ML102380594
| ML102380594 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 03/31/1978 |
| From: | Michael Orr NRC/RES/DE/RGDB |
| To: | |
| Orr M RES/ RGDB 301-251-7495 | |
| References | |
| DG-1245 RG 1.127, Rev.2 | |
| Download: ML102380594 (2) | |
Text
Page 1 REGULATORY ANALYSIS Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1245 Inspection of Water-Control Structures Associated With Nuclear Power Plants (Proposed Revision 2 of Regulatory Guide 1.127, dated March 1978)
Statement of the Problem In the years since the last revision of this regulatory guide, several changes have been made to dam safety laws and to the requirements imposed on safety programs. This draft guide reflects current NRC positions and expectations for inservice inspection programs.
Therefore, revision of this regulatory guidance is necessary to inform the public of the current NRC expectations for a dam safety inspection program.
Objective The objective of this action is to ensure that inadequate or outdated inspection programs do not compromise public health and safely.
Alternative Approaches The NRC staff considered the following alternative approaches:
Do not revise Regulatory Guide 1.127.
Revise Regulatory Guide 1.127.
Alternative 1: Do Not Revise Regulatory Guide 1.127 Under this alternative, the NRC would not revise guidance, and the current guidance would be retained. If the NRC does not take action, there would not be any changes in costs or benefit to the public, licensees, or the NRC. However, the no-action alternative would not address identified concerns with the current version of the regulatory guide. The NRC would continue to review each application on a case-by-case basis. This alternative provides a baseline condition from which any other alternatives will be assessed.
Alternative 2: Revise Regulatory Guide 1.127 Under this alternative, the NRC would revise Regulatory Guide 1.127, taking into consideration the increased knowledge of dam inspection programs, advances in the technology available, and revisions to dam safety laws that have occurred since the previous revision.
Page 2 One benefit of this action is that it would enhance public safety by providing a greater degree of assurance of dam integrity.
The impact to the NRC would be the costs associated with preparing and issuing the revision.
The impact to the public would be the voluntary costs associated with reviewing and providing comments to the NRC during the public comment period. The value to NRC staff and its applicants would be the benefits associated with enhanced efficiency and effectiveness in using a common guidance document as the technical basis for license applications and other interactions between the NRC and its regulated entities.
Conclusion Based on this regulatory analysis, the NRC staff recommends revision of Regulatory Guide 1.127. The staff concludes that the proposed action will enhance dam safety for those reactor units that depend on a dam for backup power or cooling. It could also lead to cost savings for the industry, especially with regard to the increased efficiency of inspections and to the reduced cost for compliance derived from standard inspection plans.