ML19220A437
| ML19220A437 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 03/28/1975 |
| From: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Muller D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7904180006 | |
| Download: ML19220A437 (2) | |
Text
t
)
n DISTRIBUTICN:
4 Central File
..,, e s. 7a-t a
., d e,.,
.,.,n R n
CBAB, NRR Daniel R. !'ulier, Assistant Director for Envircr.nental Projects I
ACCEPTA* ICE REVIEW 0F EliVIRCNFENTAL REPORT, S'JPPLEI.EitT II, THREE MILE ISL!aD - U!!IT 2 i
i'L:0!T ::CE: Three i;ile Island ?:uclear Station Unit 2 j
LICE.':5II;G STA3Et. OL cn y l
-x0 u : - T
,w,.....,....a c.
v.
7.ESPG:.SICLE 3P',3C:i:
Envircr.r.2ntal Projects Branch 4 l
...t c C T.,.,,,,.., - -, :
uan..crris
..a D/.TE PET:JE5T 'ECEI'.'ED EY C21.3:
";rch 20, 1975 F.EE,LESTE] CC".?LETIO ! CATE:
- ' arch E3,1915 CESCRIPTION OF RESPONSE:
Acceptance Revic.1 i
REVIEU STATUS:
Complete as regards cost-tunefit taalysis j
i In response to a request by the Envircn::.antal Projects 2Nnch 4, we uve reviewed the cost-benefit aspects of the Envi.r:;.antal Report su';nitted by the Applicant and find then sufficiently cc:::piete for accept 2: ice.
!!cwever, the Applicant should be asked to respond to the c;eesticas cnclosed. This work was perforced by Louis 3yloski.
l l
l t
Harold R. Denton, Assirtant Director I
for Site Safety Division of Technical P.evieu i
Enclosure:
As statad Y
cc:
A. Giambusso M. !!cConald t
J. Hendrie S. Hanauer
!i. Denton N. Recan J. Norris J. Pansarella A. saan le l,
R. Coyd R. CeVoung
/
V. ::ocra
,O '. 2 V I
TR Asst. Directors C
i e. u~ g I
L.
% 05 0 79041800c)f C
O
,ffss g -- l.pt(ya
. 4.g. 9t'g TR;JBfB TR: CETS i
us e,,.c,
~;y y
- .C 'n f 3 r l t;n L Ey'<c s k i : c s
..3 3/:Y/75 l
3/M75 lk_.3/*?f,~5 n-o f;. _, o,,, m,,,,...,,,
m.a cns m. 2.m u e o m
_ _ _ _.~ __ ___..., _.
i U
O e
QUESTI0fiS Off EiiVIRO?iMEf4TAL REPORT, SUPPLEMEfiT II, THREE MILE ISLAriD - U:ilT 2 1.
In terms of operating costs only (i.e., fuel costs plus or.eration and maintenance costs), at the time TMI-2 is scheduled to come on line will there be any plants that are less costly to operate?
If so, what are the generating capacity, annual energy output and capacity factors for each of these plants?
2.
Assuming no future load growth after 1974 (a worst case assumption),
provide projected operating costs for the overall system with and without TMI-2 for 1978.
3.
With reference to subsection 4.1, provide the number of operating personnel expected for TMI-2 and an estimate of the annual payroll.
Provide an annual esticate of expenditures on materials and equipment within the 100 mile radius of the site related to the operation of TMI-2.
4.
Update Section 8.3, Possibility of Pour Purchase.,which was presented in TMI ER,1971, as it relates tc i.a-2.
48 009
..... -