Categorization of the Licensee Fee Category for Full-Cost Recovery, 34370-34371 [2020-10831]
Download as PDF
34370
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 85, No. 108
Thursday, June 4, 2020
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 170
[Docket No. PRM–170–7; NRC–2018–0172]
Categorization of the Licensee Fee
Category for Full-Cost Recovery
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; closure
of petition.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) has partially granted
and partially denied a request to amend
the NRC’s regulations for licensing fees
assessed to certain water treatment
facilities. The request was submitted by
Christopher S. Pugsley, Esq., on behalf
of Water Remediation Technology, LLC
(WRT), in a petition for rulemaking.
This action closes the petition docket.
DATES: The docket for the petition for
rulemaking, PRM–170–7, closed on June
4, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID
NRC–2018–0172 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of
information for this petition. You may
obtain publicly-available information
related to this action by any of the
following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Website: Public
comments and supporting materials
related to this petition can be found at
https://www.regulations.gov by
searching on the petition Docket ID
NRC–2018–0172 or the fiscal year (FY)
2019 proposed and final fee rules
Docket ID NRC–2017–0032. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463;
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
technical questions, contact the
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document.
• The NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the
ADAMS Public Document collection at
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:21 Jun 03, 2020
Jkt 250001
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. To begin the search, select
‘‘Begin Web-Based ADAMS Search.’’ For
problems with ADAMS, please contact
the NRC’s Public Document Room (PDR)
reference staff at 1–800–397–4209, at
301–415–4737, or by email to
pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The ADAMS
accession number for each document
referenced (if it is available in ADAMS)
is provided the first time that it is
mentioned in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section.
• Attention: The Public Document
Room (PDR), where you may examine
and order copies of public documents is
currently closed. You may submit your
request to the PDR via email at
PDR.Resource@nrc.gov or call 1–800–
397–4209 between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00
p.m. (EST), Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Anthony Rossi, Office of the Chief
Financial Officer, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555–0001, telephone: 301–415–
7341; email: Anthony.Rossi@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. The Petition
The NRC received and docketed a
petition for rulemaking (PRM) (ADAMS
Accession No. ML18214A757), PRM–
170–7, dated July 2, 2018, filed by the
petitioner on behalf of WRT. On
November 2, 2018 (83 FR 55113), the
NRC published a notice of docketing.
The NRC did not institute a public
comment period for this PRM because
the NRC considered the issues raised in
the petition in the FY 2019 proposed fee
rule (84 FR 578; January 31, 2019), and
the public had an opportunity to
comment during that process.
The NRC identified three issues in the
petition, as follows:
Issue 1: The petitioner requested that
the NRC amend its regulations under
part 171 of title 10 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (10 CFR), ‘‘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,’’ to re-categorize licensees
performing water treatment services
(e.g., WRT) from a full-cost recovery
category to a category with a fixed
annual fee.
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Issue 2: The petitioner requested that
the NRC address consistency issues
between 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,’’ and 10 CFR part 171 for
small entities.
Issue 3: The petitioner requested that
the NRC consider amending language
under § 170.11, ‘‘Exemptions,’’ to
extend the timeframe within which a
licensee may appeal the assessment of
fees and apply for a fee exemption from
90 days to 180 days.
Before filing this petition, the
petitioner had made similar requests in
public comments (ADAMS Accession
No. ML18057B073) submitted on the FY
2018 proposed fee rule (83 FR 29622;
June 25, 2018). In PRM–170–7, the
petitioner asked the NRC to consider the
rule changes in the FY 2019 fee
rulemaking.
II. Public Comments on the Petition
The notice of docketing of PRM–170–
7 did not request public comments;
however, the NRC did request
comments on the issues raised in the
petition in the FY 2019 proposed fee
rule. The comment period closed on
March 4, 2019, and the NRC received
one comment submission (ADAMS
Accession No. ML19064B347) that was
from the petitioner and expressed
support for the proposed changes with
respect to PRM–170–7.
III. Reasons for Consideration
The petitioner assists small
community water systems with
compliance with uranium drinking
water standards. The petitioner asserted
that its licensed operations are not
intended to produce source material for
its commercial value, thereby reducing
the financial benefit to the licensee as
compared to uranium recovery facilities
that process ore primarily for its source
material content. Further, the petitioner
stated that it treats the source material
as a contaminant, rather than as a
commodity. The petitioner explained
that it only receives payment for
services to remove uranium from
drinking water or other water sources;
therefore, it does not profit from
processing the source material itself.
The petitioner asserts that uranium
water treatment licensees should be recategorized from their current
designation of full-cost fee recovery
E:\FR\FM\04JNP1.SGM
04JNP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 108 / Thursday, June 4, 2020 / Proposed Rules
licensees under fee category 2.A.(5),
‘‘Licenses that authorize the possession
of source material related to removal of
contaminants (source material) from
drinking water,’’ to the annual fee
category 2.F, ‘‘All other source material
licenses,’’ of 10 CFR 170.31 and 171.16.
Additionally, the petitioner asserted
that, because small entities have limited
employees, market share, and revenue,
it makes sense to charge small entities
fixed fee amounts. The petitioner
concluded that because of its current
small entity designation for 10 CFR part
171 annual fees under the NRC’s
regulations, and the nature of its
licensed operations, it should be redesignated under the 10 CFR part 170
fee category and charged a fixed-fee
amount.
The NRC reviewed PRM–170–7,
WRT’s public comment on the FY 2018
proposed fee rule, and related
documentation and addressed the first
two requests raised in the petition in its
FY 2019 fee rule, issued on May 17,
2019 (84 FR 22331). At the time of filing
of the petition, an entity that removed
uranium from drinking water at
community water systems (e.g., WRT)
was viewed as a fee category 2.A.(5)
licensee under §§ 170.31 and 171.16.
Additionally, at that time, fee category
2.A.(5) required full-cost recovery of
fees under 10 CFR part 170 for all
licensing and inspection activities and
assessed an annual fee.
Based on its review, the NRC
concluded that full-cost recovery is not
warranted for licensees that remove
contaminants from drinking water.
Therefore, in its FY 2019 fee rule, the
NRC addressed the first two of the three
petition requests by eliminating fee
category 2.A.(5) under §§ 170.31 and
171.16, and categorizing existing and
future uranium water treatment
licensees as fee category 2.F. Because of
the elimination of fee category 2.A.(5)
and the use of category 2.F., uranium
water treatment licensees such as WRT
shifted from a 10 CFR part 170 full-cost
fee category to a flat-fee category.
Moreover, licensees in the 2.F. fee
category, including WRT, may qualify
for the small entity reduced fee.
Therefore, the NRC finds this action
addresses the first two issues submitted
in the petition.
NRC extend the timeframe to apply for
a fee exemption to 180 days. The
petitioner asserted that the current
regulation does not allow an applicant
or licensee enough time to assess NRC’s
billings, its progress on an application
or other work, and whether there are
grounds for an exemption request. The
petitioner also stated that an applicant
or licensee should not be restricted
regarding when it can request an
exemption.
The 90-day timing requirement only
applies to those exemption requests for
special projects submitted under
§ 170.11(a)(1), which states that no
application fees, license fees, renewal
fees, inspection fees, or special project
fees shall be required for a special
project that is a request/report
submitted to the NRC. Therefore, the 90day timeframe is limited to only those
who are seeking fee exemptions after
submitting a request or report to the
NRC under § 170.11(a)(1). This timing
requirement does not apply to
applicants or licensees that submit an
application for the routine licensing
activities addressed in the petition. For
these licensing activities, an applicant
or licensee may request an exemption
pursuant to § 170.11(b) at any time. In
addition, § 170.51, ‘‘Right to review and
appeal of prescribed fees,’’ all debtors’
requests for review of the fees assessed
and appeal or disagreement with the
prescribed fee (staff hours and
contractual) must be submitted in
accordance with the provisions of 10
CFR 15.31, ‘‘Disputed Debts.’’ Under
§ 15.31(a), a debtor who disputes a debt
shall explain why the debt is incorrect
in fact or in law within 30 days from the
date that the initial demand letter was
mailed or hand-delivered. The
petitioner did not indicate any concerns
related to these requirements. For these
reasons, the NRC is denying the third
change requested by the petitioner.
IV. Reasons for Denial
The NRC is denying the third change
requested by the petitioner, which was
related to the timeframe to appeal the
assessment of fees under § 170.11(c).
The petitioner stated that it disagrees
with the 90-day timeframe in
§ 170.11(c), which was added in the FY
2018 fee rule, and requested that the
Dated: May 14, 2020.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:21 Jun 03, 2020
Jkt 250001
V. Conclusion
For these reasons, the NRC granted
the first two requested changes in PRM–
170–7 in the FY 2019 final fee rule, and
is denying the third requested change.
This action closes docket PRM–170–7.
[FR Doc. 2020–10831 Filed 6–3–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
34371
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2020–0451; Product
Identifier 2020–NM–036–AD]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Airbus SAS
Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
The FAA proposes to
supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD)
99–01–19 and AD 2004–25–02, which
apply to certain Airbus SAS Model
A320 series airplanes. AD 99–01–19 and
AD 2004–25–02 require repetitive
inspections to detect fatigue cracking in
certain areas of the fuselage, and
corrective action if necessary. AD 2004–
25–02 also provides an optional
terminating action for the repetitive
inspections. Since the FAA issued AD
2004–25–02, it has been reported that,
during full scale tests to support the
Model A320 structure extended service
goal (ESG) exercise, several cracks were
found on both sides of the overwing
emergency exit door cut-outs at fuselage
section 15. This proposed AD would
continue to require, for certain
airplanes, repetitive inspections of the
fastener holes for any cracking, and
repair if necessary, and would provide
an optional terminating action for the
fastener hole inspections. This proposed
AD would also expand the applicable
airplanes and require, for all airplanes,
inspections of the emergency exit door
structure for any cracking and repair if
necessary; as specified in a European
Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)
AD, which will be incorporated by
reference. The FAA is proposing this
AD to address the unsafe condition on
these products.
DATES: The FAA must receive comments
on this proposed AD by July 20, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\04JNP1.SGM
04JNP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 108 (Thursday, June 4, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 34370-34371]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-10831]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 108 / Thursday, June 4, 2020 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 34370]]
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
10 CFR Part 170
[Docket No. PRM-170-7; NRC-2018-0172]
Categorization of the Licensee Fee Category for Full-Cost
Recovery
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Petition for rulemaking; closure of petition.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has partially
granted and partially denied a request to amend the NRC's regulations
for licensing fees assessed to certain water treatment facilities. The
request was submitted by Christopher S. Pugsley, Esq., on behalf of
Water Remediation Technology, LLC (WRT), in a petition for rulemaking.
This action closes the petition docket.
DATES: The docket for the petition for rulemaking, PRM-170-7, closed on
June 4, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2018-0172 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of information for this petition. You may
obtain publicly-available information related to this action by any of
the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Website: Public comments and supporting
materials related to this petition can be found at https://www.regulations.gov by searching on the petition Docket ID NRC-2018-
0172 or the fiscal year (FY) 2019 proposed and final fee rules Docket
ID NRC-2017-0032. Address questions about NRC dockets to Carol
Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-3463; email: [email protected]. For
technical questions, contact the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this document.
The NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management
System (ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in
the ADAMS Public Document collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``Begin Web-Based ADAMS
Search.'' For problems with ADAMS, please contact the NRC's Public
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at 1-800-397-4209, at 301-415-4737,
or by email to [email protected]. The ADAMS accession number for
each document referenced (if it is available in ADAMS) is provided the
first time that it is mentioned in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section.
Attention: The Public Document Room (PDR), where you may
examine and order copies of public documents is currently closed. You
may submit your request to the PDR via email at [email protected] or
call 1-800-397-4209 between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. (EST), Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anthony Rossi, Office of the Chief
Financial Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001, telephone: 301-415-7341; email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. The Petition
The NRC received and docketed a petition for rulemaking (PRM)
(ADAMS Accession No. ML18214A757), PRM-170-7, dated July 2, 2018, filed
by the petitioner on behalf of WRT. On November 2, 2018 (83 FR 55113),
the NRC published a notice of docketing. The NRC did not institute a
public comment period for this PRM because the NRC considered the
issues raised in the petition in the FY 2019 proposed fee rule (84 FR
578; January 31, 2019), and the public had an opportunity to comment
during that process.
The NRC identified three issues in the petition, as follows:
Issue 1: The petitioner requested that the NRC amend its
regulations under part 171 of title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR), ``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,'' to re-categorize licensees
performing water treatment services (e.g., WRT) from a full-cost
recovery category to a category with a fixed annual fee.
Issue 2: The petitioner requested that the NRC address consistency
issues between 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,'' and 10 CFR part 171 for small
entities.
Issue 3: The petitioner requested that the NRC consider amending
language under Sec. 170.11, ``Exemptions,'' to extend the timeframe
within which a licensee may appeal the assessment of fees and apply for
a fee exemption from 90 days to 180 days.
Before filing this petition, the petitioner had made similar
requests in public comments (ADAMS Accession No. ML18057B073) submitted
on the FY 2018 proposed fee rule (83 FR 29622; June 25, 2018). In PRM-
170-7, the petitioner asked the NRC to consider the rule changes in the
FY 2019 fee rulemaking.
II. Public Comments on the Petition
The notice of docketing of PRM-170-7 did not request public
comments; however, the NRC did request comments on the issues raised in
the petition in the FY 2019 proposed fee rule. The comment period
closed on March 4, 2019, and the NRC received one comment submission
(ADAMS Accession No. ML19064B347) that was from the petitioner and
expressed support for the proposed changes with respect to PRM-170-7.
III. Reasons for Consideration
The petitioner assists small community water systems with
compliance with uranium drinking water standards. The petitioner
asserted that its licensed operations are not intended to produce
source material for its commercial value, thereby reducing the
financial benefit to the licensee as compared to uranium recovery
facilities that process ore primarily for its source material content.
Further, the petitioner stated that it treats the source material as a
contaminant, rather than as a commodity. The petitioner explained that
it only receives payment for services to remove uranium from drinking
water or other water sources; therefore, it does not profit from
processing the source material itself. The petitioner asserts that
uranium water treatment licensees should be re-categorized from their
current designation of full-cost fee recovery
[[Page 34371]]
licensees under fee category 2.A.(5), ``Licenses that authorize the
possession of source material related to removal of contaminants
(source material) from drinking water,'' to the annual fee category
2.F, ``All other source material licenses,'' of 10 CFR 170.31 and
171.16.
Additionally, the petitioner asserted that, because small entities
have limited employees, market share, and revenue, it makes sense to
charge small entities fixed fee amounts. The petitioner concluded that
because of its current small entity designation for 10 CFR part 171
annual fees under the NRC's regulations, and the nature of its licensed
operations, it should be re-designated under the 10 CFR part 170 fee
category and charged a fixed-fee amount.
The NRC reviewed PRM-170-7, WRT's public comment on the FY 2018
proposed fee rule, and related documentation and addressed the first
two requests raised in the petition in its FY 2019 fee rule, issued on
May 17, 2019 (84 FR 22331). At the time of filing of the petition, an
entity that removed uranium from drinking water at community water
systems (e.g., WRT) was viewed as a fee category 2.A.(5) licensee under
Sec. Sec. 170.31 and 171.16. Additionally, at that time, fee category
2.A.(5) required full-cost recovery of fees under 10 CFR part 170 for
all licensing and inspection activities and assessed an annual fee.
Based on its review, the NRC concluded that full-cost recovery is
not warranted for licensees that remove contaminants from drinking
water. Therefore, in its FY 2019 fee rule, the NRC addressed the first
two of the three petition requests by eliminating fee category 2.A.(5)
under Sec. Sec. 170.31 and 171.16, and categorizing existing and
future uranium water treatment licensees as fee category 2.F. Because
of the elimination of fee category 2.A.(5) and the use of category
2.F., uranium water treatment licensees such as WRT shifted from a 10
CFR part 170 full-cost fee category to a flat-fee category. Moreover,
licensees in the 2.F. fee category, including WRT, may qualify for the
small entity reduced fee. Therefore, the NRC finds this action
addresses the first two issues submitted in the petition.
IV. Reasons for Denial
The NRC is denying the third change requested by the petitioner,
which was related to the timeframe to appeal the assessment of fees
under Sec. 170.11(c). The petitioner stated that it disagrees with the
90-day timeframe in Sec. 170.11(c), which was added in the FY 2018 fee
rule, and requested that the NRC extend the timeframe to apply for a
fee exemption to 180 days. The petitioner asserted that the current
regulation does not allow an applicant or licensee enough time to
assess NRC's billings, its progress on an application or other work,
and whether there are grounds for an exemption request. The petitioner
also stated that an applicant or licensee should not be restricted
regarding when it can request an exemption.
The 90-day timing requirement only applies to those exemption
requests for special projects submitted under Sec. 170.11(a)(1), which
states that no application fees, license fees, renewal fees, inspection
fees, or special project fees shall be required for a special project
that is a request/report submitted to the NRC. Therefore, the 90-day
timeframe is limited to only those who are seeking fee exemptions after
submitting a request or report to the NRC under Sec. 170.11(a)(1).
This timing requirement does not apply to applicants or licensees that
submit an application for the routine licensing activities addressed in
the petition. For these licensing activities, an applicant or licensee
may request an exemption pursuant to Sec. 170.11(b) at any time. In
addition, Sec. 170.51, ``Right to review and appeal of prescribed
fees,'' all debtors' requests for review of the fees assessed and
appeal or disagreement with the prescribed fee (staff hours and
contractual) must be submitted in accordance with the provisions of 10
CFR 15.31, ``Disputed Debts.'' Under Sec. 15.31(a), a debtor who
disputes a debt shall explain why the debt is incorrect in fact or in
law within 30 days from the date that the initial demand letter was
mailed or hand-delivered. The petitioner did not indicate any concerns
related to these requirements. For these reasons, the NRC is denying
the third change requested by the petitioner.
V. Conclusion
For these reasons, the NRC granted the first two requested changes
in PRM-170-7 in the FY 2019 final fee rule, and is denying the third
requested change. This action closes docket PRM-170-7.
Dated: May 14, 2020.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2020-10831 Filed 6-3-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P