ML18230B019
| ML18230B019 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 02/21/1973 |
| From: | Phillips T US Federal Power Commission |
| To: | Muller D US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) |
| References | |
| Download: ML18230B019 (24) | |
Text
AEC D 1BUTIoiV FOR.,PART 0 DOCXET l~A~RXAL TEMPORARY FORM CONTROL No l 1233 ENVZRO FROM:
Federal Power Commission Washington, D. C.
20426 T. A. Phillips DATE OF DOC:
2-2X-73 DATE REC'D LTR MEyo 2-22-73 To'.
R. Muller ORIG 1 signed CC 1
OTfER
&ANT AZC PDB X
&A'iT LOCAL PDR Z
CLASSY PROP Iii%0 DESQRXPTXOAV Ltr re our 11-21-72 ltr...furnishing comments on Draft Enviro Statement.......
NO CXS REC'D EiVCJ OSURES:
DOCiKT NO:
0-40 50-401 50-402 403 Shearon Harris Units 1-2-3-4 IIgIt,NE~JLK@0 Do NOT REMORSE FOR ACTION INFORMATION 2"22-7 o
BUTLER(I,)
W/
Copies CLARK(Z,)
W/
Copies GOXzER(I,)
W/
Copies
'E(L)
W/
Copies SCHt~OER(L)
W/
Copies STOL@(I,)
W/
Copies vVASSALM(L)
'/1 Copies Ho DEIGN W/
Copies SCHElm.(i,)
W/
Copies zzmeeau(z,)
W/
Copies CaXmOOD(FM)
W/
Co ies XO1GN1/E)
W/4 Copies KNIGHTON(E)
W/
Copies YOUNGBLOOD(E).
W/
Copies
'EGAN(E)'/,
Copies W/
Copies HAEC-PDR OGcp ROOM P-506A MCB72ZING/STAFF CASE GXAMBUSSO BOYD-L(BW)
~EYOUNG-L(PWR)
SKOVHOLT L P.
COLLINS EEG OPE
~h'XLE &, EEGXON'2)
MORRIS STEELZ TECH HEVXEW lSRSIE SCHROEDER MACCARY KNIGHT(2)
PAWLXCKX SHAO KNUTH STELM MOORE HOUSTON TEDESCO LONG LAXNAS vBENAROYA VOLLtER DENTON GRIIKS GAMMILL KASTNER BAILED SPANGLER ENVIHO D1CKER KNXGHTON YOUNGBIDOD
'PROS ~Q)ER vHARUHS E Pihh SMXLEX NUSSBAUMER LIC ASST.
MWI MASON L
WILSON L
MAIGRET L SMITH L
GEARIN
~ L DXGGS L
TEEZS L
v"LEE L
vWADE E
SHAFER 8c M BROWN E
G. WILIZAMS E
E.
GOULBOURNE L
PLANS h~1CEO ALD DUBE INFO C, MILES
~ ZOCAL PDR Ralei h N. C.
1-DTIE(ABERNlerL) 1-NSIC(BUCHANAN) 1-ASLB-YORE/SAYRE
'I1OODWAED/H. SX.
16-CYS ACRS HOLDXNG KVPRNAL -DISTRIBUTION.
v(1)(e)-NATIONAL LABxS 1-R CARROLL<<OC~
GT B227
'l-Rs CATLINg E-256."GT 1 CONSULANT'S NE MME/BLUME/AGABIAN 1-GERALD UZRIKSON... ORNL 1-PDR-SAN/LA NY 1-Gznara LzrZOUCHE BROOKHAVEN NAT. LAB 1-AG>m(WALTER KOESTm, Rm C-427p GT) 1-RD
~. MULLER...F-$09GT
an f'
II 1
EI
~
~
lt P"
~! "<~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~ 5A
"f<f t,
II p t <<f,4 IP f()h l
~
'I 1
i~
~
[
~
FEDERAL POWER COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C.
20426 February 21, 1973 50-400 50-401 50-402 50-403 IN REPLY REFER TO:
Mr. Daniel R. Muller Assistant Director for Environmental Projects Directorate of Licensing U.
S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D.
C.
20545
Dear Mr. Muller:
aECEIJI:tt
FEB 22 ]973I CI,LI.4IOIIIC E!IEIIGY 1
COIIIIISStoq Its@htsly 14!I SeCttIII This is in response to your letter dated November 21,'972,,requesting comments on the AEC Draft Environmental Statement related to the proposed issuance of a construction permit to the Carolina Power and Light Company for the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant Units 1, 2, 3 and 4 (Docket Nos. 50-400, 50-401, 50<<402 and 50-403).
Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of,1969, and the April 23, 1971 Guidelines of the Council on Environmental Quality, these comments review the need for the facili.ties as concerns the adequacy and reliability of the affected bulk power systems and related matters'.
In preparing these
- comments, the Federal Power Commission's Bureau. of Power staff has considered the AEC Draft Environmental Statement; the Applicant's Environmental Report; related reports made in response to the Commission's Statement of Policy on Reliability and Adequacy of Electric Service (Order No. 383-2) and the staff's analysis of these documents together with related information from other reports
'submitted to this Commission by the Applicant. The staff generally bases its evaluation of the need for a specific bulk power facility upon long term considerations as well as the load-supply situation for the peak load period imtediately,following the availabi.lity of the facility on the ApplicantIs system and that of the pool or regional coordinating area with which the Applicant is associated.
Need for 'the Facilit
/
The 3,600 megawatt Shearon Harri,s Nuclear Power Plant will consist of four identical pressurized-water reactors of 900 megawatts of electrical capacity each.
The plant is owned by the Carolina Power and Light Company.
Units 1, 2, 3 and 4 are scheduled for commercial service in March 1977, March 1978, March 1979 and March 1980, respectively and each unit is planned to be available to meet the summer peak load for that year.
The plant site is located about 20 miles southwest of Raleigh, North Carolina in Wake and Chatham Counties.
The development includes construction 1233
l N
H ll V
P I
Mr. Daniel R. Muller of two earthen dams on Buckhorn Creek.
The larger reservoir will have a
water surface area of approximately 10,000 acres and the lower or afterbay reservoir will have a water surface area of approximately 400 acres.
The current generation expansion program of the Carolina Power and
.Light Company i's tabulated below:
Generation Ex ansion Pro ram-Carolina Power and Li ht Co.
Station/Unit Ca acit In Service Date Robinson No.
2 Roxboro No.
3 Brunswick No.
2 Brunswick No.
1 Roxboro No. 4 Harris No.
1 Harris No.
2 Harris No.
3 Harris No. 4 30 720 821 821 720 900 900 900
- 900,
'ZOTAL 6, 712 N (Uprate)
F N
N F
N N
N N
4-30-73 3-1-73 3-1-74 3-1-75 4-1-76 3-1-77 3-1-78 3-1-79 3-1-80 1/ Type:
N - Nuclear, F - Fospil In addition to the Applicant's planned new capacity additions, the other systems in the VACAR subregion of SERG have planned large-scale generation expansion
- programs, which are summarized below.
E H
PJ kl IX L
II V
ii I
4' IL J
I JI Mr. Daniel R. Muller CAPAClTY EXPANSXON PROGRAM FOR OTHER VACAR SYSTEMS Station Ca abilit Estimated Xn Service Date Surry No.
2 Mt. Storm No. 3, A.M. Williams No.
1 Oconee No.
1 Oconee No.
2 Yorktown No.
3 Oconee No.
3 Belews Creek No.
1 Georgetown No.
1 North Anna No.
1 Belews Creek No.
2 North Anna No.
2 Possum Point No.
5 Fairfield County McGuire No.
1 McGuire No.
2 North Anna No.
3 Georgetown No.
2 Virgil C.
Summer No.
North Anna No.
4 Plant X Jocassee No.
3 6 4 Fairfield County A.M. Williams No.
2 Undetermined Plant X Undetermined Plant Y
'N F
F N
N F
N F
F N
F N
F PS (4 units)
N N
N F
1 N
N Unde t.
PS PS (4 Units)
F XC/T Undet.
F Undet.
TOTAL 819 560 611 886 886 845 886 1,143 280 934 1,143 934 845 240 1,150 19150 938 350 900 938 1, 150 305 240 611 100 15150 400 1 300 21,694 March 1973 March 1973 May 1973 June 1973 September 1973 March 1974 May 1974 May 1974 December 1974 December 1974 May 1975 July 1975 March 1976 1976 May 1976 March 1977 March 1977 April 1977 January 1977 March 1978 1978 1978 1978 May 1979 1979 1979 1980 1980
<c'F - Fossil; N - Nuclear; PS - Pumped Storage
~
~
0 y II Mr. Daniel R. Muller I
E The following tabulation shows the projected electric system loads to be served by the Applicant and. by the systems of the Virginia-Carolina Subregion 1~(VACAR),of,the Southeastern Electric Reliability Council (SERC),
including the Applicant, and the relationship"of the electric output of the four 900-megawatt Shearon Harris units to the available reserve capacities on the summer-p'caking Applicant's and summer-peaking VACAR's systems at the time of the summer peak load in the years1977-1980.
Each of these summer peak periods coincides with the planned initial service period of one of the nuclear units.
Since the life of each of these units is expected to be some 30 years or more, they are expected to constitute a significant part of the Applicant's total generating capacity throughout that period.
Therefore, these units will be depended upon to supply power to meet future demands over a period 'of many years beyond the initial service needs dicusssed in this report.
FORECAST 1977 SUMMER PEAK LOAD-SUPPLY SITUATION Carolina Power Li ht Co.
VACAR Conditions With Shearon Harris Unit No.
1 900 Me awatts Net Total Capability - Megawatts Net Peak Load - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Percent of Peak Load Minimum Reserve
- Need, Based on 18 Percent of Peak Load - Megawatts Conditions Without Shearon Harris Unit No.
1 8, 939 70318 1,621 22.1 1,317 41, 993 34,346 7,647 22.3 Net Total Capability - Megawatts Net Peak Load - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Percent of Peak Load Reserve Deficiency - Megawatts 8,039 7,318 721 9.9 596 41,093 34,346 6,747 19.6 1/ The VACAR systems are:
Carolina Power
& Light Co.;
Duke Power Co.;
South Carolina Electric & Gas Co.; South Carolina Public Service Authority; Southeastern Power Administration of the Dept. of the Interior; Virginia Electric & Power Co.; Yadkin, Inc.
n t
t lt i'
II 1
I, l
Mr. Daniel R. Muller FORECAST 1978 SUMMER PEAK LOAD " SUPPLY SITUATION Carolina Power Li ht Co.
VACAR Conditions With Shearon Harris No.
2 900 Me awatts Net Total Capability - Megawatts Net Peak Load - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Percent of Peak Load 9,839 8,106 1 7 733 21.3 45,286 37, 856 7, 430 19.7 Minimum Reserve
- Need, Based on 18 Percent of Peak Load - Megawatts 1,459 Conditions Without Shearon Harris Unit No.
2 Net Total Capability - Megawatts Net Peak Load - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Percent of Peak Load 8, 939 8,106 833 10.3 44,386 37,856 6,530 17.4 Reserve Deficiency - Megawatts Conditions Without Shearon Harris Units 1 and 2
626 Net Total Capability - Megawatts Net Peak Load - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Percent of Peak Load Reserve Deficiency - Megawatts 8,039 8, 106
-67 1,526 43,486 37,856 5,630 14.9
l if 1
f
(
Mr. Daniel R. Muller FORECAST 1979 SUMMER PEAK LOAD - SUPPLY SITUATION Carolina Power Li ht Co.
VACAR Conditions With Shearon Harris Unit No.
3 900 Me awatts Net Total Capability - Megawatts Net Peak Load - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Percent of Peak Load 10, 739 8,971 1, 768
- 19. 7 49,622 41,684 7, 938 19.2 Minimum Reserve
- Need, Based on 18 Percent of Peak Load - Megawatts 1,615 Conditions Without Shearon Harris Unit No.
3 Net Total Capability - Megawatts Net Peak Load - Megawatts Reserve Margin -" Megawatts Reserve Margin - Percent of Peak Load 9,839 8, 971 868 9.7
'8,722 41,684 7,038 16.9 Reserve Deficiency - Megawatts 747 Conditions Without Shearon Harris Units No. 1, and 3
Net Total Capability - Megawatts Net Peak Load - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Percent of Peak Load 8,039 8, 971
-932 460922 41, 684 5,238 12.6 Reserve Deficiency - Megawatts 2,547
e I
4 L
t i
t lp I,
Mr. Daniel R. Muller K
FORECAST 1980 SUMMER PEAK LOAD - SUPPLY SITUATION Carolina Power Li ht Co.
VACAR Conditions
$0ith Shearon Harris Unit No. 4 900 Me awatts Net Total Capability - Megawatts Net Peak Load - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Percent of Peak Load 11,539 9,912 1,627 16.4 55,191 45,845 9,346 20.5 Minimum Reserve
- Need, Based on 18 Percent of Peak Load - Megawatts 1,784 Conditions Without Shearon Harris Unit No.
4 Net Total Capability - Megawatts Net Peak Load - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Percent of Peak Load 10,639 90912 727 7.4 54,291 45,845 8,446 18.4 Reserve Deficiency - Megawatts 1,057 Conditions Without Shearon Harris Units No. 1, 2
3 and 4
Net Total Capability - Megawatts Net Peak Load - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Megawatts Reserve Margin - Percent of Peak Load Reserve Deficiency - Megawatts 7, 939 9,912
-1,973 3,'757 51, 591 45,845 5,746 12.5 The availability of the Shearon Harris Unit No.
1 for the 1977 summer peak period would provide the Applicant with an expected reserve margin of 1,621 megawatts, or 22.1 percent of peak load. If this unit is delayed beyond the 1977 summer peak period, the Applicant's system reserves would be reduced to 721 megawatts, or 9.9 percent of peak load.
With the availa-bility of Units No. 2, 3 and 4 to meet the summer peak loads in 1978, 1979 and 1980, respectively, reserve margins on the Applicant's system will be 21.3, 19.7 and 16.4 percent of the peak load.
Should the units not be available as scheduled but with each one in service before the peak load period of the year following its planned date of availability, the reserve
Mr. Daniel R. Muller margins would be reduced to 10.3, 9.7, and 7.4 percent of the peak load in each of the corresponding years.
Hence, Units 1, 2 and 3 are needed as scheduled to provide the minimum reserve margin criterion stated by the Applicant to be needed to provide adequate system reliability.
In
- 1980, even with all four units in operation, the Applicant's system will not attain the needed minimum reserve margin.
The VACAR area systems will have reserve margins during the 1977-1980 period, with all units placed in commercial service as planned of 22.3, 19.7, 19.2 and,20.5 percent of the sub-area's peak load. If each Shearon Harris unit should not be in commercial service as planned, the sub-area,'s reserve margins will be xeduced to 19.6, 17.4, 16.9 and 18.4 percent of the corresponding peak loads provided that all of the" many other planned units are in service on schedule.
If the Shearon Harris plant's 'capacity.'of 3,600 megawatts should not be constructed, a reserve deficiency of 3,757 megawatts will occur on the Applicant's systemxn 1980'nd the reserve,mar'gin of the VACAR sub-area will be reduced to 5,746 megawatts, or 12.'5 percent of the projected 1980 peak -load.
hi The Applicant states that it uses a minimum reserve margin of 18 percent of peak load or,'he, capacity'of the largest unit plus 100 megawatts to maintain system reliability.
The reserve margin is gross capacity reserves andmust provide 'for scheduled outages of generating capacity for maintenance, forced outages of equipment, slippage of the availability dates of new capacity coming into service, variations in actual load from that forecasted and extreme weather conditions which the Applicant's experience has indicate'd could result in load increases as much as 4
percent above that forecast for normal conditions.
The capacity of the units planned for the Applicant's system during the 1973-1980 period would provide the reserve margin needed to maintain system reliability. If the initial Shearon Harris unit is not available for the 1977 summer peak period and the system should suffer the force'd outage of its largest unit, the 821-
, megawatt Brunswick Unit No.
1 or 2, the Applicant would not be able to meet its projected load.
The VACAR subregional area is not an established power poo1; however, these systems have mutually agreed to support each other under emergency conditions and interconnections between the VACAR systems were established primarily to provide such emergency assistance.
SERG utilizes a system reliability minimum objective of the probability of one loss of load occurrence in ten years.
For most systems, this reliability standard is satisfied with reserve margins somewhere between 15 and 25 percent of the annual peak load.
d f
hi A
ll
I 9 "-
Mr. Daniel R. Muller II I
1
'11 The Applicant's projected loads are based 'on an annual rate of growth of load of 11.4 percent, while the rate of load growth for the SERG region is estimated to be 10,percent..
When compared with the national average rate of load growth of 7.2 percent or a doubling of-the load in about ten
- years, the need for large increments of new generating capacity through the 1973-1980 period is apparent.
Hence, the Applicant's system reliability during the 1973-1980 period is dependent upon the timely commercial operation of eight large fossil and nuclear units totaling about 6,712 megawatts of capacity.
Similarly, the other VACAR utility systems are dependent upon the timely commercial operation of 28 large fossil, nuclear and pumped storage units totaling some 21,694 megawatts of capacity.
Delays are being experienced in bringing most large new generating units into commercial op'eration, and should such delays occur in even a few units, substantial reduction in system reliability could result in the SERC area.
Transmission Facilities Two 500-kilovolt and six 230-kilovolt overhead transmission lines will be required to integrate the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant into the Applicant's existing transmission system.
The exact routes of these lines have not been determined.
The Applicant states that advance planning will minimize the impact of the lines and consideration will be given to aesthetics and other environmental factors.
The lines will traverse rural areas utilized for timber and croplands.
The choice of structure design and color and the routes of the lines will be such as to limit encroachment on more valuable land uses.
Restoration and screening techniques along the rights-of-way will be utilized to achieve minimal impact.
The two 500-kilovolt lines will be located on new separate 180-foot rights-of-way.
One will terminate at the existing Wake 500-kilovolt Substation; and the other at the new Richmond 500-kilovolt Sub-station.
These lines will be mounted on steel-latticed structures.
The six 230-kilovolt lines will be located on 100-foot rights-of-way and will
'be mounted on wood H-frame structures.
All of these lines will be located, at 1east in part, on existing rights-of-way and will replace existing 115 kilovolt lines serving the Method, Cape Fear, Asheboro, Fayetteville, Erwin (South) and Erwin (North) Substations These existing 115-kilovolt substations will, of necessity, be upgraded to 230 kilovolts.
The Applicant states that the design, construction and operation of these lines will be in conformance with the recommendations contained in the Federal Power Commission's Order No. 414, Guidelines for the Protection of Natural Historic Scenic and Recreational Values; Order No. 415 Im lementation of the National Environmental Act; and the U. S. Department of the Interior and U. S. Department of Agriculture'
I Mr. Daniel R. Muller, J
joint publication, Environmental Criteria for Electrical Transmission
~Sssems.
Alternatives and Costs In determining the need for additional generation to meet its projected
- demands, the Applicant considered purchases of firm power and a number of other alternatives including locations,
- types, environmental effects and economics.
The Applicant's 'planning studies determined that the addition of an average of about 900 megawatts of capacity each year from 1977 to 1980 was required to meet the annual rate of growth of load in excess of 11 percent on its system.
Other utilities in the VACAR area have experienced similar growth rates and all have undertaken capacity construction programs to meet these projected demands and maintain system reliability.
No source for firm power purchases of the magnitude required was available to the Applicant.
The selected plant site for the Shearon Harris plant was one of six considered.
The site is centrally-located with respect to the principal load centers and it provides adequate facilities for a four-unit plant of 3,600 megawatts total capacity.
Various other types of plants were considered;
- however, no hydroelectric sites with water flows adequate to provide the needed capacity existed.
About 919 megawatts of undeveloped conventional hydroelectric capacity in North Carolina was estimated in 1968 to be available with an associated annual energy availability of 2,000,000 megawatt:-hours.
Pumped-storage was not considered, because of its unsuitability for baseload capacity.
Combustion turbine capacity was con
'idered unsuitable due to the size limitations of this type of generating unit, the high cost of energy generation and unsuitability of these units for baseload operation.
Only coal-fired and oil-fired steam units could be constructed with baseload capabilities suitable for consideration as alternates to the nuclear-fueled plant.
In the final selection, the nuclear-fueled plant was chosen because of its cleaner operation, more aesthetic appearance, elimination of environmental costs associated with air pollution, and high fuel costs and the uncertainty of the availability of low sulfur fuels.
The Applicant reported'capital costs of $267,
$ 196 and
$160 per kilowatt of capacity for the nuclear-fueled, coal-fueled and oil-fueled plants, respectively.
The Applicant reported mid-1978 fuelscosts of 17.85, 75.33 and 79.02 cents per million Btu for nuclear, coal and oil fuels, respectively, which resolve to about 1.8, Ss4 and 7.9 mills per kilowatt-hour, respectively.
The staff of the Bureau of Power finds these costs to be within the range of similar costs reported by the industry.
I r
If I
Mr. Daniel R. Muller Concl'uszons
-5,'. ",;
The. staff of the Bureau of Power concludes that the electric power output represented by the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1,
'2, 3'<an'd"4 i'stneeded to implement the Applicant's and VACAR's subregional
',genexation expansi'on programs for meeting projected loads and to provide f 'i
,S ~
needed. reserve margin capacity for the summer peak loads during the 1977-1980"period;'I In l'addition, the very large amount of other scheduled new capacity must'e in operation as planned if the forecast capacity margins are to.be met.
Very truly yours,
.~Z. A. Phil ps Chicf, Bureau of Power s
n h
CD P
-,DOCKEfED USAEC "
FEB281973 '
REGULATORY
' hOIL"SEGTlON DOCKET CLERK: