A Handbook For Cost Estimating: Do Not Microfilm Cover

.
TOVEDBYTIC m^zm NUREG/CR-3971

DO NOT MICROFILM ANL/EES-TM-265
COVER
A Handbook for Cost Estimating
A Method for Developing Estimates of Cost for

Generic Actions for Nuclear Power Plants
Prepared by J. R. Ball, S. Cohen, E. J. Ziegler
Argonne National Laboratory
S. Cohen and Associates, Inc.
United Engineers and Constructors, Inc.
Prepared for
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an

agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States
Government nor any agency Thereof, nor any of their employees,
makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal
liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or
usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process
disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately
owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product,
process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or
otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement,
recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any
agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein
do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States
Government or any agency thereof.
DISCLAIMER
Portions of this document may be illegible in

electronic image products. Images are produced
from the best available original document.
NOTICE
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States
Government Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, or any of their
employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal Itability of re-
sponsibility for any third party's use, or the results of such use, of any information, apparatus,
product or process disclosed m this report, or represents that its use by such third party would
not infringe privately owned rights
NOTICE
Availability of Reference Materials Cited in NRC Publications
Most documents cited in NRC publications will be available from one of the following sources:
1 The NRC Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, N W

Washington, DC 20555
2 The NRC/GPO Sales Program, U S Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

3 The National Technical Information Service, Springfield, V A 22161
Although the listing that follows represents the majority of documents cited in NRC publications.
It IS not intended t o be exhaustive
Referenced documents available for inspection and copying for a fee from the NRC Public Docu
ment Room include NRC correspondence and internal NRC memoranda, NRC Off ice of Inspection
and Enforcement bulletins, circulars, information notices, inspection and investigation notices.
Licensee Event Reports vendor reports and correspondence. Commission papers, and applicant and
licensee documents and correspondence
The following documents in the NUREG series are available for purchase from the NRC/GPO Sales
Program formal NRC staff and contractor reports, NRC sponsored conference proceedings, and
NRC booklets and brochures Also available are Regulatory Guides, NRC regulations in the Code of
Federal Regulations, and Nuclear Regulatory Commission Issuances
Documents available from the National Technical Information Service include NUREG series
reports and technical reports prepared by other federal agencies and reports prepared by the A t o m i c
Energy Commission, forerunner agency to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Documents available from public and special technical libraries include all open literature items,
such as books, journal and periodical articles, and transactions Federal Register notices, federal and
state legislation, and congressional reports can usually be obtained from these libraries.
Documents such as theses, dissertations, foreign reports and translations, and non NRC conference
proceedings are available for purchase from the organization sponsoring the publication cited
Single copies of NRC draft reports are available free, to the extent of supply, upon written request
to the Division of Technical Information and Document Control U S Nuclear Regulatory Com
mission Washington, DC 20555
Copies of industry codes and standards used in a substantive manner m the NRC regulatory process
are maintained at the NRC Library, 7920 Norfolk Avenue, Bethesda, Maryland, and are available
there for reference use by the public Codes and standards are usually copyrighted and may be
purchased from the originating organization or, if they are American National Standards, from the
American National Standards Institute, 1430 Broadway, New York, NY 10018
GPO Printed copy price $6 . 0 0

NOTICI
POHTIONS OF TH!S REPORT ABE tllCfilBlE.
It has been raprodiMd from tlie litst
avatlabia copy to permit the broadest NUREG/CR-3971
posslMe availalititty. ANL/EES-TM-265
A Handbook for Cost Estimating
1]UREG/CR--3 9 7 1
A Method for Developing Estimates of Costs for TI85 0 0 2 5 85
Manuscript Completed: August 1984

Date Published: October 1984
DISCLAIMER
Prepared by
J. R. Ball, S. Cohen*, E. Z. Ziegler** This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States
Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their
employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsi-
bility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or
9700 South Class Avenue process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Refer-
Argonne, IL 60439 ence herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark,
manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recom-
Subcontractors: mendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views
*S. Cohen and Associates, Inc. and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the
8200 Riding Ridge Place United States Government or any agency thereof.
McLean, VA 22102
and
**United Engineers and Constructors, Inc.

30 South 17th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19101
Prepared for
Division of Safety Technology
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
and
Cost Analysis Group
Office of Resource Management
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Washington, D.C. 20555
NRC FIN A2316 wsia
.)
VSmmm OF THIS DOCUMENT IS UNLIMtTED
CONTRIBUTORS
This report was prepared by Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) for the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The work was performed by the ANL Energy and
Environmental Systems Division, Special Projects and Industrial Applications Group, S.
Cohen and Associates, Inc., and United Engineers and Constructors, Inc.
The following individuals were the principal contributors to this project from
their respective organizations:
John R. Ball, Argonne National Laboratory

Sanford Cohen, S. Cohen and Associates, Inc.
E.J. Ziegler, United Engineers and Constructors, Inc.
1^
CONTENTS
SUMMARY ix
ABSTRACT 1
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Purpose 2
1.3 Problems with Estimating Generic Requirements 2
1.4 Scope of the Handbook 4
1.5 Assumptions About Users 4
1.6 Logic of Model Development 5
1.7 Organization of Handbook 6
2 PRESENTATION OF THE MODEL 9
2.1 Case Study Results 9

2.2 Overview of the Model 10
2.3 Detailed Model 13
2.4 Simplification of the Model 22
2.5 Applying the Model 28
3 FUNCTIONAL RESPONSES AND COST ELEMENTS 31
3.1 Functional Responses 31

3.2 Cost Elements 31
3.3 One-Time Vs. Periodic Costs 32
3.4 Descriptions of the Functional Responses 33
3.5 Simplifying Approximations 64
4 CAPITAL COST ACCOUNTING METHODOLOGY 67
4.1 Description of Energy Economic Data Base 67

4.2 Direct Plant Costs 69
4.3 Indirect Plant Costs 80
5 COST ACCOUNTING METHODOLOGY 95
5.1 Aggregating Capital Costs 95

5.2 Aggregating Periodic Costs 97
5.3 Total Present Value Lifetime Cost 98
6 COST ESTIMATE EXAMPLE: TECHNICAL SUPPORT CENTER 99
6.1 Introduction 99
6.2 Assumptions 99
6.3 Functional Response Flow Path 104
6.4 Technical Support Center Example Schedule 104
6.5 Technical Support Center Example Cost Estimate 106
6.6 Lessons Learned from the Example Problem 136
V
CONTENTS (Cont'd)
BIBLIOGRAPHY 138
APPENDIX A: Industry Cost Elements Resulting from the

Implementation of Multiplant NRC Requirements A-1
APPENDIX B: Commercial Nuclear Power Electric Generating Plants

in the United States B-1
APPENDIX C: EEDB Direct Cost Accounts -- Two-Digit Descriptions C-1
APPENDIX D: EEDB Indirect Cost Accounts — Two-Digit Description D-1
FIGURES
2.1 Illustration of the Three Parts of the Graphical Model 14
2.2 Graphical Model for a New Plant or a Plant under

Construction with None or Few of the Major Systems Installed 15
2.3 Graphical Model for Plant under Construction with Many

or Most of the Major Systems Installed 17
2.4 Graphical Model for Operating Plant 18
2.5 Collapsed Model for a Hardware Modification in a New Plant

or a Plant under Construction with None or Few of the Major
Systems Installed 23
2.6 Collapsed Model for a Hardware Modification in a Plant

under Construction with Many or Most of the Major Systems
Installed 24
2.7 Collapsed Model for a Hardware Modification in

an Operating Plant 25
2.8 Collapsed Model for a Shutdown with No Hardware Modifications

in an Operating Plant 29
4.1 Typical Structural Cost Elements 76
4.2 Typical System Cost Elements 77
4.3 A-E Engineering Logic Flow 81
4.4 Nuclear Steam Supply System Engineering Logic Flow 86
4.5 Construction Management Sector: Factors Affecting Costs,

Flow of Responsibility, and Cost Elements 90
vi
FIGURES (Cont'd)
5.1 Total Present Value Lifetime Cost Components 96
6.1 Technical Support Center Logic Flow Diagram 100
6.2 Technical Support Center Schedule 105
TABLES
2.1 List of Functional Responses 11
3.1 List of NRC Cost Elements 32
3.2 List of Non-NRC Cost Elements 33
4.1 Code of Accounts, Example of Levels of Detail 70
4.2 UE&C, Inc. Energy Economic Data Base Phase VI,

1139 MWe Pressurized Water Reactor 71
6.1 UE&C, Inc. Energy Economic Data Base Phase VI,
1139 MWe Pressurized Water Reactor 119
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
The NRC Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) has established a practice
of performing regulatory analyses, including analyses of the cost as well as the benefits,
of generic safety issues and of new or revised generic requirements. Generic safety
issues are evaluated to assist the NRC in establishing regulatory priorities as part of its
internal decision-making process. This handbook has been developed to assist the NRC
in: (a) preparing the types of cost estimates required by the Regulatory Analysis
Guidelines and internal NRC policy, and (b) estimating cost for the assignment of
priorities in the resolution of generic safety issues. This handbook is intended as a
roadmap through the complex process of structuring such a cost estimate, identifying the
major cost contributors, and identifying sources of cost data for estimating the
magnitude of the major cost contributors. The specific goals of the handbook are:
• To provide a consistent methodology and consistent set of

assumptions to assist the NRC user in preparing absolute as well as
comparative cost estimates of generic requirements for light-
water-reactor nuclear power plants.
• To identify all potentially significant cost elements associated with

generic requirements and characterize their significance.
• To provide an annotated bibliography of available cost data and

economic assumptions.
• To provide a step-by-step example estimate demonstrating the use

of the methodology and cost information.
For the purposes of this handbook, and consistent with the Regulatory Analysis
Guidelines, the monetary cost of generic requirements is defined as the net cost,
expressed in terms of the present value of total lifetime cost, incurred by the public,
industry, and government in implementing the requirement for all of the affected
plants. It should be stressed, however, that all potentially relevant cost considerations
are not addressed. For example, the handbook does not address societal costs such as the
effects on unemployment, industry viability, population exposure, and environmental
costs, nor the various other secondary costs that may result from implementing the
proposed requirement. Furthermore, the types of cost considerations addressed here will
be subject to modification based on actual NRC user experience with this handbook.
Thus, although on balance this handbook should be viewed as an important tool in
supporting the development of NRC cost analyses, it should not be considered the sole or
final source of such guidance.
IX
APPROACH
The overall approach used in developing this handbook was to establish a series of
sequential steps needed to prepare a total lifetime cost estimate, to provide the NRC
analysts with guidance in carrying out each step. The major steps involved in the cost
estimating process are:
1. Identify all potentially significant work packages (functional

responses) required to implement the requirement.
2. Identify all potentially significant cost elements associated with

each work package.
3. Obtain estimates for the cost of each cost element.
4. Organize and aggregate individual costs to obtain total plant cost.
5. Aggregate individual plant costs and other indirect costs to obtain

national lifetime cost of implementing the requirement.
The several chapters of the handbook deal with these steps and provide the NRC
cost analyst with methods, tools, guidance, and references to carry out the steps.
Chapter 2 of the handbook presents a generic graphical model of the
chronological activities required to implement an NRC requirement. The model
distinguishes between changes required for a future plant, a plant under construction, and
an operating plant.
Chapter 3 consists of a detailed discussion of each of the 49 functional responses

(work packages) in the model. The significance of each response is discussed. The cost
elements associated with each functional response are provided and discussed. Guidance
is provided, where possible, as to when certain cost elements are likely to be of major or
lesser significance. Guidelines on dealing with such important costs as backfitting,
rework, and labor cost for work in a radiation or congested environment are provided
where possible. For each cost element or group of elements, references are provided,
where possible, on sources of cost data available to the user. Also, where possible, rules-
of-thumb and cost factors are provided to assist the user in assigning realistic cost values
to each element.
Having identified and estimated the cost of the major cost elements for a
particular requirement. Chapter 4 instructs the user in how to organize and account for
all of the capital cost items. Capital costs are separated into direct and indirect costs.
Direct capital costs are organized using an existing nuclear plant cost data base
(the Energy Economic Data Base, or EEDB). The EEDB is described in detail, and typical
nuclear plant accounts, with cost values, are presented to show organization and to
illustrate for the user the relative magnitude of the costs in each of the various accounts
in a reference commercial PWR power plant. Guidance is provided on choosing the
X
appropriate level of aggregation of costs to meet the particular need of the case in
hand. Where possible, guidance is also provided on how to select the appropriate level of
detail for a particular estimate, so as to restrict the level of effort to that necessary for
the particular case under study.
A methodology for dealing with indirect capital costs is presented in the form of
cost models for engineering and design, nuclear supplier analysis, and construction
management activities. The methodology includes organization of cost data and
aggregation of detailed cost data for each of the models.
Chapter 5 instructs the user in the methods used to calculate the total, constant-
dollar, capital (one-time) cost; the total, constant-dollar, periodic cost; and finally the
total, constant-dollar, lifetime cost for the requirement being evaluated.
The total capital cost is simply the sum of the constant-dollar capital costs of
each of the major cost sectors evaluated in the previous chapters. The total periodic
cost is evaluated on a constant-dollar basis over the remaining life of the plant. This
chapter concludes with instructions on evaluating the total lifetime cost of the
requirements, either in terms of constant dollars, or preferably as an equivalent present-
worth value.
The final chapter of the handbook provides a step-by-step working example of

estimating the cost of providing a Technical Support Center for all commercial LWR
plants using the methods, references, and other information included in the handbook.
The requirement for providing a Technical Support Center is included in NUREG-0578,
"TMI-2 Lessons Learned Task Force Status Report and Short-Term Recommendations,"
dated July, 1979.
XI
1
A HANDBOOK FOR COST ESTIMATING
A Method for Developing Estimates of Costs for

ABSTRACT
This document provides overall guidance to assist the NRC in

preparing the types of cost estimates required by the Regulatory
Analysis Guidelines and to assist in the assignment of priorities in
resolving generic safety issues. The Handbook presents an overall
cost model that allows the cost analyst to develop a chronological
series of activities needed to implement a specific regulatory
requirement throughout all applicable commercial LWR power plants
and to identify the significant cost elements for each activity.
References to available cost data are provided along with rules of
thumb and cost factors to assist in evaluating each cost element, A
suitable code-of-accounts data base is presented to assist in
organizing and aggregating costs. Rudimentary cost analysis methods
are described to allow the analyst to produce a constant-dollar,
lifetime cost for the requirement. A step-by-step example cost
estimate is included to demonstrate the overall use of the Handbook.
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
For the past 3-4 years, the NRC has been performing regulatory analyses on
generic nuclear safety issues, including analyses of the cost of implementing any
requirement resulting from the resolution of such issues. The NRC Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation (NRR) has established a practice of performing regulatory analyses,
including analyses of the cost as well as the benefits of generic safety issues and of
proposed new or revised generic requirements.* In addition, cost and benefits are
evaluated to assist the NRC in establishing regulatory priorities as part of its internal
decision-making process concerning generic safety issues. In evaluating these priorities,
a method is used that gives each safety issue a priority ranking based on estimates of net
safety benefit and total cost to achieve that benefit (Ref: A Prioritization of Generic
*The term "generic requirement" used in the context of this handbook is any requirement
that is applied to a class of nuclear plants. The class could encompass all LWRs, PWRs
or BWRs; plant's of one or more specific nuclear steam supply vendors (Westinghouse,
GE, CE, B&W); or as few as two plants having certain design features or other
characteristics in common.
2
Safety Issues, NUREG-0933, Dec. 1983). Regulatory impact analyses (also called
value/impact analyses) are performed on proposed requirements to help determine
whether the safety enhancement or other public benefit sought is sufficient to justify the
estimated cost of implementing the requirement (Ref: Charter of the Committee to
Review Generic Requirements and NUREG/BR-0058). Analyses are performed regardless
of the form of the requirement; i.e., whether the requirement is a new regulation, an
order, a regulatory guide, e t c .
General methods and assumptions for performing regulatory impact analyses are
described in NUREG/BR-0058. Further guidance relevant to the Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation is available in the periodically updated NRR Office Letter No. 16.
"A Handbook for Value-Impact Assessment" (NUREG/CR-3568) has been recently
completed and is available for reference in performing regulatory analyses to which this
Cost Analysis Handbook contributes.
1.2 PURPOSE
The purpose of this handbook is to assist the NRC in: (a) preparing the types of
cost estimates required by the Regulatory Analysis Guidelines and internal NRC policy,
and (b) estimating cost for the assignment of priorities in the resolution of generic safety
issues. This handbook is intended as a road-map through the complex process of
structuring such a cost estimate, identifying the major cost contributors, and identifying
sources of cost data for estimating the magnitude of the major cost contributors. The
specific goals of the handbook are:
• To provide a consistent methodology and a consistent set of

assumptions to assist the user in preparing absolute as well as
comparative cost estimates of generic requirements for light-
w a t e r - r e a c t o r nuclear power plants.
• To identify all potentially significant cost elements associated with

generic requirements and characterize their significance.
• To provide an annotated bibliography of available cost data and

economic assumptions.
• To provide a step-by-step example estimate demonstrating the use

of the methodology and cost information.
1.3 PROBLEMS WITH ESTIMATING GENERIC REQUIREMENTS
The process of estimating the cost of designing, building, and operating nuclear
power plants has been going on within the nuclear industry since the first commercial
plants were ordered. Although there are various twists to the basic methods used in
estimating these costs, depending on who is doing the estimating, the methods are
reasonably well defined, and sources of cost data are maintained and tracked by
3
architect-engineers, suppliers, and the utilities. Several data bases exist in both the
private and public sectors to assist those involved in new-plant cost estimating.
The task of estimating the cost of implementing a generic regulatory
requirement throughout all of the affected sectors of the commercial nuclear community
poses a unique set of problems to the user of this handbook. The extent to which these
problems are addressed and overcome will determine in large part the success of the user
in estimating the true cost of the requirement. These major problem areas are
summarized as follows:
• By definition, a generic requirement is a multiplant requirement

affecting one or more classes of plants. The manner in which the
requirement is implemented and the significant cost areas may
vary—perhaps greatly—among the affected plants.
• Generic requirements cover the full spectrum of regulatory

authority and therefore can affect such diverse areas of the plant as
hardware and structures, procedures, personnel, operating status,
etc.
• Generic requirements can be applied to plants covering the full

range of plant status, from plants that exist only on paper to plants
under construction to operating plants. The status of the plant will
likely play a large role in determining the overall cost of
implementing the requirement for that plant.
• The user must be directed to focus his efforts on the areas of

greatest cost impact for each of the plants involved. At the same
time, he must be warned against overlooking potentially significant
costs in areas where these costs may not be readily evident.
• The user will find a lack of specific information on the costs

associated with plant changes. This is somewhat true in the
redesign costs for changes in new plants, largely true for rework
costs in plants under construction, and true without question when
dealing with the retrofitting costs incurred for plants in operation.
Because of this lack of cost data, estimating the cost of plant
changes often involves the use of rules of thumb and cost factors in
arriving at a cost figure for a particular activity. The lack of
information can also result in a major cost area being overlooked
altogether.
This handbook has been developed with at least a recognition of the above
problem areas. A primary goal is to assist the user wherever possible in overcoming
these problems.
4
To keep the information and data in this handbook reasonably current and to
reflect the lessons of user experience, it is intended that the handbook will be
periodically updated and revised.
1.4 SCOPE OF THE HANDBOOK
This handbook has been prepared to address the task of estimating the total
lifetime cost of generic requirements for commercial light-water-reactor power plants.
For these purposes, and consistent with the Regulatory Analysis Guidelines, the monetary
cost of generic requirements is defined as the net cost, expressed in terms of the present
value of total lifetime cost, incurred by the public, industry, and government in
implementing the requirement for all of the affected plants. This includes all costs that
are directly caused by the requirement as well as any indirect costs that are clearly and
readily traceable to the requirement. This guide does not address societal costs such as
the effects on unemployment, industry viability, population exposure, and environmental
costs nor the various other secondary costs that may result from implementing the
proposed requirement. Although the guide focuses on industry and government costs, the
user should be alerted to the possibility of other significant costs not specifically dealt
with in this guide. The total cost is considered to be net of all transfer payments such as
tax credits, depreciation, and tax payments. Where possible, the handbook provides
guidance in dealing with some of the more subtle but important cost effects such as labor
productivity in areas of significant radiation and other limiting environments, quality
assurance costs, and replacement power costs.
Plant costs considered in the handbook are those costs that are related to and/or
support the facilities, personnel and equipment located within the boundary of the plant
site. Off-site costs such as shipping and disposal costs that may be affected by a
requirement and may be significant are not dealt with specifically in the Handbook. The
user should be aware in cases involving such costs that their magnitude should be
estimated.
It is appropriate to emphasize at the outset that it is not within the scope of this
handbook to provide actual cost data or to carry out any cost estimating or cost analysis.
The financial resources available for this project precluded these activities from this
effort. The handbook does provide, where inclusion was possible, rules of thumb and
other cost factors that may be of benefit to the user in preparing cost estimates.
1.5 ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT USERS

In order to limit the amount of technical information on the design, construction,
and operation of nuclear power plants included in the handbook, it has been assumed that
the user has as a minimum the professional capabilities_generally associated with the
following academic credentials and experience:
• B.S. degree in one of the major engineering disciplines associated

with commercial nuclear plants, i.e., nuclear, electrical,
mechanical, chemical, or structural.
5
• Several years of experience in the design, engineering, construction,

or operation of commercial PWR or BWR power plants.
1.6 LOGIC OF MODEL DEVELOPMENT
One of the major tasks in preparing this handbook was the development of a
model that would describe the interaction and identify the significant areas of cost of
the major cost sectors that malce up the commercial nuclear power community. The
following five cost sectors were chosen:
Regulatory Sector
Utility Sector
Engineering and Design Sector
Nuclear Supplier Sector, including the NSS supplier
Constructor Sector
In addition, the public-sector costs, not addressed in detail in this handbook, may
be important in certain specific cases.
Outside of the regulatory sector, the role of the other sectors on any given
project may be quite different. One utility may carry out much of the engineering and
design, procurement, and construction activities as well as the operations itself, while
another utility may utilize architect-engineers (A-E) and construction contractors to
perform all of the design and construction activities. A survey of several utilities was
conducted in order to find a common structure around which to build a model to ensure
that all of the major cost functions, regardless of who carried them out, were
identified. The survey investigated each utility's response to a set of previously
implemented requirements. The common reaction to these requirements was found in a
set of generic functional responses carried out by the nuclear industry implementing a
regulatory requirement.
For the purposes of evaluating costs, it is not important to identify who actually
performs a certain function, but to identify the function being performed. A reliable
cost model must include all of the significant activities carried out in response to a
generic requirement and the associated costs of these activities. The model presented in
Sec. 2 of this handbook is centered around this concept of generic functional responses
that are common throughout the industry.
Another major consideration in the development of a cost model for generic

requirements is the recognition of the increasing complexity associated with changes
involving new plants, plants under construction, and operating plants. Each of these
classes of plants contains some unique features that can greatly affect the cost of
changes to a plant in a given status. Any successful cost model must capture the
6
significant differences actually encountered in implementing changes to plants of

different status.
1.7 ORGANIZATION OF GUIDE
The remainder of this handbook provides a description of a cost estimating

method suited for the stated purpose. It also provides guidance for the method's use,
annotated references of available cost data, and a step-by-step example cost e s t i m a t e
demonstrating its application.
The process of carrying out a cost estimate for generic requirements involves
several sequential steps. It is around these sequential activities that this handbook is
organized. The first step is to define the chronology of activities that must be carried
out to implement the requirement fully. This chronology can be developed using the
general model presented in Chapter 2. Next the work packages associated with each of
the major activities must be defined, and the individual elements of cost for each work
package must be identified. Guidance in defining the work packages (response functions)
and their associated cost elements is provided in Chapter 3. Having identified the cost
elements, the magnitude of each cost element must be estimated. Cost data references,
cost factors, rules of thumb, and other cost information is provided in Chapters 3 and 4.
The large amounts of cost data needed to estimate the total cost of typical generic
requirements should be organized in some accounting fashion to insure that all significant
costs have been accounted for and to assist in aggregating them to arrive at total cost.
Chapter 4 of the handbook is intended to assist the user in this complex task. Finally,
the various types of cost, i.e., one-time and periodic, need to be evaluated in a consistent
manner to produce a total lifetime cost of the requirement so that consistent
comparisons can be made. Chapter 5 of the handbook provides guidance in cost analysis.
1.7.1 Methodology Overview (Chapter 2)
This chapter provides the user with an overview description of the methodology.
The chapter begins with a discussion of the utility survey conducted at the outset of the
project and the importance of the results of the survey in providing the basis for the
model.
Next, a summary of the overall cost model is presented with emphasis on the
major activities addressed in the model. Three plant status categories—new plants,
plants under construction, and operating plants—are introduced and the significance of
each is discussed in relation to cost factors.
Finally, the detailed graphical models for each of the plant categories are
presented and discussed in an overview fashion. This discussion highlights the logical
flow of information throughout the model and describes in detail the various decision
nodes within the model. This section also provides guidance on how the detailed model
can be simplified and collapsed to focus the estimating effort on the areas of greatest
cost, depending on the nature of the requirement. This allows less detailed, "quickie"
estimates to be performed when appropriate.
7
1.7.2 Functional Responses and Cost Elements (Chapter 3)

This chapter gets to the heart of the handbook with a detailed discussion of the
individual functional responses and their associated cost elements. Each of these terms
is defined and described. Two major categories of cost, one-time (capital) cost and
periodic costs, are introduced and defined.
The bulk of Chapter 3 consists of a detailed discussion of each of the 49

functional responses in the model. The significance of each response is discussed. The
cost elements associated with each functional response are provided and discussed.
Guidance is provided, where possible, as to when certain cost elements are likely to be of
major or lesser significance. Guidelines on dealing with such important costs as
backfitting, rework, and labor cost for work in a radiation or congested environment are
provided where possible. For each cost element or group of elements, references are
provided, where possible, on sources of cost data available to the user. Also, where
possible, rules of thumb and cost factors are provided to assist the user in assigning
realistic cost values to each element.
1.7.3 Capital Cost Accounting Methodology (Chapter 4)

Having identified and organized the major cost elements for a particular
requirement, this chapter instructs the user in how to organize and account for all of the
capital cost items. Capital costs are separated into direct and indirect costs.
Direct capital costs are organized using an existing nuclear plant cost data base
(the Energy Economic Data Base, or EEDB). The EEDB is described in detail and typical
nuclear plant accounts, with cost values, are presented to show organization and to
illustrate to the user the relative magnitude of the costs in each of the various
accounts. Guidance is provided on choosing the appropriate level of aggregation of costs
to meet the particular need of the case in hand. Where possible, guidance is also
provided on how to select the appropriate level of detail for a particular estimate so as
to restrict the level of effort to that necessary for the particular case under study.
A methodology for dealing with the indirect capital costs is presented in the
form of cost models for engineering and design, nuclear supplier analysis, and
construction management activities. The methodology includes organization of cost data
and aggregating detailed cost data for each of the models.
Although the EEDB has been compiled to provide cost information for new plant
construction, much information is included in the data base on the cost of backfitting
plants under construction. Chapter 4 of this guide also addresses some of the special
problems when dealing with modifications to operating plants and provides cost factors
and rules of thumb for these cases where possible.
8
1.7.4 Cost Analysis Methodology (Chapter 5)

This chapter instructs the user in the methods used to calculate the total,
present value of capital (one-time) cost; the total, present value of periodic cost; and
finally the total, present value lifetime cost for the requirement being evaluated.
The total capital cost is simply the sum of the present value of capital costs of
each of the major cost sectors evaluated in the previous chapters. The total periodic
post is evaluated on the basis of the total constant dollar annual costs summed over the
remaining life of the plant and discounted back to the present. This chapter concludes
with instructions on evaluating the total present value lifetime cost of the requirements.
1.7.5 Example Cost Estimates (Chapter 6)

Chapter 6 presents an example cost estimate that has been selected to
demonstrate as many of the facets of the overall handbook as possible. The format of
this chapter is a step-by-step walk through the estimating process for the example.
Explanation is provided as appropriate to help the user understand the overall use of the
methodology.
This chapter also summarizes recommendations and lessons learned from the
application of the model and methods in this handbook to an actual example cost
estimate.
9
2 PRESENTATION OF THE MODEL
This section presents the graphical model developed to identify costs resulting
from the implementation of NRC multiplant requirements. The section is divided into
four parts. The first part (Sec. 2.1) summarizes the results of case studies that were
conducted to assess typical industry response to NRC requirements. The case studies
pointed to a consistent framework for disaggregating costs, which has been used in the
development of the graphical model, and which is presented in summary form in Sec.
2.2. The detailed model is presented and discussed in Sec. 2.3. Section 2.4 provides
guidance in simplifying the model for certain specific applications.
2.1 CASE STUDY RESULTS
Case studies were conducted to assess typical industry response to NRC

multiplant requirements. Two recent multiplant requirements were traced through the
implementatipn process at three utilities to uncover patterns of response. The case
studies were accomplished by conducting on-site interviews with project managers at
nuclear utilities. The nuclear units included in the survey are four operating BWRs, three
operating Westinghouse PWRs, two operating Combustion Engineering PWRs, and two
Westinghouse PWRs under construction.
The case studies were designed to identify a consistent framework for

disaggregating costs. Additionally, the case studies were used to determine the relative
magnitudes of the various costs, and which industry sectors typically incur the costs.
The contribution of the case studies in guiding the development of the framework of the
model is summarized below; the detailed results are presented in Appendix A.
Each of the three utilities surveyed is organized differently. One utility has a
project management department under the vice president for engineering, which
interfaces with an internal engineering group, an outside architect-engineer, an internal
production maintenance group (which in turn interfaces with an outside constructor), and
an internal plant operating group. A second utility is split into design/construction and
operations, each with nearly complete autonomy. The third utility is partly project-
oriented (a nuclear station is considered a project) and partly centrally organized, with
engineering, construction, and operations under a single manager of nuclear generation.
Some design and construction is performed in-house and some under contract. Purchasing
departments are independent of engineering and operations in two of the three utilities.
Although it would be possible to identify costs by organizational element at any one
utility, it is not possible to generalize on the basis of organization because of the
variability between utilities.
Accounting systems also vary substantially from utility to utility. Moreover, the
use of accounting elements as the building blocks for this model is impractical because it
is difficult to correlate specific accounting elements with regulatory requirements.
Therefore, the case studies dissuaded us from attempting to construct a model

using organizational or accounting elements as building blocks. However, a common
10
thread was apparent in tracing the implementation of NRC requirements through the
diverse organizations of several utilities. This was the "functional response" to each
aspect of the requirement. A functional response is defined as an action or "work
package" adopted in response to a regulatory requirement. For example, if a
requirement involves new or modified hardware, each utility responds with a design
function, whether the function is actually carried out by an internal design department at
headquarters or at the plant, or by an outside contractor (architect-engineer). Similarly,
if the requirement involves an interaction with the NRC, a licensing function, whether
resident within a design group or an operations group, is involved. Similar considerations
apply to procurement, equipment installation, training, and other functions.
Similar or identical functional responses were obtained at each utility

corresponding to a specific regulatory requirement, even though the organizational
structures differed. Moreover, the costs associated with a few of the major functional
responses (i.e., detailed design, procurement, and installation) were tracked to some
extent by each of the utilities. It is possible to disaggregate the functional responses
into their component cost elements (i.e., specific categories of labor, materials,
reproduction, etc.) However, quantitative cost data that can be related to specific
regulatory requirements are seldom available at this level.
2.2 OVERVIEW OF THE MODEL
The functional responses to regulatory requirements comprise the framework or

building blocks of the graphical cost model. The first step in the development of the
model was to compose a list of functional responses*, which is given in Table 2.1. The
identifiers in parenthesis following each functional response refer to the sector that
incurs the cost.** The identifiers are defined as follows:
U = Utility
A-E = Architect-Engineer
C = Constructor
V = Nuclear steam supply system vendor, other equipment

vendor, or contractor to the utility or the NRC
N = NRC
G = Federal (other than the NRC), s t a t e , or local government
*This initial list is most assuredly incomplete; comprehensiveness can only be

approached through review and update.
**In the final analysis, all costs are ultimately borne by the utility and reimbursed by the
ratepayers (NRC costs through license fees).
11
TABLE 2.1 List of Functional Responses
1. Develop a new regulation (N)

2. Develop/change regulatory guide (N)
3. Change/write section of Standard Review Plan (N)
4. Notify project managers, notify licensees, prepare Technical
Assignment Control (N)
5. Analyze the requirement (U)
6. Meet with licensee and/or owners' group (N)
7. Meet with NRC (A-E and/or V and/or U)
8. Request 0MB clearance (N)
9. Contractor assists NRC in reviewing responses (V and N)
10. Solicit and review responses from licensees (N)
11. Prepare responses for NRC (A-E and/or V and/or U)
12. Solicit and review answers to questions (N)
13. Answer questions from NRC (A-E and/or V and/or U)
14. Perform conceptual design, including unresolved safety question
determination, resource estimate, and preliminary schedule (A-E
and/or U)
15. Evaluate budget requirements (A-E and/or U)
16. Perform detailed design and/or design review, including spec-
ifications for outside procurement (A-E and/or U)
17. Perform safety/risk/reliability analysis (A-E and/or V and/or U)
18. Procure materials and equipment, including preparation of the bid
package, evaluation of proposals, and preparation of purchase order
(U and/or A-E and V)
19. Plan installation, including detailed procedures, labor
requirements, and schedule (C and/or U)
20. Modify structures (V and/or C and/or U)
21. Install, test and maintain hardware (V and/or C and/or U)
22. Inspect hardware (V and/or C and/or U)
23. Develop software (A-E and/or V and/or U)
24. Add to or change record keeping (U)
25. Add to or change reporting (U)
26. Increase nonoperating staff (U)
27. Federal, state, local government participation (G)
28. Impact on international trade (A-E and/or V and/or C)
29. Write/rewrite procedures (V and/or U)
30. Conduct test of system/subsystem (V and/or C and/or U)
31. Write/rewrite training manuals (V and/or U)
32. Train/retrain staff (V and/or U)
33. Write/rewrite Technical Specifications (U)
34. Review Technical Specifications (N)
35. Contractor assists NRC in reviewing design (V and N)
36. Review of design (N)
37. Contractor prepares Technical Evaluation Report (V and N)
38. Prepare Safety Evaluation Report (N)
39. Replacement energy penalty (U)
40. Modify structures in a radiation environment (V and/or C and/or U ) ^
41. Install, test and maintain hardware in a radiation environment
(V and/or C and/or U)^
42. Draft license amendment (U)
12
TABLE 2.1 (Cont'd)
43. Review l i c e n s e amendment (N)

44. C o n t r a c t o r a s s i s t s NRC in i n s p e c t i n g hardware (V and N)
45. I n s p e c t hardware (N)
46. Conduct monitoring/sampling (V and/or U)
47. Change number of o p e r a t i n g s t a f f . (U)
48. Change number of maintenance s t a f f (V and/or U)
49. Change in a c c i d e n t c o s t (U).
^There a r e a d d i t i o n a l c o s t s for performing t h e s e a c t i v i t i e s in an

operating plant.
In many cases, one or another of the cost sectors, or more than one, may be involved.
Also, note that the identifier, V, refers to any contractor, other than the a r c h i t e c t -
engineer or constructor, hired by the utility (or the NRC). This could include, for
example, a maintenance contractor hired by the utility to supply craft labor for the
installation of equipment.
The structure of the model is based on a chronological presentation of activities,

beginning with the establishment of a new requirement and proceeding through the
appropriate activities necessary to implement the requirement throughout the industry.
The proper flow path through the model for a specific requirement is determined by a
series of decision nodes where the analyst is queried about the nature of the requirement
and the status of the plant(s) affected. Based on the answers to these questions, the user
is directed through the proper logic of the model.
For example, the analyst is queried whether the requirement involves the
installation or modification of hardware or structures. If the answer to this question is
"yes," the branch of the graphical model leads the analyst to a number of functional
responses associated with the installation/modification of hardware/structures. These
include the performance of design, procurement of equipment, and installation of hard-
ware, among other functional responses. If the answer to this question is "no," none of
these functional responses pertain and the analyst is directed to the next decision node.
This process is repeated until all appropriate activities for implementing the
requirement for a plant or group of plants have been addressed. For each functional
response identified, an appropriate set of cost elements needed to carry out the response
and sources of cost information, where available, are identified. (See Sec. 3).
To emphasize the importance of plant status in the evaluation of regulatory

costs, the model is presented in three parts. The first part is intended to represent a
planned unit or one under construction that has major structures in place, but few or
none of the major systems installed. Thus little or no backfit would be entailed in the
event of a hardware modification, unless the structures already in place are affected or
long lead-time equipment is involved. Modifications to structures for plants, even a t this
13
early stage of construction, could incur significant cost and should be evaluated on a
case-by-case basis. Also, this plant typically would not have procedures written, nor
personnel trained, nor Technical Specifications written. Typically, such a plant is less
than 70% complete.
The second part represents a plant well along in construction, having many or
most of the major systems in place. A hardware modification in such a plant would
entail substantial backfit. Also, the procedures are assumed to have been written, the
training conducted, and Technical Specifications drafted. Typically this plant can be
anywhere from about 70% complete to the point of loading fuel.
Finally, an operating plant is depicted in the third part. This part of the model
encompasses all of the complexities of the plant in the final stages of construction. In
addition, however, hardware modifications may entail backfit in a radiation
environment. Modifications to operating plants also often require the purchase of
replacement power as a result of plant downtime, reduction in plant electrical output, or
reduction in plant availability or capacity factor. Similar plant unavailability costs can
result from modifications made during construction, if they cause startup delay.
Figure 2.1 illustrates how the three parts of the model fit together. For ease of
presentation, the part of the model that depicts the new plant or the plant in early stages
of construction also contains functional responses appropriate to all plants. The part of
the model that depicts plants well under construction emphasizes modifications to
existing hardware, and also contains activities that are not performed until the latter
stages of construction, such as writing procedures and training operating personnel.
Finally, the part of the model that depicts operating plants emphasizes hardware
modifications carried out in a radiation environment, and also contains activities specific
to operating plants, such as the possible purchase of replacement energy. To avoid
duplication, the part of the model for plants well under construction is added to the
portion of the part of the model for new plants, and the part of the model for operating
plants is added to the portion of the part of the model for plants well under construction.
In other words, for an operating plant, all three parts of the model must be considered.
The model is subdivided into three parts in order to sensitize the user to the
potentially significant impact on costs of making modifications in an operating plant or
one under construction, in which many or most of the major systems are already
installed. It is not only more costly to design a new piece of hardware around existing
systems, but it may be necessary to modify existing systems or structures to
accommodate the new equipment. Compounding the complexity and cost of a backfit,
the presence of a radiation environment, as in the case of an operating plant, may
increase the costs by an order of magnitude or more.
2.3 DETAILED MODEL
The detailed models are presented in Figures 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4 for the new unit or
one under construction with few or no major systems installed, the plant under
construction with many or most of the major systems installed, and the operating plant.
Meetings on New Requirement Design for New Plant Inspect Hardware
Questions and Responses on Procure Equipment Write Software

New Requirement
Install in New Plant Change Reporting
Regulations, Reg. Guides,
and Standard Review Plans Add Non-Operating Staff Change Recordkeeping
ALL PLANTS NEW AND EARLY PLANTS ALL PLANTS
Redesign
Reinstall
Write Procedures
Train Staff
PLANTS WELL UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Reinstall in Radiation
Environment
Purchase Replacement
Energy
Add Operating Staff
License Amendment
OPERATING PLANTS
FIGURE 2.1 Illustration of the Three Parts of the Graphical Model

Figure 2.2 GRAPHICAL MODEL FOR A NEW PLANT UNDER CONSTRUCTION WITH
NONE OR FEW OF THE MAJOR SYSTEMS INSTALLED
Figure 2.2 GRAPHICAL MODEL FOR A NEW PLANT OR A PLANT UNDER CONSTRUCTION WITH
NONE OR FEW OF THE MAJOR SYSTEMS INSTALLED (Cont.)
(U a/0 A-E and V)

A-E a/0 V Procure mtis and
a/oU) eqpmt, incI prep
Perform safety/ of bid pkg eval
^ risk/reliability of proposals, and
analysis prep of purch ord
(A-E a/0 U) 17
Perform detailed 18
©-
design ar)d/or de-
sigr< review, inci
specs for outside
procurement
(C a/o U) (Va/oC
(Va/oC a/oU)
Plan installation, a/oU)
incI detailed Install, test
Modify and maintain
proc's, lal>or structures
reqmts, & sched. hardware
20
19 21
(C a/0 U) (Va/oC
incl. detailed Install, test
proc's., labor and maintain
reqmts., & sched. hardware
19 21
(A-E a/o V
a/oU) Add to or
Develop change record-
software keeping
(U) (C) (A-E a/o C a/o U)

Increase Federal, state, Impact on
non-operating local govt international
staff participation trade
Yes 28
Non-oper-
ating personnel
addns 7 "
R
No
Figure 2 3 GRAPHICAL MODEL FOR PLANT UNDER CONSTRUCTION WITH MANY OR MOST
OF THE MAJOR SYSTEMS INSTALLED
(U a/o A-E and V)

(A-E a/o V
Procure mtIs and
a/oU)
Perform safety/ e q p m t , incI prep
risK/reliabil- of bid pkg , eval
ity analysis of proposals, and
(A-E a/o U) 17 prep of purch ord
Perform design or IB (C a/o U)
design review, Plan installation.
incI specs for
outside procurement
16
incI detailed
proc's, labor
reqmts , & sched
19
<D
Same logic as Yes branch
(Va/oC
(V a/o U) a/oU)
W/rite/rewrite Conduct test/
^ procedures
29
retesi of system/
o
(Va/oC (Va/oC subsystem
a/oU) 30
-0
a/oU)
Modify Install, test
and maintain
structures hardware
20 21
(V a/o U)
Train/retrain
staff
32
(V a/o U) (U) (N)

Wnte/rewnte Review
training manuals Technical
31 Specifications
33 34
Write/
rewrite train-
ing manuals
?
X No
Figure 2.4 GRAPHICAL MODEL FOR OPERATING PLANT
(A-E a/o U) (A-E a/o V

Perform design or a/oU)
design review, Perform safety/
incI specs for risk/reliabil-
outside procurement ity analysis
16 17
(A-E a/o U)
Perform design or
design review, Same logic as Yes branch past this point
incI specs for
outside procurement
16
9
(V and N)
Contractor
assists NRC in unsatisfactory
reviewing design
35
(U a/o A-E and V)
Procure mils and
eqpmt, incI prep Review of
of bid pkg . eval design
of proposals, and
prep of purch ord
IB
(V and N)
Contractor
prepares
TER
37
Prepare SER
o
(C a/o U)
Plan installation,
incI detailed
proc's , labor
reqmts, & sched
19
Figure 2.4 GRAPHICAL MODEL FOR OPERATING PLANT (Cont.)
(VandN)
Contractor assists
NRC in inspecting
hardware
(V a/o U)
Conduct
monitoring/
sampling
46
(V a/o U)
Change number Change numt>er (U)
of operating of maintenance
staff staff
47 48 39
(U) (U)
Replacement Change in
energy accident
penalty cost
Yes 49
Change
in allowable
reactor rating
7
No
Figure 2.4 GRAPHICAL MODEL FOR OPERATING PLANT (Cont.)
(U)
Replacement
energy
penalty
39
(U)
Replacement
energy
penalty
39
K3
o
(Va/oC
a/oU)
9 (V a/o 0
a/oU) (U)
Review
(N)
Modify structure Install test and
in a radiation maintain hardware license
environment in a radiation amendment
40 environment 42
41
(Va/oC
(Va/oC a/oU)
a/oU) Install, test
and maintain
hardware
21
21
respectively. In each diagram, the decision nodes, or yes-no questions, are denoted by
diamonds and identified sequentially by capital letters. The functional responses are
denoted by rectangles and identified by the number shown with each response in Table
2.1. The cost sectors defined for Table 2.1, "U" through "6," are identified in the upper
right-hand corner of each functional response rectangle. The symbol "a/o" refers to
"and/or," suggesting that one or another or more than one cost sector may be involved in
a specific response.
The branches in the diagrams are connected by circles containing lower-case
letters. Lower-case letters are also used to indicate feedback loops in the models. For
example, an unsatisfactory response by the licensee to questions from the NRC may
elicit more questions or it may call for another meeting with the licensee (connection e).
Insofar as possible, the functional responses are ordered chronologically. For

example, the potential development of a new regulation by the NRC (functional response
1) is shown to be going on simultaneously with the analysis of a new requirement by the
licensee (functional response 5). This is a simplification, in that the development of
regulations may not be undertaken until considerable dialogue has taken place between
the NRC and the licensees. Similarly, some of the functional responses shown in series,
such as the design (functional response 16) and safety analysis (functional response 17),
may be going on in parallel.
The assumed initial point in time for the analysis is the beginning of the
implementation of a new requirement. At this point, the requirement is assumed to be
fairly well defined, the approval has been obtained from the Committee to Review
Generic Requirements (CRGR), and an implementation plan has been adopted. This
omits a number of steps (and costs) prior to the actual implementation of a new
requirement, such as research, office approvals, preparation of the regulatory package,
and presentations to the CRGR and other review bodies.* This approach assumes that
the costs associated with these early steps are incurred in the course of normal NRC
business, and are not, therefore, marginal costs attributable to the new requirement. If,
however, some of these costs can be directly attributed to a new requirement, the
analyst should be aware that such costs could be significant. Also such costs must be
included in estimating the costs of resolving an issue, in connection with prioritization of
generic-issue resolution efforts.
As discussed in the previous section, the model is presented in three parts to

emphasize the importance of plant status in the evaluation of regulatory costs.
Comparison with the top branch in Figure 2.3 (f through n) with the corresponding branch
of Figure 2.2 (f through i) demonstrates that the separation is more a matter of emphasis
than one of substance. Although the contents of the branches are nearly identical, they
are displayed separately to alert the user to the potentially higher costs encountered in
backfit situations. Similarly the two branches after the decision node U, although
identical in structure, are included to emphasize the additional costs of modifying
systems and/or structures when these systems or structures are in place.
*In fact, a considerable effort could be expended on the development of a new regulation
(functional response #1) prior to CRGR approval. The extent is left open to the user.
22
As discussed in the previous section, all three parts of the model must be
considered in the analysis of an operating plant. Although not as obvious, the inverse is
also true. That is, when evaluating a requirement on a new plant, consideration must be
given to the eventual impact of the requirement on the same plant when it is further
along in construction and when it is ultimately generating electricity. For example, a
requirement on a plant in the early stages of construction (Figure 2.2) might affect the
training of operating staff (decision nodes X and Y in Figure 2.3). It might also
ultimately affect the availability of the plant (decision node OO in Figure 2.4), the
allowable reactor rating or the net electrical generating capacity (decision node PP in
Figure 2.4), resulting in replacement energy costs (functional response 39). Therefore,
all parts of the model must be consulted in a comprehensive analysis.
2.4 SIMPLIFICATION OF THE MODEL
The detailed model presented in Figures 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4 incorporates functional
responses that span the full range, in magnitude and complexity, of responses to generic
NRC requirements. In particular, many of the NRC functional responses constitute
relatively small tasks in comparison with the utility outlays required for a hardware
modification. However, these smaller tasks are retained in the detailed model in order
to provide the capability to analyze a complete range of possible administrative
requirements. Some of these administrative requirements might result in relatively
small costs that cannot be neglected because the benefit of the requirement, namely the
risk reduction, might also be small. In prioritizing issues, it is the ratio of the risk
reduction to the costs that is evaluated.
2.4.1 CoUapse of the Model for a Hardware Modification

In the event that a requirement entails a hardware modification, a number of the
administrative functional responses identified in the detailed model can be consolidated
without jeopardizing the accuracy of the analysis.* A collapsed model is presented for a
hardware modification, again in three parts, in Figures 2.5, 2.6, and 2.7. In these
diagrams, the identity and numbering of the original detailed functional responses shown
in Table 2.1 are retained.
The most significant change in the model is the consolidation of eight early NRC
functional responses into the following two (the parenthetical numbers are keyed to
Table 2.1):
• Staff administrative actions, including meetings, questions, and

review (4,6,8,10,12),
• Develop regulation, regulatory guide, and/or Standard Review Plan

modification (1-3),
*Some caution should be exercised by the analyst in accepting this approximation, as it

may not be appropriate for all hardware requirements.
Figure 2.5 COLLAPSED MODEL FOR A HARDWARE MODIFICATION IN A NEW PLANT OR A PLANT UNDER CONSTRUCTION
WITH NONE OR FEW OF THE MAJOR SYSTEMS INSTALLED
(N)
Develop regulation
Reg Guide, and/or
SRP modifications
(N) (A-E a/o V a/o U) 1,2,3
Staff Admin act's Analysis, mtgs,
(NEW REQMENT^ incI mtgs, ques's and response to
and review questions
V,^^ START J
4,6,8,10,12 5,7,9,11.13
•^
(U a/o A-E and V) (C a/o U) (Va/oC (Va/oC
Procure mtIs and Plan installation, a/oU) a/oU)
eqpmt, incI prep incI detailed Modify Install, inspect,
of bid pkg , eval structures test and maintain
^ of proposals, and
proc's, labor
hardware
reqmts, & sched
(A-E a/o U) prep of purch ord 19 20 21,22
Perform cone 18
Qy and detailed de-

sign and safety
analyais
14,15,16,17 (C a/o U) (Va/oC
incI detailed Install, inspect,
proc's, labor test and maintain
reqmts, & sched hardware
19 21,22
(A-E a/o V a/o U) (U)

Change software, Increase
recordkeeping, or non-operating
reporting staff
23, 24, 25 26
Figure 2.6 COLLAPSED MODEL FOR A HARDWARE MODIFICATION IN A PLANT UNDER CONSTRUCTION WITH
MANY OR MOST OF THE MAJOR SYSTEMS INSTALLED
(U a/o A-E and V)

Procure mtIs and
eqpmt, IncI prep
of bid pkg , eval
of proposals, and
prep of purch ord
(A-E a/o U) 18 (C a/o U) (Va/oC (Va/oC
Perform conceptual Plan installation, a/oU) a/oU)
<D
and detailed de- incl detailed Modify Install, inspect,
sign and safety proc's, lalMr structures lest and mainUin
analysis reqmts, & sctied hardware
14,15,16,17 19 21,22,30
Same logic a* Ye* branch
(V a/o U) (Va/oU)
Tram/retrain
Wnte/rewnte staff
procedures, train-
ing manuals, or
Tech Specs
29,31,33
Figure 2.7 COLLAPSED MODEL FOR A HARDWARE MODIFICATION IN AN OPERATING PLANT
(U a/o A-E and V) (V a/o N)

(A-E a/o U)
Procure mils and
Perform conceptual
eqpmt, incl prep Review of design
and detailed de-
of bid pkg , eval and preparation
sign and safely
of proposals, and of SER
analysis
prep of purch ord
14. 15. 16,17 18 35, 36, 37, 38
(A-E a/o U)
Perform conceptual
and detailed de-
sign and safely Same logic as Yes branch past this point
analysis
14.15,16, 17
(U)
Replacement
energy
penalty
(C a/o U)
Plan installation,
G> incl detailed

proc's , labor
reqmts, & sched
19 (U)
Replacement
energy
penalty
Figure 2 ^ COLLAPSED MODEL FOR A HARDWARE MODIFICATION IN AN OPERATING PLANT (Cont.)
(V a/o C (V a/o C a/o U) (Va/oU

a/oU) install, inspect,
Modify structure test and maintain
in a radiation hardware in a
environment radiation
environment
40
41.22,30
(Va/oC (Va/oC
a/oU) a/oU)
Install, inspect
and test hardware
21, 22,30
(U)
Change number
of operating
a/o maintenance
staff
47.48
'Xhange i
number of op- "
erating a/o
mainten
• V staff
\''
27
and the consolidation of five early industry functional responses into the following one:
• Analysis, meetings, and responses to questions (5,7,9,11,13).
Later administrative tasks are also consolidated, such as the following utility functional
response:
• Write/rewrite procedures, training manuals, or Technical Speci-

fications (29-31),
and the following NRC functional response:
• Review of design and preparation of SER (35-38).
Design and safety analysis functions are also consolidated, as in the following:
• Perform conceptual and detailed design and safety analysis (14-17),
and installation, inspection, and testing functions are also consolidated:
• Install, inspect, test, and maintain (21,22,30).
The following functional responses, considered to be either irrelevant or

negligible for a hardware modification requirement, were eliminated from this simplified
model:
• Federal, state, local government participation (27)
• Impact on international trade (8)
• Write/rewrite Technical Specifications (33)
• Review Technical Specifications (34)
• Draft license amendment (42)
• Review license amendment (43)
• Contractor assists NRC in inspecting hardware (44)
• Inspect hardware (45)
For most hardware modifications, other functional responses could also be

eliminated. For example, additions of staff (26,47,48), additional training (32), and
additional monitoring (46) do not result from most hardware modifications. However,
these functional responses are retained for purposes of generality, and because of the
continuing nature of the costs associated with these functional responses, they could be
significant for certain hardware modifications.
28
2.4.2 CoUapse of the Model for a Shutdown without Hardware Modifications

In the event of a plant shutdown without a hardware modification, such as an
inspection or test, the part of the model that deals with an operating plant can be
considerably simplified, as illustrated in Figure 2.8. The functional responses relating to
design, procurement, and installation of hardware have been eliminated. Additionally,
potential changes in staff, plant availability, and accident costs are not relevant. Only
the outage planning, potential purchase of replacement power, hardware inspection, and
system testing activities are retained.
2.5 APPLYING THE MODEL
The cost estimating model presented in this chapter provides a general road map
through the process of identifying significant costs for the full range of potential generic
requirements and for all possible categories of plants. In practice, the user will be
evaluating the cost of a specific requirement affecting a specific number of plants.
Section 2.4 provided guidance on simplifying the model to emphasize the likely areas of
dominant cost for a particular requirement. This section will assist the user in applying
the model so as to minimize the number and scope of the individual activities to be
estimated in order to evaluate the overall national cost of implementing the
requirement.
The first task in this process is to identify, from the simplified model, which
functional responses need be performed only once regardless of the number of plants
affected. These activities, which typically involve the regulatory responses, can be
estimated independent of any plant specific considerations. The cost of these generic
activities can be spread over all of the affected plants.
The remaining functional responses will be carried out on a plant-by-plant basis.

Therefore, it is necessary to determine what specific plants are affected by the
requirement and how the requirement will be implemented for each plant. To assist the
user in this task, Appendix B of this handbook presents a current list of all U.S.
commercial nuclear power plants with information on plant status, ownership, type of
reactor, etc. for each. Having identified the individual plants to which the requirement
applies, the user should attempt to group these plants according to plant type: PWR or
BWR; plant status: operating or under construction; or any other grouping that would
represent a common method of implementing the requirement. In some cases all
affected plants will require a similar type of response and the estimate can be carried
out on one representative plant and that cost multiplied by the total number of plants
affected. Other cases could involve more than one category of plants, i.e., PWRs and
BWRs, with different types of modifications for each. In this case a reference plant
could be selected for each category with an associated cost estimate. Plant status could
also be important in categorizing how plants respond to a requirement. Operating plants
may have no choice but to build new facilities, whereas new plants or plants still under
construction could incorporate required changes into existing structures. In some cases,
it may be necessary to do a plant-by-plant estimate for each of the affected plants.
Such a task would be very time-consuming and costly. Therefore the user is encouraged
Figure 2.8 COLLAPSED MODEL FOR A SHUTDOWN WITH NO HARDWARE MODIFICATIONS
IN AN OPERATING PLANT
(U)
Replacement
energy
penalty
39
(C a/o U)
Plan outage,
incl detailed
proc's, labor
reqmts, & sched (U)
Replacement
energy
penalty
39
ts)
(Va/oC
a/oU)
Inspect Conduct test/
hardware retest of system/
subsystem
Yes 30
Inspection
of hardware?
30
to take sufficient time initially to identify the smallest number of plant groups to be
evaluated so as to minimize the number of estimates to be prepared.
Once the affected plants have been identified and grouped according to common
types of response to the requirement, specific changes required for each group need to be
identified and developed. These changes may involve structural and hardware
modifications, procedural changes, changes in personnel or training, etc. The model
presented in this chapter will assist the user in identifying what changes are required, but
the user must also develop the specifications for these changes for each group of plants
so that their costs can be reasonably estimated. Input from the utilities, A-Es, and/or
nuclear suppliers could be valuable in developing these specifications. The more detailed
the specifications, the more accurate the cost estimate that can be prepared. Also, the
user must be alert to the possibility that a functional response not considered in develop-
ing the existing model may be necessary in evaluating the costs associated with a
specific requirement. Only through review and update can the model approach
comprehensiveness.
Based on the specifications, which spell out the specific changes required, the
cost estimate for implementing these changes for each group of plants can be prepared.
Chapters 3, 4, and 6 of this guide will assist the user in preparing these estimates.
Finally, the results of the cost estimating process have to be allocated to all
affected plants and the individual plant costs aggregated to arrive at the total national
lifetime cost of implementing the requirement. Chapters 5 and 6 of this guide will assist
the user in this final task.
31
3 FUNCTIONAL RESPONSES AND COST ELEMENTS
Chapter 2 of this guide presented a graphical model that was developed to assist
the NRC analyst in identifying the significant costs associated with the implementation
of generic regulatory requirements. The building blocks of this model are functional
responses, which are defined as actions or "work packages" performed in response to
regulatory requirements. This chapter describes these functional responses in some
detail, identifies cost elements associated with each functional response given in the
detailed model, and further provides guidance and sources of information potentially
useful in evaluating costs. The final section of this chapter discusses the use of
simplifying approximations in evaluating costs using the model.
3.1 FUNCTIONAL RESPONSES
The model presented in Chapter 2 is intended to permit the analyst to identify

the significant activities that must be carried out in response to the promulgation of an
NRC requirement. These activities — functional responses ~ form the basis for
evaluating the costs associated with the requirement. A functional response is defined as
a well-defined activity in a series of such activities that ultimately results in the
implementation of a requirement for a specific plant or group of plants. As an example,
a requirement that calls for the installation of a new type of containment radiation
monitor at a plant will involve a functional response that deals with the engineering and
design of the monitor and associated hardware.
In theory, the cost of each functional response can be evaluated directly, with no
further analysis, if the data are available. However, this is rarely the case, and it is
usually more convenient to break down the functional response into its constituent cost
elements and evaluate the costs of these entities. Cost elements are discussed in the
next section.
3.2 COST ELEMENTS
Each functional response can be broken into one or more specific areas of cost
that would be incurred in performing the activity. These cost elements address the
specific categories of equipment, materials, labor and professional effort to which
estimated dollar values are conventionally assigned. The cost elements are the building
blocks with which the total lifetime cost estimate can be constructed. Continuing with
the example in Section 3.1, the functional response calling for the engineering and design
of a containment monitor could involve any or all of the following cost elements:
Project Management Labor QA or QC Labor

Engineering Labor Computer Charges
Clerical Labor Programming Labor
Drafting Labor
32
Tables 3.1 and 3.2 provide lists of potentially significant cost elements. For convenience
in associating cost elements with specific functional responses, NRC cost elements are
listed separately. In the discussion of functional responses given in Sec. 3.4, the cost
elements associated with each functional response are identified according to their
roman numerals in Table 3.1 and the lower-case letters used in Table 3.2.
3.3 ONE-TIME VS. PERIODIC COSTS
Compiling the cost information for a particular functional response requires

knowledge not only of the estimated costs involved, but also of the time behavior of the
costs. This is important because in developing a total lifetime cost estimate, one-time
and periodic costs are evaluated differently. One-time (capital-cost) items are defined
as those costs which are incurred only once in implementing a requirement. Periodic
(operating) costs are those costs which continue to be incurred on a periodic basis over
the life of the plant.
All one-time costs are estimated on a current dollar basis and reflect the cost of
the equipment, material, labor, and effort as if all costs were incurred in the current
year. If the overall cost estimate is to be expressed in a year other than the current
year, these costs must be inflated or deflated to the year of interest. The method by
which this is done is described in Chapter 5.
Periodic costs are not necessarily all annual costs. These costs can be incurred
either on a continuing basis or for periods ranging from semiannually to every 5 or 10
years. For example, a requirement that calls for an increase in the plant operating staff
would result in an increase in the plant annual operating costs, whereas a requirement for
performing an in-service inspection every 10 years would lead to costs being incurred
only on that 10-year cycle. In order to account for the periodic costs in a lifetime cost
TABLE 3.1 List of NRC Cost Elements*
i. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Labor

ii. Office of Research Labor
iii. Office of Inspection & Enforcement Labor
iv. Regional Office Labor
V. Office of the Executive Legal Director Labor
vi. Technical Support Contract
It is assumed that travel, computer, communica-

tions, clerical support, and support from other
offices, such as Administration, Resource
Management, etc., are applied as overhead burdens
to the direct labor cost elements listed in this
table.
33
TABLE 3.2 List of Non-NRC Cost Elements
a. Project Management Labor

b. Engineering Labor
c. Clerical Labor
d. Drafting Labor
e. Programming Labor
f. Administrative Labor
g- Accounting Labor
h. Quality Assurance/Quality '
i. Executive Labor
J- Craft Supervisory Labor
k. Craft Labor
I. Radiation Protection Labor
m. Security Labor
n. Replacement Power
0. Technician Labor
P- State Official Labor
q. Local Official Labor
r. Federal Official Labor
s. Computer
t. Equipment
u. Materials
v. Simulator
w. Reproduction
X. Storage
State Contract/Grant
estimate, these costs need to be expressed in terms of an equivalent, one-time cost in

the year of the estimate (constant dollars). The method by which this can be done is also
described in Chapter 5.
In the description of the functional responses given in the following section, a
distinction is made between those cost elements which are typically one-time costs and
those which are periodic costs.
3.4 DESCRIPTIONS OF THE FUNCTIONAL RESPONSES
This section of the handbook describes each of the 49 functional responses

identified in Table 2.1 for the model presented in Figs. 2.2-2.4. The cost elements
associated with each functional response are identified, and guidance is provided for
estimating the value of the cost element and the nature (one-time or periodic) of the
cost. The last digit of each of the following subsection numbers corresponds to the
numerical designation of each functional response number given in Table 2.1 and the
graphical model, and the user is referred to Figs. 2.2-2.4 for an understanding of the
linkages between individual functional responses.
3A
3.4.1 Develop a New Regulation (N)

Some requirements involve the development of a new regulation, others do not,
and in many cases the need for a new regulation is ambiguous at the time that the cost
assessment for the requirement is performed. In any case, the analyst should make an
assumption regarding the need to develop a new regulation, because the costs to the NRC
may be substantial.
The work involved in the development of the regulation may be quite protracted,
possibly extending over a period as long as several years, and involving at least two
offices of the NRC. Labor cost elements will involve staff in both offices; thus the cost
elements are:
Labor expenditures for the development of some regulations are tracked in the
Regulatory Activities Manpower System (RSAMS). This system is maintained by the
Program & Administrative Services Branch, Administration & Resource Control Staff,
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research. The RSAMS System is described in a
memorandum to RES personnel from R.M. Scroggins, Director, ARCS, RES, entitled,
"Immediate Implementation of Changes in the Manpower System for the Office of
Nuclear Regulatory Research," September 17, 1981. The RSAMS System is RES's
management information system, formed by a merger of the original Research and
Standards systems. The system is similar to the RAMS system maintained by NRR (see
functional response #4). Manpower expenditures are tracked according to task numbers
from the "Green Book" (NUREG-0566, Standards Development Status Summary Report).
Task numbers in the "Green Book" cover regulatory guides, regulations, and standard
review plans under development by the Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.
Although the RSAMS system contains raw data on resource expenditures for the
development of some regulations, only limited analyses have been conducted on these
data to determine, for example, typical resource expenditures for these efforts.
Salary levels for NRC employees are available in "Budget Estimates Fiscal
Year ," published annually in January for the following fiscal year by the Budget
Operations & System Development Branch, Division of Budget and Analysis, Office of
Resource Management. This document contains salary levels and benefits for each NRC
office and for the NRC as a whole. Data are also available for administrative support,
which may be treated as an overhead item for direct labor from the relevant offices
(NRR, l&E, and RES). Input data are supplied by the appropriate organs within the NRC
offices, i.e., the Planning Resource and Analysis Branch within NRR. From these input
sources, branch-specific data may be obtained.
35
3.4.2 Develop/Change Regulatory Guides (N)

Many requirements entail the development of one or more Regulatory Guides.
The development of a Regulatory Guide is the responsibility of the NRC Office of
Research (RES). The work involved may be quite protracted, and the resource
expenditures substantial. Input may be required from the NRC Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation as well as the Office of Research. Thus the cost elements are:
RES expenditures for the development of some Regulatory Guides are tracked in the
RSAMS System. The RSAMS System is described in the discussion of functional response
#1. Only limited analyses have been conducted on the data contained in this system to
determine, for example, typical resource expenditures in the development of a
Regulatory Guide. The evaluation of NRR costs is addressed under functional response
#4.
3.4.3 Change/Write Section of Standard Review Plan (N)

Many requirements entail rewriting sections of the Standard Review Plan
(NUREG-0800), or even adding new sections to that document. The Standard Review
Plan is an NRC document that describes what the reviewers look for in their evaluation
of a Safety Analysis Report. Input may be required from both the NRC Office of
Research and the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. Thus the cost elements are:
RES labor expenditures for the preparation of the Standard Review Plan are tracked in
the RSAMS System, which is described above in the discussion of functional response #1.
NRR labor expenditures in connection with the preparation of the Standard Review Plan
are tracked in NRR's RAMS System, which is described below in the discussion of
functional response #4. Only limited analyses have been conducted on the data contained
in either system to determine, for example, typical resource expenditures for the
revisions to the Standard Review Plan. The evaluation of NRR costs is addressed under
functional response #4.
3.4.4 Notify Project Managers, Notify Licensees, Prepare TACs (N)
After the assignment by the NRC of a lead project manager and a lead engineer
to the generic requirement, the lead project manager notifies the relevant plant project
managers about the nature of the requirement. Then the licensees are notified. The lead
project manager also prepares the paperwork required to track the multiplant
36
requirement in the NRR management information system, known as the RAMS System.
This paperwork results in the assignment of a TACs (Technical Assignment Controls)
number. The magnitude of the costs associated with this NRC administrative functional
response is usually negligible in comparison with industry costs. The relevant cost
element is:
The NRR RAMS System is a management information system that tracks the man-hours
spent by NRR personnel in accomplishing various tasks. The system is described in NRR
Office Letter No. 27, Rev. 4, "User's Guide to the NRR RAMS System, NRR Planning and
Program Analysis Staff, May 12, 1982. Tasks are defined by entering work assignments
into the system on TAC Forms (NRC Form 197). TAC Forms contain the titles and brief
descriptions of new work assignments, activity codes, relevant facilities and docket
numbers, and names of personnel authorized to work on the assignment. NRC staff
reference the relevant TAC numbers when they fill out so-called Reviewer Report Forms
every week. These forms contain spaces for the number of hours worked and permit the
addition or deletion of new case assignments.
The Program and Program Analysis Staff performs periodic assessments of the
data contained in the RAMS System. Typical levels of effort for various NRR activities,
including multiplant requirements, are evaluated and converted to dollars (using the time
and attendance system). IVIost of this analysis has been performed in support of budget
preparation. Although the data have not been analyzed to the level of this functional
response, there is a general administrative category that includes these costs.
3.4.5 Analyze the Requirement (U)

Assuming that there is time (this step is frequently bypassed in the interest of
expediency), the first action by the utility after receipt of the requirement is to analyze
its impact. This may be performed within a licensing group or a project management
organization, depending on the organization of the utility. This relatively small effort
may involve the following cost elements:
i. Executive Labor
Project Management is intended here and in all subsequent functional response to include
all professional management and supervisory personnel directly working on the response,
not only the overall project manager. Executive labor is normally included in overhead
as an indirect cost. However, during the analysis and initial response to NRC regulatory
requirements, a disproportionate amount of executive time may be required. Accord-
ingly, it is shown here as a direct cost.
37
Project management and executive salaries and benefits can be obtained, by

subscription, from the annual Edison Electric Institution (EEl) survey, "Annual Wage and
Salary Surveys." This survey tabulates executive compensation and benefits for the top
ten executive positions, and management, administrative, and professional salaries for 75
jobs. Fringe and overhead rates and the compensation of engineers are also addressed
under functional response #26.
Additionally, a recent Electrical World article, "Utility Executive Salaries: How

High? How Low?" (Electrical World, pp. 31-35, January 1983), provides estimates of
compensation for utility Chief Executive Officers, Chief Operating Officers, and Chief
Financial Officers as functions of revenues, kWhr sales, and numbers of employees.
Compensation for utility project managers is also addressed under functional

response #7.
3.4.6 Meet with Licensee ^d/or Owners' Group (N)

For some requirements, a meeting with the licensee is necessary to clarify the
requirement or to discuss the utility response. For a requirement specific to a particular
type of reactor, the utilities may choose to be represented by an owners' group. The
magnitude of the costs associated with this NRC administrative functional response is
usually negligible in comparison with industry costs. The relevant cost element is:
The evaluation of NRR costs is addressed under functional response #4. Although the
data in the RAMS system have not been analyzed to the level of this functional response,
there is a general administrative category that includes these costs.
3.4.7 Meet with NRC (A-E and/or V and/or U)
For some requirements, a meeting with the NRC is necessary to clarify the
requirement or to discuss the utility response. The utility may elect to include in these
discussions representatives from its architect-engineer or NSSS vendor. Or, for a
requirement specific to a particular type of reactor, the utilities themselves may be
represented by an owners' group. Cost elements for this functional response are:
Compensation and fringe benefits for project managers and engineers may be obtained
from the Edison Electric Institute survey, discussed under functional response #5. Fringe
and overhead rates and the compensation of engineers are additionally addressed under
38
Recent articles in the periodical, Electrical World, also quantify engineers'

compensation. One of these, which also includes technicians' salaries, is "The Engineer's
Pay: Fatter Than Ever?", Electrical World, pp. 45-48, March 1982. This article gives
ranges of utility engineers' salaries as a function of number of years since bachelor's
degree, for both supervisors and nonsupervisors, for the year 1981.
A more recent article is "Survey Shows Engineering Salaries Rise 6%," Electrical
World, pp. 29-32, July 1983. This report gives average engineering salaries by level of
responsibility, branch of engineering, job function, and supervisory/managerial
responsibility.
3.4.8 Request Office of Management and Budget Clearance (N)
Any time a government agency formally surveys more than 10 private-sector

organizations, a clearance is required from the Office of Management and the Budget.
The procedures for obtaining an OMB clearance are described in NRR Office Letter No.
32, Revision 2, "Procedures for Obtaining OMB Clearance," memorandum for all NRR
Personnel from Jesse L. Funches, Acting Director, Planning and Program Analysis
Branch, August 4, 1982. This memorandum describes the steps necessary to process an
OMB Clearance Package, including the completion of Standard Form SF-83.
The NRC cost element for this relatively small administrative functional
response is:
i. Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
The evaluation of NRR costs is addressed under functional response #4. There are also
costs to the Office of Management and Budget in reviewing the request, which are not
explicitly identified here.
3.4.9 Contractor Assists NRC in Reviewing Responses (V and N)
The NRC frequently uses contractors to assist the staff in reviewing

documentation. It is assumed that the lead engineer monitors the contractor. Therefore,
the cost elements are:
The evaluation of NRR costs is addressed under functional response #4. The
costs incurred in the procurement of contractual support, which may be substantial, are
assumed to be reflected by the overhead burden on NRR labor. The NRR RAMS system
contains a cost category for contractual support, but these data have not been analyzed
to provide typical expenditures for this item.
39
3.4.10 Solicit and Review Responses from Licensees (N)
The NRC may solicit formal responses from affected licensees on proposed
methods for compliance. A package describing the information desired must be pre-
pared, and the responses must be reviewed (frequently with help from contractors — see
functional response #9). The information solicited may consist of preliminary or final
hardware designs, procedures, or plans. The following NRC cost element is involved:
The evaluation of NRR costs is addressed under functional response #4. The data
contained in the RAMS system have not been analyzed to the level of this functional
response; however, there is a general administrative category that includes these costs.
3.4.11 Prepare Responses for NRC (A-E and/or V and/or U)
In responding to a new NRC requirement, a preliminary evaluation is performed

to determine whether the new requirement affects the utility's nuclear project, and if so,
to prepare a recommendation to the utility. The chain of events for accomplishing this is
initiated by a request from the utility to the A-E to review the document, or upon direct
receipt of the document by the A-E. Typically, the new NRC requirement is reviewed by
a licensing engineer assigned to the nuclear project, who determines its applicability to
the project. His recommendation is forwarded to the project's engineering manager, who
determines which engineering disciplines are affected. If necessary, speciality technical
analysis groups outside of the project are called in, as well as the NSSS vendor. For
those projects under construction or in operation, input is also solicited from site
engineering and home office construction management. An acceptable engineering
response is formulated by the appropriate parties. A recommendation is made to the
utility advising what general design changes are necessary, if any, and the estimated cost
of such changes. This recommendation in turn is forwarded to the NRC if acceptable by
the utility.
The costs of implementing changes generally increase with the percent

completion of the plant. Costs are limited to A-E, V, and U manhours and expenses, and
vary considerably with the nature of the requirement. Using the Energy Economic Data
Base (EEDB) code of accounts, as described in Chapter 4 of this handbook, as a guide for
the distribution of costs, they are as follows:
Cost Element EEDB Code of Accounts
a. P r o j e c t Management Labor 921 - P r i m a r i l y — Home Office S e r v i c e s

923 - Home Office C o n s t r u c t i o n Management
b. Engineering Labor 921 - P r i m a r i l y — Home Office Services

922 - Home Office QA
220B - NSSS Vendor Engineering
c. C l e r i c a l Labor
40
e. Programming Labor 921 - P r i m a r i l y — Home Office Services
w. Reproduction
Cost References: Accounts 921, 922, and 923
1. National Survey of Professional, Administrative, and Clerical Pay,

March, 1983 published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of
Labor Statistics (Bulletin 2181).
2. Consultants, Constructors, and Designers to the Power Industry,

published by Power Engineering, 1301 S. Grove Ave., Barrington,
Illinois 60010.
3. Management Consulting Firms
Cost reference (1) summarizes the results of the Bureau of Labor Statistics
annual salary survey of selected white-collar occupations in private industry. This
information can be used to develop rough estimates of cost.
References (2) and (3) are provided as possible sources of more specific
professional, administrative, technical, and clerical pay scales for the power-generation
field. This type of data is generally proprietary information, not available to the
public. It may therefore require the retention of an independent consultant to assist in
obtaining such data, usually for a fee.
Reference (2) is a listing of representative consulting firms associated with the

power industry.
Reference (3) is a general reference to management consulting firms that

perform surveys of salary structures of selected occupations in private industry.
Account 220B: NSSS Options - NSSS Vendor Engineering
The costs of NSSS vendor engineering are included in the cost of NSSS
equipment, which appears in cost element (t), factory equipment, in functional response
#18.
3.4.12 Solicit and Review Answers to Questions (N)
The NRC may have questions on the responses from the licensees. If so, the
staff would prepare a list of questions to be answered by the licensees. This work, as
well as the review of the answers to the questions, may involve the NRC contractor (see
functional response #9) as well as the staff. Also, if the answers are unsatisfactory, or
41
bring up additional questions, there may be another round of questions. The relevant
NRC cost element is:
The evaluation of NRR costs is addressed under functional response #4. The data
contained in the RAMS system have not been analyzed to the level of this functional
response; however, there is a general administrative category that includes these costs.
3.4.13 Answer Questions from NRC (A-E and/or V and/or U)
All responses to questions from the NRC follow a procedure similar to that
described in the discussion of functional response #11. Responses are prepared by the A-
E, V, or U or any combination thereof, and require, where necessary, their approval.
Costs are limited to the A-E, V, or U manhours and expenses, and vary
considerably with the nature and extent of the questions. The cost elements are the
same as and are distributed among the EEDB code of accounts as described in functional
response #11.
Cost References: Same as those for functional response #11.
3.4.14 Perform Conceptual Design, Including Unresolved Safety Question

Determination, Resource Estimate, and Preliminary Schedule (A-E
and/or U)
As part of the preliminary evaluation of a new NRC requirement, as discussed in

functional response #11, the affected engineering disciplines perform engineering
changes, analyses, and redesign as required. This is accomplished first at the conceptual
level to meet the intent of the new NRC requirement. At this level, safety questions and
preliminary schedules are addressed to determine the extent of the modifications and
changes, if any, that are required. All proposed changes are subject to approval by the
utility.
Costs are primarily the A-E home office and utility manhours and/or expenses,
and vary considerably depending upon the magnitude of the proposed changes. The cost
elements are:
c. Clerical Labor
d. Drafting Labor
42
These cost elements are primarily included in the EEDB code of accounts 921, Home
Office Services.
Cost References: Same as those for Account 921 of functional response #11.
3.4.15 Evaluate Budget Requirements (A-E and/or U)
An evaluation of the budget is undertaken if it is determined by the affected

engineering disciplines that significant changes and associated costs are required to meet
the intent of the new NRC requirement. This evaluation includes estimating the cost of
design changes, analyses, procurement, construction, testing, and scheduled changes.
This is subject to negotiations with and approval of the utility. Costs are primarily A-E
home office and utility manhours and/or expenses, and are relatively insensitive to the
complexity of the requirement. The cost elements are:
c. Clerical Labor
g. Accounting Labor
These cost elements are primarily included in the EEDB code of accounts 921, Home
Office Services.
Cost References: Same as those for Account 921 of functional response #11.
3.4.16 Perform Detailed Design and/or Design Review, Including

Specifications for Outside Procurement (A-E and/or U)
If it is determined in the preliminary evaluation that design changes are

necessary to meet the new NRC requirements, as discussed in functional response #11,
and utility approval is received, the detailed design phase of the process is performed.
The affected engineering disciplines, as well as the NSSS vendor — if necessary ~
perform the design changes, which may entail new and/or revised drawings, specifica-
tions, and system design descriptions along with any needed supporting stress and safety
analyses. For projects under construction or in operation, input is also solicited from site
engineering and home office construction management. The work is done in considerably
more detail than required during the preliminary stage, and is reviewed by all affected
parties prior to submission to the utility for approval.
Costs are limited primarily to A-E home office and/or U manhours and expenses.
For new construction (no backfit), design costs typically account for about 17% of the
total project costs. Backfit design costs are higher, typically 30%. Design costs for
modifications to older plants could be higher yet due to the possible unavailability of
43
drawings or questions as to their accuracy. The costs elements are distributed among the
following EEDB code of accounts:
a. Project Management Labor 921 - Primarily - Home Office Services

923 - Home Office Construction Management
b. Engineering Labor 921 - Primarily - Home Office Services

c. Clerical Labor
d. Drafting Labor
e. Programming Labor 921 - Primarily - Home Office Services
h. QA/QC Labor 922 - Home Office QA
s. Computer
3.4.17 Perform Safety/Risk/Reliability Analysis (A-E and/or V and/or U)

In conjunction with required design changes, analyses of safety, risk, and
reliability are performed as required. These analyses are required to assure the
credibility of the redesign, and can be highly complex and sophisticated, requiring
interfacing of the organizational participants. The greater the number of the analytical
groups required and the more complex the changes, the greater the cost. The
performance of these analyses is subject to the approval of the utility.
Costs are incurred by the home office operations of the participants, and are
distributed as follows:
Cost Element EEDB Code-of-Accounts
a. Project Management Labor 921 - Home Office Services
b. Engineering Labor 921 - Home Office Services

c. Clerical Labor
s. Computer 921 - Primarily - Home Office Services
w. Reproduction
Cost References: Same as those for Accounts 921 and 220B of functional
response #11.
44
3.4.18 Procure Materials and Equipment, Including Preparation of the Bid

Package Evaluation of Proposals, and Preparation of Purchase Order
(A-E and/or V and/or U)
At the same time that the detailed drawings are being revised by the A-E to
meet the new NRC requirement, the appropriate engineering disciplines revise the
existing procurement specifications or write new specifications for factory-built
equipment or hardware. These are transmitted to procurement personnel to purchase the
factory-built equipment. Additional costs can be incurred at this time due to vendor
construction changes, or changes in equipment that is being fabricated.
Because of the long lead times required to procure and receive nuclear-grade
equipment and materials, the timing and expediting of this procurement process can have
a large impact on the cost of implementing the requirement at a specific plant. This
lead time has a direct affect on the timing and scheduling of construction activities at
the plant site. This will usually be of minor importance to new plants or plants in the
very early stages of construction, but can be of major importance at plants greater than
70% complete, and for operating plants. After the construction plan has been set, the
site equipment and material required to perform the modifications are procured. This
stage includes preparation of the bid packages, evaluation of proposals, preparation of
the purchase orders, and the actual costs of site equipment and materials. This also
involves the services of the construction managers (923 EEDB code of accounts) in
conjunction with the utility and A-E sectors. Site equipment costs are indirect costs and
include temporary construction facilities and construction tools and equipment (911 and
912 EEDB code of accounts). Site materials are primarily direct costs and include such
items as pipe, wire and cable, concrete, steel, etc. (21-26 EEDB code of accounts).
Costs for these activities consist of the home office manhours and expenses of
the procuring organizations, and also the cost of the purchase of factory equipment and
site materials and equipment.
The costs components are distributed as follows:
a. Project Management Labor 923 - Home Office Construction Management
b. Engineering Labor 921 - Home Office Services
c. Clerical Labor 921 - Home Office Services
f. Administrative Labor 921 - Home Office Services
h. QA/QC Labor 922 - Home Office Q/A
t. Equipment - Factory 21-26 - Direct Cost Accounts

- Site 911 & - Temporary Construction Facilities
912 and Construction Tools and Equipment
u. Materials 21-:26 - Direct Cost Accounts

45
Cost References: Accounts 921, 922, and 923
Same as those for functional response #11.
Accounts 21-26 (Materials)
1. R. S. Means Co., Inc., Construction Consultants and Publishers,

Kingston, MA 02364
a. Building Construction Cost Data, 1983
b. Mechanical <5c Electrical Cost Data, 1983
c. Means Square Foot Costs, 1983
Cost reference (la) contains unit prices for building construction items broken
down into material, labor, and total costs, as well as total costs including subcontractors'
overhead and profit.
Cost reference (lb) contains highly detailed treatment of all mechanical and
electrical unit and systems costs.
Cost reference (Ic) contains reliable total costs of construction for typical
building structures.
2. Energy Economic Data Base, Phase VI, 1983, by United Engineers

and Constructors, published periodically by the U.S. Department of
Energy
Cost reference (2) presents factory equipment, site labor, and site material costs
for nuclear plants sited in the Northeast United States. The data base can be used to
ascertain relative costs for factory equipment, site labor, and material for conventional
structures and systems and those related to safety. Generalized costs can be obtained
from the data base and can be made specific by use of other cost references. The data
base can be used as a reference for new construction and therefore used as a gauge for
estimating other structure and system costs.
Accounts 25-26 (Factory Equipment)
1. Factory equipment costs (for capital equipment) are best obtained

directly from the respective equipment vendors through
quotations.
2. Same as for Accounts 21-26, 911, and 912 (Materials) of functional

response #18, reference 2.
46
Accounts 911 and 912 (Site Equipment)
1. Same as that for Accounts 21-26, 911 and 912 (Materials) of

functional response #18, reference la - fire equipment rental
2. Same as that for Accounts 21-26, 911 and 912 (Materials) of

functional response #18, reference 2 - for equipment rental and
purchase
3. The purchase of site equipment is best obtained directly from the

respective equipment vendors through quotations.
3.4.19 Plan Installation, Including Detailed Procedures, Labor

Requirements, and Schedule (C and/or U)
This segment of the process is accomplished in conjunction with the utility, A-E
and nuclear supplier sectors, and involves specifying the work to be done to install the
equipment in the plant. This includes developing the detailed procedures for
accomplishing the work and the construction work schedule, defining the equipment and
materials required for construction purposes and specifying the labor required. The costs
of these activities are assigned to the construction management and engineers who are
responsible for detailing the work procedure (EEDB code of accounts 923).
This stage of the construction planning is significant because it defines the scope
of the work to be performed. This effort can be accomplished in a straightforward
manner for a plant in the early stages of construction. Plants well along in construction
require planning around existing construction activities and may involve planning for
work on existing structures and systems. For operating plants, planning may be done
within the context of a normal plant outage or a special plant outage, both of which call
for precise scheduling and scope definition.
Costs for this effort are limited to organization office manhours and expenses,
and could involve assistance from the A-E design organization. The cost elements are as
follows:
Cost Element EEDB Code-of-Accounts
a. P r o j e c t Management Labor 923 - Home Office C o n s t r u c t i o n Management
b. Engineering Labor 923 - Home Office C o n s t r u c t i o n Management

923 - Home Office S e r v i c e s
c. C l e r i c a l Labor 923 - Home Office C o n s t r u c t i o n Management
Cost References: Same as those for Accounts 921 and 923 of functional response
#11.
47
3.4.20 Modify Structure (V and/or C and/or U)

Modifying structures can be very costly and time consuming. In most cases,
construction of new structures requires less time and money than modifying existing
structures. Modification of structures becomes more difficult and complex in proportion
to the percentage of the plant that is complete. If modifications are to be done to a
Seismic Category 1 structure, the work will be more complex and require more time and
materials than a similar modification on a nonseismic Category I structure. This is due
to the fact that Seismic Category I structures are designed to more stringent
requirements (seismic, aircraft impact, etc.) than nonseismic Category I structures.
Modifications may involve adding to or removing portions of existing concrete structures,
during which special procedures may be necessary such as the hand chipping of concrete
to ensure that no rebar or embedments that are to remain are damaged. Modifications
may also require the removal of piping, wiring, and components previously installed.
Consideration must also be given to protecting existing equipment, e.g., by the use of
equipment coverings, semipermanent shielding walls, and high-powered vacuums to
eliminate concrete dust. These modifications may also involve access to and work in
confined and hazardous spaces, which may significantly reduce labor productivity. As a
result, the cost of modifying existing structures can vary from two to five times the cost
of constructing those portions of new structures.
Costs will include all normal field personnel manhours, home office support
manhours, and expenses, and may require consultation, assistance, and design changes by
the A-E. The cost elements can be detailed as:
a. P r o j e c t Management Labor 923 - Home Office Construction Management
b. Engineering Labor 932 - F i e l d Job Supervision

h. QA/QC Labor 933 - F i e l d QA/QC
j. Craft Supervisory Labor
k. Craft Labor 21-26 - D i r e c t Cost Accounts

913 - P a y r o l l Insurance and Taxes
Cost References: Account 923, 932, and 933

Same as those for Account 923 of functional response #11.
Accounts 21-26 and 913
1. Labor refer to the Construction Industry, 1983, published annually

by R. S. Means Co., Inc., Kingston, MA 02364.
2. Same as those for Accounts 21-26, (Materials) of functional

response #18, references (la), (lb) and (2).
48
Cost reference (1) provides an accurate listing of current hourly

union wages for building construction trades in all major U.S. and
Canadian cities.
Most of these costs will be from the craft labor and field supervision. For new
structures, typical labor, QA/QC, and field support costs are on the order of 30% of the
total cost of the new structure. As construction percent increases, these costs will
comprise an even larger percentage.
3.4.21 Install, Test and Maintain Hardware (V and/or C and/or U)

Costs for installing hardware vary considerably, depending on the systems
involved, the physical location of the components, and the presence of interferences with
existing hardware. For example, installation of safety-grade equipment requires a more
stringent quality control program than nonsafety-grade equipment, including more
inspection and verification, thus affecting labor productivity. Installation within some
buildings results in greater costs due to congestion, making work more difficult, e.g., the
containment building versus the turbine building. Installation Is a one-time cost.
However, testing and maintenance may be continuing costs.
The task can involve the removal of portions of other system and their
reinstallation to provide access for the new hardware installation. The costs are greater
the more complete the plant Is prior to the installation of the new hardware. As a result,
the cost of installing hardware in an existing plant — 50% to 100% complete ~ can vary
from one to five times the cost of such installation at a new plant.
Costs for installation will include all the usual site craft labor costs, supervision,
and field support, and may require consultation, assistance, and design changes by the A-
E. Cost elements can be detailed as:

h. QA/QC Labor 933 - Field QA/QC
k. Craft Labor 21-26 - Direct Cost Accounts

913 - P a y r o l l I n s u r a n c e and Taxes
Most of this cost will result from the craft labor and field supervision. For plants in
early stages of construction, typical labor, QA/QC, and field support costs are on the
order of 30% of the cost of the work. As the construction percentage increases, these
costs will comprise a larger percentage.

49
3.4.22 Inspect Hardware (V and/or C and/or U)
This task involves Inspecting and verifying the quality of the construction work
to ensure that installation complies with design and QA programs.
The regulatory requirement may Include inspecting existing hardware. In addition

to inspecting the modification work performed. In fact, a requirement might also Involve
periodic inspections, in which case continuing costs as well as initial costs may be
entailed. The cost components involved are Field Job Supervision (932), Field Quality
Assurance/Quality Control (933), Craft Labor (21-26), and Payroll, Insurance, and Taxes
(913). This segment of work is typically performed jointly by the utility and the A-E, and
the costs can Increase considerably if the inspection is performed in a radiation
environment. Much of the work by the construction sector may Involve removing
equipment, and then replacing the same equipment after the Inspection has been
performed.
The cost elements are as follows:
b. Engineering Labor 932 - Field Job Supervision

933 - Field QA/QC
o. Technician Labor 932 and 933 Accounts
Cost References: Accounts 932 and 933
Same as those for Account 923 of functional response #11.
Same as those for Accounts 21-26 and 913 of functional response #20, references
(1) and (2).
3.4.23 Develop Software (A-E and/or V and/or U)
New requirements may require the development of new computer programs or

modifications to existing programs to evaluate parameters such as fuel temperatures,
occupational radiation exposures, mechanical stresses, and many other technical
factors. This work may involve off-line analysis software or plant operations software.
Development of and/or revisions to programs require the modeling of the engineered
systems as well as interpretation and application of physical laws, thus requiring
engineering personnel, scientists, and computer programmers working as a team.
50
Costs are primarily centered at the performing organization's home office, and
Include manhours, expenses, and computer charges. It will include checkout and
certification of the software, documentation of the program, and preparation of a user's
manual. Costs can range widely, from minor modifications of a few lines of program to
the development of new computer codes, which may require tens of thousands of
manhours. These costs are relatively independent of the percentage of the plant that is
complete. The cost elements are:
Engineering Labor 921 A-E Home O f f i c e Services
Clerical Labor 220B NSSS Vendor Engineering
Programming Labor î-Zb
21-26 - O t h e r Vendor E n g i n e e r i n g Equipment
s. Computer
Cost References: Account 921

Same as those for Account 921 of functional response #11, plus computer time
sharing costs, which can be obtained from the various computer companies.
Accounts 21-26 (including 220B)

Same as that for Account 220B of functional response #11.
3.4.24 Add To or Change Record Keepir^ (U)

A new NRC requirement might entail the addition of or changes to a record
keeping system. The system might be manual or automated. If it is automated, or if the
requirement entails conversion to an automated system, hardware procurement and/or
software development might be involved. Also, there may be continuing costs as well as
initial costs. One type of continuing cost incurred might be the labor associated with an
increase in staff to maintain the new or enhanced record-keeping system. Potential
utility cost elements are:
Cost Element

c. Clerical Labor
s. Computer
w. Reproduction
X. Storage
51
Compensation and benefits for several categories of utility employees are

compiled in the annual EEI survey, which Is discussed under functional response #5.
Fringe and overhead rates are also addressed under functional response #26.
3.4.25 Add To or Change Reporting (U)

A new NRC requirement might entail additional reporting or changes in the
existing reporting system. The system might be manual or automated. If it is
automated, or if the requirement entails conversion to an automated system, hardware
procurement and/or software development might be involved. Also, there may be
continuing costs as well as initial costs. One type of continuing cost incurred might be
the labor associated with an increase in staff to compile the data associated with the
new or changed reporting requirement. Potential utility cost elements are:
Cost Element
a. P r o j e c t Management Labor
c. C l e r i c a l Labor
f. A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Labor
s. Computer
w. Reproduction
Compensation and fringe benefits for several categories of utility employees are
compiled in the annual EEl survey, which is discussed under functional response #5.
Fringe and overhead rates are also addressed under functional response #26.
3.4.26 Increase Nonoperating Staff (U)

A new NRC requirement might entail the addition of nonoperating utility staff
(functional response #47 deals with operating staff). An increase in staff is a continuing
cost. Cost elements are:
Cost Element

c. Clerical Labor
d. Drafting Labor
g. Accounting Labor
h. QA/QC Labor
i. Executive Labor
k. Craft Labor
52

compiled in the annual EEI survey, which is discussed under functional response #5.
Compensation for utility engineers is addressed under functional response #7. Fringe and
overhead rates are also addressed under functional response #26.
Additionally, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers publishes
annually the "Utility Department Nuclear Guide," which gives current wage schedules for
classifications of union worker by Individual power station. The data are based on an
annual survey. This source would be useful in estimating unit costs of craft supervisory
and craft labor.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes monthly data (in BLS Bulletin 1312-5) on
employment and earnings throughout the U.S. These monthly data on payroll reports of
employers are based on the 1957 Standard Industrial Classification Manual. The data
may be useful for some of the categories of utility labor.
It should be noted that this functional response may be redundant with functional
responses 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 24, and/or 25.
3.4.27 Federal, State, Local Government Participation (G)
Federal agencies other than the NRC that are most likely to be involved include
the Environmental Protection Agency (radiation standards), the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (emergency response), the Department of Justice (anti-trust), the
Department of State (export licenses), the Department of Energy (nuclear research), the
Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration (emergency response), and the
Department of Transportation (shipments of radioactive materials). State and local
agencies may be affected by NRC requirements that relate to siting and emergency
preparedness. The involvement of government agencies may entail both continuing and
initial costs. The cost elements are:
Cost Element
p. State Official Labor

q. Local Official Labor
r. Federal Official Labor
y. State Contract/Grant
3.4.28 Impact on International Trade (A-E and/or V and/or C)

Foreign sales by architect-engineers, constructors, or vendors might be affected
by changes of NRC requirements under their export license responsibilities. Utilities are
not likely to be directly affected. Any cost Impact under this category is likely to be a
continuing cost.
53
3.4.29 Write/Rewrite Procedures (V and/or U)

A new NRC requirement might entail new or revised procedures for plant
operation. The procedures may be written In-house by the utility, by a vendor under
contract, or by a combination of the two. The cost elements of this one-time cost are:
Cost Element

c. Clerical Labor
h. QA/QC Labor
w. Reproduction
Compensation and benefits of utility engineers and project managers are

addressed under functional responses #5 and #7. Fringe and overhead rates and
compensation of engineers are additionally addressed under functional response #26.
3.4.30 Conduct Test of System/Subsystem (V and/or C and/or U)

This effort may be a repeat test of a modified system, or the first test if the
system was modified during plant construction prior to testing. It may also involve the
testing of an additional system. Also, It may entail continuing as well as initial costs.
Costs include the test personnel manhours and expenses of the team involved in
the testing. Care must be taken to include only additional testing not costed in the new
plant testing program.
The costs elements are as follows:

o. Technician Labor 934 - Plant S t a r t u p and Test
Accounts 932, 933, and 934
Same as those for Accounts 921, 922 and 923 of functional response #11.
3.4.31 Write/Rewrite Training Manuals (V and/or U)
A new NRC requirement might entail new or revised training manuals for plant
operating personnel. The training manuals may be written In-house by the utility, by a
vendor under contract, or by a combination of the two. The cost elements for this one-
time cost are:
54
Cost Element
c. Clerical Labor
h. QA/QC Labor
w. Reproduction
Compensation and benefits of utility engineers are addressed under functional

responses #5 and #7. Fringe and overhead rates and compensation of engineers are
additionally addressed under functional response #26.
3.4.32 Train/Retrain Staff (V and/or U)
A new NRC requirement might entail training of operating personnel or

additional training of already trained personnel. (The development of training manuals to
support the training efforts is addressed by functional response #31.) Training may be
conducted in-house by the utility, by a vendor under contract, or by a combination of the
two. Training may be a one-time or a continuing cost, depending on the nature of the
requirement. The cost elements are:
Cost Element
0. Technician Labor
Compensation and benefits of utility engineers and technicians are addressed

under functional responses #5 and #7. Fringe and overhead rates and compensation of
engineers are additionally addressed under functional response #26.
3.4.33 Write/Rewrite Technical Specifications (U)
A new NRC requirement could Involve the drafting of a new plant operating
Technical Specification or the revision of an existing one. This would be a one-time cost
incurred directly by the utility and Is usually negligible in comparison with other costs.
Cost elements are:
Cost Element

c. Clerical Labor
i. Executive Labor
Compensation and benefits for utility engineers, project managers, executives,

and clerical personnel are addressed under functional response #5. Compensation for
utility engineers and project managers is additionally addressed under functional
55
responses #7 and #26. Fringe and overhead rates are additionally addressed under
3.4.34 Review Technical Specifications (N)
The Technical Specifications drafted by the utility must be reviewed for

technical and legal content by the NRC staff. The magnitude of the costs associated
with this NRC administrative functional response is usually negligible in comparison with
industry costs. The relevant cost elements are:
Cost Element

ii. Office of the Executive Legal D i r e c t o r Labor
The evaluation of NRR costs is addressed under functional response #4. Labor
costs by the Office of the Executive Legal Director (ELD) may be included in the
overhead costs of NRR staff.
3.4.35 Contractor Assists NRC in Reviewing Design (V and N)

This response provides assistance to the NRC in understanding the design and
Interpreting the drawings and analyses submitted by an applicant for the purposes of
demonstrating that the additions or modifications meet NRC requirements. Costs are
dependent upon NRC requests for assistance and include the contractor's home office
manhours and expenses, and may require the interaction of many engineering
disciplines. Travel to the NRC or other locations may be necessary. Costs are not
expected to be significantly affected by the percentage of construction that Is
complete. The relevant cost element is:
i . Office of Nuclear Regulation Labor 921 - Home Office Services

Cost References: Accounts 921 and 220B
Same as those for Accounts 921 and 220B of functional response #11.
3.4.36 Review of Design (N)
For operating plants, the NRC may require the affected licensees to submit for
NRC review plans and designs prior to the implementation of modifications. (Review of
modification plans for plants under construction would be conducted during the operating
56
license review, and costs Incurred would be indistinguishable from that overall review.)
This one-time cost would require the following NRC cost element:
Cost Element
The evaluation of NRR costs is addressed under functional response #4.
3.4.37 Contractor Prepares TER (V and N)

The NRC frequently uses contractors to assist the staff in preparing its Safety
Evaluation Report (SER). When a contractor is used in this capacity, a stand-alone
document known as a TER, or "Technical Evaluation Report," is prepared. The NRR lead
engineer monitors the work of the contractor. The relevant cost elements are:
Cost Element

costs incurred in the procurement of contractual support are assumed to be reflected by
the overhead burden on NRR labor. The NRR RAMS system contains a cost category for
contractual support, but these data have not been analyzed to provide typical
expenditures for this item.
3.4.38 Prepare SER (N)
SER stands for the NRC's "Safety Evaluation Report." This step is shown only in
the plant operating phase because it is assumed that during the construction phase, the
safety evaluation of a design modification would be reviewed during the operating license
proceedings, and would thus be indistinguishable from that overall review. The SER is
prepared by the NRR staff (with possible help from a contractor — see functional
response #37). The relevant cost elements are:
Cost Element
NRR RAMS system tracks SER preparation, and some of the data have been analyzed for
purposes of budget preparation.
57
3.4.39 Replacement Energy Penalty (U)

If replacement energy costs result from a regulatory requirement, these costs
are likely to predominate. In addition, the considerations leading up to the accrual of a
cost for replacement energy are quite complex. First, it must be determined if the
requirement would lead to a forced shutdown of the plant at a time other than a planned
outage. Then, depending on the season and the status of other units in the system, a
determination must still be made regarding the source of replacement energy. Replace-
ment energy may be supplied by the same utility with sufficient excess capacity, or by
purchase from another utility or power grid. In either case, as long as the marginal
energy source commands a higher cost than the disabled nuclear unit, there will be a
replacement energy cost penalty.
Even if It appears possible to accomplish a modification during a planned outage,
there still exists a possibility that the work would extend the outage, resulting in the
need for replacement energy. Also, it is not possible to evaluate regulatory requirements
Individually when evaluating the potential for outage extension, since it is the totality of
all of the modifications that affects the outage duration. Although it may not be
possible for the analyst to take all of these factors into account in determining the need
for a replacement energy cost penalty, there should be an awareness of the complexity of
the problem.
The most comprehensive and timely compilation of replacement energy costs is

contained in the following report:
"Replacement Energy Costs for Nuclear Generating Units In the

U.S.," NUREG/CR-XXXX to be published in October 1984.
This report will provide estimates of replacement energy costs for

each of the nuclear units expected to be in operation by early
1986. Replacement energy costs will be provided in units of
mills/kWhr and average daily production cost increases. A
consistent methodology will be used to estimate the costs, taking
into account the regional power pools, and assuming a nominal
utility maintenance schedule.
Three earlier reports may contain useful Information for the evaluation of
replacement energy costs:
1. "Loss of Benefits Resulting from Nuclear Power Plant Outages,"

NUREG/CR-3045, March 1982.
This source estimates costs of replacement power in mills/kWhr

from case studies on six utility systems, taking into account the
regional power pools. The estimates were based on utility
simulations, with an attempt to make the estimates consistent.
58
However, the focus is on the long-term costs of losing a reactor

due to an accident. The six plants examined were Zion, Oconee,
Prairie Island, Browns Ferry, Indian Point, and Three Mile Island.
2. "A Guide for Reviewing Estimates of Production Cost Increases

Resulting from Nuclear Plant Outages," NUREG/CR-XXXX draft
September 1982, to be published.
This report uses information from NUREG/CR-3045 (above) to

develop rough rules of thumb for estimating replacement power
costs. The percentage of oil-fired capacity in the system, for
example, is a first-order parameter.
3. "An Efficient Simulation Approach for Evaluating the Potential

Effects of Nuclear Power Plant Shutdowns on Electric Utility
Generating Systems," NUREG/CR-3553, June 1983.
This report describes the computer methodology developed to

perform replacement power cost estimates for power pools in a
consistent manner.
The actual cost of purchased power for each utility is compiled annually by the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, using data from FERC-1 (formerly FPC-L) for
private utilities, and from F E R C - l - F , for publicly-owned utilities. The data are
collected and published by the Energy Information Administration (ElA). The relevant
EIA publication for private utilities is "Statistics of Privately Owned Electric
Utilities, Annual (Classes A and B Companies)," DOE/EIA-0044( ). For publicly-
owned utilities, the EIA publication is "Statistics of Publicly Owned Electric
Utilities, Annual," published annually by the DOE Energy Information Administration
DOE/EIA-0172(_).
3.4.40 Modify Structures in a Radiation Environment (V and/or C and/or U)
In addition to the costs associated with structure modifications on new plants and
plants under construction as described under response function #20, the presence of
radiation from operating plants poses additional problems and cost. Where work on
structures or systems involving a radiation environment are encountered, temporary
shielding, personnel radiation protection, training, and additional personnel (to reduce
individual exposure time) may all be required. This will result in increased costs as well
as lengthened schedules, due to greatly reduced labor productivity as compared to work
in a nonradioactive area. In the absence of specific cost data of previous similar work
performed in a similar environment, a useful rule of thumb in estimating labor
requirements for work in a radiation environment Involving all of the special activities
Identified above is to assume a labor productivity factor of 0.1 when compared with
similar activities involving new construction. Except for replacement energy costs, this
factor may be the single greatest cost in modifying structures in a plant that is in
operation.
«
59
Costs will include all normal field personnel manhours, home office support
manhours and expenses, may require consultation, assistance, and design changes by the
A-E, and can be detailed as:

913 - P a y r o l l Insurance and Taxes
1. Radiation P r o t e c t i o n Labor Operating Costs
m. S e c u r i t y Labor 91 - Construction Services
Cost References: Accounts 911, 923, 932, 933 and Radiation Protection Labor
Same as those for Accounts 921, 922 and 923 of functional response #11.
Same as those for Accounts 21-26 and 913 of functional response #20, references
(1) and (2).
3.4.41 Install, Test and Maintain Hardware in a Radiation Environment

(V and/or C and/or U)
In addition to the costs associated with installing hardware in a new plant or

plant under construction as described in response function #21, additional costs are
incurred for operating plants due to the presence of a radiation environment. Where
hardware must be installed in structures or systems that contain radiation, temporary
shielding, personnel radiation protection, training, and additional personnel (to reduce
individual exposure time) will be required. This will result in increased costs as well as
lengthened schedules as compared to work in a nonradioactive area. The use of a labor
productivity factor of 0.1, as discussed in Sec. 3.4.40 is applicable to hardware
installation in a radiation environment. As stated previously, this may be the single
greatest factor in the costs in installing hardware in a plant that is in operation.
Costs will include all the usual site craft labor costs, supervision, and field
support, and may require consultation, assistance, and design changes by the A-E costs
can be detailed as:
60
a. P r o j e c t Management Labor 923 - Home Office Construction Management
h. QA/QC Labor 933 - Field QA/QC

913 - Payroll Insurance and Taxes
1. R a d i a t i o n P r o t e c t i o n Labor Operating Cost
m. S e c u r i t y Labor 91 - Construction Services

Most of this cost will be from the craft labor and field supervision. For plants in
early stages of construction, typical labor, QA/QC and field support costs are on the
order of 30% of the cost of the work. As construction percent increases, these costs will
comprise a larger percentage.
3.4.42 Draft License Amendment (U)
A new requirement may entail a license amendment. Although the contribution

of this functional response to the overall utility costs should be negligible, the cost
elements involved in drafting the amendment are:
Cost Element

i. Executive Labor
Compensation and benefits for utility engineers, project managers, executives,

and clerical personnel are addressed under functional response #5. Compensation for
utility engineers and project managers is additionally addressed under functional
responses #7 and #26. Fringe and overhead rates are additionally addressed under
3.4.43 Review License Amendment (N)
The license amendment drafted by the utility must be reviewed for technical and
legal content by the NRC staff. The magnitude of the costs associated with this NRC
administrative functional response is usually negligible in comparison with other costs.
The relevant NRC cost elements are:
61
Cost Element

V. Office of the Executive Legal D i r e c t o r Labor
Plant project managers and technical reviewers are in the Office of Nuclear
Reactor Regulation. The evaluation of NRR costs is addressed under functional response
#4. Labor costs by the Office of the Executive Legal Director (ELD) may be Included in
the overhead costs of NRR staff.
3.4.44 Contractor Assists NRC in Inspecting Hardware (V and N)

The NRC Office of Inspection &: Enforcement (I&E) occasionally uses contractors
to assist in inspection of hardware. The cost elements for this functional response are:
Cost Element

I&E costs are addressed under functional response #45. The I&E management
information system ("766" system) presumably contains a cost category for contracts, but
the data have not been analyzed to provide typical expenditures for this item.
3.4.45 Inspect Hardware (N)

Once a hardware modification has been made. It may be subject to inspection by
the NRC Office of Inspection Sc Enforcement (I&E). A contractor may assist in the
inspection (see functional response #44). The cost elements are:
Cost Element
iii. Office of Inspection and Enforcement Labor

I&E costs are tracked on the I&E "766" system, maintained by the l&E Program
Support Branch. The l&E "766" system is so-named because the input to the system
(containing approximately 100 data entry items) is entered on NRC Form 766. The
system contains the statistics associated with each of the roughly 4000 annual NRC
inspections, including the dates, the resulting report(s), the inspection procedures
followed, the time devoted to each procedure, and the resulting citations. If a procedure
is identified with a generic or multiplant requirement through a "Temporary Instruction,"
it Is included in the system.
Only the very largest effort among the generic or multiplant requirements are
assigned "Temporary Instructions" (TIs). Most of the inspections related to generic
62
requirements are conducted during the regularly scheduled inspections (for example, the
monthly maintenance inspections) and are not accounted for separately. Thus the costs
are hidden within the costs of regular inspection procedures. It would be possible to
analyze the existing TIs to determine the resource expenditures for larger Inspection
efforts associated with generic requirements, but this has not as yet been accomplished.
3.4.46 Conduct Monitoring/Sampling (V and/or U)
A new NRC requirement may entail new or increased monitoring/sampling. The

monitoring/sampling may be conducted by utility personnel, by a vendor under contract
to the utility, or by a combination of the two. The monitoring/sampling may be
performed once, in which case these are only one-time costs, or It may Impose a
continuing cost. The cost elements are:
Cost Element
h. QA/QC Labor
1. Radiation Protection Labor
o. Technician Labor
Compensation and fringe benefits for several categories of utility personnel may
be obtained from the EEI survey, discussed under functional response #5. Compensation
of engineers and technicians is additionally addressed under functional response #7.
Fringe and overhead rates and the compensation of engineers are addressed under
3.4.47 Change Number of Operating Staff (U)

A new NRC requirement might entail the addition of operating utility staff
(functional response #26 deals with nonoperating staff). An increase in staff is a
continuing cost. Cost elements are:
Cost Element
c. Clerical Labor
h. QA/QC Labor
m. Security Labor
0. Technician Labor

Compensation for utility engineers and technicians Is addressed under functional response
63
#7. Fringe and overhead rates and compensation for engineers, are addressed under
responses #22, 24, 25, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 46.
3.4.48 Change Number of Maintenance Staff (V and/or U)
A new NRC requirement might entail the addition of maintenance personnel,

either on a one-time basis, or on a continuous basis. The maintenance personnel may be
employees of the utility, or they may be contracted for from a vendor. If the
requirement can be accomplished on a one-time basis, or during periodic refueling
outages, the increase in staff is more likely to be provided by a contractor. Cost
elements are:
Cost Element
c. Clerical Labor
h. QA/QC Labor
j- Craft Supervisory Labor
k. Craft Labor
m. Security Labor
o. Technician Labor

Compensation for utility engineers and technicians is addressed under functional response
#7. Fringe and overhead rates, as well as compensation for engineers and craft
personnel, are addressed under functional response #26.
response #47.
3.4.49 Change in Accident Cost (U)
Theoretically, an NRC requirement should reduce either the probability or the

consequences of a major accident. If a major accident were to occur, the utility would
be liable for very large costs for plant rehabilitation (e.g.. Three Mile Island). (We do not
include here the concomitant environmental, off-site property, and public health costs.)
Thus, a new NRC requirement has a negative cost (or a benefit) relating to a potential
accident. Although difficult to evaluate, this Includes essentially all of the cost
elements considered in other functional responses.
64
Several reports have been written providing estimates of the cleanup costs for
Three Mile Island, Unit 2. (See, for example, "TMl-2 Recovery Program Estimate,"
General Public Utilities Corp., July 1981.) On a more generic basis, Sandia National
Laboratories estimated the financial consequences of accidents to the involved utilities
("Estimates of the Financial Consequences of Nuclear Reactor Accidents," Sandia
National Laboratories, NUREG/CR-2723).
3.5 SIMPLIFYING APPROXIMATIONS

The costs associated with a number of the functional responses, particularly
those attributed to the NRC, are small in comparison with others. These response
functions with relatively small associated costs are retained in the detailed model In
order to provide the capability to analyze a complete range of possible administrative
requirements. However, even for those requirements that do not entail hardware
modifications at the plants, some of the NRC functional responses can be consolidated
and others neglected. For example, NRC functional responses #4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 can be
consolidated into a single NRC administrative task that includes initial organization,
meetings, questions, and review. The NRR RAMS system tracks these activities in a
single administrative category. However, even this consolidated administrative activity
can probably be neglected in comparison with the development of a new regulation
(functional response #1) or regulatory guides (functional response #2). These activities
may extend over several years and consume several man-years of effort. Typical
resource expenditures are available from the NRR RAMS system and the RES RSAMS
system.
Several NRC functional responses performed during the latter stages of response
to a regulatory requirement also entail relatively small costs and can probably be
neglected. These are the review of technical specifications (functional response #33),
review of license amendment (functional response #36), and inspection of hardware
(functional response #45). Indeed, these activities are rarely tracked in any of the NRC
management information systems. The preparation of the Safety Evaluation Report
(SER) (functional response #38) may entail a substantial effort, and can probably be
combined with the design review (functional response #36). Resource expenditures for
SER preparation are tracked by the NRR RAMS system. Some of the data have been
analyzed for budget preparation purposes, so that generic estimates of levels of effort in
SER preparation are available.
3.5.1 CoUapse of the Model for a Hardware Modification

Section 2.4.1 presents a collapsed version of the detailed model for the case in
which a regulatory requirement involves a hardware modification. This simplification
incorporates the approximations to the NRC functional responses contained in the
previous section. It additionally collapses several of the early stage industry actions
(functional responses #5, 7, 9, 11, and 13) Into a consolidated administrative task that
includes initial analysis, meetings, and response to questions. The cost evaluation of
these activities would be difficult under any circumstance, because the tasks are
65
generally performed by senior utility personnel as part of their overall licensing

functions.
Industry administrative tasks, such as the development of technical specifica-

tions (functional response #34) and license amendments (functional response #42), are
neglected, as are functional responses #27 (federal, state, and local government
participation) and functional response #28 (impact on international trade), not considered
relevant to a hardware modification. Also, some of the activities are collapsed into a
single functional response. For example, the design and design-related tasks, encompas-
sing functional responses #14, 15, 16, and 17, are consolidated into a single activity
entitled, "perform conceptual and detailed design and safety analysis." This is
convenient from a cost analysis perspective, because most of the cost data that
encompass design Include all of these tasks. Similarly, installation (functional response
#21), inspection (functional response #22), and testing of hardware (functional response
#30) are consolidated. These tasks are also likely to be consolidated in cost data that
encompass Installation.
For purposes of generality, the collapsed model retains additions of staff

(functional response #26, 47, and 48), training (functional response #32), and monitoring
(functional response #46), but these activities do not result from most hardware
modifications and can thus be neglected. Similarly, most hardware modifications do not
result in changes to software (functional response #23), record keeping (functional
response #24), or reporting (functional response #25), but these activities are retained as
a consolidated activity for purposes of generality. Drafting of revised procedures
(functional response #29), training manuals (functional response #30), and technical
specifications (functional response #31) generally do result from hardware modifications,
but these are collapsed into a single activity for purposes of simplicity.
For most hardware modifications, the costs of design, procurement, and

installation of hardware predominate, and the administrative activities can usually be
neglected. These activities are presented as five collapsed functional responses In
Figures 2-6, 2-7, and 2-8, encompassing the detailed functional responses #14 through 22,
30 (for a plant well under construction and an operating plant), and 40 and 41 (for an
operating plant). The costs of the design function can be approximated generlcally
without evaluating the associated cost elements, using rules of thumb presented
elsewhere in this report or estimates in the open literature. Equipment procurement
costs must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis using, for example, the EEDB data
base. As discussed in Chapter 4, studies of nuclear plant capital costs have shown that
85% of the direct costs are tied up in structural commodities, the nuclear steam supply
system, the turbine generator unit, piping and duct work, electric plant and
instrumentation and controls, cooling towers and condensers. Considerable care must be
exercised, however, in evaluating the costs of equipment destined for a nuclear power
plant because, as discussed elsewhere In this report, the quality assurance requirements
on safety-grade equipment can elevate the cost substantially. Installation costs can also
vary substantially, depending on the extent of the job, whether it is a new installation or
a backfit, and whether the job must be performed in a radiation environment. Although
it is not possible to derive generic installation costs, the effects of the complications can
66
be factored into new installation cost estimates, and these rules of thumb are discussed
elsewhere in this report.
The foregoing Is premised on the assumption that the hardware modification is

carried out during a scheduled outage. If the requirement necessitates an unscheduled
shutdown, the cost of replacement power could well dominate the costs associated with
the hardware modification itself, depending on the length of the shutdown, the need for
replacement power, the availability of excess capacity from the utility, and the marginal
cost of the replacement power. The evaluation of the cost of replacement power is not a
trivial analysis, but for those cases in which this cost element predominates, there is a
consolation in the absence of other cost elements to consider.
3.5.2 Collapse of the Model for a Shutdown without Hardware Modifications
Section 2.4.4 presents a collapsed version of the detailed model for the case in
which a regulatory requirement leads to a shutdown of an operating plant without a
hardware modification. Thus the functional responses relating to design, procurement,
and installation of hardware have been eliminated. Moreover, the functional responses
relating to potential changes in staff, plant availability, and accident costs are not
relevant. A very simple model results, in which only hardware Inspection (functional
response #22) and system testing (functional response #30) remain for the cases in which
replacement power is unnecessary. If replacement energy is necessary, the cost of the
replacement energy is the only cost element requiring evaluation.
67
4 CAPITAL COST ACCOUNTING METHODOLOGY
This chapter of the handbook presents a methodology that can be used in

estimating the capital (one-time) costs associated with implementing an NRC require-
ment when such a requirement calls for changes to plant hardware or structures.
Chapter 2 of this handbook identified certain functional responses that deal with the
design, engineering, procurement, installation and modification of components and
structures as a result of an NRC requirement — functional responses #16, 17, 18, 19, 20,
and 21. Chapter 3 identified the general cost elements associated with these functional
responses. When a regulatory requirement leads to significant modification of a plant's
hardware or structures, estimating the cost of these plant modifications will likely
require a higher level of detail of cost breakdown than that represented by the cost
element breakdown. Because of the complexity involved in identifying, costing, and
aggregating all of the Individual costs encountered when a physical plant change is
necessary, a detailed accounting system to identify and track these costs is a valuable
tool. This chapter describes just such an existing accounting system and explains how it
can be fully utilized.
As stated in Chapter 2, the first task that the analyst faces in evaluating the
plant-specific costs associated with the requirement is to determine what specific plants
are affected by the requirement and how the requirement will be implemented for each
plant. To assist the user In this task. Appendix B of this handbook presents a current list
of all U.S. commercial nuclear power plants with information on plant status, ownership,
type of reactor, e t c . , for each. Next the user should attempt to group these plants into
the smallest number of categories that represent similar types, and therefore costs, of
plant modifications. For each plant category, specifications need to be developed to
define the specific changes to be made. These specifications will provide the basis for
the required changes and will therefore determine the costs for such changes.
Having identified and grouped all of the plants affected by the requirement, and
having specified the nature of the changes resulting from the requirement, the user is
faced with the task of estimating the capital cost of the requirement for each plant or
groups of plants. It is this task that will be dealt with in this chapter.
The principles of power plant capital cost accounting are Illustrated here through
a description of the Energy Economic Data Base (EEDB). The methodology presented is
based on an "engineering approach" to cost estimating that defines the equipment,
material quantities, and labor content required to build or modify a specific plant. The
capital cost estimate is developed by summing those costs. Costs are delineated as
direct costs and indirect costs, discussed in Sees. 4.2 and 4.3, respectively.
4.1 DESCRIPTION OF EEDB
The EEDB is a consistent, readily available and flexible data base that contains
annually updated, comparable-baseline capital, fuel cycle, and operating and mainte-
nance costs for different types of nuclear and coal-fired electricity generating plants.
68
Each plant in the data base consists of a technical model and a directly related
cost estimate for that model. The cost estimates Included In the data base are
unencumbered by controversial factors such as the effects of future inflation, and by
non-uniform factors such as costs arising from owners' options or utility system
configurations. All assumptions and ground rules are clearly Identified in the data base
report and are applied uniformly to all cost estimates.
The conceptual designs of technical models in the EEDB are based upon a
common hypothetical "Middletown" site. Middletown is a hard-rock site on a navigable
river in the northeastern U.S., having specifically identified environmental, geological,
and labor-cost characteristics.
Each cost estimate in the EEDB is developed in accordance with an expanded

AEC code of accounts (USAEC Report NUS-531) and is based on a detailed technical
model — described in the EEDB report ~ that includes system design descriptions for
over 400 plant systems; a detailed equipment list containing over 1250 mini-
specifications; and up to 10.000 subdivisions of commodity, materials, and equipment
quantities, labor hours, and costs. The technical models are based on actual power plant
designs and over 50 years of power plant design and construction experience. Site-
related factors are normalized by locating each technical model on the common
hypothetical "Middletown" site, for which there is a detailed, written geological and
environmental description.
For each plant design the EEDB provides base capital costs composed of direct
and indirect costs, reported in terms of factory equipment, site labor, and site materials
costs. The results are internally consistent across each plant and are sufficiently
detailed to identify why costs differ and whether they are credible.
The use of the EEDB will provide the user with several tools that will be useful in
estimating the cost of changes to nuclear plants. These include:
1. Providing a structured code of accounts around which to organize

and sum the various costs for the changes.
2. Identifying, at varying levels of detail, specific elements of cost

that make up the overall cost of the change.
3. Providing up-to-date cost data on plant components, materials, and

labor prepared by professional cost estimators In the nuclear field.
4. Providing a source of cost information for major structures,

systems, and components that can be used to estimate analogous
costs dealing with plant changes.
The user is advised to take some time at the outset of the project at hand to become
familiar with the structure and content of the EEDB so as to take full advantage of all
the data base has to offer.
69
4.2 DIRECT PLANT COSTS
Direct costs are defined as all costs associated with factory equipment and site
material used and installed in the power plant, and the labor required for that
installation. The total direct plant cost Includes the cost for land (20)*, expenditures for
structures and improvements (21), reactor and/or steam generating plant equipment (22),
turbine plant equipment (23), electric plant equipment (24), miscellaneous plant
equipment (25), and main condenser heat rejection systems (26). More detailed written
descriptions of what constitutes those major categories of direct costs are provided In
Appendix C.
4.2.1 EEDB Code of Accounts
The structure of the expanded code of accounts used in the EEDB equipment list
permits the degree of detail entered in the model to vary according to the amount of
information that Is available and the level of precision desired in the e s t i m a t e .
Consequently, mature estimates where considerable information is available, can be
detailed down to the "nine-digit" level, whereas less mature estimates can be detailed to
a lesser level of detail. Table 4.1 shows the significance of the various levels of detail,
as related to the information provided.
Studies of nuclear plant capital costs have shown that about 85% of a plant's
direct cost is tied up In six areas of plant cost. These are structural commodities, the
nuclear steam supply system, turbine generator unit, piping and duct work, electric plant
and instrumentation and controls, and cooling towers and condensers. Therefore the cost
of making major plant changes can be estimated to an acceptable level of accuracy if the
cost Impact can be estimated for these six major areas of cost. The EEDB code of
accounts can assist in organizing the individual accounts that make up these major cost
areas and in aggregating these accounts to produce an estimated cost effect on each of
these areas.
Table 4.2 illustrates a typical aggregation of current capital costs for a

pressurized water reactor plant model at the "two-digit" account levels. Each account in
turn is disaggregated Into factory equipment costs, site labor hours, site material costs,
and total costs. Each account can be detailed down to a nine-digit level, as mentioned
above and illustrated in Table 4.1 for a particular account. Figures 4.1 and 4.2 present
typical cost elements for a structure (waste processing building) and system (residual
heat removal system) within the accounting system.
4.2.2 Application to Regulatory Costs Estimating
Although the EEDB code of accounts system is set up to deal with new construc-
tion costs, this system is readily adaptable to estimating the costs for modifying plants
*The numbers in parentheses refer to the EEDB account numbers, as illustrated in Table
4.2.
TABLE 4.1 Cost of Accounts, Example of Levels of Detail
Mo. of No. of
Plgtts Account Name of Account Function/Level
26 Main Condenser Heat Rejection Name/Account
System
3 Name/Sub-Account
262 Mechanical Equipment
4 Name/System
262.1 Heat Rejection System
5 262.15 Main Cooling Tower Make-up and
Blowdown System Name/Sub-System
6 262.151 Make-up Uatet- System Name/Sub-Sub-System

o
7 Class/Equipment
262.1511 Rotating Machinery Category
Class/Equipment
262.15111 Make-up Pump and Motor Sub-Category
Class/Component
262.151111 Make-up Pump
Note; Tlie final account, in this case the 9th digit, is the line item where specific equip-
ment and material technical and/or cost information is recorded. At levels above the 9th
digit, cost information is collected from lower level accounts and recorded as the suimation
of the lower level accounts. Depending on the complexity of the system, or the level of
detail available, the final account may appear at any digit level from the 5th digit to the
9th digit.
TABLE 4.2 UE&C, Inc. Energy Economic Data Base (EEDB) Phase VI, 1139 MWe Pressurized Water Reactor
PLANT CODE COST BASIS

148 01/83 09/30/83
FACTORY SITE SITE SITE TOTAL

ACCT NO ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION EQUIP. COSTS LABOR HOURS LABOR COST MATERIAL COST COSTS
9t STRUCTURES *• IMPROVEMENTS 10.943.477 9063311 MM 167.658.008 86.931,496 265.532.981
92 REACTOR PLANT EQUIPMENT 199.412.349 4059370 MH 82.058.379 17.889,132 299.359.860
33 TURBINE PLANT EQUIPMENT 161.221,837 3089762 MH 62.061.719 10,818.296 234,101.852
ELECTRIC PLANT EQUIPMENT 28.876.413 2619599 MH 51.825.535 17.067.562 97.769.510

25 MISCELLANEOUS PLANT EOUIPT 17.303.0O3 1562223 MM 31.458,700 5.966,012 54.727.715
26 MAIN COND HEAT REJECT SVS 21.968.074 981040 MH 18.861.678 3,652.860 44.480.612
TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 439,723.153 21375305 MH 413.924.019 142.325,358 995.972,530
91 CONSTRUCTION SERVICES 96,000,000 7415000 MH 143.400,000 93,700.000 333.10O.0O0

92 HOME OFFICE ENGRG.ftSERVICE 325.250,000 325.250.000
93 FIELD OFFICE ENGRGtSERVICE 328.300.000 1012000 MH 17.680.000 15.700.000 361.680.000
TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS 749.550.000 8427000 MH 161.080.000 109,400.000 1.020,030.000
TOTAL BASE COST 1. 189,273,153 29802305 MH 575.004.019 251.725.358 2,016,002.530

TABLE 4.2 (Cont'd)

148 01/83

211. YARDWORK 358.366 1008092 MH 17.0O1.262 10.561.463 27.921.091
212. REACTOR CONTAINMENT BLDG 2.841, 174 3106289 MH 57.948,001 28.702,534 89.491,709
213. TURBINE ROOM • HEATER BAY 536,285 887696 MH 16,875.251 14.595.715 32.007.251
2 14. SECURITY BUILDING 75.0OO 52788 MH 1,002.638 487.912 1.565,550
2 15. PRIM AUX BLDG * TUNNELS 2.952,069 789050 MH 14,692,969 5.714.807 23.359,845
216. WASTE PROCESS BUILDING 580.642 717526 MH 13.230.414 5.822,999 19,634.055
217. FUEL STORAGE BLDG 934.564 304592 MH 5.697.378 3,650,043 10.281.985
218A. CONTROL RM/D-G BUILDING 1.574.364 928204 MH 17.654.329 7.115,391 26.344,084
2I8B. ADMINISTRATIONfSERVICE BLG 869.514 261379 MH 4.938.553 2.7 18.606 8.526,673
2180. FIRE PUMP HOUSE.INC FNDTNS 36.966 15469 MH 292,225 146.939 476,130
218E. EMERGENCY FEED PUMP BLDG 21.409 126083 MH 2,336,550 883,904 3,241,863
2I8F. MANWAY TUNNELS (RCA TUNLS) 47736 MH 851,286 277,528 1, 128,814
ai8G. ELEC. TUNNELS 5.465 1828 MH 36.592 14,919 56.976
2I8H. NON-ESSEN. SWGR BLDG. 20.904 20581 MH 385,157 261,720 667.781
21BJ. MN STEAM *• FW PIPE ENC. 31,560 394802 MH 7,425.639 3,119,683 10.576.882
218K. PIPE TUNNELS 17653 MH 313.248 110,616 423.864
218L. TECHNICAL SUPPORT CENTER 60.000 19729 MH 364.145 203.815 627.760
2 IBM. HYDROGEN RECOMBINER STRUCT 4. 102 7579 MH 138.215 65.162 207.479
218P. CONTAIN EO HATCH MSLE SHLD 10277 Ml-I 187.707 51,400 239.107
218S. HOLDING POND 9640 MH 173.763 64,435 238.198
218T. ULTIMATE HEAT SINK STRUCT 4 1.093 308284 MH 5.603,492 2,076.756 7.721.341
2 18V. CONTR RM EMG AIR INTK STR 11034 MM 186.194 75,349 261 .543
2t8Z. WASTE WATER TREATMENT BL06 17000 MH 323.OOO 21O.OO0 533.OOO
21 . STRUCTURES + IMPROVEMENTS 10.943.477 90633 11 MM 167.658.008 86.931.496 265.532.981

TABLE 4.2 (Cont'd)

148 01/83 09/30/83

ACCr NO ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION EOUlP. COSTS LABOR HOURS LABOR COST MATERIAL COST COSTS
220A. NUCLEAR STEAM SUPPLY(NSSS) 139.050.000 139,050,000
220B. NSSS OPTIONS
221. REACTOR EQUIPMENT 770.964 184500 MH 3.TOO.034 3.295.381 7,766.379
222. MAIN HEAT XFER XPORT SYS. 3,053.817 461736 MH 9.376.459 1. 161.581 13.591.857
223. SAFEGUARDS SYSTEM 7.857,712 619001 MH 12.545.725 1.733,934 22, 137.371
224. RADWASTE PROCESSING 11.077.652 468739 MH 9.486.393 1,250.645 21,814.690
225. FUEL HANDLING • STORAGE 4.273.034 78962 MH 1,598.398 170,136 6.041.568
236. OTHER REACTOR PLANT EQUIP 18.619,531 1628012 MH 32.986,102 6.615,452 58.221.085
227. RX INSTRUMENTATION+CONTROL 12.377.046 377700 MH 7.472,968 565,178 20,415.192
228. REACTOR PLANT MISC ITEMS 2.332.593 240720 MH 4.892.30O 3,096.825 10,321,718
22 REACTOR PLANT EQUIPMENT 199.412.349 4059370 MM 82,058.379 17,889, 132 299.359,860
231. TURBINE GENERATOR 110.132.487 454270 MM 9.OOO.548 1,657,983 120,791.018
233. CONDENSING SYSTEMS 20.549.964 621181 MH 12.529.748 2,033,281 35.1 12.993
234. FEED HEATING SYSTEM 15.794.659 579940 MH 11.755.730 1,172,108 28.722.497
235. OTHER TURBINE PLANT EQUIP. 13.011.569 949971 MH 19.245,437 2.233,243 34.490.249
236. INSTRUMENTATION * CONTROL 1,733.158 230900 MH 4.565.102 389.881 6.688. 141
237. TURBINE PLANT MISC ITEMS 253500 MH 4.965.154 3.331.BOO 8.296.954
23 TURBINE PLANT EQUIPMENT 161.221.837 3089762 MM 62.061.719 10.818.296 234.101.852

TABLE 4.2 (Cont'd)

148 01/83 09/30/83

24 1. SWITCHGEAR 10.033.856 25880 MH 510.894 78.326 10.623,,076
242. STATION SERVICE EQUIPMENT 15.786.132 128036 MM 2.525.725 347.067 18.658,.924
243. SWITCHBOARDS 1.382.728 16340 MH 322.860 123.632 1,829,,220
244. PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT 13205O MH 2.625.100 1.648. 138 4,273,,238
245. ELECT. STRUC 4^WIRING CONTNR 1435863 MH 28.318.482 4.936.615 33,255,,097
246. POWER a CONTROL WIRING 1.673.697 881430 MM 17.522.474 9.933.784 29,129,,955
24 . ELECTRIC PLANT EQUIPMENT 28.876.413 2619599 MM 51.825.535 17.067.562 97.769,.510

~4
251. TRANSPORTATION & LIFT EOPT 3.003.980 58550 MM 1. 187.324 475.539 4.666 ,843
252. AIR.WATER«^STEAM SERVICE SY 8.658,335 1202063 MM 24.353.632 4.843.273 37.855,, 240
253. COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT 1.948.800 192200 MM 3,820.858 585.348 6.355,,006
254. FURNISHINGS * FIXTURES 2.081.888 274 10 MM 538.886 61.852 2.682,,626
255. WASTE WATER TREATMENT EQ 1.6 10.OOO 82000 MM 1,558,000 3.168, OOO
25 . MISCELLANEOUS PLANT EQUIPT 17.303,003 1562223 MM 31,458,700 5.966.012 54.727,,715
261. STRUCTURES 258,105 144576 MM 2,650.503 1.372.577 4,281,, 185
262. MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT 21,707.969 836464 MM 16.211.175 2.280.283 40,199,,427
26 . MAIN COND HEAT REJECT SYS 21.966.074 981040 MH 18.861.678 3.652.860 44.480,,612
TOTAL DIRECT COSTS 439.723.153 21375305 MM 413.924.019 142.325.358 995.972,530

TABLE 4.2 (Cont'd)

148 01/83 09/30/83

ACCT NO ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION EOUIP. COSTS LABOR HOURS LABOR COST MATERIAL COST COSTS
911. TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FAC 6990000 MM 135.200.000 28.800.OOO 164.000.000
912. CONSTRUCTION TOOLS & EQUIP 425000 MM 8.200.000 62.900.000 71,100,000
913. PAYROLL INSURANCE & TAXES 96,000.000 96.000,000
914. PERMITS.INS. i LOCAL TAXES 2.000,000 2,000,000
915. TRANSPORTATION
96,000,000 7415000 MM 143.400,000 93.700.000 333,100.000

91 . CONSTRUCTION SERVICES
310,000,000 310.000.000
921. HOME OFFICE SERVICES
922. HOME OFFICE Q/A 10,400,000 10.400.OOO
4.850.000
923. HOME OFFICf CONSTHCTN MGMT 4,850,000
325.250.000
92 . HOME OFFICE ENGRG.ftSERVICE 325,250,000
62000 MM 1.180.OOO 15.70O.0OO

931. FIELD OFFICE EXPENSES 16.880.OOO
293.550.000 600000 MM 10.600.000
932. FIELD JOB SUPERVISION 304.150,000
19.250.OOO 350000 MH 5.900,000
933. FIELD OA/OC 25, 150.OOO
15.500.000
934. PLANT STARTUP ft TEST 15,500.000
93 . FIELD OFFICE ENGRGftSERVICE 10120OO MM 17,680,000 15.700,000

328.300.000
361.680.000
TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS 8427000 MH 161,080,000 109,400,000

749.550.000
1.020.030,000
TOTAL BASE COST 29802305 MH 575,004.019 251.725.358

1. 189.273. 153
2.016.002.530
STRUCTURES AND IMPROVEMENTS
212 213 2ib 214 2In
CONTAINMENT TURBINE BUILDING WASTE PROCESSING BLDC. INTAKE AND DISCHARGE OTHER BUILDINGS
1 1 1
1 1
1
r^ r^ J. 1
EXCAVATION WORK SUBSTRUCTURE CONCRETE SUPtRSTRUClTjRE
EARTH EXCAVATION CONCRETE WORK
ROCK tXCAVATlON REINFORCINC STEEL 1A15 I

REINFORCING STEEL EMBEDDED STEEL FLOOR FINISH RUBBING CONCRETE
WATERPROOF INC CONSTRUCTION JOINTS REMOVABLE PLUGS
SURFACER
CONCRETE FILL
FORMWORK-WOOU
U L L & BACKFILL EMBEDDED STEEL

l-ORMWORK-METAL
DFWATERING 1-LOOR U N I S H
blKUClURAL & HISCFL!AUEOUS SltEL

WATERPROOFING
>
CONSTRUCTION JOINTS SIRLICIURAL STEEL
Q
MISCFLI ANEOUS FRAMFS MOOR ( RATING STAIR TREADS
RUBBING CONCRETE
SURFACES
WIRE FABRIC
FIGURE 4.1 Typical Structural Cost Elements

REACTOR PUNT EQUIPMENT
221 22n
REACTOR EQUIPMENT MAIN HEAT XFER XPORT SYSTEM SAFEGUARDS SYSTEMS RADWASTE PROCESSING OTHER SYSTEMS
I I
223 1
s. L
RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL SYSTEM
223.12
ROTATING MACHINERY HEAT TRANSFER EQUIPMENT PIPING PIPING MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS INSTRUMENTATION AND CONTROL
171
RHR PUMPS AND DRIVER RHR HEAT EXCHANGERS HANGERS AND SUPPORTS
172
2 IN i SMALLER
INSULA ION
.1111
173
RHR DRIVER SS/SC2
H SPECUITIES
165
2 5 IN i LARGER
1522 I
SS/SCl SS/SC2
FIGURE 4.2 Typical System Cost Elements

78
under construction and operating plants. The accounts system contains all features of
the plant and thus can be used to identify the needed materials, equipment, etc., to
satisfy the design changes resulting from the requirement. The use of the EEDB code of
accounts to locate specific cost elements in the EEDB and to apply the EEDB cost
figures to a regulatory cost estimate is demonstrated in Chapter 6 of this handbook,
where a specific example cost estimate is carried out.
Special attention is required in the application of the EEDB cost information
when dealing with the quantity of field craft labor needed to perform a task. The time
and difficulty involved in backfitting an existing plant is different from that involved in
building a plant from scratch, so the labor hours and costs assumed in the new
construction process will need to be scaled to reflect this difference. The labor hours
specified in the EEDB for a certain activity already takes into account some amount of
rework hours that typically occurs during construction up to about the 70% construction-
completion stage. Therefore, when dealing with plants at or before this stage, the labor
hours requirements need not be adjusted for rework of hardware or systems. If, however,
the requirement involves a major structural modification even at or before the 70%
complete stage, the cost for reworking the structure should be estimated separately.
Beyond the 70% stage, rework labor should be estimated on a case-by-case basis. The
use of a labor-cost value for an analogous activity found in the EEDB would be
appropriate. However, if a change occurs during the middle stages of construction, the
change may require rework of existing structures or systems at the site, refabrication of
equipment, reduced labor productivity due to congested work areas, etc. All of these
activities will drive up the cost of implementing the changes beyond that identified in
the EEDB. For example, a requirement may call for existing piping to be removed and
replaced. To accomplish this, other materials such as cables and cable trays may have to
be removed, thus causing rework in these other areas as well. Reports have shown that
rework can add 10-35% to the labor cost of a modification at a plant that is more than
70% complete. At a national average rate of $19/hr, this could result in additional labor
costs of $70,000 for a task that would normally require 10,000 labor hours.
Equipment cost will not be greatly affected if changes occur to designs of

equipment where fabrication has not yet started. However, if equipment fabrication has
started, and the equipment has to be modified, the results are higher costs and delays in
delivery. Even worse, if the fabricated equipment has been installed, then modification
will cause on-site rework, and the equipment may have to be replaced, which will lead to
further cost and delays.
Rework in an area of the plant that is near completion must be performed under
congested conditions, sometimes where only one or two workers can fit. Reports have
shown that overcrowding can result in an estimated 10% reduction in labor productivity.
Because walls, supports, and large pieces of equipment may already be installed, the
installation of a new large component may require that the component be brought in
unassembled and fabricated in place.
The type of structures and equipment to be modified also affects the costs. For
seismic Category I structures, the work will likely be more complex and require more
time and materials than similar modifications on a nonseismic Category I structure.
79
Typical costs for both seismic and nonseismic Category I structures can be found in the
EEDB.
The type of equipment under modification also determines the difficulty and
extent of the construction work needed. The difficulty of the work, the equipment and
materials needed, the type of labor required, and the time required all depend on whether
the modification involves the reactor plant or the turbine plant or the electric plant,
etc. For example, safety-grade equipment requires a more stringent quality control
program with more inspection than nonsafety-grade equipment. Changes to some
buildings result in greater costs than others. Some buildings are more congested than
others, thus making changes more difficult, e.g., the containment building versus the
turbine building. Safety-related structures, such as the containment building, require
more stringent quality control programs, thus adding to the costs. Moreover, seismic
Category I structures require more materials than nonseismic Category 1 structures
(thicker walls, more rebar, deeper foundations).
An understanding of the cost effects of design changes is best gained when costs
can be presented at a high level of detail. This level of detail, however, varies with the
scope of the design change as well as the plant construction status. For example, if plant
changes are comprehensive and occur early in the plant construction schedule, then
costing guidance may be found in the fact that the six costing items discussed earlier
comprise about 85% of a plant's direct costs. Any major redesign would likely affect
most or all of these six items. Estimating the costs for changes in these six areas could
form the basis for a first order cost estimate. If the overall change involves several
small changes, then the above approach would not be detailed enough to identify these
changes and cost them. Thus, a more detailed breakdown of costs, such as the EEDB, is
required.
As construction progresses, changes in design become more capital intensive.

That is, labor is needed not only to install the new equipment but to remove the old
equipment. Thus, a cost accounting system such as the EEDB, which disaggregates the
capital costs of an item into its labor, materials, and equipment components, can provide
more useful guidance. As construction nears completion, the cost of a design change is
very dependent on the equipment already installed in an area, its configuration and
congestion, and construction completion date. Guidance on costing this complex
situation may, in addition to the above, require the use of detailed drawings, PERT/CPM
documents, and the systems turnover schedule.
One particularly valuable application of the EEDB technical and cost information
is in estimating the cost of a complete structure or system when an analogous structure
or system can be found in the EEDB. The EEDB includes technical descriptions of all
structures and systems in the data base, which will allow the user to match systems or
structures as a whole and to identify the total cost without detailed costing of the
components. The user is cautioned, when using this technique, to match or prorate all
important aspects of the EEDB system or structure to the user's system or structure.
This includes such aspects as seismic category, safety class, need for rework, building
volumes or surface areas, system capacities, redundancy requirements, etc.
80
4.3 INDIRECT PLANT COSTS

Indirect costs are defined as all costs associated with the engineering and design
of the power plant, as well as tools, equipment, temporary structures, and services
required to construct the plant. The total indirect costs include expenditures for
construction support activities, home office and field office engineering services, and
construction management. Stated another way, indirect costs may be viewed as co'?ts for
materials, equipment, and labor needed to support construction of the power plant, but
which are no longer needed once the plant is operational.
The indirect cost accounting method presented here is based upon the EEDB code
of accounts as a guide for the distribution of indirect costs. These costs are contained in
Account 91, Construction Services; Account 92, Home Office Engineering Services; and
Account 93, Field Office Engineering and Services. NSSS vendor engineering is addressed
in account 220B, NSSS Options are accounted for, as are all vendor engineering costs, as
direct costs. Appendix D provides more detailed descriptions of accounts 91, 92, and
93. To aid the user in understanding the complex process of design and construction,
models for the Architect Engineering A-E*, Nuclear Supplier Engineering (NSSS), and
Construction Management sectors have been developed and are presented in the
following sections.
4.3.1 A-E Sector

The process by which the A-E sector carries out its design and engineering
functions is an iterative decision-making process depicted graphically in Fig. 4.3. This
process is centered around two phases:
1) Preliminary Assessment Phase
Determining whether the new requirement affects the client's

nuclear project, and if so, preparing a recommendation to the
client (utility).
2) Detailed Design and Procurement Phase
Enacting engineering changes and procuring necessary equipment

to accomplish the changes.
The following discussion explains this process.
*As stated previously, the breakdown of responsibility for design and construction in an
A-E sector, NSSS sector and a construction management sector is done for bookkeeping
purposes only. Some utilities perform their own engineering and design as well as
construction.
Planca Before and Plant* During
IXirlng Construction Conatructlon
(0-lOOZ CoDpletc) (I-IOOZ Complete)
ICTCI aod In Operation and in Operation
Receipt of new rcitulatorv requireacnc
I
rpLE
Deteralne appllcabllitr of reouircsent
OecerBlne affected enitinecring diaclolines
1 T
SDE 1 SDE +
SDE
Prelinlnarv deslftn change
I
+
PEM j P U j SDE j SDE / SDE I
Review of prelinlnarv design chance
« INSSS I Review of prelisiinarv design chanft* If NSSS affected

I i.
rsTiETI
Review of prelinlnarv dealsn change If plant under construction
-*JPH0C I Estimation of equipment cost
ILIIL I Recommendation to c l i e n t
00
Obtain client approval
I SDE I I SDE I I SDE I Detailed design change

L
PEM / PLE / SDE / SDE / SDE / COST/ OA
tevlew of detailed design chanee
a Rrview of detailed deslen ctianse if NSSS affected
ISIIE
Review of detailed deslsn chansc if under construction
L_
I SDE |:;|<|3SCRS I COST _js:iE'
Prepare specif Icadon - chanee drawinss - notification of significant coats
1 il_L I SUE/
Procure eouipment - review drawings
JPRPC I j M SDE I SDI / S S : / OA [-
ISITE'
Exoedlte egulptnenc
I DCC I
FIGURE 4.3 A-E Engineering Logic Flow

82
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS FOR FIGURE 4.3
NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission

NSSS Nuclear Steam Supply System Vendor
UTIL Utility
COST A-E Cost Engineering

CM Home Office Construction Management
DCC Document Control Center
DSGRS Designers/Drafts men
EXP Expediting Personnel
PEM Project Engineering Manager
PLE Project Licensing Engineer
PROC Procurement Personnel
SDE Senior Discipline Engineer
SITE Site Engineering
QA Quality Assurance Engineering
83
4.3.1.1 Preliminary Phase

For new plants, plants under construction, and operating plants, the flow of
preliminary activities is generally similar, the primary differences being:
1) a review of the preliminary design changes by site engineering and

construction management is required only when construction is
underway; review by the operations management is required only
when the plant is in operation, and
2) the A-E's chain of activities must be initiated by the utility for

operating plants.
It must be noted, however, that although the activities are the same, the costs to carry
out these activities may not be the same. The costs increase with percentage of plant
completion because acceptable design solutions become more difficult to find once other
equipment is installed in and around the area of a design change.
The chain of events is initiated either by a request from the utility to the A-E to
review a new NRC document for all of the utility's plants, or upon direct receipt of the
document by the A-E (plants 0-100% complete), (see area marked Preliminary on Fig.
4.3). Typically, the new NRC requirement is reviewed by the project licensing engineer
assigned to the nuclear project, who determines its applicability to the project. His
recommendation is forwarded to the project's engineering manager, who determines
which engineering disciplines are affected. If necessary, specialty technical groups
(groups that typically perform such activities as seismic, radiological, and blowdown
analyses) outside of the project group will be called in, as well as the NSSS vendor. A
key factor in estimating the cost of the new requirement occurs at this stage. That is,
the greater the number of engineering disciplines and specialty groups affected, the
greater the cost, as more man-hours are expended. For example, a requirement involving
the determination of seismic response spectra will affect the design of every structure,
piping run, cable run, etc. On the other hand, a requirement affecting the placement of
alarms and annunciators in the control room may affect only I<5cC and electrical
engineering disciplines.
For those projects under construction or in operation, input will also be solicited
from site engineering and home office construction management. As noted previously,
the further along construction is, the greater the number of man-hours required in
finding acceptable solutions. This is because of physical space requirements and
construction sequence requirements. For example, installation of new equipment may
involve removing and reinstalling equipment that blocks access to the location of the new
equipment. For plants in operation, design consideration must also be given to
minimizing radiation exposure to site laborers during installation and to minimizing plant
downtime.
Once an engineering response is formulated it is reviewed by all affected

parties. The review process is iterated by these parties until an acceptable solution is
formulated. A recommendation is made to the client advising what general design
changes need to be made, if any, and at what approximate cost.
84
Two examples will illustrate the range of man-hours expended during the
preliminary phase as a result of new or revised regulatory actions.
Revision 3 of Reg. Guide 1.70 (SAR Format Guide) asks for the design that will
be used to meet the criticality accident monitoring requirements of 10 CFR Part 70
Section 70.24 for the storage of new fuel. Providing guidance to Section 70.24 is Reg.
Guide 8.12, which basically adopts ANSI N16.2 with minor upgradings. The above
regulatory material was reviewed according to the flow path of activities shown in Fig.
4.3 for the preliminary stage. After approximately 200 man-hours, a recommendation
was made to the client that no new monitors were required.
By comparison, when Reg. Guide 1.120 "Fire Protection Guidelines for Nuclear
Power Plants" was put forth, approximately 20,000 man-hours were expended in the
preliminary stage. When Appendix R to 10 CFR 50, "Fire Protection Program for
Nuclear Plants" was issued, a roughly equal number of man-hours was expended in the
preparation of specific recommendations for plant design changes.
4.3.1.2 Detailed Design and Procurement Phase

The flow of activities for this phase is similar for all plants, except for a review
of the detailed design changes by site engineering and construction management for
plants under construction, and by operations management for plants in operation. As
with the preliminary phase, the flow of activities may be similar, but costs increase with
the percentage of construction that is complete.
Once client approval of the preliminary design changes is received by the

project's engineering manager, the affected engineering disciplines perform the detailed
engineering changes via analyses and re-design (see area marked Detailed in Fig. 4.3).
These design changes are reviewed by all affected parties, including site engineering,
home office construction management, quality assurance engineering, and the NSSS
vendor, where necessary. As in the preliminary stage, costs increase with the number of
engineering disciplines and specialty groups affected.
Detailed design is an iterative process with review sessions, comments, revised

designs, and more reviews being held until a satisfactory design is achieved. For plants
under construction, any satisfactory design must minimize construction schedule delays.
The further complete a plant is, the more complicated this task becomes due to the
consideration of equipment and materials already installed in and around the area of the
change. For plants in operation, design consideration must also be given to minimize
radiation exposure to craft laborers during installation of equipment and materials and to
minimize plant downtime.
The approved changes are then incorporated into the engineering drawings by
draftsmen, and these drawings are then reviewed by the appropriate engineering
disciplines as well as by quality assurance engineering. Review is iterated until any
problems are resolved. The approved design changes are then sent to cost engineering,
which evaluates the cost of the change for the site construction management.
85
The examples of criticality accident monitors and the fire protection program
considered earlier illustrate possible ranges of A-E manhours expended in the detailed
phase. Because the recommendation of no additional criticality monitors was accepted
by the client, no man-hours were expended by the A-E during the detailed stage. On the
other hand, client concurrence that design changes were needed for fire protection to
meet 10 CFR 50 - Appendix R resulted in approximately 40,000 man-hours being
expended for detailed design changes.
At the same time that the design drawings are being revised, the affected
engineering disciplines revise the procurement specifications for the affected equipment
or write new ones. These are transmitted to procurement personnel to purchase the
equipment. Additional costs may be incurred at this time due to vendor construction
changes, or costs may be encountered to change equipment that is already in
fabrication. Next, expediting personnel track the equipment and advise construction
management of delivery dates.
Examples of the costs incurred at the procurement stage are typified by the
Control Room Human Factors Review and the Fuel Cask Handling Crane. One of the
requirements of NUREG-0700 was that control room panel arrangements be reviewed
from a human factors standpoint. Although this requirement was put forth before the
control panels of one plant were completely fabricated (they had been completely
designed, however), the review resulted in changes to many of the major control room
panels. The total cost for this review and subsequent changes was approximately $2.5
million, of which $1.5 million was due to additional procurement costs. Moreover,
schedule delays resulted from the extended delivery dates for the revised panels.
On the other hand, when NUREG-0554 was issued, the fuel cask handling crane
for one plant had been completely fabricated and delivered. The new requirements
necessitated a complete redesign of the crane. Because of the extensive changes, little
hardware from the original crane could be salvaged. The modification cost essentially
amounted to the cost of a new crane, approximately $1.5 million. Additionally, changes
were required to the structural steel due to higher crane loadings, and construction
delays were experienced.
4.3.2 NSSS Sector
The flow of the NSSS sector engineering activities is similarly to that of the A-E
sector for all stages of plant completion with the exception that the NSSS vendor
actually manufactures part of the nuclear steam supply system in addition to procuring
equipment from other vendors. (See Fig. 4.4, "NSSS Engineering Logic Flow.")
Therefore, the earlier discussion of the A-E sector is applicable to the NSSS engineering
with the following exceptions:
1) During the preliminary and detailed phases, input from the NSSS
manufacturing facilities is requested on problems dealing with
retooling, production delays, manufacturing limitations (both
technical and material supply), and make/buy decisions.
Plant* before and Plants During
Durinc Construction Construction
(0-IOOr Complete) (l-)OOZ Complete)
and In Operation and in Operation
Receipt of new regulatory requirement
Determine applicability of requirement
nctcrmine affected •n|ineerlng disciplines
Prallmlngry design change

JZ. ZJ
TOI I nX j SDE I SDE / SDE / >(AX1.|
Review of preliminary dealgn change
A-E Review of preliminary design change If A-E affected

"IZ
RTfETl
Review of preliminary design change If plant under construction
Eatlmadon of equipment cost
Recommendation to c l i e n t
Obtain c l i e n t approval
G3SDE SDE
Detailed dealgn change
± PEM / PEE / SDE / SDE / SDE / COST / QA /MAliuj

Review of detailed dealgn change
A-E
Review ot detailed design change if A-E a:iectco
"TI
IUETI
Review of detailed d e s l n change if under construction
DSCRS I
& - !Z] Prepare specification - change drawlntt - notification of significant
I'-ANl I I PROC | g I
SDE I SDE / SDE / 0»
^S3 ^-inufacturc eauloment - orocure eouipnent - review drawings
I
•og—t Expedite equipment
FIGURE 4.4 NSSS Engineering Logic Flow

87
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS OF FIGURE 4.4
A-E Architect-Engineer
NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission
UTIL Utility
COST NSSS Cost Engineering

CM Home Office Construction Management
DCC Document Control Center
DSGRS Designers/Draftsmen
EXP Expediting Personnel
MANU Manufacturing Personnel
PEM Project Engineering Manager
PLE Project Licensing Engineer
PROC Procurement Personnel
SDE Senior Discipline Engineer
SITE Site Engineering
QA Quality Assurance Engineering
88
2) Input is obtained from the A-E during the preliminary and detailed
phases of NSSS equipment. (In the A-E Sector, input was obtained
from the NSSS vendor.)
3) After changes are agreed to, specifications are sent to the NSSS
procurement group to send out to vendors, and/or to the NSSS
manufacturing facilities.
As with the A-E sector, costs are a function of the number of engineering
disciplines involved. For example, changes due to revised asymmetrical loads require
analysis and redesign of many NSSS and A-E systems, supports, and pieces of equipment
both mechanical and electronic. These analyses would involve engineers and scientists
from numerous disciplines, the manufacturing facilities, and the A-E. It should be noted
that when input is required from the A-E it may involve several of the A-E's engineering
disciplines, and thus many A-E man-hours may be required. On the other hand, a change
in the location of a control room annunciator within the NSSS scope of supply may affect
only the NSSS engineering disciplines.
As with the A-E sector, costs also increase significantly with the project
completion status even though the flow of activities remains essentially the same.
However, large costs can be incurred earlier by the NSSS sector as manufacturing of
major NSSS components usually begins immediately after award of the NSSS contract.
Therefore, a regulatory change that may require the redesign of a major nuclear
component after fabrication has started could be a very costly change. It bears noting
that the redesign of a component after fabrication has started may require a redesign of
the whole manufacturing process including retooling (such as redesign and
re manufacturing of stamps, dies, and castings), retraining of shop personnel, and loss of
materials already utilized. There is also the cost of the labor required for the above as
well as the resulting rescheduling of the manufacturing equipment usage so as to attempt
to meet all contractual obligations.
Once components are delivered to the site (or worse, installed in the plant),
changes to NSSS components can be extremely costly and difficult to redesign due to the
massive size and weight of the components. Thus, changes may have to be "add-ons" in
an area (such as the NSSS cavity) that is already crowded. For example, the addition of a
pipe whip restraint in the NSSS cavity after major components were installed required
the hand chipping of several cubic yards of concrete (so as to not disturb embedded
reinforcing steel), the use of special air vacuums and filters to minimize concrete dust,
additional labor and materials, and the rescheduling of other construction work planned
in that area. This type of activity could affect the entire plant construction schedule.
89
4.3.3 Construction Management Sector
4.3.3.1 Discussion of Model

The construction management sector consists of all the construction manage-
ment activities normally controlled by the construction manager. These include
management of direct costs in the form of site labor and site material as explained in
Sec. 4.2, and the indirect costs as explained in this section.
The major activities involving the construction management costs include (at the
two digit level):
91 Construction Services (temporary facilities, equipment)
92 Home Office Engineering and Services (construction management)
93 Field Office Engineering and Services (Supervision, QA/QC).
The two- and three-digit code of accounts for these costs are presented in Sec. 4.2, Table
4.2, sheets 1 and 5.
Five major activities are typically performed by the construction management
sector. The first four of these apply to all stages of plant completion, while the final
action (Plant/Subsystem Testing) is only applicable to plants in operation or nearly
complete. The five major activities, in chronological order, are:
1) Plan Installation Procedures
2) Procure Equipment
3) Perform Modification/Installation
4) Inspect Hardware
5) Test Systems and Subsystems
Figure 4.5 provides a graphical representation of the construction management

activities and their associated cost elements. Costs for each of the activities (action
nodes) depends on various factors that define the scope of the work to be done. These
include:
1) At what stage is the plant construction:?
2) Will work be done on Structures (Account 21) or Equipment (22-26)

or both?
3) Will the work require modification or installation (or both)?

F A C T O R S A F F E C T T N G C O S T S F L O W OF R E S P O N S I B I L I T Y / N D C O S T E L E H E W T S
PEBCEfn COMPLETE STRUCTURES EOUIPMENT MODIFY/INSTALL
PLAN INSTALLATION PROCURE PERFORM MODIFICATION/ HARDWARE INSPECTION

PROCEDURES EQUIPMENT INSTALUTION
NON SEISMIC
> TEMPORARY FACILITIES FIELD SUPERVISION FIELD SUPERVISION FIELD SUPERVISION
^^H
TOOLS AND EQUIPMENT
>
SITE MATERIALS CRAFT LABOR CRATT LABOR CRAFT LABOR
26 \-l
>
> PAYROLL TAXES
COST
CDIFY —f
STRUCTURES _
I RADIATION I
NON RADIATION
2-. \->
J^
FIGURE 4.5 Construction Management Sector: Factor Affecting Costs, Flow of Responbility,
and Cost Elements
91
4) If the work is required on structures, are the affected structures in

a seismic or nonseismic category?
5) If the work is on equipment, is it Account 22, 23...or 26?
6) Does it require work in a radiation environment?
7) What is the scope of the work to be done?
Each of the cost elements under the action nodes can be determined by the answers to
these seven questions. Once these cost elements are defined, the cost estimates can
then be obtained.
The following sections explain the action nodes and their respective cost
elements, and how the factors presented above affect the costs.
Plan Installation Procedures
This activity is done in conjunction with the utility, A-E, and nuclear supplier
sectors and involves specifying the work to be done at the plant site. This includes
developing the construction work schedule, detailing procedures defining equipment and
materials needed for construction purposes, and specifying the labor required. The costs
in this segment are assigned to the construction management and engineers who are
responsible for detailing the work procedures (Account 923).
This activity is especially significant because it defines the scope of the entire
construction effort. The actual construction costs that will be faced are determined by
the decisions made at this stage of the operation, because all of the cost elements are
defined here.
Procure Equipment
After the construction plan has been worked out, the construction equipment and
site materials needed to perform the modifications are procured (this does not include
factory equipment that is incorporated in the A-E and NSSS sectors). This stage includes
the actual costs of equipment and materials, preparation of the bid packages, evaluation
of proposals, and preparation of the purchase orders. This also involves the services of
the construction managers (923) in conjunction with the utility and A-E sectors.
The construction equipment includes temporary construction facilities and

construction tools and equipment from the 911 and 912 accounts. The site materials
costs are primarily from the 200 accounts, and are those direct costs described in
Chapter 4.2.
The equipment may be bought or leased, and some of the necessary equipment
and materials may already be on the site (especially if the plant is still under
construction).
92
Perform Modification/Installation
This action node is where the costs of construction management and labor
supervision directly associated with the construction process are assigned. For the
construction sector these are:
Construction Manager (923)
Field Job Supervisor (932)
Field Quality Assurance/Quality Control (933)
Payroll Insurance, Taxes (913)
Most of the cost from this action results from the field supervision. These costs are
greatly affected by the scope of the work, mostly because the costs of this sector depend
on the length of the construction schedules and where the work is to be done.
Management costs vary considerably depending on what type of work is to be done,
whether it is on structures or equipment, and the types of structures and equipment.
Inspect Hardware
The NRC requirement may include inspecting existing hardware, or inspecting
the modification(s) just completed. This involves essentially the same cost elements as
the previous action. If this is a necessary action, it adds to the cost of those elements
(construction manager, field job supervisor, QA/QC) an appropriate amount of man-hours
and increases the construction schedule length. This activity is done jointly with the
utility and the A-E, and is heavily affected if the inspection needs to be done in a
radiation environment. Much of the work may involve removing equipment- to be
inspected and then replacing the same equipment.
Plant/Subsystem Testing
This activity involves the testing of components, systems, or the entire plant
following modifications to plant hardware. The scope of the testing requirements is
determined at the construction planning stage and can include the full spectrum of
testing possibilities from testing only individual components to testing subsystems,
systems, or even the entire plant if the modifications were extensive and involved an
operating plant.
4.3.3.2 Cost Accounting in the Construction Management Sector Model
Costs are primarily incurred in the following accounts:
a Account 911 - Temporary Construction Facilities

93
a Account 912 - Construction Tools and Equipment
a Account 913 - Payroll Insurance, and Taxes
a Account 923 - Home Office Construction Management
a Account 931 - Field Office Expenses
a Account 932 - Field Job Supervisor
a Account 933 - Field QA/QC
a Account 934 - Plant Startup and Testing
4.3.3.3 How Scope of Work Effects Cost Elements

The scope of construction work is affected by the factors shown in Fig. 4.5.
These factors define the extent of the construction work to be performed, and directly
affect the magnitude of the cost elements of the construction sector.
Percent Completion
Three phases of plant status have been described for this guide. The construction
status affects the procurement of equipment and materials and the difficulty of
modifying or installing the necessary structure and equipment. If a plant is still in the
construction phase, the temporary facilities (911), the tools and equipment (912), and
much of the materials may already be at the site, so this cost may be minimal.
The cost of modifying a plant changes with the percentage of the plant that is
completed. During the early stage of construction, much of the equipment and
structures are not installed and the modification costs are the difference between the
original construction and the new construction costs. If the structures and equipment are
already in place, as is likely later in construction, the modification or installation may be
more difficult, and may require different operations and more complex cost estimating,
especially in calculating the craft labor.
Structures/Equipment
Whether the modifications or installations are performed on structures or

equipment or both affects the type of work required. The equipment needs, material
requirements, time span, and type of labor necessary to work on structures is different
than those for equipment. These are affected by whether the modification is
prefabricated or needs to be built on site.
94
Not only must the equipment or structure being changed/reworked be considered,

so must other equipment already installed. Often equipment coverings, semi-permanent
shielding walls, and high powered vacuums to eliminate concrete dust are required.
Modification/Installation
Whether the job requires modification of existing structures/equipment or
installation of new structures/equipment will determine both the materials needed for
construction and the craft labor types. In many cases, construction of new structures
requires less time and costs than modifying existing structures. Modifying or installing
equipment may be the most difficult when a plant is complete or nearly so, because
working in a confined area may require removing and replacing equipment other than
that directly affected by the requirement. Modification of installed equipment/
structures may cause increases in commodities as well, due to the rework made
necessary.
Radiation/Non-Radiation
This is only applicable to operating plants. If the work is done in a radiation
environment, the type of materials needed (radiation shielding and measurement equip-
ment), the quality of labor, and the level of supervision needed increases the costs of the
modification. For work in a radiation environment, time lost in the preparation of
workers will be increased, up to two hours before and two hours after the work is done.
Because of dose limits, more workers may be needed and each must be instructed and
briefed for the task. Except for replacement energy costs, this factor may have the
greatest single impact on the increase in costs of modifying a plant that is in operation.
4.3.4 Aggregating Indirect Costs

The aggregation of indirect costs using the EEDB codes of account as a guide for
the three sector models is as follows:
A-E Sector Model - Cost are predominately centered in Account 921-

Home Office Services, with four exceptions. NSSS Vendor Engineering
is account 220B, Quality Assurance Engineering is account 922, Home
Office Construction Management is account 923, and Site Engineering
is part of account 932 - Field Job Supervision.
NSSS Sector Model - Costs incurred are considered in Account 220B,

NSSS Options, with the exception of A-E Engineering, for which costs
would be distributed as above.
95
5 COST ACCOUNTING METHODOLOGY
Preceding chapters of this handbook have dealt with the methods that are used
to: 1) identify the activities that incur costs in implementing generic requirements, 2)
identify the specific cost elements that are necessary to carry out the action and which
must be estimated, 3) characterize the costs as one-time or periodic (including
continuing) costs, and 4) organize these costs into a consistent accounting structure so
that costs can be aggregated. This chapter provides guidance on how the one-time and
periodic costs can be combined to arrive at a present value, total lifetime cost estimate
for the requirement. It is on the basis of the present value of the total lifetime cost that
regulatory alternatives can be compared and cost/benefit comparisons can be made.
Figure 5.1 illustrates that the present value of the total lifetime cost is the sum
of two cost components: 1) total capital cost and 2) total lifetime periodic cost. Each of
these two components is expressed as a present year total dollar cost, i.e., in constant
dollars wherein all future costs are discounted to arrive at a present value estimate. It is
preferred that all costs be expressed in constant dollars as it permits the user to choose
appropriate future inflation rates and discount rates in order to arrive at a present-value
cost estimate. A present-value cost estimate is required when regulating alternatives
are to be compared and cost benefit comparisons are to be made.
As a general proposition, all costs must be expressed in the same year's dollars,
and brought to the same point in time. Typically the year in which the analysis is being
performed is adopted as the year of interest since this is when the regulatory decision
will be made. Thus, if the regulatory analysis is being prepared in 1985, all costs should
be expressed in 1985 constant dollars. All future costs should be discounted back to 1985
and all estimates of cost obtained prior to 1985 should be escalated to 1985.
To perform these adjustments in cost, the analyst must know three parameters:
e the discount or escalation rate

• the time period over which the adjustment is to be performed
a the amount of money or value that is to be adjusted.
5.1 AGGREGATING CAPITAL (ONE-TIME) COSTS

As stated previously and as illustrated in Fig. 5.1, the total capital cost is the
sum of the direct and indirect costs. Having identified and costed all of the one-time
costs for each of the plants affected by the requirement plus all of the nonplant-specific
costs, the total capital cost can be evaluated simply as the sum of these individual plant
costs plus the generic costs, provided all of these costs are expressed in terms of the
same year dollar. This is typically the case, since estimates of labor rates, equipment,
materials, etc., are easiest to obtain for the present-year market conditions.
If however, the cost estimates are not expressed in dollars representative of the
year of interest, than the capital costs must be adjusted. This is done through the
formula:
TOTAL PRESENT VALUE OF THE LIFETIME COST
TOTAL TOTAL
PRESENT VALUE PRESENT VALUE
CAPITAL COST LIFETIME PERIODIC
COST
DISCOUNTED
FUTURE I
ONE-TIME COSTS
1 1
CURRENT CURRENT
DIRECT INDIRECT
COSTS COSTS
REMAINING PLANT
LIFETIME
DISCOUNTED VALUE
OF ANNUAL COSTS
FIGURE 5.1 Total Present Value Lifetime Cost Components

97
FC = C (1 + i)"
where:
C = capital cost expressed in present year's dollars

FC = equivalent future value (year of interest)
i = inflation r a t e as a decimal
n = number of years between the current year and the future year of
interest
For example, if it is desired to express the cost of implementing a requirement in

1988 dollars but the costs have been estimated on the basis of present (1984) costs and
have a total value of $10 million, and the inflation rate is assumed to be 5%, the 1988
cost estimate would be:
Costjggg = $10 x 10^ (1 + 0.05)"*
Costjggg = $12.2 X 10^
Note, the inflation rate of 5% in this example corresponds to one's perception of general
inflation. If one expects these particular capital costs to increase faster than the r a t e of
general inflation, than the capital cost must also increase by that rate of growth. Thus,
for example if general inflation is 5% and real escalation is assumed to be 3%, than the
capital cost must be adjusted by an 8% r a t e of growth.
The same formula is used to estimate the present cost of an item whose cost was
previously estimated. An important rule to remember is that expressing a total cost in
terms of a single year's dollar requires that all of the components of the total cost also
be expressed in terms of that year's dollar.
5.2 AGGREGATING PERIODIC COSTS
The evaluation of the total lifetime cost of a requirement that contains periodic,
or continuing, costs as part of the cost estimate requires that these periodic costs be
summed over the plant lifetime. This summation cannot be done directly since the costs
are incurred at different points in time and may be subject to escalation. First, all costs
should be expressed in constant dollars commensurate with the year of interest. If each
year's costs are given in current dollars, the costs can be converted to constant dollars
using the formula in Sec. 5.1. Then the future cost stream must be discounted back to
the year of interest by applying a real discount r a t e . Note, that since all costs are
already expressed in constant dollars, the discount r a t e does not have to include a factor
for nominal changes in the value of the dollar due to general inflation. This is what is
meant by a real discount r a t e .
The real discount r a t e is the real rate of return on investment after adjustments
for inflation have been taken into account. Because future rates of inflation are difficult
to predict and are subject to much speculation; cost calculations are often done in
98
constant (inflation-free) dollars. In such calculations, it is appropriate to use a real

discount r a t e . The analyst should be aware that the real rate of return on investment
and therefore the real discount rate is determined by many factors related to financial
risk and competing need for capital.
For the purposes of calculating the estimated total lifetime present value of a
requirement, NUREG/BR-0058 stipulates that a discount r a t e of 10% be used. Other
discount rates may also be used to test the sensitivity of the analysis, and therefore it is
recommended that a value of 5% also be included in the sensitivity assessment.
When discounting a stream of periodic costs, the lump sum, present value can be
calculated using the following annuity formula:
^ d(i + d ] "
where
C ^ = constant dollar periodic cost
d = the real discount r a t e
n = the number of periods over which the costs recur.

Alternatively, if future costs are more irradic (e.g., vary in magnitude from period to
period), it is necessary to calculate the present value of each future cost period
separately.
The following basic formula can be used to determine the present value (PV) of
an amount (F^) at the end of a future time period:
F
t
PV =
(1 + d ) "
where
d = the real annual discount r a t e (expressed as a decimal)
n = the number of years in the future in which the costs occur.
Two rule-of-thumb approximations that the user may find helpful in evaluating
the present value of a future cost are the rules of 72 and 35. These rules state that the
discount factor — (1 + d)" — is 2 when the product of r a t e , expressed in percent, and
number of years is 72 and is 1.4 when the product is 35.
5.3 TOTAL PRESENT VALUE LIFETIME COST
The present value of total capital cost from a requirement plus the present value
of all non plant-specific costs and the present value of all periodic costs sum mates to the
Total Present Value of the Lifetime Cost.
99
6 COST ESTIMATE EXAMPLE: TECHNICAL SUPPORT CENTER
6.1 INTRODUCTION
This final chapter of the handbook presents, as an example, the procedure for
estimating the cost of implementing a recent NRC requirement throughout the nuclear
industry. The purpose of including this example estimate is to illustrate to the analyst, in
a step-by-step fashion, the use of the models, methods, and cost references presented in
the previous chapters. The NRC requirement selected to illustrate the estimating
process is the Technical Support Center (TSC) requirement, an outgrowth of the TMI-2
accident evaluation. The basic NRC requirement and schedule for its implementation is
included in NUREG-0578, entitled "TMI-2 Lessons Learned Task Force Status Report and
Short-Term Recommendation," published July, 1979. The detailed requirement is
promulgated in NUREG-0696, entitled "Functional Criteria for Emergency Response
Facilities", published in February, 1981.
A graphical display that portrays the implementation of the TSC for a typical
plant was developed from the general model presented in Chapter 2, and is included as
Fig. 6.1. The display consists of the appropriate flow path through the decision nodes
leading to the series of appropriate "functional responses," needed to implement this
requirement, based on the assumptions discussed below.
6.2 ASSUMPTIONS
To develop the graphical model for the implementation of the TSC requirement,
the following assumptions were used:
1. The reference plant to be analyzed is an operating plant responding

to the requirement.
2. Since the plant is already built, a separate structure was built to

house the TSC, which could also be utilized for other purposes.
3. All construction would take place in a nonradiation environment.
4. Construction of the facility would not interfere with the normal

operation of the plant, therefore no replacement power would be
necessary.
5. No increase in nonoperating or operating and maintenance staffs

would be required.
6. Plant availability and reactor rating would not be significantly

affected by the construction of the TSC.
100
(N)
START
new Yes Develop a
requirement new regulation
established
(N)
Develop/change a Yes
Regulatory Guide
Yes
(N) (N) (U)

Change/write Notify PMs,
Analyze
section of Standard notify licensees
the requirement
Review Plan and prepare TACs
3 4
(A - E a lo CN)
V a / o U)
Meet with licensee
Meet with NRC a / o owners group
7 6
(N)
Request
OMB C l e a r a n c e
OPTIONAL
r V/JT'
Contractor a s s i s t s NRC .Yes
I in reviewing responses I NRC
S o l i c i t and contractor
review responses
L ti
K
assistance ?
from licensees
10 No
FIGURE 6.1 Technical Support Center Logic Flow Diagram

101
4 (A-E a/o V
a / o U)
Unsatisfactory
Solicit and review

(N)
P r e p a r e responses
answers to question
for NRC
11 12
( A - E a / o U)
t
( A - E a/o V
Perform conceptual a / o U)
design, incl. unres.
Answer questions
safety ques. det.,
resource est. & prel. from NRC
schedule 13
14
( A - E a / o U) ( A - E a / o U)
Perform design or
Evaluate budget design review,
requirements incl. specs, for
outside procuremt
15 16
Yes
(A-E a/o V
a / o U)
No Perform s a f e t y / Yes No
risk/reliability
analysis
17
(U a / o AE & V)
Procure mtls. and
eqpfnt. , inc. prep.
of bid pkg., eval.
of proposals, and
of purch. ord.
18
(V & N)
Contractor
assists NRC in
reviewing design
35
FIGURE 6.1 (Cont'd)

102
V/N
Contractor
prepares TER
OPTIONAL
(C a/o U)
Plan installation,
incl. detailed
p r o c ' s . , labor
reqmts., & sched.
19
(V a/o C (V a/o C
a/o U) a/o U)
Modify
Install hardware
structures
20 21
(N) (U)
Review license Draft license Yes No

amendment amendment
(V & N)
No Yes Contractor assists

NRC in inspecting
hardware
44
Change (N>
Yes in number of
operating Inspect hardware
staff 7
.NN 45
I unsatisfactory
No
Yes Yes
Xhange^ Change
Yes in number in allowable No
of maintenance reactor rating
ataff ?
OO .00.
FIGURE 6.1 (Cont'd)

103
(V a / o U)
Write/rewrite
procedures
Yes
(V a/o C a/o U)
No Conduct Yes No
t e s t / r e t e s t of
system/subsystem
30
(V a / o U) (V a/o U)
Write/rewrite Yes
Train/retrain staff
traning manuals
31 32
" No 1
(V a / o C a / o U)
Yes
inspect hardware
22
' 1 ' No ^
(A-E a/o V
a/o U) No
Develop software
23
Add to or change Add to or change

reporting recordkeeping
Yes
FIGURE 6.1 (Cont'd)

104
6.3 FUNCTIONAL RESPONSE FLOW PATH
For the purpose of this example, it is assumed that at least initial preparation of
draft regulations and NUREG-0696 have occurred, so the implementation of the
requirement s t a r t s with functional responses (FR) 1, 2, and 3, and then proceeds to
notification of licensees, FR 4 and 5 (for FR 1-3, the costs have been prorated or
estimated on a per-plant basis).
In the case of TSC requirements, the NRC held several meetings at various
locations throughout the United States to explain the details of the requirements. The
logic flow through FR 6 and 7 represents this process, and the cost of FR 6 has been
prorated for an individual plant.
Inasmuch as all U.S. plants were involved, a request for OMB clearance is
required (FR 8). Here again, the cost was prorated for an individual plant. The logic
flow then progresses through solicitation of responses, FR 9 (optional) and FR 10, and
then to preparation of responses, FR 11, and a question and answer phase, FR 12 and 13.
The cost of FR 10 has been prorated for an individual plant.
For this example, the TSC requirement necessitates new design and construction,
so that the logic flow moves to conceptual design and budget estimation, FR 14 and 15,
then to the detailed design phase, FR 16, and to reliability analysis, FR 17, which results
from the data system availability requirements. The next step is FR 18, for the
procurement of materials and equipment.
The flow then proceeds through the NRC design review and SER preparation
phases, FR 35, 36, 37 (optional), and 38, and through the construction planning and
nonradiation-environment construction phases FR 19, 20, and 21.
Since the TSC is required by 10 CFR 50, a license amendment may be required,
which leads next to FR 42 and 43, and then to the NRC inspection of the utility's
hardware, FR 44 and 45.
To support the requirement for readiness testing, the logic flow then proceeds to
procedures preparation, testing of systems, revision of training manuals, and staff
training, FR 29 through 32, and initial and periodic inspection, FR 22.
The flow then proceeds to the development of software for the data system, FR
23, and finally to record keeping and reporting, FR 24 and 25.
6.4 TSC EXAMPLE SCHEDULE
Following development of the logic flow diagram, a schedule is prepared to assist

in developing the cost estimates of the associated functional responses. The schedule is
essential to permit a determination of the magnitude and distribution of the hours of the
various personnel categories required to perform the project.
Figure 6.2 is a schedule of the design, engineering, and construction phases of the
project. As indicated in the figure, the overall design, engineering, and construction
1Quilted engineers .e<»».cu»^
TSC SCHEDULE FIGURE 2
WEEKS
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LO T 12 1 1 jl4| 15| l4l7| 1^191 2(]2l|2^23| 24|25|
26 2 !128|29P0|31P2 33b4 35 6 37 8 39 4(141 4ii3 44
FR I I PREPARE RESPONSES FOR NRC • •
FR 12 SOLICIT AND REVIEW ANS. TO QUES.(N) • • •
FR 13 ANSWER QUESTIONS FRDH NRC • •
FR 14 CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
FR 15 EVALUATE BUDGET •
— —— ——
—
— — — —
' —h-
I I -
— ——
1
II
FR 1? fUM C0H5T. & IHiJTAI.lATinH ——
: II II
— ——— ———- ——
FR 23 DEVELOP SOFTVARE • • •
FR 22 INSPECT HARDWARE
...
FR 30 CONDUCT SYS. TESTS -
FIGURE 6.2 TSC Schedule

106
schedule for the TSC example consists of an overall estimated duration of 43 weeks,
which starts with FR 11 (preparation of responses to the NRC) and ends with systems
tests, FR 30. It includes a 15-week preconstruction phase and a 26-week construction
phase, followed by two weeks of inspection and testing.
The following tabulation provides a summary of the schedule:
Functional Start - Compl<

Response Begiinning of Week End of
FR 11 1 2
FR 12* 3 5
FR 13 6 7
FR 14 3 7
FR 15 7 7
FR 16 8 15
FR 18 10 13
FR 19 12 15
FR 20/21 16 43
FR 23 38 41
FR 22 42 42
FR 30 43 43
6.5 TSC EXAMPLE COST ESTIMATE
To develop a cost estimate for any NRC requirement, the following steps have
been identified:
1. Develop a specific logic flow diagram from the generic model of

Chapter 2.
a. Identify functional responses required.
b. Identify cost elements required.
2. Determine costs and/or rates for each of the required cost

elements.
a. From various references identified in Chapter 3.
b. Labor rates must include allowances for fringe benefits, pay-

roll taxes, insurances, overhead, profit and expenses. Some
craft labor rates and allowances may be obtained from the
references in Chapter 3.
*FR 12 is an NRC response and is shown since it influences the design schedule. For this
example it has been assumed that no iterative resolution is required.
107
White collar salaries and allowances are generally proprietary, and

may require the services of a consultant to obtain them.
3. Prepare a schedule identifying the period of performance for each

of the major functional responses.
4. Using the schedule as a basis, estimate the hours required for each
labor cost element of each functional response. This is usually
accomplished through the use of engineering judgment, based upon
experience, and may require the services of a consultant.
5. Develop the costs associated with the hours and labor rates
determined above for the project.
On the basis of the assumptions that appear in this chapter, and with a step-by-
step approach, the costs associated with the implementation of the TSC were developed
as described below.
6.5.1 Estimating the Cost of Individual Functional Responses
FR 1 (Develop a New Regulation (N))
The cost shown for FR 1 represents the cost of developing changes to 10CFR50.
Since the TSC requirement is a generic requirement, the overall cost for the regulatory
changes was prorated among all of the plants operating and under construction. For this
exercise a total of 140 plants was assumed (circa 1980) to be affected. Cost per plant
should be distributed between the cost elements i. NRR labor and ii. RES labor.
The total estimated cost for this activity is: 4 engineers x 1 year x 2080 hr/yr x
$50/hr T 140 plants = $2970* per plant. The hourly rate includes a multiplier to cover
overhead costs.
The analyst is urged to use the RSAMS management information system as a

means of establishing benchmarks for manpower requirements of NRC personnel. Raw
data on resource expenditures should be analyzed to ascertain manpower levels required,
and the salary levels can be determined from annual budgets. NRC personnel can
estimate the cost of FR 1 using the resources listed below:
a Regulatory Activities Manpower System (RSAMS).
a "Green Book" (NUREG-0566, Standards Development Status

Summary Report).
*Details for costs are assumed and the analyst is directed to the references that follow.
108
a RAMS System.
a "Budget Estimates Fiscal Year ." Published Annually.
These resources are discussed in Chapter 3, Sees. 3.4.1 and 3.4.4.
FR 2 (Develop/Change Regulatory Guide (N))
The cost shown for FR 2 represents the cost of preparing a NUREG that was
issued for the TMI requirements, including the TSC. The cost estimated for these
documents has been spread among the plants operating and under construction, and also
among the several requirements (4 were assumed) included in the NUREG. As in FR 1,
the cost should be distributed between cost elements ix and x.
The total estimate for this example is: 4 Engineers x 24 wks x 40 hr/wk x
$50/hr T 140 plants ^ 4 requirements = $343* per plant per requirement. The analyst is
urged to use the RSAMS and "Green Book" to establish manpower requirements and
salary levels for similar types of NRC activities.
NRC personnel can estimate costs for FR 2 using the resources listed below:
a Regulatory Activities Manpower System (RSAMS)
a "Green Book" (NUREG-0566, Standards Development Status

Summary Report)
a RAMS System
a "Budget Estimates Fiscal Year ."
These resources are discussed in Chapter 3, Sees. 3.4.1. and 3.4.4.
FR 3 (Change/Write Section of Standard Review Plan (N))

The cost for FR 3 is the cost of incorporating the TSC requirements into the
standard review plans and, as in FR 1 and 2, should be distributed between ix. NRR
labor, and x. RES labor. The costs have been prorated over the plants under construction
and in operation, as in FR 1.
The total estimated cost for this example is: 2 Engineers x 4 wks x 40 hr/wk x
$50/hr V 140 plants = $114* per plant
*Details for costs are assumed and the analyst is directed to the resources listed in FRl.
109
FR 4 (Notify PMs, Notify Licensees, Prepare TACs (N))

The cost of FR 4 is the cost of notifying the PMs and the licensees, and of
preparing the Technical Assignment Controls (TACs). The costs of this functional
response should be distributed between the following cost elements:
i. Lead PM labor
ii. Plant PMs labor
iii. Clerical Labor
iv. Lead Engineer Labor
The cost for this example is: 3 Engineers x 1/2 wk x 40 hr/wk x $50/hr = $3000*
per plant. The analyst is directed to the NRR RAM System to establish a typical level of
effort for FR 4. Analysis of administrative costs will provide benchmarks for manpower
and salary.
FR 5 (Analyze the Requirement (U))
The cost of FR 5 represents the initial analysis of the TSC requirement by the
utility and is distributed between upper level management and engineering personnel (per
plant).
a. Project Manager 20 hr x $55/hr = $1100
b. Engineering Labor 80 hr x $45/hr = $3600
c. Executive Labor 10 hr x $65/hr = $ 650
TOTAL $5350
The analyst is directed to industry resources cited below, and should consult with utilities
directly. Executive manpower levels required are included in internal utility budgets,
which are not normally published.
a "Annual Wage and Salary Surveys", EEl
a "Utility Executive Salaries: How High? How Low?" Electrical

World, PP 31-35, January 1983
a "The Engineer's Pay: Fatter Than Ever?", Electrical World pp. 45-
48, March 1982.
•Details of costs are assumed, and the analyst is directed to the NRR RAM System
discussed in Chapter 3, Section 3.4.4, and FR 1.
no
a BLS Bulletin 1312-5, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
a "Cost Estimating Guide" Tennessee Valley Authority, Division of

Engineering
a "Survey Shows Engineering Salaries Rise 6%", Electric World, pp.

29-32, July 1983
FR 6 (Meet With Licensee and/or Owners' Group (N))

The costs shown for FR 6 represent the cost of the meetings with the licensees.
It is not presently known whether each licensee required a separate meeting at this
stage; however, it is known that the NRC held four general meetings throughout the
country. A cost estimate for these meetings is made here and prorated among the plants
under construction and operating, as in FR 1. Costs per plant should be distributed
between the cost elements i. Head PM Labor and iv. Lead Engineer Labor.
The total estimated cost for these meetings is:
Transportation: 4 e n g i n e e r s x $1200 x 4 meetings = $19,200
Travel Time: 4 e n g i n e e r s x $50/hr x 8 hr x 4 meetings = 6,400
Preparation: 4 e n g i n e e r s x $50/hr x 40 hr = 8,000
Meeting: 4 e n g i n e e r s x $50/hr x 12 hr x 4 meetings = 9,600
TOTAL = $43,200 ^ 140 = $310* per p l a n t
FR 7 (Meet With NRC (A-E and/or V and/or U))

The costs shown for FR 7 represents the costs for the utility or its
representatives to attend the meeting discussed in FR 6. It is assumed that two high-
level representatives attend the meeting, and the hours include any preparation and
debriefing before and after the meeting. The effort is distributed between a project
manager and engineer. The total estimated costs are:
a. P r o j e c t Manager: 30 hr x $65/hr + $1200 ( t r a v e l ) = 3150
b. Engineering Labor: 40 hr x $45/hr + $1200 ( t r a v e l ) = 3000
$6150*
•Details of costs are assumed and the analyst is directed to the NRR RAM system
discussed in Chapter 3, Section 3.4.4.
Ill
The following references are useful in estimating these rates:
a "Annual Wage and Salary Surveys", EEI
a "Utility Executive Salaries, How High? How Low?", Electrical

World, PP 31-35, January 1983
a "The Engineer's Pay: Fatter Than Ever?", Electrical World pp 45-

48, March 1982
a BLS Bulletin 1312-5, Bureau of Labor Statistics
a "Cost Estimating Guide" Tennessee Valley Authority, Division of

Engineering
a "Survey Shows Engineering Salaries Rise 6%", Electrical World, pp

29-32, July 1983
FR 8 (Request OMB Clearance (N))
The cost shown for FR 8 is required, since the TSC requirement applied to all
plants. The cost has been prorated among all the plants as in FR 1 and others, and should
be distributed between i. Lead PM Labor and iii. Clerical Labor.
The total estimated cost for this effort is 3 Engineers x 40 hrs x $50/hr i 140 =
$40.
a "Procedures for obtaining OMB Clearance" memorandum for all

NRR Personnel, Jesse L. Funches, Acting Director, Planning and
Program Analysis Branch, August 4, 1982
a NRR RAMS System
These administrative costs can be determined using the RAMS system and the
OMB procedures cited.
FR 9 (Contractor Assists NRC in Reviewing Responses (V and N))
This cost (FR 9) is based on the assumption that the NRC used an outside
contractor to assist in the review of licensee responses. The costs are estimated on a
per-plant basis, and represent the NRC cost of monitoring the contractor and the cost of
contracting the consulting service.
112
The cost estimate is:
iv. Lead Engineer: 1 engineer x 20 hr x $50/hr = $1000
xi. Labor Hour Contract: 1 engineer x 40 hr x $45/hr = $1800
$2800*
The RAMS system also has a cost category for contractual support that should be used by
the analyst to establish benchmarks for FR 9.
FR 10 (Solicit and Review Responses From Licensees (N))

The cost of FR 10 is dependent upon whether FR 9 is used or not. Therefore
three costs are given, below, for FR 10. The first cost is the cost of developing the
request for responses and then formally requesting the responses. This cost is prorated
over the total number of plants as in FR 1. The second cost is the cost of reviewing the
contractor's work performed in FR 9. The third cost is the cost of reviewing a single
plant response. Therefore, the total cost of FR 10 is either cost 1 + 2 if FR 9 is used, or
cost 1 + 3 if FR 9 is not used. All costs should be distributed among:
i. Lead PM Labor
ii. Plant PMs Labor
iii. Clerical Labor
V. Technical Input Labor
The three estimated costs are:
1. 4 engineers x 4 wk x 40 hr x $50/hr v 140 = $ 230
2. 1 engineer x 1 wk x 40 hr x $50/hr = $2000
3. 1.5 engineer x 1 wk x 40 hr x $50/hr = $3000
Therefore FR 10 with the use of FR 9 cost $2230, and FR 10 without the use of FR 9 cost
$3230.*
•Details for costs are assumed and the analyst is directed to the RAMS system discussed
in Chapter 3, Section 3.4.4.
113
FR 11 (Prepare Responses For NRC (A-E and/or V and/or U))

FR 11 represents the effort required to perform a preliminary evaluation to
determine whether the new TSC requirement affects the utility's nuclear project, and if
so, the preparation of a recommendation to the utility. The chain of events for
accomplishing this is initiated by a request from the utility to the A-E to review the
document, or upon direct receipt of the document by the A-E.
Typically, the new NRC requirement is reviewed by a licensing engineer assigned

to the nuclear project, who determines its applicability to the project. His
recommendation is forwarded to the project's engineering manager, who determines
which engineering disciplines are affected. If necessary, speciality technical analysis
groups outside the project are called in, as is the NSSS vendor. For those projects under
construction or in operation, input is also solicited from site engineering and home office
construction management. An acceptable engineering response is formulated by the
appropriate parties. A recommendation is made to the utility advising what general
design changes are necessary, if any, and the estimated cost of such changes. This
recommendation in turn is forwarded to the NRC, if it is acceptable to the utility.
The cost elements and associated costs are as follows:
Rate
Cost Element Hours ($/hr) Cost
a. Project Management Labor 20 69 $ 1,400

b. Engineering Labor 560 45 25,200
c.,f.,x. Clerical, Administrative
& Reproduction Labor 80 19 1,500
e. Programming Labor-Not Req'd
TOTAL 720 $28,100
On the basis of the schedule shown in Fig. 6.2, hours were determined for the
various white-collar cost elements. Rates per hour for white-collar cost elements were
obtained from "National Survey of Professional, Administrative and Clerical Pay," March
1983, published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (Bulletin
2181). The rates were marked up by a factor of 2.5 to account for direct payroll charges,
overhead, expenses, and profit. This factor was obtained from the detailed data base
that supports the Energy Economic Data Base.
Engineering judgment was used to estimate the hours for each of the cost
elements required to complete each functional response as scheduled. There is a rather
formal, detailed approach for estimating engineering and supporting white-collar labor
hours needed to comply with NRC requirements. This approach is beyond the scope of
this handbook to describe in detail, but it is widely used to support proposals for
engineering projects. Briefly, the procedure is as follows:
a Review the NRC requirements, which will permit definition of the

type of equipment, type of structure, and size of structure needed
to comply.
114
a From the above, determine the number and types of drawings and
specifications that must be prepared to meet the requirements.
a Estimate the engineering, drafting, and other white-collar support

labor hours required to prepare the drawings and specifications.
These hours and associated costs were correlated with the TSC portion of the detailed
data base that supports the Energy Economic Data Base, Phase Vl-1983, by United
Engineers and Constructors, published periodically by the U.S. Department of Energy.
Following are the total white-collar labor hours for FRs 11-16, 18-23, and 30 estimated
for the TSC example.
Cost Element Total Hours
a . P r o j e c t Management Labor 1,040

b . Engineering Labor 17,920
c.,f.,x. C l e r i c a l , A d m i n i s t r a t i v e , and
Reproduction Labor 6,366
d. Drafting Labor 16,720
e. Programming Labor 160
g. Accounting Labor-Included i n Overhead Costs
h. QA/QC Labor 1,200
j. C r a f t S u p e r v i s o r y Labor 5,680
o. T e c h n i c i a n Labor 160
TOTAL 49,246
Note that in the present example, costs c , f., and x. (Clerical, Administrative, and
Reproduction labor) were combined to simplify the costing task.
FR 12 (Solicit and Review Answers to Questions (N))

The cost shown for FR 12 represents the development of plant-specific questions,
the transmittal of the questions, and review of the answers provided by the utility. The
cost for this FR should be distributed between:
i. Lead PM Labor
ii. Plant PM Labor
iii. Clerical Labor

115
The cost is estimated to be
3 engineers x 4 wk x 40 hr/wk x $50/hr = $24,000*
The RAMS system should be used to develop benchmark activity levels for NRC
personnel. Comparison to other similar activities will aid the analysts in establishing
manpower levels and salaries.
FR 13 (Answer Questions From NRC (A-E and/or V and/or U))

The costs for FR 13 represent the effort required to respond to questions from
the NRC. This follows a procedure which is similar to that described in the discussion of
FR 11.
Rate
Cost Element Hours ($/Hr.) Cost
a. P r o j e c t Engineering Management 40 69 $ 2,800

b. E n g i n e e r i n g Labor 560 45 25,200
& R e p r o d u c t i o n Labor 120 19 2,300
e. Programming L a b o r - N o t R e q ' d
TOTAL COST 720 $30,300
The procedure for estimating the above hours and rates is the same as that explained in
connection with FR 11.
FR 14 (Perform Conceptual Design, Including Unresolved Safety Question

Determination, Resource Estimate, and Preliminary Schedule (A-E and/or U))
The costs for FR 14 represent the effort required to perform engineering
changes, analyses, and redesign as required. This is part of the preliminary evaluation of
a new NRC requirement, as discussed in FR 11. This is accomplished first at the
conceptual level to meet the intent of the new NRC requirement. At this level, safety
questions and preliminary schedules are addressed to determine the extent of the
modifications and changes, if any, that are required. All proposed changes are subject to
approval by the utility.
•Details for costs are assumed and the analyst is directed to the RAMS system, which is
discussed in Chapter 3, Section 3.4.4.
116
Rate
a. Project Engineering Management 100 69 $ 6,900

c.,f.,x. Clerical, Administrative 547 19 10,400
& Reproduction Labor
d. Drafting labor 3060 24 73,400
TOTAL COST 5,247 $160,000
FR 15 (Evaluate Budget Requirements (A-E and/or U))

These costs represent the effort required to evaluate the budget, as required, to
determine the impact of changes and associated costs to meet the intent of the new NRC
requirement. This evaluation includes estimating the cost of design changes, analyses,
procurement, construction, testing, and scheduled changes. This is subject to
negotiations with, and approval by, the utility.
Costs are primarily A-E home office and utility manhours and/or expenses, and
are relatively insensitive to the complexity of the requirement.
Rate
Cost Element Hours ($/Hr..)_ Cost
a. P r o j e c t Management Labor 40 69 $ 2,800

c . , f . , x. Clerical, Administrative
g. Accounting Labor-Included 3060 24 73,400
overhead c o s t s
TOTAL COST 3220 $78,500
FR 16 (Perform Detailed Design and/or Design Review, Including

Specifications For Outside Procurement (A-E and/or U))
These costs represent the effort required to perform design changes, as required,
to meet the new NRC requirements, as discussed in FR 11. With utility approval, the
detailed design phase of the process is performed. The affected engineering disciplines.
117
as well as the NSSS vendor if necessary, perform the design changes, which may entail
new and/or revised drawings, specifications, and system design descriptions.
Rate

c.,f., X. Clerical, Administrative
d. Drafting Labor 9180 24 220,300
e. Programming Labor-Not Req'd
f. Computer-Not Required
h. QA/QC 107 45 4,800
TOTAL COST 15,842 $484,500
FR 17 (Perform Safety/Risk/Reliability Analysis (A-E and/or V and/or U))

For the TSC example, these are vendor costs, and are included in the factory
equipment costs, cost element (E), of FR 18.
FR 18 (Procure Materials and Equipment, Including Preparation of the Bid Package,

Evaluation of Proposals, and Preparation of Purchase Order (U and/or A-E and V))
These costs represent the effort required to revise existing procurement

specifications or to write new specifications for factory-built equipment or hardware,
and to procure this equipment. It also represents the procurement of site equipment and
material. After the construction plan has been set, the site equipment and material
required to perform the modifications are procured. This stage involves the services of
the construction managers (923 EEDB code of accounts) in conjunction with the utility
and A-E sectors. Site equipment costs are indirect costs, and include temporary
construction facilities and construction tools and equipment (911 and 912 EEDB code of
accounts). Site materials are primarily direct costs, and include such items as pipe, wire
and cable, concrete, steel, etc. (21-26 EEDB code of accounts).
Costs for these activities consist of the home office manhours and expenses of
the procuring organizations, and also the cost of the purchase of factory equipment and
site materials and equipment.
118
Rate
Cost Element Hours ($/Hr.) Cost ($)
a. Project Management Labor 12 69 800

h. QA/QC 53 45 2,400
m. Materials and Site Equipment 390,000
t. Factory Equipment ,080,000
TOTAL COST 1562 $1 ,530,800
The white-collar hours and hourly rates above were estimated by the same procedure
described in connection with FR 11. The other costs of FR 18, for this example, were
extracted from a draft of the EEDB-PWR cost model for Phase VI.(4) Factory
equipment, site equipment, and site material costs were obtained from the detailed data
base that supports the Energy Economic Data Base, Phase VI-1983, by United Engineers
and Constructors, published periodically by the U.S. Department of Energy. For the
structure, direct factory equipment and site materials were extracted from EEDB
account 218L, "Technical Support Center." For the data system, direct factory
equipment cost was based on EEDB account 227.9, "TMI Instrumentation." Since account
227.9 costs are for a data system that supplies data to three locations (one of which is
the TSC), the costs were prorated as 1/3 for each location. Therefore the costs for this
example are 1/3 of account 227.9. For the costs of control/display panels, direct factory
equipment cost was based on EEDB account 243.15, "TSC + OSC System Control Panels".
Since account 243.15 costs are for two locations, the costs for the TSC were prorated as
1/2 for each location. The indirect material costs were estimated by multiplying the
TSC total direct material costs, as determined above, times the ratio of total PWR
indirect material costs to total PWR direct material costs. EEDB accounts 218L, 227.9,
and 243.15 are presented in Table 6.1.
More detailed considerations for determining material and equipment costs

follow.
Materials
Materials needed for construction are based on a structural design that is

interpreted as fulfilling the requirement of the NRC or as having the enclosure capacity
to house the equipment required by the NRC. For this example, NUREG-0696 specified
the housing requirements of the structure, the habitability requirements, and the adverse
conditions such as earthquake, winds, and floods that the structure must withstand. With
this information and the costs in EEDB (in this example), a structure was sketched and
material take-offs made to develop the structural commodities.
By using references such as "Means Construction Cost Data" (Robert Snow Means
Company, Inc.), or "Richardson Rapid System - Process Plant Construction Estimating
TABLE 6.1 UE&C, Inc. Energy Economic Data Base (EEDB) Phase VI, 1139 MWe Pressurized Water Reactor
UNITED ENGINEERS S CONSTRUCTORS INC. PAGE 94

PLANT CODE COST BASIS ENERGY ECONOMIC DATA BASE (EEDB) PHASE VI
148 01/83 1139 MWE PRESSURIZED WATER REACTOR 09/38/83
FACTORY S U E •******•********•*•«*•* TOTAL

ACCT NO. ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY COSTS QUANTITY LABOR HRS LABOR COST MATERIAL COST COSTS
.»»».»•«>*•*. «»*«*«j>_»,*»jf»trf*.t***'»**>«». • • * * « » • • * * * V * > • * * * jj>jy**** A.****»**«f*i;,ffif,t,,lt;j);,t,liti.JUiii-i4i^^
ai»t. ttCHNlCAL SUPPORT CeWTtft
218L. 1 BUILDING STRUCTURE
ai8t..11 tXCAVATtON WORK
218L.111 EARTH EXCAVATION

SIBL.IIa ftDCK EXCAVATION
21BL.113 CONCRETE FILL

218L.114 FILL • BACKFILL
2t8L.119 DEWATERtNa
218L. 11 EXCAVATION WORK
21«i..ia SUB$TRUCTURI£ CONCAEti
218L.13I FORMWORK BOO SF 400 MH 7,297 1.BOO

21BL.132 REINFORCING STEEL 23 TN 920 MH 18,202
31IIL.133 CQNcrtETE 290 CY lOSO MM 18,930 ^,750
31BL.134 EMBEDDED STEEL
218L.135 FLOOR FINISH 3308 SF 169 MH 198
9 <«L. (9« ttATERPROOF tNQ
2iaL.137 CONSTRUCTION JOINTS 230 SF 330 MH 4. 196 426
218L.138 RUBBING CONCRETE SURFACE
)t9l..139 WIRC MBRIC 6620 SF 13$ MH 2,620 t.^se
TABLE 6.1 (Cont'd)
1 UNITED ENGINEERSftCONSTRUCTORS INC. PAGE 95 1
1 PLANT CODE COST BASIS ENERGY ECDNOMIC DATA BASE (EEDB) PHASE VI
1 ****•*• FACTORY •»»»••»* ******•*,****•******** SITE •••••••*»•*••»»•**»*.»* TOTAL
1 ACCT NO. ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION QUANTITY COSTS QUANTITY LABOR HRS LABOR COST MATERIAL COST COSTS
*t*************,t***m***i*** »»•••••*•» ************* ********** i****i****i* î^,*********** **j***tit**#***
1 «*****••*«
>
218L.13 SUBSTRUCTURE CONCRETE 2897 MH 51.911 at.245 ?8.16«
1 218L.14 SUPERSTRUCTURE
I 2l6t.t41 CONCRETE WORK
1 218L.1411 FORMWORK
21ttt.14M} rORMWORK-WOOO 8468 SF 6821 MH ' 108.204 l8.1tQ

218L. 14112 FORMWORK-METAL 3308 SF 496 MH 9.839 9,924
1 218L.1411 rORMWOHK 8^17 MH 118,043 ^<t.094 142.137
1 2i8L.1412 REINFORCING STEEL ' 31, TN 1709 MH 33.739 18.795

1 218L.1413 CONCRETE 243 CY 1130 MH 18,219 9,477
j }J1$L.141t GONsTRUCrtDN JOINTS 800 SF SOO MM 9,132 928
1 218L.1418 RUBBING CONCRETE SURFACES 3234 SF 582 MH 9.389 809
218L.141 CONCRETE WORK 10234 MH 186,504 96,060 242,564
zuit.t4a STRUCT. * MiSC. STECl 93 TN 2389 MH 47.292 t«,280

218L.143 EXTERIOR WALLS
Utl|L.<44 ROOF DECK ,
2l8t-.Hd ROOFING + fLASHtNd
218L.1452 B.U.R0OF.+FLASH(NO INSUL.) 3300 SF 264 MH 9,166 9,610

2t8L.M9 RQOPtNd * FLASHING 284 MH 8,168 K.810 lo.n*
218L.147 DOORS 180 SF 144 MH 2.794 3.600
stfftt.ua WAU.FLOOR,^CeiLINO FINISH

1
TABLE 6.1 (Cont'd)
UNITED ENGINEERSftCONSTRUCTORS INC. PAGE 96

***•*•• FACTORY •••»*»*. ***»•****.•****•****** SITE *».*.«•*»•*..***»•*.... TOTAL
i**m*****»it ***t,***it*******m********** ***^**»*** ************* i********* ************ t,************ ••**«***•***«*
2t8t.148l VINYL T U e FlOOR 3080 SF 248 MH 4,172 4.188
218L.1482 SUSPENDED CEILING 3080 SF 308 MH 5,975 3,234
218L.1483 SANDWICH PANELS 1800 SF 240 MH 4,898 14.389
3I8U.1486 RAISED FLOORCOISPLAr AREA) 1000 SF 490 MH 8.730 2.490

218L.148 WALL,FLOOR,+CEILING FINISH 1244 MH 24,133 24,231 48,364
218L.149 PAINTING * •
218L.1491 CONCRETE 3000 SF 570 MH 8,556 630
218L.T492 STEELWORK (PAINTtNO) 83 TN 392 MH 5,884 1.326
m a t . 1493 METAL DECK 3300 SF 99 MH 1,488 528

•'' \ "
218L.149 PAINTING 1061 MH 15.926 2,483 18,409
2181.14 SUFE(t$TRuCTUttE 18332 MM 281.818 ie'J',244 449,069
218L.1 BUILDING STRUCTURE 18229 MH 333,726 194,489 528.215
218L.« BUILPINO SERVICES 1 LT 80.000 1 LT 1900 MH 30.419 8.128
218L.21 PLUMBING * DRAINS
218L.9:} HEATING.VENTILATION 4 AC
ai«C.24 LIGHTING * SERVICE t>OWER
218L.2 BUILDING SERVICES 60,000 1500 MH 30,419 9,126 99.545
218L. Te(»#«C4t SUPPORT CENTER 80.000 19729 MH 364,146 2oa.«i8 627,760
218M. HYDROGEN RECOMBINER STRUCT
21&M.1 euOO. STRUCTURES

**
TABLE 6.1 (Cont'd)
UNITED ENGINEERS ft CONSTRUCTORS INC. PAGE 164

««••**. FACTORY SITE TOTAL

,i*i»i;i^;vj ti»*ii'H4ii '»»*******»** i***»*****»»* '****i»'i»'»)i*** »*'**»**»»***m'4i
227.9 TMI INSTRUMENTATION 1 LT 2,160,060 1 LT 57900 MH 1,144,736 3f-688

22?. RX INSTRUMENTATIONi^CONTROL 12,377.048 377700 MH 7,472,988 688. i78 4{»,41«»14^2
243.18 TSC 4 OSC SYS CONTROL PNLS TTT 895,474- • •

&a£±.^MUMMMM.
fit m^ 1*1" 38,621 UMi
N3
123
Standards" (Richardson Engineering Services, Inc.), the cost of these materials can be
estimated. In some accounts, material costs represent tangible materials such as cost of
concrete, rebar, etc. In other accounts, intangible materials such as fuel or rental of
excavation equipment, etc., are required; these costs can be found in the publications
mentioned.
In some instances the above information can be approximated by comparison of a
required facility with a similar facility that has been previously designed, thereby
eliminating a considerable amount of the effort described above.
Equipment
Equipment costs include all mechanical services for the structure, such as
plumbing, HVAC, drainpipe, and lighting, and also any process equipment, instrumenta-
tion, displays, computers and the lii<e that are either required by the NRC or needed to
support the NRC requirements.
For this example, the EEDB equipment costs for the structures (account 21 L EL
- building services) were based on like equipment utilized in other similar structures in
the data base. The instrumentation costs in account 227.9 and the control/display panels
in account 243.15 were based on vendor quotation.
For structural-account cost estimates, an alternative approach in the absence of
a comparable structure would be to prepare a detailed sizing of equipment, and to obtain
costs from quotation or estimate them from references such as the Means or Richardson
publications mentioned.
FR 35 (Contractor Assists NRC in Reviewing Design (V and N))
The cost shown for FR 35 includes the cost of A-E assistance to the NRC in re-
viewing the designs: it includes A-E costs, travel to NRC, and the cost of NRC lead
engineers.
The total costs for this review are:
iv. Lead engineer: 2 days x 8 hr/day x $50/hr = $ 800
A-E (EEDB Code of Accounts 921-Hotne Office Engineering):

4 engineers x 4 days x 8 hr/day x $45/hr = $5,800
4 engineers x $1200 (travel expenses) = $4,800
TOTAL = $11,400"
•Details of costs are assumed and the analyst is directed to the RAMS system, which is
discussed in Chapter 3, Section 3.4.4. A-E costs depend on NRC request, and salaries of
engineering personnel may be obtained from: "National Survey of Professional,
Administrative, Technical and Clerical Pay" - U.S. Dept. of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, September 1983: Bulletin 2181.
124
The salaries for the above must be multiplied by a factor to account for company
expenses, payroll costs, overhead, and fee.
FR 36 (Review of Design (N))
The costs shown for FR 36 covers the design review by NRC of a specific plant
change prior to construction of the structures and manufacture of the equipment. The
cost should be distributed between:
i. Lead PM
iv. Lead Engineer
V. Technical Input
The total estimated cost for the review is:
3 engineers x 2 wks x 40 hr/wk x $50/hr = $12,000.-
FR 37 (Contractor Prepares TER (V and N))
This cost (FR 37) assumes that the NRC used an outside contractor to prepare a
Technical Evaluation Report.
The cost estimate is:
iv. Lead e n g i n e e r : 1 e n g i n e e r x 80 h r x $ 5 0 / h r = $ 4 , 0 0 0
xi. Labor Hour Contract:
3 e n g i n e e r s x 4 wk x 40 h r / w k x $ 5 5 / h r = $ 2 6 , 4 0 0
TOTAL = $30,400*
The RAMS system also has a cost category for contractual support. The raw
data of the RAMS system must be analyzed to establish benchmarks for contractual
support activities.
FR 38 (Prepare SER (N))

The cost for FR 38 depends on whether FR 37 is used or not. Therefore two
costs are given for FR 38. The first cost is the cost of preparing the Safety Evaluation
Report (SER) using the input Technical Evaluation Report (TER) from FR 37; the second
•Details of the costs are assumed and the analyst is directed to the RAMS system which
is discussed in Chapter 3, Section 3.4.4, and FR 1.
125
cost is the cost of preparing the SER without the benefit of a TER (including developing
the information that would have been supplied in a TER). The costs should be distributed
between:
i. Lead PM Labor
iii. Clerical Labor
The total estimated cost if FR 37 is used is:
2 e n g i n e e r s x 2 wks x 40 hr/wk x $50/hr = $8,000--
The total estimated cost if FR 37 is not utilized is :
2 e n g i n e e r s x 2 wks x 40 hr/wk x $50/hr = $ 8,000
4 e n g i n e e r s x 4 wks x 40 hr/wk x $50/hr = $32,000
$40,000*
The analyst is cautioned that the contractual support category of NRR RAMS
system should be analyzed to establish benchmarks.
FR 19 (Plan Installation, Including Detailed Procedures, Labor

Requirements, and Schedule (C and/or U))
These costs represent the effort required in specifying the work to be done to
install the equipment in the plant. This includes developing the detailed procedures for
accomplishing the work and the construction work schedule, defining the equipment and
materials required for construction purposes, and specifying the labor required. The
costs of these activities are primarily assigned to the construction management and
engineers, who are responsible for detailing the work procedure (EEDB code of accounts
923).
Details of the costs are assumed and the analyst is directed to the RAMS system, which
is discussed in Chapter 3, Section 3.4.4 and FR 1.
126
Rate
a. Project Management Labor 12 69 $ 800

c.,f.,x. Clerical, Administrative,
TOTAL COST 2149 $83,000
The procedure for estimating the above hours and rates is the same as that described in
FR 20 (Modify Structures (V and/or C and/or U))

These costs represent the effort required to build a new structure for the TSC.
It should be noted that the modification of existing structures to accommodate a design
backfit can range from two to five times the cost of constructing new structures, as
discussed in Chapter 3.
Rate

b. Engineering Labor 3,640 45 163,800
c.,,f.,x. Clerical, Administrative
and Reproduction Labor 1,300 19 24,700
d. Drafting Labor 2,240 24 53,800
.]• Craft Supervisory Labor 3,500 42.50 148,700
k. Craft Labor 34,500 22 759,000
h. QA/QC Labor 630 45 — 28,400
TOTAL COST 46,070 $1 ,196,300
The procedure for estimating the above hours and rates (except for cost element
k, craft labor) is the same as that described in connection with FR 11. Craft labor hours
and rate were obtained from the detailed data base that supports the Energy Economic
Data Base, Phase Vl-1983; the analyst should consult FR 18 and the detailed data base
for similar craft labor content and labor rates.
Craft labor productivity for structures is obtained from the data base by dividing
quantities of material installed by the manhours shown for each individual account. This
can be simplified by combining types of accounts under a given category, e.g.,
substructure, superstructure, and excavation work. For the TSC, the subtask for
substructure is 218L.13, and for superstructure it is 218L.14.
127
FR 21 (Install, Test and Maintain Hardware (V and/or C and/or U))

These costs represent the effort required to install the hardware in the new TSC
structure. It should be noted that the cost of installing hardware varies considerably
depending on the systems involved, the physical location of the components, the presence
of interferences with existing hardware, and the percent completion of the plant/housing
structure.
Rate

b. Engineering Labor 3,640 45 163,800
and Reproduction Labor 1,300 19 24,700
d. Drafting Labor 2,240 24 53,800
j. Craft Supervisory Labor 2,180 24 52,300
k. Craft Labor 22,300 22 490,600
h. QA/QC Labor 410 45 18,500
TOTAL COST 32,330 $821,600
The procedures for estimating the above hours and rates are the same as those
discussed in connection with FR 11 and FR 20.
The analyst is urged to review the different types of craft labor associated with
material and equipment installation for the TSC example. The data base provides a
variety of craft labor benchmarks for use by the NRC analyst. These benchmarks may be
understood and utilized by dividing the craft labor hours for a particular account by the
items being installed to determine hardware installation productivity. These benchmarks
will increase by a multiplier of from 2 to 10 when the work is performed in radiation
environments, depending on the radiation level present and the need for special support
activities such as those described in Sec. 3.4.40. Consultants may provide additional
insight.
FR 42 (Draft License Amendment (U))

The costs shown for FR 42 represents the costs to the utility for~drafting a
licensee amendment. The total estimated costs are:
a. Project Management Labor 40 hr x $65/hr = $2,600
b. Engineering Labor 80 hr x $45/hr = $3,600
c. Executive Labor 20 hr x $100/hr= $2,000
TOTAL = $8,200*
* Details
of costs are assumed and the analyst is referred to the resources provided for
FR 5 and 7.
128
For this exercise it has been assumed that the first draft is acceptable to the
NRC and no iteration is required.
FR 43 (Review License Amendment (N))

The cost of FR 43 represents the NRC review of the license amendment prepared
by the utility. For this example it is assumed that the draft is acceptable and no
iteration is required. The costs should be distributed among:
ii. Plant PMs Labor
viii. ELD Labor
The total cost is estimated as:
5 engineers x 40 hr x $50/hr = $10,000*
Labor costs by the office of the Executive Legal Director (ELD) may be included in the
overhead costs of NRR staff.
FR 44 (Contractor Assists NRC in Inspecting Hardware (V and N))
The cost of FR 44 includes the cost of NRC labor associated with using the
assistance of a contractor in the inspection of the modifications. The costs should be
distributed between the following cost elements:
vii. I&E Region Labor
xi. Labor Hour Contract
The total estimated cost for this effort is estimated to be:
4 engineers x 40 hr x $55/hr = $8,800**
The I&E management system ("766" system) presumably contains a cost category
for contracts. The analyst is cautioned that raw data needs to be analyzed to establish
benchmarks for contracts.
•Details of costs are assumed and the analyst is referred to the resources provided for
FR 5 and 7.
••Details of costs are assumed and the analyst is directed to the I&C "766" system which
is discussed in Chapter 3, Section 3.4.45.
129
FR 45 (Inspect Hardware (N))

Since a contractor is assumed to assist in the inspection of the modifications
(FR 44), the cost shown for FR 45 includes the additional effort to complete the
inspection. The costs for FR 45 should be distributed between:
vi. I&E Headquarters Labor
vii. I&E Region Labor
The total estimated cost is:
4 engineers x 40 hr x $50/hr = $8,000*
FR 29 (Write/Rewrite Procedures (V and/or U))

The cost shown for FR 29 represents the utility's expenses in revising operating
procedures as a result of the added structure, hardware, and testing requirements.
For this example the costs for clerical labor and reproduction are assumed to be
included in the overhead markups for the other labor cost categories.
The total costs are estimated to be:
a. P r o j e c t Management Labor: 1 person x 20 hr x $65/hr = $ 1,300

b. Engineering Labor: 3 e n g i n e e r s x 160 hr x $45/hr = $21,600
c. QA/QC L a b o r : 1 e n g i n e e r x 80 h r x $ 4 5 / h r = $ 3,600
TOTAL = $26,500*
FR 30 (Conduct Test of System/Subssrstem (V and/or C and/or U))
These costs represent the effort required for testing a modified system, or the
first test if the system was modified during plant construction prior to testing. It may
also involve testing an additional system that was added during construction or after the
plant went into operation.
Care must be taken to include only the additional testing resulting from the new
requirements. For the TSC, the costs are for a new system added after the plant went
operational. The cost elements and associated costs are as follows:
•Details of costs are assumed and the analyst is directed to the l&C "766" system which
is discussed in Chapter 3, Section 3.4.45.
130
The cost for initial testing is:
Rate
b.,h. Engineering Labor (includes

QA/QC 280 45 $12,600
o. Technician Labor 80 25 2,000
c.,f.,x. Clerical, Administrative and
Reproduction Labor 93 19 1,700
The cost for periodic testing is:
Rate
b.,h. Engineering Labor (includes

QA/QC 80 45 $3,600
Reproduction Labor 40 19 760
TOTAL COST 200 $6,360/yr*
The procedure for estimating the above hours and rates is the same as that
described in connection with FR 11.
FR 31 (Write/Rewrite Training Manuals (V and/or U))
The cost shown for FR 31 represents the expense incurred by the utility to
prepare training manuals to address the added structures and equipment. For this
example clerical and reproduction costs are assumed to be included in the overhead
markups for professional labor rates, and the total costs are estimated as:
b. Engineering Labor: 2 e n g i n e e r s x 80 hr x $45/hr = $ 7,200

h. QA/QC Labor: 1 engineer x 80 hr x $45/hr = $ 3,600
TOTAL = $10,800*
FR 32 (Train/Retrain Staff (V and/or U))
The cost for this FR represents the training required by the utility personnel due
to the added structure and hardware systems. For purposes of this example, two
•Details of the costs are assumed and the analyst is directed to the resources provided in
FR 5 and 7.
131
separate sets of costs are shown. The first set is for the initial training, the second set is
for annual retraining and the training of new personnel in future years.
The cost for initial training is:
b. E n g i n e e r i n g Labor t o p r e p a r e and g i v e t r a i n i n g c o u r s e :
2 e n g i n e e r s x 80 h r x $ 4 5 / h r = $ 7,200
To r e c e i v e t r a i n i n g : 10 e n g i n e e r s x 20 hr x $ 2 5 / h r = $ 5,000
o. T e c h n i c i a n Labor t o r e c e i v e t r a i n i n g :
20 t e c h n i c i a n s x 20 h r x $ 4 5 / h r = $18,000
TOTAL = $30,200*
The cost of annual training and retraining is:
b. E n g i n e e r i n g Labor t o p r o v i d e r e t r a i n i n g :
2 e n g i n e e r s x 10 h r x $ 4 5 / h r = $ 900
To r e c e i v e r e t r a i n i n g : 10 e n g i n e e r s x 8 h r x $ 4 5 / h r = $3,600
o. T e c h n i c i a n Labor t o r e c e i v e r e t r a i n i n g :
20 t e c h n i c i a n s x 8 h r x $ 3 0 / h r = $4,800
TOTAL $9,300/Yr*
FR 22 (Inspect Hardware (V and/or C and/or U))
These costs represent the effort required to inspect and verify the quality of the
construction work, to insure that the installation complies with the design and QA
programs. It should be noted that costs can increase considerably if the inspection is
performed in a radiation environment; however, this consideration does not apply to the
TSC.
Rate
b. Engineering Labor 280 45 $12,600

Reproduction Labor 93 19 1,700
k. Craft Labor (not required for ^ - -^
the TSC)
•Details of the costs are assumed and the analyst is directed to the resources provided in
FR 5 and 7.
132
FR 23 (Develop Software (A-E and/or V and/or U))

These costs represent the effort required for the development of new computer
programs or modifications of existing programs, to evaluate such areas as energy
releases, dose dispersions, mechanical stresses, and many others. This work may involve
off-line analysis software or plant operations computer software. Development or
revisions of programs requires the modeling of the engineered systems as well as
interpretation and application of physical laws, thus requiring engineering personnel,
scientists, and computer programmers working as a team.
Costs are primarily centered at the performing organization's home office and
include manhours, expenses, and computer charges. It includes check out and
certification of the software, documentation of the program, and preparation of a user
manual. Costs can range widely, from minor modification of a few lines of program to
the development of new computer codes that may require tens of thousands of
manhours. These costs are pretty much independent of the percentage of completion of
the plant.
Rate
Cost Element Hours ($/Hr..) — Cost
b. E n g i n e e r i n g Labor 80 45 $ 3,600
e. Programming Labor 160 31 5,000
s. Computer - I n c l u d e d w i t h o t h e r
expenses in w h i t e - c o l l a r
discipline costs — _ _
FR 24 (Add to or Change Record Keeping (U))
Since periodic testing is required, FR 24 represents the cost of modifying the

plant record keeping. Here the clerical and administrative labor and computer,
reproduction, and storage costs are assumed to be included as overhead markup in the
professional labor rates.
133
The cost is estimated to be:
a. Project Management Labor: 1 man x 40 hr x $65/hr = $2,600

b. Programming Labor: 2 pgr. x 80 hr x $40/hr = $6,400
TOTAL = $9,000*
FR 25 (Add to or Change Reporting (U))

FR 25 represents the cost incurred by the utility to make additions to the
required reporting system. The costs of clerical and administrative labor and the costs
of computer and reproduction are assumed to be included in the professional labor
overhead mark-up.
The cost is estimated as:
a. Project Management L a b o r : 1 man x 40 hr x $ 6 5 / h r = $2,600*
•Details of cost are assumed and the analyst is directed to the resources provided for
FR 5 and 7.
134
6.5.2 Present Value of the Total Lifetime Cost

The total capital cost of the TSC for the reference plant evaluated is estimated
to be $4,712,500, and the annual cost is estimated to be $15,700. These costs, which
were evaluated for each functional response, are summarized below.
Single Plant Capital Costs

Single plant capital costs are aggregated as follows. All costs have been rounded
to the nearest $100.
FR COST
1 $ 3,000
2 300
3 100
4 3,000
5 5,400
6 300
7 6,200
8 -
9 2,800
10 2,200
11 28,100
12 24,000
13 30,300
14 160,000
15 78,500
16 484,500
18 1,530,800
35 11,400
36 12,000
37 30,400
38 40,000
19 83,000
20 1,196,300
21 821,600
42 8,200
43 10,000
44 8,800
45 8,000
29 26,500
30 16,300
31 10,800
32 30,200
22 16,300
23 11,600
24 9,000
25 2,600
Total $4,712,500
135
Single Plant Annual Costs
FR COST
30 6,400
32 9,300
Total $15,700
For this example, the total estimated capital cost of the TSC to the total nuclear
industry is not simply the cost to this reference plant multiplied by the 140 plants in the
nation. Approximately half of the nuclear units in the country were able to
accommodate the TSC within existing structures, while the remaining units required
construction of separate structures. Therefore the overall cost for units using existing
structures to accommodate the TSC are reduced for Functional Responses 18 and 20.
These involve the structural costs and the labor to install new structures. The cost
reduction for these plants for FR 18 is $194,000 per plant for material; for FR 20 the
reduction is $334,000 per plant for labor, a total of $528,000. For the total of 140 plants
in the country, the overall cost of the TSC is therefore estimated as described below.
Total National Capital Costs
70 p l a n t s x $4,712,500 = $329,875,000
70 p l a n t s x ($4,712,500 - 528,000) = 292,915,000
C a p i t a l Costs = $622,790,000
Assuming these one-time capital costs are in 1984 constant dollars, the 1984 P.V. of the
total national capital costs also equals $622,790,000.
Total National Annual Costs
140 p l a n t s x $15,700 = $2,198,000/yr
Present Value of Total National Lifetime Periodic Costs
For the purposes of this example, it is assumed that the 140 plants affected by
this requirement have an average remaining operating lifetime of 20 years. It is also
assumed that the total national annual cost of $2,198,000 is in 1984 constant dollars.
Therefore, the 1984 P.V. of the Total National Lifetime Periodic Costs, assuming a 10%
real discount rate, is:
* dfl . d l "
136
PV = $2,198,000 ^^ * '^^1 ^^-4rK = $2,198,000(8.51) = $18,705,000

( . 1 0 ) (1 + .10)20
Present Value of Total National Lifetime Cost
$622,790,000 + 18,705,000 = $641,495,000
6.6 LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE EXAMPLE PROBLEM
1. When dealing with a generic requirement that will require

structures and equipment to be modified or installed, the groups of
FRs in descending order of cost significance are likely to be:
A. Design, Review, Procure, Construct, and Install: FRs 14, 16,

18, 20, 21
These functional responses will tend to dominate the cost of

the graphical model when structures and equipment changes
are required.
B. Licensing, Inspection, Testing, Manuals, Records, Specifica-

tion: FRs 22, 23, 24, 25, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35, 36, 37, 38, 42, 43,
44, 45.
The supporting services and follow-up work to implement a

requirement for structures and equipment will be the second
largest category of cost in the graphical model.
C. NRC costs will be minimal for this type of requirement.
2. For this particular example, the number of cost elements could

have been reduced without sacrificing the accuracy of the overall
e s t i m a t e . For the example problem the cost elements could have
been reduced in the following manner:
A. Combine all white-collar engineering cost elements for the A-

E Functional Responses, i.e.:
• Project Management Labor
• Home Office and Field Engineering Labor
• QA/QC Engineering Labor

137
B. Combine all white-collar nonengineering cost elements for the

A-E Functional Responses, i.e.:
• Programming Labor
• Technician Labor
• Craft Supervisory Labor
• Drafting Labor
C. Combine all white-collar clerical/administrative cost

elements for the A-E Functional Responses, i.e.:
• Clerical Labor
• Administrative Labor
• Reproduction Labor
D. Include expenses such as computer costs, reproduction costs,

etc. in white-collar labor overhead costs.
Therefore, the number of cost elements for A-E Functional Responses could conceivably
be reduced as follows:
a., b., h - Engineering Labor
e., d., 0., j. - Nonengineering Labor
c , f., X. - Clerical/Administrative Labor
u. - Materials and Site Equipment
t. - Factory Equipment
k. - Craft Labor
Average labor rates can be developed for each of the above categories, and white-collar
overhead mark-up factors determined, which include expenses. However, it may require
the assistance of a consultant.
The above approach can also be to reduce the number of cost elements to be considered
for the utility, constructor, vendor, and NRC Functional Responses.
138
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Chapter 1
1. Plan for Early Review of Safety Issues, SECY-81-513, August 1981. (pg. 1-1)^
2. Charter of the Committee to Review Generic Requirements and NUREG/BR-

0058). (pg. 1-1)
3. NRR Office Letter No. 16. (pg. 1-2)
4. A Handbook for Value-Impact Assessment, (NUREG/CR-3568). (pg. 1-2)
Chapter 3
1. Immediate Implementation of Changes in the Manpower System for the Office of

Nuclear Regulatory Research, Regulatory Activities Manpower System (RSAMS),
memo to RES personnel from R.M. Scroggins, Director, ARCS, RES, Sept. 17,
1981. (pg. 3-7)
2. NUREG-0566, Standards Development Status Summary Report, (pg. 3-7)
3. Budget Estimates Fiscal Year , published annually in January for the following
FY, Budget Operations & Systems Development Branch, Division of Budget and
Analysis, Office of Resource Management, (pg. 3-7)
4. Standard Review Plan (NUREG-0800), NRC document, (pg. 3-8)
5. NRR Office Letter No. 227, Rev. 4, User's Guide to the NRR RAMS System, NRR
Planning and Program Analysis Staff, May 12, 1982. (pg. 3-10)
6. Armual Wage and Salary Surveys, Edison Electric Institution (EEI) survey, (pg. 3-11)
7. Utility Executive Salaries: How High? How Low? Electrical World, pp. 31-35, Jan.
1983. (pg. 3-11)
8. Edison Electric Institute Survey, (pg. 3-12)
9. The Engineer's Pay: Fatter than Ever?, Electrical World, pp. 45-48, March 1982.
(pg. 3-12)
10. Survey Shows Engineering Salaries Rise 6%, Electrical World, pp. 29-32, July
1983. (pg. 3-13)
•refers to the first page of citation in this guide.

139
Procedures for Obtaining OMB Clearance, NRR Office Letter No. 32, Rev. 2,
memo to NRR Personnel from J.L. Funches, Acting Director, Planning and Program
Analysis Branch, Aug. 4, 1982. (pg. 3-13)
National Survey of Professional, Administrative, and Clerical Pay, March 1983

published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (Bulletin
2181). (pg. 3-16)
Consultants, Constructors, and Designers to the Power Industry, published by Power

Engineering, 1301 S. Grove Ave., Barrington, 111. (pg. 3-16)
Management Consulting Firms: Hewitt Associates, Lincolnshire, 111., Hay

Associates, Philadelphia, Pa., The Wyatt Co., Fort Lee, NJ. (pg. 3-16)
NSSS Options - NSSS Vendor Engineering, (pg. 3-17)
R.S. Means Co., Inc., Construction Consultants and Publishers, Kingston, Mass.,
Building Construction Cost Data, 1983; Mechanical & Electrical Cost Data, 1983;
Means Square Foot Costs, 1983. (pg. 3-24)
Energy Economic Data Base, Phase VI, 1983 by United Engineers and Constructors
published periodically by the U.S. Department of Energy, (pg. 3-25)
Labor refer to the Construction Industry, 1983, published annually by R.S. Means
Co., Inc., Kingston, Mass. (pg. 3-28)
Utility Department Nuclear Guide, annual survey by the International Brotherhood

of Electrical Workers, (pg. 3-34)
BLS Bulletin 1312-5, Bureau of Labor Statistics, (pg. 3-34)
Loss of Benefits Resulting from Nuclear Power Plant Outages, NUREG/CR-3045,

ANL/AA-28, Argonne National Laboratory, March 1982. (pg. 3-41)
A Guide for Reviewing Estimates of Production Cost Increases Resulting from

Nuclear Plant Outages, NUREG/CR-XXXX, draft Sept. 1982, to be published,
(pg. 3-42)
An Efficient Simulation Approach for Evaluating the Potential Effects of Nuclear

Power Plant Shutdowns on Electric Utility Generating Systems, NUREG/CR-
XXXX, draft June 1983, to be published, (pg. 3-42)
Title to be determined (estimates of replacement power costs for each of the

nuclear units expected to be in operation by early 1986), NUREG/CR-XXXX, draft
to be published, (pg. 3-42).
Statistics of Privately Owned Electric Utilities, Annual (Classes A and •>

Companies), DOE/ElA-0044 ( ), Energy Information Administration, (pg. 3-43)
140
26. Statistics of Publicly Owned Electric Utilities, Annual, published annually by

the DOE Energy Information Administration DOE/EIA-0172(J. (pg. 3-43)
Chapter 4
1. USAEC Report NUS-531. (pg. 4-3)
2. Regulatory Guide 1.70. (pg. 4-23)
5. NUREG-0700. (pg. 4-25)
6. NUREG-0554. (pg. 4-26)
Chapter 6
1. NUREG-0578, TMI-2 Lessons Learned Task Force Status Report and Short-Term
Recommendation, July 1979. (pg. 6-1)
2. NUREG-0696, Functional Criteria for Emergency Response Facilities, Feb. 1981.

(pg. 6-1)
3. Regulatory Activities Manpower System (RSAMS). (pg. 6-9)
4. Green Book, NUREG-0566, Standards Development Status Summary Report, (pg.

6-9)
5. RAMS System, (pg. 6-9)
6. Budget Estimates Fiscal Year _ . (pg. 6-9)
7. Armual Wage and Salary Surveys, EEI. (pg. 6-11)
8. Utility Executive Salaries: How High? How Low? Electrical World, pp. 31-35,
Jan. 1983. (pg. 6-11)
9. The Engineers Pay: Fatter Than Ever?, Electrical World pp. 45-48, March 1982.
(pg. 6-12)
10. BLS Bulletin 1312-5, Bureau of Labor Statistics, (pg. 6-12)
11. Cost Estimating Guide, Tennessee Valley Authority, Division of Engineering, (pg.
6-12)
141
12. Survey Shows Engineering Salaries Rise 6%, Electric World, pp. 29-32, July 1983.
(pg. 6-12)
13. Procedures for Obtaining OMB Clearance, memorandum for all NRR Personnel,
J.L. Funches, Acting Director, Planning & Program Analysis Branch, Aug. 4, 1982.
(pg. 6-14)
14. NRR RAMS System, (pg. 6-14)

APPENDIX A
INDUSTRY COST ELEMENTS

RESULTING FROM THE IMPLEMENTATION
OF MULTI-PLANT NRC REQUIREMENTS
TASK 1 REPORT
Submitted to:
Mr. John Ball
Energy & Environmental Systems Division
9700 South Cass Avenue
Argonne, Illinois 60439
Under Contract No. 31-109-38-7163
Submitted by:
SC&A, Inc.
8200 Riding Ridge Place
McLean, Virginia 22102
(703) 893-6592
September 30, 1983

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
1.0 Introduction 1
2.0 Identification of Cost Elements 5
2.1 Approach 5
2.2 Accident Monitoring Instrumentation 6
2.3 Emergency Planning and Revisions 12
3.0 Magnitude of the Costs 16
3.1 Accident Monitoring Instrumentation 16
3.2 Emergency Planning and Revisions 22
4.0 Comparison Between Cost Estimates and
Costs Incurred 24
SC&A
A-1
APPENDIX A
INDUSTRY COST ELEMENTS RESULTING FROM THE IMPLEMENTATION
OF MULTI-PLANT NRC REQUIREMENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Argonne National Laboratory is developing for the Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (NRC) a methodology guide for cost analysis associated with NRC
requirements. The guide will assist the NRC staff in assigning costs for
establishing priorities and resolving generic issues relating to LWRs. The
guide will consist of three sections. The first section will summarize the
underlying principles of cost estimation. The second section will identify
the significant cost elements incurred by the industry, NRC, and others when
NRC requirements are implemented. The third section will consist of an
annotated bibliography of cost estimating data sources. The guide will be
written for a competent engineer who has little or no experience in performing
cost estimations.
SC&A is supporting Argonne in this effort by undertaking the following three

tasks:
1. Trace through a "typical" nuclear utility two recent example NRC

requirements, identifying all significant cost elements encountered in
the implementation of each requirement. Where possible, estimate the
magnitude of the actual cost associated with each cost element, and the
estimated cost prior to the implementation of the requirement.
2. Describe (model) a "typical" nuclear utility organizationally and

functionally, with the objective of tracing NRC requirements through the
organization, and in so doing, identifying each potential cost element
associated with the implementation of NRC requirements in each part of
the organization. Develop a comparable model for the NRC in its
implementation of a requirement.
3. Determine sources of information/data used by nuclear utilities for

estimating costs associated with each cost element identified in Task 2.
This report presents the results of Task 1. We selected for analysis two
multi-plant requirements—Accident Monitoring Instrumentation and Emergency
Planning & Revisions. These requirements were selected by reviewing the 198
SC&A
A-2
multi-plant requirements listed in a recent issue of NUREG-0748 (Operating

Reactors Licensing Actions Summary, Vol. 3, No. 6) against the following
criteria:
The requirement should be generic to several, if not all. Nuclear

Steam Supply System vendors.
The requirement should be fully, or nearly fully implemented.
The requirement should have been recently implemented.
The requirement should apply to operating plants, as well as plants

under construction.
At least one of the requirements should involve a physical

modification to the plants.
The requirement should involve multi-dimensional cost impacts.
Using the first four of the above criteria, the list was winnowed to 31
requirements. This list was further compressed to 12 requirements by invoking
the last criterion, involvement of multi-dimensional cost impacts. Finally,
the selected requirements were chosen based on complexity, namely the ability
to illustrate a large number of diverse cost elements.
The Accident Monitoring Instrumentation requirement consists of six parts,

listed as code numbers F-20 through F-25 in NUREG-0748. It is also a Three
Mile Island Action Plan requirement, listed in NUREG-0737 (Clarification of
TMI Action Plan Requirements, November 1980) as item II.F.l, Attachments 1
through 6. The first three of the parts are essentially complete at all
plants. These are the noble gas effluent monitor {F-20, TMI item II.F.l,
Attachment 1 ) , iodine/particulate sampling (F-21, TMI item II.F.l, Attachment
2 ) , and containment high-range monitor (F-22, TMI item II.F.l, Attachment 3 ) .
The last three of the parts are only approximately 60% implemented. They are
the containment pressure monitor (F-23, TMI item II.F.l, Attachment 4 ) ,
SC&A
A-3
containment water level monitor (F-24, TMI item II.F.l, Attachment 5 ) , and
containment hydrogen monitor (F-25, TMI item II.F.l, Attachment 6 ) .
Noble gas effluent monitors with an extended range (ALARA to lOpCi/cc) were
required to operate for all plants during accident conditions. All plants
were additionally required to have the capability to sample radioiodines and
particulates for accident conditions, followed by laboratory analysis. Two
o
containment radiation-level monitors with a maximum range of 10 rad/hr were
to have been installed in all plants. Containment pressure instruments,
capable of providing measurements in the control room up to four times the
design pressure (for steel containments), were required for all plants. A
continuous indication of containment water level was also required in the
control room of all plants. For PWRs this was to cover the range from the
bottom to the top of the containment sump with a narrow range instrument, and
from the bottom of the containment to the 600,000 gallon level with a wide
range instrument. For BWRs, a wide range instrument was required to cover the
range from the bottom to 5 feet above the normal water level of the
suppression pool. Finally, a continuous indication of hydrogen concentration
in the containment atmosphere was to be provided over the range of 0 to 10%
hydrogen concentration under accident conditions at all plants. All of these
accident monitoring instruments required changes to technical specifications
and reviews by the NRC of design details.
The Emergency Planning and Revisions requirement incorporates code numbers

B-16 and F-67 of NUREG-0748. F-67 is also TMI Action Plan requirement
III.A.2.1, entitled "Improving Licensee Emergency Preparedness." These are
the "software" requirements of emergency planning, as given in 10 CFR Part 50,
Appendix E.* An emergency plan, as outlined in NUREG-0654, is required, which
includes the roles of the utility, the state, and the local government. This
plan is to be supported by detailed emergency procedures, which are to be
implemented annually by exercises conducted at each station. The plan is to
be maintained and updated, as appropriate, training of on-site and off-site
* Facilities' requirements are given in item III.A.1.2, entitled "Upgrade

Emergency Support Facilities," and clarified in NUREG-0737 Supplement No. 1.
Additionally, a meteorological data upgrade is required under TMI item
III.A.2.2.
SC&A
A-4
personnel is to be carried out on a continuous basis, and the public is to be

informed of its role. All of the documentation was to be reviewed and
approved by the NRC, and the exercises are observed by the NRC and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
Discussions were held with representatives of three nuclear utilities to

identify cost elements encountered by their organizations in the
implementation of the two multi-plant requirements. Additionally, actual cost
data were obtained where available, as well as estimated cost prior to the
implementation of the requirement. The nuclear units owned and operated by
these utilities include four BWRs, three Westinghouse PWRs, and two Combustion
Engineering PWRs. Additionally, data were obtained for two Westinghouse PWRs
under construction. (These utilities are building several additional nuclear
units for which data were not obtained.)
The results are presented in Sections 2,3, and 4 of this report. Section 2
describes the approach taken in the identification of cost elements for a
"typical" utility, followed by a presentation of the functional responses and
corresponding cost elements for each of the two multi-plant requirements.
Section 3 compares actual costs, where available, for each of the stations
owned by the three utilities surveyed. Section 4 presents a comparison of
estimated (by the utility) costs with actual costs, for those few cases in
which estimated costs were made available.
SC&A
A-5
2.0 IDENTIFICATION OF COST ELEMENTS
2.1 Approach
Each of the three utilities surveyed is organized differently. One utility

had recently formed a project management department under the vice-president
for engineering, which interfaces with an internal engineering group, an
outside architect-engineer, an internal production maintenance group (which in
turn interfaces with an outside constructor), and an internal plant operating
group. A second utility is split into design/construction and operations,
each with nearly complete autonomy. Architect-engineering and construction
services are rarely purchased by this utility from the outside. The third
utility is a mixed bag, partly project oriented (a nuclear station being a
project) and partly centrally organized, with engineering, construction, and
operations under a single manager of nuclear generation. Some design and
construction are performed in-house and some under contract. Purchasing
departments were independent of engineering and operations in two of the three
utilities.
It is expected that other forms of organization would be uncovered at other

utilities. Although it would be possible to identify cost elements according
to organizational elements at any one utility, the marked differences between
utilities renders this approach unproductive from a generic point of view.
Basically, there is no such thing as a "typical" utility organization.
Identifying cost elements from an accounting perspective is equally fruitless.

There are virtually as many accounting systems as there are utilities.
Accounting systems are primarily driven by rate regulatory requirements.
There is, however, a common thread between utilities from the functional
point-of-view. Each utility exhibits a design function, whether it is
resident with an internal headquarters design department, a plant design
group, or an external architect-engineer. A licensing function may reside in
design or operations. Similar considerations apply to construction, QA,
procurement, project management, etc. Therefore, we will identify cost
elements by examining regulatory requirements in terms of related functional
SC&A
A-6
responses. To each functional response we will assign corresponding cost

elements. Our "typical" utility, therefore, exhibits typical functional
responses to regulatory requirements.
Functional responses are listed together with the "organization affected" —

namely, utility (U),architect-engineer (A-E), constructor (C), or other
vendor/contractor (V). Where more than one organization may be affected, an
attempt is made to indicate this. Both the functional responses and
corresponding cost elements are liberally annotated to provide the reader with
insights obtained in the course of the discussions with utility
representatives.
2.2 Accident Monitoring Instrumentation
The six parts of the Accident Monitoring Instrumentation requirement were not
necessary for all plants surveyed, nor were all of the items which were
necessary completed at all plants. The six parts were sufficiently similar in
terms of functional response, however, to address the requirement as a single
entity. Table I.a. presents the functional response elements corresponding to
the consolidated regulatory requirement. Although the functional responses
are presented roughly in chronological order, some of the elements may have been
undertaken simultaneously or even in a different order by some utilities.
The cost elements corresponding to each functional response are given after
each functional response in Table I.a. An alphabetized list of cost elements
is contained in Table I.b.
SC&A
A-7
Table I.a.
Functional Responses to the Accident Monitoring
Instrumentation Requirement
Analyze the requirement (U)

Involved (a) project management, (b) engineering, and (c) clerical
labor
Perform conceptual design of the modification, including unresolved

safety question determination, estimates of detailed design and
installation efforts, outside procurement requirement, preliminary
schedule (A-E and/or U)
Involved (a) project management, (b) engineering, (c) clerical, and
(d) drafting labor
Evaluate budget requirement (U)

Involved (e) administrative, (f) accounting, and (c) clerical labor
Perform detailed design, including specifications for outside

2 3
procurement, and safety analysis, as necessary * (A-E and/or U)
Involved (a) project management, (b) engineering, (c) clerical (d)
drafting, and (g) QA labor, and possibly (h) computer analysis
Procure materials and equipment, including preparation of the bid

package, evaluation of proposals, and preparation of purchase order (U
and V)
Involved (a) project management, (b) engineering, (c) clerical, (e)
administrative, and (g) QA labor, as well as purchased (i) equipment
and (j) materials
Plan installation, including detailed procedures, labor requirements, and

schedule^*^ (C and/or U)
labor
7 B 9
Install equipment • (V and/or C and/or U)
SC&A
A-8
Involved (a) project management, (b) engineering, (g) QA, (k) craft
supervisory, (1) craft, (m) radiation protection, and (n) security
labor, and possibly (o) replacement power *
8. Write procedures for testing, operation, and maintenance of the new

equipment (U)
labor
o
9. Test installed equipment (U)
Involved (a) project management, (b) engineering, and (p) technician
labor
10. Train operating personnel in the operation and maintenance of the new
equipment (U)
(p) technician labor
11. Obtain NRC approval for design, safe operation, and revised technical
specifications (U)
Involved (a) project management and (c) clerical labor
12. Operate and maintain new equipment (U)

Involves (1) craft and (p) technician labor, and possibly (q) change
in plant efficiency
Notes:
This step was frequently bypassed in the interest of expediency.
2
According to TVA statistics, this step generally consumes only 6-7% of
the total project costs (for new plants).
Design costs for modifications to other plants are generally higher than
those for newer plants because it may be time consuming to locate
drawings, and once they are located, they may not be accurate. Also,
visits to the plant by the design team may be necessary to accurately
locate existing equipment.
A-9
Vendors must be pre-qualified, an indirect cost.

'This involves a considerably lesser effort for a plant under construction
than an operating plant.
'The installation is planned for a scheduled outage, although the
procedure is iterative, since the length of the outage is dependent on
the work to be performed, amongst other considerations.
This response element, which includes the unloading, handling,inspection,

erection, and installation of equipment, generally dominates the costs,
particularly for an operating plant. The productivity of labor is very
inefficient in a radiation environment.
At this step, it is frequently discovered that it is necessary to change

the design, in which case we go back to Step 4. This occurred at least
once for one of the surveyed utilities, resulting in an increment of work
which was at least 50% of the original effort.
Several utilities use outside contractors to supplement in-house

radiation protection and security during an outage.
This cost component does not apply to a plant under construction.
Even if the modification is scheduled during a planned outage, there is

potential to extend the outage, resulting in the need for replacement
power. It is not possible to examine regulatory requirements
individually when evaluating the potential for outage extension, since it
is the combination of all of the modifications that affects outage
schedule.
SC&A
A-10
Table I.b.
Cost Elements Relating to the

Accident Monitoring Instrumentation Requirement
1 2
a. Project Management Labor *
c. Clerical Labor
d. Drafting Labor
e. Administrative Labor
f. Accounting Labor
1 3
g. Quality Assurance/Quality Control Labor *
h. Computer
i. Equipment*'^»^
j. Materials^»^
k. Craft Supervisory Labor
1. Craft Labor
1 8
m. Radiation Protection Labor *
n. Security Labor
g
0. Replacement Power
p. Technician Labor^'^^
q. Change in Plant Efficiency
Notes
1Direct labor includes base wages, fringe benefits, employee benefits, and
overhead. Items to be Included in overhead vary by the worker category
and by individual accounting practices. Indirect costs applicable to
this regulatory requirement include company management and
administration, expendable materials (such as concrete, fittings, cable,
etc.), construction equipment, document storage, reproduction, and
buildings.
2
Project management is intended to include all professional management and
supervision directly related to the project, not only that of the overall
project manager.
3
Includes Non-Destructive Testing.
Includes cost of freight and spare parts Included with the procurement of
the original equipment.
SC&A
A-11
Evaluation of the cost of safety-grade equipment is tricky. A factor of

10 may need to be applied to the off-the-shelf cost to account for QA,
seismic qualification, environmental qualification, etc.
*If equipment or materials are capitalized, it may be necessary to
consider financing costs.
r
Some materials, such as concrete fittings, cable, etc., may be included
in overhead.
Includes professional health physicists and H.P. technicians.
At one of the plants surveyed, installation of the hydrogen monitor
extended the planned outage by 15 days, or approximately 20%.
Includes supervisory level non-professionals.
SC&A
A-12
2.3 Emergency Planning and Revisions
Functional response elements relating to the Emergency Planning Requirement

are presented in Table II.a., followed by the corresponding cost elements in
Table II.b. An additional organizational identifier, "S-L," which denotes
state and local government, follows some of the functional response elements
in Table II.a.
The Emergency Planning requirement that was selected for this study, as
described in the Introduction to this report, does not include the extensive
emergency response facilities' capability nor the meteorology upgrade
additionally required by the Commission. The costs of these additional
requirements are likely to swamp the costs of the requirements examined here.
However, our focus is on the "software" aspects of the emergency preparedness
upgrade following Three Mile Island. Accordingly, we are also ignoring the
costs of notification systems, communications systems, survey instruments, and
computers, each of which is significant.
One of the interesting aspects of the emergency planning requirement is the

significant continuing costs related to maintenance of the plan and
procedures, training of personnel, conducting exercises and drills, and
informing the public. Most of the utilities have established discrete units
within their organizations to conduct these activities, staffed by several
professionals and support personnel. These units may be located within the
operating organ or within a central service organization, in which case
emergency preparedness coordinators are appointed at the plants. In general,
however, these emergency preparedness units did not exist during the early
response to the NRC requirement. Therefore, functional response elements 1
through 4 in Table II.a. were typically coordinated by an ad-hoc organization.
SC&A
A-13
Table II.a.
Functional Responses to the
Emergency Planning Requirement
Analyze the requirement (U)

(d) executive labor
Rewrite Emergency Plan consistent with the format of NUREG-0654 (V,

and/or U, and S-L)

(e) radiation protection labor, and possibly (f) labor-hour
contract(s) with private consultant(s) and (g) contract(s)/grant(s)
to the state(s). (h) State official and (i) local official labor at
various levels were also required.
Write Emergency Procedures in Support of the Emergency Plan (V, and/or U,

and S-L)
Involved (a) project management, (b) engineering, (c) clerical, (e)

radiation protection, and (j) technician labor, and possibly (f)
labor-hour contract(s) with private consultant(s) and (g)
contract(s)/grant(s) to the state(s). (h) State official and (i)
local official labor at various levels were also required.
Obtain NRC approval of plan and procedures, and revised technical

specifications (U)
Involved (a) project management and (c) clerical labor.
Continuously maintain Emergency Plan and Procedures, train personnel, and

inform the public (U)
Involves (a) project management, (b) engineering, (c) clerical, (e)

radiation protection, (j) technician, and (k) public relations labor.
SC&A
A-14
During training, plant operating labor is involved. Also may involve

(g) contract(s)/grant(s) to the state(s).
6. Annually conduct exercises and drills (V and/or U and S-L)
Involves (a) project management, (b) engineering, (c) clerical, (d)

executive, (e) radiation protection, (k) public relations, and (1)
administrative labor, (m) simulator time, and possibly an (f) outside
contract. (h) State and (i) local official labor at various levels
5
are also involved. Additional plant personnel labor is tied up.
Notes:
Emergency plans already existed for all sites; the requirements of

NUREG-0654 were so extensive, however, that existing documentation was of
little help.
2
These include contracts for evacuation studies.
3
Typically, approximately 50 plant operating personnel may be trained for
one week annually. Assume that these personnel are technicians.
4
For scenario development.
5
Exercises involve significant disruptions in plant operations, the costs
of which are difficult to quantify.
SC&A
A-15
Table II.b.
Cost Elements Relating to the Emergency Planning Requirement
1 2
a. Project Management Labor *
c. Clerical Labor
d. Executive Labor^*^
1 4
e. Radiation Protection Labor '
f. Labor-Hour Contract (private)
g. State Contract(s)/6rant(s)^
h. State Official Labor
i. Local Official Labor
k. Public Relations 1 6
j. Technician Labor *Labor
1. Administrative Labor
m. Simulator
Notes:
1Direct labor includes base wages, fringe benefits, employee benefits, and
overhead. Items to be included in overhead vary by the worker category
and by individual accounting practices. Indirect costs applicable to
this regulatory requirement include company management and
administration, document storage, reproduction, and buildings.
2
Project management is intended to include all professional management and
supervision directly related to the project, not only that of the overall
project manager.
Executive labor is normally included in overhead as an indirect cost.
However, executive involvement was so extensive in implementing this
requirement that explicit recognition of this cost element was deemed to
be desirable.
4
Includes professional health physicists and H.P. technicians
The extent of state funding for emergency preparedness varies from

utility to utility, depending on local political considerations, amongst
other factors.
Includes supervisory level non-professionals
SC&A
A-16
3.0 MAGNITUDE OF THE COSTS
This section contains quantitative cost data which were available for the two
regulatory requirements we examined. The data were not comprehensive, and
detailed breakdowns were largely unavailable.
3.1 Accident Monitoring Instrumentation
The total costs for each of the six parts of the accident monitoring
instrumentation requirement are given in Table III. For some of the plants,
totally disaggregated costs are not available. Also, parts of the requirement
were not necessary to implement at a couple of the plants. There are some
comforting consistencies in the magnitude of the costs for several of the
parts of the requirement from plant to plant, and some striking anomalies.
Some of the anomalies may be explainable; for example, the high cost of
iodine-particulate sampling for the 2 unit PWR under construction may be due
to the fact that this is only a budgeted, not an actual cost. On the other
hand, we are unable to explain the difference in containment water level
instrumentation costs between the two BWRs.
It is important to realize that there may be large real differences in costs

for any specific requirement between seemingly comparable plants. Costs are
influenced by the availability of accurate design drawings (a function of the
plant age), the accessibility of components in high radiation fields, the
tightness of planning and management control, and, to a certain extent, good
old fashioned luck. At one of the surveyed plants, an Engineering Change
Notice had to be issued because of inadequate cooling to an instrumentation
cabinet, resulting in an additional effort of approximately 50% of the initial
effort.
SC&A
TABLE III
Magnitude of the Costs for Accident Monitoring Instrumentation
Utility #1 Utility #2 Utility #3

2 unit op. 3 unit op. 2 unit op. 2 unit 2 unit 1 unit op.
CE PWR BWR W PWR^ W PWR 2 op. BWR W PWR
(const.)
Noble Gas Monitor $1500K N/A N/A $533K N/A N/A

Iodine-Part. Sampling N/A N/A N/A 3065K N/A N/A
Both of Above — — $513K — — —
Contain. High Range

Monitor 425K $350K 493K 840K N/A N/A
All 3 of Above — — — — $5800K $700K
Containment Pressure 370K 200K 407 K 120K 175K 102K

Containment Water
Level 302K 350K Not required N/A 2 BOOK 217K
Containment Hydrogen 1300K lOOOK Not required N/A 9300 K"^ 260K
Notes:
1Does not include materials cost, estimated to comprise approx. 30% of the total
'Budgeted, not actual costs
Includes replacement of other monitors in containment in addition to hydrogen monitor

A-18
We were successful in obtaining only limited data on materials (including

equipment) costs, shown in Table IV. These data illustrate the relatively
small contribution that materials make to the total costs of these
modifications. Clearly, an initial cost estimate based only on materials
costs would be grossly in error.
The contribution of design costs to total costs is illustrated in Table V,

based on slightly more data. Table V points out that, on the average,
engineering design may well contribute more to total costs than materials.
Finally, Table VI illustrates the contribution of radiation protection and

security to total installation costs at one of the plants. These costs are
not negligible.
A-19
Table IV
Materials Costs As A Percentage of Total

Costs for Accident Monitoring Instrumentation
Utility #1 Utility #3
2 unit op. CE PWR 2 unit op. BWR
Noble Gas Monitor 10% N/A

lodine-Particulate
Sampling Not required N/A
Contain. High Range Monitor 21% N/A
All 3 of Above —
21%
Containment Pressure 18% N/A
Containment Water Level 6% 5%
Containment Hydrogen 10% 4%
SC&A
A-20
TABLE V
Engineering Design Costs As a Percentage

of Total Costs for Accident Monitoring Instrumentation
Utility #1 Utility #2 Utility #3

2 unit op. CE PWt^ 2 unit op. W PWR^ 2 unit op. BWR
Noble Gas Monitor 22% N/A N/A

lodine-Particulate Sampling Not required N/A N/A
Both of Above — 30% —
Contain. High Range Monitor N/A 5% N/A

All 3 of above — — 22%
Containment Pressure N/A 5% N/A
Containment Water Level 17% Not required 30%
Containment Hydrogen N/A Not required 6%
Notes:
Includes costs of Project Management

^Total does not include materials cost; thus this percentage reflects the
ratio of design labor to design plus installation labor
SC&A
A-21
TABLE VI
Radiation Protection and Security Costs

As a Percentage of Installation Costs for
Accident Monitoring Instrumentation
Utility #3
2 unit op. BWR^
Radiation Protection Security
Noble Gas Monitor N/A N/A
lodine-Particulate Sampling N/A N/A
Contain. High Range Monitor N/A N/A
All 3 of Above 5% 0.4%
Containment Pressure N/A N/A
Containment Water Level 7% 1%
Containment Hydrogen 4% 0.6%
Note:
1
Based on 1983 project costs only
A-22
3.2 Emergency Planning and Revisions
There was no formal tracking of costs at any of the three utilities surveyed
during the development of the emergency plans or procedures. Continuing costs
for maintaining the plan and training are fairly well known, but the costs for
conducting an exercise are so diffuse that it is difficult to get a handle on
them. One of the utilities substantially funded the states during the
development of the off-site plans, and continues to provide them funding for
the maintenance of the off-site plans.
Rough estimates were made by each of the utilities for the costs of some of
the functional response elements given in Table II.a. We have taken the
liberty of converting estimates given in man-years to dollars. No attempt was
made to disaggregate costs by individual plant. The composite of these
various estimates are given in Table VII.
Despite the tenuous basis for most of the estimates given in Table VII, there
is surprising consistency between the two available estimates for the
development of emergency plans and procedures, and between the two available
estimates of the in-house costs of maintaining the plan. The funding by one
of the utilities of the state governments is anomalous, although other
utilities have provided direct grants to the states for off-site emergency
planning. Also, little can be surmised from the estimates of the costs of
annual exercises, since these were all very rough estimates.
SC&A
A-23
Table VII
Magnitude of the Costs for Emergency Planning
Utility n Utility #2 Utility #3

(1 station) (3 stations) (2 stations)
Develop Emergency Plan and

Procedures
In-house effort $300K 1 N/A $75K
Private contract N/A None 300K
State contract None $3300K None
Annual Maintenance of
the Plan
In-house effort N/A 650K^ 500-600K
State contract None 915K None
Annual Exercise
In-house effort 30K^ lOOK^ 175K^
State effort 30K'^ N/A N/A
Notes:
Based on utility estimate of 6 man-yrs at 50K/man-yr
2
Based on utility estimate of 310 man-days at $150/man-day
3
Based on utility estimate of 200 man-days at $150/man-day
$300K/yr for unit at headquarters plus $150K/yr for team performing
radiological monitoring and meteorology plus $165K/yr for time of plant
personnel undergoing training plus $12K/yr/plant for plant coordinators
5
Rough estimate
A-24
4.0 COMPARISON BETWEEN COST ESTIMATES AND COSTS INCURRED
The three utilities surveyed differ in the methods used to perform an initial
cost estimate of a plant modification. At one of the utilities, time
permitting (and it frequently doesn't), the esimate is based on the results of
an interdisciplinary conceptual design of the modification. At another it is
based on a "rap session" attended by a few engineers. A small sample of
comparisons indicates that the accuracy of the original estimate is
independent of the sophistication of the methods used.
There were no original cost estimates available for the Emergency Planning and
Revisions Requirement. Only one utility had some data relating to the
Accident Monitoring Instrumentation Requirement, and a comparison of these
original cost estimates with actual costs are given in Table VIII. In
general, the original estimates are lower than the actual costs by roughly one
order of magnitude.
One other utility, with the two-unit operating CE PWR, had some comparative
data for an aggregate of several TMI items. For this aggregate, the original
cost estimate was $10 million and the actual cost was $17 million. For this
same utility, the fire barriers under the fire protection requirement (10 CFR
50, Appendix R) cost $1.8 million, whereas the original cost estimate was $8
million. The comparison between the estimated and actual costs for the
alternate safe shutdown mechanism under the same regulatory requirement was
much closer — $6.5 million (original estimate) versus $8 million (actual).
SC&A
A-25
Table VIII
Comparison Between Cost Estimates and Costs Actually Incurred
Utility #3
2 unit op. BWR
Original Cost Est. Actual Cost
Noble Gas Monitor N/A N/A

Iodine/Part. Sampling N/A N/A
Contain. High Range Monitor N/A N/A
All Three of Above $650K $5800K
Containment Pressure 165K 175K
Containment Water Level 208K 2500K
Containment Hydrogen 564K >9300K^
Notes
1Contains work in addition to the Installation of containment hydrogen
monitors. Also work is not complete.
SC&A
B-1
APPENDIX B
COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWER ELECTRIC GLNERATING

PLANTS IN THE UNITED STATES*
Con- Commercial
struc- Operation
United States tion orig actual
Net Reactor Generator ArcMted stage sched- or ex-
MWe Supplier Engineer Constructor ult t peeled
NORTHEAST Type Supplier
r/.)
Baltimore Gas t Electric Co
• Calven CIIUS 1 (Lusby. Md ) 850 PWR C-E GE Bechtel Bechtel 100 1/73 5/75
• Calven Cliffs 2 (Lusby. Md ) 850 PWR C-E W Bechtel Bechtel 100 1/74 4/77
Boston Edison Co.
• Pilgrim 1 (Plymouth, Mass ) 670 BWR GE GE Bechtel Bechtel 100 10/71 12/72
Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co
• Haddam Neck (Haddam Neck, Conn ) 562 PWR W W s&w S&W 100 11/67 1/68
Consolidated Edison Co.
• Indian Point 2 (Indian Point, N Y ) 873 PWR W W UE&C Wedco 100 6/69 7/74
Ouquesne Light Co.
833 PWR W W S&W/DLC 100 6/73 4/77
• Beaver Valley 1 (Shippingporl, Pa )
833 PWR W W
s&w DLC 78 1 10/78 5/86
Beaver Valley 2 (Shippingporl, Pa)
GPU Nuclear Corporation
s&w
• Oyster Creek 1 (Forked River, N J ) 620 BWR GE GE B&R/GE B&R 100 2/68 12/69
• Three Mile island 1 (Londonderry Twp ,, Pa ) 792 PWR B&W GE Gilbert UE&C 100 9/71 9/74
• Three Mile Island 2 (Londonderry Twp ,, Pa ) 880 PWR B&W W B&R UE&C 100 ^73 12/78
Long Island Lighting Co.
Shoreham (Brookhaven, N Y ) 620 BWR GE GE Utility 99 /75 early 85
s&w
Maine Yankee Atomic Power Co.
• Maine Yankee (Wiscasset, M e ) 825 PWR C-E W s&w S&W 100 12/72
New York Power Authority
• Indian Point 3 (Indian Point. N Y ) 965 PWR W W UE&C Wedco 100 7/71 8/76
621 BWR GE GE J P. Bell 100 1/73 7/75
• James A FiUPatrick (Scriba, N Y )
Niagara Mohawk Power Corp
s&w
• Nine Mile Point 1 (Scnba. N Y ) 610 BWR 6E GE Utility S&W 100 11/68 12/69
Nine Mile Point 2 (Scriba, N Y ) 1080 BWR GE GE s&w S&W 78 7/78 10/86
Northeast Utilities
• Millstone 1 (Waterlord, Conn ) 660 BWR GE GE Ebasco Ebasco 100 6/69 12/70
• Millstone 2 (Waterlord, Conn ) 870 PWR C-E GE Bechtel Bechtel 100 4/74 12/75
Millstone 3 (Waterlord, Conn ) 1150 PWR W GE S&W S&W 81 3/78 5/86
Pennsylvania Power & Light Co.
• Susquehanna 1 (Berwick. Pa ) 1050 BWR GE GE Bechtel Bechtel 100 5/79 6/83
Susquehanna 2 (Berwick, Pa ) 1050 BWR GE GE Bechtel Bechtel 99 5/81 11/84
Philadelphia Electric Co
• Peach Bottom 2 (Peach Bottom, Pa ) 1065 BWR GE GE Bechtel Bechtel 100 /71 7/74
• Peach Bottom 3 (Peach Bonom, Pa ) 1065 BWR GE GE Bechtel Bechtel 100 /73 12/74
Limerick 1 (Ponstown, Pa ) 1055 BWR GE GE Bechtel Bechtel 90 8/78 4/85
Limerick 2 (Pottstown, Pa ) 1055 BWR GE GE Bechtel Bechtel 30 1/80 10/88
Public Service Co. of New Hampshire
Seabrook 1 (Seabrook, N H ) 1150 PWR W GE UE&C UE&C 89 11/79 12/84
Seabrook 2 (Seabrook, N H ) 1150 PWR W GE UE&C UE&C 29 8/81 7/87
Public Service Eleclnc A Gat Co.
• Salem 1 (Salem, N J ) 1079 PWR W W Utility UE&C 100 /71 6/77
• Salem 2 (Salem, N J ) 1106 PWR W W Utility UE&C 100 /73 10/81
Hope Creek 1 (Salem N J ) 1070 BWR GE GE Bechtel Bechtel 81 3/75 12/86
Rochester Gas i Electric Corp
• Roben E Gnna (Ontario IN Y ) 490 PWR W W Gilbert Bechtel 100 11/69 3/70
Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp.
• Vermont Yankee (Vernon. V t ) 514 BWR GE GE Ebasco Ebasco 100 10/70 11/72
Yankee Atomic Electric Co
• Yankee (Rowe, Mass) 175 PWR W W S&W S&W 100 1/61 6/61
CONTINUED
NOTE Deleted from this kst are Clinton 2, Shearon Hams-2, River Bend-2, the Cknch w\ recent months MartjIe Hill 1 and -2 are retained >) the kst at our deadline there
Rivei breeder reactor, and Skagit Hanford 1 and -2 These protects have been canceled was discussion ol canceling the statnn
•Extracted from Nuclear News, February 1984/Vol. 27/No. 2. This list is

updated semiannually (February and August). Reprinted with the permission of
Nuclear News.
B-2
Con- Commercial
struc- Operation
tion orig. actual
Net Reactor Generator Architect stage sched- or e>-
MWe Typo Supplier Supplier Engineer Constructor• (%) uiet pected
MIDWEST
Cincinnati Gas & Electric Co.

Zimmer 1 (Moscow, Ohio) 810 BWR GE W S&L Kaiser 98 /75 indef
The Cleveland Electric lllumlnaling Co.
Perry 1 (North Perry, Ohio) 1205 BWR GE GE Gilbert Utikty 90 7/79 5/85
Perry 2 (North Perry, Ohio) 1205 BWR GE GE Gilbert Utibty 42 7/80 5/88
Commonwealth Edison Company
• Dresden 1 (Morris, III) 207 BWR GE GE Bechtei Bechtei 100 7/60 8/60
• Dresden 2 (Morns, III) 794 BWR GE GE S&L UE&C 100 2/69 8/70
• Dresden 3 (Morns, ill.) 794 BWR GE GE S&L UE&C 100 2/70 10/71
• LaSalle County 1 (Seneca. Ill) 1078 BWR GE GE S&L Utility 100 2/76 10/82
LaSalle County 2 (Seneca, ill) 1078 BWR GE GE S&L Utility 99 2/77 4/84
• Zion 1 (Zion. ill) 1040 PWR W W S&L Utility 100 4/72 12/73
• Zion 2 (Zion, III) 1040 PWR W W S&L Utility 100 5/73 9/74
Byron 1 (Byron, III) 1120 PWR W W S&L Utility 93 5/79 6/84
Byron 2 ( ^ r o n . III) 1120 PWR W W S&L Utility 67 3/80 11/85
Braidwood 1 (Braidwood, III) 1120 PWR W W S&L Utility 70 10/79 10/85
Braidwood 2 (Braidwood, ill) 1120 PWR W W S&L Utility 54 10/80 10/86
Commonwealth Edison Company, Interstate
Power Company, and lowa-liilnols
Gas and Electric Company
Carroll County 1 (Savanna, III) 1120 PWR W S&L 0 10/87 /2001
Carroll County 2 (Savanna, III.) 1120 PWR W S&L 0 10/88 /2002
Commonwealth Edison Co. and
lowa-llllnols Gas & Electric Co.
• Ouad-Cites 1 (Cordova, ill) 789 BWR GE GE S&L UE&C 100 3/70 8/72
• Quad-Cities 2 (Cordova, ill) 789 BWR GE GE S&L UE&C 100 3/71 10/72
Consumers Power Co.
• Big Rock Point (Charlevoix, Mich ) 63 BWR GE GE Bechtel Bechtel 100 12/62 12/62
• Palisades (South Haven, Mich ) 740 PWR C-E W Bechtei Bechtel 100 7/70 12/71
Midland 1 (Midland, Mich ) 425* PWR B&W GE Bechtei Bechtei 85 5/78 indef
Midland 2 (Midland, Mich ) 808 PWR B&W GE Bechtei Bechtel 85 5/79 /86
Oalryiand Power Cooperative
• La Crosse BWR (Genoa. Wis ) 50 BWR Allis Allis S&L Maxon 100 10/66 11/69
Detroit Edison Co.
Fermi 2 (Newport, Mich ) 1100 BWR GE GEC Utility Daniel 98 /74 12/84
Illinois Power Co.
Clinton 1 (Clinton, III) 933 BWR GE GE S&L Baldwin 82 4 6/80 11/86
Indiana & Michigan Electric Co.
• Donald C. Cook 1 (Bridgman, Mich ) 1050 PWR W GE AEPSC AEPSC 100 4/72 8/75
• Donald C Cook 2 (Bridgman, Mich ) 1100 PWR W BBC AEPSC AEPSC 100 4/73 7/78
Iowa Electric Light & Power Co.
• Duane ArnoW (Palo. Iowa) 545 BWR GE GE Bechtel Bechtel 100 12/73 5/74
Kansas Gas & Electric Co.,
Kansas City Power & Light Co. and
Kansas Electric Power
Cooperative, Inc.
Wolf Creek (Burlington, Kans ) 1150 PWR W GE Bech/S&L Daniel 90 4/81 2/85
Nebraska Public Power Distnct
• Cooper (Brownsville. Neb ) 778 BWR GE W B&R B&R 100 4/71 7/74
Northern States Power Co.
• Moniicello (Moniicello, Minn ) 536 BWR GE GE Bechtei Bechtel 100 5/70 7/71
• Praine Island 1 (Red Wing, Minn ) 520 PWR W W FPS Utility 100 5/72 12/73
• Praine Island 2 (Red Wing. Minn ) 520 PWR W W FPS Utihty 100 5/74 12/74
Omaha Public Power District
• Fort Calhoun 1 (Fort Calhoun. Neb ) 486 PWR CE GE G&H G&H 100 5/71 9/73
Public Service Indiana
Marble Hill 1 (Jefferson County. Ind ) 1130 PWR W W S&L Utility 60 /82 12/88
Marble Hill 2 (Jefferson County, Ind ) 1130 PWR W W S&L Utility 37 /84 6/90
Toledo Edison Co.
• Davis-Besse 1 (Oak Harbor, Ohio) 906 PWR B&W GE Bechtel Bechtel 100 12/74 11/77
Union Electric Co.
Callaway 1 (Fulton. Mo ) 1150 PWR W GE Bechtei Daniel 98 10/81 4/84
Wisconsin Electric Power Co.
• Point Beach 1 (Two Creeks, Wis ) 497 PWR W W Bechtel Bechtel 100 4/70 12/70
• Point Beach 2 (Two Creeks. Wis ) 497 PWR W W Bechtel Bechtel 100 4/71 10/72
WKl 7 K m iiw M m * H I * t u c l o r i Unrt I h o w a w • » , dciignad to dcnow pan ol nt u—m lo « nwrby chamiui laciiiiy
B-3
Con- Commercial
stnic- Operation
tlon orig actual
Net Reactor Generator Architect stage sched- or ex-
MWa Type Supplier Supplier Engineer Constructor P4) ulet pected
U S —MIDWEST, cont'd
Wisconsin Public Service Corporation
• Kewaunee (Carlton. Wis ) 535 PWR W W FPS FPS 100 6/72 6/74
SOUTH
Alabama Power Company

• Joseph M Fariey 1 (Oothan, Ala ) 629 PWR W w SCSI/Bechtel Daniel 100 4/75 12/77
• Joseph M Fariey 2 (Dothan, Ala ) 829 PWR W w SCSI/Bechlel Daniel 100 4/76 7/81
Arkansas Power & Light Co.
• Nuclear One 1 (Russellviile, Arit) 836 PWR B&W w Bechtel Bechtel 100 7/72 12/74
• Nuclear One 2 (RusselKrille, Arii) 858 PWR C-E GE Bechtel Bechtel 100 12/75 3/80
Carolina Power & Light Co.
• Robinson 2 (Hartsville, S C ) 665 PWR W W Ebasco Ebasco 100 5/70 3/71
• Brunswick 1 (Southport, N C ) 790 BWR GE GE UE&C Brown 100 3/75 3/77
• Bnjnswick 2 (Southport, N C ) 790 BWR GE GE UE&C Brown 100 3/74 11/75
Shearon Harris 1 (Newhill, N C ) 900 PWR W W Ebasco Daniel 85 3/77 3/86
Duke Power Co.
• Oconee 1 (Seneca, S C ) 860 PWR B&W GE Utility/Bech Utility 100 5/71 7/73
• McGuire 1 (Cornelius, N C ) 1180 PWR W W Utility Utility 100 3/76 12/81
McGuire 2 (Cornelius, N C ) 1180 PWR W W Utility Utility 994 3/77 3/84
Catawba 1 (Clover, S C ) 1145 PWR W GE Utility Utility 97 8 3/79 6/85
Catawba 2 (Dover, S C ) 1145 PWR W GE Utility Utility 61 9 3/80 6/87
Florida Power t Light Co.
• Turtcey Point 3 (Florida City. Fla ) 666 PWR W W Bechtel Bechtel too 8/70 12/72
• Turisey Point 4 (Florida City, Fla ) 666 PWR W W Bechtel Bechtel 100 8/71 9/73
• St Lucie 1 (Hutchinson Island, Fla ) 777 PWR C-E W Ebasco Ebasco 100 1/73 12/76
• St Lucie 2 (Hutchinson Island, Fla ) 777 PWR C-E W Ebasco Ebasco 100 9/79 8/83
Florida Power Corporation
• Crystal River 3 (Red Level. Fla ) 875 PWR B&W W Gilbert Jones 100 9/72 3/77
Georgia Power Co.
• Edwin I Hatch 1 (Baxiey, Ga ) 810 BWR GE GE SS/Bechtel Utihty 100 4/73 12/75
• Edwin I Hatch 2 (Baxiey, Ga ) 820 BWR GE GE Bechtel Utility 100 4/76 8/79
Vogtie 1 (Waynesboro, Ga ) 1100 PWR W GE SS/Bechtel Utility 61 2/78 3/87
Vogtie 2 (Waynesboro, Ga ) 1100 PWR W 6E SS/Bechtel Utility 19 9 2/79 9/88
Gull Stales Utilities Co.
River Bend 1 (St Francisviiie. La ) 940 BWR GE GE S&W S&W 82 10/79 12/85
Louisiana Power A Light Co.
Waterford 3 (Taft. La ) 1104 PWR C-E W Ebasco Ebasco 99 1/77 12/84
Mississippi Power & Light Co.
Grand Gulf 1 (Port Gibson, Miss ) 1250 BWR GE Allis Bechtel Bechtel 100 9/79 9/84
Grand Gulf 2 (Port Gibson, Miss ) 1250 BWR GE Allis Bechtel Bechtel 331 9/81 indef
South Carolina Eleclnc & Gas Co.
Virgii C Summer 1 (Parr, S C ) 900 PWR W GE Gilbert Daniel 100 10/77 1/84
Tennessee Valley Authority
• Browns Feriy 1 (Decatur, Ala ) 1067 BWR GE GE Utility Utility 100 10/70 8/74
• Browns Ferry 2 (Decatur. Ala ) 1067 BWR GE GE Utility Utility 100 10/71 3/75
• Browns Ferry 3 (Decatur. Ala ) 1067 BWR GE GE Utility Utility 100 10/72 3/77
• Sequoyah 1 (Daisy. Tenn ) 1148 PWR W W Utility Utikty 100 10/73 7/81
• Sequoyah 2 (Daisy. Tenn ) 1148 PWR W W Utility Utihty 100 4/74 6/82
PWR W Utikty Utihty 96 10/76 11/84
Watts Bar 1 (Spmg City, Tenn ) 1177
PWR
w W Utikty Utihty 61 4/77 10/86
Watts Bar 2 (Spring City. Tenn ) 1177
PWR
w
B&W BBC Utility Utihty 76 7/77 4/89
Bellefonte 1 (Scottsboro, Ala ) 1213
Bellefonte 2 (Scottsboro, Ala ) 1213 PWR B&W BBC Utility Utihty 57 4/78 4/91
Hartsville A1 (Hartsville, Tenn ) 1233 BWR GE BB Utility Utihty 44 4/79 indef
Hartsville A2 (Hartsville. Tenn ) 1233 BWR GE BB Utility Utihty 34 4/80 indef
Yellow Creek 1 (luka. Miss ) 1285 PWR C-E GE Utihty Utihty 35 4/83 indet
Yellow Creek 2 (luka. Miss ) 1285 PWR C-E GE Utikty Utility 3 4/85 indef
Virginia Electric & Power Co.
• Surry 1 (Gravel Neck, Va ) 775 PWR W W S&W S&W 100 3/71 12/72
• Surry 2 (Gravel Neck, Va ) 775 PWR W W S&W S&W 100 3/72 5/73
CONTINUED
• Units m commercial operation t Estimated date of startup, announced at time reactor was ordered
cp — construction permit issued Iwa — hmited work authoruation issued

B-4
Con- Commercial
stnic- Operation
tion orig. actual
Net Reactor Generator Architect sUge sched- or ex-
MWe Type Supplier Supplier Engineer Constructor P/.) ulet pected
U.S.—SOUTH, cont'd
Virginia Electric & Power Co., cont'd
• North Anna 1 (Mineral, Va.) 877 PWR W W S&W S&W 100 3/74 6^78
• North Anna 2 (Mineral. Va ) 890 PWR W W S&W S&W 100 7/75 12/80
SOUTHWEST
Arizona Public Service Co.

Palo Verde 1 (Wintersburg, Ariz.) 1270 PWR C-E GE Bechtel Bechtel 99.5 V81 12/84
Palo Verde 2 (Wintersburg, Ariz.) 1270 PWR C-E GE Bechtel Bechtel 98.7 11/82 9/85
Palo Verde 3 (Wintersburg, Ariz.) 1270 PWR CE GE Bechtel Bechtel 83.2 V84 12/86
Houston Lighting ft Power Company
South Texas Project 1 (Paiaclos, Tex.) 1250 PWR W W Bechtel Ebasco 50 10/80 6/87
South Texas Project 2 (Palacios, Tex.) 1250 PWR W W Bechtel Ebasco 25 3/82 6/89
Texas Utilities Generating Company
Comanche Peak 1 (Glen Rose. Tex.) 1150 PWR W Alhs G&H B&R 97 1/80 /84
Comanche Peak 2 (Glen Rose, Tex.) 1150 PWR W Alhs G&H B&R 65 1/82 /86
WEST AND NORTHWEST
Pacinc Gas ft Electric Co.

Diablo Canyon 1 (Avila Beach, Calif.) 1084 PWR W W Utility Utihty 100 5/72 6/84
Diablo Canyon 2 (Avila Beach, Calif.) 1106 PWR W W Utihty Utihty 95 7/74 2/85
Portland General Electric Co.
• Trojan (Prescott. Ore.) 1130 PWR W GE Bechtel Indep 100 9/74 5/76
Public Service Company ol Colorado
• Fort St. Vrain (Platteville, Colo.) 330 HTGR GA GE S&L GA 100 4/72 1/79
Sacramento Municipal Utility District
• Rancho Seco (Clay Station, Caht.) 913 PWR B&W W Bechtel Bechtel 100 5/73 4/75
Southern Calilomia Edison and
San Diego Gas ft Electric Co.
• San Onotre 1 (San Ciemente, Cahf.) 436 PWR W W Bechtel Bechtel 100 1/68
• San Onofre 2 (San Ciemente, Calif.) 1100 PWR C-E GEC Bechtel Bechtel 100 6/75 8/83
San Onofre 3 (San Ciemente, Cahf.) 1100 PWR C-E GEC Bechtel Bechtel 100 6/75 MM
United States Department ol Energy t>
• Hantord-N (Richland, Wash.) 860 LGR GE GE B&R B&R 100 7/66
Washington Public Power Supply System

1100 BWR GE W B&R Bechtel 99 9/77 7/84
WNP-2 (Richland, Wash.)
1250 PWR B&W W UE&C Bechtel 62 5 9/80 indef
WNP-l (Richland, Wash.) Ebasco Ebasco 75 3/82 indef
1240 PWR C-E W
WNP-3 (Satsop, Wash.)
U.S. Total (139 unlU) 128 507
"Power is extracted by WPPSS through the Hanford Generating Project; the reactor is owned by the DOE.
B-5
NORTHEAST Connecticut. Delaware.

Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts.
New Hampshire, New Jersey, New
York, Pennsyhrania, Rhode Island,
Vermont
SOUTH- Alabama, Aritansas, Florida,
Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mis-
sissippi, North Carolina, South
Carokna, Tennessee, Virginia, West
Virginia
MIDWEST: liimois, Indiana. Iowa.
Kansas. Michigan, Minnesota, Mis-
souri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio,
South Dakota, Wisconsin
SOUTHWEST: Arizona. New Mexico,
Oklahoma. Texas
WEST AND NORTHWEST: Cahfomia,
Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada,
Oregon, Utah, Washington, Wyoming
Maaan Maion Construclion Company |U S I

Abbreviations used HcAlp S« noocn McAlpna 4 Sara LM ( U K )
In this table HCINO Moror CokimDus Conftullir^ Engmacrt mc (Switiarland)

MCCO Uoniraai Engmaanng Co (Canada)
A-A ASC* Mom (5««ocn| l A B Emcn 4 Borgar (Sâiarland) MEL MttMOrfhi Eiaciric Corporanon (Japan)
AC Acitt CanMom iCanaOai Ckaaco EOaaco Sarvcai inc |U S ) MM* Mnsubtfri H a » y indutlrias LM (Japan)
A C t C Atcliffft at ConstruOions ElKlfioucs 0 * OwiOfO* S A eCC Engmaarmg Conilruclion Corp (ferMra) M M Unitlry ol Nuclear mduury (PnC)
CE Er<gli»i Elaclnc Co LM lU K ) MCC Nuclear Ovri Conaimciori (U K )
ACtCO ACEC »«<< COP (B«igHim| l E C Engiitn Exclrrc Co LM (Canada) MCI Nonnern Engneermg hduUrief IU K )
A C f C O W I N ACECO • . m WtUiflsXouM |B*ls>i««) n w Enghtn EKCt'ic and C Wimpay Group (U K ) Nora Naraioom NV (The Nemetandt)
ACLF y o i ^ ACECOOcutot Lo*f*f r*fnalon«/WMtMgfiouM I I EianronucKara luiiana (Italy) N*«aa Caniraia Nuciaaira Eurooaanna A Namront Waprdat (France)
Claclric Enttgy Systtms Euroct (Ftanco) C I n Eitn LXfln AG (W Carmany) HIRA r^jciaara liaiiaru neanorr Avanâlr (Italy)
AOF AuitNra Otitnt f rancott BNB Emprata Nacional Bavan (Soam) NNC Nalonal Nuclear Corporation (U K |
A l C t . Aaonx Exxgt ol Canaoa Lid C N t A Eau'poi NucWarn SA (Scan) HPC Nuclear POMT Co LM (U K )
A K Alomoiatgoopon (USSRI |lo>motly TPE t r o C Ewct"C Pomt Dn*lopn<anl Co LM (Japan) Wnclaaraa Empre«as Nuclearos Braaiarras SA
Tacivtocomaapon) (NOTERV PoMT Plan) Da»gn Buraau (Hingaryl MM clan NucleOras Engenaria SA (Bratil)
A t a A i i g a n a m EMkl'CiUMt GauiiscKa* Aas Tai««iM>«n CTOCEA Emracanalai y O c i u (Seam) MHCIOP Nuciebras Eouipamantoa Paaados SA
|W Gtrmanyl CWI EiactroWan LM (Svrucrlandl N«rK NordMUdaulsche KralhMrka AG (FRG)
ACI AHociaMd EtcKK mouiows LM (U K I l y T Eniracanaics y Ta««ra SA (Soaî) Okay Ooayasni Gr^ni Co (Japan)
A i n c A n o c a n E i t c i x RMrat S*nx* Coip lU S I Poo Fougarolia (Franca) OM Ontario Hydro (Canada)
ACTtA Agtoman EyT EA iSpam) ^ r S Fkior Froaar SenKat (U S I o r * Ontnora PoMT SyMma (U S )
AOR advancaO B**<ooltd (•acio' ft* Framaiomc Sociate Franco-AmarrcaMa da Conilruci«ns Par(UJ(4 C A Panonaand Co LM ( U K )
AHa A l b i O i a M v t (U S ) AumtQtiaa SA (Franca) Paiaona Ralpn M PacaonaCo ( U S I
ilalfcawi Sic Ganatai* da Construc*«na Eiaclriauat a« niAMACECO Framaioma •1(1 ACECO (Baigaim) r C Promcn Enganhana SA (Biatill
Macftaniqiiai (franca) Fall Fu|i Eiaciric Co Lid (Japan) PM Ptilip Moriman (W (aermany)
A N N Anialdo Maccanico NucMa't SpA IMIyl OA Ganaral AWnxc Con<party |U S I PMWR praastîied heavy walar moderated and •ceoiao
AI>C Alonuc ftxM' Conwtichon LM lU K I • A A A Crouoameni pour lot Aci<>4as A n m q u n a) A>anca*> reactor
A>ta KKU Dyckart<oll t WMniann AG W a r t I A Fraug AG (Franca) PWR presturind rrtlar reactor
>*gdu>no (FCR| QC (»roupamanl ConUrucWii'S Francart (Frartca) RaleaM Rateaw Sla (France)
ASGCN AnuMo San G w g n Compagnia Gana<a<t (iiaiy) OCHwn oa&<Qoied noa<ry waia* modaraiad raaclor M A C Rcnardson 4 Cruddaa (I) (mdra)
A M I Auatfti inganiaria Eapanda SA (SpaM) O c n gaft-cooicd raacior ROM Roneroamie Droogdok Uadl<chapp<i (The Namenandsl
• a l Bai<ou< Baanr * Co ( U K ) OC Ganrai Eicciric Co lU S ) RPL Reyroile Parions Lid (U K )
• A M BaiaaiKna Aannanang Ua«t>clu«p>i NV O c t Ganaral Eiacirc Co (U K ) RW n-chardwnt Westganh LM (U K )
(The Namaiiandil OETSCO Ganaral Eiaclrrc lacnnicai S a r x a s Co • A C M Sociaie AiMC«nne de ConMructans Macrianiguet
M C B'o^n BOOT" « C « (Sîl/xiandi OAM G i l l M 4 H i l l Inc ( U S ) (France)
• • K BaDcow BroMt Bo«*n Raakiiv O n e M (W Gannany) OAHE &et>t 4 Hill Espanola SA (Spam) * • Sp« Balignollet SA (France)
•«c«i Bccmai C o i p o a t v l u S I O C I U Crrwri Asaociaies Inc (LI S ) • C O Suntiia Camangiuieriei
• H C l Bhaial Haa>« EKcVicai i m a a l OWCaw G-lBarDCummon.iaiw (U S I • C V Southern Company Services etc
HWII ttrnmrnWHK OKW Canwmicftaaiiraltaarti Waaar GntoH (FRGI • e S Saawapt at Brica (Frartca)
• N BaiganucKamlBaigniinl • T M & a n d t Tra>au> da MariaoM (Franca) • C N Sener SA ( S p a i )
• H O C Biann Nuciaa< Oa»gn t ConHnKixm LM l U K I M a i Haiama Curru Co (Japan) SOE Soc«le Generate d Enterprises (France)
• A N B u m i i l l o a Inc ( U S I HCC HinduOan ContaucMn Co (a«»a) ( M l Sumitomo Heavy atdusiriet LM (Japan)
• A V Biact 4 Vaaicn lU S I Mac* HocMral AC (W Garmanyi IK Sydvenska Kra* AB (Sweden)
• 4 W Baecacii 4 Wiico> Co lU S I M # Hoiidan-Paruna (Canada) B A I $argani4LundyEng«iaers(US)
M U U H C F »au>>4Co l U S I MO Hydro-Ouaeac (CanaOa) • • L Sui Laval Tirtm AB (Sweden)
> 4 " e o i Inc l U S I MMB HocManpcralur Raatnroau GmoM |W (Wrmany) • M C Surveyor Ner»»igai 4 Cheneven Inc (Canada)
MTOA nigri lan^paratura gat<aorad raactor BO Siemens Otterre<h (Austria)
& • Camoanon Bamafd IFfancol MWIWM noa<ry rntm modraMO OOrlmg IrgN •>awr.coo«0 SOCIA Socieie pov rttdusirie Atomroue (Franca)
C M ConaonadAcoMaiaaiyl •OOCNE Socrau Genorale per Lavore e PuBotrche IXiMa
C 4 ComOuiMn Engnaomg kic lU S I »M karduaro SA (Spam) (•ahrl
C I A Ctfiwiiimial a rtna«o« AaoiiMouo (Fiancol BM Steams Roger Corp ( U S I
C t M Compagna CKctto Macnanûa (Fiancal M M Marrtaironaw Naaiaini Br<maWarOau Gn«iM • • Souetern Sonnces t K (U S I
C n & • tf'EwafO'tiai CFE S A (BoigN^tii (W Garmany) • • P ^ S M d i t h Slate Poaer •oard
C O f Canadian Canotal E M C K C • H T E C Emprau Nacamai da nganaria y lacnologra SA (Span) •taao KorwMikê MachrneiaOie* S w k (The Netherlands)
C»a« CKagnaud (Ftancal M ttlaraiani (W Omtany) • A W Stone 4 WeMMr Engmeermg Corp (U S I
Cla 0 1 C « Cantaia d ' E l a o c i M <F>ancal lyP- Mormat y AOfaClaS SA (Spam) TAS Tevmend 4 •othan *ic
GTTAA Comgagn^ feidualr«Na da Tiawaw (F*anGOI A Jonn U<ng Conurucl«n I H iU K I T I Iracivn EiacliciM
CL C««uto( Loaa (Franco) 4>noa J A Jonat Canahuctron Co (U S I 1NTR aiorit^n high tamparatMO roactnr
CM Chan4ia*« Ifcdainat (Franca) >•§ Jaumin ScKneMar (Franca) TMPO The Nuclear fvmm Group (UK I
CHO Conwutora NoOarlO OMaOraCW (Bra"!) • a l a w Kaiaar Engaioara (U S I
COrrrOBI/ACee CocWr<« Oii«<a€ Pio«oancarFranca Toar RNIC Koraa Haa«y kMuUriai and ConMrucKon Company TR Tecrkces Raunrdas SA (Spam)
SpArAialwi da Conuruciion Eiacir«<a> da Citariar» SA RTKTII Kanionrum THTR—flroMi BoOTri 4 C>a AC Kkicraam TW Tartor tMoodrOi. Construclon LM ( U K )
(•a*gn»n| poralio RaakwDou Gn<aH Nuaant CmoH («t Garmany) U t 4 C U n « d Engoeers 4 Constructors IU S )
CTAFMC CFE Irawawri Asirobai (janarai Conraciort Francois •aaa Kt^nagaya (M^n* Co (Japan) VANEA Vanoeiios Empresarios Agnrpaooa (Spax)
*t Filt Maurca Oaiana Camporian Barnard (BaiQuanl KWU Kraaoark u n a n AG |W (jamany) « • • AB VanenOyggnadsOyran
CTL Carwioni LM (Canada) 1 4 T Laraan 4 Taupro (na>a) VMF verenigaa Uachinetal>r««n NV (The Netherlands)
B A I OaoanmaM ol AaanK Enargy (Mdw) LOM bgN ««lar cao«ad grapnao-mooaraiad loacior W «wsi»ighouaa Eiecinc Corporation (U S )
• a a l a l Oan«i C a n M c k a n Co |U S I I M T a i l Hand matal laal Oraadar roaclor Wadaa a suttaMrary ol Weshngnouae Eiearrc Corporaian
^ L Oaiaora lavnnai (Franca) I W W I kgo rmar tiaadar aiLiu lUSI
• a t OapanmaM ol EnargiF lU S I L W O t w •gN.waiarâeiad Kaavyai WIL. Waichandnager Indueiraa LM (Oidia)
l A Cmoraiaroi Agrupadoa (Seam) XOMtfy H B Zachry Compeny (U S I
c-1
APPENDIX C
EEDB DIRECT COST ACCOUNTS — 2 DIGIT DESCRIPTION
Structures and Improvements (Account 21)
This account includes the on-site surface buildings and structures and subsurface
foundations and tunnels that house and support all equipment, components, piping,
ducting, and wiring. Also included in this account are site improvements such as
excavation, grading, roadways, and railroads. The subaccounts for each structure include
equipment for the heating, ventilating, and air conditioning systems and the lighting and
service power systems for that structure.
Nuclear power plants have two basic classes of on-site structures. Certain
structures support and protect safety-related equipment and assist in the prevention of
significant release of radioactivity to the environment. These critical structures are
designed to withstand a Design Basis Earthquake (as opposed to the earthquake
requirements in the Uniform Building Code) at the Middletown site. They are given the
designation of Seismic Category I. The other class of structures is designated as Non-
Seismic Category 1. These structures house and support equipment not essential to the
prevention of significant release of radiation.
The account does not include the foundations for individual plant machinery or
the buildings and foundations for the heat rejection systems. The foundations are
described in the appropriate equipment account and in the Main Condenser Heat
Rejection System Structures (Account 261) accounts.
The primary structure in the plant is the Reactor Containment Building. The
other major Seismic Category I structures include the Primary Auxiliary Building, the
Waste Process Building, the Fuel Storage Building, the Control and Diesel-Generator
Building, the Emergency Feedwater Pump Building, the Main Steam and Feedwater Pipe
Enclosures, the Hydrogen Recombiner Structure and the Ultimate Heat Sink Structure.
The major Nonseismic Category I structures include the Turbine Room and
Heater Bay, the Technical Support Center, the Administration and Service Building, the
Security Building, the Fire Pump House, the Nonessential Switchgear Building and the
Holding Pond.
Reactor Plant Equipment (Account 22)
This account includes the equipment that liberates thermal energy from fuel and
uses the resulting heat to generate steam. For each reactor, support equipment is
included to control the plant output, store an inventory of fuel, and store and treat the
residue or waste products. For a nuclear power plant, this equipment includes the
reactor safety systems, the fuel storage systems, and the radioactive waste handling
systems.
C-2
The NSSS scope includes the reactor pressure vessel and internals, the control
rod system, the reactor core cooling system, the residual heat removal system, the
safety injection system, the containment spray system, the combustible gas control
system, the fuel handling system, and associated instrumentation and controls for these
systems.
The balance of reactor plant systems includes the inert gas system, the reactor
water make-up system, the coolant treatment and recycle system, the fluid leak
detection system, and the auxiliary cooling system.
Turbine Plant Equipment (Account 23)
The turbine plant includes the power conversion equipment that produces electric
power from the steam generated by the reactor plant. All of the EEDB technical models
use a conventional steam-turbine generator unit, although the configuration will vary
from plant to plant. An elevated foundation pedestal supports the steam turbine and
generator. This account includes the turbine generator unit, the condenser, the systems
to purify and return the condensate to the reactor plant, the elevated turbine generator
pedestal, and the turbine generator unit control system. The turbine plant equipment
includes the steam handling, power conversion, and condensate/feedwater machinery of
the steam cycle.
Electric Plant Equipment (Account 24)

The electric plant equipment conveys the electric power generated in the plant
to the low voltage bushings of the generator step-up (GSU) transformers, controls and
meters the electric energy, and protects the components through which the power
flows. It is the source of power for the plant auxiliaries and the plant control,
protection, and surveillance systems, during normal operation, and for the plant
protection system and engineered safety features, during normal operation, abnormal
conditions, and accident conditions.
Miscellaneous Plant Equipment (Account 25)

This account includes the auxiliary mechanical and electric equipment required
for normal power plant startup, operation, and maintenance. This includes the equipment
in the air, water and steam service system, the auxiliary boiler, the fire protection
system, and the communication system.
Miscellaneous plant equipment includes systems for maintenance, plant startup,

or general supply of plant equipment requirements. Included are the cranes and hoists,
the air, water and steam services, the auxiliary boiler and associated services, the plant
fuel oil system, the fire protection system, the communications systems, and various on-
site and off-site environmental monitoring systems.
C-3
Main Condenser Heat Rejection System (Account 26)

This system includes the equipment and associated structures that dispose of the
heat rejected by the power plant. The system is a closed-loop circulating water system.
It consists of the buildings, structures, and mechanical equipment that serve the main
condensers and the service water system to reject the excess plant heat through two
mechanical-draft, wet cooling towers. The structures included in this account are the
Make-Up Water Intake and Discharge Structure, the Circulating Water Pump House, the
Make-Up Water Pretreatment Building, and the Chlorination Building.
D-1
APPENDIX D
EEDB INDIRECT COST ACCOUNTS - 2 DIGIT DESCRIPTION
Construction Services (Account 91)
Temporary construction facilities include temporary structures and facilities,

janitorial services, maintenance of temporary facilities, guards and security, roads,
parking lots, laydown areas, temporary electrical and piping, temporary heat, air, steam,
and water systems, general cleanup, e t c .
Construction tools and equipment include rental and/or purchase of construction

equipment, small tools, consumables (fuel, lubricants, etc.), and maintenance of
construction equipment. Payroll insurance and taxes are related to craft labor, such as
social security taxes and state unemployment taxes, workmen's compensation insurance
and public liability and property damage insurance. Permits insurance and local taxes
include builders' all-risk insurance, local fees and permits, state and local taxes and
nuclear liability insurance.
Home Office Engineerii^ and Services (Account 92)
Home office services include home office engineering and design, procurement
and expediting activities, estimating and cost control, engineering planning and
scheduling, home office reproduction services, and expenses associated with performance
of the above functions (i.e., telephone, postage, computer use, travel, etc.). The costs
for these services include salaries of personnel, direct payroll-related costs (DPC),
overhead, loading expenses, and fees for these services consistent with contractual
terms.
Home office quality assurance includes the services of home office quality
assurance engineering and staff personnel engaged in work on the project. Services
include reviews, audits, vendor surveillance, e t c . as required for design and construction
of the nuclear safety-related portion of the facility. Costs for these services include
salaries, DPC, overhead loading, and expenses (i.e., travel) of these individuals.
Home office construction management costs include those of the construction

manager and his assistants. Services of construction planning and scheduling,
construction methods, labor relations, safety, and security personnel are utilized as
required. Costs for these services include salaries, DPC, overhead loading, and expenses.
Field Office Engineering and Services (Account 93)
Field office expenses include costs associated with purchase and/or rental of
furniture and equipment (including reproduction), communication charges, postage,
stationery, other office supplies, first aid, and medical expenses. Field job supervision
includes the resident construction superintendent and his assistants, craft labor
D-2
supervisors, field accounting, payroll and administrative personnel, field construction

schedulers, field purchasing personnel, warehousemen, survey parties, stenographers and
clerical personnel. Costs of these services include salaries, DPC, overhead loading,
relocation costs of key personnel, and fee.
Field quality assurance/quality control includes services of personnel located at
the job site engaged in equipment inspection, required documentation of nuclear safety-
related equipment, and inspection of construction activities. Costs included are salaries,
DPC, and overhead loading.
Test and startup engineering is associated with preparation of startup and plant
operation manuals and test procedures, direction and supervision of all testing of
equipment and systems as the plant nears completion, and direction of startup of the
facility. Costs of these services include salaries, DPC, overhead loading, and
miscellaneous related expenses. Costs of any craft labor required for startup and testing
activities are included in the appropriate direct-cost line items.
NOTICE
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States
Governrrent. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, or any of their
employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability of re-
sponsibility for any t h i r d party's use, or the results of such use, of any i n f o r m a t i o n , apparatus,
product or process disclosed in this report, or represents that its use by such.third party w o u l d
not infringe privately owned rights.
Availability of Reference Materials Cited in NRC Publications
Most documents cited in NRC publications w i l l be available from one of the following sources:
1. The N RC Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, N.W.

Washington. DC 20555
2 The NRC/GPO Sales Program, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

3. The National Technical Information Service, Springfield,,VA 22161
Although the listing t h a t follows represents the m a p r i t y of documents cited in NRC publications,
it is not intended t o be exhaustive.
Referenced documents available for inspection and copymg for a fee from the NRC Public Docu-
ment Room include NRC correspondence and internal NRC memoranda; NRC Office of Inspection
and Enforcement bulletins, circulars, information notices, inspection and investigation notices.
Licensee Event Reports; vendor reports and correspondence. Commission papers; and applicant and
licensee documents and correspondence
The following documents in the NUREG series are available for purchase from the NRC/GPO Sales
Program- formal NRC staff and contractor reports. NRC sponsored conference proceedings, and
NRC booklets and brochures. Also available are Regulatory Guides, NRC regulations in the Code of
Federal Regulations, and Nuclear Regulatory Commission Issuances
Documents available from the National Technical Information Service include NUREG series
reports and technical reports prepared by other federal agencies and reports prepared by the Atomic
Energy Commission, forerunner agency to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Documents available from public and special technical libraries include all open literature items,
such as books, journal and periodical articles, and transactions. Federal Register notices, federal and
state legislation, and congressional reports can usually be obtained from these libraries.
Documents such as theses, dissertations foreign reports and translations, and non NJRC conference
proceedings are available for purchase trom the organization sponsoring the publication cited.
Single copies of NRC draft reports are available free upon written request to the Division of Tech
meal Information and Document Control, U S Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555
Copies of industry codes and standards used in a substantive manner in the NRC regulatory process
are maintained at the NRC Library. 7920 Norfolk Avenue Bethesda, Maryland, and are available
there for reference use by, tne public Codes and standaras are usually copyrighted and may be
purchased from the originating organization or, if they are American National Standards, from the
American National Standards Institute. 1430 Broadway, New York, NY 10018
GPO Printed copy price

A Handbook For Cost Estimating: Do Not Microfilm Cover

Uploaded by

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Document Informationclick to expand document information

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Handbook For Cost Estimating: Do Not Microfilm Cover

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Handbook For Cost Estimating: Do Not Microfilm Cover

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

.

TOVEDBYTIC m^zm NUREG/CR-3971

A Handbook for Cost Estimating

A Method for Developing Estimates of Cost for

Prepared by J. R. Ball, S. Cohen, E. J. Ziegler

Argonne National Laboratory

S. Cohen and Associates, Inc.

United Engineers and Constructors, Inc.

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an

Portions of this document may be illegible in

Availability of Reference Materials Cited in NRC Publications

1 The NRC Public Document Room, 1717 H Street, N W

2 The NRC/GPO Sales Program, U S Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

3 The National Technical Information Service, Springfield, V A 22161

GPO Printed copy price $6 . 0 0

A Handbook for Cost Estimating

Manuscript Completed: August 1984

**United Engineers and Constructors, Inc.

John R. Ball, Argonne National Laboratory

2 PRESENTATION OF THE MODEL 9

2.1 Case Study Results 9

3 FUNCTIONAL RESPONSES AND COST ELEMENTS 31

3.1 Functional Responses 31

4 CAPITAL COST ACCOUNTING METHODOLOGY 67

4.1 Description of Energy Economic Data Base 67

5 COST ACCOUNTING METHODOLOGY 95

5.1 Aggregating Capital Costs 95

6 COST ESTIMATE EXAMPLE: TECHNICAL SUPPORT CENTER 99

APPENDIX A: Industry Cost Elements Resulting from the

APPENDIX B: Commercial Nuclear Power Electric Generating Plants

APPENDIX C: EEDB Direct Cost Accounts -- Two-Digit Descriptions C-1

APPENDIX D: EEDB Indirect Cost Accounts — Two-Digit Description D-1

2.1 Illustration of the Three Parts of the Graphical Model 14

2.2 Graphical Model for a New Plant or a Plant under

2.3 Graphical Model for Plant under Construction with Many

2.4 Graphical Model for Operating Plant 18

2.5 Collapsed Model for a Hardware Modification in a New Plant

2.6 Collapsed Model for a Hardware Modification in a Plant

2.7 Collapsed Model for a Hardware Modification in

2.8 Collapsed Model for a Shutdown with No Hardware Modifications

4.1 Typical Structural Cost Elements 76

4.2 Typical System Cost Elements 77

4.3 A-E Engineering Logic Flow 81

4.4 Nuclear Steam Supply System Engineering Logic Flow 86

4.5 Construction Management Sector: Factors Affecting Costs,

5.1 Total Present Value Lifetime Cost Components 96

6.1 Technical Support Center Logic Flow Diagram 100

6.2 Technical Support Center Schedule 105

2.1 List of Functional Responses 11

3.1 List of NRC Cost Elements 32

3.2 List of Non-NRC Cost Elements 33

4.1 Code of Accounts, Example of Levels of Detail 70

4.2 UE&C, Inc. Energy Economic Data Base Phase VI,

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

• To provide a consistent methodology and consistent set of

• To identify all potentially significant cost elements associated with

• To provide an annotated bibliography of available cost data and