ML19031B957
| ML19031B957 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 06/18/1975 |
| From: | Mittl R Public Service Electric & Gas Co |
| To: | Anthony Giambusso Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| Download: ML19031B957 (2) | |
Text
~--
p Public Service Electric and Gas Company 80 Park Place Newark; N.J. 07101 Phone 201 /622-7000 June 18,* 1975 Mr. A. G.iambusso Director Division of Reactor Licensing Nuclea.r Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
Dear-Mr. Giambusso:
CONSTRUCTION PERMIT NOSo CPPR-52 AND CPPR-53 SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 50-311
'*.. -~**
"'-v 1*.
.. x::'
-~>*-
In reference to our request for extension of the construction permits for Salem Nuclear Generating Station, we hereby submit information clarifying how the fall 1976 and spring 1979 commercial operation dates for Units No. 1 and 2, respectively, relate to the reduced rate of load growth experienced by Public Service.
Factors identified i--n our letter of September 25, 1974 (increased scope, new licensing requirements, more stringent design criteria, experience related design changes, and labor related problems) account for most of the delay in Unit No. 1 and only half of the four-year delay in Unit No. 2.
The balance of the delay reflects an adjustment in the schedule for new generating capacity consistent with reductions in anticipated load growth.
In view of the recent and continuing financial picture, such as the depressed stock market and high int~rest rates, we believe it is particularly prudent that completion of new capacity not be advanced earlier than required by load demands.
The degree to which our need for new capacfty has been affected by the factors such as the energy crisis and general economic conditions is well illustrated by* the following comparison of our forecasted load:
DATE OF FORECAST Fall 1971 Fall 1974 LOAD FORECAST (MW) 1975 8,220 6,850 1979 11,100 8,100 S-709 95 2001
~(,<;'.IR 7
Mr. 6/18/75 ~
Delay of the Salem Units and cancellation of two proposed oil-fired peaking units result in a reduction in our generating capacity program consistent with the above change in load forecast for 1975.
Similarly, operation of Salem Unit No. 2 in 1979 along.with delay of other base-load units and cancellation of the previously mentioned oil-fired units result in a generating capacity consistent with the change in load forecast for 1979.
RLM:ej very truly yours, R. Lo Mittl General Manager - Projects Engineering and Construction Department
- I