ML19317H239
| ML19317H239 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 12/20/1972 |
| From: | Phillips T FLORIDA POWER CORP. |
| To: | Muller D US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| 18, NUDOCS 8005020391 | |
| Download: ML19317H239 (7) | |
Text
1
(
g r
50-313 FEDERAdPOWER COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C.
20426 ID!
\\
m Rat.Y RUER T "q
rn.~.
Mr. Daniel R. Muller Assistant Director for DEC 20 1972
{
4.g., /57'.
'A Environmental Projects (7sfN g
Directorate of Licensing f,
U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C.
20545
/,
Dear Mr. Muller:
This is in response to your letter dated October 25, 15T/2, requesting comments on the AEC Draft Environmental Statement related to the issuance of an operating license to the Arkansas Power &
Light Company for the Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1 (Docket No. 50-313).
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 facilities as con-cerns 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 and supplements thereto; related reports made in response to the Commis-sion's Statement of Policy on Reliability and Adequacy of Ehetric,
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 on the need for a specific bulk power facility upon long term consid-erations as well as the load-supply situation for the peak load period immediately following the availability of the facility on the Applicant's system and that of the pool or regional coordinating area with which the Applicant is associated.
Need for the Facility The 850-megawatt Arkansas Nuclear One Unit.1 which is owned by the Arkansas Power & Light Company, is scheduled for commercial oper-ation in October 1973, and should be available to assist in meeting the 1974 summer peak load. Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1 and Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 2 (currently scheduled for commercial service in January 1976) share one site, located on the Dardanelle Reservoir in the Arkansas River System near the City of Russellville, Pope County, Arkansas.
18 800508830 ^:)
b k
.r
('..
Mr. Daniel R.' Muller The Applicant is one of five subsidiary operating companies of Middle South Utilities, Incorporated (Middle South System), a public utility holding company. The Middle South System provides coordinated operation of the bulk power facilities for the five operating com-panics and is a member of the Southwest Power Pool, which is a planning and coordinating group for the electric utility systems in the south central area of the United States.
Middle South Utilities, Inc., which plans the generating capacity needed to meet the load requirements of the Middle South System, has planned the following new capacity additions for commercial service prior to the 1774 summer peak period.
MIDDLE SOUTH C NPANIES GENERATI N EXPANSION PROGRAM Service
,j Capability Station / Unit Date Company Type u MW Nine Mile Point Unit 5 3/73 La. Pwr. & Lt. Co.
F 750 Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1 10/73 Ark. Pwr. & Lt. Co.
N 850 Waterford Unit 1-3/74 La. Pwr. & Lt. Co.
F 430 Sterlington Unit 7 5/74 La. Pwr. & Lt. Co.
FC 200 1/
F - Fossil Steam; N - Nuclear Steam; FC - Fossil Combined Cycle.
Planning generation requirements to meet the needs of the entire Middle South System permits the system to benefit from econmies of scale afforded by construction of large generating units. Through contractual arrangements on the Middle South System, reserves are shared by the five operating companies to achieve " equalized reserves", such that each company is obligated to maintain its average generating cap-acity equal to its load plus reserve requirements. When the installa-tion of a large unit gives one company a temporary excess of reserves, the cost of this excess is shared by the other operating companies.
The following tabulation shows the electric system loads to be served by the Applicant and the Middle South System, and the r* % tion-ship of the electric power output of the Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1 to the projected cvailable reserve capacities on the summer-peaking Applicant's and summer-peaking Middle South systems at the time of the f
w J
7
.(
(
Mr. Daniel R. Muller 1974 summer peak load. The 1974 summer peak period is the anticipated initial service period of the new unit, but the life of the unit is expected to be some 30 years or more, and it is expected to constitute a significant part of the Applicant's total generation capacity through-out the period. Therefore, the unit will be depended upon to supply power to meet future demands over a period of many years beyond the initial service needs discussed in this report.
1974 SUMMER PEAK LOAD - SUPPLY SITUATION Arkansas Power Middle South
& Light Co.
System Conditions with Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1 (850-Megawatts)
Net Total Capability - Megawatts 3,483 10,570 Net Load Responsibility - Megawatts 2,8781/
8,735 g Reserve Margin - Megawatts 605 1,835 Reserve Margin - Percent of Peak Load 21.0 21.0 Minimum Reserve need, based on 15 percent of Peak Load - Megawatts 357 1,310 Conditions without Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1 Net Total Capability - Megawatts 2,653 9,740 Net Load Responsibility - Megawatts 2,3792/
8,735 g Reserve Margin - Megawatts 274 1,005 Reserve Margin - Percent of Peak Load 11 5 11 5 Reserve Deficiency - Megawatts 63 305 Load of 3,210 megawatts reduced by net purchases of 332 megawatts.
2 Load of 3,210 megawatts reduced by net purchases of 831 megawatts.
Load of 9,340 megawatts reduced by net purchases of 605 megawatts.
The matter of capacity reserves and their adequacy is under con-tinuous study by the Southwest Powei Pool member systems, but the South-west Power Pool and its member systems have used in.the past a minimum reserve margin of about 15 percent to provide electric system reliability in the South Central area.
The reserves indicated in the preceding
=
(
(
. Mr. Daniel R. Muller taoulation are gross amounts expected to be available on the Applicant's and the Pool's systems before allowance for scheduled outages for main-tenance. Review of the capacity reserves of the Southwest Power Pool through the 15r(2-1981 annual peak load period indicates reserve margins are expected to range from 17 5 to 24.2 percent, if all new generating capacity planned for commercial operation within the Southwest Power Pool is brought into service as scheduled. In addition to providing for scheduled outages for maintenance the reserve margin must provide the system with an excess of generating capacity over the peak system demands to provide for errors in load forecasting, forced outaEes of generating equipment, slippage of new units and spinning reserves. Several proba-bilistic methods of determining electric system reliability are currently in use within the electric utility industry, and the characteristics of the Southwest Power Pool and its member systems considered in conjunction with generally-used methods for determining system reliability indicate
~
that a reserve margin of 15 percent of annual peak load should result in acceptable system reliability.
The availability of the Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1 for the 1974 cummer peak load period would provide a reserve margin of 605 megawatts, or 21.0 percent of the peak load responsibility on the Applicant's system. Should delays for any reason make this unit unavailable for this peak period, the reserve margin on the Applicant's system will be reduced to 274 megawatts, or 115 percent of peak responsibility. Hence, a deficiency of 63 megawatts will occur since the Applicant's system requires a minimum reserve margin of 257 megawatts to provide the crite-rion of 15 percent of peak load responsibility. Similarly, the Middle South System will have a reserve margin of 1,835 megawatts, or 21.0 percent of the peak load responsibility with the unit available; without the unit the reserve margin is reduced to 1,005 megawatts, or 115 percent of the 1974 summer peak load responsibility. The deficiency of 305 megawatts on the Middle South System would require the Applicant and other Middle South Utility companies to purchase power from other sources in order to maintain their needed reserve position.
The adequacy and reliability of the Applicant's and the Middle South systems net generating capability at the 1974 summer peak period are not only dependent upon the timely commercial operation of the Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1 but also on the timely commercial operation for some 1,380 megawatts of new fossil-fueled generating capacity planned for commercial operation prior to the 1974 summer peak period. Should delays similar to those being experienced in bringing other large new units into commercial operation result in the unavailability of the Arkansas Unit 1, any contingencies involving the loss of two other large Units during the 1974 summer peak could result in peak load exceedi'ng available installed capability on the entire Middle South System.
f L.
1
(
- Mr. Daniel R. Muller Curtailment of supplies of natural gas used for boiler fuel in the South Central Region has initiated area-wide conversion of boilers to fuel oil. As recently as 1970, scoe 95 percent of all electric power generation in the area was fueled by natural gas. The Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1 is the first nuclear-fueled electric generating unit in the South Central Region, and it should increase system reliability since it will not be affected by any curtailment of the supplies of natural gas or disruption in the supplies of fuc1 oil.
The main function of the Southwest Power Pool is the furthering of the reliability of the bulk power systems in the Pool through coor-dination of the members' plans for expansion and operation of their generation and transmission facilities, and provision for short term emergency relief in the event of contingencies normally experienced on interconnected power systems. This short term emergency relief is not, however, a substitute for adequate reserves and a proportionate reserve should be maintained by each system, based on its load. The Southwest Power Pool, of which, as stated earlier, the Applicant and Middle South Utilities are members, reports a gross reserve margin of 23.6 percent for the 1974 summer peak period. However, about 5,000 megawatts or some 68 percent of these reserves are vested in several large new generating units that are not yet in operation.
Transmission Facilities Four overhead transmission lines will be required to integrate the Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1 into the Applicant's existing transmission system. Two 500-kilovolt lines will be mounted ou single-circuit metal towers, and two 161-kilovolt lines will be mounted on double-circuit steel towers near the plant. At scme distance from the plant, the lines will be separated and mounted on wood-pole H-frame structures. The two 500-kilovolt lines will run parallel on a common right-of-way generally southeasterly for a distance of about 24 circuit miles to the existing Mabelville 500-kilovolt substation south of the City of Little Rock, and thence west to an interconnection with the Oklahcma Gas and Electric Ccupany. The two 161-kilovolt lines will serve the existing Russell-ville East Substation and the proposed Morrilton East 161-kilovolt Substation, distances of 12.2 and 39 circuit-miles respectively.
The route selected for the 500-kilovolt transmission lines was one of five routes considered. The design and routing of the four transmis-sion lines utilize design principles such as to minimize impact on the environment. The right-of-way passes through rural areas devoted to agriculture, livestock and timber production. Selective cutting will be utilized along the right-of-way and restoration of soil and planting of I
(
Mr. Daniel R. Muller shrubs and grasses will minimize the effects of soil erosion. The lines will be visible in some areas, from highways located in the area.
The Applicant, stated that to the extent possible, the lines will be routed, constructed and maintained in accordance with the guidelines issued by the U. S. Departments of Interior and Agriculture in their joint publication, Environmental Criteria for Electric Transmission Lines.
A eenatives and Costs The Applicant, in determining the need for additional generation to meet its projected system needs, considered in addition to firm power purchases, a number of practical alternatives including locations, i
plant types, fuels, environmental effects and economics. The Russell-ville site was selected after consideration of 14 sites, and the route selected for transmission lines was one of five routes considered. The undeveloped hydroelectric potential in the area is inadequate to meet the baseload capacity requirements, and, gas turbine peaking capacity cannot economically meet these requirements. Natural gas and fuel oil were not considered available in adequate quantities to meet the pro-jected needs for a generating plant of comparable capacity and the only alternative fuel available was considered to be coal. The choice of the nuclear-fueled plant was made after consideration of the environmental impact and fuel economics of the coal-fueled and nuclear-fueled plants.
the Applicant considered At the time the choice of plants was made, $166 per kilowatt of papackty estimated capital costs of $133 million or f
for a nuclear-fueled plant and $115 million or $144 per kilowatt of capacity for a coal'-fueled alternative plant, and fuel costs of 2.0 mills per kilowatt-hour for the nuclear-fueled plant and 3 72 mills per kilowatt-hour for the coal-fueled alternative plant. The staff of the Bureau of Power finds ~ these estimated costs to be lower than the current costs reported by the industry for similar projects, however, these above costs reported by the Applicant were predicted plant and fuel cost date made some five years ago.
Conclusions The staff of the Bureau of Power concludes that the electric power output of the Arkansas Nuclear One Unit 1 will be needed to meet the Applicant's and the Middle South Utilities systems projected loads and to provide them with reserve margins in accordance with their stated criterion. Furthermore, a number of other large new units must also be
' completed and placed in service on schedule if the projected reserve margins are to be attained.
Very truly yours, a
j
- 7. A.
llips Chief, Bureau of Power i
~~
AEC DISTRIBUTION FOR PART 50 DOC %ET MATERIAL (TEMPORARY FORM)
CONTROL NO:
18 -
ENVIRO FIE Ndral Power Conunission.
DATB 0F DOC:
DATE REC'D LTR IGMO RPf OTIC 4M Washington, D. C.
20426' 12-20-72 1-2-73 x
T. A. Phillips
'IO:
x D. R. Muller 1 signed 1
hPROPINFO CIASS:
INPUT NO CYS REC'D
, DOCE,T NO:
2 50-313 "ESCRIPTION:
ENCLOSURES:
Ltr re our 10-25-72 itr... furnishing comments cn Draft Enviro Statement for the Arkansas Nuclear One Unit # 1.
- @od.%;gg;)
t: t * *: - -. n..
0 0 E.'T.n,~,,
PLANT MMES: Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit # 1
' ' I d. C I FOR ACTION /INFOR:'.ATION 1 /.$
tod BUTLER (L)
- SCHWENOER L()
SCHEMEL(L)
KNIGIHON(E)
W/ Copico W/1 Copies W/ Copies W/ Copies CLARK (L)
STOLZ(L)
ZIEMANN(L)
MOUNGBIDOD(E)~
W/ Copies W/ Copies W/ Copico W/ 4 Copico GOLLER(L)
VASSALID(L) -
CHITUOOD(FM)
REGAN(E) l j
W/ Copico W/ Copies W/ Copies W/ Copies
- KNIEL(L)
H. DEITION
. DICKER (E)
W/ Copico W/ Copies W/ Copies W/ Copies
. A, INTERNAL DISTRIBUTION FILE TECH REVIEW VOLI1ER 44ARLESS WADE E
1 liswRIE DEN 1E SHAFER F&M OGC, ROOM P-506A SCHROEDER GRIMES F&M BROWN E
p+RnTIZING/ STAFF MACCARY GA! GELL EREEY G. WILLIAFE E CASE LANGE(2)
KASTNER HUSSBAUMER
,,2. GOULBOURNE L GIAMBUSSO PAWLICKI BALLARD A/T IND DOYD-L(BWR)
SHAO SPANGLER LIC ASST.
BRAITMAN 4 DEYOUNG-L(PWR)
KNUTH SERVICE L SALTZ!&N SKOVHOLT-L STELIO ENVIRO PASON L
P. COLLIIS MOORE MULLER WIISON L
PLAfB HOUSTON DICKER MAIGRET L MCDONALD REG OPR TEDESCO KNIGHION SMITH L
DUBE
- 4. PILE & REGION (2)
IDNG YOUNGBIDOD GEARIN L
FORRIS LAINAS PROJ LEADER DIGGS L
INFO SIELLE p BENAROYA TEETS L
C. MILES REGAN EXTERNAL DISTRIB1TFTON e'l-IOCAL PDR Dardanelle, Ark.
1-DTIE(ABERNATHY) p(1)ksitg3-NATIONALLAB'S ORNL 1-PDR-SAN /LA/NY 1-NSIC(BUCHANAN) 1-R. CARROLL-0C, GT-E227 1-GERALD Tn.TnUCHE 1-ASLB-YORE /SAYRE WOODWARD /H.ST.
A-R. CATLIN, E-256-GT BROOKHAVEN NAT. LAB 1-CONSULANT'S 1-AGMED(WALTER K0 ESTER, 16-CYS ACRS HOLDING NEWARK /BLU E/AGABIAN Pm C 427, GT) 1-RD... Mutter...F-309GT een o e eMdbW en-
.e
- ee m e. " e.-.- e e