ML19221A833
| ML19221A833 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/28/1979 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-0555, NUREG-0555-10.4.2, NUREG-555, NUREG-555-10.4.2, SRP-10.04.02, NUDOCS 7907090211 | |
| Download: ML19221A833 (6) | |
Text
Section 10.4.2 February 1979 ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARD REVIEW PLAN FOR ES SECTION 10.4.2 BENEFIT-COST BALANCE:
COSTS REVIEW INPUTS Environmental Report Sections 11 Summary Cost-Benefit Analysis Environmental Reviews 4
Environmental Impacts of Construction 5
Environmental Impacts of Station Operation 6
Environmental Measurements and Monitoring Programs 7
Environmental Impacts of Postuluted Accidents Involving Radioactive Materials
- 9. 3 Alternative Plant and Transmission Systems 10.1 Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts 10.2 Relationship between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity 10.3 Irreversible and Ir retrievable Commitments of Resources Standards and Guides None Other None REVIEW OUTPUTS Environmental Statement Sections 10.4.2 Benefit-Cost Balance: Costs Other Environmental Reviews 10.4.3 Benefit-Cost Balance: Summary I.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this environmental standard review plan (ESRP) is to direct the staff's identification and evale ', ion of the internal and external costs of construction and operation of the proposed project. The scope of the review directed by this plan will include (1) capital costs, fuel costs, operating and maintenance 109 '?zq 10.4.2-1 790709 6
February 1979 costs, decommissioning costs, and any other identified internal costs; (2) the external costs of impacts (e.g., loss of productivity, loss of wildlife habitat) identified in previous en,ironmental reviews; and (3) other external costs not associated with an identified environmental impact.
Costs will be identified for the applicant's proposed )roject and for any staf f-recommended alternatives to mitigate adverse impacts.
II.
REQUIRED DATA AND INFORMATION This part of the environmental review represents the final summation of all costs, either monetary or environmental (including social), that are predicted for the proposed project and for recommended staff alternatives. Consequently, all portions of the environmental review associated with these costs are to be considered by the reviewer of this section. The following data and information will usually be required:
A.
Predicted impacts of construction. This will include predicted impacts of the project as proposed and of staff-recommended meisures and controls to limit adverse impacts (from the ESRPs for Ed Section 4).
B.
Predicted impacts of operation, including predicted impacts of the pro-posed project and of staff-recommended measures and controls to limit adverse impacts (from the ESRPs for ES Section 5).
C.
Costs of the staff-recomroended modifications and additions to tho sito preparation and construction monitoring programs and preoperational monitoring programs (from ESRP 6.7).
D.
The environmental impacts of postulated accidents (from the ESRPs for ES Section 7).
E.
Construction and operating costs of the applicant's proposed project and of any alternatives recommended by the staff to avoid adverse impacts (from ESRP 9.3).
10.4.2-2 aq 109 oo-
February 1979 F.
Costs associated with the staff analysis ;f the relationship between short-term uses and lonp-term productivity (from ESRP 10.2).
G.
Costs associated with any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources (from ESRP 10.3).
III.
ANALYSIS PROCEDURE The internal and external costs to be considered by the reviewer will be based on the project as proposed by the applicant, including post-application modifications made in response to staff recommendations for measures to mitigate and control predicted adverse impacts. Where staf f recommendations have not been adopted by the applicant, the reviewer will identify and analyze internal and external costs for the project as proposed by the applicant and as modified by the staff recommendations.
A.
Internal Costs f.s a general rule, internal costs will be limited tc. capital costs (including the capital cost of added transmission lines), operating and maintenance costs, fuel costs, and decommissioning costs.
When appropriate, other cests may be classified as internal all such costs, either provided by the applicant or estimated by the staff, will be expressed in monetary terms. For all internal costs the reviewer will determine the present worth cost and 30 year levelized annual equivalent cost.
Present worth costs will be expressed in dollars of the first year of commercial operation of the first unit. Annual costs will be expressed in $/yr and mills /kWh for the first year of commercial operation of the first unit.
The reviewer will use methods and economic assumptions consistent with those used in ES Section 9.3, and will use the results of calculations provided by the reviewer of that section when available. Where plant capacity factor affects a value of an internal cost, the reviewer will determine the cost for both the high and low extremes of the range of plant capacity factors assumed in the review 109 250 10.4.2-3
February 1979 for ES Section 9.3.
The reviewer will sum the present worth values of the internal costs to arrive at a total present worth internal cost of the proposed project.
B.
External Costs The reviewer will determine the external costs of project construction and operation in consultation with the reviewers of ES Sections 4, 5, 6, and 7.
Each unmitigated adverse impact will be identified and tabulated, and its cost will be determined. The reviewar will consider the costs of mitigated adverse impacts, and will appropriately assign these as internal or external costs. Costs will be quantified in monetary or other appropriate terms whenever possible, and the significance of this cost determined on a regional
- basis. When monetary terms can be applied, they should be calculated for the same time (year) selected for the internal cost analysis.
Where external costs cannot be quantified, the reviewer will provide qualitative cost estimates for each such impact. The use of qualitative estimates should be minimized.
Examples of typical cost terms (shown for a loss of offsite agricultural production) that might be used follows:
Monetary:
" Annual loss of $4000.00 to soybean producers. The annual regional value of this crop to producers is $200,000.00."
Quantitative:
" Annual loss of 50 hectares of soybean cropland. The regional cropland used for soybean production averages 300 hectares."
Qualitative:
" Moderate impact to regional production of soybeans."
IV.
EVALUATION A.
The reviewer will ensure that appropriate internal costs have been identi-fied and quantified. The reviewer will also ensure that quantification of these costs is correct and consistent.
A See ESRPs 2.2.3 and 2.5.2 for definitions of " region."
r*
n 10.4.2-4
February 1979 B.
For external costs, the reviewer's evaluation will ensure that:
1.
Adverse impacts requiring mitigation or avoidance have been identified.
2.
The cost value assigned to each impact is appropriate.
3.
The relative significance of each cost has been established and is appropriat,e to the impact.
4.
All unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified in ES Section 10.1 have been considered and assigned cost values.
5.
All other external costs (e.g., resource commitments) not asso-ciated with an identified environmental impact have been considered.
C.
The reviewer will ensure that any transfer payment (e.g., tax) listed as a benefit in ES Section 10.4.1 has a corresponding cost considered in this section.
D.
When costs of measures and controls to mitigate or of alternatives to avoid environmental impacts have been considered, the reviewer wil? ensure that all such costs have been presented in a manner that permits their direct com-parison with corresponding costs of project elements as proposed by the applicant.
V.
INPUT TO THE ENVIRONMENIAL STATEMENT This sectinn of the environmental statement should be planned to accompiish the following objectives:
(1) public disclosure of the costs of the proposed project, (2) presentation of the basis for the staff analysis, and (3) presenta-tion of the staff conclusions as to the relative significance of the costs. The fellowing information will usually be included in ES Section 10.4.2:
A.
Each identified internal cost will be described and the method used to obtain the described value (e.g., present worth cost) will be outlined. Reference 109
?~2 10.4.2-5
February 1979 to other ES sections may be used (when appropriate) to present the basis for the staff analysis.
A tabular presentation of the internal costs is recommended; where the information to be presented would be included in a similar table prepared for ES Section 10.4.3, reference to that table may be used in place of a table for this section.
B.
Each external cost associated with an environmental impact will be described, the corresponding environmental statement section will be referenced, and the method used to develop the cost data will be described nr referenced.
For quantified costs, the relationship (significance) of the cost to the regional value of the impacted parameter will be provided. Where costs :annot be quantified, the reviewer will provide an estimate of the significance of the cost as it relates to regional values. Cost data may be provided in tabular form or referenced to an equivalent table (if provided) for ES Section 10.4.3.
C.
Where staf f-recom/nended alternatives have been analyzed, a cost com-parison for the sta'f's recorrmendations and the applicant's proposal will be pro-vided.
The reviewer will reference the appropriate environmental statement sec-tion describing the impact and the ES Section 9.3 analysis comparing the applicant's proposal and the staf f recommended alternative.
The reviewer will provide input to the following ES section:
Section 10.4.3.
The reviewer will provide inputs to the reviewer of ES Sec-tion 10.4.3 as required to conduct and presenc the final benefit-cost balance for the proposed project.
VI.
REFERENCES None
~-
10.4.2-6