Skip to main content

NRC Publishes Fee Schedule for Fiscal 2005

The NRC published its fee schedule for licensing, inspection and annual fees it charges to applicants and licensees in today's edition of the Federal Register. The following schedule becomes effective on July 25. For a PDF version of the press release announcing the changes, click here.

Class/category of licenses
Fee
Operating Power Reactors (including Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor Decommissioning annual fee)
$3,155,000
Spent Fuel Storage/Reactor Decommissioning
$159,000
Test and Research Reactors (Nonpower Reactors)
$59,500
High Enriched Uranium Fuel Facility
$5,449,000
Low Enriched Uranium Fuel Facility
$1,632,000
UF6 Conversion Facility
$699,000
Rare Earth Mills
$73,700
Transportation:

Users/Fabricators
$80,900
Users Only
$4,300
Typical Materials Users:

Radiographers
$12,800
Well Loggers
$4,100
Gauge Users (Category 3P)
$2,500


Technorati tags: , , , , ,

Comments

Rod Adams said…
Eric:
Thanks for publishing this prominently.
As the leader of a company that would like to build atomic engines that are a couple of orders of magnitude smaller than current central station electrical power plants, I advocate a revision of the fee structure to take into account the fact that not all power reactors are the same.
Our proposed plants are approximately the same size or even smaller than current test reactors, but they are definitely designed to produce power, so that do not fall into the "nonpower" reactor category.
I hope your readers notice the huge gap in fees between the test reactor and the power reactor categories.
Rod Adams
http://www.atomicengines.com

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

Why Nuclear Plant Closures Are a Crisis for Small Town USA

Nuclear plants occupy an unusual spot in the towns where they operate: integral but so much in the background that they may seem almost invisible. But when they close, it can be like the earth shifting underfoot.

Lohud.com, the Gannett newspaper that covers the Lower Hudson Valley in New York, took a look around at the experience of towns where reactors have closed, because the Indian Point reactors in Buchanan are scheduled to be shut down under an agreement with Gov. Mario Cuomo.


From sea to shining sea, it was dismal. It wasn’t just the plant employees who were hurt. The losses of hundreds of jobs, tens of millions of dollars in payrolls and millions in property taxes depressed whole towns and surrounding areas. For example:

Vernon, Vermont, home to Vermont Yankee for more than 40 years, had to cut its municipal budget in half. The town closed its police department and let the county take over; the youth sports teams lost their volunteer coaches, and Vernon Elementary School lost th…