted costs allocated to each class of licensees and the
calculation of the rebaselined fees are described in 3. and 4. below.
The work papers which support this final rule show in detail the
allocation of NRC budgeted resources for each class of licensee and how
the fees are calculated. The work papers may be examined at the NRC
Public Document Room, 2120 L Street NW (Lower Level), Washington, DC
20555-0001.
Because this final FY 1999 fee rule is a ``major'' final action as
defined by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996, the NRC's fees for FY 1999 will become effective 60 days after
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. The NRC will
send an invoice for the amount of the annual fee upon publication of
the FY 1999 final rule to reactors and major fuel cycle facilities. For
these licensees, payment will be due on the effective date of the FY
1999 rule. Those materials licensees whose license anniversary date
during FY 1999 falls before the effective date of the FY 1999 final
rule will be billed during the anniversary month of the license and
continue to pay annual fees at the FY 1998 rate in FY 1999. Those
materials licensees whose license anniversary date falls on or after
the effective date of the FY 1999 final rule will be billed at the FY
1999 revised rates during the anniversary month of the license and
payment will be due on the date of the invoice.
3. Revised Fuel Cycle and Uranium Recovery Matrixes
The NRC is adopting revised matrixes in the determination of annual
fees for fuel facility and uranium recovery licensees. As part of the
rebaselining efforts, the NRC is using 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.
The NRC is using 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 a more accurate reflection of the NRC's
current costs of providing generic and other regulatory services to
each type of fuel facility.
The FY 1999 budgeted costs of approximately $16.3 million 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 operations at certain fuel facilities. The revised matrix
also explicitly recognizes the addition of the uranium enrichment
plants to the fee base and a reduction of three licensees (B&W Parks
Township, B&W Research and General Atomic) as the result of the
termination of licensed activities. In the revised matrix (which is
included in the publicly available work papers), licensees are grouped
into five categories according to their licensed activities (i.e.,
nuclear material enrichment, processing operations, and material form)
and 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 license situations, and certificate holders.
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 amended its license/certificate in such a way that it
resulted in them not being subject to Part 171 fees applicable to fuel
facilities, the budget for the safety and/or safeguards component would
be spread among those remaining licensees/certificate holders. This
would result in a higher fee for those remaining in the fee category.
The methodology is applied as follows. First, a fee category is
assigned based on the nuclear material and activity authorized by
license or certificate. Although a licensee/certificate holder may
elect not to fully utilize a license/certificate, the license/
certificate is still used as the 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, 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:
[[Page 31465]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Effort factors
Number of --------------------------------------------------------
licenses Safety Safeguards
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
High Enriched Uranium Fuel................ 2 91 (33.1%) 76 (54.7%).
Enrichment................................ 2 70 (25.5%) 34 (24.5%).
Low Enriched Uranium Fuel................. 4 88 (32.0%) 24 (17.3%).
UF6 Conversion............................ 1 12 (4.4%) 0 (0%).
Limited Operations Facility............... 1 8 (2.9%) 3 (2.2%).
Others.................................... 1 6 (2.2%) 2 (1.4%).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Total................................. 11 275 (100%) 139 (100%).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These effort factors are applied to the $16.3 million total annual
fee amount. This amount includes the low level waste (LLW) surcharge
and other surcharges allocated to the fuel facility class.
b. Uranium Recovery Matrix.
Of the $2.1 million total budgeted costs allocated to the uranium
recovery class to be recovered through annual fees, approximately
$870,000 will be assessed to 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 will be recovered through
annual fees assessed to conventional mills, solution mining uranium
mills, and mill tailings disposal facilities. Because the final FY 1999
annual fees will 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 will 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 will
be due on the effective date of the FY 1999 rule.
The NRC has revised the matrix established in FY 1995 to determine
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
concerns for in-situ licenses and 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.
The methodology for establishing Part 171 annual fees for uranium
recovery licensees has not changed:
(1) The methodology identifies three categories of licenses:
conventional uranium mills, solution mining uranium mills, and mill
tailings disposal facilities. Each of these categories benefits from
the generic 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 has been 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 and 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 in each subelement to each
uranium recovery category was qualitatively estimated as either
significant, some, minor, or none.
The resulting relative weighted factors and the percentage of the
total generic uranium recovery program benefitting the various
subclasses are as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Level of benefit
Number of -----------------------------------------------
licenses Weighted Total for
factor subclass Percent
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class I facilities.............................. 3 770 2310 31
Class II facilities............................. 7 645 4515 61
11e(2) disposal................................. 1 475 475 6
11e(2) disposal incidental to existing tailings 2 75 150 2
sites..........................................
---------------------------------------------------------------
Total....................................... 13 1965 7450 100
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Annual Fee Determination for Other Classes
a. Power Reactor Licensees.
The approximately $267.3 million in budgeted costs to be recovered
through annual fees assessed to operating power reactors is divided
equally among the 104 operating reactors. This results in a FY 1999
annual fee of $2,570,000 per reactor. In addition, each operating
reactor will be assessed the spent fuel storage/reactor decommissioning
annual fee (see paragraph 4.b.), which for FY 1999 is $206,000 for each
power reactor. This results in a total FY 1999 annual fee of $2,776,000
for each operating power reactor.
b. Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor Decommissioning.
For FY 1999, budgeted costs of approximately $24.8 million are to
be recovered through annual fees assessed to Part 50 power reactors,
except those Part 50 licensees who have permanently ceased operations
and have no spent fuel onsite, and to Part 72 licensees who
[[Page 31466]]
do not hold a Part 50 license. The costs are divided equally among the
licensees, resulting in a FY 1999 annual fee of $206,000 for each
licensee.
c. Nonpower Reactors.
Budgeted costs for FY 1999 of approximately $343,400 are to be
recovered from four nonpower reactors subject to annual fees. This
results in a FY 1999 annual fee of $85,900.
d. Rare Earth Facilities.
The FY 1999 budgeted costs of approximately $91,200 for rare earth
facilities to be recovered through annual fees are allocated uniformly
to the three licensees who have a specific license for receipt and
processing of source material. This results in a FY 1999 annual fee of
$30,400.
e. Materials Users.
To equitably and fairly allocate the $30.5 million in FY 1999
budgeted costs to be recovered in annual fees assessed to the
approximately 5700 diverse material users and registrants, the NRC has
continued the methodology used in FY 1995 to establish baseline annual
fees for this class. The annual fee is based on the Part 170
application fees and an estimated cost for inspections. Because the
application fees and inspection costs are indicative of the complexity
of the license, this approach continues to provide a proxy for
allocating the generic and other regulatory costs to the diverse
categories of licensees based on how much it costs NRC to regulate each
category. The fee calculation also continues to consider the inspection
frequency (priority), which is indicative of the safety risk and
resulting regulatory costs associated with the categories of licensees.
The annual fee for these categories of licensees is developed as
follows:
Annual Fee = (Application Fee + (Average Inspection Cost divided by
Inspection Priority)) multiplied by the constant + (Unique Category
Costs).
The constant is the multiple necessary to recover $30.5 million and
is 1.3 for FY 1999. The unique category costs are any special costs
that the NRC has budgeted for a specific category of licensees. For FY
1999, unique costs of approximately $955,400 were identified for the
medical development program which is attributable to medical licensees.
The annual fees for each fee category are shown in Sec. 171.16(d).
f. Transportation.
Of the approximately $3.6 million in FY 1999 budgeted costs to be
recovered through annual fees assessed to the transportation class of
licensees, approximately $870,000 will be recovered from annual fees
assessed to DOE based on the number of Part 71 Certificates of
Compliance DOE holds. Of the remaining $2.7 million, approximately 10
percent is allocated to holders of approved quality assurance plans
authorizing use, and approximately 90 percent will be allocated to
holders of approved quality assurance plans authorizing design,
fabrication, and use. This results in FY 1999 annual fees of $2,200 for
holders of approved quality assurance plans for use only. The FY 1999
annual fees for holders of approved quality assurance plans for design,
fabrication, and use is $66,700.
5. Administrative Amendments
a. The NRC is revising Sec. 171.9, Communications, to indicate that
all communications concerning Part 171 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.
b. The NRC is revising Sec. 171.13 to reflect the establishment of
an annual fee for power reactors in a decommissioning or possession
only status, except those that have no spent fuel onsite.
c. The NRC is revising Sec. 171.15 as follows:
(1) The heading for Sec. 171.15 is revised to read: Section 171.15
Annual Fees: Reactor licenses and independent spent fuel storage
licenses
(2) Paragraph (b) of Sec. 171.15 is revised in its entirety to
establish the FY 1999 annual fees for operating power reactors, power
reactors in decommissioning or possession only status that have no
spent fuel onsite, and Part 72 licensees who do not hold Part 50
licenses. Fiscal year references are changed from FY 1998 to FY 1999.
The activities comprising the base annual fees and the additional
charge (surcharge) are listed in Sec. 171.15(b), (c), and (d) for
convenience purposes.
Each operating power reactor will pay an FY 1999 annual fee of
$2,776,000, which includes the annual fee of $206,000 for spent fuel
storage/reactor decommissioning. Each power reactor in decommissioning
or possession only status, except those who have permanently ceased
operations and have no spent fuel on-site, and each Part 72 licensee
who does not hold a Part 50 license will pay the spent fuel storage/
reactor decommissioning annual fee of $206,000.
(3) Paragraph (e) of Sec. 171.15 is revised to show the amount of
the FY 1999 annual fee for nonpower (test and research) reactors. The
NRC will continue to grant exemptions from the annual fee to Federally-
owned and State-owned research and test reactors that meet the
exemption criteria specified in Sec. 171.11(a)(2).
d. The NRC is revising Sec. 171.16 as follows:
(1) Section 171.16(c) covers the fees assessed for those licensees
that can qualify as small entities under NRC size standards. A
materials licensee may pay a reduced annual fee if the licensee
qualifies as a small entity under the NRC's size standards and
certifies that it is a small entity using NRC Form 526. This section is
revised to clarify that failure to file a small entity certification in
a timely manner could form the basis for the denial of any refund that
would otherwise be due. The NRC will continue to assess two fees for
licensees that qualify as small entities under the NRC's size
standards. In general, licensees with gross annual receipts of $350,000
to $5 million will pay a maximum annual fee of $1,800. A second or
lower-tier small entity fee of $400 is in place for small entities with
gross annual receipts of less than $350,000 and small governmental
jurisdictions with a population of less than 20,000. No change in the
amount of the small entity fees is being made because the small entity
fees are not based on budgeted costs but are established at a level to
reduce the impact of fees on small entities. The small entity fees are
shown in the final rule for convenience.
(2) Section 171.16(d) is revised to establish the FY 1999 annual
fees for materials licensees, including Federal agencies, licensed by
the NRC. The FY 1999 annual fees for materials licenses range from $600
for a license authorizing the use of source material for shielding, to
$27,800 for a license of broad scope for human use of byproduct,
source, or special nuclear material. The annual fee for the ``master''
materials licenses of broad scope issued to Federal agencies is
$358,000.
(3) Footnote 1 of Sec. 171.16(d) is being amended to provide a
waiver of the annual fees for materials licensees, and holders of
certificates, registrations, and approvals, who either filed for
termination of their licenses or approvals or filed for possession
only/storage only licenses before October 1, 1998, and permanently
ceased licensed activities entirely by September 30, 1998. All other
licensees and approval holders who held a license or approval
[[Page 31467]]
on October 1, 1998, will be subject to the FY 1999 annual fees.
Holders of new licenses issued during FY 1999 are subject to a
prorated annual fee in accordance with the proration provision of
Sec. 171.17. For example, those new materials licenses issued during
the period October 1 through March 31 of the FY will be assessed one-
half the annual fee in effect on the anniversary date of the license.
New materials licenses issued on or after April 1, 1999, will not be
assessed an annual fee for FY 1999. Thereafter, the full annual fee
will become due and payable each subsequent fiscal year on the
anniversary date of the license. Beginning June 11, 1996, (the
effective date of the FY 1996 final rule), affected materials licensees
are subject to the annual fee in effect on the anniversary date of the
license. The anniversary date of the materials license for annual fee
purposes is the first day of the month in which the original license
was issued.
e. The NRC is revising Sec. 171.17 as follows:
(1) Section 171.17(a) is being revised to add an annual fee
proration provision for those reactor licensees in a decommissioning or
possession only status that have no spent fuel onsite and those Part 72
licensees that do not hold Part 50 licenses. The spent fuel storage/
reactor decommissioning annual fee for these licensees will be prorated
based on the number of days during the fiscal year the license subject
to the annual fee was in effect. This provision is the same as the
proration provision provided for operating reactors in this section.
(2) Section 171.17(b) is being revised to exclude Part 72 licenses
from the proration provision for materials licenses. The annual fees
for Part 72 licenses will be prorated as provided in revised
Sec. 171.17(a).
f. The NRC is revising Section 171.19 as follows:
(1) Section 171.19(b) is being revised to update the fiscal year
references, to include a billing process for those licensees whose
annual fee for the previous fiscal year was based on the anniversary
date of the license and whose revised annual fee for the current fiscal
year is based on quarterly billing, and to give credit for partial
payments made by certain licensees in FY 1999 toward their FY 1999
annual fees. The NRC anticipates that the first, second, and third
quarterly payments for FY 1999 will have been made by operating power
reactor licensees and some large materials licensees before the final
rule becomes effective. Therefore, the NRC will credit payments
received for those quarterly annual fee assessments toward the total
annual fee to be assessed. The NRC will adjust the fourth quarterly
invoice to recover the full amount of the revised annual fee or to make
refunds, as necessary. Payment of the annual fee is due on the date of
the invoice and interest accrues from the invoice date. However,
interest will be waived if payment is received within 30 days from the
invoice date.
(2) Section 171.19(c) is being revised to update fiscal year
references.
As in FY 1998, the NRC will continue to bill annual fees for most
materials licenses on the anniversary date of the license (licensees
whose annual fees are $100,000 or more will continue to be assessed
quarterly). The annual fee assessed will be the fee in effect on the
license anniversary date, unless the annual fee for the prior year was
less than $100,000 and the revised annual fee for the current fiscal
year is $100,000 or more. In this case, the revised amount will be
billed to the licensees upon publication of the final rule in the
Federal Register, adjusted for any annual fee payments already made for
that fiscal year based on the anniversary month billing process. For FY
1999, the anniversary date billing process applies to those materials
licenses in the following fee categories: 1C, 1D, 2A(2) Other, 2A(3),
2A(4), 2B, 2C, 3A through 3P, 4A through 9D, 10A, and 10B. For annual
fee purposes, the anniversary date of the materials license is
considered to be the first day of the month in which the original
materials license was issued. For example, if the original materials
license was issued on June 17 then, for annual fee purposes, the
anniversary date of the materials license is June 1 and the licensee
will continue to be billed in June of each year for the annual fee in
effect on June 1. Materials licensees with anniversary dates in FY 1999
before the effective date of the FY 1999 final rule will be billed
during the anniversary month of the license and continue to pay annual
fees at the FY 1998 rate in FY 1999. Those materials licensees with
license anniversary dates falling on or after the effective date of the
FY 1999 final rule will be billed at the FY 1999 revised rates during
the anniversary month of their license. Payment will be due on the date
of the invoice.
The NRC reemphasizes that the annual fee will be assessed based on
whether a licensee holds a valid NRC license that authorizes possession
and use of radioactive material.
In summary, the NRC has:
1. Established a new spent fuel storage/reactor decommissioning
annual fee in 10 CFR 171.15, and eliminated the current annual fee in
10 CFR 171.16 for independent spent fuel storage licenses. The annual
fee will be assessed to those Part 72 licensees who do not hold a Part
50 license and to all Part 50 power reactor licensees, except those
that have permanently ceased operations and have no spent fuel onsite;
2. Established new baseline annual fees for FY 1999.
3. Used revised matrixes for allocating the fuel facility and
uranium recovery budgeted costs to licensees in those fee classes.
IV. Voluntary Consensus Standards
The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995, Pub.
L. 104-113, requires that agencies use technical standards that are
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standard bodies unless the
use of such a standard is inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise
impractical. In this final rule, the NRC is establishing the licensing,
inspection, and annual fees necessary to recover approximately 100
percent of its budget authority less amounts appropriated from the
Nuclear Waste Fund and the General Fund as required by the Omnibus
Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990. This action does not constitute the
establishment of a standard that establishes generally-applicable
requirements.
V. Environmental Impact: Categorical Exclusion
The NRC has determined that this final rule is the type of action
described in categorical exclusion 10 CFR 51.22(c)(1). Therefore,
neither an environmental impact statement nor an environmental impact
assessment has been prepared for the final regulation. By its very
nature, this regulatory action does not affect the environment, and
therefore, no environmental justice issues are raised.
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
This final 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.).
VII. Regulatory Analysis
With respect to 10 CFR Part 170, this final rule was developed
pursuant to Title V of the Independent Offices Appropriation Act of
1952 (IOAA) (31 U.S.C. 9701) and the Commission's fee guidelines. When
developing these guidelines the Commission took into account guidance
provided by the U.S. Supreme Court on March 4, 1974, in its decision of
National Cable Television
[[Page 31468]]
Ass'n, Inc. v. United States, 415 U.S. 352 (1974), and Federal Power
Commission v. New England Power Co., 415 U.S. 345 (1974). In these
decisions, the Court held that the IOAA authorizes an agency to charge
fees for special benefits rendered to identifiable persons measured by
the ``value to the recipient'' of the agency service. The meaning of
the IOAA was further clarified on December 16, 1976, by four decisions
of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit:
National Cable Television Association v. Federal Communications
Commission, 554 F.2d 1094 (D.C. Cir. 1976); National Association of
Broadcasters v. Federal Communications Commission, 554 F.2d 1118 (D.C.
Cir. 1976); Electronic Industries Ass'n v. Federal Communications
Commission, 554 F.2d 1109 (D.C. Cir. 1976) and Capital Cities
Communication, Inc. v. Federal Communications Commission, 554 F.2d 1135
(D.C. Cir. 1976). These decisions of the Courts enabled the Commission
to develop fee guidelines that are still used for cost recovery and fee
development purposes.
The Commission's fee guidelines were upheld on August 24, 1979, by
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Mississippi Power
and Light Co. v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 601 F.2d 223 (5th
Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1102 (1980). The Court held that--
(1) The NRC had the authority to recover the full cost of providing
services to identifiable beneficiaries;
(2) The NRC could properly assess a fee for the costs of providing
routine inspections necessary to ensure a licensee's compliance with
the Atomic Energy Act and with applicable regulations;
(3) The NRC could charge for costs incurred in conducting
environmental reviews required by NEPA;
(4) The NRC properly included the costs of uncontested hearings and
of administrative and technical support services in the fee schedule;
(5) The NRC could assess a fee for renewing a license to operate a
low-level radioactive waste burial site; and
(6) The NRC's fees were not arbitrary or capricious.
With respect to 10 CFR Part 171, on November 5, 1990, the Congress
passed Pub.L. 101-508, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990
(OBRA-90) which required that for FYs 1991 through 1995, approximately
100 percent of the NRC budget authority be recovered through the
assessment of fees. OBRA-90 was amended in 1993 to extend the 100
percent fee recovery requirement for NRC through FY 1998, and was
amended in FY 1998 to extend the 100 percent fee recovery requirement
through FY 1999. To accomplish this statutory requirement, the NRC, in
accordance with Sec. 171.13, is publishing the amount of the FY 1999
annual fees for operating reactor licensees, fuel cycle licensees,
materials licensees, and holders of Certificates of Compliance,
registrations of sealed sources and devices and QA program approvals,
and Government agencies. OBRA-90 and the Conference Committee Report
specifically state that--
(1) The annual fees be based on the Commission's FY 1999 budget of
$469.8 million less the amounts collected from Part 170 fees and the
funds directly appropriated from the NWF to cover the NRC's high level
waste program;
(2) The annual fees shall, to the maximum extent practicable, have
a reasonable relationship to the cost of regulatory services provided
by the Commission; and
(3) The annual fees be assessed to those licensees the Commission,
in its discretion, determines can fairly, equitably, and practicably
contribute to their payment.
In addition, the NRC's FY 1999 appropriations language provides
that $3.2 million appropriated from the General Fund for activities
related to regulatory reviews and other assistance provided to the
Department of Energy and other Federal agencies be excluded from fee
recovery.
10 CFR Part 171, which established annual fees for operating power
reactors effective October 20, 1986 (51 FR 33224; September 18, 1986),
was challenged and upheld in its entirety in Florida Power and Light
Company v. United States, 846 F.2d 765 (D.C. Cir. 1988), cert. denied,
490 U.S. 1045 (1989).
The NRC's FY 1991 annual fee rule was largely upheld by the D.C.
Circuit Court of Appeals in Allied Signal v. NRC, 988 F.2d 146 (D.C.
Cir. 1993).
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
The NRC is required by OBRA-90 to recover approximately 100 percent
of its budget authority through the assessment of user fees. OBRA-90
further requires that the NRC establish a schedule of charges that
fairly and equitably allocates the aggregate amount of these charges
among licensees.
This final rule establishes the schedules of fees that are
necessary to implement the Congressional mandate for FY 1999. The final
rule results in increases in the annual fees charged to certain
licensees and holders of certificates, registrations, and approvals,
and decreases in annual fees for others. The Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis, prepared in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 604, is included as
Appendix A to this final rule. The Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA) was signed into law on March
29, 1996. The SBREFA requires all Federal agencies to prepare a written
compliance guide for each rule for which the agency is required by 5
U.S.C. 604 to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis. Therefore, in
compliance with the law, Attachment 1 to the Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis is the small entity compliance guide for FY 1999.
IX. Backfit Analysis
The NRC has determined that the backfit rule, 10 CFR 50.109, does
not apply to this final rule and that a backfit analysis is not
required for this final rule. The backfit analysis is not required
because these final amendments do not require the modification of or
additions to systems, structures, components, or the design of a
facility or the design approval or manufacturing license for a facility
or the procedures or organization required to design, construct or
operate a facility.
X. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
In accordance with the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 the NRC has determined that this action is a major
rule and has verified this determination with the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget.
List of Subjects
10 CFR Part 170
Byproduct material, Import and export licenses, Intergovernmental
relations, Non-payment penalties, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power
plants and reactors, Source material, Special nuclear material.
10 CFR Part 171
Annual charges, Byproduct material, Holders of certificates,
registrations, approvals, Intergovernmental relations, Non-payment
penalties, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Source
material, Special nuclear material.
For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553,
the NRC is adopting the following amendments to 10 CFR Parts 170 and
171.
[[Page 31469]]
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 Sec. 170.2, paragraph (r) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 170.2 Scope.
* * * * *
(r) An applicant for or a holder of a certificate of compliance
issued under 10 CFR Part 76.
3. In Sec. 170.3, the definition of the terms Inspections,
Materials license, and Special projects are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 170.3 Definitions.
* * * * *
Inspections means:
(1) Routine inspections designed to evaluate the licensee's
activities within the 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, follow up 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.
* * * * *
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.
* * * * *
Special projects means those requests submitted to the Commission
for review for which fees are not otherwise specified in this chapter.
Examples of special projects include, but are not limited to, topical
reports reviews, early site reviews, waste solidification facilities,
route approvals for shipment of radioactive materials, services
provided to certify licensee, vendor, or other private industry
personnel as instructors for Part 55 reactor operators, reviews of
financial assurance submittals that do not require a license amendment,
reviews of responses to Confirmatory Action Letters, reviews of uranium
recovery licensees' land-use survey reports, and reviews of 10 CFR
50.71 final safety analysis reports. As used in this part, special
projects does not include requests/reports submitted to the NRC:
(1) In response to a Generic Letter or NRC Bulletin which does not
result in an amendment to the license, does not result in the review of
an alternate method or reanalysis to meet the requirements of the
Generic Letter, or does not involve an unreviewed safety issue;
(2) In response to an NRC request (at the Associate Office Director
level or above) to resolve an identified safety, safeguards or
environmental issue, or to assist the NRC in developing a rule,
regulatory guide, policy statement, generic letter, or bulletin; or
(3) As a means of exchanging information between industry
organizations and the NRC for the purpose of supporting generic
regulatory improvements or efforts.
* * * * *
4. Section 170.5 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 170.5 Communications.
All communications concerning 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.
5. In Sec. 170.11, paragraph (a)(11) is removed and reserved and
paragraph (a)(12) is added to read as follows:
Sec. 170.11 Exemptions.
(a) * * *
(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:
Sec. 170.12 Payment of fees.
(a) Application fees. Each application for which a fee is
prescribed must be 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 fee(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) 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) Preapplication consultations and reviews; and
(iv) 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 the applicant
or licensee has on file for 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 section. 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 on a quarterly basis. Each bill will
identify the costs related to project manager time.
(5) Costs for review of an application for renewal of a standard
design certification which have been deferred prior to the effective
date of this rule must be paid as follows: The full cost of review for
a renewed standard design certification must be paid by the applicant
for renewal or other entity supplying the design to an applicant for a
construction permit, combined license issued under 10 CFR Part 52, or
operating license, as appropriate, in five (5) equal installments. An
installment is payable each of the first five times the renewed
certification is referenced in an application for a construction
permit, combined license, or operating license. The applicant for
renewal shall pay the installment, unless another entity is supplying
the design to the applicant for the construction permit, combined
license, or operating license, in which case the entity shall pay the
installment. If the design is not referenced, or if all of the costs
are not recovered, within
[[Page 31470]]
fifteen years after the date of renewal of the certification, the
applicant for renewal shall pay the costs for the renewal, or remainder
of those costs, at that time.
(6) Costs for the review of an application for renewal of an early
site permit which have been deferred prior to the effective date of
this rule will continue to be deferred as follows: The holder of the
renewed permit shall pay the applicable fees for the renewed permit at
the time an application for a construction permit or combined license
referencing the permit is filed. If, at the end of the renewal period
of the permit, no facility application referencing the early site
permit has been docketed, the permit holder shall pay any outstanding
fees for the permit.
(7)(i) The full cost of review for a standardized design approval
or certification that has been deferred prior to the effective date of
the rule must be paid by the holder of the design approval, the
applicant for certification, or other entity supplying the design to an
applicant for a construction permit, combined license issued under 10
CFR Part 52, or operating license, as appropriate, in five (5) equal
installments. An installment is payable each of the first five times
the approved/certified design is referenced in an application for a
construction permit, combined license issued under 10 CFR Part 52, or
operating license. In the case of a standard design certification, the
applicant for certification shall pay the installment, unless another
entity is supplying the design to the applicant for the construction
permit, combined license, or operating license, in which case the other
entity shall pay the installment.
(ii) In the case of a design which has been approved and for which
an application for certification is pending, no fees are due until
after the certification is granted. If the design is not referenced, or
if all costs are not recovered, within fifteen years after the date of
certification, the applicant shall pay the costs, or remainder of
those, at the time.
(iii) In the case of a design for which a certification has been
granted, if the design is not referenced, or if all costs are not
recovered, within fifteen years after the date of the certification,
the applicant shall pay the costs for the review of the application, or
remainder of those costs, at that time.
(c) Inspection fees. (1) Inspection fees will be assessed to
recover full cost for each resident inspector (including the senior
resident inspector), assigned to a specific plant or facility. The fees
assessed will be based on the number of hours that each inspector
assigned to the plant or facility is in an official duty status (i.e.,
all time in a non-leave status will be billed), and the hours will be
billed at the appropriate hourly rate established in 10 CFR 170.20.
Resident inspectors' time related to a specific inspection will be
included in the fee assessed for the specific inspection in accordance
with paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
(2) Inspection fees will be assessed to recover the full cost for
each specific inspection, including plant- or licensee-specific
performance reviews and assessments, evaluations, and incident
investigations. For inspections that result in the issuance of an
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
contractual service costs, 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 notification by the Commission.
(d) Special Project Fees. (1) Fees for special projects are based
on the full cost of the review. Special projects includes activities
such as--
(i) Topical reports;
(ii) Financial assurance submittals that do not require a license
amendment;
(iii) Responses to Confirmatory Action Letters;
(iv) Uranium recovery licensees' land-use survey reports; and (v)
10 CFR 50.71 final safety analysis reports.
(2) The NRC intends to bill each applicant or licensee at quarterly
intervals until the review is completed. Each bill will identify the
documents submitted for review 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 contractual costs. The fees assessed will also include related
activities such as preparing, reviewing, and grading of the
examinations and tests. The NRC intends to bill the costs at quarterly
intervals to the licensee employing the operators.
(f) Method of payment. All license fee payments are to be made
payable to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The payments are to
be made in U.S. funds by electronic funds transfer such as ACH
(Automated Clearing House) using E.D.I. (Electronic Data Interchange),
check, draft, money order, or credit card. Payment of invoices 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 at the address
indicated on the invoice. Specific written instructions for making
electronic payments and credit card payments may be obtained by
contacting the License Fee and Accounts Receivable Branch at 301-415-
7554. In accordance with Department of the Treasury requirements,
refunds will only be made upon receipt of information on the payee's
financial institution and bank accounts.
7. Section 170.20 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 170.20 Average cost per professional staff-hour.
Fees for permits, licenses, amendments, renewals, special projects,
Part 55 requalification and replacement examinations and tests, other
required reviews, approvals, and inspections under Secs. 170.21 and
170.31 will be calculated using the following applicable professional
staff-hour rates:
Reactor Program (Sec. 170.21 $141 per hour.
Activities).
Nuclear Materials and Nuclear Waste $140 per hour.
Program (Sec. 170.31 Activities).
8. In Sec. 170.21, the introductory text, Category K, and footnotes
1 and 2 to the table are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 170.21 Schedule of fees for production and utilization
facilities, review of standard referenced design approvals, special
projects, inspections and import and export licenses.
Applicants for construction permits, manufacturing licenses,
operating licenses, import and export licenses, approvals of facility
standard reference designs, requalification and replacement
examinations for reactor operators, and special projects and holders of
construction permits, licenses, and other approvals shall pay fees for
the following categories of services.
[[Page 31471]]
Schedule of Facility Fees
[See footnotes at end of table]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility categories and type of fees Fees \1\ \2\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * *
*
K. Import and export licenses:
Licenses for the import and export only of
production and utilization facilities or the export
only of components for production and utilization
facilities issued under 10 CFR Part 110.
1. Application for import or export of reactors
and other facilities and exports of components
which must be reviewed by the Commissioners and
the Executive Branch, for example, actions
under 10 CFR 110.40(b).
Application--new license.................... $9,100
Amendment................................... 9,100
2. Application for export of reactor and other
components requiring Executive Branch review
only, for example, those actions under 10 CFR
110.41(a)(1)-(8).
Application--new license.................... 5,600
Amendment................................... 5,600
3. Application for export of components
requiring foreign government assurances only.
Application--new license.................... 1,700
Amendment................................... 1,700
4. Application for export of facility components
and equipment not requiring Commissioner
review, Executive Branch review, or foreign
government assurances.
Application--new license.................... 1,100
Amendment................................... $1,100
5. Minor amendment of any export or import
license to extend the expiration date, change
domestic information, or make other revisions
which do not require in-depth analysis or
review.
Amendment................................... 210
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Fees will not be charged for orders issued by the Commission under
Sec. 2.202 of this chapter or for amendments resulting specifically
from the requirements of these types of Commission orders. Fees will
be charged for approvals issued under a specific exemption provision
of the Commission's regulations under Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (e.g., Secs. 50.12, 73.5) and any other sections in
effect now or in the future, regardless of whether the approval is in
the form of a license amendment, letter of approval, safety evaluation
report, or other form. Fees for licenses in this schedule that are
initially issued for less than full power are based on review through
the issuance of a full power license (generally full power is
considered 100 percent of the facility's full rated power). Thus, if a
licensee received a low power license or a temporary license for less
than full power and subsequently receives full power authority (by way
of license amendment or otherwise), the total costs for the license
will be determined through that period when authority is granted for
full power operation. If a situation arises in which the Commission
determines that full operating power for a particular facility should
be less than 100 percent of full rated power, the total costs for the
license will be at that determined lower operating power level and not
at the 100 percent capacity.
\2\ Full cost fees will be determined based on the professional staff
time and appropriate contractual support services expended. For
applications currently on file and for which fees are determined based
on the full cost expended for the review, the professional staff hours
expended for the review of the application up to the effective date of
the final rule will be determined at the professional rates in effect
at the time the service was provided. For those applications currently
on file for which review costs have reached an applicable fee ceiling
established by the June 20, 1984, and July 2, 1990, rules but are
still pending completion of the review, the cost incurred after any
applicable ceiling was reached through January 29, 1989, will not be
billed to the applicant. Any professional staff-hours expended above
those ceilings on or after January 30, 1989, will be assessed at the
applicable rates established by Sec. 170.20, as appropriate, except
for topical reports whose costs exceed $50,000. Costs which exceed
$50,000 for any topical report, amendment, revision or supplement to a
topical report completed or under review from January 30, 1989,
through August 8, 1991, will not be billed to the applicant. Any
professional hours expended on or after August 9, 1991, will be
assessed at the applicable rate established in Sec. 170.20.
* * * * *
9. Section 170.31 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 170.31 Schedule of fees for materials licenses and other
regulatory services, including inspections, and import and export
licenses.
Applicants for materials licenses, import and export licenses, and
other regulatory services and holders of materials licenses, or import
and export licenses shall pay fees for the following categories of
services. This schedule includes fees for health and safety and
safeguards inspections where applicable.
Schedule of Materials Fees
[See footnotes at end of table]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category of materials licenses and type of fees
\1\ Fee 2 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Special nuclear material:
A. Licenses for possession and use of 200
grams or more of plutonium in unsealed
form or 350 grams or more of contained U-
235 in unsealed form or 200 grams or more
of U-233 in unsealed form. This includes
applications to terminate licenses as well
as licenses authorizing possession only:
Licensing and Inspection............... Full Cost.
B. Licenses for receipt and storage of
spent fuel at an independent spent fuel
storage installation (ISFSI):
Licensing and inspection............... Full Cost.
C. Licenses for possession and use of
special nuclear material in sealed sources
contained in devices used in industrial
measuring systems, including x-ray
fluorescence analyzers:\4\
Application............................ $640.
D. All other special nuclear material
licenses, except licenses authorizing
special nuclear material in unsealed form
in combination that would constitute a
critical quantity, as defined in Sec.
150.11 of this chapter, for which the
licensee shall pay the same fees as those
for Category 1A:\4\
[[Page 31472]]
Application............................ $1,300.
E. Licenses or certificates for
construction and operation of a uranium
enrichment facility.
Licensing and inspection............... Full Cost.
2. Source material:
A.(1) Licenses for possession and use of
source material in recovery operations
such as milling, in-situ leaching, heap-
leaching, refining uranium mill
concentrates to uranium hexafluoride, ore
buying stations, ion exchange facilities
and in processing of ores containing
source material for extraction of metals
other than uranium or thorium, including
licenses authorizing the possession of
byproduct waste material (tailings) from
source material recovery operations, as
well as licenses authorizing the
possession and maintenance of a facility
in a standby mode:
Licensing and inspection............... Full Cost.
(2) Licenses that authorize the receipt of
byproduct material, as defined in Section
11e(2) of the Atomic Energy Act, from
other persons for possession and disposal
except those licenses subject to fees in
Category 2.A.(1).
Licensing and inspection............... Full Cost.
(3) Licenses that authorize the receipt of
byproduct material, as defined in Section
11e(2) of the Atomic Energy Act, from
other persons for possession and disposal
incidental to the disposal of the uranium
waste tailings generated by the licensee's
milling operations, except those licenses
subject to the fees in Category 2.A.(1).
Licensing and inspection............... Full Cost.
B. Licenses which authorize the possession,
use, and/or installation of source
material for shielding:
Application............................ $150.
C. All other source material licenses:
Application............................ $5,500.
3. Byproduct material:
A. Licenses of broad scope for the
possession and use of byproduct material
issued under Parts 30 and 33 of this
chapter for processing or manufacturing of
items containing byproduct material for
commercial distribution:
Application............................ $6,600.
B. Other licenses for possession and use of
byproduct material issued under Part 30 of
this chapter for processing or
manufacturing of items containing
byproduct material for commercial
distribution:
Application............................ $2,400.
C. Licenses issued under Secs. 32.72,
32.73, and/or 32.74 of this chapter that
authorize the processing or manufacturing
and distribution or redistribution of
radiopharmaceuticals, generators, reagent
kits, and/or sources and devices
containing byproduct material. This
category does not apply to licenses issued
to nonprofit educational institutions
whose processing or manufacturing is
exempt under 10 CFR 170.11(a)(4). These
licenses are covered by fee Category 3D.
Application............................ $10,200.
D. Licenses and approvals issued under
Secs. 32.72, 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 includes
licenses issued under Secs. 32.72, 32.73,
and/or 32.74 of this chapter to nonprofit
educational institutions whose processing
or manufacturing is exempt under 10 CFR
170.11(a)(4).
Application............................ $2,400.
E. Licenses for possession and use of
byproduct material in sealed sources for
irradiation of materials in which the
source is not removed from its shield
(self-shielded units):
Application............................ $1,700.
F. Licenses for possession and use of less
than 10,000 curies of byproduct material
in sealed sources for irradiation of
materials in which the source is exposed
for irradiation purposes. This category
also includes underwater irradiators for
irradiation of materials where the source
is not exposed for irradiation purposes.
Application............................ $3,300.
G. Licenses for possession and use of
10,000 curies or more of byproduct
material in sealed sources for irradiation
of materials in which the source is
exposed for irradiation purposes. This
category also includes underwater
irradiators for irradiation of materials
where the source is not exposed for
irradiation purposes.
Application............................ $3,400.
H. Licenses issued under Subpart A of Part
32 of this chapter to distribute items
containing byproduct material that require
device review to persons exempt from the
licensing requirements of Part 30 of this
chapter. The category does not include
specific licenses authorizing
redistribution of items that have been
authorized for distribution to persons
exempt from the licensing requirements of
Part 30 of this chapter:
Application............................ $2,000.
I. Licenses issued under Subpart A of Part
32 of this chapter to distribute items
containing byproduct material or
quantities of byproduct material that do
not require device evaluation to persons
exempt from the licensing requirements of
Part 30 of this chapter. This category
does not include specific licenses
authorizing redistribution of items that
have been authorized for distribution to
persons exempt from the licensing
requirements of Part 30 of this chapter:
Application............................ $3,200.
J. Licenses issued under Subpart B of Part
32 of this chapter to distribute items
containing byproduct material that require
sealed source and/or device review to
persons generally licensed under Part 31
of this chapter. This category does not
include specific licenses authorizing
redistribution of items that have been
authorized for distribution to persons
generally licensed under Part 31 of this
chapter:
Application............................ $1,000.
K. Licenses issued under Subpart B of Part
32 of this chapter to distribute items
containing byproduct material or
quantities of byproduct material that do
not require sealed source and/or device
review to persons generally licensed under
Part 31 of this chapter. This category
does not include specific licenses
authorizing redistribution of items that
have been authorized for distribution to
persons generally licensed under Part 31
of this chapter:
Application............................ $600.
L. Licenses of broad scope for possession
and use of byproduct material issued under
Parts 30 and 33 of this chapter for
research and development that do not
authorize commercial distribution:
[[Page 31473]]
Application............................ $5,500.
M. Other licenses for possession and use of
byproduct material issued under Part 30 of
this chapter for research and development
that do not authorize commercial
distribution:
Application............................ $2,300.
N. Licenses that authorize services for
other licensees, except:
(1) Licenses that authorize only
calibration and/or leak testing
services are subject to the fees
specified in fee Category 3P; and (2)
Licenses that authorize waste disposal
services are subject to the fees
specified in fee Categories 4A, 4B,
and 4C:
Application........................ $2,300.
O. Licenses for possession and use of
byproduct material issued under Part 34 of
this chapter for industrial radiography
operations:
Application............................ $5,800.
P. All other specific byproduct material
licenses, except those in Categories 4A
through 9D:
Application............................ $1,300.
4. Waste disposal and processing:
A. Licenses specifically authorizing the
receipt of waste byproduct material,
source material, or special nuclear
material from other persons for the
purpose of contingency storage or
commercial land disposal by the licensee;
or licenses authorizing contingency
storage of low-level radioactive waste at
the site of nuclear power reactors; or
licenses for receipt of waste from other
persons for incineration or other
treatment, packaging of resulting waste
and residues, and transfer of packages to
another person authorized to receive or
dispose of waste material:
Licensing and inspection............... Full Cost.
B. Licenses specifically authorizing the
receipt of waste byproduct material,
source material, or special nuclear
material from other persons for the
purpose of packaging or repackaging the
material. The licensee will dispose of the
material by transfer to another person
authorized to receive or dispose of the
material:
Application............................ $1,700.
C. Licenses specifically authorizing the
receipt of prepackaged waste byproduct
material, source material, or special
nuclear material from other persons. The
licensee will dispose of the material by
transfer to another person authorized to
receive or dispose of the material:
Application............................ $2,500.
5. Well logging:
A. Licenses for possession and use of
byproduct material, source material, and/
or special nuclear material for well
logging, well surveys, and tracer studies
other than field flooding tracer studies:
Application............................ $6,000.
B. Licenses for possession and use of
byproduct material for field flooding
tracer studies:
Licensing.............................. Full Cost.
6. Nuclear laundries:
A. Licenses for commercial collection and
laundry of items contaminated with
byproduct material, source material, or
special nuclear material:
Application............................ $11,200.
7. Medical licenses:
A. Licenses issued under Parts 30, 35, 40,
and 70 of this chapter for human use of
byproduct material, source material, or
special nuclear material in sealed sources
contained in teletherapy devices:
Application............................ $6,100.
B. Licenses of broad scope issued to
medical institutions or two or more
physicians under Parts 30, 33, 35, 40, and
70 of this chapter authorizing research
and development, including human use of
byproduct material, except licenses for
byproduct material, source material, or
special nuclear material in sealed sources
contained in teletherapy devices:
Application............................ $4,400.
C. Other licenses issued under Parts 30,
35, 40, and 70 of this chapter for human
use of byproduct material, source
material, and/or special nuclear material,
except licenses for byproduct material,
source material, or special nuclear
material in sealed sources contained in
teletherapy devices:
Application............................ $2,400.
8. Civil defense:
A. Licenses for possession and use of
byproduct material, source material, or
special nuclear material for civil defense
activities:
Application............................ $320.
9. Device, product, or sealed source safety
evaluation:
A. Safety evaluation of devices or products
containing byproduct material, source
material, or special nuclear material,
except reactor fuel devices, for
commercial distribution:
Application--each device............... $5,200.
B. Safety evaluation of devices or products
containing byproduct material, source
material, or special nuclear material
manufactured in accordance with the unique
specifications of, and for use by, a
single applicant, except reactor fuel
devices:
Application--each device............... $3,700.
C. Safety evaluation of sealed sources
containing byproduct material, source
material, or special nuclear material,
except reactor fuel, for commercial
distribution:
Application--each source............... $1,580.
D. Safety evaluation of sealed sources
containing byproduct material, source
material, or special nuclear material,
manufactured in accordance with the unique
specifications of, and for use by, a
single applicant, except reactor fuel:
Application--each source............... $530.
10. Transportation of radioactive material:
A. Evaluation of casks, packages, and
shipping containers:
Licensing and inspection............... Full Cost.
[[Page 31474]]
B. Evaluation of 10 CFR Part 71 quality
assurance programs:
Application............................ $390.
Inspections............................ Full Cost.
11. Review of standardized spent fuel
facilities:
Licensing and inspection................... Full Cost.
12. Special projects: \5\
Approvals and preapplication/Licensing Full Cost.
activities.
Inspections................................ Full Cost.
13. A. Spent fuel storage cask Certificate of
Compliance:
Licensing.............................. Full Cost.
B. Inspections related to spent fuel Full Cost.
storage cask Certificate of Compliance.
C. Inspections related to storage of spent Full Cost.
fuel under Sec. 72.210 of this chapter.
14. Byproduct, source, or special nuclear
material licenses and other approvals
authorizing decommissioning, decontamination,
reclamation, or site restoration activities
under Parts 30, 40, 70, 72, and 76 of this
chapter:
Licensing and inspection................... Full Cost.
15. Import and Export licenses:
Licenses issued under 10 CFR Part 110 of
this chapter for the import and export
only of special nuclear material, source
material, tritium and other byproduct
material, heavy water, or nuclear grade
graphite.
A. Application for export or import of
high enriched uranium and other
materials, including radioactive
waste, which must be reviewed by the
Commissioners and the Executive
Branch, for example, those actions
under 10 CFR 110.40(b). This category
includes application for export or
import of radioactive wastes in
multiple forms from multiple
generators or brokers in the exporting
country and/or going to multiple
treatment, storage or disposal
facilities in one or more receiving
countries.
Application--new license........... $9,100.
Amendment.......................... $9,100.
B. Application for export or import of
special nuclear material, source
material, tritium and other byproduct
material, heavy water, or nuclear
grade graphite, including radioactive
waste, requiring Executive Branch
review but not Commissioner review.
This category includes application for
the export or import of radioactive
waste involving a single form of waste
from a single class of generator in
the exporting country to a single
treatment, storage and/or disposal
facility in the receiving country.
Application--new license........... $5,600.
Amendment.......................... $5,600.
C. Application for export of routine
reloads of low enriched uranium
reactor fuel and exports of source
material requiring only foreign
government assurances under the Atomic
Energy Act.
Application--new license........... $1,700.
Amendment.......................... $1,700.
D. Application for export or import of
other materials, including radioactive
waste, not requiring Commissioner
review, Executive Branch review, or
foreign government assurances under
the Atomic Energy Act. This category
includes application for export or
import of radioactive waste where the
NRC has previously authorized the
export or import of the same form of
waste to or from the same or similar
parties, requiring only confirmation
from the receiving facility and
licensing authorities that the
shipments may proceed according to
previously agreed understandings and
procedures.
Application--new license........... $1,100.
Amendment.......................... $1,100.
E. Minor amendment of any export or
import license to extend the
expiration date, change domestic
information, or make other revisions
which do not require in-depth
analysis, review, or consultations
with other agencies or foreign
governments.
Amendment.......................... $210.
16. Reciprocity:
Agreement State licensees who conduct
activities under the reciprocity
provisions of 10 CFR 150.20.
Application (initial filing of Form $1,200.
241).
Revisions.............................. $200.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Types of fees--Separate charges, as shown in the schedule, will be
assessed for preapplication consultations and reviews and applications
for new licenses and approvals, issuance of new licenses and
approvals, certain amendments and renewals to existing licenses and
approvals, safety evaluations of sealed sources and devices, and
certain inspections. The following guidelines apply to these charges:
(a)Application fees. Applications for new materials licenses and export
and import licenses; applications to reinstate expired, terminated, or
inactive licenses except those subject to fees assessed at full costs;
applications filed by Agreement State licensees to register under the
general license provisions of 10 CFR 150.20; and applications for
amendments to materials licenses that would place the license in a
higher fee category or add a new fee category must be accompanied by
the prescribed application fee for each category.
(1) Applications for licenses covering more than one fee category of
special nuclear material or source material must be accompanied by the
prescribed application fee for the highest fee category.
(2) Applications for new licenses that cover both byproduct material and
special nuclear material in sealed sources for use in gauging devices
will pay the appropriate application fee for fee Category 1C only.
(b) Licensing fees. Fees for reviews of applications for new licenses
and for renewals and amendments to existing licenses, for
preapplication consultations and for reviews of other documents
submitted to NRC for review, and for project manager time for fee
categories subject to full cost fees (fee Categories 1A, 1B, 1E, 2A,
4A, 5B, 10A, 11, 12, 13A, and 14) are due upon notification by the
Commission in accordance with Sec. 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 amendment to a license or approval classified in
more than 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.
[[Page 31475]]
(d) 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 Sec.
170.12(c).
\2\ Fees will not be charged for orders issued by the Commission under
10 CFR 2.202 or for amendments resulting specifically from the
requirements of these types of Commission orders. However, fees will
be charged for approvals issued under a specific exemption provision
of the Commission's regulations under Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (e.g., 10 CFR 30.11, 40.14, 70.14, 73.5, and any other
sections in effect now or in the future) regardless of whether the
approval is in the form of a license amendment, letter of approval,
safety evaluation report, or other form. In addition to the fee shown,
an applicant may be assessed an additional fee for sealed source and
device evaluations as shown in Categories 9A through 9D.
\3\ Full cost fees will be determined based on the professional staff
time multiplied by the appropriate professional hourly rate
established in Sec. 170.20 in effect at the time the service is
provided, and the appropriate contractual support services expended.
For applications currently on file for which review costs have reached
an applicable fee ceiling established by the June 20, 1984, and July
2, 1990, rules, but are still pending completion of the review, the
cost incurred after any applicable ceiling was reached through January
29, 1989, will not be billed to the applicant. Any professional staff-
hours expended above those ceilings on or after January 30, 1989, will
be assessed at the applicable rates established by Sec. 170.20, as
appropriate, except for topical reports whose costs exceed $50,000.
Costs which exceed $50,000 for each topical report, amendment,
revision, or supplement to a topical report completed or under review
from January 30, 1989, through August 8, 1991, will not be billed to
the applicant. Any professional hours expended on or after August 9,
1991, will be assessed at the applicable rate established in Sec.
170.20.
\4\ Licensees paying fees under Categories 1A, 1B, and 1E are not
subject to fees under Categories 1C and 1D for sealed sources
authorized in the same license except for an application that deals
only with the sealed sources authorized by the license.
\5\ Fees will not be assessed for requests/reports submitted to the NRC:
(a) In response to a Generic Letter or NRC Bulletin that does not result
in an amendment to the license, does not result in the review of an
alternate method or reanalysis to meet the requirements of the Generic
Letter, or does not involve an unreviewed safety issue;
(b) In response to an NRC request (at the Associate Office Director
level or above) to resolve an identified safety, safeguards, or
environmental issue, or to assist NRC in developing a rule, regulatory
guide, policy statement, generic letter, or bulletin; or
(c) As a means of exchanging information between industry organizations
and the NRC for the purpose of supporting generic regulatory
improvements or efforts.
10. The heading of Part 171 is revised to read as follows:
PART 171--ANNUAL FEES FOR REACTOR LICENSES AND FUEL CYCLE LICENSES
AND MATERIALS LICENSES, INCLUDING HOLDERS OF CERTIFICATES OF
COMPLIANCE, REGISTRATIONS, AND QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM APPROVALS
AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES LICENSED BY THE NRC
11. The authority citation for Part 171 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: Sec. 7601, Pub. L. 99-272, 100 Stat. 146, as amended
by sec. 5601, Pub. L. 100-203, 101 Stat. 1330, as amended by Sec.
3201, Pub. L. 101-239, 103 Stat. 2106 as amended by sec. 6101, Pub.
L. 101-508, 104 Stat. 1388, (42 U.S.C. 2213); sec. 301, Pub. L. 92-
314, 86 Stat. 222 (42 U.S.C. 2201(w)); sec. 201, 88 Stat. 1242, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 2903, Pub. L. 102-486, 106 Stat.
3125, (42 U.S.C. 2214 note).
12. Section 171.9 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 171.9 Communications.
All communications concerning 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.
13. Section 171.13 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 171.13 Notice.
The annual fees applicable to any NRC licensee subject to this part
and calculated in accordance with Secs. 171.15 and 171.16, will be
published as a notice in the Federal Register as soon as possible but
no later than the third quarter of the fiscal year. The annual fees
will become due and payable to the NRC as indicated in Sec. 171.19.
Quarterly payments of the annual fee of $100,000 or more will continue
during the fiscal year and be based on the applicable annual fees as
shown in Secs. 171.15 and 171.16 until a notice concerning 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.
14. Section 171.15 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 171.15 Annual Fees: Reactor licenses and spent fuel storage/
reactor decommissioning.
(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, except those that have no
spent fuel on-site; 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 Sec. 171.11(a).
(b)(1) The FY 1999 annual fee for each operating power reactor is
$2,776,000.
(2) The FY 1999 annual fee is comprised of a base operating power
reactor annual fee, a base spent fuel storage/reactor decommissioning
annual fee, and associated additional charges (surcharges). The
activities comprising the spent storage/reactor decommissioning base
annual fee are shown in paragraph (c)(2)(i) and (ii) of this section.
The activities comprising the surcharge are shown in paragraph (d)(1)
of this section. The activities comprising the base annual fee for
operating power reactors are as follows:
(i) Power reactor safety and safeguards regulation except licensing
and inspection activities recovered under Part 170 of this chapter and
generic reactor decommissioning activities.
(ii) Research activities directly related to the regulation of
power reactors except those activities specifically related to reactor
decommissioning.
(iii) Generic activities required largely for NRC to regulate power
reactors, e.g., updating Part 50 of this chapter, or operating the
Incident Response Center. The base annual fee for operating power
reactors does not include generic activities specifically related to
reactor decommissioning.
(c)(1) The FY 1999 annual fee for each power reactor holding a Part
50 license that is in a decommissioning or possession only status and
has spent fuel on-site and each independent spent fuel storage Part 72
licensee who does not hold a Part 50 license is $206,000.
(2) This fee is comprised of a base spent fuel storage/reactor
decommissioning annual fee (this fee is also included in the operating
power
[[Page 31476]]
reactor annual fee shown in paragraph (b) of this section), and an
additional charge (surcharge). The activities comprising the surcharge
are shown in paragraph (d)(1) of this section. The activities
comprising the FY 1999 spent fuel storage/reactor decommissioning base
annual fee are:
(i) Generic and other research activities directly related to
reactor decommissioning and spent fuel storage; and
(ii) Other safety, environmental, and safeguards activities related
to reactor decommissioning and spent fuel storage, except costs for
licensing and inspection activities that are recovered under part 170
of this chapter.
(d)(1) The activities comprising the FY 1999 surcharge are as
follows:
(i) Low level waste disposal generic activities;
(ii) Activities not directly attributable to an existing NRC
licensee or class of licensees (e.g., international cooperative safety
program and international safeguards activities; support for the
Agreement State program, and site decommissioning management plan
(SDMP) activities); and
(iii) Activities not currently subject to 10 CFR Part 170 licensing
and inspection fees based on existing law or Commission policy, e.g.,
reviews and inspections conducted of nonprofit educational institutions
and licensing actions for Federal agencies, and costs that would not be
collected from small entities based on Commission policy in accordance
with the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
(2) The total FY 1999 surcharge allocated to operating power
reactor class of licensees is $44 million, not including the amount
allocated to the new fee class, spent fuel storage/reactor
decommissioning. The FY 1999 operating power reactor surcharge to be
assessed to each operating power reactor is $423,000. This amount is
calculated by dividing the total operating power reactor surcharge ($44
million) by the number of operating power reactors (104).
(3) The FY 1999 surcharge allocated to spent fuel storage/reactor
decommissioning class of licensees is $3.2 million. The FY 1999 spent
fuel storage/reactor decommissioning surcharge to be added to each
operating power reactor, each power reactor in decommissioning or
possession only status that has spent fuel onsite, and to each
independent spent fuel storage Part 72 licensee who does not hold a
Part 50 license is $26,500. This amount is calculated by dividing the
total surcharge costs allocated to this class by the total number of
power reactor licensees, except those that permanently ceased
operations and have no fuel onsite, and Part 72 licensees who do not
hold a Part 50 license.
(e) The FY 1999 annual fees for licensees authorized to operate a
nonpower (test and research) reactor licensed under Part 50 of this
chapter, unless the reactor is exempted from fees under Sec. 171.11(a),
are as follows:
Research reactor........................................... $85,900
Test reactor............................................... $85,900
15. Section 171.16 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 171.16 Annual Fees: Materials Licensees, Holders of Certificates
of Compliance, Holders of Sealed Source and Device Registrations,
Holders of Quality Assurance Program Approvals and Government Agencies
Licensed by the NRC.
(a)(1) The provisions of this section apply to person(s) who are
authorized to conduct activities under--
(i) 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.
(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
and 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 Sec. 171.17 of this section. If a 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 paragraph (e) of this section. The activities comprising
the base annual fee is the sum of the NRC budgeted costs for:
(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 any refund that might
otherwise be due.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum annual
fee per
licensed
category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Businesses Not Engaged in Manufacturing and Small
Not-For-Profit Organizations (Gross Annual Receipts):
$350,000 to $5 million.............................. $1,800
Less than $350,000.................................. 400
Manufacturing entities that have an average of 500
employees or less;
35 to 500 employees................................. 1,800
Less than 35 employees.............................. 400
Small Governmental Jurisdictions (Including publicly
supported educational institutions) (Population):
20,000 to 50,000.................................... 1,800
Less than 20,000.................................... 400
Educational Institutions that are not State or Publicly
Supported, and have 500 Employees or Less:
35 to 500 employees................................. 1,800
Less than 35 employees.............................. 400
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 31477]]
(1) A licensee qualifies as a small entity if it meets the size
standards established by the NRC (See 10 CFR 2.810).
(2) A licensee who seeks to establish status as a small entity for
purpose of paying the annual fees required under this section must file
a certification statement with the NRC. The licensee must file the
required certification on NRC Form 526 for each license under which it
is billed. The NRC will include a copy of NRC Form 526 with each annual
fee invoice sent to a licensee. A licensee who seeks to qualify as a
small entity must submit the completed NRC Form 526 with the reduced
annual fee payment.
(3) For purposes of this section, the licensee must submit a new
certification with its annual fee payment each year.
(4) The maximum annual fee a small entity is required to pay is
$1,800 for each category applicable to the license(s).
(d) The FY 1999 annual fees, including the surcharge shown in
paragraph (e) of this section, for materials licensees subject to fees
under this section are shown below:
Schedule of Materials Annual Fees and Fees for Government Agencies
Licensed by NRC
[See footnotes at end of table]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category of materials licenses Annual fees 1
----------------------------------------------------------------2 3-----
1. Special nuclear material:
A.(1) Licenses for possession and use of U-235 or
plutonium for fuel fabrication activities.
(a) Strategic Special Nuclear Material:
Babcock & Wilcox SNM-42..................... 3,281,000
Nuclear Fuel Services SNM-124............... 3,281,000
(b) Low Enriched Uranium in Dispersible Form
Used for Fabrication of Power Reactor Fuel:
Combustion Engineering (Hematite) SNM-33.... 1,100,000
General Electric Company SNM-1097........... 1,100,000
Siemens Nuclear Power SNM-1227.............. 1,100,000
Westinghouse Electric Company SNM-1107...... 1,100,000
(2) All other special nuclear materials licenses not
included in Category 1.A.(1) which are licensed for
fuel cycle activities:
(a) Facilities with limited operations:
Framatome Cogema SNM-1168................... 432,000
(b) All Others:
General Electric SNM-960.................... 314,000
B. Licenses for receipt and storage of spent fuel at
an independent spent fuel storage installation
(ISFSI) See 10 CFR part 171.15(c).
C. Licenses for possession and use of special 1,200
nuclear material in sealed sources contained in
devices used in industrial measuring systems,
including x-ray fluorescence analyzers.............
D. All other special nuclear material licenses, 3,300
except licenses authorizing special nuclear
material in unsealed form in combination that would
constitute a critical quantity, as defined in Sec.
150.11 of this chapter, for which the licensee
shall pay the same fees as those for Category
1.A.(2)............................................
E. Licenses or certificates for the operation of a 2,043,000
uranium enrichment facility........................
2. Source material:
A.(1) Licenses for possession and use of source 472,000
material for refining uranium mill concentrates to
uranium hexafluoride...............................
(2) Licenses for possession and use of source
material in recovery operations such as milling, in-
situ leaching, heap-leaching, ore buying stations,
ion exchange facilities and in processing of ores
containing source material for extraction of metals
other than uranium or thorium, including licenses
authorizing the possession of byproduct waste
material (tailings) from source material recovery
operations, as well as licenses authorizing the
possession and maintenance of a facility in a
standby mode.
Class I facilities \4\.......................... 131,000
Class II facilities \4\......................... 109,000
Other facilities \4\............................ 30,400
(3) Licenses that authorize the receipt of byproduct 81,000
material, as defined in Section 11e.(2) of the
Atomic Energy Act, from other persons for
possession and disposal, except those licenses
subject to the fees in Category 2.A.(2) or Category
2.A.(4)............................................
(4) Licenses that authorize the receipt of byproduct 13,000
material, as defined in Section 11e.(2) of the
Atomic Energy Act, from other persons for
possession and disposal incidental to the disposal
of the uranium waste tailings generated by the
licensee's milling operations, except those
licenses subject to the fees in Category 2.A.(2)...
B. Licenses that authorize only the possession, use 600
and/or installation of source material for
shielding..........................................
C. All other source material licenses............... 11,700
3. Byproduct material:
A. Licenses of broad scope for possession and use of 26,000
byproduct material issued under Parts 30 and 33 of
this chapter for processing or manufacturing of
items containing byproduct material for commercial
distribution.......................................
B. Other licenses for possession and use of 6,300
byproduct material issued under Part 30 of this
chapter for processing or manufacturing of items
containing byproduct material for commercial
distribution.......................................
C. Licenses issued under Secs. 32.72, 32.73, and/or 15,300
32.74 of this chapter authorizing the processing or
manufacturing and distribution or redistribution of
radiopharmaceuticals, generators, reagent kits and/
or sources and devices containing byproduct
material. This category also includes the
possession and use of source material for shielding
authorized under Part 40 of this chapter when
included on the same license. This category does
not apply to licenses issued to nonprofit
educational institutions whose processing or
manufacturing is exempt under 10 CFR 171.11(a)(1).
These licenses are covered by fee Category 3D......
[[Page 31478]]
D. Licenses and approvals issued under Secs. 32.72, 3,800
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 includes licenses
issued under Secs. 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
authorized under Part 40 of this chapter when
included on the same license.......................
E. Licenses for possession and use of byproduct 3,400
material in sealed sources for irradiation of
materials in which the source is not removed from
its shield (self-shielded units)...................
F. Licenses for possession and use of less than 5,700
10,000 curies of byproduct material in sealed
sources for irradiation of materials in which the
source is exposed for irradiation purposes. This
category also includes underwater irradiators for
irradiation of materials in which the source is not
exposed for irradiation purposes...................
G. Licenses for possession and use of 10,000 curies 14,800
or more of byproduct material in sealed sources for
irradiation of materials in which the source is
exposed for irradiation purposes. This category
also includes underwater irradiators for
irradiation of materials in which the source is not
exposed for irradiation purposes...................
H. Licenses issued under Subpart A of Part 32 of 3,200
this chapter to distribute items containing
byproduct material that require device review to
persons exempt from the licensing requirements of
Part 30 of this chapter, except specific licenses
authorizing redistribution of items that have been
authorized for distribution to persons exempt from
the licensing requirements of Part 30 of this
chapter............................................
I. Licenses issued under Subpart A of Part 32 of 4,600
this chapter to distribute items containing
byproduct material or quantities of byproduct
material that do not require device evaluation to
persons exempt from the licensing requirements of
Part 30 of this chapter, except for specific
licenses authorizing redistribution of items that
have been authorized for distribution to persons
exempt from the licensing requirements of Part 30
of this chapter....................................
J. Licenses issued under Subpart B of Part 32 of 2,100
this chapter to distribute items containing
byproduct material that require sealed source and/
or device review to persons generally licensed
under Part 31 of this chapter, except specific
licenses authorizing redistribution of items that
have been authorized for distribution to persons
generally licensed under Part 31 of this chapter...
K. Licenses issued under Subpart B of Part 31 of 1,700
this chapter to distribute items containing
byproduct material or quantities of byproduct
material that do not require sealed source and/or
device review to persons generally licensed under
Part 31 of this chapter, except specific licenses
authorizing redistribution of items that have been
authorized for distribution to persons generally
licensed under Part 31 of this chapter.............
L. Licenses of broad scope for possession and use of 11,200
byproduct material issued under Parts 30 and 33 of
this chapter for research and development that do
not authorize commercial distribution..............
M. Other licenses for possession and use of 5,000
byproduct material issued under Part 30 of this
chapter for research and development that do not
authorize commercial distribution..................
N. Licenses that authorize services for other
licensees, except:
(1) Licenses that authorize only calibration and/
or leak testing services are subject to the
fees specified in fee Category 3P; and
(2) Licenses that authorize waste disposal 5,200
services are subject to the fees specified in
fee Categories 4A, 4B, and 4C..................
O. Licenses for possession and use of byproduct 14,700
material issued under Part 34 of this chapter for
industrial radiography operations. This category
also includes the possession and use of source
material for shielding authorized under Part 40 of
this chapter when authorized on the same license...
P. All other specific byproduct material licenses, 2,600
except those in Categories 4A through 9D...........
4. Waste disposal and processing:
A. Licenses specifically authorizing the receipt of \5\ N/A
waste byproduct material, source material, or
special nuclear material from other persons for the
purpose of contingency storage or commercial land
disposal by the licensee; or licenses authorizing
contingency storage of low-level radioactive waste
at the site of nuclear power reactors; or licenses
for receipt of waste from other persons for
incineration or other treatment, packaging of
resulting waste and residues, and transfer of
packages to another person authorized to receive or
dispose of waste material..........................
B. Licenses specifically authorizing the receipt of 11,300
waste byproduct material, source material, or
special nuclear material from other persons for the
purpose of packaging or repackaging the material.
The licensee will dispose of the material by
transfer to another person authorized to receive or
dispose of the material............................
C. Licenses specifically authorizing the receipt of 8,400
prepackaged waste byproduct material, source
material, or special nuclear material from other
persons. The licensee will dispose of the material
by transfer to another person authorized to receive
or dispose of the material.........................
5. Well logging:
A. Licenses for possession and use of byproduct 9,900
material, source material, and/or special nuclear
material for well logging, well surveys, and tracer
studies other than field flooding tracer studies...
B. Licenses for possession and use of byproduct \5\ N/A
material for field flooding tracer studies.........
6. Nuclear laundries:
A. Licenses for commercial collection and laundry of 18,900
items contaminated with byproduct material, source
material, or special nuclear material..............
7. Medical licenses:
A. Licenses issued under Parts 30, 35, 40, and 70 of 15,300
this chapter for human use of byproduct material,
source material, or special nuclear material in
sealed sources contained in teletherapy devices.
This category also includes the possession and use
of source material for shielding when authorized on
the same license...................................
B. Licenses of broad scope issued to medical 27,800
institutions or two or more physicians under Parts
30, 33, 35, 40, and 70 of this chapter authorizing
research and development, including human use of
byproduct material except licenses for byproduct
material, source material, or special nuclear
material in sealed sources contained in teletherapy
devices. This category also includes the possession
and use of source material for shielding when
authorized on the same license.\9\.................
[[Page 31479]]
C. Other licenses issued under Parts 30, 35, 40, and 5,800
70 of this chapter for human use of byproduct
material, source material, and/or special nuclear
material except licenses for byproduct material,
source material, or special nuclear material in
sealed sources contained in teletherapy devices.
This category also includes the possession and use
of source material for shielding when authorized on
the same license.\9\...............................
8. Civil defense:
A. Licenses for possession and use of byproduct 1,200
material, source material, or special nuclear
material for civil defense activities..............
9. Device, product, or sealed source safety evaluation:
A. Registrations issued for the safety evaluation of 6,000
devices or products containing byproduct material,
source material, or special nuclear material,
except reactor fuel devices, for commercial
distribution.......................................
B. Registrations issued for the safety evaluation of 4,300
devices or products containing byproduct material,
source material, or special nuclear material
manufactured in accordance with the unique
specifications of, and for use by, a single
applicant, except reactor fuel devices.............
C. Registrations issued for the safety evaluation of 1,800
sealed sources containing byproduct material,
source material, or special nuclear material,
except reactor fuel, for commercial distribution...
D. Registrations issued for the safety evaluation of 600
sealed sources containing byproduct material,
source material, or special nuclear material,
manufactured in accordance with the unique
specifications of, and for use by, a single
applicant, except reactor fuel.....................
10. Transportation of radioactive material:
A. Certificates of Compliance or other package
approvals issued for design of casks, packages, and
shipping containers.
Spent Fuel, High-Level Waste, and plutonium air \6\ N/A
packages.......................................
Other Casks..................................... \6\ N
B. Quality assurance program approvals issued under
10 CFR Part 71:
Users and Fabricators........................... 66,700
Users........................................... 2,200
11. Standardized spent fuel facilities.................. \6\ N/A
12. Special Projects.................................... \6\ N/A
13. A. Spent fuel storage cask Certificate of Compliance \6\ N/A
B. General licenses for storage of spent fuel under
10 CFR 72.210 N/A (See 10 CFR Part 171.15(c).
14. Byproduct, source, or special nuclear material \7\ N/A
licenses and other approvals authorizing
decommissioning, decontamination, reclamation, or site
restoration activities under 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, 70,
72, and 76 of this chapter.............................
15. Import and Export licenses.......................... \8\ N/A
16. Reciprocity......................................... \8\ N/A
17. Master materials licenses of broad scope issued to 358,000
Government agencies....................................
18. Department of Energy:
A. Certificates of Compliance....................... \10\ 872,000
B. Uranium Mill Tailing Radiation Control Act 869,000
(UMTRCA) activities................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Annual fees will be assessed based on whether a licensee held a
valid license with the NRC authorizing possession and use of
radioactive material during the fiscal year. However, the annual fee
is waived for those materials licenses and holders of certificates,
registrations, and approvals who either filed for termination of their
licenses or approvals or filed for possession only/storage licenses
prior to October 1, 1998, and permanently ceased licensed activities
entirely by September 30, 1998. Annual fees for licensees who filed
for termination of a license, downgrade of a license, or for a
possession only license during the fiscal year and for new licenses
issued during the fiscal year will be prorated in accordance with the
provisions of Sec. 171.17. If a person holds more than one license,
certificate, registration, or approval, the annual fee(s) will be
assessed for each license, certificate, registration, or approval held
by that person. For licenses that authorize more than one activity on
a single license (e.g., human use and irradiator activities), annual
fees will be assessed for each category applicable to the license.
Licensees paying annual fees under Category 1A(1) are not subject to
the annual fees for Category 1C and 1D for sealed sources authorized
in the license.
\2\ Payment of the prescribed annual fee does not automatically renew
the license, certificate, registration, or approval for which the fee
is paid. Renewal applications must be filed in accordance with the
requirements of Parts 30, 40, 70, 71, 72, or 76 of this chapter.
\3\ Each fiscal year, fees for these materials licenses will be
calculated and assessed in accordance with Sec. 171.13 and will be
published in the Federal Register for notice and comment.
\4\ A Class I license includes mill licenses issued for the extraction
of uranium from uranium ore. A Class II license includes solution
mining licenses (in-situ and heap leach) issued for the extraction of
uranium from uranium ores including research and development licenses.
An ``other'' license includes licenses for extraction of metals, heavy
metals, and rare earths.
\5\ There are no existing NRC licenses in these fee categories. Once NRC
issues a license for these categories, the Commission will consider
establishing an annual fee for that type of license.
\6\ Standardized spent fuel facilities, 10 CFR Parts 71 and 72
Certificates of Compliance, and special reviews, such as topical
reports, are not assessed an annual fee because the generic costs of
regulating these activities are primarily attributable to the users of
the designs, certificates, and topical reports.
\7\ Licensees in this category are not assessed an annual fee because
they are charged an annual fee in other categories while they are
licensed to operate.
\8\ No annual fee is charged because it is not practical to administer
due to the relatively short life or temporary nature of the license.
\9\ Separate annual fees will not be assessed for pacemaker licenses
issued to medical institutions who also hold nuclear medicine licenses
under Categories 7B or 7C.
\10\ This includes Certificates of Compliance issued to DOE that are not
under the Nuclear Waste Fund.
(e) The activities comprising the surcharge are as follows:
(1) LLW disposal generic activities;
(2) Activities not directly attributable to an existing NRC
licensee or classes of licensees; e.g., international cooperative
safety program and international safeguards activities; support for the
Agreement State program; site decommissioning management plan (SDMP)
activities; and
(3) Activities not currently assessed licensing and inspection fees
under 10 CFR Part 170 based on existing law or
[[Page 31480]]
Commission policy, e.g., reviews and inspections conducted of nonprofit
educational institutions and reviews for Federal agencies; activities
related to decommissioning and reclamation; and costs that would not be
collected from small entities based on Commission policy in accordance
with the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
16. Section 171.17 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 171.17 Proration.
Annual fees will be prorated for NRC licensees as follows:
(a) Reactors and Part 72 licensees who do not hold Part 50
licenses. The annual fees for power and nonpower reactors and those
Part 72 licensees who do not hold a Part 50 license that are subject to
fees under this part and are granted a license to operate on or after
October 1 of a Fiscal Year is prorated on the basis of the number of
days remaining in the fiscal year. Thereafter, the full annual fee is
due and payable each subsequent fiscal year. The base operating power
reactor annual fee for operating reactor licensees who have requested
amendment to withdraw operating authority permanently during the fiscal
year will be prorated based on the number of days during the fiscal
year the license was in effect before docketing of the certifications
for permanent cessation of operations and permanent removal of fuel
from the reactor vessel or when a final legally effective order to
permanently cease operations has come into effect. The spent fuel
storage/reactor decommissioning annual fee for reactor licensees who
permanently cease operations and have permanently removed fuel from the
site during the fiscal year will be prorated on the basis of the number
of days remaining in the fiscal year after docketing of both the
certifications of permanent cessation of operations and permanent
removal of fuel from the site. The spent fuel storage/reactor
decommissioning annual fee will be prorated for those Part 72 licensees
who do not hold a Part 50 license who request termination of the Part
72 license and permanently cease activities authorized by the license
during the fiscal year based on the number of days the license was in
effect prior to receipt of the termination request.
(b) Materials licenses (excluding Part 72 licenses included in
Sec. 171.17(a)). (1) New licenses and terminations. The annual fee for
a materials license that is subject to fees under this part and issued
on or after October 1 of the FY is prorated on the basis of when the
NRC issues the new license. New licenses issued during the period
October 1 through March 31 of the FY will be assessed one-half the
annual fee for that FY. New licenses issued on or after April 1 of the
FY will not be assessed an annual fee for that FY. Thereafter, the full
fee is due and payable each subsequent FY. The annual fee will be
prorated for licenses for which a termination request or a request for
a POL has been received on or after October 1 of a FY on the basis of
when the application for termination or POL is received by the NRC
provided the licensee permanently ceased licensed activities during the
specified period. Licenses for which applications for termination or
POL are filed during the period October 1 through March 31 of the FY
are assessed one-half the annual fee for the applicable category(ies)
for that FY. Licenses for which applications for termination or POL are
filed on or after April 1 of the FY are assessed the full annual fee
for that FY. Materials licenses transferred to a new Agreement State
during the FY are considered terminated by the NRC, for annual fee
purposes, on the date that the Agreement with the State becomes
effective; therefore, the same proration provisions will apply as if
the licenses were terminated.
(2) Downgraded licenses. (i) The annual fee for a materials license
that is subject to fees under this part and downgraded on or after
October 1 of a FY is prorated upon request by the licensee on the basis
of when the application for downgrade is received by the NRC provided
the licensee permanently ceased the stated activities during the
specified period. Requests for proration must be filed with the NRC
within 90 days from the effective date of the final rule establishing
the annual fees for which a proration is sought. Absent extraordinary
circumstances, any request for proration of the annual fee for a
downgraded license filed beyond that date will not be considered.
(ii) Annual fees for licenses for which applications to downgrade
are filed during the period October 1 through March 31 of the FY will
be prorated as follows:
(A) Licenses for which applications have been filed to reduce the
scope of the license from a higher fee category(ies) to a lower fee
category(ies) will be assessed one-half the annual fee for the higher
fee category and one-half the annual fee for the lower fee
category(ies), and, if applicable, the full annual fee for fee
categories not afftected by the downgrade; and
(B) Licenses with multiple fee categories for which applications
have been filed to downgrade by deleting a fee category will be
assessed one-half the annual fee for the fee category being deleted and
the full annual fee for the remaining categories.
(iii) Licenses for which applications to downgrade are filed on or
after April 1 of the FY are assessed the full fee for that FY.
17. Section 171.19 is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 171.19 Payment.
(a) Method of payment. Annual fee payments, made payable to the
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, are to be made in U.S. funds by
electronic funds transfer such as ACH (Automated Clearing House) using
EDI (Electronic Data Interchange), check, draft, money order, or credit
card. Federal agencies may also make payment by the On-line Payment and
Collection System (OPAC's). Where specific payment instructions are
provided on the invoices to applicants and licensees, payment should be
made accordingly, e.g. invoices 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 the invoices, to the Lockbox Bank designated for credit card
payments. In accordance with Department of the Treasury requirements,
refunds will only be made upon receipt of information on the payee's
financial institution and bank accounts.
(b) Annual fees in the amount of $100,000 or more and described in
the Federal Register notice issued under Sec. 171.13 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 is $100,000 or more (subject
to quarterly billing), will 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 anniversary 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
[[Page 31481]]
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 anniversary 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 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 issued 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 of less 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), 2B, 2C,
3A through 3P, 4B through 9D, 10A, and 10B.
(e) Payment is due on the invoice date and interest accrues from
the date of the invoice. However, interest will be waived if payment is
received within 30 days from the invoice date.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of June, 1999.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jesse Funches,
Chief Financial Officer.
Note: This appendix will not appear in the Code of Federal
Regulations.
Appendix A to This Final Rule--Regulatory Flexibility Analysis for the
Amendments to 10 CFR Part 170 (License Fees) and 10 CFR Part 171
(Annual Fees)
I. Background
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), as amended, (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.) requires that agencies consider the impact of their
rulemakings on small entities and, consistent with applicable
statutes, consider alternatives to minimize these impacts on the
businesses, organizations, and government jurisdictions to which
they apply.
The NRC has established standards for determining which NRC
licensees qualify as small entities (10 CFR 2.801). These size
standards reflect the Small Business Administration's most common
receipts-based size standards and include a size standard for
business concerns that are manufacturing entities. The NRC uses the
size standards to reduce the impact of annual fees on small entities
by establishing a licensee's eligibility to qualify for a maximum
small entity fee. The small entity fee categories in Sec. 171.16(c)
of this final rule are based on the NRC's size standards
The Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA-90), as amended,
requires that the NRC recover approximately 100 percent of its
budget authority, less appropriations from the Nuclear Waste Fund,
by assessing license and annual fees. OBRA-90 requires that the
schedule of charges established by rule should fairly and equitably
allocate the total amount to recovered from NRC's licensees and be
assessed under the principle that licensees who require the greatest
expenditure of agency resources pay the greatest annual charges. The
amount to be collected for FY 1999 is approximately $449.6 million.
Since 1991, the NRC has complied with OBRA-90 by issuing a final
rule that amends its fee regulations. These final rules have
established the methodology used by NRC in identifying and
determining the fees to be assessed and collected in any given
fiscal year.
Because the NRC is establishing a new annual fee class for FY
1999 and based on program changes that have occurred, the NRC is
establishing new baseline annual fees this fiscal year. This
rebaselining results in an increase in the annual fees charged to
some categories of materials licensees.
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
(SBREFA) is intended to reduce regulatory burdens imposed by Federal
agencies on small businesses, nonprofit organizations, and
governmental jurisdictions. SBREFA also provides Congress with the
opportunity to review agency rules before they go into effect. Under
this legislation, the NRC annual fee rule is considered a ``major''
rule and must be reviewed by Congress and the Comptroller General
before the rule becomes effective. SBREFA also requires that an
agency prepare a guide to assist small entities in complying with
each rule for which final regulatory flexibility analysis is
prepared. This Regulatory Flexibility Analysis and the small entity
compliance guide (Attachment 1) have been prepared for the FY 1999
fee rule as required by law.
II. Impact on Small Entities
The fee rule results in substantial fees being charged to those
individuals, organizations, and companies that are licensed by the
NRC, including those licensed under the NRC materials program. The
comments received on previous proposed fee rules and the small
entity certifications received in response to previous final fee
rules indicate that NRC licensees qualifying as small entities under
the NRC's size standards are primarily materials licensees.
Therefore, this analysis will focus on the economic impact of the
annual fees on materials licensees. About 20 percent of these
licensees (approximately 1,400 licensees) have requested small
entity certification in the past. A 1993 NRC survey of its materials
licensees indicated that about 25 percent of these licensees could
qualify as small entities under the NRC's size standards.
The commenters on previous fee rulemakings consistently
indicated that the following results would occur if the proposed
annual fees were not modified.
1. Large firms would gain an unfair competitive advantage over
small entities. Commenters noted that small and very small companies
(``Mom and Pop'' operations) would find it more difficult to absorb
the annual fee than a large corporation or a high-volume type of
operation. In competitive markets, such as soils testing, annual
fees would put small licensees at an competitive extreme
disadvantage with its much larger competitors because the proposed
fees would be the same for a two-person licensee and for a large
firm with thousands of employees.
2. Some firms would be forced to cancel their licenses. A
licensee with receipts of less than $500,000 per year stated that
the proposed rule would, in effect, force it to relinquish its soil
density gauge and license, thereby reducing its ability to do its
work effectively. Other licensees, especially well-loggers, noted
that the increased fees would force small businesses to get rid of
the materials license altogether. Commenters stated that the
proposed rule would result in about 10 percent of the well-logging
licensees terminating their licenses immediately and approximately
25 percent terminating their licenses before the next annual
assessment.
3. Some companies would go out of business.
4. Some companies would have budget problems. Many medical
licensees noted that, along with reduced reimbursements, the
proposed increase of the existing fees and the introduction of
additional fees would significantly affect their budgets. Others
noted that, in view of the cuts by Medicare and other third party
carriers, the fees would produce a hardship and some facilities
would experience a great deal of difficulty in meeting this
additional burden.
Since annual fees were first established, approximately 3,000
license, approval, and registration terminations have been
requested. Although some of these terminations were requested
because the license was no longer needed or licenses or
registrations could be combined, indications are that other
termination requests were due to the economic impact of the fees.
The NRC continues to receive written and oral comments from
small materials licensees indicating that the monetary threshold for
small entities was not representative of small businesses with gross
receipts in the thousands of dollars. These commenters believe that
even the $1,800 maximum annual fee represents a relatively high
percentage of gross annual receipts for these ``Mom and Pop'' type
businesses. Therefore, even the reduced annual fee could have a
significant impact on the ability of these types of businesses to
continue to operate.
To alleviate the significant impact of the annual fees on a
substantial number of small entities, the NRC considered the
following alternatives, in accordance with the RFA, in developing
each of its fee rules since 1991.
1. Base fees on some measure of the amount of radioactivity
possessed by the licensee (e.g., number of sources).
2. Base fees on the frequency of use of the licensed radioactive
material (e.g., volume of patients).
3. Base fees on the NRC size standards for small entities.
[[Page 31482]]
The NRC has reexamined its previous evaluations of these
alternatives and continues to believe that establishment of a
maximum fee for small entities is the most appropriate and effective
option for reducing the impact of its fees on small entities.
The NRC established, and is continuing for FY 1999, a maximum
annual fee for small entities. The RFA and its implementing guidance
do not provide specific guidelines on what constitutes a significant
economic impact on a small entity. Therefore, the NRC has no
benchmark to assist it in determining the amount or the percent of
gross receipts that should be charged to a small entity. For FY
1999, the NRC will rely on the analysis previously completed that
established a maximum annual fee for a small entity and the amount
of costs that must be recovered from other NRC licensees as a result
of establishing the maximum annual fees.
The NRC continues to believe that the 10 CFR Part 170
application fees, or any adjustments to these licensing fees during
the past year, do not have a significant impact on small entities.
By maintaining the maximum annual fee for small entities at
$1,800, the annual fee for many small entities is reduced while at
the same time materials licensees, including small entities, will
pay for most of the FY 1999 costs attributable to them. The costs
not recovered from small entities are allocated to other materials
licensees and to power reactors. However, the amount that must be
recovered from other licensees as a result of maintaining the
maximum annual fee is not expected to increase significantly.
Therefore, the NRC is continuing for FY 1999, the maximum annual fee
(base annual fee plus surcharge) for certain small entities at
$1,800 for each fee category covered by each license issued to a
small entity.
While reducing the impact on many small entities, the Commission
agrees that the maximum annual fee of $1,800 for small entities,
when added to the Part 170 license fees, may continue to have a
significant impact on materials licensees with annual gross receipts
in the thousands of dollars. Therefore, as in each year since 1992,
the NRC is continuing the lower-tier small entity annual fee of $400
for small entities with relatively low gross annual receipts. The
lower-tier small entity fee of $400 also applies to manufacturing
concerns, and educational institutions not State or publicly
supported, with less than 35 employees. Therefore, even though the
rebaselined annual fees will result in increased annual fees charged
to several categories of materials licensees, licensees who qualify
as small entities will not be adversely affected.
III. Summary
The NRC has determined that the 10 CFR Part 171 annual fees
significantly impact a substantial number of small entities. A
maximum fee for small entities strikes a balance between the
requirement to collect 100 percent of the NRC budget and the
requirement to consider means of reducing the impact of the fee on
small entities. On the basis of its regulatory flexibility analyses,
the NRC concludes that a maximum annual fee of $1,800 for small
entities and a lower-tier small entity annual fee of $400 for small
businesses and not-for-profit organizations with gross annual
receipts of less than $350,000, small governmental jurisdictions
with a population of less than 20,000, small manufacturing entities
that have less than 35 employees and educational institutions that
are not State or publicly supported and have less than 35 employees
reduces the impact on small entities. At the same time, these
reduced annual fees are consistent with the objectives of OBRA-90.
Thus, the fees for small entities maintain a balance between the
objectives of OBRA-90 and the RFA. Therefore, the analysis and
conclusions established in previous fee rules remain valid for FY
1999.
Attachment 1 to Appendix A--U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Small
Entity Compliance Guide, Fiscal Year 1999
Contents
Introduction
NRC Definition of Small Entity
NRC Small Entity Fees
Instructions for Completing NRC Form 526
Introduction
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996
(SBREFA) requires all Federal agencies to prepare a written guide
for each ``major'' final rule as defined by the Act. The NRC's fee
rule, published annually to comply with the Omnibus Budget
Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA-90) which requires the NRC to
collect approximately 100 percent of its budget authority each year
through fees, is considered a ``major'' rule under this law. This
compliance guide has been prepared to assist NRC material licensees
in complying with the FY 1999 fee rule.
Licensees may use this guide to determine whether they qualify
as a small entity under NRC regulations and are eligible to pay
reduced FY 1999 annual fees assessed under 10 CFR Part 171. The NRC
has established two tiers of separate annual fees for those
materials licensees who qualify as small entities under NRC's size
standards.
Licensees who meet NRC's size standards for a small entity must
complete NRC Form 526 to qualify for the reduced annual fee. This
form accompanies each annual fee invoice mailed to materials
licensees. The completed form, the appropriate small entity fee, and
the payment copy of the invoice, should be mailed to the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, License Fee and Accounts Receivable
Branch, to the address indicated on the invoice. Failure to file a
small entity certification in a timely manner may result in the
denial of any refund that might otherwise be due.
NRC Definition of Small Entity
The NRC has defined a small entity for purposes of compliance
with its regulations (10 CFR 2.810) as follows:
1. Small business--a for-profit concern that provides a service
or a concern not engaged in manufacturing with average gross
receipts of $5 million or less over its last 3 completed fiscal
years;
2. Manufacturing industry--a manufacturing concern with an
average number of 500 or fewer employees based upon employment
during each pay period for the preceding 12 calendar months;
3. Small organization--a not-for-profit organization which is
independently owned and operated and has annual gross receipts of $5
million or less;
4. Small governmental jurisdiction--a government of a city,
county, town, township, village, school district or special district
with a population of less than 50,000;
5. Small educational institution--an educational institution
supported by a qualifying small governmental jurisdiction, or one
that is not state or publicly supported and has 500 or fewer
employees.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ An educational institution referred to in the size standards
is an entity whose primary function is education, whose programs are
accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or
association, who is legally authorized to provide a program of
organized instruction or study, who provides an educational program
for which it awards academic degrees, and whose educational programs
are available to the public.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NRC Small Entity Fees
In 10 CFR 171.16 (c), the NRC has established two tiers of
small-entity fees for licensees that qualify under the NRC's size
standards. Currently, these fees are as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maximum annual
fee per
licensed
category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Small Business Not Engaged in Manufacturing and Small
Not-For Profit Organizations (Gross Annual Receipts):
$350,000 to $5 million.............................. $1,800
Less than $350,000.................................. 400
Manufacturing entities that have an average of 500
employees or less:
35 to 500 employees................................. 1,800
Less than 35 employees.............................. 400
Small Governmental Jurisdictions (Including publicly
supported educational institutions) (Population):
[[Page 31483]]
20,000 to 50,000.................................... 1,800
Less than 20,000.................................... 400
Educational Institutions that are not State or Publicly
Supported, and have 500 Employees or Less
35 to 500 employees................................. 1,800
Less than 35 employees.............................. 400
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To pay a reduced annual fee, a licensee must use NRC Form 526,
enclosed with the annual fee invoice, to certify that it meets NRC's
size standards for a small entity. Failure to file NRC Form 526 in a
timely manner may result in the denial of any refund that might
otherwise be due.
Instructions for Completing NRC Form 526
1. File a separate NRC Form 526 for each annual fee invoice
received.
2. Complete all items on NRC Form 526 as follows:
a. The license number and invoice number must be entered exactly
as they appear on the annual fee invoice.
b. The Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) Code should be
entered if it is known.
c. The licensee's name and address must be entered as they
appear on the invoice. Name and/or address changes for billing
purposes must be annotated on the invoice. Correcting the name and/
or address on NRC Form 526 or on the invoice does not constitute a
request to amend the license. Any request to amend a license is to
be submitted to the respective licensing staffs in the NRC Regional
or Headquarters Offices.
d. Check the appropriate size standard under which the licensee
qualifies as a small entity. Check one box only. Note the following:
(1) The size standards apply to the licensee, not the individual
authorized users listed in the license.
(2) Gross annual receipts as used in the size standards includes
all revenue in whatever form received or accrued from whatever
sources, not solely receipts from licensed activities. There are
limited exceptions as set forth at 13 CFR 121.104. These are: the
term receipts excludes net capital gains or losses, taxes collected
for and remitted to a taxing authority if included in gross or total
income, proceeds from the transactions between a concern and its
domestic or foreign affiliates (if also excluded from gross or total
income on a consolidated return filed with the IRS), and amounts
collected for another by a travel agent, real estate agent,
advertising agent, or conference management service provider.
(3) A licensee who is a subsidiary of a large entity does not
qualify as a small entity.
(4) The owner of the entity, or an official empowered to act on
behalf of the entity, must sign and date the small entity
certification.
The NRC sends invoices to its licensees for the full annual fee,
even though some entities qualify for reduced fees as a small
entity. Licensees who qualify as a small entity and file NRC Form
526, which certifies eligibility for small entity fees, may pay the
reduced fee, which for a full year is either $1,800 or $400
depending on the size of the entity, for each fee category shown on
the invoice. Licensees granted a license during the first six months
of the fiscal year and licensees who file for termination or for a
possession only license and permanently cease licensed activities
during the first six months of the fiscal year pay only 50 percent
of the annual fee for that year. Such an invoice states the ``Amount
Billed Represents 50% Proration.'' This means the amount due from a
small entity is not the prorated amount shown on the invoice but
rather one-half of the maximum annual fee shown on NRC Form 526 for
the size standard under which the licensee qualifies, resulting in a
fee of either $900 or $200 for each fee category billed instead of
the full small entity annual fee of $1,800 or $400.
A new small entity form (NRC Form 526) must be filed with the
NRC each fiscal year to qualify for reduced fees for that fiscal
year. Because a licensee's ``size,'' or the size standards, may
change from year to year, the invoice reflects the full fee and a
new Form must be completed and returned for the fee to be reduced to
the small entity fee. Licensees will not be issued a new invoice for
the reduced amount. The completed NRC Form 526, the payment of the
appropriate small entity fee, and the ``Payment Copy `` of the
invoice should be mailed to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
License Fee and Accounts Receivable Branch at the address indicated
on the invoice.
If you have questions about the NRC's annual fees, please call
the license fee staff at 301-415-7554, e-mail the fee staff at
fees@nrc.gov, or write to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555, Attention: Office of the Chief Financial
Officer.
False certification of small entity status could result in civil
sanctions being imposed by the NRC under the Program Fraud Civil
Remedies Act, 31 U.S.C. 3801 et. seq. NRC's implementing regulations
are found at 10 CFR Part 13.
[FR Doc. 99-14697 Filed 6-9-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
