Revision of Fee Schedules; Fee Recovery for FY 2006, 30722-30759 [06-4815]
Download as PDF
30722
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
papers may also be examined at the
NRC Public Document Room, Room O–
1F22. One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852–
2738. The PDR reproduction contractor
will copy documents for a fee.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Tammy Croote, telephone 301–415–
6041; Office of the Chief Financial
Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
10 CFR Parts 170 and 171
RIN 3150–AH83
Revision of Fee Schedules; Fee
Recovery for FY 2006
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
AGENCY:
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 requires that the
NRC recover approximately 90 percent
of its budget authority in fiscal year (FY)
2006, less the amounts appropriated
from the Nuclear Waste Fund (NWF)
and for Waste Incidental to
Reprocessing (WIR) activities. The
required fee recovery amount for the FY
2006 budget is approximately $624
million, which is increased by
approximately $0.9 million to account
for billing adjustments, resulting in a
total of approximately $625 million that
must be recovered through fees in FY
2006.
DATES: Effective Date: July 31, 2006.
ADDRESSES: The comments received and
the NRC’s work papers that support
these final changes to 10 CFR parts 170
and 171 are available electronically at
the NRC’s Public Electronic Reading
Room on the Internet at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. From this site, the public
can gain entry into the NRC’s
Agencywide Documents Access and
Management System (ADAMS), which
provides text and image files of NRC’s
public documents. For more
information, contact the NRC Public
Document Room (PDR) Reference staff
at 1–800–397–4209, or 301–415–4737,
or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. If you do
not have access to ADAMS or if there
are problems in accessing the
documents located in ADAMS, contact
the PDR.
Comments received may also be
viewed via the NRC’s interactive
rulemaking Web site (https://
ruleforum.llnl.gov). This site provides
the ability to upload comments as files
(any format), if your web browser
supports that function. For information
about the interactive rulemaking site,
contact Ms. Carol Gallagher, 301–415–
5905; e-mail CAG@nrc.gov.
For a period of 90 days after the
effective date of this final rule, the work
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. Response 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
For FYs 1991 through 2000, OBRA–90
(Pub. L. 101–508), as amended, required
that the NRC recover approximately 100
percent of its budget authority, less the
amount appropriated from the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE)
administered NWF, by assessing fees.
To address fairness and equity concerns
related to charging NRC license holders
for agency budgeted costs that do not
provide a direct benefit to the licensee,
the FY 2001 Energy and Water
Development Appropriations Act (Pub.
L. 106–377) amended OBRA–90 to
decrease the NRC’s fee recovery amount
by 2 percent per year beginning in FY
2001, until the fee recovery amount was
90 percent in FY 2005. The FY 2006
Energy and Water Development
Appropriations Act (EWDAA) (Pub. L.
109–103), as amended by the
Department of Defense, Emergency
Supplemental Appropriations to
Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of
Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act,
2006 (Pub. L. 109–148), extended this
90 percent fee recovery requirement
through FY 2006. As a result, the NRC
is required to recover approximately 90
percent of its FY 2006 budget authority,
less the amounts appropriated from the
NWF and for WIR activities, through
fees. The required fee recovery amount
for the FY 2006 budget is approximately
$624 million, which is increased by
approximately $0.9 million to account
for billing adjustments, resulting in a
total of approximately $625 million that
must be recovered through fees in FY
2006.
The NRC assesses two types of fees to
meet the requirements of OBRA–90, as
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
amended. First, license and inspection
fees, established in 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 special
benefits to identifiable applicants and
licensees. Examples of the services
provided by the NRC for which these
fees are assessed are the review of
applications for new licenses and, for
certain types of existing licenses, the
review of renewal applications, the
review of amendment requests, and
inspections. Second, annual fees
established in 10 CFR part 171 under
the authority of OBRA–90, as amended,
recover generic and other regulatory
costs not otherwise recovered through
10 CFR part 170 fees.
The amount of the NRC’s required fee
collections are set by law and are
therefore outside the scope of this
rulemaking. In FY 2006, the NRC’s total
fee recoverable budget increased by
$83.4 million from FY 2005 in response
to increased workload. As such, most
annual fees increased. The budget,
including the increases, was allocated to
the fee classes that the budgeted
activities support. As discussed in more
detail below, another factor affecting the
amount of annual fees for each fee class
is the estimated collection under part
170.
Additional factors will affect the
NRC’s required fee recovery in future
years. For example, the Energy Policy
Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109–58)
permanently extends the 90 percent fee
recovery requirement beginning in FY
2007. The Energy Policy Act also
permanently removes certain homeland
security activities from the fee base
beginning in FY 2007. Section 637 states
that the NRC will not recover in fees:
(iv) amounts appropriated to the
Commission for homeland security activities
of the Commission for the fiscal year, except
for the costs of fingerprinting and
background checks required by section 149 of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C.
2169) and the costs of conducting security
inspections.
Under this legislative requirement,
the budgeted resources for all generic
homeland security activities (those
activities that support an entire license
fee class or classes of licensees, such as
rulemakings, guidance development,
and vulnerability assessments) will be
removed from the fee base beginning
with the FY 2007 fee rulemaking. Under
the NRC’s authority under the IOAA,
the NRC will continue to bill under part
170 for all licensee-specific homeland
security-related services provided,
including security inspections and
security plan reviews. This legislative
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
change will provide fee relief for NRC
licensees. However, the net change in
annual fees in FY 2007 will also depend
on other factors, especially the amount
of the NRC’s FY 2007 appropriated
budget and the allocation of these
resources to the license fee classes and
surcharge categories (surcharge
categories include the resources
associated with activities for which the
NRC does not charge fees, as described
in more detail in Section III of this
document), as well as any other policy
decisions of the Commission.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
II. Response to Comments
The NRC published the FY 2006
proposed fee rule on February 10, 2006
(71 FR 7350) to solicit public comment
on its proposed revisions to 10 CFR
parts 170 and 171. The NRC received
three comments dated on or before the
close of the comment period (March 13,
2006) and four additional comments
thereafter, for a total of seven comments
that were considered in this fee
rulemaking. The comments have been
grouped by issues and are addressed in
a collective response.
A. Information Provided by NRC in
Support of Proposed Rule
Comment. Several commenters
requested a more detailed explanation
of significant fee increases. These
comments requested that the NRC
provide licensees and the public with a
reasonably detailed listing of the major
activities and their associated impact on
the fees. These commenters expressed
concern that the information provided
to support the proposed rule was not
adequate to allow for the full evaluation
and comment on the proposed fee rule.
While these comments acknowledged
the availability of the work papers that
provided information on the FY 2006
budget, they requested NRC provide an
itemized accounting of the major
elements that comprise the annual
assessment under part 171, including a
detailed description of the major
contracts currently outstanding. One set
of comments set forth 26 specific
questions on why budgeted resources
increased from FY 2005 to FY 2006 in
a number of areas. One comment stated
that while the proposed rule stated that
the FY 2006 included budget increases
for new plant licensing and security, no
information was available that would
allow for the identification of the
contribution of either security or new
plant licensing toward the fee increase.
These commenters further stated that
industry’s ability to evaluate the NRC’s
application of resources and priorities is
impeded because the NRC allocated 70
percent of its recoverable budget to the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
generic assessment under part 171,
while only 30 percent is recovered
under the discrete fee provisions of part
170. One commenter stated that there
was an expectation that generic fees
would be reduced as new plant
applications are filed and costs are
charged directly to an applicant under
part 170.
Response. Consistent with the
requirements of OBRA–90, as amended,
the purpose of this rulemaking is to
establish fees necessary to recover 90
percent of the NRC’s FY 2006 budget
authority, less the amounts appropriated
from the NWF and for WIR activities,
from applicants and the various classes
of NRC licensees. As with each year’s
fee rulemaking, the FY 2006 proposed
fee rule described the types of activities
included in the proposed fees and
explained how the fees were calculated
to recover the budgeted costs for those
activities. Additional summary
calculations were provided in the FY
2006 proposed fee rule: For each fee
class, a table was presented showing the
aggregate calculations (e.g., total
budgeted resources and estimated part
170 collections). For each fee class,
there was also a summary explanation
provided for the changes in fees and
budgeted resources.
In addition to the information
provided in the proposed rule, the
supporting work papers were available
for public examination in ADAMS and,
during the 30-day comment period, in
the NRC Public Document Room at One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, MD. The work papers
show the total budgeted full time
equivalent (FTE) and contract budgeted
resources at the planned activity level
for all agency activities. These papers
present an itemized accounting of all
the budgeted resources included in the
fees, at the lowest level of detail
available agency-wide. The papers
included extensive information
detailing the allocation of the budgeted
costs for each planned activity within
each program to the various classes of
licenses, as well as information on
categories of budgeted costs included in
the hourly rates.
Also to assist commenters, the NRC
made available NUREG–1100, Volume
21, ‘‘Performance Budget: Fiscal Year
2006’’ (February 2005), which discusses
the NRC’s budget for FY 2006, including
the activities to be performed in each
program. This document is available on
the NRC public Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html. The
extensive information available
provided the public with sufficient
information on how NRC calculated the
proposed fees. Additionally, the contact
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
30723
listed in the proposed fee rule was
available during the public comment
period to answer any questions that
commenters had on the development of
the proposed fees. Therefore, the NRC
believes that ample information was
available on which to base constructive
comments on the proposed revisions to
parts 170 and 171 and that its fee
schedule development is a transparent
process.
In the FY 2006 proposed fee rule work
papers, the NRC improved the
organization of some of the reports to
allow for increased transparency. For
example, a separate document was
created for each fee class and surcharge
category to show the budget allocations
for FY 2006 and FY 2005 at the planned
activity level, thereby making it easier to
see the reasons for any fee changes
between FY 2006 and FY 2005.
Accordingly, the proposed rule showed
the total value of budgeted resources
allocated to a fee class and described the
major reasons for any fee change(s), and
the supporting work papers clearly set
forth the changes in budgeted resources
for each class at the planned activity
level for both FTE and contract dollars.
For example, the proposed fee rule
stated that the power reactor annual fee
increased due to an increase in
budgeted resources for activities such as
regulatory infrastructure for new reactor
licensing activities (other examples
were also provided). The work papers
showed that the budgeted resources for
that planned activity increased by
approximately 42 FTE and $2.9 million
in FY 2006, as compared to FY 2005.
In response to the comments with
numerous detailed questions requesting
information on why the budget
increased for certain planned activities
from FY 2005 to FY 2006, or requesting
additional information on the use of
resources under a specific planned
activity, the NRC notes again that the
purpose of this rulemaking is to
establish fees to recover most of the
NRC’s budget, as required by OBRA–90,
as amended. The NRC’s budget and the
manner in which the NRC carries out its
activities are not within the scope of
this rulemaking. The NRC’s budget is
submitted to the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) and Congress for
review and approval. The Congressional
budget process involves meetings,
testimony, press briefings, etc. The
Congressionally-approved budget
resulting from this process reflects the
resources deemed necessary for NRC to
carry out its statutory obligations.
The purpose of the FY 2006 fee
rulemaking, as with prior year fee
rulemakings, is to establish fees in a fair
and transparent manner to recover the
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
30724
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
required portion of the NRC’s budget.
As such, the purpose of these rules is
not to justify the use or need for current
year budgeted resources, but to describe
and take comment on the allocation of
these resources for fee calculation and
purposes. For example, the rule and
supporting work papers are not
intended to justify why the budgeted
resources for a given planned activity
increased by a particular percentage.
(Note, however, the Performance Budget
for each fiscal year does provide the
objectives of the budget and how it
supports the agency’s Strategic Plan
goals and strategies, and this
justification is part of the Congressional
approval and Executive Branch review
process.) The rule and work papers
show the value of the approved
budgeted resources, and most
importantly for fee calculation
purposes, the fee classes and surcharge
categories to which these resources are
allocated. As mentioned previously, the
work papers provide this information at
the lowest level of detail available at the
agency-level, which is by planned
activity.
Regarding the comments that
expressed concern that too much of the
NRC’s budget was designated for
recovery under part 171, as discussed in
previous fee rulemakings, the NRC is
not at liberty to allocate fees
indiscriminately between parts 170 and
171, because fee allocation is controlled
by statute. The NRC assesses part 170
fees under the IOAA, consistent with
implementing OMB Circular A–25,
‘‘User Charges,’’ to recover the costs
incurred from each identifiable
recipient for special benefits derived
from Federal activities beyond those
received by the general public. Generic
costs that do not provide special
benefits to identifiable recipients cannot
be recovered under part 170. Further,
the NRC notes that, as required by
OBRA–90, as amended, the part 171
annual fee recovery amounts are offset
by the estimated part 170 fee
collections. The NRC’s work papers
clearly set forth the components of these
generic costs and how those costs are
recovered through annual fees.
Additionally, the NRC notes that it has
taken action to maximize the amount
recovered under part 170, consistent
with existing law and agency policy. For
example, in FY 1998 the NRC began
charging part 170 fees for all resident
inspectors’ time (63 FR 31840; June 10,
1998) and in FY 1999 the NRC started
charging part 170 fees for all project
manager activities associated with
oversight of the assigned license or
plant (64 FR 31448; June 10, 1999). In
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
FY 2003, the NRC amended its
regulations to allow the NRC to recover
costs associated with contested hearings
on licensing actions involving U.S.
Government national security initiatives
through part 170 fees assessed to the
affected applicant or licensee (67 FR
64033; October 17, 2002). Included
under this provision are activities
involving the fabrication and use of
mixed oxide fuel. Additionally,
beginning with the FY 2005 fee rule (70
FR 30526; May 26, 2005), the NRC
revised its hourly rate calculation
formula to better reflect actual agency
costs, resulting in higher hourly rates.
These higher hourly rates increased fee
recovery under part 170.
Similarly, in response to the comment
that reactor generic fees should be
reduced as new plant applications are
filed and costs are charged directly to an
applicant under part 170, the
Commission notes that it recovers (and
will continue to recover) the costs of all
specific work relating to the review of
new reactor or design applications and
pre-application activities through part
170 fees. For example, the FY 1999
policy that established part 170 fee
recovery for all project managers
assigned to a license or plant, applies to
project managers assigned to new
reactor applications and pre-application
reviews. All other specific activities for
these reviews are also recovered through
part 170 fees. This part 170 fee recovery
reduces the amount of budgeted
resources that must be recovered
through annual fees to reactor licensees.
B. Specific Part 170 Issues
1. Hourly Fees
Comment. Several commenters
expressed concerns about the increases
in the NRC’s hourly rates associated
with the proposed changes to 10 CFR
170.20. These commenters noted that
the increases exceeded the rate of
inflation, and requested the NRC
investigate ways to reduce the hourly
fees.
Response. The NRC’s hourly rates are
based on budgeted costs and must be
established each year to meet the NRC’s
fee recovery requirements. As discussed
in the proposed fee rule, the increases
to the Nuclear Reactor Safety (Reactor)
Program and Nuclear Materials and
Waste Safety (Materials) Program rates
are due to the recent Government-wide
pay raise and the more accurate
allocation of agency overhead to these
programs and fee-exempt activities. The
hourly rates are calculated to recover all
of the budgeted costs supporting the
services provided under part 170,
including all programmatic and agency
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
overhead, consistent with the full cost
recovery concept emphasized in OMB’s
Circular A–25, ‘‘User Charges.’’ The
NRC did not receive any comments on
ways to revise the hourly rate
calculation methodology, and notes that
other comments, on this fee rulemaking
and others, have consistently supported
the NRC in its efforts to collect more of
its budget through part 170 fees-forservices vs. part 171 annual fees.
Therefore, the NRC is retaining the
hourly rate formula as presented in the
FY 2006 proposed fee rule. This results
in hourly rates of $217 for the Reactor
Program, and $214 for the Materials
Program. The NRC recognizes that the
higher hourly rates will have a greater
impact on licensees that receive more
part 170 services, but believes this is
appropriate because the new rates more
accurately reflect the costs of providing
these services.
2. Invoice Information
Comment. Several commenters stated
that the Commission should continue its
efforts to provide invoices that contain
more meaningful descriptions of the
work done by staff and especially
contractors. These comments stated that
in the private sector, adequate
explanations, dates and times are
provided to clients for clients to fully
understand the work performed. One
commenter stated that if the agency
performs a large amount of work on a
submittal from a single licensee, billings
should be frequent so that a licensee is
better able to track costs.
Response. The NRC appreciates the
comments on this topic, and believes
that sufficient information is provided
to licensees or applicants on which to
base payment of invoices. The NRC’s
invoices for full-cost licensing actions
and inspections contain details such as
the type of service for which the costs
are being billed, the name of the person
or contractor performing the service, the
date range the service was performed,
the number of professional staff-hours
expended in providing the service, the
hourly rate, and the contractual costs
incurred. These costs are billed
quarterly, which the NRC believes is an
adequate frequency to track and pay for
these costs. Additionally, a licensee or
applicant who does not understand the
charges, or who would like more
information to interpret the bill, may
request additional information from the
NRC regarding the specific bill in
question. The NRC will provide all
available data used to support the bill in
response to this type of request.
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
3. Part 170 Fees to Federal Agencies
Comment. One commenter supported
the Commission’s proposal to charge
Federal agencies for specific services
provided by the NRC, agreeing that it is
fair and appropriate to assess these fees
to Federal agencies in the same manner
as other NRC licensees.
Response. The NRC appreciates the
support for this proposal, and is
enacting this policy change in this
rulemaking, as described in more detail
in Section III.A.3.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
C. Specific Part 171 Issues
1. Annual Fees for Uranium Recovery
Licensees
Comment. The NRC received four
comments objecting to the large increase
in the annual fees for uranium recovery
licensees. Some of these commenters
expressed concerns that the FY 2006
proposed fee structure appears to
unfairly discriminate against the
uranium recovery section by imposing a
120 percent increase in annual fees, and
requested that any required fee increase
be similar to increases for other classes
of licensees. Some commenters stated
that there continues to be a lack of a
reasonable relationship between the cost
to uranium recovery licensees of NRC’s
regulatory program and the benefit
derived from these services.
Additionally, some commenters stated
that the NRC needs to address the issue
of decreasing numbers of uranium
recovery licensees. Specifically, the
concern was raised that as more states
become Agreement States and/or
additional sites are decommissioned,
the number of NRC regulated sites
continues to decline, leaving fewer
licensees to pay a larger share of the
NRC’s regulatory costs.
Some of these commenters
acknowledged that the reallocation of
existing FTE to uranium recovery
licensing and inspection activities from
other activities may be warranted,
considering market forces and expected
licensing activities. These commenters
stated that fee increases might be more
acceptable if they were accompanied by
more timely licensing actions, but some
commenters expressed concerns that
there are still too few NRC staff on
uranium recovery issues, and some of
these staff are relatively new to the field.
Some commenters also stated that the
continued existence of remaining
uranium recovery facilities is in the
public interest given the renewed
interest in nuclear power, and stated
that large fee increases for these
facilities is not in the public interest.
These commenters noted a previous
Commission comment which indicated
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
the existence of a uranium recovery
facility was in the public interest. One
commenter noted that the increased fees
and uncertainty of the timely review of
licensing actions makes it difficult for
licensees to manage costs, which could
create a chilling effect on the
development of new domestic uranium
recovery facilities.
Response. The NRC acknowledges
that the FY 2006 uranium recovery
annual fee of $65,900 is significantly
higher than the annual fees charged to
these facilities in FYs 2005 and 2004.
(For FYs 2005 and 2004, the NRC
overestimated the part 170 collections it
would receive from uranium recovery
facilities, which resulted in lower part
171 annual fees.) However, the FY 2006
uranium recovery annual fee amount is
more similar to the annual fee amounts
for FYs 2001 through 2003, when, for
example, the annual fee for
conventional mills ranged from
approximately $53,000 to $111,000.
Annual fees fluctuate from year to year
based on a number of factors, including
the budgeted resources for a license fee
class. Additionally, because annual fees
must recover all fee class resources not
recovered through part 170 fees, annual
fees are impacted by the part 170 fees
collected from that fee class.
As explained in the proposed rule, the
higher FY 2006 annual fee for uranium
recovery licensees reflects an increase in
budgeted resources for this fee class.
The NRC appreciates the
acknowledgment that this budget
change may be warranted to support
uranium recovery licensees. In response
to the concern about the NRC’s staffing
of uranium recovery issues and the
timeliness of the review of licensing
actions, these issues are outside the
scope of this rulemaking. However, as
noted in the FY 2005 final fee rule (70
FR 30526; May 26, 2005), the NRC does
consider market forces and expected
future licensing activities in formulating
its budget, and has a human resources
program in place to address future
agency skill needs.
In response to concerns regarding
decreasing numbers of NRC licensees in
light of more states becoming
Agreement States, the NRC notes the
concerns that the ‘‘last NRC licensee’’
may have to pay for the cost of the
entire uranium recovery program are
unfounded because the NRC’s fee
calculation methodology considers the
percentage of uranium recovery
licensees in Agreement States in
establishing fees for the uranium
recovery fee class. As explained in the
FY 2005 final fee rule, the budgeted
resources providing support to
Agreement States or their licensees are
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
30725
included in total surcharge costs, which
are offset by non-fee recovery funding
provided by Congress. For example, if
the NRC develops a rule, guidance
document, or database or other tracking
system, that is associated with or
otherwise benefits Agreement State
licensees, the costs of these activities are
prorated to the surcharge according to
the percentage of licensees in that fee
class in Agreement States (e.g., if 50
percent of uranium recovery licensees
are in Agreement States, 50 percent of
these regulatory infrastructure costs are
included in the surcharge). Total
surcharge costs are reduced by the fee
relief (i.e., direct appropriations from
the General Treasury) provided by
Congress. To address fairness and equity
concerns associated with licensees
paying for the cost of activities that do
not directly benefit them, as noted
previously, the FY 2001 Energy and
Water Development Appropriations Act
amended OBRA–90 to decrease the
NRC’s fee recovery amount by two
percent per year beginning in FY 2001,
until the fee recovery amount was 90
percent in FY 2005. To the extent that
this fee relief is insufficient to cover all
surcharge costs, these remaining
surcharge costs are spread to all
licensees based on their percentage of
the budget. (Note generic
decommissioning costs for the materials
program are also included in the
surcharge.)
In FY 2006, $3.5 million of the $72.8
million in total surcharge costs was not
covered by the 10 percent fee relief, and
therefore is included in licensees’
annual fees. Eighty-four percent (the
percentage of the budget associated with
reactors) of the $3.5 million in net
surcharge costs is included in reactor
annual fees, and the remainder is spread
to all other licensees’ annual fees.
Accordingly, NRC’s uranium recovery
licensees are not generally burdened
with the costs of regulating Agreement
State licensees or any other costs not
associated with uranium recovery
licensees (only to the extent that a small
portion of these costs are spread to all
licensees through the net surcharge). In
FY 2006, the total surcharge cost
allocated to the entire uranium recovery
class is approximately $13,000. Because
DOE is charged 50 percent of the total
surcharge cost (as well as 50 percent of
all generic resources associated with the
uranium recovery fee class) for its
UMTRCA Title I licensees, consistent
with the methodology adopted in the FY
2002 final fee rule (67 FR 42612; June
24, 2002), this leaves approximately
$6,500 in total surcharge costs allocated
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
30726
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
to NRC Title II program licensees that
are subject to annual fees.
This means about $1,300 of the
$65,900 FY 2006 annual fee per
uranium recovery license is attributable
to activities that do not directly benefit
these uranium recovery licensees. The
remainder of the annual fee reflects the
budgeted resources associated with the
regulation of NRC’s uranium recovery
licensees, as shown in the detailed work
papers made available to support the
proposed rulemaking. As such, the NRC
believes there is a strong relationship
between the cost to uranium recovery
licensees of NRC’s regulatory program
and the benefit derived from this
program.
The NRC acknowledges that license
fee classes with fewer licensees are
more impacted by changes to the budget
and changes to part 170 collections. The
uranium recovery fee class was reduced
by four licensees (two of which paid
annual fees) in FY 2005 because
regulatory responsibility for these
licensees was transferred to the State of
Utah in accordance with an Agreement
under Section 274 of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, as amended, effective
August 16, 2004. There are currently six
uranium recovery licensees, including a
license for the DOE, paying for the
generic and other regulatory costs
associated with the regulation of the
NRC’s uranium recovery licensees.
Because annual fees must recover
budgeted resources for a fee class not
recovered through part 170 fees, to the
extent that part 170 fees do not
completely recover the costs of
budgeted resources for part 170
activities, these costs are included in
annual fees. The fewer the licensees, the
larger the impact this has on the annual
fee per license. (Because these budgeted
resources are for site-specific inspection
and licensing activities, they are not
prorated to the surcharge category of
Agreement State Regulatory Support
because the resources are budgeted for
the purpose of supporting only NRC
licensees.) The NRC does note that the
increases to hourly rates enacted
through this rulemaking will enable the
agency to recover more of the budgeted
resources for licensee-specific activities,
and once implemented, will reduce
costs that must be recovered through
annual fees.
In response to comments about the
existence of uranium recovery facilities
being in the public interest, and the
potential economic consequences of fees
on this industry, the NRC notes it has
addressed similar comments in previous
fee rulemakings. The NRC has stated
since FY 1991, when the 100 percent fee
recovery requirement was first
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
implemented, that it recognizes the
assessment of fees to recover the
agency’s costs may result in a
substantial financial hardship for some
licensees. However, consistent with the
OBRA–90, as amended, requirement
that annual fees must have, to the
maximum extent practicable, a
reasonable relationship to the cost of
providing regulatory services, the NRC’s
annual fees for each class of licensee
reflect the NRC’s budgeted cost of its
regulatory services to the class. The
NRC determines the budgeted costs to
be allocated to each class of licensee
through a comprehensive review of
every planned activity in each of the
agency’s major program areas.
Furthermore, a reduction in the fees
assessed to one class of licensees would
require a corresponding increase in the
fees assessed to other classes.
Accordingly, the NRC has not based its
annual fees on licensees’ economic
status, market conditions, or potential
economic consequences. Instead, the
NRC has only considered the impacts
that it is required to address by law.
While the NRC acknowledges the
previous Commission comment about
the existence of a uranium recovery
facility being in the public interest, this
does not negate the NRC’s legal
obligation to collect fees to recover the
costs of regulating uranium recovery
facilities.
2. Annual Fees for Fuel Facilities
Licensees
Comment. One commenter expressed
concern over the increase in annual fees
for fee category 2.A.1, UF6 conversion
facilities. The commenter expressed
concern that the fee increase was not
explained in sufficient detail. In
particular, the commenter did not
believe the changes in the fuel facility
fee matrix (i.e., the value of the effort
factors for fee category 2.A.1) were
explained in enough detail to allow for
informed public comment. This
commenter also stated that any fees for
future 10 CFR part 40 or conversion
facility rulemakings not be allocated to
fee category 2.A.1.
Response. The NRC established the
methodology for calculating annual fees
for individual fuel facilities through
public notice and comment rulemaking
(64 FR 31448; June 10, 1999), and the
FY 2006 fee rulemaking uses this same
methodology. This methodology
establishes that the total budgeted
resources for fuel facilities are allocated
to individual fuel facility fee categories
based on the effort/fee determination
matrix. This methodology was also
described in detail in the FY 2006
proposed fee rule. In addition, the
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
publicly available work papers for the
FY 2006 proposed rule provided
detailed information on the FTE and
contract resources for each planned
activity that were allocated to the fuel
facility fee class. The work papers also
provided information on all the values
of the effort factors used in the fuel
facility matrix for FY 2006.
As noted in the FY 2006 proposed fee
rule, the NRC revised the effort factors
for the UF6 conversion facility to better
reflect the effort level associated with
safeguards activities such as interim
compensatory measures (ICMs). In
response to the commenter’s request for
additional detailed information on the
basis of the values of the effort factors,
the NRC notes that before September 11,
2001, this UF6 conversion facility had a
‘0’ for safeguards and security based on
the fact that the facility had no security
plan with the NRC. Shortly after
September 11, 2001, NRC issued an
Order to this facility requiring it to
implement interim security upgrades.
When the NRC performed security
assessments and reviewed
implementation of the ICMs in 2004,
NRC determined (1) this UF6 conversion
facility needed to maintain additional
security measures as part of its baseline
program, and (2) NRC needed to
perform routine oversight of the security
program including licensing review of
security measures, inclusion of security
measures in the license as part of
license renewal, and routine inspection
of security programs. Therefore, based
on the new routine level of NRC effort
for this facility, its score increased from
‘0’ to ‘5’ in the matrix used for the FY
2006 fee rule, which is ‘rebaselined’
each year based on the most recent
assessment by the program and
technical experts responsible for the
regulation of these facilities. Note that
because of the timing of the fee rule
each year, the fuel facility fee matrix
represents a ‘snapshot’ of expected
effort levels at the beginning of the fiscal
year. Therefore, a change in effort level
that occurs after that ‘snapshot’ may not
be reflected until the next year.
Finally, in response to the comment
that any fees for future part 40 or
conversion facility rulemakings not be
allocated to fee category 2.A.1, the
Commission notes that it approved the
initiation of a part 40 rulemaking on
ground water protection at in situ leach
uranium recovery facilities on March
24, 2006 (see Staff Requirements
Memorandum—COMJSM–06–0001—
Regulation of Groundwater Protection at
In Situ Leach Uranium Extraction
Facilities; ML060830525). (While this is
a part 40 rulemaking, it relates to
uranium recovery facilities, not UF6 or
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
other fuel facilities.) In the referenced
Staff Requirements Memorandum, the
Commission stated, ‘‘The staff should
plan on covering the costs of this
rulemaking not through part 171 fees for
existing uranium recovery licensees, but
instead through the surcharge, which is
assessed to all NRC licensees paying
part 171 fees.’’ As such, in the FY 2007
proposed fee rulemaking, the staff plans
to propose to recover the costs of this
rule through the surcharge. Note that the
part 40 rulemaking was not budgeted for
in FY 2006, and therefore there is no
adjustment to the FY 2006 fees to reflect
the fee recovery of that rulemaking
through the surcharge. Additionally,
there were no other part 40 or
conversion facility rulemakings
budgeted for in FY 2006, and therefore,
the FY 2006 annual fee for the UF6
conversion facility does not include any
resources for these activities. The NRC
will address the fee recovery of any
other rulemakings that may be budgeted
for in future years through its future
year fee rulemakings.
3. Elimination of Fee Payment
Exception for Uranium Recovery
Licensees
Comment. Several commenters
requested that the quarterly payment
provisions for uranium recovery remain
in effect, and that the NRC not begin
billing these licensees annually. One
commenter stated that quarterly
payments allow licensees to better
allocate budgetary outlays.
Response. While the NRC appreciates
the concerns raised by the commenters,
the NRC believes that there is
insufficient justification for retaining
the fee payment exception for Title II
uranium recovery facilities, only. As
discussed in the proposed rule, the NRC
currently bills licensees’ part 171 fees
annually if their annual fees are less
than $100,000, and quarterly if their
annual fees are $100,000 or more.
However, the NRC bills Class I and
Class II uranium recovery licensees
quarterly in accordance with
§ 171.19(b), regardless of the amount of
their annual fee. The NRC established
this payment exception for Class I and
Class II uranium recovery licensees in
the FY 2001 final rule (66 FR 32452;
June 14, 2001) because the annual fees
for these licensees had been fluctuating
just above or below $100,000. Since
then, uranium recovery license fees
have been well below $100,000. Because
the basis of the existing exception is no
longer a factor, as well as that the
exception is administratively
burdensome to implement with the
current fee billing system, the NRC is
eliminating this billing exception for
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
Class I and Class II uranium recovery
licensees.
Additionally, the NRC notes that there
are benefits to the annual payment of
fees, which it believes further justify
this change. This is because the annual
payment of fees may provide for more
notice of annual fee changes. When
paying quarterly, the last quarterly
payment of the current fiscal year’s
annual fee must be for the entire
difference between that annual fee and
the payments made in the first three
quarters of that year. This payment is
due as of the effective date of the final
fee rule. When paying annually,
licensees are billed on the anniversary
month of the license. This payment
practice, as established in the FY 1996
fee rule (61 FR 16203; April 12, 1996),
means licensees know exactly when
they will be billed each year and will
know the exact fee amount in advance.
D. Other Issues
1. Recovery of Security Costs
Comment. Some commenters objected
to the NRC collecting security-related
costs from licensees, while
acknowledging that Section 637 of the
Energy Policy Act of 2005 will remove
certain homeland security activities
from the fee base beginning in FY 2007.
One commenter mentioned that
homeland security costs should be off
the fee base beginning in FY 2006. Other
commenters questioned whether the
funds under the ‘Homeland Security
Unallocated’ planned activity in the
proposed rule have been allocated to
specific activities.
Response. The NRC appreciates the
concerns raised by commenters
regarding homeland security costs being
funded through license fees. As
referenced previously, generic (i.e., not
site-specific) homeland security
budgeted resources will be removed
from the fee base beginning in FY 2007,
per the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
However, these resources are on the fee
base in FY 2006. Therefore, the fees
established in this rulemaking include
homeland security budgeted resources,
consistent with OBRA–90, as amended.
Regarding the question about the
allocation of the ‘Homeland Security
Unallocated’ planned activity, the NRC
has now allocated these resources to
specific activities, and then to the fee
classes and surcharge categories which
these resources support. Specifically,
the $4,498,000 under the ‘HLS
Unallocated’ planned activity in the
proposed rule has been distributed as
follows: (1) $808,000 to Nuclear
Material Users/Homeland Security
Information Technology, Control of
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
30727
Sources (for the Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards); (2)
$420,000 to Management and Support
Information Technology Compliance/
Homeland Security Information
Security (for the Office of Nuclear
Security and Incident Response); (3)
$420,000 to Reactor Licensing/
Homeland Security Licensing/
Homeland Security Mitigating Strategies
(for the Office of Nuclear Regulatory
Research); and (4) $2,850,000 to Reactor
Licensing/Licensing Tasks/Risk
Informing the Regulatory Process (for
the Office of Nuclear Regulatory
Research).
As shown in the work papers, the
resources for item 1 have been allocated
to the materials users fee class (and
prorated to the surcharge categories of
Agreement State Regulatory Support
and Nonprofit Educational Institutions),
and the resources for items 3 and 4 have
been allocated to the operating power
reactor fee class. The resources for item
2 are treated as overhead, consistent
with the treatment of other resources in
the Management and Support Program.
In the FY 2006 proposed fee rule, the
resources associated with this planned
activity were allocated to the fee classes
in a manner consistent with how other
homeland security resources were
allocated.
2. NRC Budget
Comment. Several commenters stated
that NRC fees should reflect NRC
efficiencies and provided suggestions
for reducing NRC’s budget and for more
efficient/different use of NRC’s
resources. Some of these commenters
addressed expenditures on homeland
security, while others suggested more
generally that NRC reduce expenditures,
streamline processes, or otherwise
perform activities more efficiently.
Some commenters suggested that
changes in NRC’s regulatory approach,
such as the reactor oversight process,
should result in a reduced budget. Some
commenters included suggestions to
reallocate resources dedicated to the
inspection of areas of plants that have
little or no safety significance, to efforts
to risk-inform regulations, license new
reactor designs, and process combined
operating licenses for new plants. A
number of comments suggested that
Memorandums of Understanding
between the Commission and nonAgreement States regarding the
regulation of in-situ well fields would
help to reduce costs to licensees, as
would the expansion of performancebased licensing and the increased use of
Safety and Environmental Review
Panels.
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
30728
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Response. The NRC appreciates the
importance of identifying and
implementing process efficiencies on an
ongoing basis. As discussed in previous
fee rulemakings, NRC offices conduct
process reviews every year and rely on
risk-informed practices to develop costefficient budgets that will allow them to
achieve the NRC’s Strategic Plan
mission objectives. Nonetheless, the
NRC’s budget and the manner in which
the NRC carries out its activities are not
within the scope of this rulemaking.
Therefore, this final rule does not
address the commenters’ suggestions
concerning the NRC’s budget and the
use of NRC resources. As discussed
previously, the NRC’s budget is
submitted to OMB and Congress for
review and approval. The
Congressionally-approved budget
resulting from this process reflects the
resources deemed necessary for NRC to
carry out its statutory obligations. In
compliance with OBRA–90, as
amended, the fees are established to
recover the required percentage of the
approved budget. The NRC will
continue efforts to ensure that the NRC
carries out its statutory obligations in an
efficient manner.
3. Fees Predictability and Timing/
Requested Fee Increase Phase-Ins or
Caps
Comment. Several commenters raised
concerns that the timing of the issuance
of the fee rule makes it difficult for
licensees to plan for regulatory expenses
within the framework of their normal
budget cycles. One commenter
specifically noted that because the
NRC’s fiscal year differs from the
majority of licensees’ fiscal years, and
fee recovery is not known until after a
new calendar year begins, the process
forces licensees to estimate potential
changes to the NRC fiscal year fee
structure six to eight months in advance
of the fee rulemaking. To address this
issue, commenters suggested that the
NRC publish an estimate of fees for the
following year, coincident with issuance
of the proposed fee rule each year. Some
commenters recognized that while it
would likely be impossible for the NRC
to offer exact projections, the
Commission should be able to develop
reasonable estimates of the next year’s
fees. Some commenters suggested that
the agency’s projected total budget
authority might be based on the fiveyear projection the Commission
prepares as part of its annual budgeting
process, and requested that this fiveyear projection be included in the
Performance Budget each year (NUREG–
1100 series). One commenter requested
that the NRC’s license fee estimates
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
resulting from the anticipated FY 2007
budget be estimated and communicated
to the commenter, with some
confidence, by June 2006. Other
commenters requested that NRC
consider deferring a portion of the
annual fee increase to the first quarter
of 2007 to alleviate the unexpected
burden imposed by large fee increases.
Some commenters suggested the
Commission revisit the issue of arbitrary
fee caps or combining fee classes to
lessen the impact of fee changes. Some
commenters expressed concern with
hourly fees increases, because total
hourly fees are more unpredictable than
annual fees and create a substantial
amount of uncertainty in a given
licensee’s annual costs.
Response. The NRC acknowledges the
concerns raised by these commenters,
and has addressed similar comments in
previous fee rulemakings. However, the
timing of the NRC’s required fee
collections is established by OBRA–90,
as amended. In accordance with that
statute, the NRC must collect the
mandated level of fees by the end of the
fiscal year to which they are attributed,
in this case September 30, 2006. As
such, the agency does not have the
discretion to delay the collection of
these fees by deferring some fee
increases.
Additionally, the timing of the fee
rule each year is contingent upon when
the NRC receives its Congressionally
approved budget. The Commission
makes every effort to issue the proposed
fee rule as soon as possible after
receiving its appropriations. Because the
NRC does not know in advance what its
future budgets will be (i.e., proposed
budgets must be submitted to the OMB
for its review before the President
submits the budget to Congress for
enactment), the NRC believes it is not
practicable to project fees based on
future estimated budgets. For example,
the FY 2006 budget appropriation for
the NRC reflected a significant increase
over the NRC’s initial FY 2006 budget
request because of an increase in
workload for new reactor and certain
security activities. Had the NRC
proposed or established preliminary
fees based on the FY 2006 budget
request, these estimated fees would
have been quite different from the fees
ultimately assessed to licensees. The
fees reflected in this rulemaking reflect
the final approved appropriation that
was signed by the President on
December 30, 2005 (Department of
Defense, Emergency Supplemental
Appropriations to Address Hurricanes
in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic
Influenza Act, 2006).
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Changes in economic markets, as well
as the security and policymaking
environments, make predicting the
NRC’s future budgets even more
difficult than this was previously.
However, even if the NRC were able to
reasonably predict a future year total
budget, the annual fee amounts are also
highly sensitive to other factors,
including the allocation of these
budgeted resources to license fee
classes, the numbers of licensees in a fee
class, and the proportion of total class
costs recovered from part 170. (Part 170
revenue from a fee class is particularly
difficult to predict in advance, and more
so for fee classes with small numbers of
licensees, whose annual fees are even
more sensitive to part 170 revenue
estimates.) Estimating these factors even
further in advance than the NRC
currently does would likely lead to
inaccurate future fee projections, which
would be misleading to licensees.
The NRC has previously considered
requests to cap fee increases or phase
them in over a longer period of time. In
the FY 1999 proposed fee rule, the NRC
solicited comments on the idea of a cap
to fee increases (64 FR 15876; April 1,
1999). While some comments supported
this proposal, others did not because
they believed it would lead to some
licensees subsidizing the costs of other
licensees. The NRC did not adopt a fee
increase cap in the FY 1999 final fee
rule in light of fairness and equity
concerns with this approach and a lack
of overwhelming support from
commenters (64 FR 31448; June 10,
1999). The NRC again considered these
strategies in the FY 2005 fee rule and
came to the same conclusion. The NRC
continues to believe that the legal and
fairness concerns with these fee cap
strategies or other phase-in approaches
outweigh the benefits of enhanced fee
stability. Given the requirements of
OBRA–90, as amended, to collect most
of NRC’s budget authority through fees,
failure to fully recover costs from
certain classes of licensees due to caps
or thresholds would result in other
classes of licensees bearing these costs.
The NRC’s fees are based on the current
year budgeted costs of activities
benefitting the associated license fee
classes, and hence reflect the best
assessment of who should be paying for
these costs. However, the NRC will
continue to strive to issue its fee
regulations as early in the fiscal year as
is practicable to give as much time as
possible for licensees to plan for
changes in fees.
In response to the comment that
hourly rate charges are even more
difficult to predict than annual fees, the
NRC notes that, if requested, the NRC
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
program staff will provide a best
estimate of hours required to complete
a specific licensing action, with the
caveat that the actual hours expended
may differ from that estimate based on
certain circumstances (e.g., timeliness of
submittals, quality of products
submitted for review).
III. Final Action
The NRC is amending its licensing,
inspection, and annual fees to recover
approximately 90 percent of its FY 2006
budget authority less the appropriations
received from the NWF and for WIR
activities. The NRC’s total budget
authority for FY 2006 is $741.5 million,
of which approximately $45.7 million
has been appropriated from the NWF,
and $2.5 million for WIR activities.
Based on the 90 percent fee recovery
requirement, the NRC must recover
approximately $624 million in FY 2006
through part 170 licensing and
inspection fees and part 171 annual
fees. The amount required by law to be
recovered through fees for FY 2006 is
$83.4 million more than the amount
estimated for recovery in FY 2005, an
increase of over 15 percent.
The FY 2006 fee recovery amount is
increased by $0.9 million to account for
billing adjustments (i.e., for FY 2006
invoices that the NRC estimates will not
be paid during the fiscal year, less
payments received in FY 2006 for FY
2005 invoices). There is no FY 2005
carryover to apply to FY 2006 fee
collections. This leaves approximately
$625 million to be recovered in FY 2006
through part 170 licensing and
inspection fees and part 171 annual
fees.
The NRC estimates that
approximately $183.3 million will be
30729
recovered in FY 2006 from part 170 fees.
This represents an increase of 19
percent as compared to the actual part
170 collections for FY 2005 of $154.1
million. The NRC derived the FY 2006
estimate of part 170 fee collections
based on the previous four quarters of
billing data for each license fee class,
with adjustments to account for changes
in the NRC’s FY 2006 budget, as
appropriate, and the increase in the
hourly rates from FY 2005 to FY 2006.
The remaining $441.7 million will be
recovered through the part 171 annual
fees in FY 2006, compared to $380.5
million for FY 2005, an increase of
approximately 16 percent.
Table I summarizes the budget and fee
recovery amounts for FY 2006
(individual values may not sum to totals
due to rounding).
TABLE I.—BUDGET AND FEE RECOVERY AMOUNTS FOR FY 2006
[Dollars in millions]
$741.5
¥48.1
Balance .........................................................................................................................................................................................
Fee Recovery Rate for FY 2006 .........................................................................................................................................................
693.4
× 90.0%
Total Amount To Be Recovered for FY 2006 ..............................................................................................................................
Less Carryover from FY 2005 .............................................................................................................................................................
624.0
¥0.0
Plus Part 171 Billing Adjustments:
Unpaid FY 2006 Invoices (estimated) ..........................................................................................................................................
Less Payments Received in FY 2006 for Prior Year Invoices (estimated) .................................................................................
3.2
¥2.3
Subtotal .................................................................................................................................................................................
0.9
Amount to be Recovered Through Parts 170 and 171 Fees ..............................................................................................................
Less Estimated Part 170 Fees ............................................................................................................................................................
625.0
¥183.3
Part 171 Fee Collections Required ..............................................................................................................................................
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Total Budget Authority .........................................................................................................................................................................
Less NWF and WIR .............................................................................................................................................................................
441.7
The NRC has made four updates to
the FY 2006 fee calculations since the
proposed rule. First, the NRC updated
the part 170 estimates based on the
latest invoice data available. In total, the
part 170 estimates decreased by
approximately $5.4 million;
approximately $3 million of this
reduction is from the power reactor fee
class. Second, the NRC has updated its
allocation of the ‘Homeland Security
Unallocated’ planned activity, as
described in Section II.D.1. This
resulted in more budgeted resources
allocated to the power reactor fee class,
and less to fuel facilities and some other
licensees in the Materials Program.
Third, the NRC has adjusted downward
the amount of generic transportation
resources to be recovered from annual
fees. This adjustment takes into account
the annual fee collections received for
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
transportation activities (fee categories
10.B.1 and 10.B.2 under § 171.16) until
the effective date of the FY 2006 final
fee rule, which decreased the required
fee collections for most fee classes (see
Section III.B.3.h for details). (Note that
this is only a one-time adjustment
because the 10.B.1 and 10.B.2 annual
fees have been eliminated as of the
effective date of this rule. Therefore,
licensees should expect the value of
these allocated transportation resources
to increase in future years.) Fourth, the
number of NRC materials users
licensees has been updated to reflect the
transfer of approximately 150 licensees
to the State of Minnesota. This
adjustment was made because NRC
entered into an Agreement with the
State as authorized by Section 274 of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended,
effective March 31, 2006. This resulted
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
in a slight increase in fees for some
materials users licensees because fewer
NRC licensees are paying for budgeted
licensing and inspection costs. Each of
these changes and their associated
impacts on each fee class is discussed
in more detail in Section III.B.3.
The net result of all these updates on
the FY 2006 fees is small. Fees for most
licensees remained the same between
the FY 2006 proposed and final fee
rules. The most significant change was
a five percent increase in the test and
research reactor annual fee, which
resulted from a decrease in estimated
part 170 fee collections for this fee class.
Other fees increased or decreased by a
small amount as a result of the changes
listed in the preceding paragraph.
The FY 2006 final fee rule is a ‘‘major
rule’’ as defined by the Congressional
Review Act of 1996. Therefore, the
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
30730
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
NRC’s fee schedules for FY 2006 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
to reactors, major fuel cycle facilities,
and other licensees with annual fees of
$100,000 or more, upon publication of
the FY 2006 final rule. For these
licensees, payment is due on the
effective date of the FY 2006 rule.
Because these licensees are billed
quarterly, the payment due is the
amount of the total FY 2006 annual fee
less payments made in the first three
quarters of the fiscal year. Those
materials licensees whose license
anniversary date during FY 2006 falls
before the effective date of the final FY
2006 rule will be billed for the annual
fee during the anniversary month of the
license at the FY 2005 annual fee rate.
Those materials licensees whose license
anniversary date falls on or after the
effective date of the final FY 2006 rule
will be billed for the annual fee at the
FY 2006 annual fee rate during the
anniversary month of the license, and
payment will be due on the date of the
invoice.
The NRC has discontinued mailing
the final fee rule to all licensees as a cost
saving measure, in accordance with its
FY 1998 announcement. Accordingly,
the NRC does not plan to routinely mail
the FY 2006 final fee rule or future final
fee rules to licensees. However, the NRC
will send the final rule to any licensee
or other person upon specific request.
To request a copy, contact the License
Fee Team, Division of Financial
Management, Office of the Chief
Financial Officer, at 301–415–7554, or
e-mail fees@nrc.gov. In addition to
publication in the Federal Register, the
final rule will be available on the
Internet at https://ruleforum.llnl.gov for
at least 90 days after the effective date
of the final rule, and will be
permanently available at https://
www.access.gpo.gov.
The NRC is amending 10 CFR parts
170 and 171 as discussed in Sections A
and B of this document.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
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
The NRC is establishing hourly rates
to recover the full cost of activities
under part 170, and to use these rates to
calculate ‘‘flat’’ application fees.
Additionally, this rule establishes that
Federal agencies are subject to part 170
fees (with the exception of certain
Federally-owned test and research
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
reactors); clarifies that the tracking and
monitoring of shipments necessary for
certain licensing actions is subject to
full cost fees under part 170; establishes
additional import/export fee categories
(subclasses); and makes minor
administrative changes for purposes of
clarification, consistency, and to
eliminate redundancy.
The NRC is making the following
changes:
1. Hourly Rates
The NRC is establishing in § 170.20
two professional hourly rates for NRC
staff time. These rates are based on the
number of FY 2006 direct program FTEs
and the NRC’s FY 2006 fee recoverable
budget, excluding direct program
support costs. These rates are used in
assessing full cost fees for specific
services provided, as well as flat fees for
certain application reviews. The rate for
the Reactor Program is $217 per hour.
This rate is applicable to all activities
for which fees are assessed under
§ 170.21 of the fee regulations (with the
exception of reactor decommissioning
and import/export licensing activities).
The rate for the Materials Program is
$214 per hour. This rate is applicable to
all activities for which fees are assessed
under § 170.31 of the fee regulations, as
well as the reactor decommissioning
and import/export activities under
§ 170.21. In the FY 2005 final fee rule,
the Reactor and Materials Program rates
were $205 and $197, respectively.
The increases to the Reactor and
Materials Program rates from FY 2006 to
FY 2005 are due to the recent
Government-wide pay raise and to the
more accurate allocation of agency
overhead to these Programs and feeexempt activities. The hourly rate for
the Materials Program decreased slightly
(from $215 to $214) between the FY
2006 proposed and final rules because
of some minor reductions in the
allocation of resources to this program
because of the revised allocation of
resources under the ‘Homeland
Security’ planned activity (discussed in
Section II.D.1).
The hourly rate is derived by dividing
the sum of budgeted resources for (1)
Direct labor; (2) allocated program
overhead; and (3) allocated agency
overhead, by budgeted direct hours.
This calculation is performed for both
the Reactor and Materials Programs, and
excludes the budgeted resources and
associated overhead for fee exempt
activities. The specific method used to
determine the two professional hourly
rates is as follows:
a. Direct program budgeted FTE, as
well as all associated program overhead
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(FTE and contracts), are allocated at the
planned activity level to the fee classes
and surcharge (i.e., fee exempt)
categories based on who benefits from
these activities. Direct contract support,
which is the use of contract or other
services in support of the line
organization’s mission-direct program,
is excluded from the calculation of the
hourly rates because the costs for direct
contract support are recovered directly
through either part 170 or 171 fees.
b. All management and support
budgeted resources (FTE and contracts),
including resources associated with the
Office of the Inspector General, are
allocated to each fee class and surcharge
category based on the percent of the
total budgeted resources allocated to
each fee class and surcharge category in
step a.
c. The hourly rate for the Reactor
Program is calculated by dividing the
total budgeted resources (calculated in
steps a. and b.) allocated to the power
reactor and test and research reactor fee
classes by the direct hours allocated to
those classes. Similarly, the hourly rate
for the Materials Program is calculated
by dividing the total budgeted resources
allocated to the spent fuel/reactor
decommissioning, fuel facility,
transportation, materials users, uranium
recovery, rare earth, and import/export
fee classes by the direct hours allocated
to those fee classes. Although an hourly
rate for surcharge activities is not
needed, the appropriate allocation of
budgeted resources (including all
associated overhead) and hours to the
surcharge categories is calculated to
ensure that these budgeted resources
and hours are excluded from the Reactor
and Materials Program hourly rates.
The direct hours used in the
denominator of this hourly rate
calculation continue to be calculated
based on an estimate of 1,446 direct
hours worked per direct FTE per year,
as established in the FY 2005 fee rule
(70 FR 30526; May 26, 2005). As
explained in the FY 2005 fee rule, this
estimate is based on data from the
NRC’s time and labor system. The NRC
continues to believe this estimate
appropriately reflects the direct time
expended per direct FTE.
Table II shows the results of this
hourly rate calculation methodology.
Due to rounding, adding the individual
numbers in the table may result in a
total that is slightly different than the
one shown.
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
30731
TABLE II.—FY 2006 BUDGET AUTHORITY TO BE INCLUDED IN HOURLY RATES
Reactor
program
Direct Program Salaries & Benefits .........................................................................................................................
Program Overhead Salaries & Benefits, and Contract Support .............................................................................
Allocated Agency Management and Support ..........................................................................................................
Subtotal .............................................................................................................................................................
Less Offsetting Receipts ..........................................................................................................................................
Total Budget Included in Hourly Rate ..............................................................................................................
Program Direct FTEs ...............................................................................................................................................
Professional Hourly Rate (Total Budget Included in Hourly Rate divided by Program Direct FTE times 1,446
hours) ...................................................................................................................................................................
As shown in Table II, dividing the
$416 million budgeted amount
(rounded) included in the hourly rate
for the Reactor Program by the Reactor
Program direct hours (1,322.8 FTE times
1,446 hours) results in an hourly rate of
$217 for the Reactor Program for FY
2006. Similarly, dividing the $93.1
million budgeted amount (rounded)
included in the hourly rate for the
Materials Program by the program direct
hours (300.3 FTE times 1,446 hours)
results in an hourly rate of $214 for the
Materials Program in FY 2006. These
hourly rates are rounded to the nearest
whole dollar.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
2. Fee Adjustments
The NRC is adjusting the current part
170 fees in §§ 170.21 and 170.31 to
reflect the changes in the hourly rates.
The full cost fees assessed under
§§ 170.21 and 170.31 are based on the
professional hourly rates and any direct
program support (contractual services)
costs expended by the NRC. Any
professional hours expended on or after
the effective date of the final rule will
be assessed at the FY 2006 hourly rates.
The fees in §§ 170.21 and 170.31 that
are based on the average time to review
an application (flat fees) have been
adjusted to reflect the change in the
Materials Program professional hourly
rate from FY 2005. The flat fees are
calculated by multiplying the average
professional staff hours needed to
process the licensing actions by the
Materials Program professional hourly
rate for FY 2006. The agency estimates
the average professional staff hours
needed to process licensing actions
every other year as part of its biennial
review of fees performed in compliance
with the Chief Financial Officers Act of
1990 (Pub. L. 101–578). (This review
was last performed as part of the FY
2005 fee rulemaking.) The amounts of
the materials licensing flat fees are
rounded so that the fees would be
convenient to the user and the effects of
rounding would be ‘‘de minimis.’’ Fees
under $1,000 are rounded to the nearest
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
$10, fees that are greater than $1,000 but
less than $100,000 are rounded to the
nearest $100, and fees that are greater
than $100,000 are rounded to the
nearest $1,000.
The licensing flat fees are applicable
for fee categories K.1 through K.5 of
§ 170.21, 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.R, 16, and 17
of § 170.31. The higher hourly rate of
$214 for the Materials Program is the
reason for the increases in the licensing
fees. Because the hourly rate decreased
by one dollar between the FY 2006
proposed and final fee rules, some of the
flat fees decreased by a small amount
since the FY 2006 proposed fee rule.
Applications filed on or after the
effective date of the final rule will be
subject to the revised fees in this rule.
3. Charging Part 170 Fees to Federal
Agencies/Fees for Research Reactors
The NRC is amending §§ 170.11 and
170.31 to provide that part 170 fees will
be assessed to Federal agencies where
applicable. Under the Energy Policy Act
of 2005 (Section 623), the NRC was
granted authority to assess fees for
specific services provided to any
Federal government agency which
applies to the NRC for, or is issued by
the NRC, a license or certificate. The
NRC currently recovers the costs of
licensee-specific activities for nonFederal licensees, applicants, and
certificate holders under part 170, but
lacked the authority to assess these fees
to Federal agencies (other than the
Tennessee Valley Authority) until the
effective date of the Energy Policy Act
of 2005.
Because activities such as processing
license applications provide a specific
benefit to the recipient, the Commission
believes it is fair and appropriate to
implement this new authority and
thereby recover the costs of providing
specific services to Federal agencies
through part 170 fees. The NRC has
provided written notification to Federal
agencies that have an NRC license or
certificate that the NRC plans to
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Materials
program
$182.4M
81.9M
151.8M
416.1M
¥0.1M
$416.0M
1,322.8
$41.3M
17.8M
34.0M
93.1M
¥0.0M
$93.1M
300.3
$217
$214
implement this new authority in the FY
2006 final fee rule, so that they may
include this cost in their budgets.
The Commission notes that this
provision of the Energy Policy Act of
2005 cannot legally be applied to
services the NRC provides to Federal
agencies that are not NRC licensees,
certificate holders, or applicants.
Therefore, the NRC will not charge part
170 fees to Federal agencies for
activities that are not subject to NRC
licensing. Examples of NRC activities
not related to a license or certificate,
and therefore not subject to part 170
fees, include those to support the DOE
in its decommissioning of the West
Valley site in New York, and technical
assistance provided to the Department
of Transportation for certain foreign
approved transport package designs for
import/export (for which NRC does not
have regulatory authority).
Under these changes to part 170,
Federal agency licensees, certificate
holders, and applicants will be assessed
fees in the same manner as are nonFederal agency licensees, certificate
holders, and applicants. This means that
Federal agencies will be required to pay
part 170 fees for NRC services provided,
including reviews of applications and
other licensing actions, inspections, and
decommissioning activities. This change
does not require the calculation of any
new fee amounts or establishment of
new fee categories for Federal agencies.
The only exception is that the NRC is
establishing a new flat application fee of
$17,800 for fee category 17, ‘‘Master
materials licenses of broad scope issued
to Government agencies,’’ under
§ 170.31. There is currently no
application fee listed for this fee
category because the only licensees in
this fee category are for the Federal
government. The flat application fee
established in this rule was calculated
in the same manner as other flat
application fees; it equals the product of
the average hours estimated to process
these types of applications and the
Materials Program hourly rate.
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
30732
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
Because of insufficient data on average
processing times for these master
materials licenses (there are only three
such NRC licensees), the NRC based its
estimate of average processing time for
master materials licensees on other
license applications of similar
complexity.
Additionally, to implement this new
authority, the NRC is revising fee
category 18.A under § 170.31 to specify
that full cost fees will be assessed for
licensing and inspection activities
associated with DOE’s part 71
Certificates of Compliance.
The NRC is exempting from part 170
fees Federally-owned test and research
reactors that meet the fee exemption
criteria set forth in Section 2903 of the
Energy Policy Act of 1992 (Pub. L. 102–
486). [These criteria relate to factors
such as thermal power level and
whether the reactor contains a liquid
fuel loading, and are listed under both
§§ 170.11(a)(9) and 171.11(a)(2). Three
Federally-owned research reactors
currently meet this criteria (reactors at
the Veteran’s Administration Medical
Center in Omaha, Nebraska, the U.S.
Geological Survey in Denver, Colorado,
and the Armed Forces Radiobiological
Institute in Bethesda, Maryland)]. As
implemented by § 171.11(a)(2),
Federally-owned test and research
reactors that meet the statutory criteria
are already exempt from paying annual
fees. At the time Congress enacted this
fee exemption, however, Federallyowned reactors (other than the
Tennessee Valley Authority) were not
subject to part 170 fees. Therefore, the
exemption criteria set forth in the
Energy Policy Act of 1992 did not
specifically address part 170 fees. Now
that NRC has the authority to charge
part 170 fees to Federally-owned
reactors, the NRC believes that it is
appropriate as a matter of policy to
apply the same criteria to Federallyowned test and research reactors, and
exempt those meeting the criteria from
part 170 fees. State-owned reactors
meeting this same criteria are currently
exempt from part 170 fees under
§ 170.11(a)(9). The Commission
explained the rationale for this decision
in the FY 1994 fee rule (59 FR 36895;
July 20, 1994) by stating that the NRC
believed this was ‘‘* * * consistent
with the legislative intent of the Energy
Policy Act of 1992 that governmentowned research reactors be exempt from
fees if they meet the technical design
criteria of the exemption and are used
primarily for educational training and
academic research purposes.’’ The
Commission continues to believe this is
consistent with the intent of the Energy
Policy Act of 1992, and therefore is
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
exempting these Federally-owned
reactors from part 170 fees.
Note the NRC is clarifying that the fee
exemption in § 170.11(a)(9) remains in
effect even after the reactors meeting
this criteria are no longer authorized to
operate in the revision to that
paragraph.
4. Charging Part 170 Fees for Tracking
and Monitoring Shipments of Classified
Matter
The NRC is clarifying that full cost
part 170 fees will be assessed to track
and monitor shipments of classified
materials (e.g., components of gas
centrifuge uranium enrichment
facilities). The NRC currently has under
review applications to build and operate
gas centrifuge uranium enrichment
facilities. Because of the sensitive
technology, many of the components
associated with these facilities are
classified as Restricted Data under the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (Pub. L. 83–
703), as amended. Furthermore, some of
these components are voluminous and
cannot be transported under the
standard classified matter transportation
requirements of § 95.39(b) and (c) (e.g.,
double wrapping, marking, and
tracking). In these cases, the NRC
requires the licensee or applicant to
submit a security plan under § 95.39(e)
for transporting this non-standard
classified matter. One aspect of
classified matter transportation security
plans is continuous telemetric position
monitoring and tracking of shipments of
classified matter, including a capability
for notification of local law enforcement
officials and the NRC in the case of an
emergency.
Because of the inherent national
security concerns associated with the
transportation of Restricted Data
components and the current threat
environment, the NRC has not
considered permitting licensees to
establish their own telemetric position
monitoring and tracking capability for
shipments of classified matter, nor to
contract with a commercial service to
meet this requirement. Instead, the NRC
intends to require that these shipments
be tracked and monitored by a U.S.
government owned or operated system
(e.g., systems operated by the U.S.
Departments of Defense or Energy). As
such, the NRC is establishing an
interagency agreement and
memorandum of understanding and
reimbursable agreement with another
government agency to provide the
necessary tracking, monitoring, and
communications center capabilities.
Accordingly, the costs incurred by the
NRC from this other government agency
in monitoring these shipments will be
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
passed on to the applicable licensee in
full. While this is a new activity, the
recovery of these costs through part 170
fees is consistent with the NRC’s
existing full cost recovery policy for
licensing activities.
The NRC is making this clarification
by modifying the definition of ‘‘special
projects’’ in § 170.3 to include this type
of activity. This definition currently
includes examples of special projects.
Including this activity as an example
would ensure that licensees are
informed that these activities are subject
to part 170 fees.
5. Revisions To Import/Export Fee
Categories
The NRC is modifying the import and
export fee categories at § 170.31 to
reflect revisions to 10 CFR part 110 that
were published on July 1, 2005 (70 FR
37985), effective December 28, 2005.
These part 110 revisions take into
account provisions in the International
Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Code of
Conduct on the Safety and Security of
Radioactive Sources concerning the
import and export of radioactive
sources, and the supplemental IAEA
guidance on the Import and Export of
Radioactive Sources.
The specific radioactive material and
quantities newly covered by NRC
regulations, per the July 1, 2005
revisions, are listed in Table 1 of
Appendix P to part 110, and are
essentially identical to the list of
radioactive materials in Category 1 and
Category 2 of the Code of Conduct. The
amendments to part 110 require NRC
authorization of certain exports and
imports by specific license. As a result
of these changes, it is necessary to add
additional import/export fee categories
under § 170.31 to accommodate these
new types of licensees.
Therefore, the NRC is modifying fee
category 15 at § 170.31 to include
separate fee categories for Category 1
Exports (fee categories 15.F through
15.I), Category 2 Exports (fee categories
15.J through 15.L), Category 1 Imports
(fee categories 15.M and 15.N), Category
2 Imports (fee category O), Category 1
Imports with Agent and Multiple
Licensees (fee categories 15.P and 15.Q),
and minor amendments to Category 1
and 2 Exports and Imports (fee category
15.R). As with other flat fees established
under § 170.31, the fees associated with
each fee category reflect the NRC’s
estimate of average hours required to
process the license application,
multiplied by the hourly rate. These
changes also establish that for a
combined import and export license
application for material listed in
Appendix P to part 110, only the higher
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
of the two applicable fee amounts must
be paid. This is because the difference
in level of effort associated with
processing a combined import and
export license versus processing just the
export license (for the material listed in
Appendix P to part 110, only) is
negligible.
6. Administrative Amendments
The NRC is eliminating the reference
to ‘‘route approvals for shipment of
radioactive materials’’ in the definition
of ‘‘special projects’’ under § 170.3. This
activity is currently covered under
§ 170.31, fee category 10 C., which
establishes full cost recovery for this
and other related activities; therefore,
the additional reference to this activity
as a special project (for which the NRC
assesses full cost fees) is redundant.
The NRC is also modifying
§ 170.11(a)(4) to clarify that the fee
exemption does not apply if an
institution meets at least one of the
criteria listed in § 170.11(a)(4)(i)–(iv).
Currently, these criteria are connected
with an ‘‘and,’’ rather than an ‘‘or,’’
making it unclear whether the fee
exemption in § 170.11(a)(4) applies to
an institution that meets one of the
criteria. This revised language is
consistent with the language used for
this same exemption as applied to part
171 fees under § 171.11(a)(1) and will
enhance the clarity of this provision.
Additionally, the NRC is clarifying
which hourly rate is applicable to which
activities. Currently, § 170.20 states that
the Reactor Program rate is applicable to
§ 170.21 activities, and the Materials
Program rate is applicable to § 170.31
activities. The NRC is amending
§ 170.20 to clarify that (1) the Reactor
Program hourly rate is applicable to all
activities for which fees are assessed
under § 170.21 of the fee regulations,
with the exception of reactor
decommissioning and import/export
licensing activities, and (2) the Materials
Program rate is applicable to all
activities for which fees are assessed
under § 170.31 of the fee regulations, as
well as the reactor decommissioning
and import/export activities under
§ 170.21. This change better aligns the
applicable hourly rate with the data
used to calculate that rate (i.e., reactor
decommissioning resources are
included in the Materials Program
hourly rate).
Finally, the NRC is creating a new fee
category under § 170.31, which would
effectively split the current fee category
1.A.2.b (‘‘other’’ fuel facilities) into two
categories, one for gas centrifuge
enrichment demonstration facilities and
one for hot cell facilities. This change
keeps the fee categories under parts 170
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
and 171 consistent, in light of the same
change the NRC made to § 171.16. This
change does not affect part 170 fee
recovery requirements, as each category
is subject to full cost part 170 fees where
applicable. This change results in
different annual fees for the existing fee
category 1.A.2.b and the new fee
category 1.A.2.c, as explained in more
detail under Section III.B.3.a of this
document.
In summary, the NRC is making the
following changes to 10 CFR part 170—
1. Establishing revised Reactor and
Materials Program hourly rates;
2. Revising the licensing fees to be
assessed to reflect the Reactor and
Materials Program hourly rates;
3. Amending §§ 170.11 and 170.31 to
provide that part 170 fees will be
assessed to Federal agencies where
applicable (except for certain Federallyowned research reactors);
4. Revising § 170.3 to clarify that full
cost part 170 fees will be assessed to
track and monitor shipments of
classified matter;
5. Modifying the import and export
fee categories under § 170.31; and
6. Making minor administrative
changes for purposes of clarification,
consistency, and to eliminate
redundancy.
B. Amendments to 10 CFR 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
The NRC is making the following
changes under part 171: Proceeding
with a presumption in favor of
rebaselining annual fees beginning with
the final FY 2006 rule; recovering
generic transportation costs as part of
other existing annual fees; revising the
annual fees for FY 2006 to reflect the FY
2006 budget, changes in the number of
NRC licensees, and the division of an
existing fuel facilities fee category into
two categories; eliminating the existing
fee payment method exception for Class
I and Class II uranium recovery
licensees; and making an administrative
change to clarify the definition of
‘‘overhead and general and
administrative costs.’’ The amendments
are described below.
1. Rebaselining Annual Fees
The NRC uses one of two methods to
determine the amounts of the annual
fees established in its fee rule each year.
One method is ‘‘rebaselining,’’ for
which the NRC’s budget is analyzed in
detail and budgeted resources are
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
30733
allocated to fee classes and categories of
licensees. The second method is the
‘‘percent change’’ method, for which
fees are revised based on the percent
change in the total budget, taking into
account other adjustments, such as the
number of licensees and the projected
revenue to be received from part 170
fees.
The NRC is establishing rebaselined
annual fees for FY 2006, and is
proceeding with a presumption in favor
of rebaselining when determining
annual fees for FY 2007 and beyond.
The Commission’s previous policy
regarding the method of calculating
annual fees, made in the statement of
consideration of the FY 1995 fee rule
(60 FR 32218; June 20, 1995), and
further explained in the statement of
consideration of the FY 1999 fee rule
(64 FR 31448; June 10, 1999), was that
annual fees would be rebaselined at
least every third year, and more
frequently if there was a substantial
change in the total NRC budget or in the
magnitude of the budget allocated to a
specific class of licensees. The NRC is
establishing a presumption in favor of
rebaselining beginning with the FY 2006
rulemaking because (1) rebaselining is
usually appropriate since there is often
a substantial change in the total NRC
budget or in the magnitude of the
budget allocated to a specific class of
licensees, and (2) delaying rebaselining
can result in larger fee changes in the
years when fees are rebaselined. The use
of the percent change method will
remain an option should there be a year
in which there are no significant
changes to the total budget or individual
programs for fee classes. The NRC
expects that in most years, annual fees
will be rebaselined.
Until FY 1996, annual fees were
determined using the rebaselining
method. In an effort to stabilize fees, the
NRC decided to adjust annual fees using
the percent change method beginning in
FY 1996, unless there was a substantial
change in the NRC budget or in the
magnitude of a specific budget
allocation to a class of licensees. Fees
were determined using the percent
change method in the FYs 1996–1998
fee rules.
The NRC rebaselined fees in the FY
1999 fee rule, and solicited comment on
the use and frequency of the percent
change method. Some commenters,
such as the Nuclear Energy Institute,
supported rebaselining every year,
believing that this method best supports
the accurate alignment of costs to fee
classes and the in-depth review needed
to maximize agency efficiency. Other
commenters appreciated the fee stability
provided by the percent change method.
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
30734
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
In response to these comments, the
Commission determined that annual
fees should be rebaselined every three
years, or more frequently if there is a
substantial change in the total NRC
budget or in the magnitude of the
budget allocated to a specific class of
licensees. Fees were calculated using
the percent change method in FY 2000,
and were rebaselined in FYs 2001–2005.
As mentioned previously, the NRC
believes that it should proceed, in future
rulemakings, with a presumption in
favor of rebaselining because there is
often a substantial change in the total
NRC budget or in the magnitude of the
budget allocated to a specific class of
licensees. Changes occurring in FY 2006
and beyond that warrant a rebaselining
of fees include those in the areas of new
reactor licensing, homeland security
(including the removal of certain
homeland security costs from the fee
base beginning in FY 2007, per the
Energy Policy Act of 2005), and new
regulatory authority for naturally
occurring and accelerator produced
radioactive material. Accordingly, the
Commission has concluded that the
percent change method should be used
infrequently, and therefore, is
proceeding with a presumption in favor
of rebaselining each year beginning with
this fee rule.
2. Recovering Generic Transportation
Costs as Part of Other Existing Annual
Fees
The NRC is establishing that generic
transportation costs unrelated to DOE be
recovered as part of existing annual fees
for license fee classes, rather than
through a separate annual fee for part 71
Quality Assurance (QA) program
approval holders (as is the current
practice). Under this change, the annual
fee for fee categories 10.B.1 and 10.B.2
under § 171.16 will be eliminated.
However, the NRC is not changing or
eliminating the annual fee under
§ 171.16, fee category 18.A, for DOE
transportation activities, which will
continue to be calculated using the
current methodology (described further
under Section III.B.3.h of this
document). This change will enhance
the equity of NRC’s fees, increase the
consistency of 10 CFR parts 71 and 72
fee recovery, and decrease the
administrative burden associated with a
separate transportation annual fee.
All NRC licensees must perform some
activities related to the transportation of
radioactive material as a necessary part
of their licensed activities. This
transportation is authorized by their
NRC license (under 10 CFR parts 30, 40,
50, 70, etc.). [10 CFR 71.17 establishes
a general license that authorizes NRC
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
licensees to make shipments using
packages with an approved Certificate of
Compliance (CoC), without further
approval.] For example, all licensees
receive licensed material at their site,
and ship products and waste materials.
Because the NRC does not issue separate
licenses under part 71 for transportation
activities, the NRC currently recovers
the cost of all ‘‘generic’’ transportation
activities (i.e., those activities that are
not licensee-specific, and therefore not
recovered through part 170 fees)
through annual fees for QA program
approvals. QA program approvals are
required for entities holding NRC
approved CoCs for transportation
packages and for licensees that ship
large (Type B) quantities of radioactive
material or fissile material. NRC
licensees must also use an approved
CoC to transport radioactive material.
The NRC currently charges annual
fees for the two types of QA program
approvals it issues: (1) Use
(approximately 80 programs), and (2)
use and fabrication (approximately 40
programs). However, the resources for
generic transportation activities—
which are recovered through these two
annual fees—support many other
transportation-related NRC approvals
and services, including the issuance of
CoCs, route approvals, and evaluations
of transportation devices and security
plans. (The NRC charges part 170 fees
for these specific services, not annual
fees, for various reasons.)
One reason this approach raises
fairness concerns is that a company is
required to have only one QA program
approval regardless of the number of
CoCs it holds. This means companies
pay the same annual fee regardless of
whether they own one or many CoCs.
As industry consolidation has increased
over the past decade and the NRC has
issued fewer QA program approvals,
this equity concern has increased.
The NRC believes generic
transportation resources would be
recovered more equitably if these costs
were included in the existing annual
fees for NRC licenses for 10 CFR parts
30, 40, 50, 70, etc. The resources
associated with generic transportation
activities would be distributed to the
license fee classes based on the number
of CoCs benefitting (used by) that fee
class, as a proxy for the generic
transportation resources expended for
each fee class. (This is a method similar
to that used to calculate DOE’s annual
fee for transportation activities under
§ 171.16 fee category 18.A.) In this way,
the annual fee for a license would
include the estimated share of
transportation resources needed to
support that license, similar to the
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
recovery of other types of generic
resources such as rulemakings and risk
assessments. Note that the amount of
generic transportation resources
distributed to the fee classes does not
include the cost of activities associated
with fee-exempt entities (e.g., nonprofit
educational institutions). Additionally,
the distribution of these resources to the
fee classes is adjusted to account for the
licensees in each fee class that are fee
exempt. [For example, if two CoCs
benefit the entire test and research
reactor class, but only four of 31 test and
research reactors are subject to annual
fees, the number of CoCs used to
determine the proportion of generic
transportation resources allocated to test
and research reactor annual fees equals
((4/31)*2), or 0.26 CoCs.]
Under this new approach, reactors
pay approximately 38 percent of these
costs in FY 2006, materials users
approximately 32 percent, fuel facilities
approximately 21 percent, spent fuel/
reactor decommissioning licensees
approximately nine percent, and test
and research reactors approximately 0.3
percent.
This new approach will also increase
the consistency of parts 71 and 72 fee
recovery. Part 72 QA programs are
approved as part of the CoC approval
process, and an annual fee is not
assessed for either this QA approval or
the CoC. The generic costs associated
with spent fuel storage are recovered as
part of the annual fee assessed to
operating power reactors,
decommissioning power reactors, and
independent spent fuel storage
installation licensees who do not hold a
part 50 license.
Finally, an additional benefit of this
approach is that it will decrease
administrative burden and costs for both
NRC and licensees by eliminating a
required systems interface for NRC fee
billing purposes, as well as reduce the
number of NRC bills and accounts
receivable transactions.
3. Revised Annual Fees
The annual fees in §§ 171.15 and
171.16 are revised for FY 2006 to
recover approximately 90 percent of the
NRC’s FY 2006 budget authority, less
the estimated amount to be recovered
through part 170 fees and the amounts
appropriated from the NWF and for WIR
activities. The total amount to be
recovered through annual fees for FY
2006 is $441.7 million, compared to
$380.5 million for FY 2005.
Rebaselining fees in FY 2006 results
in increased annual fees compared to
FY 2005 for all licensees except certain
fuel facilities. The increases in annual
fees range from four percent for certain
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
sealed source safety devices to
approximately 118 percent for uranium
recovery facilities. However, most of the
annual fee increases are of similar
magnitude to the percentage increase in
total required fee recovery of
approximately 15 percent. The annual
fee for certain medical licensees (fee
category 7C) and industrial users of
nuclear material (fee category 3P),
which are the two fee categories with
the largest number of licensees (with a
combined total of over 3,200 of the
NRC’s approximately 4,400 billable
materials users licensees), increased by
approximately 18 percent and 16
percent, respectively.
As mentioned previously, the most
significant factor affecting the changes
to the annual fee amounts is the
increase in the NRC’s fee recoverable
budget in FY 2006. The NRC’s fee
recoverable budget, as mandated by law,
is $83.4 million larger in FY 2006 as
compared to FY 2005, an increase of
over 15 percent. Much of this increase
is for the additional workload demand
in areas such as new plant licensing and
security. Other factors include
adjustments in the distribution of
budgeted costs to the different classes of
licenses (based on the specific activities
NRC will perform in FY 2006) and the
estimated part 170 collections for the
various classes of licenses. The
percentage of the NRC’s budget not
subject to fee recovery remained
unchanged at ten percent from FY 2005
to FY 2006.
Note that the NRC’s total estimated
part 170 fee collections increased by
nineteen percent in FY 2006 (compared
to FY 2005 actual part 170 collections).
This increase is mainly due to the
increase in the FY 2005 hourly rates as
compared to the FY 2004 hourly rates.
As discussed in the FY 2005
rulemaking, the higher hourly rates
established in FY 2005 increased part
170 fee collections beginning in FY
2006. (These rates took effect near the
end of FY 2005, and the NRC began
collecting receipts from these higher
rates as of the beginning of FY 2006.)
Because costs not recovered under part
170 are recovered through part 171
annual fees, an increase in total part 170
fee collections results in a reduction in
total annual fees by the same amount.
Because of the higher hourly rates and
resulting higher part 170 fee collections
in FY 2006, the FY 2006 annual fees are
lower than they would have been had
NRC not established higher hourly rates
in FY 2005.
As mentioned previously, the NRC
has made four updates to the FY 2006
fee calculations since the proposed rule,
and these adjustments affected the
annual fee estimates in this rule. First,
the NRC updated the part 170 estimates
based on the latest invoice data
available. (The part 170 estimates
decreased somewhat for most fee
30735
classes, and remained the same for two.)
Second, the NRC has updated its
allocation of the ‘‘Homeland Security
Unallocated’’planned activity, as
described in Section II.D.1. Third, the
NRC has adjusted downward the
amount of generic transportation
resources to be recovered from annual
fees to take into account the annual fee
collections received for transportation
activities (fee categories 10.B.1 and
10.B.2 under § 171.16) until the effective
date of the FY 2006 final fee rule. (Note
that this is only a one-time adjustment
because the 10.B.1 and 10.B.2 annual
fees have been eliminated as of the
effective date of this rule; therefore,
licensees should expect the value of
these allocated transportation resources
to increase in future years.) Fourth, the
number of NRC materials users
licensees has been updated to reflect the
transfer of approximately 150 licensees
to the State of Minnesota. The net
impact of these updates is that annual
fees for most licensees either decreased
slightly or remained the same since the
proposed rule, but some did increase by
a small amount. Each of these changes
and their associated impacts on each fee
class is discussed in more detail in
Section III.B.3.a–.
Table III shows the rebaselined
annual fees for FY 2006 for a
representative list of categories of
licenses. The FY 2005 fee is also shown
for comparative purposes.
TABLE III.—REBASELINED ANNUAL FEES FOR FY 2006
FY 2005
annual fee
Class/category of licenses
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Operating Power Reactors (including Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor Decommissioning annual fee) ......................
Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor Decommissioning ......................................................................................................
Test and Research Reactors (Non-power Reactors) ..............................................................................................
High Enriched Uranium Fuel Facility .......................................................................................................................
Low Enriched Uranium Fuel Facility ........................................................................................................................
UF6 Conversion Facility ...........................................................................................................................................
Conventional Mills ....................................................................................................................................................
Typical Materials Users:
Radiographers ..................................................................................................................................................
Well Loggers .....................................................................................................................................................
Gauge Users (Category 3P) .............................................................................................................................
Broad Scope Medical .......................................................................................................................................
The annual fees assessed to each class
of licenses include a surcharge to
recover those NRC budgeted costs that
are not directly or solely attributable to
the classes of licenses, but must be
recovered from licensees to comply with
the requirements of OBRA–90, as
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
amended. Based on the FY 2006
EWDAA, which amended OBRA–90 (as
amended) to require that the NRC
recover 90 percent of its budget in FY
2006, the total surcharge costs for FY
2006 will be reduced by approximately
$69.3 million. The total FY 2006
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
FY 2006
annual fee
$3,155,000
159,000
59,500
5,449,000
1,632,000
699,000
30,200
$3,704,000
173,000
80,100
5,420,000
1,596,000
1,046,000
65,900
12,800
4,100
2,500
27,300
15,400
4,800
2,900
33,000
budgeted costs for these activities and
the reduction in the total surcharge
amount for fee recovery purposes are
shown in Table IV (individual values
may not sum to totals due to rounding).
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
30736
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE IV.—SURCHARGE COSTS
[Dollars in millions]
FY 2006 budgeted costs
Category of costs
1. Activities not attributable to an existing NRC licensee or class of licensee:
a. International activities ...............................................................................................................................................................
b. Agreement State oversight .......................................................................................................................................................
c. Activities for unlicensed sites (includes decommissioning costs associated with unlicensed sites, formerly referred to as
site decommissioning management plan activities not recovered under part 170; also includes activities associated with
unregistered general licensees) ................................................................................................................................................
2. Activities not assessed part 170 licensing and inspection fees or part 171 annual fees based on existing law or Commission
policy:
a. Fee exemption for nonprofit educational institutions ...............................................................................................................
b. Licensing and inspection activities associated with other Federal agencies ..........................................................................
c. Costs not recovered from small entities under 10 CFR 171.16(c) ..........................................................................................
3. Activities supporting NRC operating licensees and others:
a. Regulatory support to Agreement States 1 ..............................................................................................................................
b. Generic decommissioning/reclamation (except those related to power reactors) ...................................................................
$13.8
8.0
5.4
11.9
1.4
5.7
20.2
6.5
Total surcharge cost ..............................................................................................................................................................
Less 10 percent of NRC’s FY 2006 total budget (less NWF and WIR) .............................................................................................
72.8
¥69.3
Total Net Surcharge Costs to be Recovered ........................................................................................................................
3.5
As shown in Table IV, $3.5 million is
the total net surcharge cost allocated to
the various classes of licenses for FY
2006 (i.e., that portion of the total
surcharge not covered by the NRC’s 10
percent fee relief). The NRC has
continued to allocate these surcharge
costs to each class of licenses based on
the percent of the budget for that fee
class compared to the NRC’s total
budget. The surcharge costs allocated to
each class is included in the annual fee
assessed to each licensee. The FY 2006
surcharge costs (and the percent of total
surcharge costs) allocated to each class
of licenses, are shown in Table V
(individual amounts may not sum to
totals due to rounding). Separately, the
NRC has continued to allocate the lowlevel waste (LLW) surcharge costs based
on the volume of LLW disposal of
certain classes of licenses. For FY 2006,
the LLW surcharge costs are $3.5
million.
TABLE V.—ALLOCATION OF SURCHARGE
LLW surcharge
Non-LLW surcharge
Percent
Total surcharge $M
Percent
$M
$M
Operating Power Reactors ......................................................................
Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor Decomm .....................................................
Test and Research Reactors ...................................................................
Fuel Facilities ...........................................................................................
Materials Users ........................................................................................
Transportation ..........................................................................................
Rare Earth Facilities ................................................................................
Uranium Recovery ...................................................................................
74
....................
....................
8
18
....................
....................
....................
2.6
....................
....................
0.3
0.6
....................
....................
....................
83.7
4.3
0.1
6.5
4.1
0.7
0.1
0.4
2.9
0.2
0
0.2
0.1
0
0
0
5.5
0.2
0
0.5
0.8
0
0
0
Total Surcharge ................................................................................
100
3.5
100.0
3.5
7.0
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
The budgeted costs allocated to each
class of licenses and the calculations of
the rebaselined fees are described in
paragraphs a. through h. below. The
work papers which support this rule
show in detail the allocation of NRC’s
budgeted resources for each class of
licenses and how the fees are calculated.
The reports included in these work
papers summarize the FY 2006
budgeted FTE and contract dollars
allocated to each fee class and surcharge
category at the planned activity and
program level, and compare these
allocations to those used to develop
final FY 2005 fees. The work papers are
available electronically at the NRC’s
Electronic Reading Room on the Internet
at Web site address https://www.nrc.gov/
reading-rm/adams.html. For a period of
90 days after the effective date of this
final rule, the work papers may also be
examined at the NRC Public Document
Room located at One White Flint North,
Room O–1F22, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, MD 20852–2738.
Note that all budgeted resources and
annual fee amounts presented in this
document reflect an increase in the full
cost of an FTE. This increase occurred
due to the Government-wide pay raise
and the more accurate allocation of
overhead to the FTEs supporting fee
classes versus surcharge categories,
which increased the full cost of FTEs
supporting fee classes. As a percent of
1 This estimate includes the costs of homeland
security activities associated with sources in
Agreement States, even though regulatory authority
remains with the NRC for these activites. However,
fees are not assessed to sources in Agreement States
for these activities, therefore these costs are
included in this surcharge category. Additionally,
this estimate includes some costs associated with
establishing a regulatory infrastructure for naturally
occurring and accelerator produced radioactive
material because this infrastructure will further the
future regulation of these sources by both NRC and
Agreement States.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
total fee-based budgeted resources, the
resources associated with NRC’s
overhead actually declined from FY
2005 to FY 2006.
a. Fuel Facilities
The FY 2006 budgeted cost to be
recovered in the annual fees assessment
to the fuel facility class of licenses is
approximately $24.8 million. This value
is derived based on the full cost of
budgeted resources associated with all
activities that support this fee class,
which is reduced by estimated part 170
collections and adjusted to reflect the
net allocated surcharge, allocated
30737
generic transportation resources, and
billing adjustments. The summary
calculations used to derive this value
are presented in Table VI for FY 2006,
with FY 2005 values shown for
comparison purposes (individual values
may not sum to totals due to rounding):
TABLE VI.—ANNUAL FEE SUMMARY CALCULATIONS FOR FUEL FACILITIES
[Dollars in millions]
FY 2005 final
FY 2006 final
Fuel Facility Fee Class:
Total budgeted resources .................................................................................................................................
Less estimated part 170 receipts .....................................................................................................................
$38.2
¥14.3
$39.6
¥15.8
Net part 171 resources .....................................................................................................................................
Plus allocated generic transportation ...............................................................................................................
Plus allocated surcharge ..................................................................................................................................
Billing adjustments (including carryover and budget rescission) .....................................................................
24.0
+N/A
+0.4
¥0.2
23.8
+0.4
+0.5
+0.0
Total required annual fee recovery ...........................................................................................................
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Summary fee calculations
24.1
24.8
The small increase in fuel facilities
FY 2006 total budgeted resources
compared to FY 2005 is due mostly to
an increase in the full cost of an FTE (as
explained previously). The total
required annual fee recovery also
increases as a result of the allocation of
generic transportation resources.
The total required annual fee recovery
amount is allocated to the individual
fuel facility licensees based on the
effort/fee determination matrix
established in the FY 1999 final fee rule
(64 FR 31448; June 10, 1999). In the
matrix (which is included in the NRC
work papers that are publicly available),
licensees are grouped into 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 a safety
and safeguards perspective. This
methodology can be applied to
determine fees for new licensees,
current licensees, licensees in unique
license situations, and certificate
holders.
This methodology is adaptable to
changes in the number of licensees or
certificate holders, licensed or certified
material and/or activities, and total
programmatic resources to be recovered
through annual fees. When a license or
certificate is modified, it may result in
a change of category for a particular fuel
facility licensee as a result of the
methodology used in the fuel facility
effort/fee matrix. Consequently, this
change may also have an effect on the
fees assessed to other fuel facility
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
licensees and certificate holders. For
example, if a fuel facility licensee
amends its license/certificate in such a
way (e.g., decommissioning or license
termination) that results in it not being
subject to part 171 costs applicable to
the fee class, then the budgeted costs for
the safety and/or safeguards
components will be spread among the
remaining fuel facility licensees/
certificate holders.
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
use 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.
Once the structure of the matrix is
established, the NRC’s fuel facility
project managers and regulatory
analysts determine the level of effort
associated with regulating each of these
facilities. This is done by assigning, for
each fuel facility, separate effort factors
for the safety and safeguards activities
associated with each type of regulatory
activity. The matrix includes ten types
of regulatory activities, including
enrichment and scrap/waste related
activities (see the work papers for the
complete list). Effort factors are assigned
as follows: zero (no regulatory effort),
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
one (low regulatory effort), five
(moderate regulatory effort), and ten
(high regulatory effort). These effort
factors are then totaled for each fee
category, so that each fee category has
a total effort factor for safety activities
and a total effort factor for safeguards
activities.
The budgeted resources for safety
activities are then allocated to each fee
category based on its percent of the total
regulatory effort for safety activities. For
example, if the total effort factor for
safety activities for all fuel facilities is
100, and the total effort factor for safety
activities for a given fee category is ten,
that fee category will be allocated ten
percent of the total budgeted resources
for safety activities. Similarly, the
budgeted resources for safeguards
activities are allocated to each fee
category based on its percent of the total
regulatory effort for safeguards
activities. The surcharge that must be
recovered from fuel facilities is
allocated to each fee category based on
its percent of the total regulatory effort
for both safety and safeguards activities.
The annual fee per licensee is then
calculated by dividing the total
allocated budgeted resources for the fee
category by the number licensees in that
fee category.
The effort factors for the various fuel
facility fee categories are summarized in
Table VII. The value of the effort factors
shown, as well as the percent of the
total effort factor for all fuel facilities,
reflects the total for each fee category
(not per facility). Note this table
includes the addition of a new fee
category, as discussed immediately
following the table.
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
30738
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE VII.—EFFORT FACTORS FOR FUEL FACILITIES
Effort factors
(percent of total)
Number of
facilities
Facility type (fee category)
Safety
High Enriched Uranium Fuel .......................................................................................................
Enrichment ...................................................................................................................................
Low Enriched Uranium Fuel ........................................................................................................
UF6 Conversion ...........................................................................................................................
Limited Operations .......................................................................................................................
Gas Centrifuge Enrichment Demonstration .................................................................................
Hot Cell ........................................................................................................................................
The NRC is dividing fee category
1.A.2.b under § 170.31 into two
categories, and is using the existing fee
methodology to establish separate
annual fees for these two categories.
Currently, fee category 1.A.2.b captures
all fuel facility licensees that do not fall
into other fee categories. There are
currently two licensees in this fee
category; one is a gas centrifuge
enrichment demonstration facility, and
one is a hot cell facility. The NRC
provides significantly different levels of
regulatory support for these facilities.
For example, the gas centrifuge
enrichment demonstration facility
generates and requires the safe
management of significantly greater
amounts of sensitive information. For
this reason, the NRC is dividing this fee
category into two categories to
separately establish annual fees for
these two types of facilities based on the
NRC’s resources (i.e., level of effort)
specifically associated with regulating
each type of facility. This change better
aligns the NRC’s budgeted resources
with the fees assessed to these two
facilities.
Applying the FY 2006 effort factors
(as summarized in Table VII) to the
safety, safeguards, and surcharge
components of the $24.8 million total
annual fee amount for the fuel facility
class results in annual fees for each
licensee within the categories of this
class summarized in Table VIII. Note
that the annual fees for the gas
centrifuge enrichment demonstration
and UF6 conversion facilities are higher
than the FY 2005 annual fees because
the safeguards effort factors for these
facilities have been raised. These
revised factors better reflect the effort
levels associated with safeguards
activities for these facilities, including
those associated with interim
compensatory measures and the
handling of sensitive information.
TABLE VIII.—ANNUAL FEES FOR FUEL
FACILITIES
Facility type (fee category)
High Enriched Uranium Fuel
Uranium Enrichment .............
Low Enriched Uranium .........
UF6 Conversion ....................
Gas Centrifuge Enrichment
Demonstration ...................
Limited Operations Facility ...
Hot Cell .................................
FY 2006
annual fee
2
2
3
1
1
1
1
Safeguards
101 (38.0)
70 (26.3)
66 (24.8)
12 (4.5)
8 (3.0)
3 (1.1)
6 (2.3)
96 (52.2)
40 (21.7)
21 (11.4)
7 (3.8)
3 (1.6)
15 (8.2)
2 (1.1)
Note the fuel facility annual fees
decreased slightly between the FY 2006
proposed and final fee rules due to (1)
the revised allocation of the ‘‘Homeland
Security Unallocated’’ planned activity,
which resulted in fewer budgeted
resources allocated to this fee class
(discussed further in Section II.D.1), and
(2) a reduction of allocated resources for
generic transportation activities
(discussed further in Section III.B.3.h).
As mentioned previously, the NRC is
currently reviewing applications to
build and operate gas centrifuge
uranium enrichment facilities. If these
facilities are licensed to operate, they
will be subject to an annual fee in
accordance with the methodology
described previously. The NRC’s current
plans are to establish a separate fee
category for these facilities.
b. Uranium Recovery Facilities
The total FY 2006 budgeted cost to be
recovered through annual fees assessed
to the uranium recovery class is
approximately $1.1 million. The
derivation of this value is shown below,
with FY 2005 values shown for
991,000
comparison purposes. (Individual
605,000
values may not sum to totals due to
440,000
rounding.)
$5,420,000
3,027,000
1,596,000
1,046,000
TABLE IX.—ANNUAL FEE SUMMARY CALCULATIONS FOR URANIUM RECOVERY FACILITIES
[Dollars in millions]
FY 2005 final
FY 2006 final
Uranium Recovery Fee Class:
Total budgeted resources .................................................................................................................................
Less estimated part 170 receipts .....................................................................................................................
$2.01
¥1.30
$2.34
¥1.29
Net part 171 resources .....................................................................................................................................
Plus allocated generic transportation ...............................................................................................................
Plus allocated surcharge ..................................................................................................................................
Billing adjustments (including carryover and budget rescission) .....................................................................
0.71
+N/A
+0.01
¥0.01
1.05
+N/A
+0.01
+0.00
Total required annual fee recovery ...........................................................................................................
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Summary fee calculations
0.70
1.06
The increase in budgeted resources
reflects the reallocation of existing NRC
FTE to uranium recovery licensing and
inspection activities from other
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
activities (e.g., Agreement State
oversight). The part 170 estimate (as
shown above) reflects an increase, over
historical actual part 170 collections, to
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
fully account for these additional
activities. The FY 2006 part 170
estimate is not much different than the
FY 2005 part 170 estimate because the
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
30739
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
FY 2005 estimate was higher than the
actual part 170 collections.
Of the required annual fee collections,
approximately $732,000 would be
assessed to DOE. The remaining
$329,000 would be recovered through
annual fees assessed to conventional
mills, in-situ leach solution mining
facilities, and 11e.(2) mill tailings
disposal facilities (incidental to existing
tailings sites).
Consistent with the change in
methodology adopted in the FY 2002
final fee rule (67 FR 42612; June 24,
2002), the total annual fee amount, less
the amounts specifically budgeted for
Title I activities, is allocated equally
between Title I and Title II licensees.
This results in an annual fee being
assessed to DOE to recover the costs
specifically budgeted for NRC’s Title I
activities plus 50 percent of the
remaining annual fee amount, including
the surcharge and generic/other costs,
for the uranium recovery class. The
remaining 50 percent of the surcharge
and generic/other costs are assessed to
the NRC Title II program licensees that
are subject to annual fees. The costs to
be recovered through annual fees
assessed to the uranium recovery class
are shown in Table X.
TABLE X.—COSTS RECOVERED THROUGH ANNUAL FEES; URANIUM RECOVERY FEE CLASS
DOE Annual Fee Amount [Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) Title I and Title II general licenses]:
UMTRCA Title I budgeted costs ..................................................................................................................................................
50 percent of generic/other uranium recovery budgeted costs ...................................................................................................
50 percent of uranium recovery surcharge ..................................................................................................................................
$402,913
322,722
6,536
Total Annual Fee Amount for DOE (rounded) ......................................................................................................................
Annual Fee Amount for UMTRCA Title II Specific Licenses:
50 percent of generic/other uranium recovery budgeted costs ...................................................................................................
50 percent of uranium recovery surcharge ..................................................................................................................................
732,000
Total Annual Fee Amount for Title II Specific Licenses .......................................................................................................
329,258
The matrix used to allocate the costs
of various categories of Title II specific
licensees has been reviewed and
continues to equally weight, as in FY
2005, the effort levels for each category
of uranium recovery facilities, in
accordance with the NRC’s FY 2006
budgeted activities. As such, each nonDOE uranium recovery licensee will be
assessed an equal share of the total
annual fee amount for UMTRCA Title II
specific licenses. Additionally, the NRC
is maintaining the existing approach for
establishing part 171 annual fees for
Title II uranium recovery licensees
[established in the FY 1995 fee rule (60
FR 32218; June 20, 1995)]. This
approach is as follows:
(1) The methodology identifies three
categories of licenses: Conventional
uranium mills (Class I facilities),
uranium solution mining facilities
(Class II facilities), and mill tailings
disposal facilities (11e.(2) disposal
facilities). Each category benefits from
the generic uranium recovery program
efforts (e.g., rulemakings, staff guidance
documents);
(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 facility closure;
(4) Each of the major program
elements was further divided into three
subelements; and
(5) The three major subelements of
generic activities associated with
uranium facility operations are
regulatory efforts related to the
operation of mills, handling and
disposal of waste, and prevention of
322,722
6,536
groundwater contamination. The three
major subelements of generic activities
associated with uranium facility closure
are regulatory efforts related to
decommissioning of facilities and land
clean-up, reclamation and closure of
tailings impoundments, and
groundwater clean-up. Weighted values
were assigned to each program element
and subelement considering health and
safety implications and the associated
effort to regulate these activities. 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 relative weighted factors per
facility type for the various categories of
specifically licensed Title II uranium
recovery licensees are as follows:
TABLE XI.—WEIGHTED FACTORS FOR URANIUM RECOVERY LICENSES
Level of benefit
Number of
facilities
Facility type
Category
weight
Total weight
Value
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Class I (conventional mills) ..............................................................................
Class II (solution mining) .................................................................................
11e.(2) disposal ...............................................................................................
11e.(2) disposal incidental to existing tailings sites ........................................
Applying these factors to the
approximately $329,000 in budgeted
costs to be recovered from Title II
specific licensees results in the
following revised annual fees for FY
2006:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
1
3
0
1
TABLE XII.—ANNUAL FEES FOR TITLE
II SPECIFIC LICENSES
Class I (conventional mills) ..
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
$65,900
800
2,400
0
800
20
60
0
20
TABLE XII.—ANNUAL FEES FOR TITLE
II SPECIFIC LICENSES—Continued
FY 2006
annual fee
Facility type
PO 00000
800
800
0
800
Percent
Facility type
Class II (solution mining) ......
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
FY 2006
annual fee
65,900
30740
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
fee for this fee category. If NRC issues
a license for this fee category in the
future, then the Commission will
establish the appropriate annual fee.
FY 2006
Facility type
annual fee
The uranium recovery annual fees
decreased slightly between the FY 2006
11e.(2) disposal ....................
N/A proposed and final fee rules due to the
11e.(2) disposal incidental to
revised allocation of the ‘‘Homeland
existing tailings sites .........
65,900
Security Unallocated’’ planned activity,
which resulted in fewer budgeted
Note because there are no longer any
resources allocated to this fee class
11e.(2) disposal facilities under the
(discussed further in Section II.D.1).
NRC’s regulatory jurisdiction, the NRC
As discussed in Section III.B.4,
has not allocated any budgeted
‘‘Eliminating the Existing Fee Payment
resources for these facilities, and
Exception for Uranium Recovery
therefore has not established an annual
Licensees,’’ the NRC is establishing that
TABLE XII.—ANNUAL FEES FOR TITLE
II SPECIFIC LICENSES—Continued
all Title II facilities be subject to the
billing provisions of § 171.19(c), which
state that annual fees that are less than
$100,000 are billed on the anniversary
date of the license.
c. Operating Power Reactors
The approximately $367.2 million in
budgeted costs to be recovered through
FY 2006 annual fees assessed to the
power reactor class was calculated as
shown in Table XIII. (FY 2005 values
shown for comparison purposes;
individual amounts may not sum to
totals due to rounding.)
TABLE XIII.—ANNUAL FEE SUMMARY CALCULATIONS FOR OPERATING POWER REACTORS
[Dollars in millions]
Summary fee calculations
FY 2005 final
FY 2006 final
Operating Power Reactors Fee Class:
Total budgeted resources .................................................................................................................................
Less estimated part 170 receipts .....................................................................................................................
$440.7
¥130.5
$515.9
¥155.2
Net part 171 resources .....................................................................................................................................
Plus allocated transportation ............................................................................................................................
Plus allocated surcharge ..................................................................................................................................
Billing adjustments (including carryover, any budget rescission) ....................................................................
310.2
+N/A
+4.0
¥2.6
360.7
+0.8
+5.5
+0.2
Total required annual fee recovery ...........................................................................................................
311.6
367.2
The budgeted costs to be recovered
through annual fees to power reactors,
including those for homeland security
activities related to power reactors, is
divided equally among the 104 power
reactors licensed to operate. This results
in a FY 2006 annual fee of $3,531,000
per reactor. Additionally, each power
reactor licensed to operate will be
assessed the FY 2006 spent fuel storage/
reactor decommissioning annual fee of
$173,000. This results in a total FY 2006
annual fee of $3,704,000 for each power
reactor licensed to operate.
The annual fee for power reactors
increases in FY 2006 compared to FY
2005 due to an increase in budgeted
resources for a number of activities,
including regulatory infrastructure for
new reactor licensing activities,
preparations for future combined
license applications, homeland securityrelated mitigating strategies, licensing
tasks related to the aging of reactor
systems and components, and
evaluating and resolving operational
issues. As shown previously, the NRC
estimates an increase in part 170
collections of about 19 percent from
operating power reactors; these
collections offset the required annual
fee recovery amount by a total of over
$155 million.
The power reactor annual fee
increased by about one percent between
the FY 2006 proposed and final rules
because of (1) a decrease in the
estimated part 170 collections from this
fee class, based on the latest four
quarters of invoices available, and (2)
the revised allocation of the ‘‘Homeland
Security Unallocated’’ planned activity,
which resulted in more budgeted
resources allocated to this fee class
(discussed further in Section II.D.1).
d. Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor
Decommissioning
For FY 2006, budgeted costs of
approximately $21.2 million for spent
fuel storage/reactor decommissioning
are to be recovered through annual fees
assessed to part 50 power reactors, and
to part 72 licensees who do not hold a
part 50 license. Those reactor licensees
that have ceased operations and have no
fuel onsite are not subject to these
annual fees. Table XIV below shows the
calculation of this annual fee amount.
(FY 2005 values shown for comparison
purposes; individual values may not
sum to totals due to rounding.)
TABLE XIV.—ANNUAL FEE SUMMARY CALCULATIONS FOR THE SPENT FUEL STORAGE/REACTOR DECOMMISSIONING FEE
CLASS
[Dollars in millions]
FY 2005 final
FY 2006 final
Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor—Decommissioning Fee Class:
Total budgeted resources .................................................................................................................................
Less estimated part 170 receipts .....................................................................................................................
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Summary fee calculations
$25.1
¥5.7
$26.6
¥5.8
Net part 171 resources .....................................................................................................................................
Plus allocated generic transportation ...............................................................................................................
Plus allocated surcharge ..................................................................................................................................
Billing adjustments (including carryover and budget rescission) .....................................................................
19.4
+N/A
+0.1
¥0.1
20.8
+0.2
+0.2
+0.0
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
30741
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE XIV.—ANNUAL FEE SUMMARY CALCULATIONS FOR THE SPENT FUEL STORAGE/REACTOR DECOMMISSIONING FEE
CLASS—Continued
[Dollars in millions]
Summary fee calculations
FY 2005 final
FY 2006 final
19.4
21.2
Total required annual fee recovery ...........................................................................................................
The required annual fee recovery
amount is divided equally among 122
licensees (and to one new licensee with
a 60 prorated annual fee, in accordance
with § 171.17(a)), resulting in a FY 2006
annual fee of $173,000 per licensee. The
value of total budgeted resources for this
fee class increased in FY 2006 compared
to FY 2005 due to an increase in the full
cost of a budgeted FTE, the allocation of
generic transportation resources, and
relatively small increases in contracts
allocated for activities such as licensing/
certification and training.
The annual fee for this fee class
increased slightly between the FY 2006
proposed and final fee rules because of
a reduced estimate of part 170 fee
collections, based on the latest four
quarters of invoices.
e. Test and Research Reactors
(Nonpower Reactors)
Approximately $320,000 in budgeted
costs is to be recovered through annual
fees assessed to the test and research
reactor class of licenses for FY 2006.
Table XV summarizes the annual fee
calculation for test and research reactors
for FY 2006 (as compared to FY 2005).
Individual values may not sum to totals
due to rounding.
TABLE XV.—ANNUAL FEE SUMMARY CALCULATIONS FOR TEST AND RESEARCH REACTORS
[Dollars in millions]
Summary fee calculations/test and research reactors fee class
FY 2005 final
FY 2006 final
Total budgeted resources ........................................................................................................................................
Less estimated part 170 receipts ............................................................................................................................
$0.52
¥0.28
$0.88
¥0.57
Net part 171 resources ............................................................................................................................................
Plus allocated generic transportation ......................................................................................................................
Plus allocated surcharge .........................................................................................................................................
Billing adjustments (including carryover and budget rescission) ............................................................................
0.24
+N/A
+0.00
¥0.00
0.31
+0.01
+0.01
+0.00
Total required annual fee recovery ..................................................................................................................
0.24
0.32
This required annual fee recovery
amount is divided equally among the
four test and research reactors subject to
annual fees, and results in a FY 2006
annual fee of $80,100 for each licensee.
This increase in annual fees from FY
2005 to FY 2006 is due to a relatively
large increase in budgeted resources for
licensing activities for test and research
reactors, which is part of an initiative to
reduce a backlog of reactor licensing
actions. Although the NRC estimates
that much of this increase will result in
an increase in estimated part 170
collections (which is factored into the
part 170 estimates above), some of these
resources are projected to be associated
with non-licensee specific activities,
and therefore will need to be recovered
under part 171.
Note the annual fee for test and
research reactors increased by about five
percent between the FY 2006 proposed
and final fee rules. This is due to a
lower estimate of part 170 fee
collections, based on the latest four
quarters of invoices.
f. Rare Earth Facilities
The FY 2006 budgeted costs of
$95,900 for rare earth facilities to be
recovered through annual fees will be
assessed to the one licensee who has a
specific license for receipt and
processing of source material, resulting
in a FY 2006 annual fee of $95,900.
Table XVI summarizes the annual fee
calculation for the rare earth fee class
for FY 2006 (as compared to FY 2005).
(Individual values may not sum to totals
due to rounding.)
TABLE XVI.—ANNUAL FEE SUMMARY CALCULATIONS FOR RARE EARTH FACILITIES
[Dollars in millions]
FY 2005 final
FY 2006 final
Rare Earth Fee Class:
Total budgeted resources .................................................................................................................................
Less estimated part 170 receipts .....................................................................................................................
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Summary fee calculations
$0.875
¥0.800
$0.831
¥0.740
Net part 171 resources .....................................................................................................................................
Plus allocated generic transportation ...............................................................................................................
Plus allocated surcharge ..................................................................................................................................
Billing adjustments (including carryover and budget rescission) .....................................................................
0.075
+N/A
+0.000
¥0.000
0.091
+N/A
+0.005
+0.000
Total required annual fee recovery ..................................................................................................................
0.074
0.096
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
30742
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
The total allocated resources for this
fee class decreased slightly in FY 2006
compared to FY 2005, but the annual fee
increases due to lower estimated part
170 collections. Note the rare earth
annual fee decreased slightly between
the FY 2006 proposed and final fee rules
because of the revised allocation of the
‘Homeland Security Unallocated’
planned activity, which resulted in
fewer budgeted resources allocated to
this fee class (discussed further in
Section II.D.1).
g. Materials Users
Table XVII shows the calculation of
the FY 2006 annual fee amount for
materials users licensees. (FY 2005
values shown for comparison purposes;
individual values may not sum to totals
due to rounding.)
TABLE XVII.—ANNUAL FEE SUMMARY CALCULATIONS FOR MATERIALS USERS
[Dollars in millions]
FY 2005 final
FY 2006 final
Fee Class:
Total budgeted resources .................................................................................................................................
Less estimated part 170 receipts .....................................................................................................................
$27.5
¥1.9
$30.3
¥2.0
Net part 171 resources .....................................................................................................................................
Plus allocated generic transportation ...............................................................................................................
Plus allocated surcharge ..................................................................................................................................
Billing adjustments (including carryover and budget rescission) .....................................................................
25.6
+N/A
+0.6
¥0.1
28.2
+0.6
+0.8
+0.0
Total required annual fee recovery ...........................................................................................................
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Summary fee calculations/materials users
26.0
29.6
To equitably and fairly allocate the
$29.6 million in FY 2006 budgeted costs
to be recovered in annual fees assessed
to the approximately 4,400 billable
diverse materials users licensees, the
NRC has continued to base the annual
fees for each fee category within this
class on the part 170 application fees
and estimated inspection costs for each
fee category. 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 licenses based on how much it costs
the 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
licenses.
The annual fee for these categories of
materials users licenses is developed as
follows:
Annual fee = Constant × [Application
Fee + (Average Inspection Cost divided
by Inspection Priority)]+ Inspection
Multiplier × (Average Inspection Cost
divided by Inspection Priority) +
Unique Category Costs.
The constant is the multiple necessary
to recover approximately $21.5 million
in general costs (including allocated
generic transportation costs) and is 1.21
for FY 2006. The inspection multiplier
is the multiple necessary to recover
approximately $7.2 million in
inspection costs, and is 1.57 for FY
2006. The unique category costs are any
special costs that the NRC has budgeted
for a specific category of licenses. For
FY 2006, approximately $111,000 in
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
budgeted costs for the implementation
of revised 10 CFR part 35, Medical Use
of Byproduct Material (unique costs),
has been allocated to holders of NRC
human use licenses.
The annual fee assessed to each
licensee also includes a share of the
$143,000 in surcharge costs allocated to
the materials users class of licenses and,
for certain categories of these licenses,
a share of the approximately $634,000
in LLW surcharge costs allocated to the
class. The annual fee for each fee
category is shown in § 171.16(d).
The annual fees for materials
licensees increased in FY 2006 mainly
because of an increase in budgeted
resources for activities relating to
information technology/tracking
systems for these types of licensees
(including tracking that relates to
homeland security purposes), increases
for inspection activities, and the
allocation of generic transportation
resources. Increases in annual fees for
materials users licensees (other than
master materials licenses, for which the
annual fee increased 49 percent) range
from approximately four percent to
approximately 23 percent. These
changes reflect the overall increase of
over 14 percent in budgeted resources to
be recovered through annual fees to this
fee class; the actual percentage increase
for different fee categories varies mainly
because of the difference in how
inspection versus other types of
resources are distributed to the fee
categories. For example, the inspection
resources to be recovered through
annual fees increased more than noninspection resources from FY 2005 to
FY 2006. Those fee categories that
receive a relatively larger share of these
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
inspection budgeted costs (due to their
higher average hours per inspection),
have annual fees that increase
somewhat more than other fee
categories, as compared to FY 2005.
This is also a key reason for the master
materials license fee increase.
Between the FY 2006 proposed and
final fee rules, annual fees increased
slightly for some materials users
licensees, decreased slightly for others,
and remained the same for the majority.
The reasons for changes in the materials
users fees are (1) A slight reduction in
the estimated part 170 collections for
this fee class, which increased the
annual fee recovery amount; (2) a small
decrease in allocated resources from the
‘Homeland Security Unallocated’
planned activity (discussed in Section
II.D.1); (3) a decrease in allocated
generic transportation resources
(discussed in more detail in Section
III.B.3.h); and (4) the transfer of
approximately 150 licensees to the State
of Minnesota (see Section III.B.3.5).
The impact of the transfer of licensees
to the State of Minnesota is that the
budgeted resources for most licensing
and inspection activities for the
materials users fee class are allocated to
fewer licensees. The FY 2006 final fee
rule calculations reflect the allocation of
a larger percentage of materials users
regulatory infrastructure resources to
the surcharge category of Agreement
State Regulatory Support because these
infrastructure resources are allocated to
the surcharge based on the percentage of
total materials users licensees in
Agreement States (and this percentage
increased from 79 to 80 percent between
the FY 2006 proposed and final fee
rules). However, budgeted resources for
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
activities such as licensing and
inspections for NRC materials users
licensees are not allocated to the
surcharge because they do not benefit
Agreement States or their licensees.
Therefore, the transfer of licensees to
the State of Minnesota between the FY
2006 proposed and final fee rules
increased the amount of licensing and
inspection resources to be recovered per
NRC licensee. The impact of this action
was somewhat offset by the changes
listed in (2) and (3) in the preceding
paragraph; the result is that there are no
significant changes in materials users
fees inbetween the FY 2006 proposed
and final fee rules.
30743
h. Transportation
Table XVIII shows the calculation of
the FY 2006 generic transportation
budgeted resources to be recovered
through annual fees. (FY 2005 values
shown for comparison purposes.)
TABLE XVIII.—ANNUAL FEE SUMMARY CALCULATIONS FOR TRANSPORTATION
[Dollars in millions]
Summary Fee calculations/transportation
FY 2005 final
FY 2006 final
Fee Class:
Total budgeted resources .................................................................................................................................
Less estimated part 170 receipts .....................................................................................................................
$5.4
¥1.1
$6.3
¥1.2
Net part 171 resources (required annual fee recovery) ...................................................................................
4.3
5.1
As discussed previously, the NRC is
recovering generic transportation costs
unrelated to DOE as part of existing
annual fees for license fee classes.
Under this approach, the annual fee for
fee categories 10.B.1 and 10.B.2 under
§ 171.16 are eliminated, but the NRC
will continue to assess a separate annual
fee under § 171.16, fee category 18.A, for
DOE transportation activities.
The total FY 2006 budgeted resources
for generic transportation activities,
including those to support DOE CoCs, is
$5.1 million. [Generic transportation
resources associated with fee-exempt
entities are not included in this total;
these costs are included in the
appropriate surcharge category (e.g., the
surcharge category for nonprofit
educational institutions).] These
resources are distributed to DOE (to be
included in its annual fee under fee
category 18.A of § 171.16) and each
license fee class based on the CoCs used
by DOE and each fee class, as a proxy
for the generic resources expended for
each fee class. (Note that the number of
CoCs used by fee class is adjusted to
take into account the percentage of
licensees in that fee class subject to
annual fees, as explained previously.)
As such, the amount of the generic
resources allocated is calculated by
multiplying the percentage of total CoCs
used by each fee class (and DOE) by the
total generic transportation resources to
be recovered.
For the FY 2006 final fee rule, the
amount of generic transportation
resources allocated to the fee classes
was reduced by the amount of estimated
annual fee collections for QA program
approvals in FY 2006 (approximately
$1.9 million). This is because of the
timing of the issuance and effective date
of the FY 2006 fee rule: The NRC is
receiving payments for annual fees for
transportation activities (fee categories
10.B.1 and 10.B.2 under § 171.16 for QA
program approval activities) until the
effective date of this fee rule. As such,
these collections have been applied to
the NRC’s fee recovery of FY 2006
generic transportation resources. This is
only a one-time adjustment because the
10.B.1 and 10.B.2 annual fees have been
eliminated as of the effective date of this
rule. Therefore, licensees should expect
the value of these allocated
transportation resources to increase in
future years. Note that the NRC has
applied the $1.9 million in FY 2006 QA
program approval fee collections to the
generic transportation resources to be
recovered from the fee classes, only, and
not to DOE’s required annual fee
recovery. This is because DOE is not
subject to the QA program approval
requirements as are commercial
licensees. Accordingly, DOE did not pay
these QA program approval fees nor
benefit from these approvals.
The distribution of these resources to
the license fee classes and DOE is as
follows (individual values may not sum
to totals due to rounding):
TABLE XIX.—DISTRIBUTION OF GENERIC TRANSPORTATION RESOURCES, FY 2006
[Dollars in millions]
Percentage of
total CoCs
(percent)
Allocated generic transportation
resources
License fee class/DOE:
Total ......................................................................................................................................
DOE ......................................................................................................................................
134
33
100
24.6
$5.13
1.26
Remainder to be Recovered ................................................................................................
Less Estimated FY 2006 QA program approval fee collections ..........................................
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
No. CoCs
benefitting fee
class (or DOE)
........................
........................
........................
........................
3.87
1.90
Net Amount to be Recovered from Fee Classes .................................................................
Fee Classes:
Total (w/o DOE) ....................................................................................................................
Operating Power Reactors ...................................................................................................
Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor Decommissioning ...................................................................
Test and Research Reactors ...............................................................................................
Fuel Facilities ........................................................................................................................
........................
........................
1.97
101
39
9
0.3
21
100
38.4
8.9
0.3
20.7
1.97
0.76
0.17
0.01
0.41
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
30744
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
TABLE XIX.—DISTRIBUTION OF GENERIC TRANSPORTATION RESOURCES, FY 2006—Continued
[Dollars in millions]
No. CoCs
benefitting fee
class (or DOE)
Percentage of
total CoCs
(percent)
Allocated generic transportation
resources
32
31.7
0.63
Materials Users .....................................................................................................................
The NRC is continuing to assess DOE
an annual fee based on the part 71 CoCs
it holds. The NRC is not allocating these
DOE-related resources to other
licensees’ annual fees because these
resources specifically support DOE;
hence the current fee recovery
methodology for these resources
remains efficient and equitable. Note
that DOE’s annual fee includes a portion
of the surcharge, resulting in a total
annual fee of $1,285,000 for FY 2006.
This fee increases from last year due to
budgeted increases for licensing/
certification activities and an increase in
the full cost of an FTE. The fee
decreased slightly between the FY 2006
proposed and final fee rules because of
a small decrease in allocated resources
from the ‘Homeland Security
Unallocated’ planned activity
(discussed in Section II.D.1).
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
4. Eliminating the Existing Fee Payment
Exception for Uranium Recovery
Licensees
Under the payment provisions of
§ 171.19, the NRC currently bills
licensees’ part 171 fees annually if their
annual fees are less than $100,000, and
quarterly if their annual fees are
$100,000 or more. However, the NRC
bills Class I and Class II uranium
recovery licensees quarterly in
accordance with § 171.19(b), regardless
of the amount of their annual fee. The
NRC established this payment exception
for Class I and Class II uranium recovery
licensees in the FY 2001 final rule (66
FR 32452; June 14, 2001) because the
annual fees for these licensees had been
fluctuating just above or below
$100,000. Since then, uranium recovery
license fees have been well below
$100,000. Because the basis of this
billing exception is now not a factor,
and this exception is administratively
burdensome to implement with the
current fee billing system, the NRC is
eliminating the billing exception for
Class I and Class II uranium recovery
licensees. These licensees are now
subject to the same payment provisions
as all other licensees, as described
previously.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
5. Agreement State Activities
By letter dated July 6, 2004, Governor
Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota requested
that the NRC enter into an Agreement
with the State as authorized by Section
274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954,
as amended. The Commission approved
this Agreement on January 26, 2006, and
the Agreement took effect March 31,
2006. This resulted in the transfer of
approximately 150 licenses to the State
of Minnesota from the NRC.
Note that the continuing costs of
Agreement State regulatory support and
oversight for the State of Minnesota, as
for any other Agreement State, are
recovered through the surcharge (as
reduced by the ten percent of its budget
that the NRC receives in appropriations
each year for these types of activities),
consistent with existing policy. As
discussed in Sections II.C.1 and III.B.g,
the budgeted resources for the
regulatory infrastructure to support
these types of licensees are prorated to
the surcharge based on the percent of
total licensees in Agreement States.
Accordingly, as a result of the State of
Minnesota becoming an Agreement
State, the NRC has increased the
percentage of materials users regulatory
infrastructure costs that are recovered
through the surcharge. Specifically, this
percentage increased from 79 to 80
between the FY 2006 and proposed and
final fee rules. However, some resources
associated with the materials users fee
class are not prorated to the surcharge
(e.g., resources for licensing and
inspection activities), because these
resources are for the purpose of
supporting NRC licensees, only. As
such, the transfer of licensees to the
State of Minnesota resulted in an
increase in annual fees for some
materials users licensees because the
budgeted resources for activities such as
licensing and inspection are now spread
to fewer NRC licensees.
6. Administrative Amendments
The NRC is clarifying the definition of
‘‘overhead and general and
administrative costs’’ under § 171.5.
This definition provides examples of
organizations that are included as
‘‘indirect costs.’’ The NRC is clarifying
that certain costs of some of these
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
organizations are not considered to be
indirect; therefore, in these instances,
these costs are not included in overhead
and general and administrative costs.
For example, the Atomic Safety and
Licensing Board Panel (ASLBP) is listed
as an indirect office in this definition.
There are instances in which the ASLBP
performs direct mission-related work,
and the budgeted resources for these
activities are considered to be direct in
the fee calculations (consistent with the
categorization of these resources in the
NRC’s budget). The NRC believes this
clarification better reflects the most
recent data on the types of budgeted
resources associated with these offices.
Additionally, this definition is revised
to eliminate reference to an organization
within the agency that no longer exists.
In summary, the NRC is—
1. Proceeding with the presumption
in favor of rebaselining beginning with
the FY 2006 fee rule;
2. Recovering generic transportation
costs as part of other existing annual
fees;
3. Revising the annual fees to reflect
the FY 2006 budget and other changes;
4. Eliminating the existing fee
payment exception for Class I and Class
II uranium recovery licensees;
5. Revising the number of NRC
licensees given that the State of
Minnesota became an Agreement State;
and,
6. Making an administrative change to
clarify the definition of ‘‘overhead and
general and administrative costs.’’
IV. Voluntary Consensus Standards
The National Technology Transfer
and Advancement Act of 1995, Pub. L.
104–113, requires that Federal agencies
use technical standards that are
developed or adopted by voluntary
consensus standards bodies unless
using these standards is inconsistent
with applicable law or is otherwise
impractical. In this final rule, the NRC
is amending the licensing, inspection,
and annual fees charged to its licensees
and applicants as necessary to recover
approximately 90 percent of its budget
authority in FY 2006 as required by the
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of
1990, as amended. This action does not
constitute the establishment of a
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
standard that contains 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 assessment nor an
environmental impact statement 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.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act
Statement
This final rule does not contain
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 under 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
National Cable Television Association,
Inc. v. United States, 415 U.S. 36 (1974)
and Federal Power Commission v. New
England Power Company, 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: 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 Association 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). The Commission’s
fee guidelines were developed based on
these legal decisions.
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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
F.2d 223 (5th Cir. 1979), cert. denied,
444 U.S. 1102 (1980). This 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 of 1954 and with applicable
regulations;
(3) The NRC could charge for costs
incurred in conducting environmental
reviews required by the National
Environmental Policy Act;
(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 lowlevel 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
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 subsequently
amended to extend the 100 percent fee
recovery requirement through FY 2000.
As mentioned previously, the FY 2001
EWDAA amended OBRA–90 to decrease
the NRC’s fee recovery amount by 2
percent per year beginning in FY 2001,
until the fee recovery amount was 90
percent in FY 2005. The FY 2006
EWDAA extended this 90 percent fee
recovery requirement through FY 2006.
As a result, the NRC is required to
recover approximately 90 percent of its
FY 2006 budget authority, less the
amounts appropriated from the NWF
and for WIR activities, through fees. To
comply with this statutory requirement
and in accordance with § 171.13, the
NRC is publishing the amount of the FY
2006 annual fees for reactor licensees,
fuel cycle licensees, materials licensees,
and holders of Certificates of
Compliance, registrations of sealed
source and devices, and Government
agencies. OBRA–90, consistent with the
accompanying Conference Committee
Report, and the amendments to OBRA–
90, provides that—
(1) The annual fees be based on
approximately 90 percent of the
Commission’s FY 2006 budget of $741.5
million less the funds directly
appropriated from the NWF to cover the
NRC’s high-level waste program and for
WIR activities, and less the amount of
funds collected from part 170 fees;
(2) The annual fees shall, to the
maximum extent practicable, have a
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
30745
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.
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).
Further, the NRC’s FY 1991 annual fee
rule methodology was 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 the Omnibus
Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, as
amended, to recover approximately 90
percent of its FY 2006 budget authority
through the assessment of user fees.
This Act 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 2006. This rule will result in
increases in the annual fees charged to
certain licensees and holders of
certificates, registrations, and approvals,
and decreases in annual fees for others.
Licensees affected by the annual fee
increases and decreases include those
that qualify as a small entity under
NRC’s size standards in 10 CFR 2.810.
The Regulatory Flexibility Analysis,
prepared in accordance with 5 U.S.C.
604, is included as Appendix A to this
final rule.
The Congressional Review Act of
1996 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 2006.
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 amendments do not
require the modification of, or additions
to systems, structures, components, or
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
30746
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
92–314, 86 Stat. 227 (42 U.S.C. 2201w); sec.
201, Pub. L. 93–438, 88 Stat. 1242, as
amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 205a, Pub. L.
101–576, 104 Stat. 2842, as amended (31
U.S.C. 901, 902); sec. 1704, 112 Stat. 2750 (44
U.S.C. 3504 note); sec. 623, Pub. L. 109–58,
119 Stat. 783 (42 U.S.C. 2201(w)).
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
I 2. In § 170.3, the definition of special
projects is revised to read as follows:
In accordance with the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996, Pub. L. 104–121,
the NRC has determined that this action
is a major rule and has verified the
determination with the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs of
the Office of Management and Budget.
§ 170.3
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;
the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974,
as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553,
the NRC is adopting the following
amendments to 10 CFR parts 170 and
171.
I
PART 170—FEES FOR FACILITIES,
MATERIALS, IMPORT AND EXPORT
LICENSES, AND OTHER
REGULATORY SERVICES UNDER THE
ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954, AS
AMENDED
1. The authority citation for part 170
is revised to read as follows:
I
Definitions.
*
*
*
*
*
Special projects means those requests
submitted to the Commission for review
for which fees are not otherwise
specified in this chapter and contested
hearings on licensing actions directly
related to U.S. Government national
security initiatives, as determined by
the NRC. Examples of special projects
include, but are not limited to,
contested hearings on licensing actions
directly related to Presidentiallydirected national security programs,
topical report reviews, early site
reviews, waste solidification facilities,
activities related to the tracking and
monitoring of shipment of classified
matter, 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. Special
projects does not include those
contested hearings for which a fee
exemption is granted in § 170.11(a)(2),
including those related to individual
plant security modifications.
*
*
*
*
*
I 3. In § 170.11, paragraph (a)(5) is
removed and reserved, and paragraph
(a)(4)(iii) and the introductory text of
paragraph (a)(9), paragraph (a)(9)(i) and
the introductory text of paragraph
(a)(9)(ii) are revised as follows:
§ 170.11
Authority: Sec. 9701, Pub. L. 97–258, 96
Stat. 1051 (31 U.S.C. 9701); sec. 301, Pub. L.
Exemptions.
(a) * * *
(4) * * *
(iii) Distribution of byproduct
material, source material, or special
nuclear material or products containing
byproduct material, source material or
special nuclear material; or
*
*
*
*
*
(9) Federally-owned and State-owned
research reactors used primarily for
educational training and academic
research purposes. For purposes of this
exemption, the term research reactor
means a nuclear reactor that—
(i) Is licensed by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission under section
104c. of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954
(42 U.S.C. 2134(c)) at a thermal power
level of 10 megawatts or less; and
(ii) If so licensed at a thermal power
level of more than 1 megawatt, does not
contain—
*
*
*
*
*
I 4. Section 170.20 is revised to read as
follows:
§ 170.20 Average cost per professional
staff-hour.
Fees for permits, licenses,
amendments, renewals, special projects,
part 55 re-qualification and replacement
examinations and tests, other required
reviews, approvals, and inspections
under §§ 170.21 and 170.31 will be
calculated using the following
applicable professional staff-hour rates:
(a) Reactor Program (§ 170.21
Activities, excluding reactor
decommissioning and import/export
licensing activities): $217 per hour
(b) Nuclear Materials and Nuclear
Waste Program (§ 170.31 Activities, as
well as the reactor decommissioning
and import/export licensing activities
covered under § 170.21): $214 per hour
I 5. In § 170.21, Category K and footnote
1 in the table are revised to read as
follows:
§ 170.21 Schedule of fees for production
and utilization facilities, review of standard
referenced design approvals, special
projects, inspections and import and export
licenses.
*
*
*
*
*
SCHEDULE OF FACILITY FEES
[See footnotes at end of table]
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
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 production and utilization facilities 4 (including reactors and other facilities) and exports of components requiring Commission and Executive Branch review, for example, actions under 10 CFR
110.40(b).
Application—new license, or amendment
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
*
$13,900
30747
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
SCHEDULE OF FACILITY FEES—Continued
[See footnotes at end of table]
Facility categories and type of fees
Fees 1 2
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, or amendment
3. Application for export of components requiring the assistance of the Executive Branch to obtain foreign government
assurances.
Application—new license, or amendment
4. Application for export of facility components and equipment (examples provided in 10 CFR part 110, Appendix A,
Items (5) through (9)) not requiring Commission or Executive Branch review, or obtaining foreign government assurances.
Application—new license, or amendment
5. Minor amendment of any active export or import license, for example, to extend the expiration date, change domestic information, or make other revisions which do not involve any substantive changes to license terms or conditions
or to the type of facility or component authorized for export and therefore, do not require in-depth analysis or review
or consultation with the Executive Branch, U.S. host state, or foreign government authorities.
Minor amendment
$8,100
$2,600
$1,700
$320
1 Fees
will not be charged for orders related to civil penalties or other civil sanctions issued by the Commission under § 2.202 of this chapter or
for amendments resulting specifically from the requirements of these orders. For orders unrelated to civil penalties or other civil sanctions, fees
will be charged for any resulting licensee-specific activities not otherwise exempted from fees under this chapter. 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 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 § 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 § 170.20.
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
4 Imports only of major components for end-use at NRC-licensed reactors are now authorized under NRC general import license.
6. Section 170.31 is revised to read as
follows:
I
§ 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. For those fee
categories identified to be subject to full
cost fees, full cost fees will be assessed
for all licensing and inspection
activities, unless otherwise indicated.
SCHEDULE OF MATERIALS FEES
[See footnotes at end of table]
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Category of materials licenses and type of fees 1
Fees 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 (High Enriched Uranium) ...........................................................................................
(b) Low Enriched Uranium in Dispersible Form Used for Fabrication of Power Reactor Fuel ..............................................
(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 ........................................................................................................................................
(b) Gas centrifuge enrichment demonstration facilities ...........................................................................................................
(c) Hot cell facilities .................................................................................................................................................................
B. Licenses for receipt and storage of spent fuel and reactor-related Greater than Class C (GTCC) waste at an independent
spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI).
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 § 150.11 of this chapter, for which the licensee shall pay the
same fees as those for Category 1A: 4
Application ...............................................................................................................................................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
19:03 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
Full Cost.
Full Cost.
Full
Full
Full
Full
Cost.
Cost.
Cost.
Cost.
$990.
$2,000.
30748
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
SCHEDULE OF MATERIALS FEES—Continued
[See footnotes at end of table]
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Category of materials licenses and type of fees 1
Fees 2 3
E. Licenses or certificates for construction and operation of a uranium enrichment facility .........................................................
2. Source material:
A.(1) Licenses for possession and use of source 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.
(a) Class I facilities 4 ................................................................................................................................................................
(b) Class II facilities 4 ...............................................................................................................................................................
(c) Other facilities 4 ..................................................................................................................................................................
(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, except those licenses subject to the fees in Category 2A(2) or Category 2A(4).
(4) 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 2A(2).
B. Licenses which authorize the possession, use, and/or installation of source material for shielding:
Application ...............................................................................................................................................................................
C. All other source material licenses:
Application ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
C. Licenses issued under §§ 32.72 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 § 170.11(a)(4). These licenses are covered by fee Category 3D.
Application ...............................................................................................................................................................................
D. Licenses and approvals issued under §§ 32.72 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 §§ 32.72 and/or 32.74 of this chapter to nonprofit educational institutions
whose processing or manufacturing is exempt under § 170.11(a)(4).
Application ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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:
Application ...............................................................................................................................................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
Full Cost.
Full Cost.
Full
Full
Full
Full
Cost.
Cost.
Cost.
Cost.
Full Cost.
$240.
$8,400.
$10,000.
$3,800.
$5,100.
$3,600.
$2,500.
$5,000.
$12,000.
$14,600.
$8,700.
$1,500.
$880.
$8,400.
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
30749
SCHEDULE OF MATERIALS FEES—Continued
[See footnotes at end of table]
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Category of materials licenses and type of fees 1
Fees 2 3
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
O. Licenses for possession and use of byproduct material issued under part 34 of this chapter for industrial radiography operations:
Application ...............................................................................................................................................................................
P. All other specific byproduct material licenses, except those in Categories 4A through 9D:
Application ...............................................................................................................................................................................
Q. Registration of a device(s) generally licensed under part 31 of this chapter:
Registration ..............................................................................................................................................................................
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:
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
B. Licenses for possession and use of byproduct material for field flooding tracer studies:
Licensing ..................................................................................................................................................................................
6. Nuclear laundries:
A. Licenses for commercial collection and laundry of items contaminated with byproduct material, source material, or special
nuclear material:
Application ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 ...............................................................................................................................................................................
8. Civil defense:
A. Licenses for possession and use of byproduct material, source material, or special nuclear material for civil defense activities:
Application ...............................................................................................................................................................................
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 ........................................................................................................................................................
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 ........................................................................................................................................................
C. Safety evaluation of sealed sources containing byproduct material, source material, or special nuclear material, except reactor fuel, for commercial distribution:
Application—each source ........................................................................................................................................................
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 ........................................................................................................................................................
10. Transportation of radioactive material:
A. Evaluation of casks, packages, and shipping containers:
1. Spent Fuel, High-Level Waste, and plutonium air packages ..............................................................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
$3,400.
$3,800.
$3,500.
$1,200.
$730.
Full Cost.
$2,600.
$3,900.
$1,400.
Full Cost.
$17,100.
$9,400.
$6,700.
$2,300.
$490.
$21,000.
$21,000.
$2,400.
$810.
Full Cost.
30750
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
SCHEDULE OF MATERIALS FEES—Continued
[See footnotes at end of table]
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Category of materials licenses and type of fees 1
Fees 2 3
2. Other Casks .........................................................................................................................................................................
B. Quality assurance program approvals issued under part 71 of this chapter.
1. Users and Fabricators
Application ........................................................................................................................................................................
Inspections ........................................................................................................................................................................
2. Users
Application ........................................................................................................................................................................
Inspections ........................................................................................................................................................................
C. Evaluation of security plans, route approvals, route surveys, and transportation security devices (including immobilization
devices).
11. Review of standardized spent fuel facilities ....................................................................................................................................
12. Special projects:
Including approvals, preapplication/licensing activities, and inspections .......................................................................................
13. A. Spent fuel storage cask Certificate of Compliance .....................................................................................................................
B. Inspections related to storage of spent fuel under § 72.210 of this chapter .............................................................................
14. A. 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.
B. Site-specific decommissioning activities associated with unlicensed sites, regardless of whether or not the sites have been
previously licensed. Part 170 fees for these activities will not be charged until July 25, 2006.
15. Import and Export licenses:
Licenses issued under part 110 of this chapter for the import and export only of special nuclear material, source material, tritium and other byproduct material, and the export only of heavy water, or nuclear grade graphite (fee categories 15.A
through 15.E).
A. Application for export or import of nuclear materials, including radioactive waste requiring Commission and Executive
Branch review, for example, those actions under 10 CFR 110.40(b).
Application—new license, or amendment ........................................................................................................................
B. Application for export or import of nuclear material, including radioactive waste, requiring Executive Branch review,
but not Commission review. This category includes applications for the export and import of radioactive waste and requires NRC to consult with domestic host state authorities, Low-Level Radioactive Waste Compact Commission, the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, etc.
Application—new license, or amendment ........................................................................................................................
C. Application for export of nuclear material, for example, routine reloads of low enriched uranium reactor fuel and/or
natural uranium source material requiring the assistance of the Executive Branch to obtain foreign government assurances.
Application—new license, or amendment ........................................................................................................................
D. Application for export or import of nuclear material, including radioactive waste, not requiring Commission or Executive Branch review, or obtaining foreign government assurances. This category includes applications 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 located in the same country, 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, or amendment ........................................................................................................................
E. Minor amendment of any active export or import license, for example, to extend the expiration date, change domestic
information, or make other revisions which do not involve any substantive changes to license terms and conditions or
to the type/quantity/chemical composition of the material authorized for export and therefore, do not require in-depth
analysis, review, or consultations with other Executive Branch, U.S. host state, or foreign government authorities.
Minor amendment .............................................................................................................................................................
Licenses issued under part 110 of this chapter for the import and export only of Category 1 and Category 2 quantities of
radioactive material listed in Appendix P to part 110 of this chapter (fee categories 15.F through 15.R).5
Category 1 Exports:
F. Application for export of Category 1 materials involving an exceptional circumstances review under 10 CFR 110.42(e)(4).
Application—new license, or amendment ...............................................................................................................................
G. Application for export of Category 1 materials requiring Executive Branch review, Commission review, and government to
government consent.
Application—new license, or amendment ...............................................................................................................................
H. Application for export of Category 1 materials requiring Commission review and government to government consent.
Application—new license, or amendment ...............................................................................................................................
I. Application for export of Category 1 material requiring government to government consent.
Application—new license, or amendment ...............................................................................................................................
Category 2 Exports:
J. Application for export of Category 2 materials involving an exceptional circumstances review under 10 CFR 110.42(e)(4).
Application—new license, or amendment ...............................................................................................................................
K. Applications for export of Category 2 materials requiring Executive Branch review and Commission review.
Application—new license, or amendment ...............................................................................................................................
L. Application for the export of Category 2 materials.
Application—new license, or amendment ...............................................................................................................................
Category 1 Imports:
M. Application for the import of Category 1 material requiring Commission review.
Application—new license, or amendment ...............................................................................................................................
N. Application for the import of Category 1 material.
Application—new license, or amendment ...............................................................................................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
Full Cost.
$5,600.
Full Cost.
$5,600.
Full Cost.
Full Cost.
Full Cost.
Full
Full
Full
Full
Cost.
Cost.
Cost.
Cost.
Full Cost.
$13,900.
$8,100.
$2,600.
$1,700.
$320.
$13,900.
$8,100.
$5,100.
$4,300.
$13,900.
$8,100.
$3,900.
$4,100.
$3,400.
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
30751
SCHEDULE OF MATERIALS FEES—Continued
[See footnotes at end of table]
Category of materials licenses and type of fees 1
Fees 2 3
Category 2 Imports:
O. Application for the import of Category 2 material.
Application—new license, or amendment ...............................................................................................................................
Category 1 Imports with Agent and Multiple Licensees:
P. Application for the import of Category 1 material with agent and multiple licensees requiring Commission review.
Application—new license, or amendment ...............................................................................................................................
Q . Application for the import of Category 1 material with agent and multiple licensees.
Application—new license, or amendment ...............................................................................................................................
Minor Amendments (Category 1 and 2 Export and Imports):
R. Minor amendment of any active export or import license, for example, to extend the expiration date, change domestic information, or make other revisions which do not involve any substantive changes to license terms and conditions or to the
type/quantity/chemical composition of the material authorized for export and therefore, do not require in-depth analysis, review, or consultations with other Executive Branch, U.S. host state, or foreign authorities.
Minor amendment ....................................................................................................................................................................
16. Reciprocity:
Agreement State licensees who conduct activities under the reciprocity provisions of 10 CFR 150.20.
Application ...............................................................................................................................................................................
17. Master materials licenses of broad scope issued to Government agencies:
Application ...............................................................................................................................................................................
18. Department of Energy
A. Certificates of Compliance. Evaluation of casks, packages, and shipping containers (including spent fuel, high-level waste,
and other casks, and plutonium air packages).
B. Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) activities ............................................................................................
1 Types
$3,000.
$4,700.
$3,900.
$ 320.
$1,900.
$17,800.
Full Cost.
Full Cost.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
of fee—Separate charges, as shown in the schedule, will be assessed for pre-application consultations and reviews; applications for
new licenses, approvals, or license terminations; possession only licenses; issuance of new licenses and approvals; certain amendments and renewals to existing licenses and approvals; safety evaluations of sealed sources and devices; generally licensed device registrations; and certain
inspections. The following guidelines apply to these charges:
(a) Application and registration 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 pre-application
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
§ 170.12(b).
(c) Amendment fees. Applications for amendments to export and import licenses must be accompanied by the prescribed amendment fee for
each license 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.
(d) Inspection fees. Inspections resulting from investigations conducted by the Office of Investigations and non-routine inspections that result
from third-party allegations are not subject to fees. Inspection fees are due upon notification by the Commission in accordance with § 170.12(c).
(e) Generally licensed device registrations under 10 CFR 31.5. Submittals of registration information must be accompanied by the prescribed
fee.
2 Fees will not be charged for orders related to civil penalties or other civil sanctions issued by the Commission under 10 CFR 2.202 or for
amendments resulting specifically from the requirements of these orders. For orders unrelated to civil penalties or other civil sanctions, fees will
be charged for any resulting licensee-specific activities not otherwise exempted from fees under this chapter. 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
§ 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
§ 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 § 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 For a combined import and export license application for material listed in Appendix P to part 110 of this chapter, only the higher of the two
applicable fee amounts must be paid.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
30752
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
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
7. The authority citation for part 171
is revised to read as follows:
I
8. In § 171.5, the definition of
Overhead and general and
administrative costs is revised to read as
follows:
I
Definitions.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
*
*
*
*
*
Overhead and general and
administrative costs means:
(1) The Government benefits for each
employee such as leave and holidays,
retirement and disability benefits,
health and life insurance costs, and
social security costs;
(2) Travel costs;
(3) Direct overhead [e.g., supervision
and support staff that directly support
the NRC safety mission areas;
administrative support costs (e.g., rental
of space, equipment,
telecommunications and supplies)]; and
(4) Indirect costs that would include,
but not be limited to, NRC central policy
direction, legal and executive
management services for the
Commission and special and
independent reviews, investigations,
and enforcement and appraisal of NRC
programs and operations. Some of the
organizations included, in whole or in
part, are the Commissioners, Secretary,
Executive Director for Operations,
General Counsel, Congressional and
Public Affairs (except for international
safety and safeguards programs),
Inspector General, Investigations,
Enforcement, Small and Disadvantaged
Business Utilization and Civil Rights,
the Technical Training Center, Advisory
Committees on Nuclear Waste and
Reactor Safeguards, and the Atomic
Safety and Licensing Board Panel. The
Commission views these budgeted costs
as support for all its regulatory services
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
§ 171.15 Annual fees: Reactor licenses
and independent spent fuel storage
licenses.
*
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. 2132, as
amended by sec. 6101, Pub. L. 101–508, 104
Stat. 1388, as amended by sec. 2903a, Pub.
L. 102–486, 106 Stat. 3125 (42 U.S.C. 2213,
2214), and as amended by Title IV, Pub. L.
109–103, 119 Stat. 2283 (42 U.S.C. 2214); sec.
301, Pub. L. 92–314, 86 Stat. 227 (42 U.S.C.
2201w); sec. 201, Pub. L. 93–438, 88 Stat.
1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 1704,
112 Stat. 2750 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note).
§ 171.5
provided to applicants, licensees, and
certificate holders, and these costs must
be recovered under Public Law 101–
508.
*
*
*
*
*
I 9. In § 171.15 paragraphs (b), (c), (d),
and (e) are revised to read as follows:
*
*
*
*
(b)(1) The FY 2006 annual fee for each
operating power reactor which must be
collected by September 30, 2006, is
$3,704,000.
(2) The FY 2006 annual fee is
comprised of a base annual fee for
power reactors licensed to operate, a
base spent fuel storage/reactor
decommissioning annual fee, and
associated additional charges
(surcharges). The activities comprising
the FY 2006 spent storage/reactor
decommissioning base annual fee are
shown in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) and (ii) of
this section. The activities comprising
the FY 2006 surcharge are shown in
paragraph (d)(1) of this section. The
activities comprising the FY 2006 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 2006 annual fee for each
power reactor holding a 10 CFR part 50
license that is in a decommissioning or
possession only status and has spent
fuel onsite and each independent spent
fuel storage 10 CFR part 72 licensee who
does not hold a 10 CFR part 50 license
is $173,000.
(2) The FY 2006 annual fee is
comprised of a base spent fuel storage/
reactor decommissioning annual fee
(which is also included in the operating
power reactor annual fee shown in
paragraph (b) of this section), and an
additional charge (surcharge). The
activities comprising the FY 2006
surcharge are shown in paragraph (d)(1)
of this section. The activities comprising
the FY 2006 spent fuel storage/reactor
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
decommissioning rebaselined 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 2006 surcharge are as follows:
(i) Low-level waste disposal generic
activities;
(ii) Activities not attributable to an
existing NRC licensee or class of
licenses (e.g., international cooperative
safety program and international
safeguards activities, support for the
Agreement State program,
decommissioning activities for
unlicensed sites, and activities for
unregistered general licensees); 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, 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, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
(2) The total FY 2006 surcharge
allocated to the operating power reactor
class of licenses is $5.5 million, not
including the amount allocated to the
spent fuel storage/reactor
decommissioning class. The FY 2006
operating power reactor surcharge to be
assessed to each operating power reactor
is approximately $53,000. This amount
is calculated by dividing the total
operating power reactor surcharge ($5.5
million) by the number of operating
power reactors (104).
(3) The FY 2006 surcharge allocated
to the spent fuel storage/reactor
decommissioning class of licenses is
$152,000. The FY 2006 spent fuel
storage/reactor decommissioning
surcharge to be assessed 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 10 CFR part 72
licensee who does not hold a 10 CFR
part 50 license is approximately $1,200.
This amount is calculated by dividing
the total surcharge costs allocated to this
class by the total number of power
reactor licenses, except those that
permanently ceased operations and
have no fuel onsite, and 10 CFR part 72
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
licensees who do not hold a 10 CFR part
50 license.
(e) The FY 2006 annual fees for
licensees authorized to operate a test
and research (non-power) reactor
licensed under part 50 of this chapter,
unless the reactor is exempted from fees
under § 171.11(a), are as follows:
Research reactor—$80,100.
Test reactor—$80,100.
10. In § 171.16, the section heading
and paragraph (d) are revised to read as
follows:
I
§ 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.
*
*
*
*
*
30753
(d) The FY 2006 annual fees are
comprised of a base annual fee and an
additional charge (surcharge). The
activities comprising the FY 2006
surcharge are shown for convenience in
paragraph (e) of this section. The FY
2006 annual fees for materials licensees
and holders of certificates, registrations
or approvals subject to fees under this
section are shown in the following table:
SCHEDULE OF MATERIALS ANNUAL FEES AND FEES FOR GOVERNMENT AGENCIES LICENSED BY NRC
[See footnotes at end of table]
Annual
fees1 2 3
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Category of materials licenses
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 (High Enriched Uranium) .........................................................................................
(b) Low Enriched Uranium in Dispersible Form Used for Fabrication of Power Reactor Fuel ............................................
(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 ......................................................................................................................................
(b) Gas centrifuge enrichment demonstration facilities ........................................................................................................
(c) Hot cell facilities ...............................................................................................................................................................
B. Licenses for receipt and storage of spent fuel and reactor-related Greater than Class C (GTCC) waste at an independent spent fuel storage installation (ISFSI) ........................................................................................................................
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 ...................................................................................................
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 § 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 uranium enrichment facility .............................................................................
2. Source material:
A. (1) Licenses for possession and use of source 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.
(a) Class I facilities 4 ..............................................................................................................................................................
(b) Class II facilities 4 .............................................................................................................................................................
(c) Other facilities 4 ................................................................................................................................................................
(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, except those licenses subject to the fees in Category 2A(2) or Category
2A(4) .........................................................................................................................................................................................
(4) 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 2A(2) .....................................................
B. Licenses that authorize only the possession, use and/or installation of source material for shielding ..................................
C. All other source material licenses ...........................................................................................................................................
3. Byproduct material:
A. Licenses of broad scope for 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 ..........................................
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 ........................................................................
C. Licenses issued under §§ 32.72 and/or 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 § 171.11(a)(1). These licenses are covered by fee under
Category 3D ..............................................................................................................................................................................
D. Licenses and approvals issued under §§ 32.72 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 §§ 32.72 and 32.74 of this chapter to nonprofit educational institutions
whose processing or manufacturing is exempt under § 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 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 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 ....................................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
$5,420,000
1,596,000
605,000
991,000
440,000
11 N/A
2,500
6,900
3,027,000
1,046,000
65,900
65,900
95,900
5 N/A
65,900
890
14,800
28,900
9,400
11,600
6,600
4,800
8,600
30754
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
SCHEDULE OF MATERIALS ANNUAL FEES AND FEES FOR GOVERNMENT AGENCIES LICENSED BY NRC—Continued
[See footnotes at end of table]
Annual
fees1 2 3
Category of materials licenses
4.
5.
6.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
7.
8.
9.
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 in which the source is not exposed for irradiation purposes ....................................................................
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, 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 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 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 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, 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 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 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 services
are subject to the fees specified in fee categories 4A, 4B, and 4C ........................................................................................
O. Licenses for possession and use of byproduct 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, except those in Categories 4A through 9D ...................................................
Q. Registration of devices generally licensed under part 31 of this chapter ...............................................................................
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 ...............................................................
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 ...........................................................................
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 ............................................................................................................................................
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 .................................................................................
B. Licenses for possession and use of byproduct material for field flooding tracer studies .......................................................
Nuclear laundries:
A. Licenses for commercial collection and laundry of items contaminated with byproduct material, source material, or special nuclear material ..................................................................................................................................................................
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. 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 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 ...
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. This category also includes the possession and use of source material
for shielding when authorized on the same license.9 ..............................................................................................................
Civil defense:
A. Licenses for possession and use of byproduct material, source material, or special nuclear material for civil defense activities ........................................................................................................................................................................................
Device, product, or sealed source safety evaluation:
A. Registrations issued for the safety evaluation of devices or products containing byproduct material, source material, or
special nuclear material, except reactor fuel devices, for commercial distribution ..................................................................
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
31,100
19,300
11,700
3,200
1,900
16,400
6,900
7,300
15,400
2,900
13 N/A
5 N/A
12,900
9,700
4,800
5 N/A
27,400
15,100
33,000
6,000
1,900
25,700
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
30755
SCHEDULE OF MATERIALS ANNUAL FEES AND FEES FOR GOVERNMENT AGENCIES LICENSED BY NRC—Continued
[See footnotes at end of table]
Annual
fees1 2 3
Category of materials licenses
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
B. Registrations issued for the 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 .......................................................................................................................................................
C. Registrations issued for the safety evaluation of 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 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 ....................................................................................................................................................................
Transportation of radioactive material:
A. Certificates of Compliance or other package approvals issued for design of casks, packages, and shipping containers.
1. Spent Fuel, High-Level Waste, and plutonium air packages ...........................................................................................
2. Other Casks ......................................................................................................................................................................
B. Quality assurance program approvals issued under part 71 of this chapter.
1. Users and Fabricators .......................................................................................................................................................
2. Users .................................................................................................................................................................................
C. Evaluation of security plans, route approvals, route surveys, and transportation security devices (including immobilization
devices) .....................................................................................................................................................................................
Standardized spent fuel facilities ...................................................................................................................................................
Special Projects .............................................................................................................................................................................
A. Spent fuel storage cask Certificate of Compliance ..................................................................................................................
B. General licenses for storage of spent fuel under 10 CFR 72.210 ..........................................................................................
Decommissioning/Reclamation:
A. 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 .........................................
B. Site-specific decommissioning activities associated with unlicensed sites, regardless of whether or not the sites have
been previously licensed ..........................................................................................................................................................
Import and Export licenses ............................................................................................................................................................
Reciprocity .....................................................................................................................................................................................
Master materials licenses of broad scope issued to Government agencies ................................................................................
Department of Energy:
A. Certificates of Compliance .......................................................................................................................................................
B. Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) activities ..........................................................................................
25,700
2,900
1,000
6 N/A
6 N/A
6 N/A
6 N/A
6 N/A
6 N/A
6 N/A
6 N/A
12 N/A
7 N/A
7 N/A
8 N/A
8 N/A
373,000
10 1,285,000
732,000
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 current 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 before October 1, 2006,
and permanently ceased licensed activities entirely by September 30, 2006. 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 § 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 Categories 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 § 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. If NRC issues a license for these categories, the Commission will consider establishing an annual fee for this type of license.
6 Standardized spent fuel facilities, 10 CFR parts 71 and 72 Certificates of Compliance and related Quality Assurance program approvals, 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 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.
11 See § 171.15(c).
12 See § 171.15(c).
13 No annual fee is charged for this category because the cost of the general license registration program applicable to licenses in this category will be recovered through 10 CFR part 170 fees.
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
*
*
*
*
*
11. In § 171.19 paragraphs (b) and (d)
are revised to read as follows:
I
§ 171.19
*
*
Payment.
*
VerDate Aug<31>2005
*
*
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
(b) Annual fees in the amount of
$100,000 or more and described in the
Federal Register document issued
under § 171.13, must be paid in
quarterly installments of 25 percent as
billed by the NRC. The quarters begin
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
30756
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
amount of the revised annual fee, the
overpayment will be refunded.
Licensees whose annual fee for the
previous fiscal year was less than
$100,000 (billed on the anniversary date
of the license), and whose revised
annual fee for the current fiscal year is
$100,000 or greater (subject to quarterly
billing), will be issued a bill upon
publication of the final rule for the full
amount of the revised annual fee for the
current fiscal year, less any payments
received for the current fiscal year based
on the anniversary date billing process.
*
*
*
*
*
(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, 1D, 2A(2)
Other Facilities, 2A(3), 2A(4), 2B, 2C,
3A through 3P, and 4B through 9D.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th day
of May, 2006.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jesse L. Funches,
Chief Financial Officer.
Note: This Appendix will not appear in the
Code of Federal Regulations.
Appendix A to this Final Rule
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Final 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 2.810). These size
standards were established based on 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 § 171.16(c) of this
final rule are based on the NRC’s size
standards.
From FY 1991 through FY 2000, the
Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (OBRA–
90) (Pub. L. 101–508), as amended, required
that the NRC recover approximately 100
percent of its budget authority, less
appropriations from the Nuclear Waste Fund,
by assessing license and annual fees. The FY
2001 Energy and Water Development
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 106–377)
amended OBRA–90 to decrease the NRC’s fee
recovery amount by 2 percent per year
beginning in FY 2001, until the fee recovery
amount was 90 percent in FY 2005. The FY
2006 Energy and Water Development
Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 109–103)
extended this 90 percent fee recovery
requirement through FY 2006. As a result,
the NRC is required to recover approximately
90 percent of its FY 2006 budget authority,
less the amounts appropriated from the
Nuclear Waste Fund (NWF) and for Waste
Incidental to Reprocessing (WIR) activities,
through fees. The total amount NRC is
required to recover in fees for FY 2006 is
approximately $624.0 million.
OBRA–90 requires that the schedule of
charges established by rulemaking should
fairly and equitably allocate the total amount
to be recovered from the NRC’s licensees and
be assessed under the principle that licensees
who require the greatest expenditure of
agency resources pay the greatest annual
charges. Since FY 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.
The Commission is rebaselining its part
171 annual fees in FY 2006. Rebaselining fees
results in increased annual fees for all
licensees, with the exception of certain fuel
facilities.
The Congressional Review Act of 1996 is
intended to reduce regulatory burdens
imposed by Federal agencies on small
businesses, nonprofit organizations, and
governmental jurisdictions. This Act 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.
The Congressional Review Act also requires
that an agency prepare a guide to assist small
entities in complying with each rule for
which a final RFA is prepared. This RFA and
the small entity compliance guide
(Attachment 1) have been prepared for the
FY 2006 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. In FY
2005, about 26 percent of these licensees
(approximately 1,200 licensees) requested
small entity certification.
The commenters on previous fee
rulemakings consistently indicated that the
following results would occur if the proposed
annual fees were not modified:
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
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 highvolume type of operation. In competitive
markets, such as soil testing, annual fees
would put small licensees at an extreme
competitive disadvantage with their much
larger competitors because the proposed fees
would be the same for a two-person licensee
as 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 wellloggers, 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.
Over 3,000 license, approval, and
registration terminations have been requested
since the NRC first established annual fees
for materials licenses. 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.
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 FY
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.
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.
III. Maximum Fee
The RFA and its implementing guidance
do not provide specific guidelines on what
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
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. In
developing the maximum small entity annual
fee in FY 1991, the NRC examined its 10 CFR
part 170 licensing and inspection fees and
Agreement State fees for those fee categories
which were expected to have a substantial
number of small entities. Six Agreement
States (Washington, Texas, Illinois, Nebraska,
New York, and Utah), were used as
benchmarks in the establishment of the
maximum small entity annual fee in FY
1991. Because small entities in those
Agreement States were paying the fees, the
NRC concluded that these fees did not have
a significant impact on a substantial number
of small entities. Therefore, those fees were
considered a useful benchmark in
establishing the NRC maximum small entity
annual fee.
The NRC maximum small entity fee was
established as an annual fee only. In addition
to the annual fee, NRC small entity licensees
were required to pay amendment, renewal
and inspection fees. In setting the small
entity annual fee, NRC ensured that the total
amount small entities paid annually would
not exceed the maximum paid in the six
benchmark Agreement States.
Of the six benchmark states, the maximum
Agreement State fee of $3,800 in Washington
was used as the ceiling for the total fees.
Thus the NRC’s small entity fee was
developed to ensure that the total fees paid
by NRC small entities would not exceed
$3,800. Given the NRC’s FY 1991 fee
structure for inspections, amendments, and
renewals, a small entity annual fee
established at $1,800 allowed the total fee
(small entity annual fee plus yearly average
for inspections, amendments and renewal
fees) for all categories to fall under the $3,800
ceiling.
In FY 1992, the NRC introduced a second,
lower tier to the small entity fee in response
to concerns that the $1,800 fee, when added
to the license and inspection fees, still
imposed a significant impact on small
entities with relatively low gross annual
receipts. For purposes of the annual fee, each
small entity size standard was divided into
an upper and lower tier. Small entity
licensees in the upper tier continued to pay
an annual fee of $1,800 while those in the
lower tier paid an annual fee of $400.
Based on the changes that had occurred
since FY 1991, the NRC re-analyzed its
maximum small entity annual fees in FY
2000, and determined that the small entity
fees should be increased by 25 percent to
reflect the increase in the average fees paid
by other materials licensees since FY 1991,
as well as changes in the fee structure for
materials licensees. The structure of the fees
that NRC charged to its materials licensees
changed during the period between 1991 and
1999. Costs for materials license inspections,
renewals, and amendments, which were
previously recovered through part 170 fees
for services, are now included in the part 171
annual fees assessed to materials licensees.
As a result, the maximum small entity annual
fee increased from $1,800 to $2,300 in FY
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
2000. By increasing the maximum annual fee
for small entities from $1,800 to $2,300, the
annual fee for many small entities was
reduced while at the same time materials
licensees, including small entities, would
pay for most of the costs attributable to them.
The costs not recovered from small entities
are allocated to other materials licensees and
to power reactors.
While reducing the impact on many small
entities, the NRC determined that the
maximum annual fee of $2,300 for small
entities may continue to have a significant
impact on materials licensees with annual
gross receipts in the thousands of dollars
range. Therefore, the NRC continued to
provide a lower-tier small entity annual fee
for small entities with relatively low gross
annual receipts, and for manufacturing
concerns and educational institutions not
State or publicly supported, with less than 35
employees. The NRC also increased the lower
tier small entity fee by the same percentage
increase to the maximum small entity annual
fee. This 25 percent increase resulted in the
lower tier small entity fee increasing from
$400 to $500 in FY 2000.
The NRC stated in the RFA for the FY 2001
final fee rule that it would re-examine the
small entity fees every two years, in the same
years in which it conducts the biennial
review of fees as required by the Chief
Financial Officer’s Act. Accordingly, the NRC
examined the small entity fees again in FY
2003 (68 FR 36714; June 18, 2003), and
determined that a change was not warranted
to the small entity fees established in FY
2003.
The NRC again re-examined the small
entity fees for FY 2005, and did not believe
that a change to the small entity fees was
warranted. Unlike the annual fees assessed to
other licensees, the small entity fees are not
designed to recover the agency costs
associated with particular licensees. Instead,
the reduced fees for small entities are
designed to provide some fee relief for
qualifying small entity licensees while at the
same time recovering from them some of the
agency’s costs for activities that benefit them.
The costs not recovered from small entities
for activities that benefit them must be
recovered from other licensees. Given the
reduction in annual fees from FY 2000 to FY
2005, on average, for those categories of
materials licensees that contain a number of
small entities, the NRC has determined that
the current small entity fees of $500 and
$2,300 continue to meet the objective of
providing relief to many small entities while
recovering from them some of the costs that
benefit them.
Therefore, the NRC retained the $2,300
small entity annual fee and the $500 lower
tier small entity annual fee for FY 2005, and
is not changing these fees in FY 2006. The
NRC plans to re-examine the small entity fees
again in FY 2007.
IV. 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 recover
90 percent of the NRC budget and the
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
30757
requirement to consider means of reducing
the impact of the fee on small entities. Based
on its regulatory flexibility analysis, the NRC
concludes that a maximum annual fee of
$2,300 for small entities and a lower-tier
small entity annual fee of $500 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
previously established remain valid for FY
2006.
Attachment 1 to Appendix A—U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission
Small Entity Compliance Guide, Fiscal Year
2006
Contents
Introduction
NRC Definition of Small Entity
NRC Small Entity Fees
Instructions for Completing NRC Form 526
Introduction
The Congressional Review Act of 1996
(CRA) 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), as amended, is considered
a ‘‘major’’ rule under the CRA. Therefore, in
compliance with the law, this guide has been
prepared to assist NRC materials licensees in
complying with the FY 2006 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 2006 annual fees assessed under
10 CFR part 171. The NRC has established
two tiers of annual fees for those materials
licensees who qualify as small entities under
the NRC’s size standards.
Licensees who meet the NRC’s size
standards for a small entity (listed in 10 CFR
2.810) must submit a completed NRC Form
526 ‘‘Certification of Small Entity Status for
the Purposes of Annual Fees Imposed Under
10 CFR Part 171’’ to qualify for the reduced
annual fee. This form can be accessed on the
NRC’s Web site at https://www.nrc.gov. The
form can then be accessed by selecting
‘‘License Fees’’ and under ‘‘Forms’’ selecting
NRC Form 526. For licensees who cannot
access the NRC’s Web site, NRC Form 526
may be obtained through the local point of
contact listed in the NRC’s ‘‘Materials
Annual Fee Billing Handbook,’’ NUREG/BR–
0238, which is enclosed with each annual fee
billing. Alternatively, the form may be
obtained by calling the fee staff at 301–415–
7554, or by e-mailing the fee staff at
fees@nrc.gov. The completed form, the
appropriate small entity fee, and the payment
copy of the invoice should be mailed to the
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
30758
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
License Fee Team, at the address indicated
on the invoice. Failure to file the NRC small
entity certification Form 526 in a timely
manner may result in the denial of any
refund that might otherwise be due.
NRC Definition of Small Entity
For purposes of compliance with its
regulations (10 CFR 2.810), the NRC has
defined a small entity as follows:
(1) Small business—a for-profit concern
that provides a service, or a concern that is
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 of
500 or fewer employees based on
employment during each pay period for the
preceding 12 calendar months;
(3) Small organizations—a not-for-profit
organization that 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
To further assist licensees in determining
if they qualify as a small entity, the following
guidelines are provided, which are based on
the Small Business Administration’s
regulations (13 CFR part 121).
(1) A small business concern is an
independently owned and operated entity
which is not considered dominant in its field
of operations.
(2) The number of employees means the
total number of employees in the parent
company, any subsidiaries and/or affiliates,
including both foreign and domestic
locations (i.e., not solely the number of
employees working for the licensee or
conducting NRC licensed activities for the
company).
(3) Gross annual receipts includes all
revenue received or accrued from any source,
including receipts of the parent company,
any subsidiaries and/or affiliates, and
account for both foreign and domestic
locations. Receipts include all revenues from
sales of products and services, interest, rent,
fees, and commissions, from whatever
sources derived (i.e., not solely receipts from
NRC licensed activities).
(4) A licensee who is a subsidiary of a large
entity does not qualify as a small entity.
NRC Small Entity Fees
In 10 CFR 171.16(c), the NRC has
established two tiers of fees for licensees that
qualify as a small entity under the NRC’s size
standards. The fees are as follows:
Maximum
annual fee per
licensed
category
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
Small business not engaged in manufacturing and small not-for-profit organizations (Gross Annual Receipts):
$350,000 to $5 million ..................................................................................................................................................................
Less than $350,000 ......................................................................................................................................................................
Manufacturing entities that have an average of 500 employees or less:
35 to 500 employees ....................................................................................................................................................................
Less than 35 employees ..............................................................................................................................................................
Small Governmental Jurisdictions (Including publicly supported educational institutions) (population):
20,000 to 50,000 ..........................................................................................................................................................................
Less than 20,000 ..........................................................................................................................................................................
Educational institutions that are not State or publicly supported, and have 500 Employees or less:
35 to 500 employees ....................................................................................................................................................................
Less than 35 employees ..............................................................................................................................................................
$2,300
500
2,300
500
2,300
500
2,300
500
Instructions for Completing NRC Small
Entity 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. Enter the license number and invoice
number exactly as they appear on the annual
fee invoice.
b. Enter the Standard Industrial
Classification (SIC) or North American
Industry Classification System (NAICS) if
known.
c. Enter the licensee’s name and address 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 must be submitted to the respective
licensing staff in the NRC’s regional or
headquarters offices.
d. Check the appropriate size standard for
which the licensee qualifies as a small entity.
Check only one box. Note the following:
(i) A licensee who is a subsidiary of a large
entity does not qualify as a small entity.
(ii) The size standards apply to the
licensee, including all parent companies and
affiliates—not the individual authorized
users listed in the license or the particular
segment of the organization that uses
licensed material.
(iii) Gross annual receipts means 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 entity by a travel agent, real estate
agent, advertising agent, or conference
management service provider.
(iv) 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
licensees qualify for reduced fees as small
entities. Licensees who qualify as small
entities and file NRC Form 526, which
certifies eligibility for small entity fees, may
pay the reduced fee, which is either $2,300
or $500 for a full year, depending on the size
of the entity, for each fee category shown on
the invoice. Licensees granted a license
during the first 6 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 6
months of the fiscal year, pay only 50 percent
of the annual fee for that year. Such invoices
state that the ‘‘amount billed represents 50%
proration.’’ This means that the amount due
from a small entity is not the prorated
amount shown on the invoice, but rather onehalf 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 $1,150 or $250 for each fee
category billed (instead of the full small
entity annual fee of $2,300 or $500).
Licensees must file a new small entity form
(NRC Form 526) with the NRC each fiscal
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.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules and Regulations
wwhite on PROD1PC61 with RULES2
year to qualify for reduced fees in that year.
Because a licensee’s ‘‘size,’’ or the size
standards, may change from year to year, the
invoice reflects the full fee and licensees
must complete and return form 526 for the
fee to be reduced to the small entity fee
amount. LICENSEES WILL NOT RECEIVE 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
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:06 May 26, 2006
Jkt 208001
should be mailed to the U. S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, License Fee Team at
the address indicated on the invoice.
If you have questions regarding the NRC’s
annual fees, please contact 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
20555–0001, Attention: Office of the Chief
Financial Officer.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
30759
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. 06–4815 Filed 5–26–06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
E:\FR\FM\30MYR2.SGM
30MYR2
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 103 (Tuesday, May 30, 2006)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30722-30759]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-4815]
[[Page 30721]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
10 CFR Parts 170 and 171
Revision of Fee Schedules; Fee Recovery for FY 2006; Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 103 / Tuesday, May 30, 2006 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 30722]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Parts 170 and 171
RIN 3150-AH83
Revision of Fee Schedules; Fee Recovery for FY 2006
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 requires that
the NRC recover approximately 90 percent of its budget authority in
fiscal year (FY) 2006, less the amounts appropriated from the Nuclear
Waste Fund (NWF) and for Waste Incidental to Reprocessing (WIR)
activities. The required fee recovery amount for the FY 2006 budget is
approximately $624 million, which is increased by approximately $0.9
million to account for billing adjustments, resulting in a total of
approximately $625 million that must be recovered through fees in FY
2006.
DATES: Effective Date: July 31, 2006.
ADDRESSES: The comments received and the NRC's work papers that support
these final changes to 10 CFR parts 170 and 171 are available
electronically at the NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room on the
Internet at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this site,
the public can gain entry into the NRC's Agencywide Documents Access
and Management System (ADAMS), which provides text and image files of
NRC's public documents. For more information, contact the NRC Public
Document Room (PDR) Reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, or 301-415-4737,
or by e-mail to pdr@nrc.gov. If you do not have access to ADAMS or if
there are problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, contact
the PDR.
Comments received may also be viewed via the NRC's interactive
rulemaking Web site (https://ruleforum.llnl.gov). This site provides the
ability to upload comments as files (any format), if your web browser
supports that function. For information about the interactive
rulemaking site, contact Ms. Carol Gallagher, 301-415-5905; e-mail
CAG@nrc.gov.
For a period of 90 days after the effective date of this final
rule, the work papers may also be examined at the NRC Public Document
Room, Room O-1F22. One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike,
Rockville, MD 20852-2738. The PDR reproduction contractor will copy
documents for a fee.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tammy Croote, telephone 301-415-6041;
Office of the Chief Financial Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. Response 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
For FYs 1991 through 2000, OBRA-90 (Pub. L. 101-508), as amended,
required that the NRC recover approximately 100 percent of its budget
authority, less the amount appropriated from the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE) administered NWF, by assessing fees. To address fairness
and equity concerns related to charging NRC license holders for agency
budgeted costs that do not provide a direct benefit to the licensee,
the FY 2001 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act (Pub. L.
106-377) amended OBRA-90 to decrease the NRC's fee recovery amount by 2
percent per year beginning in FY 2001, until the fee recovery amount
was 90 percent in FY 2005. The FY 2006 Energy and Water Development
Appropriations Act (EWDAA) (Pub. L. 109-103), as amended by the
Department of Defense, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to Address
Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act, 2006
(Pub. L. 109-148), extended this 90 percent fee recovery requirement
through FY 2006. As a result, the NRC is required to recover
approximately 90 percent of its FY 2006 budget authority, less the
amounts appropriated from the NWF and for WIR activities, through fees.
The required fee recovery amount for the FY 2006 budget is
approximately $624 million, which is increased by approximately $0.9
million to account for billing adjustments, resulting in a total of
approximately $625 million that must be recovered through fees in FY
2006.
The NRC assesses two types of fees to meet the requirements of
OBRA-90, as amended. First, license and inspection fees, established in
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 special benefits to identifiable applicants and
licensees. Examples of the services provided by the NRC for which these
fees are assessed are the review of applications for new licenses and,
for certain types of existing licenses, the review of renewal
applications, the review of amendment requests, and inspections.
Second, annual fees established in 10 CFR part 171 under the authority
of OBRA-90, as amended, recover generic and other regulatory costs not
otherwise recovered through 10 CFR part 170 fees.
The amount of the NRC's required fee collections are set by law and
are therefore outside the scope of this rulemaking. In FY 2006, the
NRC's total fee recoverable budget increased by $83.4 million from FY
2005 in response to increased workload. As such, most annual fees
increased. The budget, including the increases, was allocated to the
fee classes that the budgeted activities support. As discussed in more
detail below, another factor affecting the amount of annual fees for
each fee class is the estimated collection under part 170.
Additional factors will affect the NRC's required fee recovery in
future years. For example, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109-
58) permanently extends the 90 percent fee recovery requirement
beginning in FY 2007. The Energy Policy Act also permanently removes
certain homeland security activities from the fee base beginning in FY
2007. Section 637 states that the NRC will not recover in fees:
(iv) amounts appropriated to the Commission for homeland
security activities of the Commission for the fiscal year, except
for the costs of fingerprinting and background checks required by
section 149 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2169) and
the costs of conducting security inspections.
Under this legislative requirement, the budgeted resources for all
generic homeland security activities (those activities that support an
entire license fee class or classes of licensees, such as rulemakings,
guidance development, and vulnerability assessments) will be removed
from the fee base beginning with the FY 2007 fee rulemaking. Under the
NRC's authority under the IOAA, the NRC will continue to bill under
part 170 for all licensee-specific homeland security-related services
provided, including security inspections and security plan reviews.
This legislative
[[Page 30723]]
change will provide fee relief for NRC licensees. However, the net
change in annual fees in FY 2007 will also depend on other factors,
especially the amount of the NRC's FY 2007 appropriated budget and the
allocation of these resources to the license fee classes and surcharge
categories (surcharge categories include the resources associated with
activities for which the NRC does not charge fees, as described in more
detail in Section III of this document), as well as any other policy
decisions of the Commission.
II. Response to Comments
The NRC published the FY 2006 proposed fee rule on February 10,
2006 (71 FR 7350) to solicit public comment on its proposed revisions
to 10 CFR parts 170 and 171. The NRC received three comments dated on
or before the close of the comment period (March 13, 2006) and four
additional comments thereafter, for a total of seven comments that were
considered in this fee rulemaking. The comments have been grouped by
issues and are addressed in a collective response.
A. Information Provided by NRC in Support of Proposed Rule
Comment. Several commenters requested a more detailed explanation
of significant fee increases. These comments requested that the NRC
provide licensees and the public with a reasonably detailed listing of
the major activities and their associated impact on the fees. These
commenters expressed concern that the information provided to support
the proposed rule was not adequate to allow for the full evaluation and
comment on the proposed fee rule. While these comments acknowledged the
availability of the work papers that provided information on the FY
2006 budget, they requested NRC provide an itemized accounting of the
major elements that comprise the annual assessment under part 171,
including a detailed description of the major contracts currently
outstanding. One set of comments set forth 26 specific questions on why
budgeted resources increased from FY 2005 to FY 2006 in a number of
areas. One comment stated that while the proposed rule stated that the
FY 2006 included budget increases for new plant licensing and security,
no information was available that would allow for the identification of
the contribution of either security or new plant licensing toward the
fee increase.
These commenters further stated that industry's ability to evaluate
the NRC's application of resources and priorities is impeded because
the NRC allocated 70 percent of its recoverable budget to the generic
assessment under part 171, while only 30 percent is recovered under the
discrete fee provisions of part 170. One commenter stated that there
was an expectation that generic fees would be reduced as new plant
applications are filed and costs are charged directly to an applicant
under part 170.
Response. Consistent with the requirements of OBRA-90, as amended,
the purpose of this rulemaking is to establish fees necessary to
recover 90 percent of the NRC's FY 2006 budget authority, less the
amounts appropriated from the NWF and for WIR activities, from
applicants and the various classes of NRC licensees. As with each
year's fee rulemaking, the FY 2006 proposed fee rule described the
types of activities included in the proposed fees and explained how the
fees were calculated to recover the budgeted costs for those
activities. Additional summary calculations were provided in the FY
2006 proposed fee rule: For each fee class, a table was presented
showing the aggregate calculations (e.g., total budgeted resources and
estimated part 170 collections). For each fee class, there was also a
summary explanation provided for the changes in fees and budgeted
resources.
In addition to the information provided in the proposed rule, the
supporting work papers were available for public examination in ADAMS
and, during the 30-day comment period, in the NRC Public Document Room
at One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD. The work
papers show the total budgeted full time equivalent (FTE) and contract
budgeted resources at the planned activity level for all agency
activities. These papers present an itemized accounting of all the
budgeted resources included in the fees, at the lowest level of detail
available agency-wide. The papers included extensive information
detailing the allocation of the budgeted costs for each planned
activity within each program to the various classes of licenses, as
well as information on categories of budgeted costs included in the
hourly rates.
Also to assist commenters, the NRC made available NUREG-1100,
Volume 21, ``Performance Budget: Fiscal Year 2006'' (February 2005),
which discusses the NRC's budget for FY 2006, including the activities
to be performed in each program. This document is available on the NRC
public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html. The extensive
information available provided the public with sufficient information
on how NRC calculated the proposed fees. Additionally, the contact
listed in the proposed fee rule was available during the public comment
period to answer any questions that commenters had on the development
of the proposed fees. Therefore, the NRC believes that ample
information was available on which to base constructive comments on the
proposed revisions to parts 170 and 171 and that its fee schedule
development is a transparent process.
In the FY 2006 proposed fee rule work papers, the NRC improved the
organization of some of the reports to allow for increased
transparency. For example, a separate document was created for each fee
class and surcharge category to show the budget allocations for FY 2006
and FY 2005 at the planned activity level, thereby making it easier to
see the reasons for any fee changes between FY 2006 and FY 2005.
Accordingly, the proposed rule showed the total value of budgeted
resources allocated to a fee class and described the major reasons for
any fee change(s), and the supporting work papers clearly set forth the
changes in budgeted resources for each class at the planned activity
level for both FTE and contract dollars. For example, the proposed fee
rule stated that the power reactor annual fee increased due to an
increase in budgeted resources for activities such as regulatory
infrastructure for new reactor licensing activities (other examples
were also provided). The work papers showed that the budgeted resources
for that planned activity increased by approximately 42 FTE and $2.9
million in FY 2006, as compared to FY 2005.
In response to the comments with numerous detailed questions
requesting information on why the budget increased for certain planned
activities from FY 2005 to FY 2006, or requesting additional
information on the use of resources under a specific planned activity,
the NRC notes again that the purpose of this rulemaking is to establish
fees to recover most of the NRC's budget, as required by OBRA-90, as
amended. The NRC's budget and the manner in which the NRC carries out
its activities are not within the scope of this rulemaking. The NRC's
budget is submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and
Congress for review and approval. The Congressional budget process
involves meetings, testimony, press briefings, etc. The
Congressionally-approved budget resulting from this process reflects
the resources deemed necessary for NRC to carry out its statutory
obligations.
The purpose of the FY 2006 fee rulemaking, as with prior year fee
rulemakings, is to establish fees in a fair and transparent manner to
recover the
[[Page 30724]]
required portion of the NRC's budget. As such, the purpose of these
rules is not to justify the use or need for current year budgeted
resources, but to describe and take comment on the allocation of these
resources for fee calculation and purposes. For example, the rule and
supporting work papers are not intended to justify why the budgeted
resources for a given planned activity increased by a particular
percentage. (Note, however, the Performance Budget for each fiscal year
does provide the objectives of the budget and how it supports the
agency's Strategic Plan goals and strategies, and this justification is
part of the Congressional approval and Executive Branch review
process.) The rule and work papers show the value of the approved
budgeted resources, and most importantly for fee calculation purposes,
the fee classes and surcharge categories to which these resources are
allocated. As mentioned previously, the work papers provide this
information at the lowest level of detail available at the agency-
level, which is by planned activity.
Regarding the comments that expressed concern that too much of the
NRC's budget was designated for recovery under part 171, as discussed
in previous fee rulemakings, the NRC is not at liberty to allocate fees
indiscriminately between parts 170 and 171, because fee allocation is
controlled by statute. The NRC assesses part 170 fees under the IOAA,
consistent with implementing OMB Circular A-25, ``User Charges,'' to
recover the costs incurred from each identifiable recipient for special
benefits derived from Federal activities beyond those received by the
general public. Generic costs that do not provide special benefits to
identifiable recipients cannot be recovered under part 170. Further,
the NRC notes that, as required by OBRA-90, as amended, the part 171
annual fee recovery amounts are offset by the estimated part 170 fee
collections. The NRC's work papers clearly set forth the components of
these generic costs and how those costs are recovered through annual
fees. Additionally, the NRC notes that it has taken action to maximize
the amount recovered under part 170, consistent with existing law and
agency policy. For example, in FY 1998 the NRC began charging part 170
fees for all resident inspectors' time (63 FR 31840; June 10, 1998) and
in FY 1999 the NRC started charging part 170 fees for all project
manager activities associated with oversight of the assigned license or
plant (64 FR 31448; June 10, 1999). In FY 2003, the NRC amended its
regulations to allow the NRC to recover costs associated with contested
hearings on licensing actions involving U.S. Government national
security initiatives through part 170 fees assessed to the affected
applicant or licensee (67 FR 64033; October 17, 2002). Included under
this provision are activities involving the fabrication and use of
mixed oxide fuel. Additionally, beginning with the FY 2005 fee rule (70
FR 30526; May 26, 2005), the NRC revised its hourly rate calculation
formula to better reflect actual agency costs, resulting in higher
hourly rates. These higher hourly rates increased fee recovery under
part 170.
Similarly, in response to the comment that reactor generic fees
should be reduced as new plant applications are filed and costs are
charged directly to an applicant under part 170, the Commission notes
that it recovers (and will continue to recover) the costs of all
specific work relating to the review of new reactor or design
applications and pre-application activities through part 170 fees. For
example, the FY 1999 policy that established part 170 fee recovery for
all project managers assigned to a license or plant, applies to project
managers assigned to new reactor applications and pre-application
reviews. All other specific activities for these reviews are also
recovered through part 170 fees. This part 170 fee recovery reduces the
amount of budgeted resources that must be recovered through annual fees
to reactor licensees.
B. Specific Part 170 Issues
1. Hourly Fees
Comment. Several commenters expressed concerns about the increases
in the NRC's hourly rates associated with the proposed changes to 10
CFR 170.20. These commenters noted that the increases exceeded the rate
of inflation, and requested the NRC investigate ways to reduce the
hourly fees.
Response. The NRC's hourly rates are based on budgeted costs and
must be established each year to meet the NRC's fee recovery
requirements. As discussed in the proposed fee rule, the increases to
the Nuclear Reactor Safety (Reactor) Program and Nuclear Materials and
Waste Safety (Materials) Program rates are due to the recent
Government-wide pay raise and the more accurate allocation of agency
overhead to these programs and fee-exempt activities. The hourly rates
are calculated to recover all of the budgeted costs supporting the
services provided under part 170, including all programmatic and agency
overhead, consistent with the full cost recovery concept emphasized in
OMB's Circular A-25, ``User Charges.'' The NRC did not receive any
comments on ways to revise the hourly rate calculation methodology, and
notes that other comments, on this fee rulemaking and others, have
consistently supported the NRC in its efforts to collect more of its
budget through part 170 fees-for-services vs. part 171 annual fees.
Therefore, the NRC is retaining the hourly rate formula as presented in
the FY 2006 proposed fee rule. This results in hourly rates of $217 for
the Reactor Program, and $214 for the Materials Program. The NRC
recognizes that the higher hourly rates will have a greater impact on
licensees that receive more part 170 services, but believes this is
appropriate because the new rates more accurately reflect the costs of
providing these services.
2. Invoice Information
Comment. Several commenters stated that the Commission should
continue its efforts to provide invoices that contain more meaningful
descriptions of the work done by staff and especially contractors.
These comments stated that in the private sector, adequate
explanations, dates and times are provided to clients for clients to
fully understand the work performed. One commenter stated that if the
agency performs a large amount of work on a submittal from a single
licensee, billings should be frequent so that a licensee is better able
to track costs.
Response. The NRC appreciates the comments on this topic, and
believes that sufficient information is provided to licensees or
applicants on which to base payment of invoices. The NRC's invoices for
full-cost licensing actions and inspections contain details such as the
type of service for which the costs are being billed, the name of the
person or contractor performing the service, the date range the service
was performed, the number of professional staff-hours expended in
providing the service, the hourly rate, and the contractual costs
incurred. These costs are billed quarterly, which the NRC believes is
an adequate frequency to track and pay for these costs. Additionally, a
licensee or applicant who does not understand the charges, or who would
like more information to interpret the bill, may request additional
information from the NRC regarding the specific bill in question. The
NRC will provide all available data used to support the bill in
response to this type of request.
[[Page 30725]]
3. Part 170 Fees to Federal Agencies
Comment. One commenter supported the Commission's proposal to
charge Federal agencies for specific services provided by the NRC,
agreeing that it is fair and appropriate to assess these fees to
Federal agencies in the same manner as other NRC licensees.
Response. The NRC appreciates the support for this proposal, and is
enacting this policy change in this rulemaking, as described in more
detail in Section III.A.3.
C. Specific Part 171 Issues
1. Annual Fees for Uranium Recovery Licensees
Comment. The NRC received four comments objecting to the large
increase in the annual fees for uranium recovery licensees. Some of
these commenters expressed concerns that the FY 2006 proposed fee
structure appears to unfairly discriminate against the uranium recovery
section by imposing a 120 percent increase in annual fees, and
requested that any required fee increase be similar to increases for
other classes of licensees. Some commenters stated that there continues
to be a lack of a reasonable relationship between the cost to uranium
recovery licensees of NRC's regulatory program and the benefit derived
from these services. Additionally, some commenters stated that the NRC
needs to address the issue of decreasing numbers of uranium recovery
licensees. Specifically, the concern was raised that as more states
become Agreement States and/or additional sites are decommissioned, the
number of NRC regulated sites continues to decline, leaving fewer
licensees to pay a larger share of the NRC's regulatory costs.
Some of these commenters acknowledged that the reallocation of
existing FTE to uranium recovery licensing and inspection activities
from other activities may be warranted, considering market forces and
expected licensing activities. These commenters stated that fee
increases might be more acceptable if they were accompanied by more
timely licensing actions, but some commenters expressed concerns that
there are still too few NRC staff on uranium recovery issues, and some
of these staff are relatively new to the field. Some commenters also
stated that the continued existence of remaining uranium recovery
facilities is in the public interest given the renewed interest in
nuclear power, and stated that large fee increases for these facilities
is not in the public interest. These commenters noted a previous
Commission comment which indicated the existence of a uranium recovery
facility was in the public interest. One commenter noted that the
increased fees and uncertainty of the timely review of licensing
actions makes it difficult for licensees to manage costs, which could
create a chilling effect on the development of new domestic uranium
recovery facilities.
Response. The NRC acknowledges that the FY 2006 uranium recovery
annual fee of $65,900 is significantly higher than the annual fees
charged to these facilities in FYs 2005 and 2004. (For FYs 2005 and
2004, the NRC overestimated the part 170 collections it would receive
from uranium recovery facilities, which resulted in lower part 171
annual fees.) However, the FY 2006 uranium recovery annual fee amount
is more similar to the annual fee amounts for FYs 2001 through 2003,
when, for example, the annual fee for conventional mills ranged from
approximately $53,000 to $111,000. Annual fees fluctuate from year to
year based on a number of factors, including the budgeted resources for
a license fee class. Additionally, because annual fees must recover all
fee class resources not recovered through part 170 fees, annual fees
are impacted by the part 170 fees collected from that fee class.
As explained in the proposed rule, the higher FY 2006 annual fee
for uranium recovery licensees reflects an increase in budgeted
resources for this fee class. The NRC appreciates the acknowledgment
that this budget change may be warranted to support uranium recovery
licensees. In response to the concern about the NRC's staffing of
uranium recovery issues and the timeliness of the review of licensing
actions, these issues are outside the scope of this rulemaking.
However, as noted in the FY 2005 final fee rule (70 FR 30526; May 26,
2005), the NRC does consider market forces and expected future
licensing activities in formulating its budget, and has a human
resources program in place to address future agency skill needs.
In response to concerns regarding decreasing numbers of NRC
licensees in light of more states becoming Agreement States, the NRC
notes the concerns that the ``last NRC licensee'' may have to pay for
the cost of the entire uranium recovery program are unfounded because
the NRC's fee calculation methodology considers the percentage of
uranium recovery licensees in Agreement States in establishing fees for
the uranium recovery fee class. As explained in the FY 2005 final fee
rule, the budgeted resources providing support to Agreement States or
their licensees are included in total surcharge costs, which are offset
by non-fee recovery funding provided by Congress. For example, if the
NRC develops a rule, guidance document, or database or other tracking
system, that is associated with or otherwise benefits Agreement State
licensees, the costs of these activities are prorated to the surcharge
according to the percentage of licensees in that fee class in Agreement
States (e.g., if 50 percent of uranium recovery licensees are in
Agreement States, 50 percent of these regulatory infrastructure costs
are included in the surcharge). Total surcharge costs are reduced by
the fee relief (i.e., direct appropriations from the General Treasury)
provided by Congress. To address fairness and equity concerns
associated with licensees paying for the cost of activities that do not
directly benefit them, as noted previously, the FY 2001 Energy and
Water Development Appropriations Act amended OBRA-90 to decrease the
NRC's fee recovery amount by two percent per year beginning in FY 2001,
until the fee recovery amount was 90 percent in FY 2005. To the extent
that this fee relief is insufficient to cover all surcharge costs,
these remaining surcharge costs are spread to all licensees based on
their percentage of the budget. (Note generic decommissioning costs for
the materials program are also included in the surcharge.)
In FY 2006, $3.5 million of the $72.8 million in total surcharge
costs was not covered by the 10 percent fee relief, and therefore is
included in licensees' annual fees. Eighty-four percent (the percentage
of the budget associated with reactors) of the $3.5 million in net
surcharge costs is included in reactor annual fees, and the remainder
is spread to all other licensees' annual fees. Accordingly, NRC's
uranium recovery licensees are not generally burdened with the costs of
regulating Agreement State licensees or any other costs not associated
with uranium recovery licensees (only to the extent that a small
portion of these costs are spread to all licensees through the net
surcharge). In FY 2006, the total surcharge cost allocated to the
entire uranium recovery class is approximately $13,000. Because DOE is
charged 50 percent of the total surcharge cost (as well as 50 percent
of all generic resources associated with the uranium recovery fee
class) for its UMTRCA Title I licensees, consistent with the
methodology adopted in the FY 2002 final fee rule (67 FR 42612; June
24, 2002), this leaves approximately $6,500 in total surcharge costs
allocated
[[Page 30726]]
to NRC Title II program licensees that are subject to annual fees.
This means about $1,300 of the $65,900 FY 2006 annual fee per
uranium recovery license is attributable to activities that do not
directly benefit these uranium recovery licensees. The remainder of the
annual fee reflects the budgeted resources associated with the
regulation of NRC's uranium recovery licensees, as shown in the
detailed work papers made available to support the proposed rulemaking.
As such, the NRC believes there is a strong relationship between the
cost to uranium recovery licensees of NRC's regulatory program and the
benefit derived from this program.
The NRC acknowledges that license fee classes with fewer licensees
are more impacted by changes to the budget and changes to part 170
collections. The uranium recovery fee class was reduced by four
licensees (two of which paid annual fees) in FY 2005 because regulatory
responsibility for these licensees was transferred to the State of Utah
in accordance with an Agreement under Section 274 of the Atomic Energy
Act of 1954, as amended, effective August 16, 2004. There are currently
six uranium recovery licensees, including a license for the DOE, paying
for the generic and other regulatory costs associated with the
regulation of the NRC's uranium recovery licensees. Because annual fees
must recover budgeted resources for a fee class not recovered through
part 170 fees, to the extent that part 170 fees do not completely
recover the costs of budgeted resources for part 170 activities, these
costs are included in annual fees. The fewer the licensees, the larger
the impact this has on the annual fee per license. (Because these
budgeted resources are for site-specific inspection and licensing
activities, they are not prorated to the surcharge category of
Agreement State Regulatory Support because the resources are budgeted
for the purpose of supporting only NRC licensees.) The NRC does note
that the increases to hourly rates enacted through this rulemaking will
enable the agency to recover more of the budgeted resources for
licensee-specific activities, and once implemented, will reduce costs
that must be recovered through annual fees.
In response to comments about the existence of uranium recovery
facilities being in the public interest, and the potential economic
consequences of fees on this industry, the NRC notes it has addressed
similar comments in previous fee rulemakings. The NRC has stated since
FY 1991, when the 100 percent fee recovery requirement was first
implemented, that it recognizes the assessment of fees to recover the
agency's costs may result in a substantial financial hardship for some
licensees. However, consistent with the OBRA-90, as amended,
requirement that annual fees must have, to the maximum extent
practicable, a reasonable relationship to the cost of providing
regulatory services, the NRC's annual fees for each class of licensee
reflect the NRC's budgeted cost of its regulatory services to the
class. The NRC determines the budgeted costs to be allocated to each
class of licensee through a comprehensive review of every planned
activity in each of the agency's major program areas. Furthermore, a
reduction in the fees assessed to one class of licensees would require
a corresponding increase in the fees assessed to other classes.
Accordingly, the NRC has not based its annual fees on licensees'
economic status, market conditions, or potential economic consequences.
Instead, the NRC has only considered the impacts that it is required to
address by law.
While the NRC acknowledges the previous Commission comment about
the existence of a uranium recovery facility being in the public
interest, this does not negate the NRC's legal obligation to collect
fees to recover the costs of regulating uranium recovery facilities.
2. Annual Fees for Fuel Facilities Licensees
Comment. One commenter expressed concern over the increase in
annual fees for fee category 2.A.1, UF6 conversion
facilities. The commenter expressed concern that the fee increase was
not explained in sufficient detail. In particular, the commenter did
not believe the changes in the fuel facility fee matrix (i.e., the
value of the effort factors for fee category 2.A.1) were explained in
enough detail to allow for informed public comment. This commenter also
stated that any fees for future 10 CFR part 40 or conversion facility
rulemakings not be allocated to fee category 2.A.1.
Response. The NRC established the methodology for calculating
annual fees for individual fuel facilities through public notice and
comment rulemaking (64 FR 31448; June 10, 1999), and the FY 2006 fee
rulemaking uses this same methodology. This methodology establishes
that the total budgeted resources for fuel facilities are allocated to
individual fuel facility fee categories based on the effort/fee
determination matrix. This methodology was also described in detail in
the FY 2006 proposed fee rule. In addition, the publicly available work
papers for the FY 2006 proposed rule provided detailed information on
the FTE and contract resources for each planned activity that were
allocated to the fuel facility fee class. The work papers also provided
information on all the values of the effort factors used in the fuel
facility matrix for FY 2006.
As noted in the FY 2006 proposed fee rule, the NRC revised the
effort factors for the UF6 conversion facility to better
reflect the effort level associated with safeguards activities such as
interim compensatory measures (ICMs). In response to the commenter's
request for additional detailed information on the basis of the values
of the effort factors, the NRC notes that before September 11, 2001,
this UF6 conversion facility had a `0' for safeguards and
security based on the fact that the facility had no security plan with
the NRC. Shortly after September 11, 2001, NRC issued an Order to this
facility requiring it to implement interim security upgrades. When the
NRC performed security assessments and reviewed implementation of the
ICMs in 2004, NRC determined (1) this UF6 conversion
facility needed to maintain additional security measures as part of its
baseline program, and (2) NRC needed to perform routine oversight of
the security program including licensing review of security measures,
inclusion of security measures in the license as part of license
renewal, and routine inspection of security programs. Therefore, based
on the new routine level of NRC effort for this facility, its score
increased from `0' to `5' in the matrix used for the FY 2006 fee rule,
which is `rebaselined' each year based on the most recent assessment by
the program and technical experts responsible for the regulation of
these facilities. Note that because of the timing of the fee rule each
year, the fuel facility fee matrix represents a `snapshot' of expected
effort levels at the beginning of the fiscal year. Therefore, a change
in effort level that occurs after that `snapshot' may not be reflected
until the next year.
Finally, in response to the comment that any fees for future part
40 or conversion facility rulemakings not be allocated to fee category
2.A.1, the Commission notes that it approved the initiation of a part
40 rulemaking on ground water protection at in situ leach uranium
recovery facilities on March 24, 2006 (see Staff Requirements
Memorandum--COMJSM-06-0001--Regulation of Groundwater Protection at In
Situ Leach Uranium Extraction Facilities; ML060830525). (While this is
a part 40 rulemaking, it relates to uranium recovery facilities, not
UF6 or
[[Page 30727]]
other fuel facilities.) In the referenced Staff Requirements
Memorandum, the Commission stated, ``The staff should plan on covering
the costs of this rulemaking not through part 171 fees for existing
uranium recovery licensees, but instead through the surcharge, which is
assessed to all NRC licensees paying part 171 fees.'' As such, in the
FY 2007 proposed fee rulemaking, the staff plans to propose to recover
the costs of this rule through the surcharge. Note that the part 40
rulemaking was not budgeted for in FY 2006, and therefore there is no
adjustment to the FY 2006 fees to reflect the fee recovery of that
rulemaking through the surcharge. Additionally, there were no other
part 40 or conversion facility rulemakings budgeted for in FY 2006, and
therefore, the FY 2006 annual fee for the UF6 conversion
facility does not include any resources for these activities. The NRC
will address the fee recovery of any other rulemakings that may be
budgeted for in future years through its future year fee rulemakings.
3. Elimination of Fee Payment Exception for Uranium Recovery Licensees
Comment. Several commenters requested that the quarterly payment
provisions for uranium recovery remain in effect, and that the NRC not
begin billing these licensees annually. One commenter stated that
quarterly payments allow licensees to better allocate budgetary
outlays.
Response. While the NRC appreciates the concerns raised by the
commenters, the NRC believes that there is insufficient justification
for retaining the fee payment exception for Title II uranium recovery
facilities, only. As discussed in the proposed rule, the NRC currently
bills licensees' part 171 fees annually if their annual fees are less
than $100,000, and quarterly if their annual fees are $100,000 or more.
However, the NRC bills Class I and Class II uranium recovery licensees
quarterly in accordance with Sec. 171.19(b), regardless of the amount
of their annual fee. The NRC established this payment exception for
Class I and Class II uranium recovery licensees in the FY 2001 final
rule (66 FR 32452; June 14, 2001) because the annual fees for these
licensees had been fluctuating just above or below $100,000. Since
then, uranium recovery license fees have been well below $100,000.
Because the basis of the existing exception is no longer a factor, as
well as that the exception is administratively burdensome to implement
with the current fee billing system, the NRC is eliminating this
billing exception for Class I and Class II uranium recovery licensees.
Additionally, the NRC notes that there are benefits to the annual
payment of fees, which it believes further justify this change. This is
because the annual payment of fees may provide for more notice of
annual fee changes. When paying quarterly, the last quarterly payment
of the current fiscal year's annual fee must be for the entire
difference between that annual fee and the payments made in the first
three quarters of that year. This payment is due as of the effective
date of the final fee rule. When paying annually, licensees are billed
on the anniversary month of the license. This payment practice, as
established in the FY 1996 fee rule (61 FR 16203; April 12, 1996),
means licensees know exactly when they will be billed each year and
will know the exact fee amount in advance.
D. Other Issues
1. Recovery of Security Costs
Comment. Some commenters objected to the NRC collecting security-
related costs from licensees, while acknowledging that Section 637 of
the Energy Policy Act of 2005 will remove certain homeland security
activities from the fee base beginning in FY 2007. One commenter
mentioned that homeland security costs should be off the fee base
beginning in FY 2006. Other commenters questioned whether the funds
under the `Homeland Security Unallocated' planned activity in the
proposed rule have been allocated to specific activities.
Response. The NRC appreciates the concerns raised by commenters
regarding homeland security costs being funded through license fees. As
referenced previously, generic (i.e., not site-specific) homeland
security budgeted resources will be removed from the fee base beginning
in FY 2007, per the Energy Policy Act of 2005. However, these resources
are on the fee base in FY 2006. Therefore, the fees established in this
rulemaking include homeland security budgeted resources, consistent
with OBRA-90, as amended.
Regarding the question about the allocation of the `Homeland
Security Unallocated' planned activity, the NRC has now allocated these
resources to specific activities, and then to the fee classes and
surcharge categories which these resources support. Specifically, the
$4,498,000 under the `HLS Unallocated' planned activity in the proposed
rule has been distributed as follows: (1) $808,000 to Nuclear Material
Users/Homeland Security Information Technology, Control of Sources (for
the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards); (2) $420,000 to
Management and Support Information Technology Compliance/Homeland
Security Information Security (for the Office of Nuclear Security and
Incident Response); (3) $420,000 to Reactor Licensing/Homeland Security
Licensing/Homeland Security Mitigating Strategies (for the Office of
Nuclear Regulatory Research); and (4) $2,850,000 to Reactor Licensing/
Licensing Tasks/Risk Informing the Regulatory Process (for the Office
of Nuclear Regulatory Research).
As shown in the work papers, the resources for item 1 have been
allocated to the materials users fee class (and prorated to the
surcharge categories of Agreement State Regulatory Support and
Nonprofit Educational Institutions), and the resources for items 3 and
4 have been allocated to the operating power reactor fee class. The
resources for item 2 are treated as overhead, consistent with the
treatment of other resources in the Management and Support Program. In
the FY 2006 proposed fee rule, the resources associated with this
planned activity were allocated to the fee classes in a manner
consistent with how other homeland security resources were allocated.
2. NRC Budget
Comment. Several commenters stated that NRC fees should reflect NRC
efficiencies and provided suggestions for reducing NRC's budget and for
more efficient/different use of NRC's resources. Some of these
commenters addressed expenditures on homeland security, while others
suggested more generally that NRC reduce expenditures, streamline
processes, or otherwise perform activities more efficiently. Some
commenters suggested that changes in NRC's regulatory approach, such as
the reactor oversight process, should result in a reduced budget. Some
commenters included suggestions to reallocate resources dedicated to
the inspection of areas of plants that have little or no safety
significance, to efforts to risk-inform regulations, license new
reactor designs, and process combined operating licenses for new
plants. A number of comments suggested that Memorandums of
Understanding between the Commission and non-Agreement States regarding
the regulation of in-situ well fields would help to reduce costs to
licensees, as would the expansion of performance-based licensing and
the increased use of Safety and Environmental Review Panels.
[[Page 30728]]
Response. The NRC appreciates the importance of identifying and
implementing process efficiencies on an ongoing basis. As discussed in
previous fee rulemakings, NRC offices conduct process reviews every
year and rely on risk-informed practices to develop cost-efficient
budgets that will allow them to achieve the NRC's Strategic Plan
mission objectives. Nonetheless, the NRC's budget and the manner in
which the NRC carries out its activities are not within the scope of
this rulemaking. Therefore, this final rule does not address the
commenters' suggestions concerning the NRC's budget and the use of NRC
resources. As discussed previously, the NRC's budget is submitted to
OMB and Congress for review and approval. The Congressionally-approved
budget resulting from this process reflects the resources deemed
necessary for NRC to carry out its statutory obligations. In compliance
with OBRA-90, as amended, the fees are established to recover the
required percentage of the approved budget. The NRC will continue
efforts to ensure that the NRC carries out its statutory obligations in
an efficient manner.
3. Fees Predictability and Timing/Requested Fee Increase Phase-Ins or
Caps
Comment. Several commenters raised concerns that the timing of the
issuance of the fee rule makes it difficult for licensees to plan for
regulatory expenses within the framework of their normal budget cycles.
One commenter specifically noted that because the NRC's fiscal year
differs from the majority of licensees' fiscal years, and fee recovery
is not known until after a new calendar year begins, the process forces
licensees to estimate potential changes to the NRC fiscal year fee
structure six to eight months in advance of the fee rulemaking. To
address this issue, commenters suggested that the NRC publish an
estimate of fees for the following year, coincident with issuance of
the proposed fee rule each year. Some commenters recognized that while
it would likely be impossible for the NRC to offer exact projections,
the Commission should be able to develop reasonable estimates of the
next year's fees. Some commenters suggested that the agency's projected
total budget authority might be based on the five-year projection the
Commission prepares as part of its annual budgeting process, and
requested that this five-year projection be included in the Performance
Budget each year (NUREG-1100 series). One commenter requested that the
NRC's license fee estimates resulting from the anticipated FY 2007
budget be estimated and communicated to the commenter, with some
confidence, by June 2006. Other commenters requested that NRC consider
deferring a portion of the annual fee increase to the first quarter of
2007 to alleviate the unexpected burden imposed by large fee increases.
Some commenters suggested the Commission revisit the issue of
arbitrary fee caps or combining fee classes to lessen the impact of fee
changes. Some commenters expressed concern with hourly fees increases,
because total hourly fees are more unpredictable than annual fees and
create a substantial amount of uncertainty in a given licensee's annual
costs.
Response. The NRC acknowledges the concerns raised by these
commenters, and has addressed similar comments in previous fee
rulemakings. However, the timing of the NRC's required fee collections
is established by OBRA-90, as amended. In accordance with that statute,
the NRC must collect the mandated level of fees by the end of the
fiscal year to which they are attributed, in this case September 30,
2006. As such, the agency does not have the discretion to delay the
collection of these fees by deferring some fee increases.
Additionally, the timing of the fee rule each year is contingent
upon when the NRC receives its Congressionally approved budget. The
Commission makes every effort to issue the proposed fee rule as soon as
possible after receiving its appropriations. Because the NRC does not
know in advance what its future budgets will be (i.e., proposed budgets
must be submitted to the OMB for its review before the President
submits the budget to Congress for enactment), the NRC believes it is
not practicable to project fees based on future estimated budgets. For
example, the FY 2006 budget appropriation for the NRC reflected a
significant increase over the NRC's initial FY 2006 budget request
because of an increase in workload for new reactor and certain security
activities. Had the NRC proposed or established preliminary fees based
on the FY 2006 budget request, these estimated fees would have been
quite different from the fees ultimately assessed to licensees. The
fees reflected in this rulemaking reflect the final approved
appropriation that was signed by the President on December 30, 2005
(Department of Defense, Emergency Supplemental Appropriations to
Address Hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, and Pandemic Influenza Act,
2006).
Changes in economic markets, as well as the security and
policymaking environments, make predicting the NRC's future budgets
even more difficult than this was previously. However, even if the NRC
were able to reasonably predict a future year total budget, the annual
fee amounts are also highly sensitive to other factors, including the
allocation of these budgeted resources to license fee classes, the
numbers of licensees in a fee class, and the proportion of total class
costs recovered from part 170. (Part 170 revenue from a fee class is
particularly difficult to predict in advance, and more so for fee
classes with small numbers of licensees, whose annual fees are even
more sensitive to part 170 revenue estimates.) Estimating these factors
even further in advance than the NRC currently does would likely lead
to inaccurate future fee projections, which would be misleading to
licensees.
The NRC has previously considered requests to cap fee increases or
phase them in over a longer period of time. In the FY 1999 proposed fee
rule, the NRC solicited comments on the idea of a cap to fee increases
(64 FR 15876; April 1, 1999). While some comments supported this
proposal, others did not because they believed it would lead to some
licensees subsidizing the costs of other licensees. The NRC did not
adopt a fee increase cap in the FY 1999 final fee rule in light of
fairness and equity concerns with this approach and a lack of
overwhelming support from commenters (64 FR 31448; June 10, 1999). The
NRC again considered these strategies in the FY 2005 fee rule and came
to the same conclusion. The NRC continues to believe that the legal and
fairness concerns with these fee cap strategies or other phase-in
approaches outweigh the benefits of enhanced fee stability. Given the
requirements of OBRA-90, as amended, to collect most of NRC's budget
authority through fees, failure to fully recover costs from certain
classes of licensees due to caps or thresholds would result in other
classes of licensees bearing these costs. The NRC's fees are based on
the current year budgeted costs of activities benefitting the
associated license fee classes, and hence reflect the best assessment
of who should be paying for these costs. However, the NRC will continue
to strive to issue its fee regulations as early in the fiscal year as
is practicable to give as much time as possible for licensees to plan
for changes in fees.
In response to the comment that hourly rate charges are even more
difficult to predict than annual fees, the NRC notes that, if
requested, the NRC
[[Page 30729]]
program staff will provide a best estimate of hours required to
complete a specific licensing action, with the caveat that the actual
hours expended may differ from that estimate based on certain
circumstances (e.g., timeliness of submittals, quality of products
submitted for review).
III. Final Action
The NRC is amending its licensing, inspection, and annual fees to
recover approximately 90 percent of its FY 2006 budget authority less
the appropriations received from the NWF and for WIR activities. The
NRC's total budget authority for FY 2006 is $741.5 million, of which
approximately $45.7 million has been appropriated from the NWF, and
$2.5 million for WIR activities. Based on the 90 percent fee recovery
requirement, the NRC must recover approximately $624 million in FY 2006
through part 170 licensing and inspection fees and part 171 annual
fees. The amount required by law to be recovered through fees for FY
2006 is $83.4 million more than the amount estimated for recovery in FY
2005, an increase of over 15 percent.
The FY 2006 fee recovery amount is increased by $0.9 million to
account for billing adjustments (i.e., for FY 2006 invoices that the
NRC estimates will not be paid during the fiscal year, less payments
received in FY 2006 for FY 2005 invoices). There is no FY 2005
carryover to apply to FY 2006 fee collections. This leaves
approximately $625 million to be recovered in FY 2006 through part 170
licensing and inspection fees and part 171 annual fees.
The NRC estimates that approximately $183.3 million will be
recovered in FY 2006 from part 170 fees. This represents an increase of
19 percent as compared to the actual part 170 collections for FY 2005
of $154.1 million. The NRC derived the FY 2006 estimate of part 170 fee
collections based on the previous four quarters of billing data for
each license fee class, with adjustments to account for changes in the
NRC's FY 2006 budget, as appropriate, and the increase in the hourly
rates from FY 2005 to FY 2006. The remaining $441.7 million will be
recovered through the part 171 annual fees in FY 2006, compared to
$380.5 million for FY 2005, an increase of approximately 16 percent.
Table I summarizes the budget and fee recovery amounts for FY 2006
(individual values may not sum to totals due to rounding).
Table I.--Budget and Fee Recovery Amounts for FY 2006
[Dollars in millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Budget Authority.................................. $741.5
Less NWF and WIR........................................ -48.1
---------------
Balance............................................. 693.4
Fee Recovery Rate for FY 2006........................... x 90.0%
---------------
Total Amount To Be Recovered for FY 2006............ 624.0
Less Carryover from FY 2005............................. -0.0
---------------
Plus Part 171 Billing Adjustments:
Unpaid FY 2006 Invoices (estimated)................. 3.2
Less Payments Received in FY 2006 for Prior Year -2.3
Invoices (estimated)...............................
---------------
Subtotal........................................ 0.9
===============
Amount to be Recovered Through Parts 170 and 171 Fees... 625.0
Less Estimated Part 170 Fees............................ -183.3
===============
Part 171 Fee Collections Required................... 441.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NRC has made four updates to the FY 2006 fee calculations since
the proposed rule. First, the NRC updated the part 170 estimates based
on the latest invoice data available. In total, the part 170 estimates
decreased by approximately $5.4 million; approximately $3 million of
this reduction is from the power reactor fee class. Second, the NRC has
updated its allocation of the `Homeland Security Unallocated' planned
activity, as described in Section II.D.1. This resulted in more
budgeted resources allocated to the power reactor fee class, and less
to fuel facilities and some other licensees in the Materials Program.
Third, the NRC has adjusted downward the amount of generic
transportation resources to be recovered from annual fees. This
adjustment takes into account the annual fee collections received for
transportation activities (fee categories 10.B.1 and 10.B.2 under Sec.
171.16) until the effective date of the FY 2006 final fee rule, which
decreased the required fee collections for most fee classes (see
Section III.B.3.h for details). (Note that this is only a one-time
adjustment because the 10.B.1 and 10.B.2 annual fees have been
eliminated as of the effective date of this rule. Therefore, licensees
should expect the value of these allocated transportation resources to
increase in future years.) Fourth, the number of NRC materials users
licensees has been updated to reflect the transfer of approximately 150
licensees to the State of Minnesota. This adjustment was made because
NRC entered into an Agreement with the State as authorized by Section
274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, effective March 31,
2006. This resulted in a slight increase in fees for some materials
users licensees because fewer NRC licensees are paying for budgeted
licensing and inspection costs. Each of these changes and their
associated impacts on each fee class is discussed in more detail in
Section III.B.3.
The net result of all these updates on the FY 2006 fees is small.
Fees for most licensees remained the same between the FY 2006 proposed
and final fee rules. The most significant change was a five percent
increase in the test and research reactor annual fee, which resulted
from a decrease in estimated part 170 fee collections for this fee
class. Other fees increased or decreased by a small amount as a result
of the changes listed in the preceding paragraph.
The FY 2006 final fee rule is a ``major rule'' as defined by the
Congressional Review Act of 1996. Therefore, the
[[Page 30730]]
NRC's fee schedules for FY 2006 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 to reactors, major
fuel cycle facilities, and other licensees with annual fees of $100,000
or more, upon publication of the FY 2006 final rule. For these
licensees, payment is due on the effective date of the FY 2006 rule.
Because these licensees are billed quarterly, the payment due is the
amount of the total FY 2006 annual fee less payments made in the first
three quarters of the fiscal year. Those materials licensees whose
license anniversary date during FY 2006 falls before the effective date
of the final FY 2006 rule will be billed for the annual fee during the
anniversary month of the license at the FY 2005 annual fee rate. Those
materials licensees whose license anniversary date falls on or after
the effective date of the final FY 2006 rule will be billed for the
annual fee at the FY 2006 annual fee rate during the anniversary month
of the license, and payment will be due on the date of the invoice.
The NRC has discontinued mailing the final fee rule to all
licensees as a cost saving measure, in accordance with its FY 1998
announcement. Accordingly, the NRC does not plan to routinely mail the
FY 2006 final fee rule or future final fee rules to licensees. However,
the NRC will send the final rule to any licensee or other person upon
specific request. To request a copy, contact the License Fee Team,
Division of Financial Management, Office of the Chief Financial
Officer, at 301-415-7554, or e-mail fees@nrc.gov. In addition to
publication in the Federal Register, the final rule will be available
on the Internet at https://ruleforum.llnl.gov for at least 90 days after
the effective date of the final rule, and will be permanently available
at https://www.access.gpo.gov.
The NRC is amending 10 CFR parts 170 and 171 as discussed in
Sections A and B of this document.
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
The NRC is establishing hourly rates to recover the full cost of
activities under part 170, and to use these rates to calculate ``flat''
application fees. Additionally, this rule establishes that Federal
agencies are subject to part 170 fees (with the exception of certain
Federally-owned test and research reactors); clarifies that the
tracking and monitoring of shipments necessary for certain licensing
actions is subject to full cost fees under part 170; establishes
additional import/export fee categories (subclasses); and makes minor
administrative changes for purposes of clarification, consistency, and
to eliminate redundancy.
The NRC is making the following changes:
1. Hourly Rates
The NRC is establishing in Sec. 170.20 two professional hourly
rates for NRC staff time. These rates are based on the number of FY
2006 direct program FTEs and the NRC's FY 2006 fee recoverable budget,
excluding direct program support costs. These rates are used in
assessing full cost fees for specific services provided, as well as
flat fees for certain application reviews. The rate for the Reactor
Program is $217 per hour. This rate is applicable to all activities for
which fees are assessed under Sec. 170.21 of the fee regulations (with
the exception of reactor decommissioning and import/export licensing
activities). The rate for the Materials Program is $214 per hour. This
rate is applicable to all activities for which fees are assessed under
Sec. 170.31 of the fee regulations, as well as the reactor
decommissioning and import/export activities under Sec. 170.21. In the
FY 2005 final fee rule, the Reactor and Materials Program rates were
$205 and $197, respectively.
The increases to the Reactor and Materials Program rates from FY
2006 to FY 2005 are due to the recent Government-wide pay raise and to
the more accurate allocation of agency overhead to these Programs and
fee-exempt activities. The hourly rate for the Materials Program
decreased slightly (from $215 to $214) between the FY 2006 proposed and
final rules because of some minor reductions in the allocation of
resources to this program because of the revised allocation of
resources under the `Homeland Security' planned activity (discussed in
Section II.D.1).
The hourly rate is derived by dividing the sum of budgeted
resources for (1) Direct labor; (2) allocated program overhead; and (3)
allocated agency overhead, by budgeted direct hours. This calculation
is performed for both the Reactor and Materials Programs, and excludes
the budgeted resources and associated overhead for fee exempt
activities. The specific method used to determine the two professional
hourly rates is as follows:
a. Direct program budgeted FTE, as well as all associated program
overhead (FTE and contracts), are a