ML20136D731
Text
,
f.
'i g,J
/
MAY 7 E5 MEMORANDUM FOR: Guy A. Arlotto, Director Division of Engineering Technology Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research 1
^'
FROM:
Edwin G. Triner, Director Division of Budget and Analysis Office of Resource Management
SUBJECT:
COST ANALYSIS OF REVISIONS TO 10 CFR PART 50, APPENDIX J.
" LEAK TESTS FOR PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CONTAINMENTS OF LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS" w
In December 1984 the Cost Analysis Group (CAG) was requested by the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) to prepare a cost analysis in support of proposed revisions to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J.
Our final report is attached. Because of its potential value and interest to all nuclear 2
utilities, we propose issuing the final report as a NUREG.
In sumary, the report focuses on all differences between the existing and proposed Appendix J and identifies eleven substantive areas where quantifiable impacts will likely result. Our test estimate is that Appendix J revisions will result in cost savings ranging from about $100 million to $160 million, and increase routine occupational exposure on the order of 10,000 person-rem.
These estimates capture the total impact to industry and the NRC over the assumed operating life of all existing and planned future power reactors. All dollar impacts projected to occur in future years have been present worthed at discount rates ranging from 5% to 10%. Following is a brief description of the projected impacts to the NRC and the nuclear power industry. Sumary tables which depict results for each affected value-impact attribute are aise attached.
]
For the NRC, total costs on the order of $4 million are projected, principally due to increased man-power efforts associated with technical specification revisions and reviews of Corrective Action Plans. Of this $4 million, about
$3 million is incurred up front during implementation, and the remainder represents the present worth of all NRC costs incurred over the operating life of the reactor population, For industry, relatively small implementation costs of about $3 million to u
$4 million are projected due to preparation of technical specification changes less savings associated with reduced exemption requests. The major industry impact occurs during the operating life of the power reactor population where present worth savings on the order of $106 million to $173 million are projected. Although increased operating costs are also identified, these i
costs are outweighed by significant savings in replacement energy costs.
h12 56 851022 0g 36 neuB5.-a61
~ ^ ^
Guy A. Arlotto 2-Savings in replacement energy costs result because several of the revisions will reduce the expected frequency of Type A Tests which currently require 3 to 5 days of reactor downtime per test.
Finally, a 10,000 person-rem increase in routine occupational exposure is estimated over the operating life of the power reactor population primarily due to increased maintenance efforts in implementing Corrective Action Plans, and the industry's ability to substitute Type B and C Tests for Type A Tests.
On a per reactor-year basis, this represents an average increase in occupa-tional exposure of approximately 0.4%.
l It should be noted, that the Executive Summary from the attached report has already been incorporated into the Regulatory Analysis and serves as the quantifiable portion of the value-impact assessment.
f I
r Edwin G. Triner, Director Division of Budget and Analysis Office of Resource Management
'i
Attachment:
As stated cc w/ attachment:
Robert Minogue, RES James Sniezek, DEDROGR James Taylor, IE James Richardson, MSEB Gunter Arndt MSEB Anthony DiPalo, RAMRB Jack Roe, DED0 Learned Barry, RM Ronald Scroggins, RM Sidney Feld, RM Brian Richter, RM
-y
-~r e%c w.,
l..".
~
TABLE 1.1 Sumary of Impacts Due to Proposed Revision of 10 CFR 50, Appendix J _ 5% Discount Rate IMPACTS BEST HIGH LOW ESTIMATE ESTIMATE ESTIMATE i
J Industry Implementation 6
Cost (10 3)
(-)3.5
(-) 1.4
(_) 5.5
{
Industry Operating Cost (10 $)
172.8 305.3 40.2 0
0 NRC Implementation Cost (10 $)
(-) 3.2
(_) 3.0
(-)3.4 6
NRC Operating Cost (10 $)
(_) 1.2
(_) 1.1
(-) 2.5 6
Het Dollar Impact (10 3) 164.3 299.8 28.8 Occupational Exposure (Routine)
(person-rem)
(-)9885
(_)18297
(-)l472 3
TABLE 1.2 Summary of Impacts Due to Proposed Revision of 10 CFR Appendix J - 10% Discount Rate IMPACTS BEST HIGH LOW ESTIMATE ESTIMATE ESTIMATE 10gustry Implementation Cost In i
$)
(-) 3.5
(-) 1.4
(-) 5.5 6
Industry Operating Cost (10 $)
106.4 188.1 24.7 6
NRC Implementation Cost (10 $)
(-)3.2
(-) 3.0
(-) 3.4 6
NRC Operating Cost (10 $)
-) 1.2 '
(-) 0.7
(-) 1.7 6
Net Dollar Impact (10 $)
98.5 183.7 14.1 Occupational Exposure (Routine)'
(person-rem)
(-)9885
(_)18297
.(-)l472 NOTE:
(-) denotes increased costs or increased exposure; Dollar estimates represent the present worth of dollar impacts incurred over the remaining lifetime of all reactors (existing and planned; Estimate of occupational exposure (routine) represents total non-discounted
,,_.... <.... a...
a - --- a ae-u e-
~
-