ML19270G080
| ML19270G080 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000502 |
| Issue date: | 05/15/1979 |
| From: | Ballard R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Burstein S WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7906020203 | |
| Download: ML19270G080 (14) | |
Text
-
s 5
A 9
DISTRIBUTION:
O MAY ' 5 1979 Docket File (ENVIRON)
O,s TERA V
~~_ T'y 9
NRC PDR 7)
LPDR T
NRR Reading EP-1 Reading Docket flo. 50-502 0 ELD RWatkins/RBallard z.%q MSlater Wisconsin Electric Power Company ATTil: fir. Sol Burstein
...'~~
Executive Vice President 231 West flichigan Street m
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53201 Gentlemen:
In the interest of expediting review of the llaven application, and to permit most effective utilization of your staff effort, we are transmitting for your consideration a request for additional information for the llaven plant.
This request for additional information results from staff review of
' Amendments 9 through 11 of the Environmental Report (ER), exclusive of questions related to alternate sites, and the visit by the staff to Haven and the primary alternate sites during the week of October 23, 1978.
Staff questions related to alternative sites were transmitted to you previously as a separate request for additional infomation by my letter of March 14, 1979.
The present request for additional information, as well as that previously for alternate sites, is based on staff review for a two-unit plant application (Amendments 9, 10, and 11).
However, the imediate possibility of a two-unit
?
application was precluded by the order of the Wisconsin Public Service Comission in August 1978 limiting the plant to one unit. Therefore, the questions may be
.i revised where necessary and appropriate after review of Amendments 13 and 14 which are intended to update the ER for a single unit.
As indicated in our March 14, 1979 letter, a complete list of new and revised questions will be provided to your office upon completion of staff review of these later amendments (Nos.13 and 14). Anendment 12 (based on two units) was received by the NRC in December 1978.
We are hopeful that receipt of this request for additional information at this time will be helpful in the planning of your project work effort.
Your response to this request for additional infonnation is requested in writing by June 15, 1979.
7 90602 0do3 Sincerely, 2}{g
Drip,! dc1cd I:y Ror.ald L c'. lard nunaiu .. uaiidro, Q wi D -1... l.... .......Env.1.rs.aaent.01.F.t9J.e.c.t s...Br.anch,1,,., 3~~ ......y.. ..R.7....j.us.;.gj.. .R..B..a..f..l..g.r.d...... .............Di v i s i o 1 of Site Saft ty and .',. ff ...M r e ta1 Anab sis "a'~" =& Iar$IIl. 79 5../..)../.7 9.... c O mc eamu u 4.h?"k%.,a +......
I
- 1..
Wisconsin Electric Power Company g hj 9k '] Haven 2-} Robert H. Gorske, Esq. Mr. Mark Horling 4 Vice President and General Counsel Friends of the Earth Wisconsin Electric Power Company 124 Spear Street 231 West Michigan Street San Francisco, California 94105 - ~ Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202 f Honorable Bronson C. LaFollette C.h Gerald Charnoff, Esq. Attorney General, State of Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge Wisconsin 1800 M Street, fl. W. Department of Justice =' Washington, D. C. 20006 State Capitol i Madison, Wisconsin 53702 A. William Finke, Esq. Senior Attorney Peter Peshek, Esq. Wisconsin Electric Power Company Assistant Attorney General 231 West Michigan Street Public Intervenor Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53201 Department of Justice State Capitol Myron M. Cherry, Esq. Madison, Wisconsin 53702 Suite 4501 One IBM Plaza Mr. Hilmer Wagner, Town Chicago, Illinois 60611 Chairman Town of Mosel Mr. Stephen M. Schur Route 1 Public Service Commission of Cleveland, Wisconsin 53015 Wisconsin 2 Hill Farms State Office Building Mr. Tom Lockyear, Assistant 4802 Sheboygan Avenue Chief Counsel Madison, Wisconsin 53720 Wisconsin Public Service Commission
- d.
4802 Sheboygan, Rm. 471 Mr. Richard L. Prosise Madison, Wisconsin 53705 Bureau of Legal Services 1 Department of flatural Resources Mr. John Williams 4 Box 7921 Wisconsin Public Service Commission Madison, Wisconsin 53707 4802 Sheboygan, Rm. 471 Madison, Wisconsin 53705 Mr. Howard Druckenmiller Department of flatural Resources 4610 University Avenue, Rm. 916 Madison, Wisconsin 53705 Ms. Jame Schaefer }}(g }4 Safe Haven, Ltd. 3741 Koehler Drive Sheboygan, Wisconsin 53081 M m a
W. Request for Additional Information Haven Nuclear Plant Unit 1 2268 335 9 O -m, ee w _ w4 _
HAVEN 1. Please provide the updated versions of tables in Chapter 1 and revise the rest of sections in that chapter (in Amendment 9) based on the current demand forecasts. Since the updated demand growth scenario is signifi-cantly different from the projections appearing in the tables in Amendment 9,* the analyses and tables including those listed below should be revised accordingly. a. Tables 1.1-1 to 1.1-11 (Amendment 9) b. Analyses: (i) the second paragraph, p. 1.1-4; (ii) Wisconsin Utilities Weather Correction of August Peak Demand, pp. 1.1 1.1-5; (iii) Section 1.1.1.2 - Demand Projection, pp. 1.1-5. 2. Revise, if necessary, the load duration curves (Figures 1.1-5 to 1.1-10) in light of the updated load characteristics based on the gas availability, rate reforms, and other assumptions reflected in the updated growth scenario. If the load duration curves are expected to remain the same, please explain why. 3. Please revise Tables 1.1-14 and 1.1-16 to 1.1-18 and the analyses in Section 1.1.2, if necessary, due'to the updated demand scenario. If the updated demand scenario is not expected to affect the capacity planning and capacity factors, reserve margin, reliability and outage rate, please explain why for each listed item above (if necessary, provide the investment criteria indicating the cost effectiveness of the decisions with regard to the above issues). 4. In Amendment 9, Sections 1.2 and 1.3 are missing. Provide these sections and analyze the consequences of delay in light of the updated demand forecast and capacity expansion plan. Assuming one to three years delay from the planned operation year, and the applicants had to find replace-ment energy from the source indicated in the table below, what is your best estimate of the numbers in the following table (1978 dollars)? Indicate the most favorable source of energy supplies in the case of purchasing electricity (Column 8). What are the cost estimates of the alternatives during the planned life of the proposed station? Reflecting the most recent regional demand data, the applicant revised the forecasted growth rate drastically different from those in the currently available versions of the ER. For example, annualized peak demand fore-casted in the ER is about 5 percent.mendment 10, Table 1.1-1) while the current version of the annualized grov.h rate publicized elsewhere is 3.1 percent during the period of 1977 to 1987 (CBE Environmental Review, September 1978, pp. 3-6). 2?68 :36 -ewg,_- ..,m. ,p w
. High Low Sulfur Sulfur Coal Coal Oil Turbine Nuclear Hydro Purchase
- a.
Fuel Cost (mills /KWh) b. Operating and Maintenance Cost (mills /KWh) c. Total Operating Cost d. Capital Cost (mills /KWh) e. Percent of Replacement. Energy Generated
- Please identify as far as practical the name of utility company.
5. Provide current KWh sales (1977) volume of the applicants WUMS and MAIN by customers [ residential, agricultural, commercial, industrial (retail and wholesale), etc.). Applicant WUMS MAIN MW ( %) MW ( %) MW ( %) a. Residential b. Agricultural 2268 _37 c. Commercial d. Industrial Retail Wholesale e. Public f. Other TOTAL
. 6. Provide complete data and methodologies updating the demand forecast for Wisconsin Power and Light, Wisconsin Electric Power System, and Wisconsin Public Service. Provide the annual projections of the three utilities separately in a tabular form used in Table 1.1-10 (Amendment 11). Demonstrate the procedure and assumption in integrating the projections of the three individual utilities to construct the updated version of Table 1.1-18 shown in Amendment 11. (A flow chart can assist the demon-stration of the logical structure of the process.) 7. Provide the description of the proposed rate reform and demonstrate the expected impacts on load characteristics (seasonal, time of day, and sectoral) and cnnservation. Provide the' study results of rate reform and other conservation measures by the applicant or by others relevant to the applicant's demand analysis. 8. Provide necessary updates of the exhibits and analysis in Appendix B including: a. Wisconsin Electric Power System, Exhibits 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 19. b. Wisconsin Power and Light: (i) Items 2, 4, and 7 (TAB 6, page 1); (ii) tne fourtn paragrapn (TAB 7, page 1). c. Wisconsin Public Service: provide a full description of the forecasting methodology and the updated results (there is no title page for the WPS in Appendix B as of Amendment 9). 8a. Explain the difference between some of the entries of Table 1.1-11 and Column 2 of Table 1.1-18 (Amendment 11). 8b. Define the term "non-firm" in power-exchange agreements with other utilities. Identify the name of the company which has the exchange agreement (" firm" and "non-firm") (Tables 1.1-11 and 1.1-12 in the ER). 8c. What is the estimated effects of the system reliability level and reserve margin due to the operation of the proposed unit? Please provide the relationship between the loss of load probability and reserve margin with and without the proposed unit for Wisconsin utilities, and if possible, for WUMS and MAIN. Compare the reserve margin and the system reliability with and without the operation of the proposed unit. Please provide the 1978 report of MAIN Guide 6. 8d. Please explain the increase in generating capability of 1105 MW during 1986 to 1987 in Table 1.1-18. In addition, the staff is unsure of the relationship between the 5th column of Table 1.1-18 and the 2nd column of Table 1.3-1 regarding the impact of Haven unit:, on adjusted capacity and the schedule for bringing Haven up to full capacity. 2268 38 6 8e. Provide historical and estimated growth for the service area of the following variables: population, number of households, per capita income, consumer price index, manufacturing output, gross regional product, trends in size of household, energy use per residential customer, satura-tion by major appliance and price of alternative fuels. Data should cover the 15 years prior to the date of application through the third year of commercial operation of the proposed unit. Please describe explicitly how the variables are reflected in the applicant's demand forecasting model. 8f. The staff is unsure of the assumptions and analysis applied in addressing the following issues. Please expand and provide the analytical procedures, assumptions, and relevant reference. a. The extent of the price induced conservation efforts and increases in electric sales due to unavailability of gas (first paragraph, TAB 3, p. 3, Appendix B). b. The percentage of new customer choosing electric heat (. sixth paragraph, TAB 3, p. 4, Appendix B). c. Choosing the 10% reduction of annual electric usage without changing standard of living significantly (seventh paragraph, TAB 3, p. 5, Appendix B). Please provide references, if possible. d. The number of new customers (5,200) over the period 1978-2000. e. Last paragraph of TAB 5, p. 2 of Appendix B. f. The result of a computer study of SIC codes (TAB 5, p. 2, Appendix B). Please provide the result of the study. 8g. Define in quantitative terms baseload, intermediate, and peaking load used in the description of function of the applicant's system (Table 1.1-14). Given the definition above, provide the baseload, intermediate, and peak energy requirement during the period of 1967 to 1996 (or up to 1991). Provide the functions of generating capacity and energy requirement based on the baseload defined by average load during the period of 1967 to 1991 (or up to H91). Provide the minimum hourly load for the current year and for the first year of commercial operation of the unit. Please provide the anticipated loading order of units available to the applicants for each of the seasons of the year, M identify the function of unit as defined above. 2263 39 9a. Please provide the following information on capital costs of building 900 MWe Haven in whatever form is convenient. Haven Coal Direct Costs Haven Nuclear (With Scrubbers) Land Structures and Site Reactor / Boiler Equipment Turbine Plant Other Contingency Sub-Total Indirect Costs Construction Facilities and Services Engineering and Construction Management Other Sub-Total Total Total Direct and Indirect Allowance for Escalation Allowance for Interest on Funds Used During Construction Total Cost at Date Commercial Operation 9b. What is the makeup of the nuclear 16% fixed charge rate for Haven? Explain the use of a different fixed charge rate for coal (16.5%). 9c. What is the projected uranium fuel cost in dollars for Haven for the lifetime of Haven plant? Please indicate the estimated cost of yellowcake ($ per Ib) for the above fuel costs. 9d. Please indicate the formula used in annualizing (levelizing) total costs. 9e. Please indicate how the difference between the value of electricity produced (11.1-1) and the cost of Haven to produce it (11.1-2) is composed. Please update these benefit and cost estimates for planned change from two to one unit operation including operating dates, construction period, and other affected areas such as employment. 2268 40 .m -e.-- 'y,m .,m, p 3m-9f. Please fill in the following table for WU's firm contracts: Low High Uranium Sulfur Sulfur Fuel Coal Coal 1. Delivered Cost per Ton 2. Delivered Cost per BTU x 108 3. Beginning and Ending Date for Contract 4. Tons / Year Contracted for 9g. To the extent possible, please indicate the relative forecasted growth in fuel cost (percent escalation) of uranium, low sulfur, and high sulfur coal in the next 20 years. (Please relate to Table 9.2-48; is there a typographical error in Item 6.b?) 10. a. Please provide hearing materials and reports on the applicant's rate reform, load management, and the need for power forecasts prepared by the applicants, PSC, and others to various agencies including PSC, state regulatory agencies, FERC and DOE. b. Is there any storage facility operated or planned to be operated by the applicant? Provide analysis of its impact on load management, if available. 11. How did WEPC0 decide to use a factor of 3.16 persons per household for Sheboygan Co. and 3.31 for Manitowoc Co. (2.2-1) 12a. If there are any potential land use conflicts between Haven and the "Sheboygan County Comprehensive outdoor Recreation and open space plan 1975," please list them. (2.2-9). 12b. If there are any pntential land use conflicts between the " Recreation and open space plan from Manitowoc County, March 1975" and Haven, please list them (2.2-9). 14a. Give names and locations of present mobile home parks in the plant area and areas within 10 miles where new mobile home parks are legal possibilities. (4.1-3) 14b. For mobile home parks in existence, please supply any publicly available information on police protection, fire protection, water supply and sewage facilities and degree to which expansion of the park can be accommodated within each of those social services. (4.1-3) 14c. What are the 1978 vacancy rates for the towns listed on 8.2-3, and for other towns within 10 miles of the site. Please use the same columns as on page 8.2-3, and add a column for motels if those numbers are available. 2268
- 41
- ;+ ~ ~ w. -- m - - = - ~ = - 14d. Define " vacant units for rent" on page 8.2-3. 15. For the last 5 power plants constructed and starting with the plant most recently completed, please fill in the blanks. (4.1-10) Number of construction workers who MWe temporarily Household Name Year (coal Peak relocated size of Construction or Construction near the relocating Plant Completed Location nuclear) Force plant with worker 1 2 3 4 5 16. For Section 5.9.4, please give a short description of how the costs were estimated. 17. In Table 8.1-3, break down the taxes 1977-1985 into amount collected by taxing district each year. 18. Does the staff understand correctly that a description of the transmission lines is forthcoming which will supply information on its: (1) cost, (2) land use impact, (3) archaeological survey of the same quality as that for the Haven site itself? 19. Describe the measures that will be taken to guarantee drift rate of 0.002% is both met and maintained. (P. 3.6-13) 20. Provide information on the validation of the cooling tower drift model to show that the model does in fact accurately predict drift deposition values. (Section 3.6.3.1) 21. Provide information in the validation of the cooling tower plume model to show that the model does in fact accurately simulate nature (the limited validation information in Ref. 17 does not do this). (P. 5.1-18) 22. Compare the predicted salt deposition values due to drift with natural deposition due to dry fallout and rainout. 2268
- 42
- g.
M*~ ~ p,y 23. State the value of the drag coefficient (C ) used in,the calculations. d (P. 5.1-19) 24. Describe how aerodynamic downwash is included in the model for cooling tower plumes. 25. Cooling tower plumes higher than 1500 feet and longer than one mile do occur frequently. Indicate the frequency direction, length and plume height of such plumes. 26. Justify the failure to consider round mechanical-draft and fan-assisted cooling towers in your analyses. (Section 10.1) 27. Describe how aerodynamic downwash is included in the model for linear mechanical-draft cooling tower plumes. Describe how this feature of the model has been validated. (P. 10.1-9) 28. Indicate the change in expected hours of fogging due to the use of one instead of two power plants. (Figures 10.1-2 and 10.1-3) 29. Indicate the expected hours of fog per year expected over Highways 141, 42 and I-43, and County LS due to tha operation of one power plant with MDCTs. 30. Describe the model used to predict steam fog over the thermal plume in the Lake. Indicate the validation procedures used. Are the data on steam fog over the lake at Point Beach and Kewaunee reactor sites con-sistent with the model predictions? (Section 10.1.73) 31. Provide monthly values of evaporation and blowdown for extreme meteoro-logical conditions. 32. Provide monthly maximum, average-maximum, average, average-minimum, and minimum water temperatures of Lake Michigan, preferably in the shore region, 0-30 ft. 33. The maximum concentration factor has a probability of being exceeded 0.03% of the time. To what extent is the maximum concentration factor exceeded? (Section 3.6.1.3) 34. Collected oil is trucked offsite for disposal. Where is this site and who owns it? (Section 3.6.1.4) 35. Is blowdown discontinued during the period when hypochlorite is injected into the circulating water system? This practice could minimize residual chlorine levels in cooling blowdown. (Section 3.6.4) 36. Provide a site map showing soil types accompanied by a description of the mapping units. 2268 c43 Y
_g_ 37. Provide a table and/or figure which gives densities by species and depths for fish eggs and larvae through time at the Haven site. Include densi- ~ ties at the location and depth of the proposed intakes. (Section 5.1) 38. Provide similar (as in 42 above) data for young and adult fishes. (Section 5.1) 39. Provide a discussion on the relative impingement vulnerability of Lake Michigan fishes at the Haven site. Include such factors as size, swimming speed, and spatial and temporal availability. (Section 5.1) 40. What effect will upwelling conditions have on potential impingement and entrainment. How often do upwelling conditions occur? (Section 5.1) 41. Provide a discussion of the seasonal vertical and horizontal dispersion of the thermal plume with respect to the nearshore shallow water biotic communities. (Section 5.1) 42. In view of diurnal vertical migrations by zooplankton, were samples collected at night? Did density differences occur between day and night samples? (P. 11, App. I) 43. Provide the rationale far compositing phytoplankton samples from all depths. 44. To what depth into the sediment were benthos samples collected with the pumping technique. (P. 17, App. I) 45. Provide the flow rate (volume / time) for the ichthyoplankton sampling pump and the volume of water sampled during the 3-minute sampling periods. (P. 22, App. I) 46. Were any ichthyoplankton pump samples taken at the depth and location of the proposed intakes? What are the results of that sampling. (P. 22, App. I) 47. Provide the rationale for using 1-1/2" mesh as the smallest mesh size for benthic gill net sampling rather than smaller sized mesh. (P. 20, App. I) 48. What was the catch efficiency of the midwater traw1? (P. 20, App. I) 49. Provide drawings and specifications of proposed intake and discharge structures including locations, water depths, bottom type at location, and any impingement or entrainment mitigation devices. 50. Provide a table or graph which documents fish species abundance and sizes, in the vicinity of the proposed intake and discharge structures through a 12 month period, including swimm,ing performance at size. 2268 _44
- - *. -
- : u - m
,m
.. 51. Provide a table listing important and dominant aquatic species of Lake Michigan in the Haven area and their preferred temperatures and temperature tolerances. 52. Provide a quantification or projection of impingement and entrainment. Using catch per unit effort with comparable gear at the Haven site and existing Lake Michigan power plants (e.g., Kewaunee and Point Beach) extrapolate from known impingement and entrainment to the Haven site.
- 53. Will blasting be used for excavation of intake and discharge structures?
If so, during what time of year will it occur, for what duration, and at what locations. 54. Describe erosion prevention techniques which will be used on the shoreline and bluff. 55. Provide results of the lake trout potential spawning study. 56. In the ER, WE addressed the construction workforce as a total unit without developing a distribution of workers by skilled trade (i.e., number of boilermakers, carpenters, electricians, etc.). Also, not included in the ER was how and where these workers would be acquired. During the Haven site visit, these questions were addressed. WE's response suggested that the local union will be responsible for locating the workforce. To provide more specific data on the workforce, the chart below was developed. Its purpose ;s to show worker availability compared to skilled craft worker needs. Thus, by filling in the blanks, ANL may determine whether or not the local area (defined as a 50-mile radius) will be able to supply the construction workforce for the project. How Many Workers Are Expected to be Membership Radius and/or Employed from the Strength 1 Workers Area Local Following Counties Craft 12/78 _ Needed2 Union Covers and Cities Boilermakers Sheboygan (county) Carpenters Sheboygan (city) Electricians Howards Grove Iron Workers Millersville (city) Operating Engineers Kohler (city) Fitters Sheboygan Falls (city) Laborers Manitowoc (county) All Others Manitowoc (city) Cleveland Ozaukee (county) 2 Refers to total numbers of members in union by skilled craf t. 2 Refers to workers needed by specific skilled craf t for construction of piant. 2268 _45 __. ~. _. -..
. How Many Workers Are Expected to be Membership Radius and/cr Employed from the Strengthl Workers Area Local Following Counties Craft 12/78 Needed2 Union Covers and Cities Port Washington (city) Cedarburg (city) Megvon (city) Washington (county) West Bend (city) Germantown (village) Hartford (city) Fond du Lac (county) Fond du Lac (city) Winnebago (county) Oshkosh (city) Neenah (city) Brown (county) DePere (city) Allovez (city) Green Bay (city) Outagamie (county) Appleton (city) Waukesha (county) Menomonee Falls (village) 57. All base line data provided by WE on the alternate sites was in the preliminary ER completed 1972-1973. Since these data are approximately five years out of date, and changes are assuraed to have taken place during this period of time (i.e., demography, land us'e, socioeconomics, etc.), request updated baseline data be provided on all alternative sites. 58. Provide data, results, and conclusions of the Wood site water quality stJdy. 59. Explain why additional units at existing power plants were not considered as an alternative to the proposed activity.
- 60. Will the intake deicing system produce any change in water temperature near the intake? If yes, how much? (Sec. 3.4.3)
- 61. What will be the fate of any fish removed during screen cleaning?
(Sec. 3.4.3) 62. The concentration of undissociated ammonia in the discharge is quite high (above the toxicity threshold for some fishes). What areas of the plume will contain such high concentrations? (Tables 3.6-5 and 5.4-2) 2263 46 -.. ~ _ ~._. _~ n -}}