ML17262A548
| ML17262A548 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/11/1979 |
| From: | Levine S Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| RIL-0045 | |
| Download: ML17262A548 (5) | |
Text
~-**
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Harold R. Denton, Director FROM:
SUBJECT:
Introduction Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Saul Levi.ne, Di rector Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research RESEARCH INFORMATION LETTER #45 - THE CONCEPT COMPUTER CODE AND CAPITAL COSTS FOR BOILING WATER REACTOR PLANTS This memorandum transmits the results of completed research updating and expanding the CONCEPT computer code for forecasting capital costs of boiling water reactor plants. The work was performed by United Engineers and Constructors, Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania under the direction.of the Environmental Effects Research Branch of RES in response to a research request from your office (RR-NRR 76-6).
- In 1971 the Atomic Energy Commission authorized power plant investment cost studies, which culminated in the WASH-1230 reports (1000 MWe Central Station Power Plants - Investment Cost Study) published in 1972. Their purpose was to facilitate policy and economic decisions about electric generation facilities in the public and private sectors. The WASH-1230 report series consists of five volumes:
Pressurized Water Reactor, Boiling Water Reactor, Coal-Fired, Oil-Fired and High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor power plants. National priorities on energy, the regulatory environment and the cost of.labor, equipment and material have changed significantly. These. changes dictated the necessity of updating this series of studies, and expanding the scope to consider the fuel cycle and the total generating cost.
As a result, a program to study, reassess and produce a new set of updated reports was authorized and undertaken.
The current series includes investment cost reports for a Pressurized Water Reactor Plant, a Boiling Water Reactor Plant, High Sulfur Coal Plants, and Low Sulfur Coal Plants. *The Oil Fired Power Plant Study was not up-dated because utilities are not expected to build significant numbers of these plants, and the High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor Plant Study was not updated because these reactors arenot now being marketed.
Investment cost reports on multi-unit stations and for different cooling system types are included.
In addition, the series addresses fuel supply investment costs and total generating costs for both nuclear and coal fired power pl ants.
..~
Harold The studies in these series have a uniform set of economic and technical criteria and a uniform accounting system as contained in.Guide for Economic Evaluation of Nuclear Reactor* Plant Designs, NUS-531, Jan*uary 1969.
The investment cost estimates in these series are developed for reference plants constructed at a hypothetical site called 11Middletown, USA.
11 The reference investment and total generating cost estimates can be used for baseline comparisons of different generating systems.
However, the major use of the investment cost data is as input to the CONCEPT computer code which was developed for DOE at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL).
The CONCEPT computer program adjusts the baseline cost estimates contained in these studies for different *plant sizes, regional variations in material and craft labor rates, different construction schedule lengths,' and different escalation and interest rates. These adjustments result in pre-liminary sets of alternative cost estimates for electric power plants constructed anywhere in the United States.
Methodology The investment cost study for the 1190 MWe boiling water reactor (BWR) central station power plant consists of two volumes.
Volume I includes the Foreword and Summary, the Plant Description and the Detailed Cost Estimate.
Volume II contains the Drawings, Equipment List and Site Description.
Additionally, Volume II, Section 6 presents the 11Site Description 11 and major ground rules used in this study as follows:
The reference plant design is based on the General Electric,Technical Reference Plant Design, the General Electric Standard Safety Analysis Report (GESSAR), the General Electric 238 Inch Reactor Pressure Vessel (RPV) Nuclear Island Study arrangements, and United Engineers ex-perience.
The reactor plant design is based on the General Electric references listed above.
Key plant parameters for the nuclear steam supply system (NSSS) and steam and power conversion system are shown in Tables 2-1 and 2-2 in Section 2.
Cost data is based on prices effective July 1, 1976.
A full complement of licensing and design criteria circa January 1, 1976 are utilized. Safety classifications, seismic categories and design codes for the major structure and equipment are addressed in Section 2 and in the Equipment List-(Volume II, Section 5).
The detailed cost estimate is developed for a single unit station, with sufficient land area to accomodate an identical section unit.
l
. :f- \\,
Harold R.. Denton The design of the main heat rejection system is based upon the use of mechanical draft wet cooling towers.
The nuclear ultimate heat sink is also based on mechani"cal draft wet cooling towers.
Escalation and interest during construction are not included in the cost estimate.
The plant has an onsite nuclear reactor core storage capacity for 5/4 core.
The design uses two independent offsite sources of power; one at 500 kV and one at 230 kV.
The plant design life is 40 years duri_ng the first part of which it will be baseloaded.
Results The estimated total base construction cost for the 1190 f.Me BWR reference design is $582,748,330 or $490/kW based on Julv 1, 1976 prices. Summaries of the Detailed Cost Estimate at both the two and three digit account levels are shown in Tables 1-1 and 1-2 -respectively. The cost estimate does not include normal contingency costs for the equipment, material and labor components of the total base construction cost; nor does it include escalation and interest during construction. Other items not included in the cost estimate are listed in the beginning of Section 3, Detailed Cost Estimate.
As noted, for a specific s*ite, this baseline cost estimate must be adjusted for regional variations in material and labor rates, different construction schedule lengths, and escalation and interest rates incurred during construction.
Conclusions and Recommendations The total base construction cost for the BWR power plant (1061 MWe net output) reference in WASH-1230 was approximately $213,000,000 or $201/kW, based upon prices effective January 1971. Thus, the 1977 study indicates approximately a 143 percent increase in the cost of the plant in tenns of
$/kW.
The principal factors contributing to this increase are as follows:
Cost escalation from January 1971 to Julv 1976.
Regulatory requirements for additional engineering and safety features, and envtronmental considerations affecting plant des_ign.
These result in increased engineering, management, labor, equipment and
_material costs due to increased scope and lengthened schedules.
The increase in direct construction costs of the current plant design
.:/'
L.-1 Harold R~ Denton
--4-.
(.using th.e updated CONCEPT Code) over those estimated in WASH-1230 are dire.ctly related to increases in the auantities of the various con-struction commodities required for compliance with licensi,ng and design criteria circa January l, 1976. Following are examples of the differences in the quantities of some of these construction materials:
Concrete, cu. yds.
Reinforcing Steel, lbs.
Structural Steel, l~s.
WASH-1230 BWR 1061 MWe Net Output
( l /71) 115,000 22.0 x 10~
8~7 x 10 BWR 1190.MWe Net Output (1/76) 196,400 40.6 x 1066 20.8 x 10 Table 1-3 is a summary breakdown of the direct craft labor costs and.
hours for this reference design. The total direct craft labor cost of approximately $139,500,000 corresponds to an*average hourly rate of
$12.. 29.
Approximately 11,350,000 craft labor manhours average about 9.5 manhours/kW.
These compare to averages of $8.84/hour and 6.3 manhours/kW respectively for the earlier design reported in WASH-1230.
This study provides the NRC cost-benefit analyst with an updated methodology for forecasting investment costs of boiling water reactor plants. In the performance of NEPA obligations to evaluate alternatives to the proposed action, the NRR staff niust reach a conclusion as to the comparative costs of generating power among the feasible alternatives. For the past five years, the NRR staff has used the CONCEPT computer code to obtain fore-casts of plant capital costs. The code was developed and used on the premise that basic des.igns for a given type of steam power plant are sufficiently similar so that capital costs for any plant can be reliably estimated given parametric speGifications for the regional cost variation, labor efficiency and interest cost..
The study and its methodologies have been reviewed extensively while in progress by the RES project manager and various staff members from NRR.
RES recommends that the updated methodologv be used by NRR for application to the identified regulatory need (RR-NRR 76-6).. Technical questions related to these results may be directed to David Barna at 427-4358.
bd..b Office of Nuclear Regulatorv Research
Enclosures:
- 1.
NUREG-0242, Volume l
- 2.
NUREG-0242, Volume 2
/
- - Harold..
(using the updated CONCEPT Code) over those est1.mated tn WASH-1230 af'e directly related to increases tn the quantities of the various eon-struct1on commodities required for complfance with licensing and :des1ift *
- cr1ter1a circa January 1. 1976. Following are examples of the differences fn the quantities of some of these construction materials:
Concrete, cu. yds.
Reinforcing Steel, lbs.
Structural Steel. lbs.
WASH* 1230 BWR
.. BWR
- 1061 M4e Net OutPut * **.1190 Mie Net Output*
- I o
- 0£711. WP 1 p
.. (1/76)
- 0 1;~*;
- *11s,ooo 22.0 x 161 '.:
- 8.7.x.10 196 400
,s:* *.
40.6 )C *,~.
20.,8 x 106
.. ',.;.. ~*-... **.*.*
Table 1-3.1s a summary breakdown of the direct c:raft labor costs end.. ** *-
- hours for this reference design. The total direct craft labor cost of. *... *.
- pproximately $139.600.000 corresponds to an average hourly. rate of * :*
$12,.29. Approx1mately 11,350,000 craft labor manhours average about.
1 I
9.. 5 manhours/kW. These compare to averages of $8.84/hour and 6.3 manhours/kW respectively for the earlier design reported fn WASH-1230.
Thts study provides the NRC cost-benefit analyst wfth an updated methodology *.
for forecasting investment costs of bo111ng water reactor plants. In the -. '
perfonnance of NEPA obligations to evaluate alternatives to the proposed action. the NRR staff must reach 1 conclusion as to the comparative eosts of generating power among the feasible alternatives. For the past five years, the NRR staff has used the CONCEPT computer code to obtain fore-casts of plant capital costs. The code was developed and used on the
- premise that basic designs for a gfven type of steam power plant are sufff c1ently similar so that capital costs for any plant can be reliably estimated given parametric spec1f1cat1ons for the regional cost variation.
labor eff1c1ency and interest cost.
-~~,
The study and its methodologies have been rev1e'1ed extensively while 1n progress by the RES project manager and various staff members from NRR.
RES rec0111nends that the updated methodology be used by NRR for app1f cat1on to the 1dent1f1ed regulatory need (RR-NRR 76-6)... Technical questfons *,
- related to these results may be ci1retted to ~vid Barna at 427-43~8~
- ~:.-.. ;_.-
DISTRIBUTION:
Central Fi le JDavis CHRONO OBassett PfigrnaI Si~cg l>~.-:~ *....
- .6Jlul Levine.. * ;. *. '.*
~. __ :'.-J:.....-..
CIRC FArsenault DBarna RScroggina FSwanberg, Jr.QBudnitz Saul Levine, -Di.rector
-Office of Nue1ear Regulatory Research s:*
"" ~;.***.
,j
'". ~
"i.
"I
Enclosures:
Slevine S~ES I
- 1. NUREG-0242, Volume 1
. oB'ille-d
']**
- 2.
NUR G.. 0242, Volum 2 atc;'/79
.~' ~
~---~~~~--\\..\\-,,.---..~-t-"t~~--.-~~~~T-':"~-:--~-;;:~~~-:--.-~-=-~-
'I