ML19322C075

Addendum to Fes Re Operation of Facility

ML19322C075
Person / Time
Site:	Oconee
Issue date:	01/14/1973
From:	US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To:
Shared Package
ML19322C074	List: ML19322C073 ML19322C075
References
ENVS-730114, NUDOCS 7912300056
Download: ML19322C075 (20)

Text

,

+

a.--

3 l

4 ADDENDIR!

]

to the j

FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMEMT related to the operation of 4

OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION l' NITS 4

1, 2, and 3 1

DUKE POWER COMPANY 3

DOCKET ?DS. 50-269, 50-270 & 50-287 i

I 1

i 1

l 4

JIEE 1973 UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY C0 F ISSI0F DIRECTORATE OF LICENSING l

l 4

7912800 o f f

~

I.

J

~

~

SINMARY AND CONCLUSIONS This Addendum to the Final Environmental Statement was prepared by the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, Directorate of Licensing.

1.

This action is administrative.

2.

The proposed action is the issuance of ouerating licenses to the Duke Power Company for the startup and operation of Oconee Units 2 and 3 (Docket Nos. 50-270 and 50-287) located on Lake Keovee in Oconee County, South Carolina.

3.

The " Final Environmental Statement related to the Operation of Oconee Nuclear Station Units 1, 2 and 3" was published by the Directorate of Licensing in March 1972.

Paragraph 2 of the Summary and Conclusions pointed out that "this statement con-siders the environmental impact of the simultaneous operation of all three units," although the action at the time was con-cerned with the proposed issuance of a license to operate Unit 1.

4.

In connection with the proposed issuance of operating licenses for Units 2 and 3, the Final Environmental Statement was reviewed and it was determined that the Statement sets forth an adequate analysis and evaluation of the environmental impact of the proposed actions.

Neve rtheless, this addendum to the FES is issued in order to pro-vide a progress report on the Station's continuing monitoring program and to update certain "need for power" information.

The information set forth in this addendum is not of sufficient impor-tance to warrant its circulation for comment, and accordingly, the addendum is being issued as a part of the Final Environmental Statement.

5.

On the basis of the analysis and evaluation set forth in the Final Environmental Statement, as supplemented by the material in this Addendum, and after weighing the environmental, economic, tedanical, and other benefits of Oconee Nuclear Station Uhits 2 and 3 against environmental and other costs and considering available alternatives, it is concluded that findings in the FES are reaffirmed; that the required monitoring programs have been developed and are incorporated as part of the Technical Specifications for the Oconee Station; and that the further actions called for under the National Environmental Policy Act i

^

3

. of 1969 (NEP1) and Appendix D to 10 CFR Part 50 are the issuance of operating licenses for Oconae Units 2 and 3, subject to the condition that the applicant shall continue and modify as neces-sary the comprehensive monitoring program described in Appendix B to operating License No. DPR-38 Technical Specifications for Unit 1 and which will be made a part of any licenses issued for Units 2 and 3.

b i.

- 111 -

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No.

I.

Introduction 1

II.

Environinental Monitoring Prograins 3

III. The Need for Power in the Duke Service Area 8

IV.

Recreation and Conservation 16.

l 1

4 w

._.__m_

g -r e y m.,y -g: m - - T

! ' ',,. [

r g

~

Jf

.h f

g l y j. y. y y' Q y y.h.

an-M 1, v

WJgg L

n'<.

' <a. gw l q. ';46.,_%;y y,,7 *']

.A mawn r.

7y3 p,

k. y4-s.gf * );,p.

4

%):" '

^

} }g ?>

.t. def f L~-

y'

>,.m.av,-2.:.b(,;.?fiX,f!.,.Q'I' W.

t !9.) --: p W,

i $'< b:lTs' %,.

j

}

^ ::, : :- w y :.n.

[.,q'..' i T

. < t.

-f a m, - y v

'L Y '"

• k ,,

}

~

w.;,, r

.-.+

4 w _,

j b.q y,l r 1-I, q h& speyp.'5{l ff g

y

u. A xmn !.. W

- y~.a vmm gy

. W,2. r.p'4;:. ggggi

~

,. p*A. y,5. IMCl * ;, ;;W yc 3p.

,,9 s

c v-

,.y ;

,, ( \\ g,$,.

3 p-t

-W J.,,,

y yn;B i

4:

7 -

a

c. g,:h 2:.%T-a

>4x.3 3

l' a

yps. v l

, - mde -, 'tg t

~

ss-

,n

? u

.#~

~

,t',*-

. sD e.pN l ~.

f a,d :

b

_s

, 1

' ' s. '

~--, ; - f, Qt.sr.S r, e, wg g

,. 3' m.

f

[

~*

. w w}.

4

.mr;, p n, I w.; *, t y bt,q,-s 4 O, v

.g..:.

w

.'b P I.t;1, i [. ip!

s;_-

g,

_g'

, t, ', i:7 t,

3Wg

,. Y , ~;

• il ' })

. :n.

4

.. m

... ya

. o. A y.I p i

L

. N,f

'1 ~3'Q ';f. ^ C)i 49's p'\\ {,/

^ **

.c. W i, g ! \\

a:t; ! ' s x...-

c4 c*;f -l NMl:,-

7 "; 5 L S.

~ ~f !p

[

f.m (, mgru.

W

-y,m,qs %diEIW _

m,a,g

.a q.

• %i "'Q ds f f;',

s,

, >.s { > f m _..-.

Y

=

,l

b.,, ff.

'G V y

j

>q; q

{

p.;

, 1.. ]

d t!

r m- ),,,p 3 J y.

s

.q -. <; y 3,,

O, $.,

.:uu; p :w wyq, 4.ue,,e r. t ha r

n w

v -

ng

'f

,,+, F. e 'y - ^-1 M-. /,1,y;'g, '.,M'.V

,i, ' &'

n e

y

s.,.

n.

ca,:;

/

f

> i ') $ I,F' 1 9 k" t).(C <.. y

+. "ll4k'R0 h?l(Md&*b t

.. l j

l

~

f^

Ql%

'f; ::pl3 ;e.i}.& )'tyUd'.G:::}.yiDQW.Mk

i i

C-M' n--,,

l

. Introduction On November 6, 1967, the Duke Power Company was issued construction permits CPPR-33, CPPR-34 and CPPR-35 for Oconee Units 1, 2 and 3, respectively. On June 2,1969, Duke applied for operating licenses for these three units.

The Oconee Nuclear Power Station is part of the Applicant's Keowee -

Toxaway Project located on the Keowee River (a tributary of the Savannah River) in northwestern South Carolina.

Construction of the project was started in 1967.

When ecmpleted, it will consist of a series of man-made lakes serving nuclear, hydro and pumped storage generation. The initial hydroelectric development of the project consists of two lakes.

The lower lake, Lake Keowee, is formed by dams on the Keowee and Little Rivers. A canal connects the two bodies of water forming one lake with a surface area of 18,500 aeras and some 300 miles of shoreline. The Keowee Hydroelectric Station, located at the Keowee Dam, consists of two 70 MW generators which began operation in 1971. Upstream some 11 miles from the Keowee Dam, the Jocasse Dam rises 385 feet to form Lake Jocassee and back a 7565 acre lake into the steeply rising flanks of the Blue Ridge Mountains.

The Jocassee Hydroelectric Station is scheduled to go into operation in early 1974 and, initially, will have two 152.5 MW reversible pump turbines. Two additional reversible pump turbines of the same size are scheduled to be installed in 1975, bringing the Jocassee facilities' total output to 610 MW of reversible pumped storage output.

The hydroelectric power will only provide peaking power and, while a valuable supplement, is no substitute for base-loaded steam-generated I

electricity.

j The Oconee Nuclear Station consists of three pressurized water reactors, each rated at 2568 MW thermal (MWt).

A steam turbine-generator associated with each reactor will use this heat to provide 886.3 MW (net) of electrical power capacity.

Total capacity of the station will be 2,658.9 MW.

Unit 1, which was scheduled to be available for the summer cf 1971, was delayed by several preoperational problems.

Oconee 1 went critical on April 19, 1973 but it is questionable whether core physics and startup testing can be completed in time for the plant to contribute fully to the 1973 summer peak loads.

Fuel loading for Oconee 2 has slipped from March 1973 to August 1973 so that, at best, this plant will not be on the line until 1974. Oconee 3 is in the final stages of construction.

l

,m a

~

The arrangement of the Oconee Nuclear Station is shown in fig.1.

The intake structure is located in the lower center of the picture with Keowee Dam in the upper right.

A more encompassing view of the overall site is shown in fig. 2.

The meteorology tower is visible (above unit 3) along with the Visitor's Center on the hill above the station and discharge structure.

The overall layout of the Oconee Nuclear Station, Lakes Keowee and Jocasse and the associated hydroelectric plants are shown in fig. 3.

After review of the Final Environmental Statement it was determined that the Addendum should update the need for power in the Applicant's service area and should examine compliance with the original conditions for the protection of environmental values, which were:

(a) Accumulate information required to establish baselines for the evaluation of thermal, chemical and radiological effects of station operation on terrestrial biota and aquatic biota in Lakes Keowee, Hartwell and Jocassee.

(b) Develop and implement a comprehensive monitoring program that will permit surveillance during plant operation of thermal, chemical, and radiological effects on terrestrial biota and on aquatic biota in Lakes Keowee, Hartwell, and Jocassee.

(c) Monitor concentrations of chemical discharges into Hartwell Rese rvoir.

(d) Monitor the temperature of the condenser cooling discharges into lake Keowee.

This information is included in the following sections.

i i

. Tnvironmental Monitoring Procrams Since the Final Environmental Statement was issued (varch 1072), a non-radiological environmental monitorine progran has been established and incorporated as Appendix B to Operating License DpR-38 for Unit 1 as required by the Final Environmental Statement.

The data developed from the program will provide cuantitative information on the effects of chemical and thermal discharges from Oconee Units 1, 2 and 3 on the aquatic and terrestrial life associated with Lakes Keowee and Hartwell.

Samples from throughout the lakes are being analyzed for dhemical com-position, temperature and dissolved gases.

The general acuatic surveil-lance includes samples to detect and cuantify the effect of the Station's operation on plankton, periphyton, zooplankton, phytoolankton and benthos.

An extensive fish sampling program will identify the spawnine areas,

species composition, size class and age composition of fish in Lake Keowee with emphasis on the intake and discharge areas.

The overall studies will provide data that can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the skimmer wall, submerged weir and intake and discharge desien in minimizing thermal and entrainnent effects.

This program will be con-tinued during the operation of Units 2 and 3.

A summary of the sampling schedules and locations is outlined in Table 1.

To assure that concentrations of dhemicals released from the Oconee Station will not be toxic to the aquatic environment in Hartwell Reservoir, limits have been placed on the tyoe and quality of liquid discharges.

The plant vaste streams collected in the waste water collection basin are required to be treated to produce essentially a neutral e f fluent.

The two most important indicators of chemical com-position pH and conductivity - must be sampled and recorded at least once per day.

To monitor the effect and extent of thermal enrichment of Lake Keowee, samoles are required to be routinely taken at nine sampling locations on Lake Keovee and at five locations on the Keowee River and Hartwell Reservoirs.

Temperature and dissolved oxygen measurements are recuired to be taken at ten (10) foot intervals on all lake samples.

B.O.D.

measurements on Lake Keowee are required to be taken at one foot, ten feet and bottom depths.

To supplement the routine " grab" samples, dhree multipoint continuous water temperature monitoring s tations have been installed at the entrance to the intake canal, the discharge area and the connecting canal between the Little River and Keowee a rms o f th e lake.

i i

1 i

j

-~~.

sl

.J J

.g In addition to the surveillance programs beinn conducted by Duke Power Company, the Fishery Research Division, Bureau of Sport Fisheries and flildlife, Department of the Interior has under way a ten-year Southeast Reservoirs Investigations Project.

The resident office is at Clemson, South Carolina. A major part of the program is being carried out on Lakes Jocassee, Keowee and Hartwell to establish the effect of heated effluent, pumped storage and hydro-electric generation on fish population, distribution, movement, growth, production and harvest and on production and utilization of plankton and benthos. The projects being conducted in FY 73 are listed in Table 2.

Between the studies being conducted by the Bureau of Sport Fisheries and the environmental surveillance programs being conducted by Duke, the effects of the Oconee Nuclear Station on the acuatic environment are being adeouately monitored.

1

[

4 4

3_

Table 1 SLM1ARY Of THE NON-RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTA; MONITORING PROGRAM FOR OCO S A M P L I N G S T A T I O N S (Fig 1.3-1, Fig 1.3-2) gg LAKE KEOwEE LAKE HARTWELL PROGRAM Intake 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 Discharge Discharge Structure Structure cove 601 602 603 604 605 WATER QUALITY Temperature M M M M M M M M Dissolved Oxygenfl)

M M M M M M M M M

M M M M M Light Penetration i.

M M M M M M M M M M M M M PR M

M M M M H M M M M M M M Manganese M

M M M M M M M M M M M M M Total Iron M

M M M M M M M M M M M M M Turbidity M M M M M M M M M

M M M M M BOD M

M M M M M M

M M

Alkalinity M.M M

-M M M M M M

M M M M M NH3 Nitrogen M M M M M M M M NO3 Nitrogen M M M M M M M M Ortho - P M M M M M M M M T2tal - P M M M M M M M M Silica M M M M M M M M Ccuductivity M M M M M M M M PLCME STUDIES Continuous Temp.

C C C Mapping (2)

Q Q Q Q

Q PuNKTON(3)

+

Entrainment (Section 1.6)

Surveillance BM BM EM EM PutIPHYTON M

BM EM BENTH0S M

Q Q Q

Q DISSOLVEn CASES Q

Q Q w

w w w

w w

FISHES (Section 1.3.1)

Nets Electrofishing Rotenone TERRESTRIAL (Section 1.4)

(1) See Section 1.3.1 (2)

Approx 1nately 25 additional stations will be sampled.

(3)

Two additional locations will be sampled in the discharge plume.

Key:

M - Monthly (Minimum of 10 times per year with a pepod not to exceed 45 days between samples);

C - Continuously; Q - Quarterly; BM - Bi-monthly (6 times per year); w - winter period acat i

i

.m

.m Table 2 Department of the Interior Bureau.: Sport Fisheries and Wildlife Division of Fishery Research PROJECT AND WORK UNIT SIMfARY FY 73 Southeas t Reservoir Investigations P. O. Box 429 Clemson, South Carolina 29631 Project 900 - Life histories of Keowee-Jocassee Reservoir fishes Work Units 900-1 Life history of largemouth bass, Keowee Reservoir 900-2 Life history of black crappie, Keovee Reservoir 900-3 Life history of yellow perch, Keowee Reservoir 900-4 Life history of bluegill, Keowee Reservoir 900-5 Underwater observations of shoreline fishes, Keowee-Jocassee Reservoirs Project 901 - Population dynamics of fishes Work Units 901-1 Larval and juvenile fish sampling and analysis 90 1-2 Relative abundance of adult fishec 901-3 Fish biomass estinates in coves 901-4 Relative abundance of fishes in trannet catches 901-5 Shoreline fish population es tinates 901-6 Larval fish abundance estimation Project 902 - Limnology of Keowee-Jocassee Reservoirs Work Units 902-1 Water chemistry of Keowee Reservoir 902-2 Plankton studies of Keowee Reservoir 902-3 Benthos studies of Keowee Reservoir Project 903 - Catch Statistics Work Units 903-1 Sport fish harvest and angler use pattern Project 904 - Research Contracts - Clemson University

~

Work Units 904-1 Reaction of largemouth bass to heated water discharges

^

Table 2 (Cont'd) 904-2 Interaction of cared fish culture to heated water dis dharges 904-3 Seasonal dynamics of zooplankton subjected to dhermal flux Project 905 - Research Contract - Georgia Cooperative Fisheries Unit, University of Georgia Work Units 905-1 The fish populations in two reservoirs receiving heated effluents

N, Need For Power ne need for power in the applicant's service area is discussed in Chapter X (p 156) of the Final Environmental Statement. As a result of more recent data submitted both by the Applicant and by other utilities in the southeast who have recently applied for construction permits, some amplification of the need for power section was deemed desirable.

e The applicant's service area encompasses approximately 20,000 square miles in west-central North Carolina and northwestern South Carolina (Fig I-l of FES). Although the service area represents only a fourth of the total land area of the Carolinas, it is home for about 3.3 million people - more than half of the states' populations.

Re Duke Power Company serves about 900,000 residential customers and 145,000 other customers and is the principal supplier of electric energy in 44 of 56 countries in its service area. It supplies electric service directly to retail customers in 216 cities, towns and unincorporated communities.

It also sells power at wholesale to 40 other incorporated municipalities and to a number of Rural Electrification Administration cooperatives and private utilities.

4 4

k

m

. Past Growth of the Power System The Applicant's average and peak loads for the cast ten years were analyzed. Since 1962, the average annual growth rates in the four main categories of customers were as follows:

Table 3 Average Anntal Growth Rates Commercial 12.9%

Residential 9.2%

Industrial 8.6%

All Other 10.1%

Howe ve r, the peak loads, which is the basis on which the applicant has to plan generating capacity, can often show variations from the average load growth for a particular year. In 1972, for example, the total energy sales increased by only 8.1% due to extremely mild weather conditions during the year, yet the 1972 oeak load of 7450 MN (July 24, 1972) exceeded the 1971 peak load of 6622 MR (June '28,1971) by 12.5%.

Future Growth of Peak Load and Generating Capability The Applicant's cresent generating facilities consist of 10 steam electric niants with a capability of 5439 MR, 29 quick-start combustion turbines with a total capacity of 638 MR and 27 hydroelectric plants with a capability of 1003 MR.

Of the 27 hydro stations, almost all of which were installed prior to 1928, two-thirds of these stations can add less than 27 MW each of short-te rm peaking power. As late as 1967, the applicant had essentially no peaking combustion turbines: since then, Duke Power Company, like.other utilities, has been using these units to supple-ment the steam plants during peak loads because of their capability of being able to be brought-on and taken-off the line rather quickly, their relatively low installed cost per kw, their relatively short delivery times and the minimal governmental approvals required.

The applicants ' last major addition of these units was the installa-tion of ten combustion turbines totaling 196 MR at Buzzards ' Roost, S.C. in 1971.

The extent to which the Applicant used the combustion turbines and hydro capacity to supplement the base-loaded steam plants for peak power oeriods during the past six years is shown in Table 4:

R Table 4 Sources of Enerev (Millions of Krgg) 1972 1971 1970 1969

_1968_

1967 Generated by steam 37,736 35,393 34,212 30,591 28,019 26,276 hydro 1,961 2,028 1,491 1,784 1,521 1,315 CTG

• 869 726 837 643 173 2

Purchased & Net Inter-2,607 1,789 1,728 1,534 1,801 546 change

• Combustion Turbine Generators Since the Final Environmental Statement was issued a year ago, the need for power from the Oconee Station has become even more necessarv.

The summer peak on the Duke Power System has generally occurred in the It generally takes about three months from months of June and July.

the time a nuclear plant achieves criticality until the core physics and power escalation tests are completed and the plant is ready for Inasmuch as Oconee 1 did not go critical until commercial operation.the unit may not be available to assist in meeting the -

April 19, 1973, applicant's peak summer load.

For planning purposes, it has been Oconee 2 is scheduled for included in the 1973 planrt) additions.

commercial operation about ',ecember 15,_1973; for practical purposes, Oconee 3 has been included this has been considered as a 1974 addition.The applicant's estimated peak loads in the 1975 planned additions.

(excluding purchased compared with the installed generating capacity for the next three years in shown in Table 5:

powe r)

Table 5 MJs_

Peak Loads vs Maximum Installed Generating Capability, 1972 actual 1973 1974 1975 7450 8101 8838 9635 Peak Load, average weather 13,161( )

8572(

10,827 7654 System generating capability (1) with Oconee 1 (2).with Oconee 1 & 2 and Belevs Creek 1 (3) 'with Oconee 1, 2 & 3 and Belevs Creek 1 & 2

m

. Regional Relationships The applicant's service area is in the Federal Power Commission's Region III. As a member of the Southeastern Electric Reliability Council (SERC), (one of nine regional coordinating councils which constitute the National Electric Reliability Council), the applicant conducts reliability studies in cooreration with other Region III utilities.

The applicant is also a member of SEPC's Virginia-Carolina Subregion (VAC AR). Besides Duke Power Company, the other members of VACAR are the Virginia Electric Power Company (VEPCO), Carolina Power and Light Company (CP&L), South Carolina Electric and Gas Company (SCE&G) the Southeastern Power Administration (SEPA), Yadkin, Inc. and the South Carolina Public Service Authority (SCPSA).

Through VACAR and SERC, planning for major transmission interconnections with the other utilities are conducted and operating agreements for power exchange arrangements are made within the region and with similar reliability groups in the mid-Atlantic and east-central sections of the country.

Within the next five years, plans call for Duke Power Company to install 550 miles of 500 KV transmission interconnections with neighboring utilities, Carolina Power and Light Company, Appalachian Power Company and Georgia Power Company. By the end of 1972, 160 miles of the system had been completed.

The existing interconnections with neighboring utilities was used extensively in the past few years for the exchange of power during periods of heavy load. Since 1968, the applicant has purchased from 1.5 to 2.6 billion kilowatthours each year.

Through VACAR, the applicant has made arrangements for the purchase of a small amount of power from several neighboring utilities.

To partially replace the power that was not available in 1972 from Oconee 1 being delayed, Duke Power Company made arrangements for short term purchases of power during the summer of 1972.

In total, these, short term purchases amounted to 344 MW and included 166 !M from the Southern Company,1-0 MW from American Electric Power To cover the Company and 38 MR from the Apoalachian Power Company.

delays in Oconee 2, the applicant has made arrangements with SCE&G j

for the purchase of 250 MR from May through August 1973 and with APC These for the purchase of 250 MW from May through October 1973.

short term purchases of power were considered advisable to provide reserve capacity in case of forced outages of generating equipment j

~

or unpredictable high power demand.

In the long-run, dependence on purchased power - even if it is available - to maintain needed reserve capacity is undesirable because:

1.

Purchased power is less reliable as a result of the greater number of interconnecting relay stations and the exposure of transmission lines between the generating stations and the load centers.

2.

Purchased power is not always available on a firm basis and of ten such power can only be contracted for' on an inter-ruptible basis.

In the latter instance, the power require-ments of the seller take precedence over the needs of the purchasing utility and, therefore, the power may not be available.

3.

Purchased power generally costs the utility more than power generated within its own system.

Reserve Canability Of crucial importance to an electric utility is the amount of generating reserve capacity.

This is the generating capability of power available in excess of the peak load. Capacity in excess of estimated load is necessary to increase the probability of maintaining uninterrupted service to all firmly connected loads.

This reserve capacity provides for contingencies such as higher-than-predicted loads, dry weather i

which decreases hydroelectric capacity, delay in startup of new units, transmission system failures, storms and natural disasters which knock-out part of the system and the unscheduled, forced shut-down of generating units.

Duke Power Company's criteria for reserves include allowances at the time of peak load for:

1.

Load increases brought on by severe weather.

(Peak load estimates are Itased on average weather.)

2.

The unscheduled outage of the largest generating unit.

3.

Forced outages or reductions in capability of other generating units, based on operating experience.

4. ~ Forecast error or the outage of additional generation equivalent

- i to the largest unit.

/

. be 8572 SM.'Ihe 1973 installed generating capacit Oconee Unit 1, the anticipated summerWith a forced outage o erating unit, criteria will not be net, exceed system generating capacity by 411 Clearly, the reserve loads reduced.

and additional power must be purchased and/or be 10,827 W.In 1974, the system capacity (including both O an anticipated summer peak load of 8 838 WWith the outage of 1 (1,143 m) and excess reserve of 846 W.

This reserve is not sufficient to meet, the sys tem Criteria No. 4 above.

Units 1, 2, and 3).The installed capacity in 1975 will be 13161 W 2 (1,143 m), and the anticipated summer peak lWith the outage installed reserve will be 2,383 W, which 1 or oad of 9,635 W, the the reserve criteria.

should be adeouate to meet Resource Planning 1975, the estimated installed capacity includiTable ~

ae peak loads through units and the agreements for ourchased power whichng the three Oconee negotiated.

Station are required to provide an uninterrThe table illustrates w of the Oconee uptible power supply.

Cost of Alternate Power As of March 30, 1973, the total installed c i

i Power system that is provided by combustionapacity within the Duke 638 W.

turbines and diesels is Like hydroelectric power, combustion turbines c as a substitute for base loaded steam plants annot be considered are designed for peaking service.

Conbustion turbines 14% and may be as low as 3 to 5%. factor'for combuetion tu system is not over 12 to th'e ' turbines were (in 1971) in use an aveHowever, in the applicant's system 1973 and'1974 when the need for additional base lrage of 35% of the time capacity is the most critical, combustion turbinesoaded generating In as an alternative to Oconee.

design gas turbines is over a year.ead time on even small, standardcould not be The l I

i l

p

~

14 -

In the long run, gas turbines could not be consid. ;ed a viable alter-native to the Oconee units because of their hi h operating and main-F tenance costs even if an adequate supply of oil or gas were available.

According to the latest figures from the Applicant (3/30/73), the average cost of burnup of nuclear fuel over the next 10 years in the Oconee Station is expected to be approximately 15 cents per million BTU.

At 15 cents per million BTU, and assuming a heat. rate of 10,000 BTU per net Kilowatt hour, each of the 866 megawatt Oconee units will have a daily fuel expense based on full load operation of approximately $31,900.

If, during periods of milder-than-normal weather in the winter of 1973-74, older fossil-fired units were to be used to generate energy to replace that which would not be available should operation of Oconee Unit 2 be delayed, the cost of fuel consumed per day would be

$103,900.

This is based upon a current fuel cost of 46.7 cents per million BTU and an average heat rate o# 10,674 BTU per kilowatt hour to produce 886 megawat_a each day.

Thus, euch day that each unit of the Oconee Station should be delayed during periods of relatively mild weather results in increased fuel expense of approximately $72,000.

Under extreme conditions, combustion turbines are used to help meet -

peak laads.

Combustion turbines have an average heat rate of approxi-mately 15,650 BTU per kilowatt hour and a winter-time fuel cost of approximately 87 cents per million BTU. Utilizing combustion turbines with a generating capacity of 886 megawatts for one full day would j

result in a fuel cost of $289,500 per day. Thus, having to replace energy that could be generated by ene unit of Oconee Station with i

energy generated by combustion turbines during cold weather would cost an additional generating expense of $257,600.

The above fuel costs for alternative power sources are in addition to the substantial expense that would be incurred if Oconee units 2 and 3 were not licensed for full power operation.

Interest on funds used in plant construction are charged at an annual rate of 71/2%.

Each day that operation of the Oconee Nuclear Station should be delayed would add $73,000 in interest to the cost of the plant.

l

~

O Table 6 higrating Capability and Firm Purchase Agreements, MM 1972 actual 1973 1974 1975 Loads _:

7450 8101 8838 9635 Peak, Average Weather 437 484 536 Extreme steather Increment 8538 9322 10,171 Peak:

Ext reme Weather System capability, Before Additions _

7082 7654 8572 10,827 572 22 Cliffside 5 886 Oconee 1 886 Oconee 2 886 Oconee 3 305 Jocassee 1-2 305 Jocassee 3-4 1143 Beleus Creek 1 1143 Belews Creek 2 l

79 To Be Retired: Tiger, Buzzards Roost, Greenwood 7654 8572 10,827 13,161 Af ter Additions and Retirements Purchases : Short term (Summer 344 500 only) 297 277 257 239

VACAR Members 8295 9349 11,084 13,400 Total System capabilitv_

(Installed Cst aitv)

Reserve s

20 4-471 19 89 3526 2.74 5.81 22.51 36.60 MR Percent

r-Recreation and Conservation With the increasing number of people who are interested in camping and water related recreation - and the limited facilities available -

Lakes Keewee and Jocassee are expected to attract extensive recreational-use.

Duke Power Company har. encouraged public recreation usage of their impounded lakee. At Lakes Keowee and Jocasse the Applicant has taken a number of actions to permit public enjoyment of the water and the scenic Blue Ridge Mountains that form a backdrop for the lakes.

The Applicant donated 1,000 acres of land to South Carolina for development of the Keovee-Toxaway State Park.

To provide access for b oa te rs, fishermen, swimmers, campers, picnickers and hikers, Duke Power Company also constructed eight recreational areas around Lake Keowee and three around Lake Jocasse.

In each of these areas the campany has installed boat launching ramas and parking facilities.

These areas range in size from 21 acres to a 135 acre complex that will involve campgrounds, complete sanitary facilitf s and bathhouses,

boat storage facilities and marinas. Near the upper end of Lake Jocasse, a wilderness campground is being developed, accessible only by hiking trail or water.

Duke Pcwer Company has worked with the wildlife and conservation services of both North and South Carolina in providing game management areas and hunting refuges.

More than 68,000 acres of land around Keowee-Toxaway have become a game management area by a working agreement with the wildlife commissions of the two states.

-