ML20136G290
| ML20136G290 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/07/1985 |
| From: | Matthews D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | Malaro J NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20136D809 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-85-653 NUDOCS 8508130001 | |
| Download: ML20136G290 (2) | |
Text
>,WES
- p. .m'o, g4' UNITED STATES 2 o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{' 9 ,E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20$55
%;*..../ g AUG 7 1985 MEMORANDUM FOR: James C. Malaro, Chief Regulatory Analysis and Materials Risk Branch Division of Risk Analysis and Operations Office of Research FROM: David B. Matthews, Chief Emergency Preparedness Branch Division of Emergency Preparedness and Engineering Response Office of Inspection and Enforcement
SUBJECT:
INPUT TO REGULATORY ANALYSIS FOR EARTHQUAKE PAPER On Friday August 2, 1985, IE delivered its and FEMA's concurrence in the Commission paper titled, " Final Amendments to 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix E: Consideration of Earthquakes in Emergency Planning." This morning Bill Floyd, RES, asked Ed Podolak, IE, if we could supply input for the Regulatory Analysis by the end of the day.
Specifically, Mr. Floyd wanted estimates of the costs of the new requ1rements to FEMA, state and local governments, NRC, and licensees.
Regarding the cost of the new requirements to FEMA and state and local governments, we have asked Mr. Floyd to send the next draft of the Commission paper, which should be available Thursday, to Marshall Sanders, FEMA, by courier. We will ask Marshall if he can provide the costs to FEMA and state and local governments by Friday. It is unlikely that he will be able to respond on such short notice but he should be able to provide the data within two weeks.
Regarding the cost of the new requirements to NRC, we estimate approximately 6 FTE spread over two years for the review of amendments to the emergency plans for operating reactors by the regions. This is somewhat less than one person-month per site. It considers that some sites will have an elaborate TERA type study even though that level of analysis is not required. This is presently not budgeted.
Regarding the cost of the new requirements to licensees, we propose the following cost categories and provide a preliminary estimate of the dollar value. The cost categories and estimates should be checked with at least a few licensees and the methodology should be reviewed by NRC's Cost Analysis Group.
Contact:
Edward M. Podolak, IE 1 492-7290 0
% T1.3%$ W + 2PP
AUG 7 1985 James C. Malaro 1. Transp d on Cost ($)
radio-equipped four-wheel drive vehicles TOK - 200K or contracts for transportation (vehicles or helicopters)
- 2. Comunications
- a. Workers (sophisticatedbeepers) 0 - 50K
- b. Offsite authorities (upgraded radios) 0 - 50K
- 3. Alternate Routes Study (may be state and local cost) 0 - 100K
- 4. Update Emergency Plans and Procedures 10K - 100K 20K - 500K The lower value is based upon use of existing equipment, contracts for transpor-tation, and modest upgrades to emergency procedures. Although this cost analysis is crude, we currently believe that the new requirements will not exceed one-half million dollars per site.
hi David B. Matthews, Chief Emergency Preparedness Branch Division of Emergency Preparedness and Engineering Response Office of Inspection and Enforcement O
-_- _ . - . . . ,-