Quiero saber acerca de...

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 33 / Monday, February 22, 2021 / Proposed Rules
tkelley on DSKBCP9HB2PROD with PROPOSALS

can be found under ADAMS Accession No. ML20339A673. Standard use of an NRC form and amendments to the current regulations in 15.31 will increase efficiency by providing the licensees and applicants with clear guidelines and expectations for submitting a fee dispute. It will also eliminate ambiguity regarding the appropriate information needed for the NRC to consider and make a determination on a fee dispute.
In response to NEIMAs requirement that the NRC modify its regulations to provide licensees and applicants an opportunity to efficiently dispute or otherwise seek review and correction of errors in service fee invoices. The NRC
proposes to revise its regulations in 10
CFR part 15. Specifically the NRC is proposing revisions to 15.31, Disputed debts, with conforming amendments in 15.37, Interest, penalties, and administrative costs, 15.53, Reasons for suspending collection action, and changing 170.51, Right to review and appeal of prescribed fees, to Right to dispute assessed fees. The NRC also proposes to add a new regulation, 171.26, Right to dispute assessed fees, to 10
CFR part 171. These proposed changes outline the interactions between the submitter and the NRC. The proposed process will enhance understanding of the dispute process by setting out the process for submitting a fee dispute, the stages of the decisionmaking process while the dispute is under review, and the manner by which the NRC will notify a debtor after it makes a final determination on a dispute.
Additionally, the proposed revisions provide consistent terminology to differentiate fee disputes under 10 CFR
part 15 from fee exemptions under 10
CFR parts 170 and 171.
Assessment of Annual Fees for Future 10 CFR Part 50 Non-Power Production or Utilization Facility Licensees and for Small Modular Reactor Licensees The NRC proposes to amend 171.15a so that the assessment of annual fees commences after future nonpower production or utilization facility NPUF licensees have successfully completed startup testing and have provided written notification to the NRC. In addition, the NRC is proposing to rename the research and test reactors fee class the non-power production and utilization facility fee class, which would include currently operating research and test reactors and future NPUFs, such as non-reactor NPUF technologies. Finally, the NRC is proposing to amend 171.15e so that the assessment of annual fees for a small
VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:29 Feb 19, 2021

Jkt 253001

modular reactor SMR licensee commences after the successful completion of power ascension testing and the licensee provides written notification to the NRC. These proposed policy changes are consistent with the FY 2020 final fee rule that amended the timing of the assessment of annual fees for future 10 CFR part 50 power reactors and 10 CFR part 52 COL holders.
Currently, 171.15a, requires the NRC to assess annual fees to a test or research reactor excluding test or research reactors exempted under 171.11b when the NRC authorizes the licensee to use nuclear materials i.e., begin operating the reactor in accordance with its license. The NRC
has not established a policy for assessing 10 CFR part 171 annual fees to future non-reactor NPUF licensees e.g., SHINE Medical Technologies, LLC
SHINE; at this time, the NRC
currently assesses only 10 CFR part 170
service fees to prospective applicants for preapplication activities, construction permit holders i.e., SHINE and Northwest Medical Isotopes, LLC
NWMI and applicants for operating licenses i.e., SHINE for commercial NPUFs. While the NRCs fee regulations do not have a fee class for future nonreactor NPUF licensees, the NRC
historically has included budgeted resources for NWMI and SHINE within the research and test reactor fee class.
The budgeted resources for NWMI and SHINE not recovered in 10 CFR part 170
service fees previously were included in fee-relief. These resources for the development of a medical isotope production infrastructure are now excluded from the fee-recovery requirement under NEIMA as a fee-relief activity identified by the Commission.
In anticipation that the NRC could issue an operating license in the future, the NRC is proposing to assess annual fees under 171.15a to non-reactor NPUFs when they have notified the NRC of the successful completion of startup testing. As discussed previously, the NRC is also proposing to rename the research and test reactors fee class the non-power production and utilization facility fee class to account for new NPUF technologies not included in the research and test reactors fee class. This rule uses the term non-power production or utilization facility to have the same meaning as the definition used in SECY190062, Final Rule:
Non-power Production or Utilization Facility License Renewal ADAMS
Accession No. ML18031A000, dated June 17, 2019.4 The definition would 4 The NPUF final rule would also revise the definition of research reactor in 170.3 and 171.5

PO 00000

Frm 00015

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

10473

include production or utilization facilities, licensed under 50.21a, 50.21c, or 50.22, as applicable, that are not nuclear power reactors or production facilities within the meaning of paragraphs 1 and 2 of 50.2, which defines Production facility.
This definition includes currently operating and future research and test reactors and proposed medical radioisotope facilities that would be licensed under 10 CFR part 50. As such, non-reactor NPUF licensees, such as SHINE, would be included in the same annual fee class as currently operating research and test reactors that pay 10
CFR part 171 annual fees. This proposed approach is consistent with the current approach of combining limited numbers of similar facilities into a single annual fee category, where test reactors of which only one is currently operational are assessed the same 10 CFR part 171
annual fees as research reactors. In addition, the NRC expects that NPUF
facilities will request that a single license under 10 CFR part 50 authorize the operation of multiple utilization and/or production facilities. Based on the number of facilities authorized to operate under a single license, the number of staff hours dedicated to licensing and oversight activities for these facilities is not expected to differ significantly compared to those for the current operating fleet of NPUFs.
Furthermore, stakeholders have previously supported this approach regarding the assessment of 10 CFR part 171 annual fees for future NPUFs.
Therefore, a single annual fee would be appropriate even where an NPUF
licensee has multiple facilities operating under a single 10 CFR part 50 license.
SMR licenses can be issued under 10
CFR part 50 or 10 CFR part 52.
Currently, 171.15, requires the NRC to assess annual fees to a 10 CFR part 50
SMR licensee upon issuance of an operating license, or to a 10 CFR part 52
SMR COL holder after the Commission has made the finding under 52.103g for all licenses held for an SMR site. The annual fee would be determined using the cumulative licensed thermal power rating of all SMR units and the bundled unit concept. For a given site, the use of the bundled unit concept is to conform to other definitions in 10 CFR chapter I. The NRC is not proposing to change the definition of Research reactor in the specific exemption for federally-owned and State-owned research reactors in 170.11a9 or 171.11b2. The current definition in 171.11b2 is based on the language of OBRA90. Further, a substantively similar definition of research reactor was included in the provisions of NEIMA that relate to the NRCs fee recovery structure. Changing the definition of research reactor in 171.11b2 would therefore be inconsistent with NEIMA.

E:FRFM22FEP1.SGM

22FEP1