Revision of Fee Schedules; Fee Recovery for FY 2009, 27642-27673 [E9-13425]

Agencies

• NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 110 (Wednesday, June 10, 2009)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 27642-27673]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-13425]



[[Page 27641]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part III





Nuclear Regulatory Commission





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



10 CFR Parts 170 and 171



Revision of Fee Schedules; Fee Recovery for FY 2009; Final Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / 
Rules and Regulations

[[Page 27642]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Parts 170 and 171

[NRC-2008-0620]
RIN 3150-AI52


Revision of Fee Schedules; Fee Recovery for FY 2009

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 the 
NRC to recover through fees approximately 90 percent of its budget 
authority in fiscal year (FY) 2009, not including amounts appropriated 
from the Nuclear Waste Fund (NWF), amounts appropriated for Waste 
Incidental to Reprocessing (WIR), and amounts appropriated for generic 
homeland security activities. The NRC's required fee recovery amount 
for the FY 2009 budget is approximately $870.6 million. After 
accounting for billing adjustments, the total amount to be billed as 
fees is approximately $866.5 million.

DATES: Effective Date: August 10, 2009.

ADDRESSES: The comments received on the proposed rule and the NRC's 
work papers that support these final changes to 10 CFR parts 170 and 
171 are available from the following locations:
    Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and 
search for documents filed under Docket ID NRC-2008-0620. Address 
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher 301-492-3668; e-mail 
Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov.
    You can access publicly available documents related to this 
document using the following methods:
    NRC's Public Document Room (PDR): The public may examine and have 
copied for a fee publicly available documents at the NRC's PDR, Public 
File Area O1 F21, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, 
Rockville, Maryland.
    NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS): 
Publicly available documents created or received at the NRC after 
November 1, 1999, are available electronically at the NRC's Electronic 
Reading Room at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. From this 
page, the public can gain entry into ADAMS, which provides text and 
image files of NRC's public documents. If you do not have access to 
ADAMS or if there are problems in accessing the documents located in 
ADAMS, contact the NRC's PDR reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, 301-
415-4737, or by e-mail to pdr.resource@nrc.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rebecca I. Erickson, Office of the 
Chief Financial Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone 301-415-7126, e-mail 
Rebecca.Erickson@NRC.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background
II. Response to Comments
III. Final Action
    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
    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
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. Congressional Review Act

I. Background

    The NRC is required each year, under OBRA-90 (42 U.S.C. 2214), as 
amended, to recover approximately 90 percent of its budget authority, 
not including amounts appropriated from the NWF, amounts appropriated 
for WIR, and amounts appropriated for generic homeland security 
activities (non-fee items), through fees to NRC licensees and 
applicants. The NRC receives 10 percent of its budget authority (not 
including non-fee items) from the general fund each year to pay for the 
cost of agency activities that do not provide a direct benefit to NRC 
licensees, such as international assistance and Agreement State 
activities (as defined under section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 
1954, as amended).
    The NRC assesses two types of fees to meet the requirements of 
OBRA-90. First, user fees, set forth 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 cost of providing special benefits 
to identifiable applicants and licensees. For example, the NRC assesses 
these fees to cover the cost of inspections, applications for new 
licenses and license renewals, and requests for license amendments. 
Second, annual fees, set forth in 10 CFR part 171 under the authority 
of OBRA-90, recover generic regulatory costs not otherwise recovered 
through 10 CFR part 170 fees.
    In accordance with OBRA-90, $27.1 million of the agency's budgeted 
resources for generic homeland security activities are excluded from 
the NRC's fee base in FY 2009. These funds cover generic activities, 
such as rulemakings and the development of guidance documents, that 
support entire license fee classes or classes of licensees. Under its 
IOAA authority, the NRC will continue to charge part 170 fees for all 
licensee-specific homeland security-related services provided, 
including security inspections and security plan reviews.
    On March 11, 2009, the President signed the Omnibus Appropriations 
Act, 2009 (Pub. L. 111-8). This Act appropriated $1,045,516,000 to the 
NRC to carry out its mission in FY 2009. This amount is $24.3 million 
lower than the estimate used to develop the FY 2009 proposed rule (74 
FR 9129; March 2, 2009). The FY 2009 proposed rule was based on the FY 
2009 Energy and Water Development Appropriations Bill (H.R. 7324), 
reported by the U.S. House of Representatives Appropriations Committee. 
As discussed in the Statement of Consideration of the FY 2009 proposed 
rule, the NRC's FY 2009 final fee rule has been adjusted to reflect the 
enacted budget. However, because the $24.3 million decrease only 
affected the amount appropriated from the NWF, which is a non-fee item, 
the NRC's required fee recovery amount for the FY 2009 budget has not 
changed from the proposed fee rule.
    The amount of the NRC's required fee collections is set by law, and 
is, therefore, outside the scope of this rulemaking. In FY 2009, the 
NRC's total fee recovery amount has increased by $91.5 million from FY 
2008, mostly in response to an increased regulatory and infrastructure 
support workload for reactor renewal activities, new uranium recovery 
facility applications, new uranium enrichment facilities, and materials 
licensing. The FY 2009 budget was allocated to the fee classes that the 
budgeted activities support. As such, the annual fees for reactor, fuel 
facility, most uranium recovery, and small materials licensees have 
increased. Another factor affecting the amount of annual fees for each 
fee class is the estimated collection under part 170. The

[[Page 27643]]

annual fee amounts in the FY 2009 final fee rule are lower for most fee 
categories than those in the proposed rule primarily due to the 
increase in part 170 revenue estimates.

II. Response to Comments

    The NRC published the FY 2009 proposed fee rule on March 2, 2009 
(74 FR 9129) to solicit public comment on its proposed revisions to 10 
CFR parts 170 and 171. The NRC received eight comments by the close of 
the comment period (April 1, 2009) and two comments thereafter, for a 
total of 10 comments that were considered in this fee rulemaking. The 
comments have been grouped by issue and are addressed in a collective 
response.

A. Specific Part 170 Issue

1. Hourly Rate Increase
    Comment. Several commenters were concerned about the increase in 
the NRC's hourly rate. These commenters requested a better explanation 
for the 19 percent increase in the cost of agency administrative 
overhead and the 10 percent increase in the cost of salaries and 
benefits for mission direct full-time equivalents (FTE) from FY 2008 to 
FY 2009. Some commenters also noted that NRC's hourly rates have always 
exceeded those charged by private firms for similar work.
    Response. The NRC's hourly rate is based on budgeted costs and must 
be established each year to meet the NRC's fee recovery requirements. 
As discussed in the proposed rule, the increase in the hourly rate is 
due to the higher budget necessary for an increased regulatory and 
infrastructure support workload for reactor license renewals and 
applications from new uranium recovery and enrichment facilities. The 
increase in the agency's regulatory activities requires a comparable 
increase in agency administrative support (e.g., rent, supplies, and 
information technology). The 10 percent increase in the cost of 
salaries and benefits is primarily due to an increase of 101 mission 
direct FTEs in FY 2009 as compared with FY 2008 along with Government-
wide pay raises. The FTE increase reflects additional support for new 
facility applications.
    In response to comments that the NRC hourly rate is significantly 
higher than private industry rates, the NRC's rate is calculated to 
recover all of the budgeted costs supporting the services provided 
under part 170, including all programmatic and agency overhead, which 
is consistent with the full cost recovery concept emphasized in the 
Office of Management and Budget's Circular No. A-25, ``User Charges.'' 
The NRC did not receive any comments suggesting ways to revise its 
hourly rate calculation methodology, and comments on this fee rule and 
other rulemakings have consistently supported the NRC's efforts to 
collect more of its budget through part 170 fees-for-services rather 
than part 171 annual fees. Therefore, the NRC is retaining the hourly 
rate formula as presented in the FY 2009 proposed rule.
2. Multiple Hourly Rates
    Comment. One commenter requested that the NRC consider developing 
different hourly rates to account for the more complex licensing tasks 
of new licensed facilities as opposed to the routine work required for 
well-established programs.
    Response. From FY 1988 through FY 1994, the NRC used one agency-
wide professional hourly rate. In the FY 1995 fee rule (60 FR 32218; 
June 20, 1995), the NRC replaced the single rate with two professional 
hourly rates based on ``cost center concepts'' used for budgeting 
purposes to separately, and more equitably, allocate the costs 
associated with the reactor and materials programs. In the FY 2007 fee 
rule (72 FR 31401; June 6, 2007), the NRC returned to the use of one 
hourly rate. The NRC found that there was no longer a significant 
difference in the two hourly rates. Also, the NRC incurs administrative 
burden in calculating and billing two different hourly rates.
    As stated in the previous response, the NRC's hourly rate is based 
on budgeted costs and must be calculated each year to meet the agency's 
fee recovery requirements. The NRC believes that the added burden from 
requiring both mission direct and administrative staff to develop and 
provide annual review and oversight of a multiple hourly rate schedule 
would be counterproductive. In addition, there is not a significant 
difference in the NRC budget for the various programs that would result 
in different hourly rates. Therefore, the NRC is retaining the single 
hourly rate as presented in the FY 2009 proposed rule.
3. Fee Category 17 Description Revisions
    Comment. One commenter requested that NRC rescind the revision to 
the description of fee category 17, ``master materials licenses of 
broad scope issued to Government agencies and other entities,'' as 
stated in the proposed rule. This commenter stated that it understands 
and supports the NRC's need to meet its fee recovery responsibilities, 
but believes adequate notice should be given to impacted licensees as 
required under the Administrative Procedure Act. This commenter also 
noted that the addition of the phrase ``and other entities'' to the 
description of fee category 17 and further elaboration that this 
category is being expanded to include non-governmental entities with 
multi-site licenses did not clearly indicate that certain fee category 
3.C. entities would now fall under fee category 17.
    Response. The NRC's intent in revising the description of fee 
category 17 was to enhance the fairness and equity of its fee schedule. 
The data gathered for the FY 2009 biennial review of fees showed that 
the NRC's review efforts for large non-Federal multi-site, multi-region 
licenses under fee category 3.C. were similar to efforts for a Master 
Materials License (MML) (fee category 17) and, thus, there should be 
similar fees. However, NRC appreciates the concerns raised by this 
commenter. To address these concerns, NRC will rescind the proposed 
revision to the description for fee category 17 (MML). The NRC believes 
it is necessary to perform additional studies of the best way to 
equitably recover the costs of providing the regulatory oversight for 
multi-site licenses and such review will be addressed in a future 
rulemaking. The impact of removing the revised description from this 
final rule on fee categories 3.C. and 17 is discussed in Sections 
III.A.2, of this document, Flat Application Fee Changes, and III.B.3.g, 
Materials Users.

B. Specific Part 171 Issues

1. Increase in Annual Fee Base
    Comment. Some commenters requested a more detailed explanation for 
the bases for the increase in annual fees as opposed to an increase in 
the NRC hourly fee charges. The commenters recognized that additional 
fees are necessary to support increases in NRC staffing levels and the 
agency infrastructure required to license new facilities, but the 
commenters expected a larger percentage of the increase to be recovered 
through hourly fee charges.
    Response. As a matter of policy, the NRC strives to maximize its 
fee collections under part 170, and this has been addressed in previous 
fee rules. The NRC is rebaselining its fees in FY 2009, as noted in the 
proposed fee rule. Under this methodology, the agency's annual fee 
amounts are calculated based on budgeted resources allocated to the fee 
class and may fluctuate from one year to the next. In FY 2009 the NRC 
budget amount to be recovered increased by 14 percent. This is

[[Page 27644]]

reflected in the increase in annual fees for most licensees.
    Because NRC's annual fees must recover all fee class resources not 
collected through part 170 fees, the annual fees are also affected by 
the part 170 fees collected from that fee class. The NRC prepares its 
budget using the best information available at the time, including 
scheduled application and licensing activities. However, part 170 
revenue from a fee class is particularly difficult to predict in 
advance. Although the total part 170 revenue in FY 2009 is greater than 
FY 2008, fact-of-life issues, such as delays in application activities 
and restrictions in a six-month continuing resolution, resulted in 
lower than expected part 170 estimated revenues for some classes of 
licensees like fuel facilities. In addition, most of the FY 2009 part 
170 revenue is billed at the lower FY 2008 professional hourly rate of 
$238 because the higher FY 2009 rate of $257 is not effective until 60 
days after the publication of this final rule in the Federal Register. 
This has resulted in annual fee increases higher than the increase in 
total budget to be recovered for some licensees.
2. Fuel Facilities Annual Fees
    Comment. One commenter was concerned about the increase in annual 
fees for fee category 1.A.(1)(a), High Enriched Uranium Fuel (HEU), and 
requested that NRC re-evaluate the matrix used in determining the Fuel 
Facilities annual fees. In particular, this commenter believes that the 
annual fee for fee category 1.E., Uranium Enrichment, should have a 
higher percentage increase because the NRC stated that the primary 
reason for the Fuel Facilities budget increase was for new uranium 
enrichment facility licensing activities. The commenter then asserted 
that the proposed annual fee increase for an HEU facility was 
unjustified because the NRC said that the effort factors for the HEU 
fee category have decreased from FY 2008. Another commenter did not 
believe that the annual fee increase for a Low-Enriched Uranium Fuel 
Facility was justified and wanted the NRC to provide further 
explanation.
    Response. Annual fees fluctuate from year to year based on a number 
of factors, including the budgeted resources for a license fee class. 
The NRC acknowledges that the annual fees for fuel facilities increased 
by a large percentage (between 56 percent and 124 percent) from FY 2008 
to FY 2009. However, the annual fees decreased approximately 27 percent 
from FY 2007 to FY 2008. The licensing activities for the new uranium 
enrichment facility are not included in the annual fee for a specific 
facility licensed by the NRC. The NRC bills the applicant for these 
activities as part 170 hourly charges. The delay in the submission of 
the license application impacted the part 170 fee estimate for fuel 
facilities. Because annual fees must recover all budgeted resources for 
a fee class not recovered through part 170 fees, annual fees for all 
facilities in the fee class are impacted by the lower part 170 fee 
estimate, as explained in the answer to the previous comment.
    In response to the request to re-evaluate the matrix used for 
calculating annual fees for individual fuel facilities, the NRC 
established its methodology through public notice and comment 
rulemaking (64 FR 31448; June 10, 1999). Under this methodology the 
total budgeted resources for fuel facilities are allocated to 
individual fuel facility fee categories based on the effort/fee 
determination matrix, which was described in detail in the FY 2009 
proposed fee rule. As stated in the FY 1999 rulemaking, 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. 
The NRC continues to believe that an effort/fee determination matrix, 
based on the commensurate level of regulatory effort related to the 
various fuel facility categories from a safety and safeguards 
perspective, results in annual fees that accurately reflect the current 
costs of providing generic and other regulatory services to each fuel 
facility type. In response to the comment on the decrease in effort 
factors for HEU fee category, the 2.6 percent decrease in the total 
safety and safeguards effort factor change is relatively small, as 
noted in the proposed rule. The primary reason for the increase in 
annual fees is the higher budget without a proportionate increase in 
part 170 revenue. The decrease in total effort factors for HEU fee 
category did not have a large impact on the annual fee. Therefore, the 
NRC is retaining the effort/fee determination matrix as outlined in the 
proposed rule.
3. Uranium Recovery Annual Fees
    Comment: One commenter, representing various stakeholders, stated 
that the proposed rule did not adequately explain the substantial 
increase in FY 2009 annual fees for in-situ recovery (ISR) operations 
and conventional mills from the $10,300 [corrected] annual fee in FY 
2008. This commenter was also concerned that contrary to the uranium 
recovery industry's expectations, the preparation of the Generic 
Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) for in-situ uranium recovery has 
not decreased NRC staff effort. This commenter supported the creation 
of three new classes of uranium recovery licenses as presented in the 
proposed rule, but requested the addition of a statement in the final 
rule to clarify that conventional mills will not be double-billed as a 
resin toll milling facility under fee category 2.A.(2)(e) if their 
license allows them to process uranium bearing resins from other sites 
and sources. Another commenter stated that the proposed fee rule did 
not adequately explain the basis for the Uranium Mill Tailings 
Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) Title I budgeted costs. This commenter 
worried that reductions in generic fees would result in reduced NRC 
support for UMTRCA license actions and requested site-specific budget 
details in the final rule and supporting documents.
    Response. The NRC acknowledges that the FY 2009 uranium recovery 
annual fees for in-situ recovery operations and conventional mills fee 
classes of $29,700 and $31,200, respectively, are significantly higher 
than the FY 2008 annual fee of $10,300 charged to these facilities. 
However, the annual fees charged to these facilities have decreased 
substantially since FY 2006 when the annual fee was $65,900. Annual 
fees fluctuate from year to year based on a number of factors, 
including the budgeted resources for a license fee class. The increase 
in the total required annual fee recovery is mainly due to an increase 
in uranium recovery licensing and inspection budget resources for the 
existing licensees, as stated in the proposed rule. The NRC's annual 
fees reflect the budgeted cost of its regulatory services to the class.
    In response to the request for clarification in the fee schedule to 
avoid the possibility of double-billing, most NRC materials licenses 
that authorize more than one activity on a single license will be 
assessed annual fees for each category applicable to the license (see 
Sec.  171.16, footnote 1, of this document). Thus, if an NRC license 
authorizes the operation of both a conventional mill and a resin toll 
milling facility then annual fees will be assessed for both fee 
category 2.A.(2)(a), Conventional Mills, and 2.A.(2)(e), Resin Toll 
Milling Facilities. As described in the proposed rule, each fee 
category for uranium recovery facilities reflects the NRC's regulatory 
effort expended for the different types of facilities, both existing 
and planned. Consistent with requirements under OBRA-90, the NRC 
believes the annual

[[Page 27645]]

fees have a reasonable relationship to the cost of its regulatory 
services to each fee category. Therefore, the final rule provides no 
exceptions.
    In response to comments on budgeted resources for specific uranium 
recovery activities, 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. The 
NRC's Performance Budget submitted to the Congress for review provides 
the objectives of the budget and how it supports the agency's Strategic 
Plan goals and strategies. 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' concerns regarding the NRC's budget and the use of NRC 
resources for specific activities, such as the GEIS and UMTRCA.
4. Agreement State Activities
    Comment. Some commenters requested more discussion of the fee 
impact on NRC licensees once additional states beyond the Commonwealth 
of Virginia and the State of New Jersey become Agreement States. One 
commenter worried that they would be required to pay fees to both the 
NRC and the Commonwealth of Virginia. This commenter also suggested 
that NRC consider implementing monthly billing for seasonal usage 
whereby the licensee would only be charged for the months during which 
the equipment was used.
    Response. In response to concerns about decreasing numbers of NRC 
licensees as more states become Agreement States, the NRC notes that 
the fee calculation methodology considers the percentage of licensees 
in Agreement States in establishing fees for the materials users fee 
class. As explained in the proposed fee rule, the budgeted resources 
providing support to Agreement States or their licensees are included 
in total fee-relief costs, which are offset by non-fee recovery funding 
provided by Congress. For example, if the NRC develops a rule, guidance 
document, or a tracking system that is associated with or otherwise 
benefits Agreement State licensees, the costs of these activities are 
prorated to the fee-relief activities according to the percentage of 
licensees in that fee class in Agreement States (e.g., if 85 percent of 
materials users licensees are in Agreement States, 85 percent of these 
regulatory infrastructure costs are included in the fee-relief 
category). To address fairness and equity concerns associated with 
licensees paying for the cost of activities that do not directly 
benefit them, the FY 2001 Energy and Water Development Appropriations 
Act amended OBRA-90 to decrease the NRC's fee recovery amount to 90 
percent beginning in FY 2005. To the extent that the 10 percent of 
NRC's budget authority which is not fee recoverable is insufficient to 
cover the total cost of all fee-relief activities, these remaining 
costs are spread to all licensees based on their percentage of the 
budget. In FY 2009, the NRC's fee relief exceeds the total fee-relief 
activities cost. This excess fee relief is used to reduce licensees' 
annual fees, based on their percentage of the fee recoverable budget 
authority.
    In response to the comment about paying fees to both NRC and the 
Commonwealth of Virginia, the proposed fee rule explained that, because 
of Virginia's effective Agreement date of March 31, 2009, the licensees 
transferring to Virginia are subject to one-half of their NRC annual 
fee for FY 2009. In response to the comment suggesting a monthly charge 
to account for seasonal usage, the NRC recognizes the assessment of 
fees to recover the agency's costs may result in a financial hardship 
for some licensees. However, the annual fees are based on the budgeted 
resources for activities such as licensing and inspection and the level 
of effort to perform these activities. The NRC does not believe that 
seasonal usage of equipment should be a factor in determining annual 
fees. Therefore, the NRC will continue to charge an annual fee to its 
licensees.

C. Other Issues

1. The NRC Budget and Explanation of Increases
    Comment. Several commenters stated that the proposed rule did not 
adequately explain the increase in NRC's total fee recovery for FY 2009 
and they felt that the NRC should provide a plan for controlling and 
limiting the rate of future budget increases. While the commenters 
recognized and supported NRC's hiring effort in the past five years in 
response to an increase of new licensees in several fee categories, 
they believe the proposed rule should have provided a more detailed 
explanation and justification for the fee increases.
    Response. The NRC appreciates the importance of developing cost-
efficient budgets. NRC offices conduct process reviews every year and 
rely on risk-informed practices to develop cost-efficient budgets that 
allow them to achieve the NRC's Strategic Plan mission objectives. 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 the NRC 
to carry out its statutory obligations. In compliance with OBRA-90, 
NRC's fees are calculated to recover the required percentage of its 
approved budget. The NRC will continue efforts to ensure that the NRC 
carries out its statutory obligations in an efficient manner.
2. Need for Timely Budget Estimate
    Comment. Some commenters raised concerns that the timing of the fee 
rule makes it difficult for licensees to plan for regulatory expenses 
within the framework of their normal budget cycles. To address this 
issue, these commenters suggested that the NRC hold an annual public 
meeting for the purpose of sharing fee projection information. The 
commenters recognized NRC's efforts in providing information to the 
industry through an October 2008 public meeting but requested that an 
annual public meeting be held earlier in the year to align with their 
budget planning cycle. In addition, some commenters worried about the 
unpredictability of estimating proposed fee increases. One commenter 
recommended NRC publish advance notice of the NRC's next fiscal year 
budget during the first half of the current calendar year. Another 
commenter did not believe the NRC adequately communicated the impact of 
its budget increases to NRC licensees when the proposed FY 2009 budget 
was released to Congress. Some commenters recommended that the NRC 
improve its methods of communicating monthly inspection costs.
    Response. The NRC appreciates the concerns about fee predictability 
and stability, and strives to notify licensees of proposed fee changes 
as early as possible. The Commission also makes every effort to issue 
the proposed fee rule as soon as possible. Unfortunately, the NRC 
cannot precisely estimate its budget in advance, as much of the process 
is out of the agency's direct control. The NRC's proposed budget is 
submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for executive review 
before the President submits a budget to Congress, which often makes 
changes before approving the final budget for the President's 
signature. As was noted at the October 2008 public meeting, the NRC is 
committed to open communication within the confines of the rulemaking 
process, but the agency cannot provide predecisional policies or 
certain administrative fee-related

[[Page 27646]]

information until the proposed fee rule is published. However, the NRC 
agrees to hold an annual public meeting with interested licensees to 
share projected fee information as the commenters suggested. The date 
of the meeting will be determined annually, taking into consideration 
the timing of the budget process and NRC staff availability.
    In response to suggestions that the agency improve its methods of 
communicating monthly inspection costs, the NRC appreciates the 
concerns regarding invoice predictability. Nonetheless, providing 
estimated monthly inspection costs before invoicing is not within the 
scope of this rulemaking and will not be addressed in this final rule.

III. Final Action

    The NRC is amending its licensing, inspection, and annual fees to 
recover approximately 90 percent of its FY 2009 budget authority minus 
the appropriations for non-fee items. The NRC's total budget authority 
for FY 2009 is $1,045.5 million. The non-fee items include $49 million 
appropriated from the NWF, $2 million for WIR activities, and $27.1 
million for generic homeland security activities. Based on the 90 
percent fee-recovery requirement, the NRC must recover approximately 
$870.6 million in FY 2009 through part 170 licensing and inspection 
fees and part 171 annual fees. The amount required by law to be 
recovered through fees for FY 2009 is $91.5 million more than the 
amount estimated for recovery in FY 2008, an increase of approximately 
12 percent.
    The FY 2009 fee recovery amount of $870.6 million is reduced by 
$4.1 million to account for billing adjustments (i.e., for FY 2009 
invoices that the NRC estimates will not be paid during the fiscal 
year, less payments received in FY 2009 for prior year invoices). This 
leaves approximately $866.5 million to be billed as fees in FY 2009 
through part 170 licensing and inspection fees and part 171 annual 
fees.
    Table I summarizes the budget and fee recovery amounts for FY 2009. 
(Individual values may not sum to totals due to rounding.)

          Table I--Budget and Fee Recovery Amounts for FY 2009
                          [Dollars in millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Budget Authority................................          $1,045.5
    Less Non-Fee Items................................             -78.1
                                                       -----------------
        Balance.......................................            $967.4
    Fee Recovery Rate for FY 2009.....................           x 90.0%
                                                       -----------------
Total Amount to be Recovered for FY 2009..............            $870.6
    Less Part 171 Billing Adjustments:
        Unpaid FY 2009 Invoices (estimated)...........               1.9
        Less Payments Received in FY 2009 for Prior                 -6.0
         Year Invoices (estimated)....................
                                                       -----------------
            Subtotal..................................              -4.1
Amount to be Recovered Through Parts 170 and 171 Fees.            $866.5
    Less Estimated Part 170 Fees......................            -333.9
                                                       -----------------
Part 171 Fee Collections Required.....................            $532.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NRC added six updates to the FY 2009 fee calculations since the 
proposed rule. First, the agency updated the Part 171 Billing 
Adjustments based on the latest information available. The estimated 
payments received in FY 2009 for prior year invoices decreased by 
approximately $1.7 million, resulting in a greater amount to be 
recovered through fees. Second, the NRC updated the part 170 estimates 
based on the latest billing data available, adding adjustments to 
account for changes in the budget, as appropriate. In total, the part 
170 estimates increased by approximately $13.7 million. The NRC 
estimates that $333.9 million will be recovered from part 170 fees in 
FY 2009, which represents an increase of approximately 20 percent 
compared to the $277.3 million in part 170 collections during FY 2008. 
Part 171 annual fees account for the remaining $532.6 million to be 
recovered in FY 2009, an increase of approximately 13 percent compared 
to the $472.9 million in part 171 collections during FY 2008. Third, 
the NRC lowered the amount of resources for generic decommissioning 
(fee-relief) and correspondingly increased resources for the uranium 
recovery fee class. These changes more accurately allocate budgeted 
resources. Fourth, in response to a commenter's concerns, the NRC has 
not changed the definition for fee category 17. Fifth, the NRC 
corrected the ``Flat'' application fee for fee category 17, Master 
Materials License (MML). The proposed rule listed an application fee of 
$29,900, which was incorrect. The correct amount is $60,100, as shown 
in the proposed rule work papers. Sixth, the NRC adjusted the average 
number of professional staff hours needed to complete inspection 
actions for fee categories 3C and 17, and to complete licensing actions 
for fee category 17. This adjustment takes into account the unchanged 
definition for fee category 17.
    The impact of these updates on the FY 2009 fees is minimal. Fees 
for most licensees decreased between the FY 2009 proposed and final fee 
rules. The two most significant changes were: (1) A 30 percent decrease 
in the test and research reactor annual fee, which resulted from an 
increase in estimated part 170 fee collections for this fee class; and 
(2) a 144 percent increase in the ``Flat'' application fee for fee 
category 17, which resulted from a correction to the proposed fee 
amount and an adjustment to the average number of professional staff 
hours. Other fees decreased or increased by small amounts as a result 
of the changes listed in the preceding paragraph.
    The FY 2009 final fee rule is a ``major rule'' as defined by the 
Congressional Review Act of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801-808). Therefore, the 
NRC's fee schedules for FY 2009 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, part 72 
licensees, major fuel cycle facilities, and other licensees with annual 
fees of $100,000 or more, upon publication of the FY 2009 final rule. 
For these licensees, payment is due on the effective date of the FY 
2009 final rule. Because these licensees are billed

[[Page 27647]]

quarterly, the payment due is the amount of the total FY 2009 annual 
fee, less payments made in the first three quarters of the fiscal year.
    Materials licensees with annual fees of less than $100,000 are 
billed annually. Those materials licensees whose license anniversary 
date during FY 2009 falls before the effective date of the FY 2009 
final rule will be billed for the annual fee during the anniversary 
month of the license at the FY 2008 annual fee rate. Those materials 
licensees whose license anniversary date falls on or after the 
effective date of the FY 2009 final rule will be billed for the annual 
fee at the FY 2009 annual fee rate during the anniversary month of the 
license, and payment will be due on the date of the invoice.
    The NRC will not routinely mail the FY 2009 final fee rule or 
future final fee rules to applicants or licensees. 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 the 
Controller, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, at 301-415-7554, or 
e-mail fees.resource@nrc.gov. In addition to publication in the Federal 
Register, the final rule will be available on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov [NRC Docket ID NRC-2008-0620].
    The NRC is amending 10 CFR parts 170 and 171 as discussed in 
Sections III.A and III.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 a single hourly rate of $257 to recover the 
full cost of activities under part 170, and using this rate to 
calculate ``flat'' application fees. The rule also makes revisions to 
descriptions of some fee categories.
    The NRC is making the following changes:
1. Hourly Rate
    The NRC's hourly rate is used in assessing full cost fees for 
specific services provided, as well as flat fees for certain 
application reviews. The NRC is increasing the FY 2009 hourly rate to 
$257. This rate is applicable to all activities for which fees are 
assessed under Sec. Sec.  170.21 and 170.31. The FY 2009 hourly rate is 
higher than the hourly rate of $238 in the FY 2008 final fee rule. The 
increase is primarily due to the higher FY 2009 budget, which accounts 
for an increased regulatory and infrastructure support workload for 
reactor license renewals and applications from new uranium recovery and 
enrichment facilities. The hourly rate calculation is described in 
further detail in the following paragraphs.
    The NRC's hourly rate is derived by dividing the sum of recoverable 
budgeted resources for (1) mission direct program salaries and 
benefits; (2) mission indirect salaries and benefits and contract 
activity; and (3) agency management and support and Inspector General 
(IG), by mission direct FTE hours. The mission direct FTE hours are the 
product of the mission direct FTE times the hours per direct FTE. The 
only budgeted resources excluded from the hourly rate are those for 
mission direct contract activities.
    In FY 2009, the NRC is using 1,371 hours per direct FTE, the same 
as in FY 2008, to calculate the hourly fees. The NRC has reviewed data 
from its time and labor system to determine if the annual direct hours 
worked per direct FTE estimate requires updates for the FY 2009 fee 
rule. Based on its review of the most recent data, the NRC determined 
that 1,371 hours is the best estimate of direct hours worked annually 
per direct FTE. This estimate excludes all non-direct activities, such 
as training, general administration, and leave.
    Table II shows the results of the hourly rate calculation 
methodology. (Individual values may not sum to totals due to rounding.)

                Table II--FY 2009 Hourly Rate Calculation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mission Direct Program Salaries & Benefits............            $322.0
Mission Indirect Salaries & Benefits, and Contract                129.2M
 Activity.............................................
Agency Management and Support, and IG.................            316.5M
                                                       -----------------
    Subtotal..........................................            767.7M
Less Offsetting Receipts..............................             -0.1M
                                                       -----------------
    Total Budget Included in Hourly Rate..............           $767.6M
Mission Direct FTEs...................................             2,180
Professional Hourly Rate (Total Budget Included in                  $257
 Hourly Rate divided by Mission Direct FTE Hours).....
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As shown in Table II, dividing the $767.6 million budgeted amount 
(rounded) included in the hourly rate by total mission direct FTE hours 
(2,180 FTE times 1,371 hours) results in an hourly rate of $257. The 
hourly rate is rounded to the nearest whole dollar.
2. ``Flat'' Application Fee Changes
    As noted above, the NRC is adjusting the current flat application 
fees in Sec. Sec.  170.21 and 170.31 to reflect the revised hourly rate 
of $257. These flat fees are calculated by multiplying the average 
professional staff hours needed to process the licensing actions by the 
professional hourly rate for FY 2009.
    Biennially, the NRC evaluates historical professional staff hours 
used to process a new license application for materials users fee 
categories subject to flat application fees. This is in accordance with 
the requirements of the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990. The NRC 
conducted this biennial review for the FY 2009 fee rule which also 
included license and amendment applications for import and export 
licenses.
    Evaluation of the historical data in FY 2009 shows that the average 
number of professional staff hours required to complete licensing 
actions in the materials program should be increased in some fee 
categories and decreased in others to more accurately reflect current 
data for completing these licensing actions. The average number of 
professional staff hours needed to complete new licensing actions was 
last updated for the FY 2007 final fee rule. Thus, the revised average 
professional staff hours in this fee rule reflect the changes in the 
NRC licensing review program that have occurred since that time.
    The higher hourly rate of $257 is the main reason for the increases 
in the application fees. Application fees for some fee categories 
(2.B., 3.G., 3.O., 3.R.1., 4.B., 5.A., 8.A., 9.C., and 17 under Sec.  
170.31) also increase because of the results of the biennial review, 
which

[[Page 27648]]

showed an increase in average time to process these types of license 
applications. The decrease in fees for six fee categories (3.C., 3.H., 
3.S., 9.A., 9.B., and 10.B. under Sec.  170.31) is due to a decrease in 
average time to process these types of applications. As noted earlier, 
the application fee for fee category 17, Master Materials License (MML) 
was incorrect in the proposed rule. The correct proposed rule amount is 
$60,100, as shown in the proposed rule work papers.
    In light of concerns raised by a commenter, the proposed change to 
the definition for fee category 17 is rescinded in this final rule (see 
Section II.A.3., Response to Comments, of this document). Therefore, 
the NRC revised the biennial review resulting in a higher average 
number of professional staff hours needed to complete new MML licensing 
actions. This increased the MML application fee by approximately 22 
percent compared to the proposed rule corrected fee amount. Additional 
discussion is provided in Section III.B.3.g, Materials Users, of this 
document.
    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 minimal. Fees under $1,000 are rounded to the nearest 
$10, fees that are greater than $1,000 but less than $100,000 are 
rounded to the nearest $100, 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 Sec.  170.21, and fee categories 1.C., 1.D., 2.B., 
2.C., 3.A. through 3.S., 4.B. through 9.D., 10.B., 15.A. through 15.R., 
16, and 17 of Sec.  170.31. Applications filed on or after the 
effective date of the FY 2009 final fee rule will be subject to the 
revised fees in the final rule.
3. Fee Category Changes
    The NRC is revising the fee categories for uranium recovery 
facilities in Sec.  170.31. The new fee categories better reflect the 
NRC's regulatory effort expended for the different types of facilities, 
both existing and planned. A more detailed discussion follows in 
Section III.B.3.b. Uranium Recovery Facilities, of this document.
    In addition, the NRC is revising the description for fee category 
7.A. in Sec.  170.31. The NRC is amending fee category 7.A., related to 
medical licenses, to more precisely state which medical devices it 
covers. Currently, the fee category applies to teletherapy devices. The 
NRC has historically included gamma stereotactic radiosurgery units 
(gamma knives) in this category in accordance with NUREG 1556, Volume 
20, Appendix G. This amendment explicitly provides that fee category 
7.A. include gamma knives and other similar beam therapy devices. The 
new fee category description does not represent any additions to the 
types of licenses regulated by NRC. The change clarifies the types of 
licenses covered under specific categories for NRC licensees.
    In light of concerns raised by a commenter, the NRC is not revising 
the description for fee category 17 in Sec.  170.31.
4. Administrative Amendments
    In response to a number of questions on specific sub-sections 
related to fee exemptions for special projects, the NRC is simplifying 
Sec.  170.11 for ease of reading. There is no change to the NRC's fee 
exemption policy.
    In summary, the NRC is making the following changes to 10 CFR part 
170:
    1. Establish revised professional hourly rate to use in assessing 
fees for specific services;
    2. Revise the license application fees to reflect the proposed FY 
2009 hourly rate;
    3. Revise some fee categories to better reflect NRC's regulatory 
effort; and
    4. Make certain administrative changes for purposes of 
clarification.

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 using its fee relief to reduce all licensees' annual 
fees and changes in the number of NRC licensees. This rulemaking also 
establishes rebaselined annual fees based on the NRC's FY 2009 budget 
authority. The final amendments are described as follows:
1. Application of ``Fee-Relief/Surcharge''
    The NRC is using its fee relief to reduce all licensees' annual 
fees, based on their percent of the budget.
    The NRC applies the 10 percent of its budget that is excluded from 
fee recovery under OBRA-90 (fee relief), to offset the total budget 
allocated for activities which do not directly benefit current NRC 
licensees. The budget for these fee-relief activities are totaled, and 
then reduced by the amount of the NRC's fee relief. Any remaining fee-
relief activities budget is allocated to all licensees' annual fees, 
based on their percent of the budget (i.e., over 80 percent is 
allocated to power reactors each year).
    In FY 2009, the NRC's 10 percent fee relief exceeds the total 
budget for fee-relief activities by $3.2 million. In FY 2008, the 10 
percent fee relief exceeded the total budget by $8.9 million. The 
excess fee relief in FY 2009 is lower compared with FY 2008, primarily 
due to higher FY 2009 budget resources for Agreement States support and 
international activities.
    The excess fee relief for the FY 2009 final rule increased by 
approximately $0.3 million compared with the proposed rule primarily 
due to a change in the costs not recovered from the small entities 
under 10 CFR 171.16(c) and generic decommissioning/reclamation fee-
relief costs. The amounts in these fee-relief categories decreased from 
the proposed rule due to an increase in part 170 revenue estimate for 
the materials users fee class and a change resulting in a smaller 
budget resource allocation for generic decommissioning activities 
related to uranium recovery sites.
    As in FY 2008, the NRC is using the $3.2 million fee relief to 
reduce all licensees' annual fees, based on their percent of the fee 
recoverable budget authority. This is consistent with the existing fee 
methodology, in that the benefits of the NRC's fee relief are allocated 
to licensees in the same manner as deficit was allocated as surcharge 
when the NRC did not receive enough fee relief to pay for fee-relief 
activities. In FY 2009, the power reactors class of licensees will 
receive approximately 88 percent of the fee relief based on their share 
of the NRC fee recoverable budget authority.
    The FY 2009 budgeted resources for NRC's fee-relief activities are 
$93.5 million. The NRC's total fee relief in FY 2009 is $96.7 million, 
leaving $3.2 million in fee relief to be used to reduce all licensees' 
annual fees. These values are shown in Table III. (Individual values 
may not sum to totals due to rounding.)

[[Page 27649]]



                    Table III--Fee-Relief Activities
                          [Dollars in millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        FY 2009 budgeted
                                                              costs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Activities not attributable to an existing NRC
 licensee or class of licensee:
    a. International activities.......................             $17.6
    b. Agreement State oversight......................              11.2
    c. Scholarships and Fellowships...................              15.0
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                      11.5
     institutions.....................................
    b. Costs not recovered from small entities under                 3.7
     10 CFR 171.16(c).................................
    c. Regulatory support to Agreement States.........              17.5
    d. Generic decommissioning/reclamation (not                     13.6
     related to the power reactor and spent fuel
     storage fee classes).............................
    e. In situ leach rulemaking and unregistered                     3.5
     general licensees................................
                                                       -----------------
        Total fee-relief activities...................              93.5
Less 10 percent of NRC's FY 2009 total budget (non                 -96.7
 including non-fee items).............................
                                                       -----------------
        Fee Relief to be Allocated to All Licensees'               $-3.2
         Annual Fees..................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Table IV shows how the NRC is allocating the $3.2 million in fee 
relief to each license fee class. As explained previously, the NRC is 
allocating this fee relief to each license fee class based on the 
percent of the budget for that fee class compared to the NRC's total 
budget. The fee relief is used to partially offset the required annual 
fee recovery from each fee class.
    Separately, the NRC has continued to allocate the low-level waste 
(LLW) surcharge based on the volume of LLW disposal of three classes of 
licenses, operating reactors, fuel facilities, and materials users. 
Table IV also shows the allocation of the LLW surcharge activity. 
Because LLW activities support NRC licensees, the costs of these 
activities are not offset by the NRC's fee relief. For FY 2009, the 
total budget allocated for LLW activity is $2.3 million. (Individual 
values may not sum to totals due to rounding.)

                         Table IV--Allocation of Fee-Relief Activities and LLW Surcharge
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          LLW Surcharge                     Fee-Relief                 Total
                                --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Percent           $M            Percent            $M               $M
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating Power Reactors.......            54.0             1.2             88              -2.8            -1.6
Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor       ..............  ..............              2.5            -0.1            -0.1
 Decommissioning...............
Test and Research Reactors.....  ..............  ..............              0.1             0.0             0.0
Fuel Facilities................            15.0             0.3              5.2            -0.2             0.2
Materials Users................            31.0             0.7              3.0            -0.1             0.6
Transportation.................  ..............  ..............              0.4             0.0             0.0
Uranium Recovery...............  ..............  ..............              0.8             0.0             0.0
                                --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total......................           100.0             2.3            100.0            -3.2            -0.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In FY 2009, the LLW surcharge exceeded the fee relief for two fee 
classes, fuel facilities and materials users. The net surcharge will be 
included in the annual fee for fuel facility and materials users 
licensees.
2. Agreement State Activities
    By letter dated June 12, 2008, Governor Timothy Kaine of the 
Commonwealth of Virginia requested that the NRC enter into an Agreement 
with the State as authorized by Section 274 of the Atomic Energy Act of 
1954. The NRC approved the request. This resulted in the transfer of 
approximately 386 licenses from the NRC to the Commonwealth of Virginia 
effective March 31, 2009.
    Note that the continuing costs of oversight and regulatory support 
for the Commonwealth of Virginia, as for any other Agreement State, are 
recovered as fee-relief activities consistent with existing policy. The 
budgeted resources for the regulatory support of Agreement State 
licensees are prorated to the fee-relief activity based on the percent 
of total licensees in Agreement States. The NRC has updated the 
proration percentage in its fee calculation to make sure that resources 
are allocated equitably between the NRC materials users fee class and 
the regulatory support to Agreement States fee-relief category. 
Accordingly, as a result of the Commonwealth of Virginia becoming an 
Agreement State, the NRC has increased the percentage of materials 
users regulatory support costs prorated to the fee-relief activity from 
82 percent in FY 2008 to 85 percent in FY 2009. The resources for 
licensing and inspection activities supporting NRC licensees in the 
materials users fee class are not prorated to the fee-relief activity.
    The number of NRC materials users licensees has been updated to 
reflect the transfer of licensees to the Commonwealth of Virginia. 
Because of the effective date of March 31, 2009, the approximately 386 
licensees transferring to the Commonwealth of Virginia will be subject 
to one-half of their annual fee for FY 2009. The number of materials 
users licensees is revised to reflect that the NRC will still collect 
one-half of the annual fee from these licensees.
    This is not a substantive policy change, but rather a calculation 
change that will result in a more accurate estimate of the actual costs 
of supporting Agreement State activities.

[[Page 27650]]

    Also, Governor Jon Corizine of the State of New Jersey has by 
letter dated October 16, 2008, formally requested that the NRC enter 
into an Agreement with his state. If approved by the Commission, this 
Agreement is expected to take effect by September 30, 2009. 
Approximately 500 NRC licensees will be transferred to the State of New 
Jersey. Because the expected effective date is September 30, 2009, 
these licensees will be assessed annual fees by NRC for the full year 
of FY 2009. Therefore, no changes to the FY 2009 fees or the number of 
NRC licensees have been made for this potential event.
3. Revised Annual Fees
    The NRC is revising its annual fees in Sec. Sec.  171.15 and 171.16 
for FY 2009 to recover approximately 90 percent of the NRC's FY 2009 
budget authority after subtracting the non-fee amounts and the 
estimated amount to be recovered through part 170 fees. The part 170 
estimate for this final rule increased by approximately $13.7 million 
from the proposed fee rule based on the latest available invoice data. 
The total amount to be recovered through annual fees for FY 2009 is 
decreased to $532.6 million compared with $544.6 million in the 
proposed fee rule primarily due to the increase in the part 170 
estimate. The required annual fee collection in FY 2008 was $468.9 
million.
    The Commission has determined (71 FR 30733; May 30, 2006) that the 
agency should proceed with a presumption in favor of rebaselining when 
calculating annual fees each year. Under this method, the NRC's budget 
is analyzed in detail and budgeted resources are allocated to fee 
classes and categories of licensees. The Commission expects that most 
years there will be budget and other changes that warrant the use of 
the rebaselining method.
    As compared to FY 2008 annual fees, rebaselined fees are higher for 
three classes of licensees (power reactors, non-power reactors, and 
fuel facilities) and lower for spent fuel storage/reactor 
decommissioning licensees. There is no change in rebaselined fees for 
the transportation fee class. Within the materials users and uranium 
recovery fee classes, annual fees for most licensees increase, while 
annual fees for some licensees decrease.
    The NRC's total fee recoverable budget, as mandated by law, has 
increased by approximately $92 million in FY 2009 as compared to FY 
2008. Much of this increase is for reactor renewal activities, new 
uranium recovery facility applications, new uranium enrichment facility 
applications, and materials licensing. The FY 2009 budget was allocated 
to the fee classes that the budgeted activities support. As such, the 
final annual fees for operating reactor, non-power reactor, fuel 
facility, most uranium recovery and small materials licensees increase. 
Also in FY 2009, generic NRC resources supporting new uranium recovery 
applications are included in the budget allocated to operating power 
reactors and fuel facility fee classes. This is because these licensees 
will potentially benefit from increased production of uranium milled by 
new uranium recovery facilities. The impact of this allocation on the 
operating reactors and fuel facilities annual fees is less than one 
percent.
    The factors affecting all annual fees include the distribution of 
budgeted costs to the different classes of licenses (based on the 
specific activities NRC will perform in FY 2009), the estimated part 
170 collections for the various classes of licenses, and allocation of 
the fee relief to all fee classes. The percentage of the NRC's budget 
not subject to fee recovery remained unchanged at 10 percent from FY 
2008 to FY 2009.
    Table V shows the rebaselined annual fees for FY 2009 for a 
representative list of categories of licenses. The FY 2008 fee is also 
shown for comparative purposes.

              Table V--Rebaselined Annual Fees for FY 2009
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       FY 2008  annual   FY 2009  final
     Class/category of licenses              fee           annual fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating Power Reactors (Including         $4,167,000        $4,625,000
 Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor
 Decommissioning Annual Fee)........
Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor                     135,000           122,000
 Decommissioning....................
Test and Research Reactors (Non-                76,500            87,600
 power Reactors)....................
High Enriched Uranium Fuel Facility.         3,007,000         4,691,000
Low Enriched Uranium Fuel Facility..           899,000         1,649,000
UF6 Conversion Facility.............           589,000           969,000
Conventional Mills..................            10,300            31,200
Typical Materials Users:
    Radiographers (Category 3O).....            11,100            22,700
    Well Loggers (Category 5A)......             3,400             9,700
    Gauge Users (Category 3P).......             2,100             3,700
    Broad Scope Medical (Category               22,900            36,300
     7B)............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The work papers which support this final 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 2009 budgeted FTE and contract dollars allocated to 
each fee class and fee-relief category at the planned activity and 
program level, and compare these allocations to those used to develop 
the final FY 2008 fees. The work papers are available electronically as 
stated in the ADDRESSES section of this document.
    The budgeted costs allocated to each class of licenses and the 
calculations of the rebaselined fees are described in paragraphs a. 
through h. of this section. Individual values in the tables presented 
in this section may not sum to totals due to rounding.
a. Fuel Facilities
    The FY 2009 budgeted cost to be recovered in the annual fees 
assessment to the fuel facility class of licenses [which includes 
licensees in fee categories 1.A.(1)(a), 1.A.(1)(b), 1.A.(2)(a), 
1.A.(2)(b), 1.A.(2)(c), 1.E., and 2.A.(1), under Sec.  171.16] is 
approximately $23 million. This value is 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 
for allocated generic transportation resources, and fee relief. In FY 
2009, the LLW surcharge for fuel facilities exceeds the allocated fee-
relief (see Table IV in Section III.B.1., Application of Fee Relief/
Surcharge, of this document). The summary calculations used to derive

[[Page 27651]]

this value are presented in Table VI for FY 2009, with FY 2