ML19221A817
| ML19221A817 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/28/1979 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-0555, NUREG-0555-08.2.1, NUREG-555, NUREG-555-8.2.1, SRP-08.02.01, SRP-8.02.01, NUDOCS 7907090180 | |
| Download: ML19221A817 (8) | |
Text
Section 8.2.1 February 1979 FRELIMINARY*
ENVIRONMtNThL STitNDARD REVIEW PLAN FOR ES SECTION 8.2.1 POWER AND EtiERGY REOUtREMENTS 8.2.1.1 ELECTRICAL EhERGY DEMAND 8.2.1.2 PEAKLOAD DEMAND REVIEW INPUTS Environmental Report Sections 1.1 System Demand and Reliability Environmental Reviews 8.1 Description of the Power System 8.2.2 Factors Af fecting Growth of Demand Standards and Guides None Other Consultation with local, State, and Federal agencies Federal Power Commission Forms 3, 5, and 12 Responses to requests for additional information Edison Electric Institute, Sales to Manuf acturing and Mining Establishments Classified by SIC Code Uniform Statistica! Report to American Gas Association, Edison Electric Institute, and Financial Analysts (for investor-owned utilities only)
Applicable regional electricity forecasts Applicable regional economic and demographic forecasts REVIEW OUTPUTS Environmental Statement Sections 8.2.1 Power and Energy Requirements 8.2.1.1 Electrical Energy Demand 8.2.1.2 Peakload Demand Other Environmental Reviews 8.2.2 Factors Af fecting Growth of Demand 8.4 Staf f Assessment of Need 109 051
- This ESRP will be revised at a future date.
8-7 907096 @
February 1979 I.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this environmental standard review plan (ESRP) is to direct the staff's analysis and evaluation of the historic and projected electricity consumption and peakload demands in the applicant's service area.
The scope of the review directed by this plan will include a detailed analysis and evaluation of the applicant's treatmont of these projections and, where needed, an independent assessment of forecasts of the service area growth in electricity consumption and peakload demand.
II.
REQUIRED DATA AND INFORMATION The following information will usually be required:
A.
Historical and projected electrical energy use by major categories in the service area.
Data will cover the 15 years prior to the date of appli-cation through the third year of commercial operation of all proposed units.
Major categories are those that account for 5 percent or more of the service-area consumption, including residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, large special loads (such as Federal installations or high-electricity-intensive industries), street lighting, municipal systems and co-ops, other utilities, and rapid transit systems.
B.
Forecasts of all aggregate long-range consumption and system peakload demand made during the 15 years prior to the date of application.
C.
The yearly increase in total kWh sales f or the 15 yeare prior to the date of application, and an average annual c ort,p u u nd growtli rate for tfi t s period.
D.
A normalized kWh sales growth rate that accounts f or unusual changes (e.g., weather and fluctuations in major loads not representative of system growth), a list of the changes considered, and the method of normalization.
,y,
8.2.1-2
February 1979 E.
A description of the methodology or methodologies used in f orecasting (e.g., econometric, extrapolation, judgmental, and surveys) showing all major factors considered in arriving at the forecast, how these f actors were introduced to the forecast, and an estimate of their likely ef f ect on the growth of kWh sales and peckload demand in the service area.
F.
The historic and projected service area season of peakload demand (sunser-winter) for the 15 years prior to the cate of application through the third,(ear of commercial operation of all proposed units.
G.
The historic and projected service-area load factor (average load /
peakload) for the 15 years prior to the date of application through the third year of commercial opr ration of all proposed units.
Where shifts in load fact ar or load-factor trends are evident, identification of the principal factors contributing to these shif ts or trends.
H.
The year'y increase in system peakload demand for the 15 years prior to the date of application, and an average annual compound growth rate for this period.
I.
A normalized system peakload rate that accounts for unusual changes (e.g., weather, interruptible contracts, and fluctuations in major loads not representative of system growth), a list of the changes considered, and the method of normalization.
J.
Load duration curves for the current year and for the first year of commercial operation of the first proposed unit.
K.
The minimum hourly load for the current year and for the first year of connercial operation of the first proposed unit.
109 ri c -
UaJ 8.2.1-3
February 1979 III.
ANALYSIS PROCEDURE The reviower will analyze the historical data and forecasts of demand factors for completeness and agreemer.t with other forecasts, emphasizing the forecasted growth in kWh sales.
The reviewer will analyze the forecasting methodologies employed to the extent needed to reach conclusions regarding their acceptability.
Relevant fM tors to be considered by the reviewer include crice of electricity, conserva-tion and substitution, price of alternative fuels, income, economic activity, aumber of customers, weather, and saturation levels.
The reviewer will consider how the demand-influencing f actors are taken into account.
If scientific methodologies are employed, the reviewer will determine if they pass standard tests of acceptibility (e.g.,
statistical tests of signiiicance).
If parameter estimates (e.g., price and income elasticities) are obtained by the applicant's methodologies, these will be analyzed to determine the degree to which they agree with other estimates that are generally available.
The reviewer will compare the applicant's latest projections with those projec-tions made earlier f or the same or ' overlapping time periods.
IV.
EVALUATION The reviewer will evaluate the applicant's forecasts and the data and methodology used to make these forecasts and reach one of the following conclu-sions:
A.
The applicant's forecast and all data and methodologies are Verified by the staff analyses and the reviewer concludes that the nmthodology, underlying assumptions, and results are similar to those that would have been used and obtained by the staf f.
m~9 8.2.1-4
February 1979 B.
The applicant's forecasts, methodologies, and data used cannot be verified by the staff.
In this case, the staff will perform an independent assessment using independent forecasting models and underlyir.g assumptions.
The rollowing approach has been faund acceptable for conducting independent assessments of forecasts of service area growth in electricity consumption and peakload demand.
The reviewer will consider independent forecasting models (e.g., Oak Ridge State Model, FEA regional model) to obtain from each a growth rate forecast that is viewed as reasonable by the staf f.
The reviewer will always determine if other models (e.g.,
for the service area or specifically for the region) are available and will consider their use for this assessment.
The Oak Ridge State Model will be considered for all cases.
In applying the selected models, the staf f will conduct a parametric analysis, based on a range of plausible growth rates, against which the appli-cant's projected growth rate will be compared to determine reasonableness.
The results of other f orecast models will be compared with the parametric analysis results of the Oak Ridge Model.
The selection of additional models will be based partially on geographic compatibility and partially on the model sophistication.
Wherever possible, all models used will be adjusted to reflect important service area trends and characteristics.
The reviewer will Jse the results of these models to prepare comparable peakload forecasts.
(See Appendix A of this ESRP for a discussion of peakload demand assessment.)
V.
ljNP'IT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT This section of the environmental statement will accomplish the following objectives:
(1) public disclosure of the applicc.at's forecasts of peakload and electrical energy demand and (2) presentat i'in of the staf f's evaluation regarding the completeness and adequacy of these forecasts.
109 rec JJJ 8.2.1-5
February 1979 A.
When the reviewer has determined that the applicant's forecasts are complete and edequate, the following information will usually be included in this section:
1.
The forecast method. ology used by the applicant.
2.
Summaries of the riata used, together with the staf f's evaluation of the data.
3.
The forecasts made by the applicant and the basis for the staff's evaluation of the adequacy of thcse forecasts.
B.
When the reviewer has performed an independent analysis, the following information will usually be included in this section:
1.
For each model, a description of the model, the explanatory variables used, the parameter estimates generated, and the assumed growth rates for each of the explanatory variables.
2.
A description and justificction of any changes mJde in the model by the revicwer.
These will typically be with respect to assumed growth rates in explanatory variables and in some cases adjustments to elasticity estimates.
3.
A desmription of the assumptions and techniques used to convert the energy growth forecasts to peakload growth forecasts.
4.
The ranges for energy growth and peakload growth that have been determined to be reasonable.
The reviewer will provide inputs or ensure that inputs will be made to the following ES sections:
Section 8.2.2.
The reviewer will provide the reviewer of ES Section 8.2.2 with the historic and projected growth data that are considered appropriate for the applicant's service area.
o
\\fj,'
8.2.1-6
February 1979 Section 8.4.
The range of forecasts developed from this plan will be used in ES Section 8.4 in assessment of the need for baseload generating units of the proposed capacity.
VI.
REFERENCES 1.
W.S. Chern and B.D. Holcomb, A Regional Model for Electric Energy, Part I -
New Engiand, Middle Atlantic, and South Atlantic Regions, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Energy Division, April 1977 (Draf t).
2.
Federal Energy Administration, 1976 National Energy Outlook, U. S. Govern-ment Printing Of fice, Washington, DC, February 1976.
3.
Water Resources Council, 1972 OBERS Projections, Vols. I-VII, U. S. Govern-ment Printing Office, Washington, DC, April 1974.
Ob, 8.2.1-7
Appendix A to ESRP 8.2.1 February 1979 ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARD REVIEW PLAN FOR ES SECTION 8.2.1 POWER AND GENERATING REQUIREMENTS APPENDIX A ASSESSING PEAKLOAD DEMAND The forecasts of electricity consumption become the basis on which peakload demand is projected. Once electrical energy growth is forecasted, the reviewer must make a determination as to whether peakload demand will be likely to grow at a f aster or slower rate.
In most instances, applicants are forecasting f aster growth for peakload than for electricity consumption.
This is often supported by the historical trend in the service area as well as for the nation as a whole. (For all U. S. utilities, between 1963 and 1973 electrical energy consumption grew at 6.9% per year and non-coincident peakload grew at 8% per year. ) In addition, the FEA reference case assumes a continued deterioration of the load factor with peakload growing half a percent faster than electrical consumption.
If the reviewer accepts the appli-cant's predictions, the reviewer may conclude that peakload will grow faster than electrical energy consumption by the same amount as the applicant is predicting.
That is, if the applicant is predicting 5% for energy consumption and 6% for peak-load, and the staff's comparative range for electrical consumption growth is between 4.5 and 5.8%, the staf f's peakload range should be between 5.5 and 6.8%
(or 1% higher). However, the reviewer may always select an independent differ-ential (e.g., the FEA's assumption of only a 0.5% dif ferential) depending on con-ditions sp cific to the service area.
It may also be the case that the applicant is forecasting peakload demand growth below that being projected for electricity consumption.
This may be justified, for example, if the applicant is committed to an aggressive load manage-ment program. The reviewer will evaluate the merits of such programs or any other load management program and assess the likelihood of their success. Based on this evaluation, the reviewer may choose to accept the applicant's growth differential or introduce another differential based on either the historic trend, FEA's differ-ential, or some combination of factors.
109 053
- 8. 2.1-A-1