ML22244A173

Comment (1) of Tony Brown on Behalf of Nuclear Energy Institute on Industry Comments on Draft Appendices to NUREG/BR-0058, Revision 5, Regulatory Analysis Guidelines of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

ML22244A173
Person / Time
Site:	Nuclear Energy Institute
Issue date:	08/31/2022
From:	Tony Brown Nuclear Energy Institute
To:	NRC/ADM/PMAE
References
87FR40280 00001, NRC-2017-0091, NUREG/BR-0058 R5
Download: ML22244A173 (3)

Text

9/1/22, 2:05 PM blob:https://www.fdms.gov/204d9773-67ae-4c3b-96cf-d5b6d22a72dd SUNI Review Complete As of: 9/1/22, 2:03 PM Template=ADM-013 E-RIDS=ADM-03 Received: August 31, 2022 PUBLIC SUBMISSION ADD: Pamela Noto, Status: Pending_Post Tracking No. l7i-1qmf-fipa Mary Neely Comment (1) Comments Due: September 06, 2022 Publication Date: Submission Type: Web 7/6/2022 Citation: 87 FR Docket: NRC-2017-0091 40280 Regulatory Analysis Guidelines Comment On: NRC-2017-0091-0012 Regulatory Analysis Guidelines Document: NRC-2017-0091-DRAFT-0014 Comment on FR Doc # 2022-14287 Submitter Information Email: atb@nei.org Organization: Nuclear Energy Institute General Comment See attached file(s)

Attachments 08-31-22_NRC_NEI Comments on NUREG-BR-0058-Appendix K and L blob:https://www.fdms.gov/204d9773-67ae-4c3b-96cf-d5b6d22a72dd 1/1

TONY BROWN Technical Advisor, Regulatory Affairs 1201 F Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20004 NUCLEAR ENERGY INSTITUTE P: 202.739.8087 mab@nei.org nei.org August 31, 2022 Office of Administration Mail Stop: TWFN-7-A60M U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 ATTN: Program Management, Announcements and Editing Staff Submitted via Regulations.gov

Subject:

Industry Comments on Draft Appendices to NUREG/BR-0058, Revision 5, Regulatory Analysis Guidelines of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Docket ID NRC-2017-0091 Project Number: 689

Dear Program Management,

Announcements and Editing Staff:

On behalf of the Nuclear Energy Institutes (NEI) 1 members (hereinafter referred to as industry), we 0F appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on the Draft Appendices K and L to NUREG/BR-0058, Revision 5, Regulatory Analysis Guidelines of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, [ADAMS ML22175A202, ML22175A203]. The guidance found in these draft appendices is used by the NRC staff when performing cost-benefit analyses. We appreciate the staffs continued efforts to develop these documents with a data-driven approach and a risk-informed perspective to support NRC rulemakings. We recognize that these appendices are generic guidance, and our comments reflect this.

Regarding Appendix L, Replacement Energy Costs, we note that in conducting this analysis, the NRC is only considering the wholesale replacement cost of electricity, as described on Page L-1, Line 7. OMB Circular A-4 2 directs that analyses should include all costs accruing to the public as the result of an action. NRC should 1F expand this analysis to include the impacts of replacing nuclear energy with sources that have associated air 1

The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) is responsible for establishing unified policy on behalf of its members relating to matters affecting the nuclear energy industry, including the regulatory aspects of generic operational and technical issues. NEIs members include entities licensed to operate commercial nuclear power plants in the United States, nuclear plant designers, major architect and engineering firms, fuel cycle facilities, nuclear materials licensees, and other organizations involved in the nuclear energy industry.

2 https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-4 content/uploads/legacy_drupal_files/omb/circulars/A4/a-4.pdf NUCLEAR. CLEAN AIR ENERGY

Program Management, Announcements and Editing Staff August 31, 2022 Page 2 and climate pollutants. In addition, the analysis should include the full economic impact of removing a plant from service and not just the impact on wholesale prices.

Additionally, Appendix L assumes that replacement energy will always be available with the only impact being a change in price, as describe on Page L-2, Line 18. This is not always the case. The analysis should be expanded to include situations where replacement power is not available and calculate the resulting costs from system-wide shortages in power resulting from plant closure.

Finally, Section L.3.2 assumes long-term benefits from regulatory action but ignores the possibility that a plant owner may make changes on their own. For example, if a regulatory action only accelerates the timeline of an action already planned by the plant owner, then the expected present value of averted replacement energy costs should be reduced.

If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at 202.739.8087 or mab@nei.org.

Sincerely, Tony Brown cc: Pamela Noto, NRR, NRC