# Revision of Fee Schedules; 100% Fee Recovery, FY 1997

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A97-13777

## Record

- **Collection:** Federal Register
- **Document type:** Rule
- **Published:** May 29, 1997
- **Citation:** 62 FR 29194

## Text

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), which mandates that the NRC
recover approximately 100 percent of its budget authority in Fiscal
Year (FY) 1997 less amounts appropriated from the Nuclear Waste Fund
(NWF). The FY 1997 NRC Appropriation also excluded from the fee base
the cost of NRC review relating to the commercial vitrification of
waste stored at the Department of Energy Hanford, Washington, site. The
amount to be recovered for FY 1997 is approximately $462.3 million.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 28, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Copies of comments received and the agency workpapers that
support these final changes to 10 CFR Parts 170 and 171 may be examined
at the NRC Public Document Room at 2120 L Street, NW. (Lower Level),
Washington, DC 20555-0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: C. James Holloway, Jr., Office of the
Chief Financial Officer, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001, Telephone 301-415-6213.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background
II. Responses to Comments
III. Final Action
IV. Section-by-Section Analysis
V. Environmental Impact: Categorical Exclusion
VI. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
VII. Regulatory Analysis
VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
IX. Backfit Analysis
X. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

I. Background

Public Law 101-508, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990
(OBRA-90), enacted November 5, 1990, requires that the NRC recover
approximately 100 percent of its budget authority, less the amount
appropriated from the Department of Energy (DOE) administered NWF, for
FYs 1991 through 1995 by assessing fees. OBRA-90 was amended in 1993 to
extend the NRC's 100 percent fee recovery requirement through FY 1998.
The NRC assesses two types of fees to recover its budget authority.
First, license and inspection fees, established in 10 CFR Part 170
under the authority of the Independent Offices Appropriation Act
(IOAA), 31 U.S.C. 9701, recover the NRC's costs of providing
individually identifiable services to specific applicants and
licensees. Examples of the services provided by the NRC for which these
fees are assessed are the review of applications for the issuance of
new licenses, approvals or renewals, and amendments to licenses or
approvals. Second, annual fees, established in 10 CFR Part 171 under
the authority of OBRA-90, recover generic and other regulatory costs
not recovered through 10 CFR Part 170 fees.
On April 12, 1996 (61 FR 16203), the NRC published its final rule
establishing the licensing, inspection, and annual fees necessary for
the NRC to recover approximately 100 percent of its budget authority
for FY 1996, less the appropriation received from the Nuclear Waste
Fund. Several changes to the fees assessed for FY 1996 were adopted by
the NRC. These changes were highlighted in the final rule (61 FR 16203;
April 12, 1996) and bear on the approach for establishing annual fees
set forth in this final rule for FY 1997.
On February 27, 1997 (62 FR 8885), the NRC published a proposed
rule to establish the licensing, inspection, and annual fees necessary
for the NRC to recover approximately 100 percent of its budget
authority for FY 1997, less the appropriation received from the Nuclear
Waste Fund and the General Fund. These changes were highlighted in the
proposed rule (62 FR 8885; February 27, 1997) and have been adopted in
this final rule for FY 1997. The major changes are summarized as
follows:
1. Adjust all 10 CFR 171 annual fees upward by about 8 percent.
This change is consistent with the NRC's intention stated in the FY
1995 final rule. The NRC indicated that, beginning in FY 1996, annual
fees would be stabilized by adjusting prior year annual fees by the
percent change (plus or minus) in the NRC budget authority taking into
consideration the estimated collections from 10 CFR Part 170 fees and
the number of licensees paying fees;
2. Establish and assess a new annual fee of $2,606,000 (fee
Category 1.E.) for each Certificate of Compliance issued to the United
States Enrichment Corporation.
3. Revise the two professional hourly rates in Sec. 170.20 which
are used to determine the 10 CFR Part 170 fees assessed by the NRC. The
rate for FY 1997 for the reactor program is $131 per hour and the rate
for the materials program is $125 per hour.
4. Adjust the current licensing and inspection fees in Secs. 170.21
and 170.31 for applicants and licensees to reflect both the changes in
the revised hourly rates and the results of the review required by the
Chief Financial Officers Act.
5. Implement a procedural change whereby fees will be assessed
under Secs. 170.21 and 170.31 to verify quality assurance, safeguards
contingency, and emergency plan changes submitted by licensees.

II. Responses to Comments

The NRC received nine comments on the proposed rule. Although the
comment period ended on March 31, 1997, the NRC has reviewed and
evaluated all comments received, including those submitted after that
date.
Several of the comments were similar in nature. For evaluation
purposes, these comments have been grouped, as appropriate, and
addressed as single issues in this final rule.
The comments are as follows:

A. Comments Regarding the Major Changes Proposed in the FY 1997 Fee
Rule

1. Streamline and Stabilize Annual Fees
Comment. Commenters continue to support the positive steps taken by
the NRC to equitably distribute and to reduce the burden of user fees
on licensees. Two commenters, who represent nuclear power plants, argue
that the annual fees being charged to power plant licensees, and
particularly the 8 percent increase in those fees proposed for 1997,
are inconsistent with statutory requirements. In particular, the
commenters argue that 42 U.S.C. 2214(b) requires, without exception,
that every recipient of a definite service from the NRC should pay 10
CFR Part 170 fees. The statute says that ``any person who receives a
service or thing of value from the Commission shall [emphasis added]
pay fees to cover the Commission's costs in providing any such service
or thing of value.'' 42 U.S.C. 2214(b). The commenters believe that the
word ``shall'' means that the agency has no authority not to charge 10
CFR Part 170 fees to parties who receive benefits from the agency. They
argue that the result of the NRC's not charging all beneficiaries, is a
fee system that

[[Page 29195]]

charges nuclear power plants for services provided to others.
Therefore, the NRC fee system fails to meet the statutory requirement
that, ``[t]o the maximum extent practicable, the charges shall have a
reasonable relationship to the cost of providing regulatory services'
to licensees. 42 U.S.C. 2214(c)(3). As evidence that this statutory
requirement has been violated, the commenters argue that the 8 percent
increase in annual fees in FY 1997 is due largely to a projected and
unexplained reduction in 10 CFR Part 170 fees charged to persons and
entities other than power reactor licensees and is thus unrelated to
the costs of regulating nuclear power reactors. The commenters believe
that the agency should replace the proposed rule with one that charges
everyone who receives a service from the agency the cost of providing
that service.
Response. The NRC readily acknowledges the commenters' concerns for
fairness and equity. To meet its statutory obligation to recover
approximately 100 percent of its budget through fees, the NRC does
collect from each power reactor licensee an annual fee a portion of
which recovers costs not attributable to the regulation of nuclear
power plants. There are also other licensees whose annual fees in part
cover costs not attributable to the regulation of those licensees.
However, for reasons the NRC has set forth on many occasions, the
NRC believes that the current fee system is as fair and equitable as
the current statutory structure underlying the agency's fee system will
permit. For example, the NRC is barred by law from charging all but two
Federal agencies 10 CFR Part 170 fees; not all the work which the NRC
does for other agencies and governments can be recovered through
reimbursable agreements (see 60 FR 32218, 32222 (June 20, 1995)), and
yet that work is necessary for public health and safety and U.S.
national interests and under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, the agency
is obliged to consider carefully the impact of its fee rules on small
entities and to seek less onerous alternatives.
Such exemptions from fees as the NRC has granted are of long-
standing, have been granted only after full and public consideration of
the relevant policy questions (see, for example, 59 FR 12539 (March 19,
1994)), and are well-founded in law. When subsection 2214(b) in 42
U.S.C. says that ``any person who receives a service or thing of value
from the Commission shall pay fees'', the words ``shall'' and ``any
person'' are not absolute. They certainly do not eliminate any
possibility of exemptions or override other statutory restrictions on
the NRC's ability to assess user fees.
For example, the phrase ``any person'' is not all-inclusive.
Subsection 2214(b) says persons shall pay ``pursuant to section 9701 of
title 31, United States Code'', but section 9701 in turn rules out
imposing such fees on any ``person on official business of the United
States Government'', absent other legislation authorizing such
assessments. Moreover, neither subsection 2214(b) nor the legislative
history behind it reveal any intention to do away with the 10 CFR Part
170 exemptions that existed at the time subsection 2214(b) was enacted,
and of which Congress was fully aware. Indeed, section 2214's basic
requirement that the agency recover approximately 100 percent of its
budget, less certain amounts, has been extended more than once since
its enactment in 1990, and throughout the period since that enactment,
most notably in the report to Congress required by section 2903 of the
Energy Policy Act of 1992, the NRC has kept the Congress fully informed
about the Part 170 exemptions and their impact on power reactor
licensees, and Congress has chosen not to take any action against those
exemptions. ``When the statute giving rise to the longstanding
interpretation has been reenacted without change, the congressional
failure to revise or repeal the agency's interpretation is persuasive
evidence that the interpretation is the one intended by Congress.''
FDIC v. Philadelphia Gear, 476 U.S. 426, 437 (1986).
Moreover, to the extent that the commenters' arguments are directed
at the burdens they bear because some licensees are exempted from
annual fees, the answer is much the same. Such exemptions have been
carefully considered, after notice and comment rulemaking; and it is
unmistakable that exemptions from Part 171 are permitted by law: See
Florida Power & Light v. NRC, 846 F.2d 765, 770 (D.C. Cir 1988), cert.
denied 109 S. Ct. 1952 (1989) (NRC did not abuse its discretion by
failing to impose annual fees on all licensees).
The 8 percent increase in annual fees for power reactors, about
which the commenters are understandably concerned, was fully explained
in the statement of considerations accompanying the proposed rule. See
Part II, Section B and Table 1 in 62 Fed. Reg. 8885, 8887 (February 27,
1997). As the discussion there shows, the increase is neither arbitrary
nor capricious. To recap briefly, the increase is the result of several
factors: a substantial reduction in projected 10 CFR Part 170 fees,
largely because reductions in resources devoted to reviews of
applications for standard plant and reactor operating licenses; a
reduction in the number of licensees paying annual fees, largely the
result of one reactor's having ceased operations permanently and the
reassignment this last March to Massachusetts of regulatory
responsibility for some 425 materials licenses; several million dollars
less in collections received in the current fiscal year as a result of
billings from an earlier fiscal year; a small increase in the amount by
which small entity fees are reduced; and a greater allowance for unpaid
bills, to help assure that the agency will meet its obligation to
collect 100 percent of its budget.
The commenters mention the increase in power reactor annual fees
resulting from Massachusetts becoming an Agreement State as evidence
that the increase in those fees is in fact attributable to costs of
programs unrelated to the regulation of nuclear power reactors. See,
e.g., 60 FR 32218, 32225 (June 20, 1995). The NRC has already addressed
the comment that part of the increase cannot be attributed to the costs
of regulating power reactors. The NRC adds here simply that only a
small part of that increase can be attributed to the loss of half the
annual fees from former NRC licensees in Massachusetts.
While the agency believes that its current structure is fully
justified by law and policy, the agency remains committed to working
with Congress to reduce the fee burdens that power reactor licensees,
and other licensees, bear because they pay for regulatory activities
that do not directly benefit them. Three years ago, the agency
submitted a report to Congress that recommended enactment of
legislation that would reduce the amount to be recovered from fees from
100 percent of the NRC budget to about 90 percent, thus eliminating the
surcharge the power plant licensees, and some others, bear because some
parties receive benefits for which they do not pay. In the near future,
the NRC will be updating that report and reassessing the need for
legislation.
This final rule adopts the methodology to streamline and stabilize
FY 1997 annual fees by adjusting these fees by the percentage change
(plus or minus) in NRC's total budget authority. The FY 1996 annual
fees have been used as base annual fees and these annual fees have been
adjusted upward for FY 1997 based on the percentage change in the NRC's
budget authority, taking into consideration the total number of
licensees paying fees and

[[Page 29196]]

estimated collections from 10 CFR Part 170 licensing and inspection
fees. Therefore for FY 1997, all annual fees have been adjusted 8.4
percent above the FY 1996 levels.
2. Revise the Two Professional Rates in 10 CFR 170.20 Based on the FY
1997 Budget and Adjust the 10 CFR 170.21 and 170.31 Licensing
(Application and Amendment) ``Flat'' Fees to Reflect the Costs of
Providing the Licensing Services
a. Comment. Commenters supported the revised method of calculating
two hourly rates adopted by NRC in FY 1995 to separately and more
equitably allocate costs associated with the reactor program and the
materials program. However, one commenter was concerned that the
increase in hourly rates from last year exceeds the general increase
that was provided to all government workers. The commenter encouraged
the NRC to control its costs by seeking efficiencies in these areas to
attain a downward trend of licensing and inspection fees. Another
commenter indicated that the hourly rate will increase almost five
percent ($120 per hour to $125 per hour) and believes the hourly rate
is unjustifiably high and does not reflect the cost of providing
regulatory services to licensees. The commenter stated that the $125
hourly rate equals or exceeds the hourly charges of senior consultants
or principals at major consulting firms and that it exceeds the
generally accepted rate for similar work in private industry. The
commenter requests that with hourly rates as high as $125, the NRC
continue its efforts to provide bills that contain more meaningful
descriptions of the work done.
Response. The NRC has established in this final rule two
professional hourly rates for FY 1997 which will be used to determine
the 10 CFR Part 170 fees. A rate of $131 per hour is established in
Sec. 170.20 for the reactor program and a second rate of $125 per hour
is established in $170.20 for the nuclear materials and nuclear waste
programs. The two rates are based on the ``cost center'' concept that
is now being used for budgeting purposes.
The NRC professional hourly rates are established to recover
approximately 100 percent of the agency's Congressionally-approved
budget, less the appropriation from the Nuclear Waste Fund (NWF), and
the General Fund. The rates reflect the NRC budgeted cost per direct
professional hour. This cost includes the salary and benefits for the
direct hours, a prorata share of the salary and benefits for the
program and agency overhead and agency general and administrative
expenses (e.g., rent, supplies, and information technology). Both the
method and budgeted costs used by the NRC in the development of the
hourly rates of $131 and $125 are discussed in detail in Part III,
Section-by-Section Analysis, relating to Sec. 170.20 of the proposed
rule (62 FR 8888; February 27, 1997) and the same section of this final
rule. For example, Table II shows the budgeted costs and the direct
FTEs that must be recovered through fees assessed for the hours
expended by the direct FTEs. The budgeted costs as well as the direct
resources are those required by the NRC to implement its statutory
responsibilities and effectively accomplish the mission of the agency.
Additional information on the hourly rates is provided in the NRC
workpapers located in the Public Document Room. The specific details
regarding the budget for FY 1997 are documented in the NRC's
publication ``Budget Estimates, Fiscal Year 1997'' (NUREG-1100, Volume
12), which is available to the public. Copies of NUREG-1100, Volume 12,
may be purchased from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government
Printing Office, P.O. Box 37082, Washington, DC 20402-9328. Copies are
also available from the National Technical Information Service, 5285
Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161. A copy is also available for
inspection and copying for a fee in the NRC Public Document Room, 2120
L Street, NW. (Lower Level), Washington, DC 20555-0001. The NRC will
continue its current practice of providing available backup data to
support 10 CFR Part 170 licensing and inspection billings upon request
by the licensee or applicant.
b. Comment. One commenter indicated that although they appreciate
NRC's efforts to stabilize fees based on percentage changes in NRC's
annual budget, they have concerns about the lack of a reasonable
relationship between the cost to uranium recovery licensees of NRC's
regulatory program and the benefit derived from such services. The
commenter asserts that the Commission cannot impose fees under the IOAA
unless there is a rational relationship between the fees and the
regulatory services provided. The commenter, citing Central & S. Motor
Freight Tariff Ass'n v. United States, 777 F.2d 722, 729 (D.C. Cir.
1985), notes that in applying this IOAA requirement, the fees assessed
must be reasonably related to, and may not exceed the value of the
service to the recipient whatever the agency's cost may be. The
commenter then suggests that the NRC fee system may violate this
principle because the proposed hourly rate of $125 for services
provided by agency professionals is unduly high. The commenter goes on
to say that the problem of the lack of reasonable relationship between
annual fees and services rendered is exacerbated as more states become
Agreement States, e.g., Massachusetts which became an Agreement State
in FY 1997, leaving fewer NRC licensees to bear an even greater share
of the burden. The commenter states that the current system, in effect,
gives preferential treatment to licensees in Agreement States. The
commenter also indicated that as the uranium recovery industry
continues to shrink in size, the decreasing number of licensees will
ultimately be charged increasing annual fees thereby forcing more
financial hardships on an already depressed industry.
Response. The Commission believes that its IOAA fee schedule is
fully supported by applicable legal precedent and does not accept
commenter's suggestion. In upholding the Commission's IOAA fee
schedule, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held
that the NRC may recover the full cost of providing a service to an
identifiable recipient. (Emphasis in original) Mississippi Power &
Light v. NRC, 601 F.2d at 230 (5th cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S.
1102 (1980). This is consistent with the earlier teaching of National
Cable Television Ass'n Inc. v. FCC, 554 F.2d 1094, 1106 (D.C. 1976)
relied upon by the court in Central & S Motor Freight Tariff Ass'n,
supra. There the court held that fees should be a reasonable
approximation of the attributable costs that the Commission identifies
as being expended to benefit the recipient. The Court suggested that a
fee might be questionable if the fee unreasonably exceeds the value of
the specific services for which it is charged. Here the services
provided by the NRC are required for licensees to maintain their
licenses and the benefits derived therefrom. The basis for the revised
hourly rates is fully discussed in NRC's response to comment A.2.a.
which relates to the hourly rates being assessed by NRC under 10 CFR
Part 170. The commenter has provided virtually no evidence that could
cause the NRC to conclude that its fees unreasonably exceed the value
of the services rendered.
In FY 1995, the NRC changed the methodology for allocating those
budgeted costs (about 10 percent of the NRC budget authority) that
cause fairness and equity concerns because

[[Page 29197]]

the legislation requested by the NRC had not been passed by the
Congress (60 FR 32218; June 20, 1995). These costs, which include the
cost of the Agreement State oversight and regulatory support to the
Agreement States, are now treated in a manner similar to overhead.
These costs are distributed based on the percentage of the budget
directly attributable to a class of licensees. Commenters at that time
supported this method of allocation as being more equitable, pending
legislative relief by Congress to remedy this inequitable situation. If
additional states become Agreement States and the NRC decides to
rebaseline the fees based on substantive changes to the budget, then
any increased cost for Agreement State oversight and regulatory support
to the Agreement States would be identified, treated similar to
overhead, and distributed based on the percentage of the budget
directly attributable to a class of licensees.
The NRC also revised its methodologies in the FY 1995 final rule
for determining annual fees for fuel facility and uranium recovery
licensees. The revised methodologies resulted in annual fees that more
accurately reflect the costs of providing regulatory services to the
subclasses of fuel facility and uranium recovery licensees. The revised
methodologies were fully explained in Section IV, Section-by-Section
Analysis, of the final FY 1995 rule (60 FR 32218; June 20, 1995).
In response to comments relative to increases in annual fees as a
result of the decrease in the number of licensees, the changes adopted
in the FY 1995 final rule to stabilize fees should minimize large fee
changes as a result of decreases in licensees.
3. Annual Fees for Certificates of Compliance Issued to the United
States Enrichment Corporation
a. Comment. The United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC)
commented that the proposed annual fees of $2,600,000 which have been
proposed for the first time for each of the two enrichment facilities
are not fair and equitable when compared to those imposed on similar
facilities regulated by the NRC. USEC stated that the rationale for
this as expressed in the NRC's proposed rule is an unsupported
assertion that the relative weighted safety and safeguards factors for
USEC's facilities are similar to a high enriched uranium facility. USEC
believes this rationale is incorrect, unsupported by the facts, and
contradictory to the NRC's own licensing actions. USEC indicates that
the NRC has, in fact, certified USEC's gaseous diffusion plants (GDPs)
as low enriched uranium facilities and, as part of that licensing
action, the NRC has approved safeguards measures appropriate for low
enriched uranium facilities and has not imposed the safeguards measures
required at high enriched facilities possessing strategic special
nuclear material. USEC indicates that, in accordance with the joint
statement of understanding between the NRC and the Department of Energy
(DOE), DOE is solely responsible for any strategic special nuclear
material which may be located at the Portsmouth, Ohio, GDP and that the
presence of any such high enriched uranium at the Portsmouth GDP is not
relevant to the NRC's fee-setting process. USEC states that the NRC
methodology for determining annual fees for major fuel facilities,
presented in the June 20, 1995, Federal Register, clearly states that
the issued license is the source for determining authorized nuclear
material and use/associated activity and is the determining factor in
placing a licensee into one of the five fuel facility license fee
categories created in the NRC's methodology. USEC argues that the GDPs
are clearly in the low enriched fuel category on the basis of the
issued licenses (certificates) and not in the high enriched-fuel
category. USEC states that the NRC's proposal to put the GDPs into the
same fee category as high enriched fuel facilities has not been
justified by the cited NRC methodology and appears to be arbitrary and
that the NRC has provided no basis for its conclusion that the relative
weighted safety and safeguards factors for the GDPs are similar to a
high enriched uranium facility. USEC states that the annual fee for the
GDPs should be the same as that proposed for other low enriched
facilities, $1,276,000 annually.
Response. NRC does not dispute that the GDPs have been certified as
low enriched uranium facilities with corresponding safeguards measures
for category III facilities. The NRC recognizes that DOE maintains sole
regulatory responsibility for strategic special nuclear material that
may be located at the Portsmouth GDP. The NRC methodology for
determining annual fees for major fuel facilities, published in the
June 20, 1995 Federal Register, (60 FR 32218, 32234), does state that
the issued license is the source for determining authorized nuclear
material and use/associated activity. However, it does not state that
this information is the determining factor for placing a licensee into
one of the five fee categories. The factors for placing a licensee into
a fee category were stated as:

This new methodology results in the creation of five fuel
facility license fee categories. Licenses are grouped into these
categories according to their license (nuclear material type,
enrichment, form, quantity, and use/associated activity) and
according to the scope, depth of coverage and rigor of generic
regulatory programmatic effort applicable to each category (emphasis
added).

The nuclear material and activity at the GDPs, authorized by the
certificates, does not automatically place the facilities into the high
enriched fuel category. The scope, depth of coverage, and rigor of
generic regulatory programmatic effort applicable to the GDPs, however,
is approximately equivalent to that of a high enriched fuel facility.
As described in the GDP Safety Analysis Reports, the facilities are
subject to a relatively large number of credible accidents, most of
which have multiple initiating events. The potential onsite and offsite
consequences posed by these accidents are significantly greater than
those applicable to low enriched fuel facilities. The large size and
scope of the GDP operations require substantially more effort for the
development of inspection procedures, guidance, and schedules. This
large size and scope is also expected to result in a higher number of
reportable events that NRC staff must review.
The complexity, higher potential accident consequences, and large
size and scope of the GDP operations require the NRC to provide generic
regulatory programmatic effort that is of a scope, depth of coverage,
and rigor equivalent to that for a high enriched fuel facility. This
level of generic effort is the basis for assigning the two GDPs to the
high enriched fuel facility category for the purpose of determining and
assessing annual fees in FY 1997.
b. Comment. USEC also indicated that based on the March 16, 1993,
D.C. Court of Appeals decision directing the NRC to grant Combustion
Engineering an exemption from fees for one of its two low enriched
uranium plants located in Hematite, Missouri and Windsor, Connecticut,
it too deserves to be considered for an exemption because its two
enrichment facilities are operationally equivalent to a single licensed
facility because they are part of one process to produce enriched
uranium product. Therefore, the commenter requests that the NRC
reconsider the implication of the Court's holding with respect to the
disproportionate allocation of its costs under 10 CFR 171.11(d),
especially as the allocation of these costs adversely impacts the
licensee.

[[Page 29198]]

Response. With respect to USEC's request that one of its
certificates be exempt from annual fees, the D.C. Circuit Court of
Appeals in Allied Signal, Inc. v. NRC, 988 F.2d 146 (D.C. Cir. 1993)
directed the NRC to grant an exemption from annual fees to Combustion
Engineering (CE) for one of its two low enriched uranium facilities.
The NRC had previously denied the exemption request from CE. The Court
found that the two facilities in the aggregate were operationally
equivalent to the single-plant, single-license facilities of other low
enriched uranium manufacturers. The Court concluded that ``the argument
that the ``equal fee per license'' rule is ``unfair and inequitable''
is persuasive only on the ground that the rule produced troubling
results when applied to Combustion's circumstances.'' The Court saw no
reason for requiring the NRC to attend to that rather rare situation in
the rule itself. Thus, consistent with the Court decision and 10 CFR
Part 171, if USEC feels that based on the circumstances of its
particular situation it can make a strong case to the NRC for an
exemption from the FY 1997 annual fees then they should do so. The NRC
will consider such requests for exemption under the provisions of 10
CFR 171.11(d). In accordance with 10 CFR Part 171.11(b), such requests
for exemption must be filed within 90 days from the effective date of
this final rule. The filing of an exemption request does not extend the
date on which the bill is payable. If a partial or full exemption is
granted, any overpayment will be refunded.

B. Other Comments

1. Eliminate the Application Fee for Uranium Enrichment Facilities
Comment. One commenter noted that an application fee of $125,000 is
required to accompany an application to construct and operate a uranium
enrichment facility (Sec. 170.31, fee Category 1.E.) and stated that
the application fee is assessed in addition to the ``full cost'' to
process the application. The commenter requests that the application
fee for uranium enrichment facilities be eliminated to achieve fee
equity among all materials licensees.
Response. Section 170.31, fee Category 1.E. of the Commission's
regulations was established on June 1, 1992 (57 FR 18388). The change
in the fee regulations was made to reflect changes made to the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954 (as amended) by the Solar, Wind, Waste and
Geothermal Power Production Incentives Act of 1990. The principal
effect of these amendments is that uranium enrichment facilities will
be licensed subject to the provisions of the Act pertaining to source
and special nuclear material rather than under the provisions
pertaining to a production facility. Previous to June 1992, uranium
enrichment facilities were treated for fee purposes under Sec. 170.21,
the fee regulation that relates to reactors and other production and
utilization facilities. As a result of the conforming changes made June
1, 1992, to the NRC's regulations, the category relating to uranium
enrichment facilities, which included the application fee, was moved
directly to the materials schedule in Sec. 170.31. Licensees who pay
the $125,000 fee upon filing an application are given credit for the
fee toward the full cost of processing the application. Licensees do
not pay the full cost of processing plus the application fee of
$125,000. However, because other major fuel facilities covered by
Sec. 170.31 do not pay an application fee for a new license
application, the NRC agrees with the commenter and has eliminated the
$125,000 application fee from Sec. 170.31, fee Category 1.E.
2. Fees for Amendments to Medical Licenses
Comment. One commenter, while indicating support for fees to
recover costs of NRC regulatory activities, questioned why such a high
fee ($460) would be required to amend a medical license to add another
physician to the license.
Response. In developing the revised fee schedule, the NRC was
obligated under Title V of the Independent Offices Appropriation Act of
1952 to examine the costs of processing license amendments not only for
medical license fee Category 7C but also for all of its materials
license fee categories. The amendment fee of $460 was developed based
on the ``average-cost'' method (flat fees) to process an amendment for
medical licensees in fee Category 7C. Based on data for the last five
years, the average number of hours expended to review and approve
license amendments for licenses included in fee Category 7C is 3.7
hours of professional effort. An explanation of how the average number
of hours are determined for materials licenses is found in Part IV,
Section-by-Section Analysis, Section 170.31 of this final rule. To
determine the amount of the amendment fee, the average hours to review
and approve medical amendments (3.7 hours) was multiplied by the
professional hourly rate ($125/hour) to arrive at the amendment fee of
$460 for the medical license.
3. Fee Legislation
Comment. Several commenters noted that the NRC had completed its
report on fee policy as required by the Energy Policy Act of 1992 and
that the NRC had sent a report to Congress with legislative
recommendations. The commenters commended NRC's efforts in this regard
and stated that they continue to believe that 100 percent fee recovery
for NRC, as mandated by OBRA-90, is inequitable and unfair to licensees
because licensees are paying for certain costs that are not directly
related to and do not benefit them. The commenters acknowledged that
without legislative change to OBRA-90, the central problems with NRC's
fees cannot be completely resolved. Commenters strongly supported more
efforts to define a more equitable fee base and recommended that the
NRC continue to work with Congress and the Administration and actively
seek the necessary legislative changes. In this regard, commenters
stated that it is time for NRC to actively pursue a legislative agenda
with Congress by drafting specific language to modify OBRA-90 or the
Atomic Energy Act.
Response. The need for legislation is beyond the scope of this
rulemaking proceeding. As indicated in the FY 1996 final rule (61 FR
16203; April 12, 1996), the NRC will continue to work with the Congress
to make fees more fair and equitable. As part of its Strategic
Assessment and Rebaselining initiative, the Commission considered
issues associated with fees. After evaluation of comments from
stakeholders, the Commission concluded that in order to make annual
fees more fair and equitable for all NRC licensees, the Commission must
seek Office of Management and Budget and Congressional authorization to
remove certain NRC activities that do not directly benefit NRC
licensees from the fee base and instead fund those activities from non
fee-based appropriations or separate appropriations. To this end, the
Commission has requested the NRC staff to prepare an update to its
February 1994 report to Congress on this matter.
4. Fees Based on Other Factors
Comment. One commenter, while understanding the need for NRC to be
financially self-sufficient, was concerned about the effect of an 8
percent increase in annual fees on rural hospitals. The commenter
states that the annual fees should be revised to take into account the
small, low procedure volume, one room, one camera, diagnostic nuclear
medicine department

[[Page 29199]]

who pays the same annual fee as a large metropolitan hospital. Another
commenter indicated that the NRC's intention to continue small entity
and lower tier small entity fees based on market volume (gross annual
receipts) is necessary and proper in order to aid in the survival of
small firms.
Response. The issue of basing fees on the amount of material
possessed, the frequency of use of the material, the size of the
facilities, and market competitive positions, was addressed by the NRC
in previous rules and in the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis in
Appendix A to the final rule published July 10, 1991 (56 FR 31511-
31513). The NRC did not adopt that approach because it would require
licensees to submit large amounts of new data and would require
additional NRC staff to evaluate the data submitted and to develop and
administer even more complex fee schedules. The NRC continues to
believe that uniformly allocating the generic and other regulatory
costs to the specific licensee within a class to determine the amount
of the annual fee is a fair, equitable, and practical way to recover
those costs and that establishing reduced annual fees based on gross
receipts (size) is the most appropriate approach to minimize the impact
on small entities. Therefore, NRC finds no basis for altering its
approach at this time. This approach was upheld by the D.C. Circuit in
its March 16, 1993, decision in Allied-Signal, supra.

III. Final Action

The NRC is amending its licensing, inspection, and annual fees to
recover approximately 100 percent of its FY 1997 budget authority,
including the budget authority for its Office of the Inspector General,
less the appropriations received from the NWF and the General Fund. For
FY 1997, the NRC's budget authority is $476.8 million, of which $11.0
million has been appropriated from the NWF. In addition, $3.5 million
has been appropriated from the General Fund for activities related to
commercial vitrification of waste stored at the Department of Energy
Hanford, Washington, site. The FY 1997 appropriation statute states
that the $3.5 million appropriated for regulatory reviews and other
activities pertaining to waste stored at the Hanford, Washington, site
shall be excluded from license fee revenues notwithstanding 42 U.S.C.
2214. Therefore, NRC is required to collect approximately $462.3
million in FY 1997 through 10 CFR Part 170 licensing and inspection
fees and 10 CFR Part 171 annual fees.
The total amount to be recovered for FY 1997, and therefore the
total fees, is the same as the amount estimated for recovery for FY
1996. However, the distribution of the total amount to be collected
between the two types of fees is different. The NRC estimates that
approximately $95.2 million will be recovered in FY 1997 from fees
assessed under 10 CFR Part 170 and other receipts compared to $120.5
million in FY 1996. The remaining $367.1 million in FY 1997 will be
recovered through the 10 CFR Part 171 annual fees. Because the
estimated 10 CFR Part 170 fees and other offsetting receipts for FY
1997 are below the estimates for FY 1996, annual fees must increase.
The lower estimate for 10 CFR Part 170 fees plus other changes cause an
8.4 percent increase in FY 1997 annual fees compared to FY 1996. These
changes are more fully explained in Section B. The following examples
illustrate the changes in annual fees.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 1996 annual FY 1997 annual
fee fee
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Class of Licensees:
Power Reactors.................... $2,746,000 $2,978,000
Nonpower Reactors................. 52,800 57,300
High Enriched Uranium Fuel
Facility......................... 2,403,000 2,606,000
Low Enriched Uranium Fuel Facility 1,179,000 1,279,000
UF6 Conversion Facility........... 597,800 648,000
Uranium Mills..................... 57,000 61,800
Typical Materials Licenses:
Radiographers..................... 13,000 14,100
Well Loggers...................... 7,500 8,200
Gauge Users....................... 1,600 1,700
Broad Scope Medical............... 21,700 23,500
------------------------------------------------------------------------

The amounts of the annual fees for some of the classes of licenses
have slightly increased since the publication of the proposed fee in
February 1997. The annual fees for a majority of the classes of
licensees remain the same as those proposed. The reason for the
increase in annual fees from those proposed for some of the classes is
that the NRC has recently completed the third quarter billing in FY
1997 for 10 CFR Part 170 fees for services. The total estimate for 10
CFR Part 170 fee billings for the remainder of FY 1997 based on actual
amount billed for the first three quarters is about $800,000 below the
estimate of $96,000,000 used in the FY 1997 proposed rule. As a result,
annual fees have been increased in this final rule 8.4 percent above
the FY 1996 levels as compared to an 8.2 percent increase in the
proposed rule. The amount of the increases from the proposed rule range
from a low of $100 for a radiographer, for example, to a high of $6,000
for an operating power reactor and a high enrichment uranium facility.
Because the final FY 1997 fee rule will be a ``major'' final rule
as defined by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of
1996, the NRC's fees for FY 1997 will become effective 60 days after
publication of the final rule in the Federal Register. The NRC will
send a bill for the amount of the annual fee upon publication of the FY
1997 final rule to reactors and major fuel cycle facilities. For these
licensees, payment will be due on the effective date of the FY 1997
rule. Those materials licensees whose license anniversary date during
FY 1997 falls before the effective date of the final FY 1997 final rule
will be billed during the anniversary month of the license and continue
to pay annual fees at the FY 1996 rate in FY 1997. Those materials
licensees whose license anniversary date falls on or after the
effective date of the FY 1997 final rule will be billed at the FY 1997
revised rates during the anniversary month of the license and payment
will be due on the date of the invoice.

[[Page 29200]]

A. Amendments to 10 CFR Part 170: Fees for Facilities, Materials,
Import and Export Licenses, and Other Regulatory Services

Three amendments have been made to 10 CFR Part 170 and one change
in practice under 10 CFR Part 170. These amendments do not change the
underlying basis for the regulation--that fees be assessed to
applicants, persons, and licensees for specific identifiable services
rendered. The amendments also comply with the guidance in the
Conference Committee Report on OBRA-90 that fees assessed under the
Independent Offices Appropriation Act (IOAA) recover the full cost to
the NRC of identifiable regulatory services each applicant or licensee
receives.
First, the NRC is amending Sec. 170.11 of the Commission's fee
regulations to add an exemption provision for those amendments to
materials portable gauge licenses issued in accordance with NUREG 1556,
Volume 1, that will change only the name of the Radiation Safety
Officer (RSO). This change is consistent with the proposed regulatory
approach outlined in draft NUREG-1556, Volume 1, entitled
``Consolidated Guidance About Materials Licenses, Program-Specific
Guidance About Portable Gauge Licenses'' issued October 3, 1996, for
public comment. No amendment fees will be assessed for the amendments
to portable gauge licenses because the regulatory program outlined in
NUREG-1556, Volume 1, includes commitments from the licensee concerning
RSO qualifications and if those commitments are included in the
amendment application, then a technical review is not required. NUREG-
1556, Volume 1, is expected to be finalized in May 1997.
Second, the two professional hourly rates established in FY 1996 in
Sec. 170.20 are revised based on the FY 1997 budget. These rates are
based on the FY 1997 direct FTEs and that portion of the FY 1997 budget
that either does not constitute direct program support (contractual
services costs) or is not recovered through the appropriation from the
NWF or the General Fund. These rates are used to determine the Part 170
fees. The NRC has established a rate of $131 per hour ($233,055 per
direct FTE) for the reactor program. This rate is applicable to all
activities whose fees are based on full cost under Sec. 170.21 of the
fee regulations. A second rate of $125 per hour ($222,517 per direct
FTE) is established for the nuclear materials and nuclear waste
program. This rate is applicable to all materials activities whose fees
are based on full cost under Sec. 170.31 of the fee regulations. In the
FY 1996 final fee rule, these rates were $128 and $120 respectively.
The two rates are based on cost center concepts adopted in FY 1995
(60 FR 32225; June 20, 1995) and used for NRC budgeting purposes. In
implementing cost center concepts, all budgeted resources are assigned
to cost centers to the extent they can be distinguished. These costs
include all salaries and benefits, contract support, and travel that
support each cost center activity.
Third, the NRC has adjusted the current Part 170 licensing and
inspection fees in Secs. 170.21 and 170.31 for applicants and licensees
to reflect both the changes in the revised hourly rates and the results
of the biennial fee schedule review required by the Chief Financial
Officers (CFO) Act. To comply with the requirements of the CFO Act, the
NRC has evaluated historical professional staff hours used to process a
licensing action (new license and amendment) for those materials
licensees whose fees are based on the average cost method (flat fees).
This review also included new license and amendment applications for
import and export licenses.
Based on evaluation of the historical data related to the average
number of professional staff hours needed to complete materials
licensing actions, the NRC increased the fees in some categories and
decreased the fees in others to reflect the costs incurred in
completing the licensing actions. Thus, the revised average
professional staff hours reflect the changes in the NRC licensing
review program that have occurred since FY 1995. The licensing fees are
based on the revised average professional staff hours needed to process
the licensing actions multiplied by the nuclear materials professional
hourly rate for FY 1997 of $125 per hour. The data for the average
number of professional staff hours needed to complete licensing actions
were last updated in FY 1995 (60 FR 32218; June 20, 1995). For new
materials licenses, the licensing fees for FY 1997 are increased in
approximately 70 percent of the categories, while the proposed fees for
materials amendments will increase in over 60 percent of the
categories. In response to a comment received on the proposed rule, the
NRC has eliminated the $125,000 application fee from Sec. 170.31, fee
Category 1.E.
In addition to these changes, the NRC is clarifying how it will
recover the costs of post-implementation reviews of changes licensees
make without prior NRC review; for example, changes under Secs. 50.54,
50.59 and 70.32. Licensees will be billed for post-implementation
review of these changes under Secs. 170.21 and 170.31, beginning with
the effective date of the FY 1997 final fee rule. There will be no
change in how fees are assessed for any pre-implementation
interactions, including any review prior to licensee submissions,
between NRC and licensees. As in the past, any pre-implementation
interaction will not be fee bearing. The NRC plans to inform reactor
licensees in the near future that their submittals under Sec. 50.54
(a), (p) and (q) should not ask for pre-implementation reviews.
Instead, licensees are required to perform their analyses, implement
their changes (if the analyses show that the changes do not degrade
plans the NRC has already approved), and make their submittals under
the relevant paragraph of Sec. 50.54. The NRC will then verify that the
changes are in compliance with Sec. 50.54.
In summary, the NRC has:
(1) Revised the two 10 CFR Part 170 hourly rates;
(2) Revised the licensing (application and amendment) fees assessed
under 10 CFR Part 170 in order to comply with the CFO Act's requirement
that fees be revised to reflect the cost to the agency of providing the
service;
(3) Added a provision to the regulations exempting from
10 CFR Part 170 fees certain amendments to materials portable gauge
licenses issued in accordance with NUREG-1556 Volume 1 which is
expected to be issued in May 1997;
(4) Eliminated the $125,000 application fee in Sec. 170.31 for fee
Category 1.E.; and
(5) Changed the procedure whereby charges under Part 170 will be
made for post-implementation review of quality assurance plan,
safeguards contingency plan and emergency plan changes.

B. Amendments to 10 CFR Part 171: Annual Fees for Reactor Operating
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 NRC

Six amendments have been made to 10 CFR Part 171. First, the NRC is
amending Sec. 171.13 to revise the language to indicate that if the NRC
is unable to publish a fee rule with an effective date within the
current fiscal year, then the NRC will continue to assess fees on the
same basis as the previous fiscal year. The NRC believes that it will
be able to publish an effective fee rule within a current fiscal year
as it has done since FY 1991. However, as a contingency the NRC is

[[Page 29201]]

amending the rule to permit NRC to meet the requirements of OBRA-90 in
the case that unforeseen events prevent NRC from publishing a new rule
during a fiscal year.
Second, the NRC is amending Secs. 171.15 and 171.16 to revise the
annual fees for FY 1997 to recover approximately 100 percent of the FY
1997 budget authority, less fees collected under 10 CFR Part 170 and
funds appropriated from the NWF and the General Fund. In the FY 1995
final rule, the NRC stated that it would stabilize annual fees as
follows. Beginning in FY 1996, the NRC would adjust the annual fees
only by the percentage change (plus or minus) in NRC's total budget
authority unless there was a substantial change in the total NRC budget
authority or the magnitude of the budget allocated to a specific class
of licensees. If either case occurred, the annual fee base would be
recalculated (60 FR 32225; June 20, 1995). The NRC also indicated that
the percentage change would be adjusted based on changes in 10 CFR Part
170 fees and other adjustments as well as on the number of licensees
paying the fees.
In the FY 1996 final rule, the NRC stabilized the annual fees by
establishing the annual fees for all licensees at a level of 6.5
percent below the FY 1995 annual fees. In this FY 1997 final rule, the
NRC followed the same method as used in FY 1996. Because the total
amount estimated for recovery through fees in FY 1997 is the same as
the amount for FY 1996, establishing new baseline fees is not warranted
for FY 1997. While the total amount to be collected is the same, the
distribution between Part 170 and 171 fees has changed. In FY 1996, 26
percent was estimated to be collected from 10 CFR Part 170 fees. This
decreases to 21% in FY 1997. Therefore, to recover 100 percent of the
budget, 10 CFR Part 171 annual fees must increase in FY 1997 compared
to FY 1996. The NRC is establishing the FY 1997 annual fees for all
licensees at a level of 8.4 percent above the FY 1996 annual fees. The
8.4 percent increase results primarily from a reduction in the amount
of the budget recovered for 10 CFR Part 170 fees, a reduction in other
offsetting adjustments, and reduction in the number of licensees paying
annual fees. In addition, the NRC has made adjustments to recognize
that all fees billed in a fiscal year are not collected in that year.
Table I shows the total budget and amounts of fee billed and collected
for FY 1996 and FY 1997.

Table I.--Calculation of the Percentage Change to the FY 1996 Annual
Fees
[Dollars in millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY96 FY97
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Budget........................ $473.3 $476.8
Less NWF.......................... -11.0 -11.0
Less General Fund (Hanford Tanks). -- -3.5
-----------------------------------
Total Fee Base...................... 462.3 462.3
Less Part 170 Fees................ 114.5 95.2
Less other receipts............... \1\ 6.01 ................
-----------------------------------
Part 171 Fee Collections Required... 341.8 367.1
===================================
Part 171 Billing Adjustments:\2\
Small Entity Allowance............ 4.9 5.0
Unpaid FY 1997 bills.............. ................ 3.0
Payments from prior year bills.... ................ -2.0
-----------------------------------
Subtotal........................ 4.9 6.0
===================================
Total Part 171 Billing.......... 346.7 373.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ $6 million in excess collections from FY 1995 were available to
reduce FY 1996 annual fees.
\2\ These adjustments are necessary to ensure that the ``billed'' amount
results in the required collections. Positive amounts indicate amounts
billed that will not be collected in FY 1997.

As shown in Table I, the total amount of annual fees to be billed
in FY 1997 is $26.4M ($373.1-$346.7) or 7.6 percent higher than the
amount that was to be billed in annual fees in FY 1996. The NRC notes
that the reduction in the estimates of 10 CFR Part 170 fees for FY 1997
is primarily in the areas relating to the review of applications for
reactor operating licenses and the review of standard plant
applications. In addition, for the first time, the estimates take into
consideration an allowance for bad debt by estimating billings in the
fiscal year that are not projected to be collected in that fiscal year
and collections received in the current fiscal year as a result of
billings from a prior fiscal year. These adjustments to the annual fees
will allow the NRC to come closer to meeting its obligation to recover
approximately 100 percent of its budget authority through the
assessment of fees.
In addition to changes in 10 CFR Part 170 fees and other
adjustments, the number of licensees to pay fees in FY 1997 has
decreased compared to FY 1996. This decrease in the number of licensees
paying fees causes annual fees to increase by an additional 0.8
percent. For example, the Haddam Neck power reactor ceased operations
in December 1996 and the fuel has been permanently removed from the
reactor. Therefore, the utility will pay only a partial annual fee in
FY 1997. In addition, Massachusetts became an Agreement State on March
21, 1997, and regulatory authority over approximately 425 NRC materials
licenses was transferred to Massachusetts. These licensees will pay
only one half of the annual fee for FY 1997.
Third, an annual fee is established in Sec. 171.16(d), fee Category
1.E., for each certificate of compliance issued to the United States
Enrichment Corporation (USEC) on November 26, 1996, to operate the two
gaseous diffusion plants (GDPs) located at Paducah, Kentucky and at
Piketon, Ohio. The NRC assumed regulatory jurisdiction over the two
plants from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) on March 3, 1997.
Fourth, Footnote 1 of 10 CFR 171.16(d) is amended to provide for a
waiver of annual fees for FY 1997 for those materials licensees, and
holders of

[[Page 29202]]

certificates, registrations, and approvals who either filed for
termination of their licenses or approvals or filed for possession
only/storage licenses before October 1, 1996, and permanently ceased
licensed activities entirely by September 30, 1996. All other licensees
and approval holders who held a license or approval on October 1, 1996,
are subject to FY 1997 annual fees. This change is being made in
recognition of the fact that since the final FY 1996 rule was published
in April 1996, some licensees have filed requests for termination of
their licenses or certificates with the NRC. Other licensees have
either called or written to the NRC since the FY 1996 final rule became
effective requesting further clarification and information concerning
the annual fees assessed. The NRC is responding to these requests as
quickly as possible. However, the NRC was unable to respond and take
action on all such requests before the end of the fiscal year on
September 30, 1996. Similar situations existed after the FY 1991-1995
rules were published, and in those cases, the NRC provided an exemption
from the requirement that the annual fee is waived only when a license
is terminated before October 1 of each fiscal year.
Fifth, the NRC has amended the proration provisions in Sec. 171.17
for reactor and materials licensees. The reactor provision in
Sec. 171.17(a) is revised to reflect the changes in 10 CFR Part 50
relating to the decommissioning of power reactors which became
effective August 28, 1996 (61 FR 39278). The materials provision is
amended to recognize that licenses transferred to an Agreement State as
a result of a new Agreement are effectively terminated by the NRC, for
annual fee purposes, on the date that the Agreement with the State
becomes effective.
Sixth, Sec. 171.19 is amended to update fiscal year references and
to credit the partial payments made by certain licensees in FY 1997
either toward their total annual fee to be assessed or to make refunds,
if necessary. This section is amended to modify the annual fee billing
schedule for materials licenses terminated and new materials licenses
issued during the fiscal year.
The NRC will send a bill to reactors and major fuel cycle
facilities for the amount of the annual fee upon publication of the FY
1997 final rule. For these licensees, payment will be due on the
effective date of FY 1997 rule. Those materials licensees whose license
anniversary date during FY 1997 falls before the effective date of the
final FY 1997 rule will be billed during the anniversary month of the
license and continue to pay annual fees at the FY 1996 rate in FY 1997.
Those materials licensees whose license anniversary date falls on or
after the effective date of the final FY 1997 rule will be billed, at
the FY 1997 revised rates, during the anniversary month of the license
and payment will be due on the date of the invoice.
The final amendments to 10 CFR Part 171 do not change the
underlying basis for 10 CFR Part 171; that is, charging a class of
licensees for NRC costs attributable to that class of licensees. The
final changes are consistent with the NRC's FY 1995 final rule
indicating that, for the period FY 1996-1999, the expectation is that
annual fees would be adjusted by the percentage change (plus or minus)
to the NRC's budget authority adjusted for NRC offsetting receipts and
the number of licensees paying annual fees.

IV. Section-by-Section Analysis

The following analysis of those sections that will be amended by
this final rule provides additional explanatory information. All
references are to Title 10, Chapter I, U.S. Code of Federal
Regulations.

Part 170

Section 170.11--Exemptions
This section is amended to add a new paragraph indicating that
amendments to materials portable gauge licenses issued in accordance
with NUREG-1556, Volume 1, that change only the name of the Radiation
Safety Officer (RSO) are exempt from amendment fees. No amendment fees
will be assessed for the amendments issued in accordance with NUREG-
1556, Volume 1, to portable gauge licenses because the regulatory
program includes commitments from the licensee concerning RSO
qualifications and if those commitments are included in the amendment
application then there is no technical review conducted by the NRC.
NUREG-1556, Volume 1, is expected to be finalized in May 1997.
Section 170.20--Average Cost per Professional Staff-Hour
This section is amended to establish two professional staff-hour
rates based on FY 1997 budgeted costs--one for the reactor program and
one for the nuclear material and nuclear waste program. Accordingly,
the NRC reactor direct staff-hour rate for FY 1997 for all activities
whose fees are based on full cost under Sec. 170.21 is $131 per hour,
or $233,055 per direct FTE. The NRC nuclear material and nuclear waste
direct staff-hour rate for all materials activities whose fees are
based on full cost under Sec. 170.31 is $125 per hour, or $222,517 per
direct FTE. The rates are based on the FY 1997 direct FTEs and NRC
budgeted costs that are not recovered through the appropriation from
the NWF or the General Fund. The NRC has continued the use of cost
center concepts established in FY 1995 in allocating certain costs to
the reactor and materials programs in order to more closely align
budgeted costs with specific classes of licensees. The method used to
determine the two professional hourly rates is as follows:
1. Direct program FTE levels are identified for both the reactor
program and the nuclear material and waste program.
2. Direct contract support, which is the use of contract or other
services in support of the line organization's direct program, is
excluded from the calculation of the hourly rate because the costs for
direct contract support are charged directly through the various
categories of fees.
3. All other direct program costs (i.e., Salaries and Benefits,
Travel) represent ``in-house'' costs and are to be allocated by
dividing them uniformly by the total number of direct FTEs for the
program. In addition, salaries and benefits plus contracts for general
and administrative support are allocated to each program based on that
program's salaries and benefits. This method results in the following
costs which are included in the hourly rates.

Table II.--FY 1997 Budget Authority To Be Included in Hourly Rates
[Dollars in millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reactor Materials
program program
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salary and Benefits..................... $155.3 $48.4
Allocated Agency Management & Support... 42.5 13.2
-------------------------------

[[Page 29203]]

Subtotal.......................... 197.8 61.6
===============================
General and Administrative Support
(G&A):
Program Travel and Other Support...... 9.6 2.5
Allocated Agency Management and
Support.............................. 72.1 22.4
-------------------------------
Subtotal.......................... 81.7 24.9
Less offsetting receipts.............. .1 ..............
===============================
Total Budget Included in Hourly
Rate............................. 279.4 86.5
Program Direct FTEs................... 1,196.9 388.7
Rate per Direct FTE................... 233,055 222,517
Professional Hourly Rate.............. 131 125
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dividing the $279.4 million budget for the reactor program by the
number of reactor program direct FTEs (1196.9) results in a rate for
the reactor program of $233,055 per FTE for FY 1997. Dividing the $86.5
million budget for the nuclear materials and nuclear waste program by
the number of program direct FTEs (388.7) results in a rate of $222,517
per FTE for FY 1997. The Direct FTE Hourly Rate for the reactor program
is $131 per hour (rounded to the nearest whole dollar). This rate is
calculated by dividing the cost per direct FTE ($233,055) by the number
of productive hours in one year (1776 hours) as indicated in the
revised OMB Circular A-76, ``Performance of Commercial Activities.''
The Direct FTE Hourly Rate for the materials program is $125 per hour
(rounded to the nearest whole dollar). This rate is calculated by
dividing the cost per direct FTE ($222,517) by the number of productive
hours in one year (1776 hours). The FY 1997 rate is slightly higher
than the FY 1996 rate due in part to the Federal pay raise given to all
Federal employees.
Section 170.21--Schedule of Fees for Production and Utilization
Facilities, Review of Standard Reference Design Approvals, Special
Projects, Inspections and Import and Export Licenses
The NRC is revising the licensing and inspection fees in this
section, which are based on full-cost recovery, to reflect FY 1997
budgeted costs and to recover costs incurred by the NRC in providing
licensing and inspection services to identifiable recipients. The fees
assessed for services provided under the schedule are based on the
professional hourly rate, as shown in Sec. 170.20, for the reactor
program and any direct program support (contractual services) costs
expended by the NRC. Any professional hours expended on or after the
effective date of the final rule will be assessed at the FY 1997 hourly
rate for the reactor program, as shown in Sec. 170.20. The fees in
Sec. 170.21 for the review of import and export licensing, facility
Category K, are adjusted for FY 1997 to reflect both the increase in
the hourly rate and the revised average professional staff hours needed
to process certain types of licensing actions.
For those applications currently on file and pending completion,
footnote 2 of Sec. 170.21 is revised to provide that professional hours
expended up to the effective date of the final rule will be assessed at
the professional rates in effect at the time the service was rendered.
For topical report applications currently on file that are still
pending completion of the review, and for which review costs have
reached the applicable fee ceiling established by the July 2, 1990,
rule, the costs incurred after any applicable ceiling was reached
through August 8, 1991, will not be billed to the applicant. Any
professional hours expended for the review of topical report
applications, amendments, revisions, or supplements to a topical report
on or after August 9, 1991, are assessed at the applicable rate
established by Sec. 170.20.
Section 170.31--Schedule of Fees for Materials Licenses and Other
Regulatory Services, Including Inspections and Import and Export
Licenses
The licensing and inspection fees in this section, which are based
on full-cost recovery, are modified to recover the FY 1997 costs
incurred by the NRC in providing licensing and inspection services to
identifiable recipients. The fees assessed for services provided under
the schedule are based on both the professional hourly rate as shown in
Sec. 170.20 for the materials program and any direct program support
(contractual services) costs expended by the NRC. Licensing fees based
on the average time to review an application (``flat'' fees) are
adjusted to reflect both the revised average professional staff hours
needed to process a licensing action (new license and amendment) and
the increase in the professional hourly rate from $120 per hour in FY
1996 to $125 per hour in FY 1997.
As previously indicated, the CFO Act requires that the NRC conduct
a biennial review of fees and other charges imposed by the agency for
its services and revise those charges to reflect the costs incurred in
providing the services. Consistent with the CFO Act requirement, the
NRC has completed its most recent review of license fees assessed by
the agency. The review focused on the flat fees that are charged to
nuclear materials users for licensing actions (new licenses and
amendments). The full cost license and inspection fees (e.g., for fuel
cycle facilities) and annual fees were not included in this biennial
review because the hourly rate for full cost fees and the annual fees
are reviewed and updated annually in order to recover 100 percent of
the NRC budget authority.
To determine the licensing flat fees for materials licensees and
applicants, the NRC uses historical data to determine the average
number of professional hours required to perform a licensing action for
each license category. These average hours are multiplied by the
materials program professional hourly rate of $125 per hour for FY
1997. The review indicated that the NRC needed to modify the average
number of hours on which the current licensing flat fees are based in
order to recover the cost of providing licensing services. The average
number of hours required for licensing actions was last reviewed and
modified in 1995 (60 FR 32218; June 20, 1995). Thus the revised hours
used to determine the fees

[[Page 29204]]

for FY 1997 reflect the changes in the licensing program that have
occurred since that time. For new licenses, the fees for FY 1997 are
increased in approximately 70 percent of the fee categories, while the
fees for amendments have increased in over 60 percent of the fee
categories.
The ``flat'' fees in Sec. 170.31 for the review of licensing
applications have increased from FY 1996 as a result of the increase in
the hourly rate and the results of the biennial review. The licensing
``flat'' fees are applicable to fee categories 1.C and 1.D; 2.B and
2.C; 3.A through 3.P; 4.B through 9.D, 10.B, 15.A through 15.E and 16.
Applications filed on or after the effective date of the final rule
will be subject to the fees in this final rule.
The amounts of the materials licensing ``flat'' fees were rounded
off so that the amounts would be de minimis and the resulting flat fee
would be convenient to the user. Fees under $1,000 are rounded to the
nearest $10. Fees that are greater than $1,000 but are less than
$100,000 are rounded to the nearest $100. Fees that are greater than
$100,000 are rounded to the nearest $1,000.
For those licensing, inspection, and review fees that are based on
full-cost recovery (cost for professional staff hours plus any
contractual services), the materials program hourly rate of $125, as
shown in Sec. 170.20, applies to those professional staff hours
expended on or after the effective date of the final rule.
In addition to these changes, the NRC is clarifying how it would
recover the costs of post-implementation reviews of changes licensees
make without prior NRC review; for example, changes under Secs. 50.54,
50.59 and 70.32. Licensees will be billed for post-implementation
reviews of these changes under Secs. 170.21 and 170.31, beginning with
the effective date of the FY 1997 final fee rule. There will be no
change in how fees are assessed for any pre-implementation interactions
including any review prior to licensee submissions, between the NRC and
licensees. As in the past, any pre-implementation interaction will not
be fee-bearing. The NRC intends to inform reactor licensees, in the
near future, that their submittals under Sec. 50.54 (a), (p) and (q)
should not ask for pre-implementation reviews. Instead, licensees are
required to perform their analyses, implement their changes (if the
analyses show that the changes do not degrade plans the NRC has already
approved), and make their submittals under the relevant paragraph of
Sec. 50.54. The NRC will then verify that the changes are in compliance
with Sec. 50.54.

Part 171

Section 171.13--Notice
The language in this section is revised to indicate that in the
unlikely event the NRC is unable to publish a fee rule with an
effective date within the current fiscal year, the NRC will continue to
assess fees at the same rates as the previous fiscal year. The NRC
believes that it will be able to publish an effective fee rule within a
current fiscal year as it has done since FY 1991 when 100 percent fee
recovery was initiated. However, the possibility exists that the NRC
might be unable to establish fees for a current fiscal year in a timely
manner through the notice and comment process. Therefore, as a
contingency plan for meeting the requirement of OBRA-90, the NRC is
amending Sec. 171.13 to indicate that if the NRC is unable to
promulgate a final fee rule within a current fiscal year, then fees
will continue to be assessed at the same rates as the previous fiscal
year. The NRC will continue to work diligently to publish the fee rules
at the earliest possible time during the fiscal year.
Section 171.15--Annual Fee: Reactor Operating Licenses
The annual fees in this section are revised as described below.
Paragraphs (a), (b), (c)(1), (c)(2), (e), and (f) are revised to comply
with the requirement of OBRA-90 that the NRC recover approximately 100
percent of its budget for FY 1997.
Paragraph (b) is revised in its entirety to establish the FY 1997
annual fee for operating power reactors and to change fiscal year
references from FY 1996 to FY 1997. The fees are established by
increasing FY 1996 annual fees (prior to rounding) by 8.4 percent. In
the FY 1995 final rule, the NRC stated it would stabilize annual fees
by adjusting the annual fees only by the percentage change (plus or
minus) in NRC's total budget authority and adjustments based on changes
in 10 CFR Part 170 fees as well as in the number of licensees paying
the fees. The first adjustment to the annual fees using this method
occurred in FY 1996 when all annual fees were decreased 6.5 percent
below the FY 1995 annual fees. The activities comprising the base FY
1995 annual fee and the FY 1995 additional charge (surcharge) are
listed in paragraphs (b) and (c) for convenience purposes.
With respect to Big Rock Point, a smaller, older reactor, the NRC
hereby grants a partial exemption from the FY 1997 annual fees similar
to FY 1996 based on a request filed with the NRC in accordance with
Sec. 171.11.
Each operating power reactor, except Big Rock Point, will pay an
annual fee of $2,978,000 in FY 1997.
Paragraph (e) is revised to show the amount of the FY 1997 annual
fee for nonpower (test and research) reactors. In FY 1997, the annual
fee of $57,300 is 8.4 percent above the FY 1996 level. The NRC will
continue to grant exemptions from the annual fee to Federally-owned and
State-owned research and test reactors that meet the exemption criteria
specified in Sec. 171.11(a)(2).
Paragraph (f) is revised to change fiscal year date references.
Section 171.16--Annual fees: Materials Licensees, Holders of
Certificates of Compliance, Holders of Sealed Source and Device
Registrations, Holders of Quality Assurance Program Approvals, and
Government Agencies Licensed by the NRC
Section 171.16(c) covers the fees assessed for those licensees that
can qualify as small entities under NRC size standards. The NRC will
continue to assess two fees for licensees that qualify as small
entities under the NRC's size standards. In general, licensees with
gross annual receipts of $350,000 to $5 million pay a maximum fee of
$1,800. A second or lower-tier small entity fee of $400 is in place for
small entities with gross annual receipts of less than $350,000 and
small governmental jurisdictions with a population of less than 20,000.
No change in the amount of the small entity fees is being made because
the small entity fees are not based on the budget but are established
at a level to reduce the impact of fees on small entities. The small
entity fees are shown in the final rule for convenience. A materials
licensee may pay a reduced annual fee if the licensee qualifies as a
small entity under the NRC's size standards and certifies that it is a
small entity using NRC Form 526.
Section 171.16(d) is revised to establish the FY 1997 annual fees
for materials licensees, including Government agencies, licensed by the
NRC. These fees were determined by increasing the FY 1996 annual fees
(prior to rounding) by 8.4 percent.
In addition, an annual fee is established in Sec. 171.16(d), fee
Category 1.E., for each Certificate of Compliance issued to the USEC on
November 26, 1996, to operate the two gaseous diffusion plants (GDPs)
located at Paducah, Kentucky, and at Piketon, Ohio. The NRC announced
its intent to issue the compliance certificates to USEC on September
19, 1996 (61 FR 49360). The NRC assumed regulatory jurisdiction over
the two plants from

[[Page 29205]]

DOE on March 3, 1997. Because the two plants have been certified in FY
1997, the NRC is establishing an annual fee of $2,606,000 for each of
these two facilities. The NRC methodology for determining annual fees
for major fuel facilities was explained in the FY 1995 final fee rule
published in the Federal Register on June 20, 1995 (60 FR 32234). As
indicated in the Federal Register, the methodology can be applied to
determine annual fees for new licenses or certificates. The NRC has
applied the methodology to the USEC facilities and has concluded that
the relative weighted safety and safeguards factors for these
facilities is similar to a high enriched uranium facility. Therefore,
the NRC is establishing the annual fee for each USEC uranium enrichment
facility at $2,606,000, the same as that for a high enrichment facility
(fee category 1.A.(1)(a)). Because the certifications are in effect for
the last six months of FY 1997, the NRC will assess one-half of the
annual fee or $1,303,000 to USEC for each certificate for FY 1997.
The amount or range of the FY 1997 annual fees for all materials
licensees is summarized as follows:

Materials Licenses--Annual Fee Ranges
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category of license Annual fees
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part 70--High enriched fuel facility. $2,606,000.
Part 70--Low enriched fuel facility.. $1,279,000.
Part 40--UF6 conversion facility..... $648,000.
Part 40--Uranium recovery facilities. $22,300 to $61,800.
Part 30--Byproduct Material Licenses. $490 to $23,500.\1\
Part 71--Transportion of Radioactive $1,000 to $78,900.
Material.
Part 72--Independent Storage of Spent $283,000.
Nuclear Fuel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes the annual fee for a few military ``master'' materials
licenses of broad-scope issued to Government agencies, which is
$421,000.

Footnote 1 of 10 CFR 171.16(d) is amended to provide a waiver of
the annual fees for materials licensees, and holders of certificates,
registrations, and approvals, who either filed for termination of their
licenses or approvals or filed for possession only/storage only
licenses before October 1, 1996, and permanently ceased licensed
activities entirely by September 30, 1996. All other licensees and
approval holders who held a license or approval on October 1, 1996, are
subject to the FY 1997 annual fees.
Section 171.17--Proration
The NRC is amending the proration provisions in Sec. 171.17 for
reactor and materials licenses. Paragraph (a) is amended to reflect the
changes in 10 CFR Part 50 relating to the decommissioning of power
reactors which became effective August 28, 1996 (61 FR 39278). Reactor
annual fees will be prorated based on the requirements of
Sec. 50.82(a)(2) that upon docketing of the certifications for
permanent cessation of operations and permanent removal of fuel from
the reactor vessel or when a final legally effective order to
permanently cease operations has come into effect, the 10 CFR Part 50
license no longer authorizes operation of the reactor or emplacement or
retention of fuel into the reactor vessel. Previously the proration of
reactor annual fees was based on the date of issuance of the possession
only license (POL).
Paragraph (b) is amended to recognize that materials licenses
transferred to a new Agreement State are considered terminated by the
NRC for annual fee purposes, on the date that the Agreement with the
State becomes effective. The State of Massachusetts became an Agreement
State on March 21, 1997, and approximately 425 materials licenses were
transferred to the State on the effective date of the Agreement. The
NRC will assess the annual fees for those licenses being transferred to
the State of Massachusetts using the current proration provisions of
Sec. 171.17(b) whereby the licenses will be considered terminated on
the effective date of the Agreement with Massachusetts.
New licenses issued during FY 1997 will receive a prorated annual
fee in accordance with the current proration provision of Sec. 171.17.
For example, those new materials licenses issued during the period
October 1 through March 31 of the FY will be assessed one-half the
annual fee in effect on the anniversary date of the license. New
materials licenses issued on or after April 1, 1997, will not be
assessed an annual fee for FY 1997. Thereafter, the full annual fee is
due and payable each subsequent fiscal year on the anniversary date of
the license. Beginning June 11, 1996, (the effective date of the FY
1996 final rule), affected materials licensees will be subject to the
annual fee in effect on the anniversary date of the license. Affected
licensees who are not sure of the anniversary date of their materials
license should check the original issue date of the license.
Section 171.19--Payment
Paragraph (b) is revised to give credit for partial payments made
by certain licensees in FY 1997 toward their FY 1997 annual fees. The
NRC anticipates that the first, second, and third quarterly payments
for FY 1997 will have been made by operating power reactor licensees
and some large materials licensees before the final rule becomes
effective. Therefore, the NRC will credit payments received for those
quarterly annual fee assessments toward the total annual fee to be
assessed. The NRC will adjust the fourth quarterly bill to recover the
full amount of the revised annual fee or to make refunds, as necessary.
Payment of the annual fee is due on the date of the invoice and
interest accrues from the invoice date. However, interest will be
waived if payment is received within 30 days from the invoice date.
Paragraph (c) is revised to update fiscal year references.
Paragraph (d) is revised to modify the billing schedule for terminated
materials licenses and new materials licenses. Licenses subject to the
annual fee that are terminated during the fiscal year but prior to the
anniversary month of the license will be billed upon termination for
the fee in effect at the time of the billing. New licenses subject to
the annual fee will be billed in the month the license is issued or in
the next available monthly billing for the fee in effect on the
anniversary date of the license. Thereafter, annual fees for new
licenses will be assessed in the anniversary month of the license.
As in FY 1996, the NRC will continue to bill annual fees for most
materials licenses on the anniversary date of the license (licensees
whose annual fees are $100,000 or more will continue to be assessed
quarterly). The annual fee assessed will be the fee in effect on the
license anniversary date. This applies to those materials licenses in
the following fee categories: 1.C. and 1.D.; 2.A.(2) through 2.C.; 3.A.
through 3.P.; 4.A. through 9.D., and 10.B. For annual fee purposes, the
anniversary date of the materials license is considered to be the first
day of the month in which the original materials license was issued.
For example, if the original materials license was issued on June 17
then, for annual fee purposes, the anniversary date of the materials
license is June 1 and the licensee would continue to be billed in June
of each year for the annual fee in effect on June 1. Materials
licensees with anniversary dates in FY 1997 before the effective date
of the FY 1997 final rule will be billed during the anniversary month
of the license and continue to pay annual fees at the FY

[[Page 29206]]

1996 rate in FY 1997. Those materials licensees with license
anniversary dates falling on or after the effective date of the FY 1997
final rule will be billed, at the FY 1997 revised rates, during their
anniversary month of their license and payment will be due on the date
of the invoice.
During the past six years, many licensees have indicated that,
although they held a valid NRC license authorizing the possession and
use of special nuclear, source, or byproduct material, they were either
not using the material to conduct operations or had disposed of the
material and no longer needed the license. In response, the NRC has
consistently stated that annual fees are assessed based on whether a
licensee holds a valid NRC license that authorizes possession and use
of radioactive material. Whether or not a licensee is actually
conducting operations using the material is a matter of licensee
discretion. The NRC cannot control whether a licensee elects to possess
and use radioactive material once it receives a license from the NRC.
Therefore, the NRC reemphasizes that the annual fee will be assessed
based on whether a licensee holds a valid NRC license that authorizes
possession and use of radioactive material. To remove any uncertainty,
the NRC issued minor clarifying amendments to 10 CFR 171.16, footnotes
1 and 7 on July 20, 1993 (58 FR 38700).

V. Environmental Impact: Categorical Exclusion

The NRC has determined that this final rule is the type of action
described in categorical exclusion 10 CFR 51.22(c)(1). Therefore,
neither an environmental impact statement nor an environmental impact
assessment has been prepared for the final regulation. By its very
nature, this regulatory action does not affect the environment, and
therefore, no environmental justice issues are raised.

VI. Paperwork Reduction Act Statement

This final rule contains no information collection requirements
and, therefore, is not subject to the requirements of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).

VII. Regulatory Analysis

With respect to 10 CFR Part 170, this final rule was developed
pursuant to Title V of the Independent Offices Appropriation Act of
1952 (IOAA) (31 U.S.C. 9701) and the Commission's fee guidelines. When
developing these guidelines the Commission took into account guidance
provided by the U.S. Supreme Court on March 4, 1974, in its decision of
National Cable Television Association, Inc. v. United States, 415 U.S.
36 (1974) and Federal Power Commission v. New England Power Company,
415 U.S. 345 (1974). In these decisions, the Court held that the IOAA
authorizes an agency to charge fees for special benefits rendered to
identifiable persons measured by the ``value to the recipient'' of the
agency service. The meaning of the IOAA was further clarified on
December 16, 1976, by four decisions of the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia: National Cable Television Association v.
Federal Communications Commission, 554 F.2d 1094 (D.C. Cir. 1976);
National Association of Broadcasters v. Federal Communications
Commission, 554 F.2d 1118 (D.C. Cir. 1976); Electronic Industries
Association v. Federal Communications Commission, 554 F.2d 1109 (D.C.
Cir. 1976) and Capital Cities Communication, Inc. v. Federal
Communications Commission, 554 F.2d 1135 (D.C. Cir. 1976). These
decisions of the Courts enabled the Commission to develop fee
guidelines that are still used for cost recovery and fee development
purposes.
The Commission's fee guidelines were upheld on August 24, 1979, by
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Mississippi Power
and Light Co. v. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 601 F.2d 223 (5th
Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1102 (1980). The Court held that--

(1) The NRC had the authority to recover the full cost of
providing services to identifiable beneficiaries;
(2) The NRC could properly assess a fee for the costs of
providing routine inspections necessary to ensure a licensee's
compliance with the Atomic Energy Act and with applicable
regulations;
(3) The NRC could charge for costs incurred in conducting
environmental reviews required by NEPA;
(4) The NRC properly included the costs of uncontested hearings
and of administrative and technical support services in the fee
schedule;
(5) The NRC could assess a fee for renewing a license to operate
a low-level radioactive waste burial site; and
(6) The NRC's fees were not arbitrary or capricious.

With respect to 10 CFR part 171, on November 5, 1990, the Congress
passed Public Law 101-508, the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of
1990 (OBRA-90) which required that for FYs 1991 through 1995,
approximately 100 percent of the NRC budget authority be recovered
through the assessment of fees. OBRA-90 was amended in 1993 to extend
the 100 percent fee recovery requirement for NRC through FY 1998. To
accomplish this statutory requirement, the NRC, in accordance with
Sec. 171.13, is publishing the final amount of the FY 1997 annual fees
for operating reactor licensees, fuel cycle licensees, materials
licensees, and holders of Certificates of Compliance, registrations of
sealed source and devices and QA program approvals, and Government
agencies. OBRA-90 and the Conference Committee Report specifically
state that--

(1) The annual fees be based on the Commission's FY 1997 budget
of $476.8 million less the amounts collected from Part 170 fees and
the funds directly appropriated from the NWF to cover the NRC's high
level waste program and the general fund related to commercial
vitrification of waste at the Department of Energy Hanford,
Washington site.
(2) The annual fees shall, to the maximum extent practicable,
have a reasonable relationship to the cost of regulatory services
provided by the Commission; and
(3) The annual fees be assessed to those licensees the
Commission, in its discretion, determines can fairly, equitably, and
practicably contribute to their payment.

10 CFR Part 171, which established annual fees for operating power
reactors effective October 20, 1986 (51 FR 33224; September 18, 1986),
was challenged and upheld in its entirety in Florida Power and Light
Company v. United States, 846 F.2d 765 (D.C. Cir. 1988), cert. denied,
490 U.S. 1045 (1989).
The NRC's FY 1991 annual fee rule was largely upheld by the D.C.
Circuit Court of Appeals in Allied Signal v. NRC, 988 F.2d 146 (D.C.
Cir. 1993).

VIII. Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

The NRC is required by the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of
1990 to recover approximately 100 percent of its budget authority
through the assessment of user fees. OBRA-90 further requires that the
NRC establish a schedule of charges that fairly and equitably allocates
the aggregate amount of these charges among licensees.
This final rule establishes the schedules of fees that are
necessary to implement the Congressional mandate for FY 1997. The final
rule results in an increase in the annual fees charged to all
licensees, and holders of certificates, registrations, and approvals.
The Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, prepared in accordance with 5
U.S.C. 604, is included as Appendix A to this final rule. The Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA) was
signed into law on March 29, 1996. The SBREFA requires all Federal
agencies to prepare a written compliance guide for each rule for which
the agency is required by 5 U.S.C.

[[Page 29207]]

604 to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis. Therefore, in
compliance with the law, Attachment 1 to the Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (Appendix A to this document) is the small entity compliance
guide for FY 1997.

IX. Backfit Analysis

The NRC has determined that the backfit rule, 10 CFR 50.109, does
not apply to this final rule and that a backfit analysis is not
required for this final rule. The backfit analysis is not required
because these final amendments do not require the modification of or
additions to systems, structures, components, or the design of a
facility or the design approval or manufacturing license for a facility
or the procedures or organization required to design, construct or
operate a facility.

X. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act

In accordance with the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 the NRC has determined that this action is a major
rule and has verified this determination with the Office of Information
and Regulatory Affairs of the Office of Management and Budget.

List of Subjects

10 CFR Part 170

Byproduct material, Import and export licenses, Intergovernmental
relations, Non-payment penalties, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power
plants and reactors, Source material, Special nuclear material.

10 CFR Part 171

Annual charges, Byproduct material, Holders of certificates,
registrations, approvals, Intergovernmental relations, Non-payment
penalties, Nuclear materials, Nuclear power plants and reactors, Source
material, Special nuclear material.
For the reasons set out in the preamble and under the authority of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553,
the NRC is adopting the following amendments to 10 CFR parts 170 and
171.

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

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

Authority: 31 U.S.C. 9701, 96 Stat. 1051; sec. 301, Pub. L. 92-
314, 86 Stat. 222 (42 U.S.C. 2201w); sec. 201, Pub. L. 93-4381, 88
Stat. 1242, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5841); sec. 205, Pub. L. 101-576,
104 Stat. 2842, (31 U.S.C. 901).

2. In Sec. 170.11, paragraph (a)(11) is added to read as follows:

Sec. 170.11 Exemptions.

(a) * * *
(11) Materials portable gauge licenses issued in accordance with
NUREG-1556, Volume 1, that are amended to change only the name of the
Radiation Safety Officer. This exemption does not apply to those
materials portable gauge licenses that also authorize possession and
use of nuclear materials for other activities.
* * * * *
3. Section 170.20 is revised to read as follows:

Sec. 170.20 Average cost per professional staff-hour.

Fees for permits, licenses, amendments, renewals, special projects,
Part 55 requalification and replacement examinations and tests, other
required reviews, approvals, and inspections under Secs. 170.21 and
170.31 that are based upon the full costs for the review or inspection
will be calculated using the following applicable professional staff-
hour rates:

Reactor Program (Sec. 170.21 Activities).. $131 per hour.
Nuclear Materials and Nuclear Waste Program $125 per hour.
(Sec. 170.31 Activities).

4. In Sec. 170.21, the introductory text, Category K, and footnotes
1 and 2 to the table are revised to read as follows:

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

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

Schedule of Facility Fees
[See footnotes at end of table]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Facility categories and type of fees Fees1 2
------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * *
* * *
K. Import and export licenses:
Licenses for the import and export only of
production and utilization facilities or the export
only of components for production and utilization
facilities issued pursuant to 10 CFR Part 110:
1. Application for import or export of reactors
and other facilities and exports of components
which must be reviewed by the Commissioners and
the Executive Branch, for example, actions
under 10 CFR 110.40(b):
Application-new license..................... $8,100
Amendment................................... $8,100
2. Application for export of reactor and other
components requiring Executive Branch review
only, for example, those actions under 10 CFR
110.41(a)(1)-(8):
Application-new license..................... $5,000
Amendment................................... $5,000
3. Application for export of components
requiring foreign government assurances only:
Application-new license..................... $2,900
Amendment................................... $2,900
4. Application for export of facility components
and equipment not requiring Commissioner
review, Executive Branch review, or foreign
government assurances:
Application-new license..................... $1,300
Amendment................................... $1,300

[[Page 29208]]

5. Minor amendment of any export or import
license to extend the expiration date, change
domestic information, or make other revisions
which do not require in-depth analysis or
review:
Amendment................................... $190
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Fees will not be charged for orders issued by the Commission
pursuant to Sec. 2.202 of this chapter or for amendments resulting
specifically from the requirements of these types of Commission
orders. Fees will be charged for approvals issued under a specific
exemption provision of the Commission's regulations under Title 10 of
the Code of Federal Regulations (e.g., Secs. 50.12, 73.5) and any
other sections now or hereafter in effect 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. In no
event will the total review costs be less than twice the hourly rate
shown in Sec. 170.20.

* * * * * * *
5. Section 170.31 is revised to read as follows:

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

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

Schedule of Materials Fees
[See footnotes at end of table]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category of materials licenses and type of fees
\1\ Fee 2 3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Special nuclear material:
A. Licenses for possession and use of 200
grams or more of plutonium in unsealed
form or 350 grams or more of contained U-
235 in unsealed form or 200 grams or more
of U-233 in unsealed form. This includes
applications to terminate licenses as well
as licenses authorizing possession only:
License, Renewal, Amendment............ Full Cost.
Inspections Full Cost.
B. Licenses for receipt and storage of
spent fuel at an independent spent fuel
storage installation (ISFSI):
License, Renewal, Amendment............ Full Cost.
Inspections............................ Full Cost.
C. Licenses for possession and use of
special nuclear material in sealed sources
contained in devices used in industrial
measuring systems, including x-ray
fluorescence analyzers: \4\
Application--New license............... $580.
Amendment.............................. $390.
D. All other special nuclear material
licenses, except licenses authorizing
special nuclear material in unsealed form
in combination that would constitute a
critical quantity, as defined in Sec.
150.11 of this chapter, for which the
licensee shall pay the same fees as those
for Category 1A: \4\
Application--New license............... $780.
Amendment.............................. $300.
E. Licenses or certificates for
construction and operation of a uranium
enrichment facility:
License, Renewal, Amendment............ Full Cost.
Inspections............................ Full Cost
2. Source material:
A. (1) Licenses for possession and use of
source material in recovery operations
such as milling, in-situ leaching, heap-
leaching, refining uranium mill
concentrates to uranium hexafluoride, ore
buying stations, ion exchange facilities
and in processing of ores containing
source material for extraction of metals
other than uranium or thorium, including
licenses authorizing the possession of
byproduct waste material (tailings) from
source material recovery operations, as
well as licenses authorizing the
possession and maintenance of a facility
in a standby mode:
License, Renewal, Amendment............ Full Cost.
Inspections............................ Full Cost.
(2) Licenses that authorize the receipt of
byproduct material, as defined in Section
11e(2) of the Atomic Energy Act, from
other persons for possession and disposal
except those licenses subject to fees in
Category 2.A.(1).
License, renewal, amendment............ Full Cost.
Inspections............................ Full Cost.

[[Page 29209]]

(3) Licenses that authorize the receipt of
byproduct material, as defined in Section
11e(2) of the Atomic Energy Act, from
other persons for possession and disposal
incidental to the disposal of the uranium
waste tailings generated by the licensee's
milling operations, except those licenses
subject to the fees in Category 2.A.(1):
License, renewal, amendment............ Full Cost.
Inspections............................ Full Cost.
B. Licenses which authorize the possession,
use and/or installation of source material
for shielding:
Application--New license............... $130.
Amendment.............................. $290.
C. All other source material licenses:
Application--New license............... $3,700.
Amendment.............................. $580.
3. Byproduct material:
A. Licenses of broad scope for possession
and use of byproduct material issued
pursuant to Parts 30 and 33 of this
chapter for processing or manufacturing of
items containing byproduct material for
commercial distribution:
Application--New license............... $3,900.
Amendment.............................. $550.
B. Other licenses for possession and use of
byproduct material issued pursuant to Part
30 of this chapter for processing or
manufacturing of items containing
byproduct material for commercial
distribution:
Application--New license............... $1,600.
Amendment.............................. $580.
C. Licenses issued pursuant to Secs.
32.72, 32.73, and/or 32.74 of this chapter
authorizing the processing or
manufacturing and distribution or
redistribution of radiopharmaceuticals,
generators, reagent kits and/or sources
and devices containing byproduct material.
This category does not apply to licenses
issued to nonprofit educational
institutions whose processing or
manufacturing is exempt under 10 CFR
170.11(a)(4). These licenses are covered
by fee Category 3D:
Application--New license............... $7,100.
Amendment.............................. $650.
D. Licenses and approvals issued pursuant
to Secs. 32.72, 32.73, and/or 32.74 of
this chapter authorizing distribution or
redistribution of radiopharmaceuticals,
generators, reagent kits and/or sources or
devices not involving processing of
byproduct material. This category includes
licenses issued pursuant to Secs. 32.72,
32.73, and/or 32.74 to nonprofit
educational institutions whose processing
or manufacturing is exempt under 10 CFR
170.11(a)(4):
Application--New license............... $2,000.
Amendment.............................. $440.
E. Licenses for possession and use of
byproduct material in sealed sources for
irradiation of materials in which the
source is not removed from its shield
(self-shielded units):
Application--New license............... $1,100.
Amendment.............................. $390.
F. Licenses for possession and use of less
than 10,000 curies of byproduct material
in sealed sources for irradiation of
materials in which the source is exposed
for irradiation purposes. This category
also includes underwater irradiators for
irradiation of materials where the source
is not exposed for irradiation purposes:
Application--New license............... $2,000.
Amendment.............................. $450.
G. Licenses for possession and use of
10,000 curies or more of byproduct
material in sealed sources for irradiation
of materials in which the source is
exposed for irradiation purposes. This
category also includes underwater
irradiators for irradiation of materials
where the source is not exposed for
irradiation purposes:
Application--New license............... $4,700.
Amendment.............................. $760.
H. Licenses issued pursuant to Subpart A of
Part 32 of this chapter to distribute
items containing byproduct material that
require device review to persons exempt
from the licensing requirements of Part 30
of this chapter, except specific licenses
authorizing redistribution of items that
have been authorized for distribution to
persons exempt from the licensing
requirements of Part 30 of this chapter:
Application--New license............... $2,800.
Amendment.............................. $1,000.
I. Licenses issued pursuant to Subpart A of
Part 32 of this chapter to distribute
items containing byproduct material or
quantities of byproduct material that do
not require device evaluation to persons
exempt from the licensing requirements of
Part 30 of this chapter, except for
specific licenses authorizing
redistribution of items that have been
authorized for distribution to persons
exempt from the licensing requirements of
Part 30 of this chapter:
Application--New license............... $4,500.
Amendment.............................. $1,100.
J. Licenses issued pursuant to Subpart B of
Part 32 of this chapter to distribute
items containing byproduct material that
require sealed source and/or device review
to persons generally licensed under Part
31 of this chapter, except specific
licenses authorizing redistribution of
items that have been authorized for
distribution to persons generally licensed
under Part 31 of this chapter:
Application--New license............... $1,800.
Amendment.............................. $310.
K. Licenses issued pursuant to Subpart B of
Part 32 of this chapter to distribute
items containing byproduct material or
quantities of byproduct material that do
not require sealed source and/or device
review to persons generally licensed under
Part 31 of this chapter, except specific
licenses authorizing redistribution of
items that have been authorized for
distribution to persons generally licensed
under Part 31 of this chapter:
Application--New license............... $1,000.
Amendment.............................. $350.

[[Page 29210]]

L. Licenses of broad scope for possession
and use of byproduct material issued
pursuant to Parts 30 and 33 of this
chapter for research and development that
do not authorize commercial distribution:
Application--New license............... $5,600.
Amendment.............................. $780.
M. Other licenses for possession and use of
byproduct material issued pursuant to Part
30 of this chapter for research and
development that do not authorize
commercial distribution:
Application--New license............... $1,900.
Amendment.............................. $640.
N. Licenses that authorize services for
other licensees, except:
(1) Licenses that authorize only
calibration and/or leak testing
services are subject to the fees
specified in fee Category 3P; and
(2) Licenses that authorize waste
disposal services are subject to the
fees specified in fee Categories 4A,
4B, and 4C:
Application--New license........... $2,100.
Amendment.......................... $510.
O. Licenses for possession and use of
byproduct material issued pursuant to Part
34 of this chapter for industrial
radiography operations:
Application--New license............... $4,400.
Amendment.............................. $700.
P. All other specific byproduct material
licenses, except those in Categories 4A
through 9D:
Application--New license............... $750.
Amendment.............................. $350.
4. Waste disposal and processing:
A. Licenses specifically authorizing the
receipt of waste byproduct material,
source material, or special nuclear
material from other persons for the
purpose of contingency storage or
commercial land disposal by the licensee;
or licenses authorizing contingency
storage of low-level radioactive waste at
the site of nuclear power reactors; or
licenses for receipt of waste from other
persons for incineration or other
treatment, packaging of resulting waste
and residues, and transfer of packages to
another person authorized to receive or
dispose of waste material:
License, renewal, amendment............ Full Cost.
Inspections............................ Full Cost.
B. Licenses specifically authorizing the
receipt of waste byproduct material,
source material, or special nuclear
material from other persons for the
purpose of packaging or repackaging the
material. The licensee will dispose of the
material by transfer to another person
authorized to receive or dispose of the
material:
Application--New license............... $2,600.
Amendment.............................. $540.
C. Licenses specifically authorizing the
receipt of prepackaged waste byproduct
material, source material, or special
nuclear material from other persons. The
licensee will dispose of the material by
transfer to another person authorized to
receive or dispose of the material:
Application--New license............... $2,300.
Amendment.............................. $230.
5. Well logging:
A. Licenses for possession and use of
byproduct material, source material, and/
or special nuclear material for well
logging, well surveys, and tracer studies
other than field flooding tracer studies:
Application--New license............... $3,600.
Amendment.............................. $850.
B. Licenses for possession and use of
byproduct material for field flooding
tracer studies:
License, renewal, amendment............ Full Cost.
6. Nuclear laundries:
A. Licenses for commercial collection and
laundry of items contaminated with
byproduct material, source material, or
special nuclear material:
Application--New license............... $6,600.
Amendment.............................. $1,000.
7. Medical licenses:
A. Licenses issued pursuant to Parts 30,
35, 40, and 70 of this chapter for human
use of byproduct material, source
material, or special nuclear material in
sealed sources contained in teletherapy
devices:
Application--New license............... $3,600.
Amendment.............................. $400.
B. Licenses of broad scope issued to
medical institutions or two or more
physicians pursuant to Parts 30, 33, 35,
40, and 70 of this chapter authorizing
research and development, including human
use of byproduct material, except licenses
for byproduct material, source material,
or special nuclear material in sealed
sources contained in teletherapy devices:
Application--New license............... $3,900.
Amendment.............................. $740.
C. Other licenses issued pursuant to Parts
30, 35, 40, and 70 of this chapter for
human use of byproduct material, source
material, and/or special nuclear material,
except licenses for byproduct material,
source material, or special nuclear
material in sealed sources contained in
teletherapy devices:
Application--New license............... $1,800.
Amendment.............................. $460.
8. Civil defense:
A. Licenses for possession and use of
byproduct material, source material, or
special nuclear material for civil defense
activities:
Application--New license............... $590.
Amendment.............................. $410.

[[Page 29211]]

9. Device, product, or sealed source safety
evaluation:
A. Safety evaluation of devices or products
containing byproduct material, source
material, or special nuclear material,
except reactor fuel devices, for
commercial distribution:
Application--each device............... $3,700.
Amendment--each device................. $610.
B. Safety evaluation of devices or products
containing byproduct material, source
material, or special nuclear material
manufactured in accordance with the unique
specifications of, and for use by, a
single applicant, except reactor fuel
devices:
Application--each device............... $2,200.
Amendment--each device................. $1,100.
C. Safety evaluation of sealed sources
containing byproduct material, source
material, or special nuclear material,
except reactor fuel, for commercial
distribution:
Application--each source............... $940.
Amendment--each source................. $630.
D. Safety evaluation of sealed sources
containing byproduct material, source
material, or special nuclear material,
manufactured in accordance with the unique
specifications of, and for use by, a
single applicant, except reactor fuel:
Application--each source............... $480.
Amendment--each source................. $160.
10. Transportation of radioactive material:
A. Evaluation of casks, packages, and
shipping containers:
Approval, Renewal, Amendment........... Full Cost.
Inspections............................ Full Cost.
B. Evaluation of 10 CFR Part 71 quality
assurance programs:
Application--Approval.................. $350.
Amendment.............................. $640.
Inspections............................ Full Cost.
11. Review of standardized spent fuel
facilities:
Approval, Renewal, Amendment........... Full Cost.
Inspections............................ Full Cost.
12. Special projects:\5\
Approvals and preapplication/ licensing Full Cost.
activities.
Inspections............................ Full Cost.
13. A. Spent fuel storage cask Certificate of
Compliance:
Approvals.............................. Full Cost.
Amendments, revisions, and supplements. Full Cost.
Reapproval............................. Full Cost.
B. Inspections related to spent fuel
storage cask
Certificate of Compliance.............. Full Cost.
C. Inspections related to storage of spent Full Cost.
fuel under Sec. 72.210 of this chapter.
14. Byproduct, source, or special nuclear
material licenses and other approvals
authorizing decommissioning, decontamination,
reclamation, or site restoration activities
pursuant to 10 CFR Parts 30, 40, 70, and 72 of
this chapter:
Approval, Renewal, Amendment........... Full Cost.
Inspections............................ Full Cost.
15. Import and Export licenses:
Licenses issued pursuant to 10 CFR Part 110
of this chapter for the import and export
only of special nuclear material, source
material, tritium and other byproduct
material, heavy water, or nuclear grade
graphite.
A. Application for export or import of high
enriched uranium and other materials,
including radioactive waste, which must be
reviewed by the Commissioners and the
Executive Branch, for example, those
actions under 10 CFR 110.40(b). This
category includes application for export
or import of radioactive wastes in
multiple forms from multiple generators or
brokers in the exporting country and/or
going to multiple treatment, storage or
disposal facilities in one or more
receiving countries.
Application-new license................ $8,100.
Amendment.............................. $8,100.
B. Application for export or import of
special nuclear material, source material,
tritium and other byproduct material,
heavy water, or nuclear grade graphite,
including radioactive waste, requiring
Executive Branch review but not
Commissioner review. This category
includes application for the export or
import of radioactive waste involving a
single form of waste from a single class
of generator in the exporting country to a
single treatment, storage and/or disposal
facility in the receiving country.
Application-new license................ $5,000.
Amendment.............................. $5,000.
C. Application for export of routine
reloads of low enriched uranium reactor
fuel and exports of source material
requiring only foreign government
assurances under the Atomic Energy Act.
Application--new license............... $2,900.
Amendment.............................. $2,900.
D. Application for export or import of
other materials, including radioactive
waste, not requiring Commissioner review,
Executive Branch review, or foreign
government assurances under the Atomic
Energy Act. This category includes
application for export or import of
radioactive waste where the NRC has
previously authorized the export or import
of the same form of waste to or from the
same or similar parties, requiring only
confirmation from the receiving facility
and licensing authorities that the
shipments may proceed according to
previously agreed understandings and
procedures.
Application--new license............... $1,300.
Amendment.............................. $1,300.

[[Page 29212]]

E. Minor amendment of any export or import
license to extend the expiration date,
change domestic information, or make other
revisions which do not require in-depth
analysis, review, or consultations with
other agencies or foreign governments.
Amendment.............................. $190.
16. Reciprocity:
Agreement State licensees who conduct
activities under the reciprocity
provisions of 10 CFR 150.20.
Application (initial filing of Form $1,100.
241).
Revisions.............................. $200.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ T

[Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.]

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A97-13777. Public record. Not legal advice.