[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 201 (Thursday, October 17, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 64033-64039]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-26446]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

10 CFR Part 170

RIN 3150-AH03


Cost Recovery for Contested Hearings Involving U.S. Government 
National Security Initiatives

AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is amending its 
regulations to allow the agency to recover its costs associated with 
contested hearings on licensing actions involving U.S. Government 
national security initiatives through licensing fees assessed to the 
affected applicant or licensee. This final rule is a special exception 
to the Commission's longstanding policy of not charging this type of 
fee for contested hearings. In this case, the Commission will charge 
its contested hearing costs directly to the involved licensee or 
applicant rather than recovering its costs through the annual fees 
assessed to all licensees within the affected class.

EFFECTIVE DATE: November 18, 2002.

ADDRESSES: The comments received are available electronically at the 
NRC's Public Electronic Reading Room on the Internet at http://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 email to 
[email protected]. If you do not have access to ADAMS, or if there are 
problems in accessing the documents located in ADAMS, please contact 
the PDR.
    Comments received may also be viewed via the NRC's interactive 
rulemaking website (http://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 
[email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Carlson, telephone 301-415-
8165, 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 Certification
IX. Backfit Analysis
X. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

I. Background

    The NRC has a longstanding policy of charging the affected 
applicant part 170 licensing fees to recover the agency's costs for any 
uncontested hearings that the NRC holds on applications to construct a 
power reactor or enrichment facility. These hearings are mandated by 
statute. However, the NRC's costs for all contested hearings \1\ have 
been recovered through part 171 annual fees assessed to the members of 
the particular class of licensee to which the applicant belongs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ A contested proceeding is defined in 10 CFR 2.4 as (1) a 
proceeding in which there is a controversy between the staff of the 
Commission and the applicant for a license concerning the issuance 
of the license or any of the terms or conditions thereof or (2) a 
proceeding in which a petition for leave to intervene in opposition 
to an application for a license has been granted or is pending 
before the Commission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NRC published the final rule establishing the part 170 and part 
171 fees for FY 2002 on June 24, 2002, (67 FR 42612) after considering 
a comment

[[Page 64034]]

from a nuclear industry group concerning the assessment of annual fees 
to the fuel facility class of licensees for recovery of the costs 
involving a contested hearing related to the application for a mixed 
oxide (MOX) fuel fabrication facility. The industry group commented 
that assessing the MOX contested hearing costs to the fuel facility fee 
class was unfair, and that it was a violation of the Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA-90), as amended, to charge licensees 
for an agency activity or program from which the licensees receive no 
benefit. The commenter asserted that fuel facility licensees should not 
be responsible for bearing the costs of contested hearings associated 
with MOX fabrication because this process has no relation to the NRC's 
regulatory services from which fuel facility licensees obtain a 
benefit.\2\ The commenter added that the beneficiaries of the MOX 
program are the Federal government and the Nation's citizenry because 
it will aid in the reduction of weapons-grade plutonium. The commenter 
contended that commercial fuel facility licensees should not have to 
subsidize the Federal government's efforts to ensure national security, 
and that such costs should be appropriated through the General Fund and 
removed from the NRC fee base.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ The MOX program is a Federal government initiative to ensure 
national security through the disposition of plutonium from 
dismantled nuclear weapons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The NRC responded that it must recover its hearing costs through 
either part 170 fees for services or through part 171 annual fees in 
order to recover most of its budgeted costs (less the amounts 
appropriated from the Nuclear Waste Fund) through fees as required by 
OBRA-90, as amended. The Commission's longstanding policy of recovering 
contested hearing costs through part 171 annual fees assessed to the 
affected class of licensee was confirmed repeatedly in the course of 
many past fee rulemakings, in court pleadings, and in an NRC report to 
Congress on fees.
    However, in this case the Commission stated in the FY 2002 final 
fee rule that it found merit in the commenter's concern about the 
assessment of annual fees targeted to the fuel facility class for the 
MOX contested hearing costs because the NRC licensing action, which is 
the subject of the hearing, involves a U.S. Government national 
security initiative to dispose of plutonium stockpiles. Accordingly, 
the final fee rule provided that FY 2002 budgeted costs for the MOX 
contested hearing should be recovered through part 171 annual fees 
assessed to all classes of licensees. The final fee rule also stated it 
was the Commission's intent to issue a proposed rule for public comment 
that would recover the costs for contested hearings on licensing 
actions involving U.S. Government national security initiatives through 
part 170 fees assessed to the affected applicant or licensee, beginning 
in FY 2003.
    The Commission published its proposed rule for comment on July 31, 
2002, in the Federal Register (67 FR 49623). The comment period for 
this rule ended August 30, 2002. After considering all comments 
received during the public comment period, the Commission has now 
adopted its proposal as a final rule.
    This final rule is a special exception to the Commission's policy 
of not recovering contested hearing costs through part 170 fees 
assessed to the affected applicant or licensee. This exception only 
applies to contested hearings on licensing actions directly associated 
with U.S. Government national security initiatives, such as 
Presidentially-directed national security programs. The affected 
applicant or licensee will be responsible for the payment of the part 
170 fees assessed for these types of contested hearings. However, 
because part 170 fees will only be assessed for contested hearings on 
licensing actions directly involving U.S. Government national security 
initiatives, the Commission generally expects that the costs will 
ultimately be borne by the Federal government, rather than the 
applicant.
    In addition to the contested hearing on the MOX fuel fabrication 
facility application, any contested hearing on the Tennessee Valley 
Authority (TVA) license amendments to produce tritium at the Watts Bar 
and Sequoyah reactors for the Nation's nuclear weapons program would be 
another example of a contested hearing on a licensing action directly 
involving a U.S. Government national security initiative for which part 
170 fees would be assessed under this final rule.
    Examples of contested hearings on licensing actions that do not 
involve a U.S. Government national security initiative include the 
contested hearing on the application for a uranium recovery license 
filed by Hydro Resources Inc., and the contested hearing on the 
independent spent fuel storage installation application filed by 
Private Fuel Storage L.L.C. Furthermore, this final rule leaves intact 
the existing policy of not assessing part 170 fees for contested 
hearings associated with applications or licenses that are used to 
provide routine services to U.S. Government agencies.
    It should be noted that the Independent Offices Appropriation Act 
(IOAA) prohibits the NRC from assessing part 170 fees to Federal 
agencies, except in limited circumstances, such as licensing and 
inspection of TVA power reactors. Therefore, in most cases, this final 
rule would not apply to contested hearings on licensing actions 
involving U.S. Government national security initiatives where a Federal 
agency is the applicant or licensee.

II. Response to Comments

    On July 31, 2002 (67 FR 49623), the NRC published for public 
comment a proposed rule to recover the agency's costs for contested 
hearings on licensing actions directly involving U.S. Government 
national security initiatives through part 170 fees assessed to the 
affected applicant or licensee. The NRC received two comments by the 
close of the public comment period on August 30, 2002.
    The comments and the NRC's responses, grouped according to the 
issues raised, are as follows:
    1. Comment. One commenter indicated that the NRC has not provided a 
specific definition of what a ``U.S. Government national security 
initiative'' is, and that the agency's definition should be clarified 
so as to eliminate confusion or potential misapplication of this 
exception to policy. Specifically, the commenter further explained that 
a ``national security initiative'' should exclude proceedings and 
licensing actions related to individual plant security modifications.
    Response. The proposed rule presented a revised definition of 
Special Projects in Sec.  170.3 Definitions to include contested 
hearings on licensing actions directly involving U.S. Government 
national security initiatives. The statement of considerations for the 
proposed rule provided examples of contested hearings on licensing 
actions that would and would not be considered as these types of 
proceedings. The NRC also proposed to add a part 170 fee exemption 
provision in Sec.  170.11(a)(2) for contested hearings. This provision 
will codify the Commission's past policy of not charging applicants or 
licensees for the costs of contested hearings, with one limited 
exception. Applicants or licensees involved in contested hearings that 
the NRC determines involve a U.S. Government national security-related 
initiative will be charged fees for the cost of such proceedings. The 
NRC cannot predict the types of future licensing actions that

[[Page 64035]]

will involve U.S. Government national security initiatives. 
Consequently, the NRC will evaluate such actions on a case-by-case 
basis, and no further definition is being provided in this final rule. 
However, the Commission agrees with the commenter that licensing 
actions related to individual plant security modifications, including 
those required by Federal regulation, do not constitute a national 
security initiative for the purposes of part 170 fees. Accordingly, in 
this final rule the Special Projects definition under Sec.  170.3 has 
been modified to specifically exclude contested hearings involving 
individual plant security modifications, including those required by 
Federal regulation. Similarly, the proposed language in Sec.  
170.11(a)(2) has been revised to specifically grant an exemption from 
the part 170 fees for contested hearings related to these individual 
plant security modifications.
    2. Comment. One commenter asserted that this rulemaking should be 
implemented as an interim measure, and that the NRC should actively 
pursue whatever legislative changes are necessary, including amending 
the IOAA, to ensure licensees are not required to fund actions 
unrelated to their licensed activities.
    Response. The agency is presently bound by existing legislation to 
recover most of its budgeted costs, including costs related to 
contested hearings, from NRC applicants and licensees through fees. The 
NRC's current policy is to recover its contested hearing costs from 
part 171 annual fees assessed to licensees in the affected fee class. 
This rulemaking modifies the existing policy such that the NRC's 
contested hearing costs associated with licensing actions specifically 
related to U.S. Government national security initiatives will be 
assessed directly to the affected licensee or applicant as part 170 
fees. As noted in the proposed rule, the Commission generally expects 
that these costs would ultimately be borne by the Federal government 
rather than the applicant or licensee. This belief is based on the 
premise that U.S. Government national security-related initiatives will 
be sponsored by the Federal government; therefore, the sponsoring 
agency would reimburse the applicant or licensee for any associated 
costs, including NRC's costs for contested proceedings directly related 
to these initiatives.
    Congress has taken action to remove from the fee base some of the 
costs for activities that raise fairness and equity concerns. However, 
unlike the activities that raise fairness and equity concerns related 
to NRC licensees having to pay the costs of activities for which they 
derive no benefit--the agency's activities related to contested 
hearings on licensing actions involving a U.S. Government national 
security initiative are directly related to regulating the affected 
applicant or licensee. Therefore, assessing the affected applicant or 
licensee for the NRC's costs of such contested hearings does not raise 
fairness and equity concerns, and as such, the Commission does not plan 
to pursue legislation to remove these costs from the fee base.
    3. Comment. A commenter stated that the NRC should provide a more 
specific explanation of additional exceptions it plans to make to 
permit allocation of fees assessed for costs associated with national 
security-related programs to individual applicants or licensees (e.g., 
with respect to petitions filed pursuant to 10 CFR 2.206 or allegations 
related to national security related programs in an NRC licensing 
context).
    Response. As stated in the proposed rule, the Commission plans to 
consider recovering its costs for future activities involving U.S. 
Government national security-related programs, including allegations 
and 10 CFR 2.206 petitions, through part 170 fees assessed to the 
applicant or licensee in a manner consistent with this final rule. Any 
determination in this regard that could result in changes to the NRC's 
existing fee recovery policies would be published in the Federal 
Register for public comment.
    4. Comment. Both commenters indicated the need for the NRC to 
clarify the intent of this rulemaking regarding the cost implications 
of these types of contested proceedings to petitioners. One of the 
commenters believed that this rule would require petitioners to pay all 
of the NRC's costs for contested proceedings involving U.S. Government 
national security initiatives.
    Response. This rulemaking will not require petitioners/interveners 
to pay the NRC's costs associated with contested hearings on licensing 
actions involving U.S. Government national security initiatives. The 
rule will result in the assessment of fees to the affected applicant or 
licensee to recover the NRC's costs for these types of contested 
proceedings. Moreover, the NRC has no plans to propose any further 
revision that would result in charging petitioners for the NRC's 
contested hearing costs.
    5. Comment. One commenter inquired about the applicability of this 
rulemaking to the Yucca Mountain project.
    Response. This rulemaking does not apply to the Yucca Mountain 
project because the agency's costs for this program are recovered by 
the NRC through appropriations from the Nuclear Waste Fund, and thus 
are excluded from fee recovery. Therefore, the rule will not result in 
the NRC assessing fees to recover the agency's costs for the Yucca 
Mountain proceeding.
    6. Comment. One commenter asked who was responsible for making the 
``national security'' determination.
    Response. The NRC will make the final determination of whether a 
particular licensing action is directly related to a U.S. Government 
national security initiative. This decision will be made on a case-by-
case basis. In those instances where the NRC decides a licensing action 
is related to a U.S. Government national security initiative, and the 
licensing process involves a contested hearing, the licensee or 
applicant will be assessed part 170 fees to recover the agency's costs 
associated with the contested proceeding.
    7. Comment. A commenter questioned whether this rule would affect 
the licensing process based on a determination of a national security 
initiative.
    Response. This rulemaking will not affect the NRC's licensing 
process, nor will it change how the agency executes its regulatory 
oversight mission. This final rule concerns an exception to the NRC's 
existing fee policy, and narrowly focuses on cost recovery associated 
with contested hearings involving U.S. Government national security 
initiatives.

III. Final Action

    The NRC is amending 10 CFR part 170 to establish a provision for 
assessing part 170 fees to the affected applicant or licensee to 
recover the NRC's full costs of contested hearings on licensing actions 
directly involving U.S. Government national security initiatives, as 
determined by the NRC. To implement this special exception to the 
Commission's longstanding policy of not assessing part 170 fees for 
contested hearing costs, the NRC is adding a fee exemption to Sec.  
170.11 for contested hearings. This provision will codify the 
Commission's past policy of not charging applicants or licensees for 
the costs of contested hearings, with one limited exception. Applicants 
or licensees involved in contested hearings that the NRC determines 
involve a U.S. Government national security-related initiative will be 
charged fees for the cost of such proceedings. A conforming revision is 
being made to Sec.  170.11(a) to add the term special project fees to 
the existing list of fee types that will not be assessed under the 
exemption provision. The NRC is also revising the

[[Page 64036]]

definition of Special Projects in Sec.  170.3 to include contested 
hearings on licensing actions related to U.S. Government national 
security initiatives, and is making corresponding changes to the 
section related to the payment of special project fees, to fee category 
J. of Sec.  170.21, and to fee category 12. of Sec.  170.31. Only those 
contested hearings on licensing actions directly associated with a U.S. 
Government national security initiative, such as those specifically 
related to Presidentially-directed national security programs, will be 
subject to cost recovery under part 170. The NRC will continue to 
recover its costs for those contested hearings that are exempted from 
part 170 fees through part 171 annual fees assessed to the affected 
class of licensees.
    The final rule will not be a ``major'' final action as defined by 
the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. 
Therefore, the final rule will become effective 30 days after 
publication in the Federal Register.
    As stated in the proposed rule, the NRC does not plan to mail this 
final rule to all licensees; however, a copy of this final rule will be 
mailed to any licensee or other person upon specific request. To 
request a copy, contact the License Fee and Accounts Receivable Branch, 
Division of Accounting and Finance, Office of the Chief Financial 
Officer, at 301-415-7554, or e-mail us at [email protected]. In addition to 
publication in the Federal Register, the final rule will be available 
on the Internet at http://ruleforum.llnl.gov for at least 90 days after 
the effective date of the final rule.

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 such a standard is inconsistent with applicable law or is 
otherwise impractical. In this final rule, the NRC is amending part 170 
to recover costs from applicants or licensees in contested hearings 
involving Commission-specified U.S. Government national security-
related initiatives. This action does not constitute the establishment 
of a 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.

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

    This final rule was developed pursuant to Title V of the 
Independent Offices Appropriation Act of 1952 (IOAA) (31 U.S.C. 9701) 
and the Commission's fee guidelines. When developing these guidelines 
the Commission took into account guidance provided 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 Supreme 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 F.2d 223 (5th 
Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1102 (1980).

VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Certification

    In accordance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 
605(b)), the Commission certifies that this final rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
This final rule will impose a fee on a very limited number of 
applicants or licensees to recover the costs of contested hearings 
involving Commission-specified, U.S. Government national security-
related initiatives, and it is unlikely that these few organizations 
would fall within the scope of the definition of ``small entities'' set 
forth in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, or the size standards 
established by the NRC (10 CFR 2.810).

IX. Backfit Analysis

    The NRC has determined that its backfit rules do not apply to this 
final rule and therefore, that a backfit analysis is not required for 
this final rule, because these final amendments do not impose any 
provisions that would impose backfits as defined in 10 CFR Chapter 1.

X. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

    In accordance with the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act of 1996, the NRC has determined that this action is not a 
major rule and has verified this determination with the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, of the Office of Management and 
Budget.

List of Subjects in 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.

    For the reasons set forth 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 part 170.

PART 170--FEES FOR FACILITIES, MATERIALS, IMPORT AND EXPORT 
LICENSES, AND OTHER REGULATORY SERVICES UNDER THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT 
OF 1954, AS AMENDED

    1. The authority citation for part 170 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: Sec. 9701, Pub. L. 97-258, 96 Stat. 1051 (31 U.S.C. 
9701); 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. 205a, Pub. L. 101-576, 104 Stat. 2842, as amended (31 
U.S.C. 901, 902).


    2. Section 170.3 is amended by revising the definition of Special 
Projects to read as follows:


Sec.  170.3  Definitions.

* * * * *
    Special Projects means those requests submitted to the Commission 
for review

[[Page 64037]]

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 Presidentially-
directed national security programs, topical report reviews, early site 
reviews, waste solidification facilities, route approvals for shipment 
of radioactive materials, services provided to certify licensee, 
vendor, or other private industry personnel as instructors for part 55 
reactor operators, reviews of financial assurance submittals that do 
not require a license amendment, reviews of responses to Confirmatory 
Action Letters, reviews of uranium recovery licensees' land-use survey 
reports, and reviews of 10 CFR 50.71 final safety analysis reports. 
Special Projects does not include those contested hearings for which a 
fee exemption is granted in Sec.  170.11(a)(2), including those related 
to individual plant security modifications.
* * * * *
    3. In Sec.  170.11, the introductory text of paragraph (a) is 
revised and paragraph (a)(2) is added to read as follows:


Sec.  170.11  Exemptions.

    (a) No application fees, license fees, renewal fees, inspection 
fees, or special project fees shall be required for:
* * * * *
    (2) A contested hearing conducted by the NRC on a specific 
application or the authorizations and conditions of a specific NRC 
license, certificate, or other authorization, including those involving 
individual plant security modifications. This exemption does not apply 
to a contested hearing on a licensing action that the NRC determines 
directly involves a U.S. Government national security-related 
initiative, including those specifically associated with 
Presidentially-directed national security programs.
* * * * *

    4. In Sec.  170.12, paragraph (d) is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  170.12  Payment of fees.

* * * * *
    (d) Special Project Fees. (1) Fees for special projects are based 
on the full cost of the review or contested hearing. Special projects 
include activities such as--
    (i) Topical reports;
    (ii) Financial assurance submittals that do not require a license 
amendment;
    (iii) Responses to Confirmatory Action Letters;
    (iv) Uranium recovery licensees' land-use survey reports;
    (v) 10 CFR 50.71 final safety analysis reports; and
    (vi) Contested hearings on licensing actions directly involving 
U.S. Government national security initiatives, as determined by the 
NRC.
    (2) The NRC intends to bill each applicant or licensee at quarterly 
intervals until the review or contested hearing is completed. Each bill 
will identify the documents submitted for review or the specific 
contested hearing and the costs related to each. The fees are payable 
upon notification by the Commission.
* * * * *

    5. In Sec.  170.21, the introductory text is presented for the 
convenience of the user and Category J is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  170.21  Schedule of fees for production and utilization 
facilities, review of standard referenced design approvals, special 
projects, inspections, and import and export licenses.

    Applicants for construction permits, manufacturing licenses, 
operating licenses, import and export licenses, approvals of facility 
standard reference designs, re-qualification and replacement 
examinations for reactor operators, and special projects and holders of 
construction permits, licenses, and other approvals shall pay fees for 
the following categories of services.

                        Schedule of Facility Fees
                     [See footnotes at end of table]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Facility categories and type of fees               Fees 1 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              * * * * * * *
J. Special projects:
    Approvals and preapplication/licensing     Full Cost.
     activities.
    Inspections \3\..........................  Full Cost.
    Contested hearings on licensing actions    Full Cost.
     directly related to U.S. Government
     national security initiatives.
                              * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Fees will not be charged for orders issued by the Commission under
  Sec.   2.202 of this chapter or for amendments resulting specifically
  from the requirements of these types of Commission orders. Fees will
  be charged for approvals issued under a specific exemption provision
  of the Commission's regulations under Title 10 of the Code of Federal
  Regulations (e.g., 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 Sec.   170.20, as appropriate, except
  for topical reports whose costs exceed $50,000. Costs which exceed
  $50,000 for any topical report, amendment, revision or supplement to a
  topical report completed or under review from January 30, 1989,
  through August 8, 1991, will not be billed to the applicant. Any
  professional hours expended on or after August 9, 1991, will be
  assessed at the applicable rate established in Sec.   170.20.

[[Page 64038]]

 
\3\ Inspections covered by this schedule are both routine and non-
  routine safety and safeguards inspections performed by NRC for the
  purpose of review or follow-up of a licensed program. Inspections are
  performed through the full term of the license to ensure that the
  authorized activities are being conducted in accordance with the
  Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, other legislation, Commission
  regulations or orders, and the terms and conditions of the license.
  Non-routine inspections that result from third-party allegations will
  not be subject to fees.


    6. In Sec.  170.31, the introductory text is presented for the 
convenience of the user and Category 12. is revised to read as follows:


Sec.  170.31  Schedule of fees for materials licenses and other 
regulatory services, including inspections, and import and export 
licenses.

    Applicants for materials licenses, import and export licenses, and 
other regulatory services, and holders of materials licenses or import 
and export licenses shall pay fees for the following categories of 
services. The following schedule includes fees for health and safety 
and safeguards inspections where applicable:

                       Schedule of Materials Fees
                     [See footnotes at end of table]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Category of materials licenses and type of
                   fees \1\                             Fee 2 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                              * * * * * * *
12. Special projects:
    Approvals and preapplication/licensing     Full Cost.
     activities.
    Inspections..............................  Full Cost.
    Contested hearings on licensing actions    Full Cost.
     directly related to U.S. Government
     national security initiatives.
                             * * * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Types of fees--Separate charges, as shown in the schedule, will be
  assessed for pre-application consultations and reviews and
  applications for new licenses and approvals, issuance of new licenses
  and approvals, certain amendments and renewals to existing licenses
  and approvals, safety evaluations of sealed sources and devices,
  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 Sec.   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 Sec.   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 issued by the Commission under
  10 CFR 2.202 or for amendments resulting specifically from the
  requirements of these types of Commission orders. However, fees will
  be charged for approvals issued under a specific exemption provision
  of the Commission's regulations under Title 10 of the Code of Federal
  Regulations (e.g., 10 CFR 30.11, 40.14, 70.14, 73.5, and any other
  sections in effect now or in the future), regardless of whether the
  approval is in the form of a license amendment, letter of approval,
  safety evaluation report, or other form. In addition to the fee shown,
  an applicant may be assessed an additional fee for sealed source and
  device evaluations as shown in Categories 9A through 9D.
\3\ Full cost fees will be determined based on the professional staff
  time multiplied by the appropriate professional hourly rate
  established in Sec.   170.20 in effect at the time the service is
  provided, and the appropriate contractual support services expended.
  For applications currently on file for which review costs have reached
  an applicable fee ceiling established by the June 20, 1984, and July
  2, 1990, rules, but are still pending completion of the review, the
  cost incurred after any applicable ceiling was reached through January
  29, 1989, will not be billed to the applicant. Any professional staff-
  hours expended above those ceilings on or after January 30, 1989, will
  be assessed at the applicable rates established by Sec.   170.20, as
  appropriate, except for topical reports whose costs exceed $50,000.
  Costs which exceed $50,000 for each topical report, amendment,
  revision, or supplement to a topical report completed or under review
  from January 30, 1989, through August 8, 1991, will not be billed to
  the applicant. Any professional hours expended on or after August 9,
  1991, will be assessed at the applicable rate established in Sec.
  170.20.


[[Page 64039]]

* * * * *

    Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day of October, 2002.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Jesse L. Funches,
Chief Financial Officer.
[FR Doc. 02-26446 Filed 10-16-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P