ML19338D615
| ML19338D615 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 09/30/1980 |
| From: | CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19338D606 | List: |
| References | |
| ENVR-800930, NUDOCS 8009230562 | |
| Download: ML19338D615 (100) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ ' ,,w
% ip
~
, f) ._ ':l.
W-p
^
i c -
,s n
, ,- - , ,_ ~_
~
EMIDLAND /1&2'-ER(OLS) ;
- ~
y ._
.t jr % : .,
'.'; k- - '
.S : INSTRUCTIONS'FOR" ADDING REVISION-.11' n- '
iTO.THE MIDLAND PLANTJ ENVIRONMENTAL: REPORT-
~
LThisiRevision 11 to the. Environmental Report-(ER) of the'Mi_dland Plant.. con-4
~
sists of pages Lthattare cto be inserted ~ into your copy of ^ the ER.
Vertical bars inlthe" margin indicate the location of the revisions:in text and' tables. LPages.without bars are.either~unchang'ed pages furnished for con-:
'.tinuity or contain minor -spelling Lo'r' editorial . corrections which do not change
~
the. text content.~ The~pages to'be removed and-inserted are/as followsi
. REMOVED INSERT'
' Volume'l Atter Tab,1LOEP-1 thru LOEP-11 After Tab, Letter and L0EP-1
, thru LOEP '
'l-i thru l-iii 1-i'-thru l-iii 1.1-1 thru 1.1-32 1.1-1.thru 1.1-39
~ Tables'1.1-1 thru 1.1-14 Tables 1.1-1 thru 1.1-14 Figures _1.-1-1 thru'1.1-3' Figures 1.1-1 thru-1.1-3 1.3-1/1.3-21 . 1.3-1/1.3 Tbl 1,3-1/123-2 , '
Tb1 1.3-1/1.3-2
>2-i/2-ii- 2-1/2-ii 2-v/2-vi . .
2-v/2-vi Tables 4 2.1-9/2.1-10: Tables 2.1-9/2.1-10 2.2-15-thru 2.2-21: 2.2-15 thru 2.2-24
-2.2R-1/2.2R-2. 2.2R-1 thru 2.2R-3 2.5-5/2.5-6l 2.5-5/2.5-6
_ Table 2.5-1: Table 2.5-1
~
rVo'lume 2~
2.6-5/2.6-6 ?
2.6-5/2.6 2.7.1/2.7.-21 2.7-1/2.7-2
>3-iii/3-iv: 3-iii/3-iv T3.3-1/3.3-la. .
3.3-1/3.3-la
~
. Tables 3.4-7/3'.4 . Tables.3.4-7/3.4 _-3.6-1/3.6-2.; _ _ . L3.6-1/3.6-2
'3.7-3 thru 3.~25L 3.7-3 thru 3.7-5 73.9-7/3.9-8 > .. 3.9-7 3.9-8
'4.'2-l' thru 4.1-8'- 4.2-1 thru 4.2-8
-Table.4.2-1~ Table 4.2-1~
f ITab1E5'8-1; 6 -
Table:5.8-1
^
y ,
K REVISION 11{-~ SEPTEMBER [19801 _l'of 2.
._. -~ ,__-
t, A
.c_-
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
REMOVED INSERT O
Volume 3 6-i thru 6-iv 6-i thru 6-iv 6.1-19 thru 6.1-26 6.1-19 thru 6.1-26 6.2A-1-1 thru 6.2Al-7 6.2Al-1 thru 6.2A-1-7 6.2A-3-7/6.2A-3-8 6.2A-3-7/6.2A-3-8 6.3-9 6.3-9 6.4-1 6.4-1 Table 6.4-1 Tables 6.4-1/6.4-2 8-i 8-i/8-ii 8.1-1 thru 8.1-4 8.1-1 thru 8.1-4 Table 8.1-1 8.1R-1 8.1R-1 8.2-1 thru 8.2-3 8.2-1 thru 8.2-4 Tables 8.2-1/8.2-2 8.2R-1 --
11-i/11-ii 11-i/11-ii 11-1 11-1 Table 11-1 Table 11-1/11-2 11R-1 --
13.2-7 thru 13.2-12 13.2-7 thru 13.2-12 13.8-1 13.8-1 13.11-1 --
Q&R-i thru Q&R-iii Q&R-i thru Q&R-iii ARC 11-1 ARC 11-1 B-C la-1,2 B-C la-1,2 B-C lb-1 B-C lb-1 B-C Ic-1 thru B-C Ic-6 B-C Ic-1 thru B-C Ic-6 B-C 2-1,2 B-C 2-1,2 B-C 3-1 B-C 3-1 B-C 8-1,2 B-C 8-1,2 B-C 9b-1,2 B-C 9b-1,2 B-C 11-1 B-C 11-1 END 1-4 END 1-4 Table END 1-1 Table END 1-1 END 6-1 END 6-1 HYD 4-1,2 HYD 4-1,2 SOC 12-1 S0C 12-1 0
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 2 of 2 b .
J
MIDLAND)1f:2-ER(OLS) '
LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES.
Dx 'CP-Co Transmittal (j '
Letter- NRC Receipt Tendered ER 02/28/78 03/01/78 Docket- .
04/12/78 04/14/78 Revision 1 - April 1978 .
05/08/78 05/12/78 Revision 2 - June 1978 06/29/78- 07/05/78 Revision November 1978 11/10/78 11/16/78 Revision 4 December 1978 12/07/78 12/12/78-Revision'5 January 1979 01/29/79 02/01/79 Revision 6 ' - February 1979 02/27/79 03/06/79 Revision 7 - March 1979 03/30/79 03/30/79 Revision 8 - April 1979 04/30/79 05/03/79 Revision 9 - June 1979 06/29/79 07/05/79 Revision 10 - November 1979 11/30/79- 12/03/79 Revision 11 - September 1,980 09/15/80
-Latest Latest Latest Sheet ID Rev Sheet ID 'Rev Sheet ID Rev VOLUME-I i 3 -1.1-18' 11- (2 of 5) 11 ii. 3 1.1-19 11 (3 of 5) 11 lii 0 1.1-20 11 (4 of-5) 11 iv 0 1.1-21 -11 (5 of-5) 11 v 0 1.1-22 11 Tb1 1.1-12 11 LOEP-1 11 1.1-23 11 Tb1 1.1-13 11 n LOEP-2 11 1.1-24 11 Tb1 1.1-14 11
'( LOEP-3 11 1.1-25 11 Fig 1.1-1 11-
- ')~ LOEP-4 11- -1.1-26 11 Fig.1.1-2 11 LOEP-5 11 1.1-27 11 Fig 1.1-3 11 '
LOEP-6 11- 1.1-28 11 1.2-1 3 LOEP-7 11 1.1 11 1.3-1 11
-L0EP-8' 11 1.1-30 11 1.3-2 11 L0EP-9' 11 1.1-31 11 Tb1 1.3-1 11 L0EP-10 11 1.1-32 11 Tb1 1.3-2 11 L0EP-11 11 1.1-33 11 2-1 11 1-i- 11 1.1-34 11 2-11 11 1-ii 11 1.1-35 11 2-iii 2 1-iii . 11. 1.1-36 11 2-iv 3 1.1-1 11 1.1-37 11 2-v 11 1.1 11- 1.1-38 11 2-vi 0 1.1-3 11 1.1-39 11 2-vii 0 1.1-4. 11 Tbl 1.1-1 11 2-viii 0 1.1-5: ~11 Tb1 1.1-2 11 2-ix 3 1.1-6 11 TblLI.1 11 2.1-1 0 1.1-7 11 Tb1 1.1-4 11 2.1-2 0 1.1-8 11 Tb111.1-5 11 2.1-3 0 1.1-9 11- Tb1 1.1-6 11 2.1-4 0 1.1-10 ;;1 Tb1 1.1-7 -11 2.1-5 1
- 1.1-11' 111 Tbl.1.1-8 11 2.1-6 1 1.1-12 11 ^Tb1 1.1-9: 11 2.1-7 0-1.1-13l ~ 11 Tb1 1.1-10 2.1-8 0 x 1;1-14 11 -(1 of-2) 2 2.1-9 1 II.1-15 11- -(2 of,2). 2 2.1-10 1 E(' N 'l
- ' 1.1 ll- Tb1 1.1 .
2.1-11 0 --
1.1 11' (1 of.5) 11L 2.1-12 0
- REVISION 11. - SEPTEMBER ;1980 - :LOEP-1 -I 1
. l l
u La ,
e MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
Latest Latest Latest Sheet ID Rev Sheet ID Rev Sheet ID Rev .
2.1-13 1 Tb1 2.1-19 2.2-10 1 2.1-14 1 (1 of 2) 1 2.2-11 0 2.1-14a 1 (2 of 2) 1 2.2-12 1 2.1-14b I Tb1 2.1-20 1 2.2-13 0 2.1-15 0 Tb1 2.1-21 1 2.2-14 0 2.1-16 0 Tb1 2.1-22 1 2.2-15 11 2.1-17 2 Tb1 2.1-23 1 2.2-16 11 2.1-18 1 Tb1 2.1-24 1 2.2-17 11 2.1-19 0 Tb1 2.1-25 1 2.2-18 11 2.1-20 1 Fig 2.1-1 0 2.2-19 11 2.1-21 1 Fig 2.1-2 0 2.2-20 11 2.1-22 1 Fig 2.1-3 0 2.2-21 11 2.1-23 1 Fig 2.1-4 0 2.2-22 11 2.1-23a 1 Fig 2.1-5 0 2.2-23 11 2.1-23b 0 Fig 2.1-6 0 2.2-24 11 2.1-24 0 Fig 2.1-7 0 Tb1 2.2-1 0 2.1-25 1 Fig 2.1-8 0 Tb1 2.2-la 7 2.1-26 1 Fig 2.1-9 0 Tb1 2.2-2 2.1-27 2 Fig 2.1-10 0 (1 of 3) 0 2.1-28 1 Fig 2.1-11 0 (2 of 3) 0 2.1-29 I Fig 2.1-12 0 (3 of 3) 0 2.1-30 1 Fig 2.1-13 0 Tb1 2.2-3 0 2.1-31 1 Fig 2.1-14 0 Tb1 2.2-4 0 2.1-32 0 Fig 2.1-15 0 Tb1 2.2-5 1 2.1-33 0 Fig 2.1-16 0 Tb1 2.2-6 1 2.1-34 1 Fig 2.1-17 0 Tb1 2.2-7 Tb1 2.1-1 0 Fig 2.1-18 0 (1 of 2) 0 Tb1 2.1-2 0 Fig 2.1-19 0 (2 of 2) 0 Tb1 2.1-3 0 Fig 2.1-20 0 Tb1 2.2-8 Tb1 2.1-4 0 Fig 2.1-21 0 (1 of 2) 0 Tb1 2.1-5 0 Fig 2.1-22 0 (2 of 2) 0 Tb1 2.1-6 0 2.1R-1 1 Fig 2.2-1 0 Tb1 2.1-7 1 2.1R-2 0 Fig 2.2-2 0 Tb1 2.1-8 0 2.1R-3 0 Fig 2.2-3 0 Tb1 2.1-9 0 2.1R-4 1 Fig 2.2-4 0 Tb1 2.1-10 11 2.1R-5 1 2.2R-1 7 Tb1 2.1-11 0 2.2-1 1 2.2R-2 11 Tb1 2.1-12 0 2.2-2 5 2.2P-3 11 Tb1 2.1-13 0 2.2-2a 4 App 2.2A NA Tb1 2.1-14 0 2.2-2b 4 App 2.2B NA Tb1 2.1-15 0 2.2-3 1 App 2.2C NA Tb1 2.1-16 2.2-4 1 2.3-1 0 (1 of 3) 1 2.2-5 1 2.3-2 0 (2 of 3) 0 2.2-6 0 2.3-3 1 (3 of 3) 1 2.2-7 1 2.3-4 0 Tb1 2.1-17 1 2.2-8 1 2.3-5 0 Tb1 2.1-18 1 2.2-9 1 2.3-6 1 2.3-7 0 2.3-8 0 2.3-9 0 NA = Not applicable. This appendix was not written by Consumers. Power Company or its contractors.
REVISION ~11'- S'EPTEMBER 1980 LOEP-2 E. j
y - -n ,
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
Latest: . .
Latest- - Latest
-Sheet IIR 'Rev . Sheet ID Rev Sheet'ID Rev 12.3-10. 04 2.3R-3 1 Tb1 2.4L3 -0
-2.3-11. ;0: App 2.3A Tbl-2.4-4 0
- 2.3-12 0 2.3A Title Pg .O Tb1'2.4-5 0 2.3-13. Tb1 2.4-6 0 .2.3A-i' 0 -
0 2.3 0 Tbl 2.3A-1 ,0 Tb1 2.4-7 2 2.3-15 0 'Tbl.2.3A-2' 0 Tb1 2.4-8
'2.3-16 0 Tbl 2.3A-3 'O (1 of-4) 0 2.3-17~ 1. Tb1 2.3A-4 01 (2 of 4) 0 2.3-18 4 .Tbl 2.3A-5 0 :(3 of 4) 0 2.3-19 0 1Tb1 2.3A-6 0 .(4 of 4) 0
-2.3-20 0 Tb1 2.3A-7 0 Tb1 2.4-9 2.3-21 0 .Tb1 2.3A-8 0 (1 of 5) 0 Tb1 2.3A-9 (2 of 5)
~
Tbl'2.3-1 0 0 . 0 Tb1 2.3-2 0 Tb1 2.3A-10 0 (3 of 5) 0 Tb1 2.3-3 0 2.4-1' 0 (4 of 5) 0 Tb1 2.3-4 0 =2.4-2 1 (5 of 5) 0 Tb1 2.3-5 0 2.4-3 1 Tb1 2.4-10 0 Tb1 2.3-6 0 2.4-4 0 Tb1 2.'4-11 2 Tb1 2.3 0 2.4-5 1 Fig 2.4-1 0 Tb1 2.3-8 0 2.4 0 Fig 2.4-2 0 Tb1 2.3 0 2.4-7 0 Fig 2.4-3 0 Tb1 2.3-10 0 2.4-8 0 Fig 2.4-4 O Tb1 2.3-11 0 2.4-9 O Fig 2.4-5 0
.Tbl 2.3-12 0 '2.4-10 . 9 Fig 2.4-6 0
.Tbl.2.3-13 0 2.4-11 1 Fig 2.4-7 0 Tb1 2.3-14 0 2.4-12 1 Fig 2.4-8 0 Tb1 2.3-15 0 2.4-13 1 Fig 2.4-9 0 Tb1 2.3-16 0 2.4-14 0 Fig 2.4-10 0 Tbl 2.3-17 0 2.4-15 2 Fig 2.4-11 0 Tb1 2.3-18 -0 2.'4-15a 2 Fig 2.4-12 2 Fig 2.3-1 0 2.4-15b' 2 2.4R-1 1 Fig 2.3-2 10 2.4-16 0 2.4R-2 1 Fig 2.3-3 0 2.4-17 0 2.4R-3 0 Fig 2.3-4' .0 2.4-18 2 2.5-1 0 Fig 2.3-5 0 '. 2.4-19 2 2.5-2 2 Fig.2.3-6 0 2.4-20 1 2.5-3 0 Fig 2.3-7 : 0 2.4-21 0 2.5-4 2 Fig 2.3-81 .0. 2.4-22 0 2.5-5 11 Fig 2.3-9 10 2.4-23. 2 2.5-6 11-Fig 2.3 0 2.4-23a 2 Tb1 2.5-1 11-Fig:2.3-11' 0 2.4-23b 2 Fig 2.5-1 0
. Fig.2.3-12: 0- 2.4-24 '2 . Fig 2.5-2 ~0 Fig 2.3-13 0- -2.4-25. 'O. Fig 2.5-3 -0 2.'3R-1 1- Tb1 2.4-1.. -0 Fig 2.5-4 0-2.3R-2, .0 Tb1~2.4 0 Fig 2.5-5 0 8
j-A. )' : '
SREVISION 9;- JUNE-1979 LOEP-3
-+
. . - ., . + +
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
Latest Latest Latest Sheet ID Rev Sheet ID Rev Sheet ID Rev Fig 2.5-6 0 Fig 3.1-4 0 Fig 3.4-8 0 Fig 2.5-7 0 Fig 3.1-5 0 Fig 3.4-9 3 2.5R-1 1 Fig 3.1-6 0 Fig 3.4-19 2 2.5R-2 1 3.1R-1 1 3.4R-1 9 3.2-1 1 3.5-1 1 VOLUME II 3.2-2 3 3.5-2 0 i 3 3.2-3 3 3.5-3 1 ii 3 Fig 3.2-1 1 3.5-4 1 iii 0 Fig 3.2-2 3 3.5-5 1 iv 0 3.3-1. 11 3.5-6 1 v 0 3.3-la 2 3.5-7 0 2.6-1 9 3.3-lb 2 3.5-8 0 2.6-2 3 3.3-2 6 3.5-9 0 2.6-3 3 3.3-3 0 3.5-10 0 2.6-4 6 Tb1 3.3-1 3.5-11 0 2.6-5 11 (1 of 2) 9 3.5-12 0 2.6-6 11 (2 of 2) 9 3.5-13 1 2.6-7 11 Tb1 3.3-2 8 3.5-14 0 Fig 2.6-1 3 Fig 3.3-1 8 3.5-15 0 2.6R-1 3 3.4-1 9 3.5-16 1 App 2.6A NA 3.4-2 9 3.5-17 0 App 2.6B NA 3.4-3 9 3.5-18 0 App 2.6C NA 3.4-4 0 3.5-19 0 2.7-1 11 3.4-5 2 3.5-20 0 2.7-2 0 3.4-6 9 3.5-21 1 Fig 2.7-1 0 3.4-7 2 3.5-22 0 Fig 2.7-2 0 3.4-7a 2 3.5-23 0 Fig 2.7-3 0 3.4-7b 2 3.5-24 1 Fig 2.7-4 0 3.4-8 10 3.5-25 0 Fig 2.7-5 0 3.4-9 9 3.5-26 0 Fig 2.7-6 0 3.4-10 9 3.5-27 0 3-1 2 3.4-11 9 3.5-28 0 3-ii 2 Tb1 3.4-1 0 3.5-29 0 3-iii 11 Tb1 3.4-2 1 3.5-30 1 3-iv 6 Tb1 3.4-3 2 3.5-31 1 3-v 2 Tb1 3.4-4 0 Tb1 3.5-1 0 3.1-1 0 Tb1 3.4-5 0 Tb1 3.5-2 3.1-2 1 Tb1 3.4-6 6 (1 of 2) 0 3.1-3 1 Tb1 3.4-7 11 (2 of 2) 0 3.1-4 0 Tb1 3.4-8 2 Tb1 3.5-3 3.1-5 0 Fig 3.4-1 0 (1 of 2) 0 3.1-6 0 Fig 3.4-2 0 (2 of 2) 0 3.1-7 0 Fig 3.4-3 3 Tb1 3.5-4 0 Tb1 3.1-1 Fig 3.4-4 0 Tb1 3.5-5 0 (1 of 2) 0 Fig 3.4-5 0 Tb1 3.5-6 0 (2 of 2) 0 Fig 3.4-6 0 Fig 3.1-1 0 Fig 3.4-7 0 Fig 3.1-2 0 Fig 3.1-3/
NA = Not applicable. 'This appendix was not written by Consumers Power Company h or its contractors.
REVISION 10 - NOVEMBER 1979 LOEP-4
~
% c - -
^
i_ 4 MIDLAND-1&2'-ER(OLS)~ ,
'O. Latest Lat'est . Latest.
(f Sheet-ID -Rev Sheet ID Rev Sheet ID Rev Tblj3.5-7 1 Tbl.3.5A-10 0 3.6R-1 9
'Tb1 3.5-8 ~Tb1 3.5A-11 0 3.7-1 0
.(1 of-2)
~
0 Tbl'3.5A 0 3.7 4
.(2 of 2). O Fig 3.5A 0 3.7-2a 4:
Tb1 3.5-9 0 . Fig-3.5A 0 3.7-2b 4
'Tb1 3.5-10 1 Fig 3.5A-3 0 3.7-3 0 Tb1 3.5-11 0 Fig 3.5A-4 0 3.7-4 11 Tb1 3.5-12 0 Fig 3.5A-5 0 3.7 z11 Tb1 3.5-13 Fig 3.5A-6 0 3.8 0 (1.of 4) 1 Fig 3.5A-7 1- 3.8R-1 0
'(2 of 4) 0 Fig 3.5A-81 1 3.9-1 0
'(3 of'4) 1 Fig 3.5A-9-- 1 3.9-2 1 (4. of 4) 0 -Fig 3.5A-10 0 3.9-3 9 Fig 3.5-1 0- Fig 13.5A-11 0 3.9-4 1 Fig 3.5-2 0 Fig 3.5A-12 0 3.9-5 1 3.5R-1 1 Fig 3.5A-13 0 3.9-6 .0
-App 3.5A . Fig 3.5A-14 0 3.9-7 11 3.5A Title Pg 0 Fig 3.5A-15 0 3.9-8 1 3.5A-i 0 Fig 3.5A-16 0 3.9-9 1 L. 3.5A-ii 0 Fig 3.5A-17 0 3.9-10 1 3.5A-iii 0 Fig 3.5A-18 0 3.9-11 4 3.5A-1 0 Fig 3.5A 0 3.9-12 4 3.5A-2 0 3.6-1 11 3.9-13 1 3.5A-3 0 3.6-2 8 3.9-14 0 A 3.5A-4 0 3.6-3 8 3.9-15 0 3.'5A-5 0 3.6-3a~ 1 Tb1 3.9-1 5
'3.5A-6 0 3.6-3b 1 Tb1 3.9-2 0 3.5A 0 3.6-4 1 Fig 3.9-1 0 3.5A-8 -0 3.6-5 1 Fig 3.9-2 0 3.5A-9 0 3.6-6 2 Fig 3.9-3A 0 3.5A-10 0 3.6-6a 7 Fig 3.9-3B 0 3.5A-11 0 3.6-6b 9 Fig 3.9-3C 0 3.5A-12 0 3.6-7 1 Fig 3.9-3D 0-3.5A-13 0. 3.6-8 8 Fig 3.9-3E O.
.3.5A-14 0 3.6-9 _8* Fig 3.9-3F' 0
-3.5A-15 . .O Tb1 3.6-1 0 Fig 3.9-3G 0 Tb1 3.5A-1 0 Tb1 3.6-2 Fig 3.9-3H 0 Tb1 3.5A-2 0 -(1.of 2) 8 Fig 3.9-4 0 Tb1 3.5A-3 0 (2 of 2) 8 Fig 3.9-5 0 Tb1 3.5A-4 -. 0 Tb1 3.6-3 8 Fig 3.9-6 0 Tb1 3.5A-5 0 Tbl.3.6-4 9 - Fig 3.9-7 0 Tb1 3.5A-6 0 - Tb1 3.6-5' 0 Fig 3.9-8 0 Tb113.5A-7. O Tb1 3.6-6 Fig 3.9-9 5 Tb1 3.5A-8 0: (1 of 2) 8 3.9R-1 1 Tb1 3.5A-9 0'- .(2 of 2) 8 3.9R-2 1 3.9R-3 1 j-)g-Is -
6
~
REVISI0'N 10 -1 NOVEMBER 1979 -LOEP-5 '
$ .5 '2
_j
e - -
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
Latest Latest Latest Sheet ID Rev Sheet ID Rev Sheet ID Rev 4-i 10 5.1-8 9 Fig 5.1B-4 0 4-il 4 5.1-9 9 Fig 5.1B-5 0 4.1-1 1 5.1-10 9 5.1BR-1 9
'. 1-2 1 5.1-11 0 App 5.1C NA 4.1-3 1 5.1-12 0 5.2-1 0 4.1-4 6 5.1-13 1 5.2-2 0 4.1R-1 1 5.1-14 0 5.2-3 0 4.2-1 0 5.1-15 0 5.2-4 0 4.2-2 11 5.1-16 0 5.2-5 0 4.2-3 10 5.1-17 0 5.2-6 0 4.2-4 11 5.1-18 1 5.2-7 0 4.2-5 11 5.1-19 0 5.2-8 0 4.2-o 11 5.1-20 0 5.2-9 0 4.2-7 11 5.1-21 1 5.2-10 0 4.2-8 11 Tb1 5.1-1 3 5.2-11 0 4.2-9 10 Tb1 5. 3 1 5.2-12 0 Tb1 4.2-1 11 Fig 5.1-1 3 5.2-13 0 4.2R-1 1 Fig 5.1-2 3 5.2-14 0 4.2R-2 0 Fig 5.1-3 3 5.2-15 0 4.3-1 1 Fig 5.1-4 3 5.2-16 0 4.3-2 1 Fig 5.1-5 3 5.2-17 0 4.3-3 0 Fig 5.1-6 0 5.2-18 0 4.3-4 6 5.1R-1 1 5.2-19 0 4.3-5 0 5.1R-2 1 5.2-20 0 4.3-6 1 5.1R-3 9 5.2-21 10 4.3R-1 0 App 5.1A NA 5.2-22 10 4.4-1 0 App 5.1B 5.2-23 10 4.4-2 1 5.1B Title Pg 0 5.2-24 10 Tb1 4.4-1 0 5.1B-i 0 5.2-25 10 4.4R-1 0 5.1B-ii 0 5.2-26 10 4.5-1 0 5.1B-iii 0 5.2-27 7 4.5R-1 1 5.1B-1 1 5.2-28 0 5-i 9 5.1B-2 1 5.2-29 0 5-ii 4 5.1B-3 1 5.2-30 0 5-iii 0 5.1B-4 1 5.2-31 1 5-iv 10 5.1B-5 0 5.2-32 1 5-v 4 5.1B-6 0 5.2-33 0 5-vi 3 5.1B-7 0 5.2-34 1 5.1-1 10 5.1B-8 0 5.2-35 7 5.1-2 1 5.1B-9 0 5.2-36 7 5.1-3 1 Tb1 5.1B-1 0 Tb1 5.2-1 0 5.1-4 0 Tb1 5.1B-2 0 Tb1 5.2-2 0 5.1-5 0 Fig 5.1B-1 0 Tb1 5.2-3 0 5.1-6 9 Fig 5.1B-2 0 Tb1 5.2-4 0 5.1-Sa 8 Fig 5.1B-3 0 Tb1 5.2-5 0 5.1-6b 8 5.1-7 7 NA = Not applicable. This appendix was not written by Consumers Power Company or its contractors.
REVISION 10 . NOVEMBER 1979 L0EP-6
3 g - v.b +
t,:s- 6
, , 4 n.
M6 ,
' MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)--
y;;i = <
ll -
7; 4 V}
b U
Sheet'ID
- Latest-
'Rev: ' Sheet ID-Latest.
Rev' _l Sheet ID Latest.
Rev h' Tbl'5[2-6 0 5.5-7 4' VOLUME III'
' Tb1 5.2-7 'O- :5.5-8 4. -i 3 '
Tb1 5.2-8: 1 '5.5-9 '
4 ii' >
3 Tbl'5.2-9 10 -5.5R-1 I iii 0- -
r- Tbl:5.2-10 f0 5.5R-2. 1 iv 0 '
p Tb1~5.2 0 '5;5R-3 4' v- 0 lTb1 5.2 c0- 5.6-1 ~
4 6-1 10-
- Tb1 ' 5.2-13 ' '10 5.6-la ' 4 6-ii' 5.
Tb1 5.2-15'- 10 5.6-1b ~4 6-iii 5 ,
Tbl~5'2-16 . 4 10. 5.6-2 3: 6-iv' '11
- Tbl' 5.2-17 ~'0- 5.6-3 8 6-v ' 10 Tb1 5.2-18' ~
0 '5.6-4 8- 6.'l-1 10 [
L LTb1 5.2-19 '5' 5;6-4a 8 6.1-2 10 ;i rD
.Tb1 5.2-20 0- 5.6-4b- 8 6.1-3 10' Thi 5.2 'O 15.6-5~ .. I 6.1-4 10 L Tb1'5.2-22 0: Tb1 5.6-1 0' 6.1-5 10' Tb1 5.2-23 5~ Tbll5.6-2 1, 6.1-6 2 J l Tb1 5.2-24 0 5.' 6R-1 4 6.1-7 10 l~
-Tb1 5.2-25:
~
5 -
App 5.6A 6.1-8 2 ;,
Fig 5.2 0 5.6A Tit.le Pg 1 0 6.1-9 2 l Fig 5.2-2 'O 5.6A Title Pg 2 '0 6.1-10 0 Fir 5.2-3 0. 5.6A-1 0 6.1-11 1
-Fig 5.2-4~' O 5.6A-1 0 6.1-12 0 p Fim 5.~2-5' 0 5.6A-2 0 6.1-13 0 Fig 5.2-6 0 5'6A-3
. 0 6.1-14' 0
[ -Fig 5 2-7.. 0~ 5.6A-4: 0 6.1-15 0 Fig 5'2-8
. 0- _5.6A-5 0 .6.1-16 -0 Fig 5.2-9 0 5.6A-6' . 0 6.1-17 1-Fig 5.2-10 0 _ App.A-(l'of 2) .0 6.1-18 10
- Fig 5.2 0, -App'A'(2 of 2) 0 6.1-18a 10 H
Fig 5.2-12 0' App _B Title.Pg 0 -6.1-18b- 10 l- 5.2R-1: 01 App B'(1 of 2) 0 6.1-19 .11
-5.2R-2 ' App B'(2 of~2) l: .
9 ~0 6.1-20 11 1
'5.2R-3i - * 'l -App C. Title Pg 0 6.1-21 11 App C-(1 of 7)
~
ll - 5. 2R .4 .1 l0 ' 6.~1-22 11 L 5.3 .8. App C (2:of 7) 'O. 6.1-23 11 15.3 -3 ' App _C (3 of 7) 0 6.1-23a 11 Tbl-5.3-11 9' App'C.(4;of 7)- 0- 6.1-23b 11
- 5'.3R-1 -0
- App C (5 of.7) 0' 6.1-24 .3 i5.4-1 ._1. App C'(6fof-7) -0 6.1-25 11 15.5-1 .OL App C-(7 of 7) 1 'O- 6.1-26 3-g- :5.5-2' =0 : 5.7-1 ;0 '6.1-27. 10 5.5-3 0' .5.7-2 0 6.1-27a 10 l
.5.5-4.
- , ;
- 0J 5'.8-1 6'- 6.1-27b 7 g
5.5-5 _ H 03 .5.8-2~ .
0
. ' 7" :5.5-6: 4- Tbl? 5. 8 11.
5.8R-1 '6 6.1 7' 79 -
5.9-1 0 -6.1-29 7- .
n'N l
m.
', _.O s
e
, ; i. ,
- r. j I.f" .
$REVISI'ONi10)-: NOVEMBER 1979:
.> : LOEP-7 L
- : <. 7 ,
g * *
- 4 ' "
4 )[ r .kd 2
W yL l%
% : [~ _ [? '
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
Latest Latest Latest Sheet ID Rev Sheet ID Rev Sheet ID Rev Tb1 6.1-1 10 6.2A-2-5 0 Tb1 6.2A-3-5 10 Tb1 6.1-2 10 6.2A-2-6 0 Tb1 6.2A-3-6 7 Tb1 6.1-3 0 6.2A-2-7 0 Tb1 6.2A-3-9 10 Tb1 6.1-4 0 6.2A-2-8 0 Tb1 6.2A-3-10 7 Tb1 6.1-5 0 6.2A-2-9 0 Tbl 6.2A-3-11 7 Tb1 6.1-6 0 6.2A-2-10 8 6.2A-3R-1 1 Tb1 6.1-8 10 6.2A-2-11 0 6.2A-3R-2 7 Fig 6.1-1 10 6.2A-2-12 0 6.2A-4-1 0 Fig 6.1-la 10 6.2A-2-13 0 6.2A-5-1 0 Fig 6.1-lb 10 6.2A-2-14 0 6.2A-5-2 0.
Fig 6.1-2 2 6.2A-2-15 0 6.2A-5-3 0 Fig 6.1-3 2 6.2A-2-16 0 6.2A-5-4 0 Fig 6.1-4~ 1 6.2A-2-17 0 6.2A-5-5 0 Fig 6.1-5 0 6.2A-2-18 0 6.2A-5-6 7 Fig 6.1-6 0 6.2A-2-19 0 6.2A-5-7 7 Fig 6.1-7 0 6.2A-2-20 0 6.2A-5-8 0 Fig 6.1-8 2 Tb1 6.2A-2-1 0 6.2A-5-9 0 Fig 6.1-9 0 Tb1 6.2A-2-2 0 6.2A-5-10 0 6.1R-1 1 Tb1 6.2A-2-3 1 6.2A-5-11 0 6.1R-2 1 Tb1 6.2A-2-4 1 Tb1 6.2A-5-1 0 6.1R-3 10 Tb1 6.2A-2-5 0 Fig 6.2A-5-1 0 6.2-1 10 6.2A-2R-1 1 6.2A-5R-1 0 6.2-2 10 6.2A-3-1 9 App 6.2A-5A 6.2-3 2 6.2A-3-2 9 6.2A-5A-1 0 6.2-3a 2 6.2A-3-3 0 6.2A-5A-2 0 6.2-3b 2 6.2A-3-4 0 6.2A-5A-3 0 6.2-4 2 6.2A-3-5 2 6.2A-5A-4 0 6.2-5 0 6.2A-3-Sa 2 6.2A-5A-5 0 6.2-6 0 6.2A-3-5b 2 6.2A-5A-6 0 6.2R-1 0 6.2A-3-6 0 6.2A-5A-7 0 App 6.2A 6.2A-3-7 0 6.2A-5A-8 0 6.2A Title Pg 0 6.2A-3-8 11 6.2A-5A-9 0 6.2A-i 9 6.2A-3-9 11 6.2A-5A-10 0 6.2A-ii 7 6.2A-3-10 10 6.2A-5A-11 0 6.2A-lii 9 6.2A-3-11 10 Tb1 6.2A-5A-1A 0 6,2A-iv 0 6.2A-3-12 4 Tb1 6.2A-5A-1B 0 6.2A-1-1 11 6.2A-3-13 7 Tb1 6.2A-5A-1C 0 6.2A-1-2 11 6.2A-3-14 7 Tb1 6.2A-5A-2A 0 6.2A-1-3 11 6.2A-3-15 7 Tb1 6.2A-5A-2B 0 6.2A-1-4 11 6.2A-3-16 7 Tb1 6.2A-5A-3 0 6.2A-1-5 11 6.2A-3-17 7 Tb1 6.2A-5A-4A 0 6.2A-1-6 11 6.2A-3-18 7 Tb1 6.2A-5A-4B 0 6.2A-1-7 11 6.2A-3-19 7 Tb1 6.2A-5A-5 6.2A-2-1 1 Tb1 6.2A-3-1 9 (1 of 2) 0 6.2A-2-2 0 Tb1 6.2A-3-2 10 (2 of 2) 0 6.2A-2-3 0 Tb1 6.2A-3-3 10 6.2A-5AR-1 0 6.2A-2-4 0 Tb1 6.2A-3-4 1 9
REVISION 10 - NOVEMBER 1979 LOEP-8 p
Q L_
r, . , ,
HIDLAND~1&2-ER(OLS).
1 L
~
7' xl - ~
- Latest Latest Latest.
( p! . Sheet :ID Rev Sheet ID Rev Sheet ID Rev
' 6. 3- 1 -- 0 Tb1 7.1-8 'O 10-iii- 0 6.3-2 ~0 Tb1 7.1-9 0- '10-1 0 6.3-3 0' Tb1 7.1-10 1 10R-1 0 6.3-4 0- 7.1R-1 1 10.3-1 0 6.3 'O .7.2-1 0 10.3-2 0
- 6.3-6 10 7.3-1 0 10.3-3 1 6.3-7: 0 7.3-2 1 10.3-4 1 6'.3 '5 - 7.3 1 10.3-5 0
-6.3-9 5 7.3-4 1 Tb1 10.3-1 0-6.3R-1 1 7.3-5 0 Fig 10.3-1 0
~6.3R-2' 0 , '6' 1 Fig.10.3-2 .0 6.4 11 .~ 7 . . -7 1 10.3R-1 1 Tb1 6.4-1 11 Tb1 7.3-1 0 10.9-1 0 Tb1 6.4-2 11 Tb1 7.3-2 1 10.9-2 1
.7-1 0 7. 3F.-1 1- 10.9-3 1 7-il 0 8-i 11 10.9R-1 0 7-iii 0 8-ii 11 11-i 11 7.1-1 0 8.1-1 11 11-ii 11 7.1-2 0 8.1-la 11 11-1 11 7.1-3 1 8.1-Ib 11 Tb1 11-1 11 7.1-4 0 8.1-2 11 Tb1 11-2 11 7.1-5 1 8.1 -2a 11 12-i 0
'7.1-6 1 8.1-2b 11 12-ii 0 .
'7.1 1 8.1-3 , 11 12.1-1 3
\~ 7.1-8 8.1-4 0 0 Tb1 12.1-1 l 7.1-9. 0- Tb1 8.1-1 11 (1 of 15) 10 7.1-10 0 8.1R-1 11 (2 of 15) .10 7.1-11 'O 8.2-1 11 (3 of 15) 10 7.1-12 0 8.2-2 11 (4 of 15) 10
( 7.1-13 0 8.2-3 11 (5 of.15) 10
' 1-14 0. 8.2-4 11 (6 of 15) 10 l .1 0- Tb1 8.2-1 11 (7 of 15) 10
-7.1-16. O Tb1 8.2-2 11 (8 of 15) 10 7.1-17 0~ '9-i 0 (9 of 15) 10 7.1-18 0 9-ii 2 (10 of 15) 10 7.1-19 0 9.1 0 (11 of 15) 10 7.1-20 0 9-1R-1 0 (12 of 15) 10 7.1-21 0 9.2-1 0 (13 of 15) 10
.7.1-22 0 9.2R-1 0 (14 of 15) 10 7.1-23. 0 9.3-1 0 (15 of 15) 10
-7.1-24 0 9.4 2 12.2-1 0 7.1-25 , 0 Tb1 9.4-1 2 12.3-1 0 Tb1 7.1-1_ 0 .9.4R-1 2 12.4-1 0 L Tb1 7.1-2 : 0- 9.5-1 3 12.5-1 0
'Tbl'7.1-3' 0. 9.5R-1 0 12.6-1 0 Tb1 7.1 0' 10-i 0 12.6-2 0 Tb117.1-5 0 il 0 -13.2 0
, :Tbl 7.1-6 0 13.2-2 0 L Tb1 7.1-7 0 13.2-3 0
- s 4 i'
._/ :.
CP L 1. REVISION?10. : NOVEMBER 1979 L0EP -
~
4
_ _. _ _______________._i _ - - ,
m - - - . _
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
Latest Latest Latest Sheet ID Rev Sheet ID Rev Sheet ID Rev 13.2-4 0 AEC.5-1 2 B-C Ic-5 11 13.2-5 0 AEC 3-2 2 B-C Ic-6 11 13.2-6 0 AEC 5-3 2 B-C 2-1 11 13.2-7 11 AEC 5-4 2 B-C 2-2 11 13.2-8 11 AEC 6-1 2 B-C 3-1 11 13.2-9 11 AEC'7-1 2 B-C 4-1 2 13.2-10 11 AEC 8-1 8 Tb1 4-1 2 13.2-11 11 AEC 9-1 2 B-C 5-1 2 13.2-12 11 AEC 9-2 2 B-C 6-1 2 13.3-1 9 AEC 10-1 9 B-C 7a-1 2 13.3-la 7 AEC 10-2 9 B-C 7b-1 2 13.3-1b 7 AEC 11-1 3 B-C 8-1 11 13.3-2 0 AEC 11-2 3 B-C 8-2 11 13.3-3 0 AEC 12-1 9 B-C 9a-1 10 13.3-4 0 AEC 13-1 10 B-C 9b-1 11 13.4-1 0 AEC 13-2 10 B-C 9b-2 11 13.4-2 0 AEC 13-3 10 B-C 9c-1 2 13.4-3 0 AEC 13-4 10 B-C 10-1 2 13.5-1 9 AEC 13-5 10 B-C 10a-1 3 13.5-2 0 Tb1 AEC P3-1 B-C 11-1 11 13.5-3 0 (1 of 2) 10 B-C 12-1 2 13.5-4 0 (2 of 2) 10 B-C 13-1 3 13.5-5 0 Tb1 AEC 13-2 10 B-C 14a-1 2 13.5-6 0 Tb1 AEC 13-3 B-C 14b-1 2 13.5-7 0 (1 of 2) 10 B-C 15-1 7 13.5-8 8 (2 of 2) 10 END 1-1 10 13.5-9 7 Tb1 AEC 13-4 10 END 1-2 10 13.6-1 7 Tb1 AEC 13-5 10 END 1-3 10 13.6-2 0 Tb1 AEC 13-6 END 1-4 11 13.6-3 3 (1 of 4) 10 END 1-5 10 13.6-4 10 (2 of 4) 10 END 1-6 10
'13.6-5 10 (3 of 4) 10 END 1-7 10 13.6-6 10 (4 of 4) 10 END 1-8 10 13.7-1 0 ARC 1-1 3 Tb1 END 1-1 13.7-2 0 ARC 2-1 3 (1 of 2) 4 13.8-1 11 ARC 3-1 6 (2 of 2) 4 13.9-1 2 ARC 4-1 3 END 2-1 4 13.10-1 0 ARC 5-1 3 END 2-2 4 13.10-2 0 ARC 6-1 3 END 3-1 4 Q&R i 11 ARC 7-1 3 END 4-1 4 Q&R ii 11 ARC 8-1 3 END 5-1 5 Q&R iii 11 ARC 9-1 6 END 6-1 11 Q&R iv 7 ARC 10-1 6 FPM 1-1 7 Q&R v 10 ARC 11-1 11 FPM 1-2 7 ARC 1-1 2 B-C la-1 11 FPM 1-3 7 AFC 2-1 9 B-C la-2 11 FPM 2-1 7 AEC 2 9 B-C lb-1 11 FPM 3-1 7 AEC 3-1 10 B-C Ic-1 11 HDS 1-1 2 AEC 4-1 2 B-C Ic-2 11 HDS 2-1 2 2 B-C Ic-3 .. HDS 3-1 2 B-C Ic-4 11 HDS 4-1 2 REVISION 10 - NOVEMBER 1979 L0EP-10 b e
p - - - - -
-MIDLAND'l&2-ER(0LS)l (S. ' Latest Latest Latest
()
Sheet ID Rev Sheet ID- Rev Sheet ID Rev HDS 4-2 2 PEC 6-1 9 HYD 1-1 2L PEC 7-1 2 HYD 2-1 10 PEC 8-1 2 HYD 3-1 2 PEC 9-1 2 HYD 4-1 11 RAD 1-1 '4 HYD 4-2 11 RAD 1-2 5 HYD 5-1 9 RAD 1-3 5 HYD 6-1 9 RAD 1-4 5 HYD 7-1 3 RAD 1-5 5 HYD-7-2 3 RAD 2-1 4 HYD 8-1 10 RAD 3-1 4
~HYD 8-2 10 RAD 4-1 4 HYD 9-1 10 RAD 4-2 4 '
HYD 9-2 10 RAD 5-1 4 HYD 10-1. 4 RAD 6-1 5 HYD 11-1 10 Tb1 RAD 6-1 5 HYD.12-1 3 RAD 7-1 4 Tb1 HYD'12-1 RAD 8-1 4 (1 of 3) 3 SOC 1-1 2 (2 of 3) 3 SOC 2-1 2 (3 of 3) 3 S0C 3-1 4 -
HYD 13-11 4 S0C 4-1 2 Tbl~HYD 13-1 4 SOC 5-1. 2
- (s HYD 14-1 MET 1.-1 3 S0C 6-1 3
( 2 S0C 7-1 2 MET 2-1 2 S0C 8-1 4 HET 3-1 2- SOC 9-1 3' MET'4-1 3 S0C 10-1 4 MET 5-1 2 SOC 10-2 4 MET 6b-1 2 SOC 11-1 3 MET 7 2 S0C 11-2 3 MET 8-1 2 SOC 11 3 MET 9-1 2 S0C 11-4 3 MET 10-1 2' SOC 12-1 11 MET 11-1 2 SOC 13-1 4
-MET 12-1 2 SOC 14-1 4 MET 13-1 3 SOC 14-2 4
, MET 14-1 3 S0C 15-1 3 MET 15-1 3 SOC 16-1 3 MET 16-1 3 SOC 17 3 MET 17-1 3 S0C 17-2. 3 i PEC 1 9 S0C 18-1 3 I PEC 2-1-' 4 S0C 18-2 3 ;
PEC:2-2 -
.4
, TEC 1-1 2 '
PEC.2-3 4 TEC 2-1. 7
-PEC 2-4 4 TEC 3-1: 7 Tb1 PEC 2-1 TEC 4-1. 4 (1 of ~ 2)- ~4~ TEC 5-1 3 (2 of12) 4
.PEC:3-1 .2 O(%x--^j
.PEC!4 9 PEC 75-1 .2
~
1 l
- REVISION'10 -~ NOVEMBER 1979- 'L0EP - ~
, _i
' :._ .; __ .A
4
.g
\
CHAPTER 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page No 1 PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED FACILITY Ah3 ASSOCIATED TRANSMISSION............................ 1.1-1 1.1 -SYSTEM DEMAND AND RELIABILITY...................... 1.1-1 1.1.0 Consumers Power Company Energy Conservation Program............................................ 1.1-1 2 1.1.0.1 Elimination of Sales Promotion Practices .......... 1.1-2 1.1.0.2 Promotion of Conservation of Electric Energy . . . . . . 1.1-2 1.1.0.3 Energy Conservation Studies........................ 1.1-6 1.1.0.4 Measuring the Effect of Energy Conservation........ 1.1-7 1.1.0.5 Conservation Efforts Through Rate Design .......... 1.1-7 1.1.0.6 Implications of Energy Conservation -for Consumers 1.1.1 Power Load For3 cast................................ 1.1-15 Load Characteristics .............................. 1.1-17
(}
(,,/
1.1.1.1 1.1.1.2 Load Analysis......................................
Demand Projections ................................
1.1-17 1.1-17 1.1.'1.2.1 Consumers Power Company Forecasting Policy and
- 11 1.1.1.2.2 Procedures ........................................ 1.1-17 Electric Sales Projections ........................ 1.1-21 1.1.1.2.3 Generation Requirements and Peak Load Projections........................................ 1.1-32 1.1.1.3 P owe r Ex ch ange s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1-33 1.1.2 System Capacity.................................... 1.1-33 1.1.3 Reserve Margins.................................... 1.1-35 1.1.3.1 Maintenance........................................ 1.1-36 1.1.3.2 Loss of Load Probability Methods .................. 1.1 1.1.3,3 Capacity Support .................................. 1.1-38 1.1.3.4 Reserve Responsibility ............................ '
1.1-38 1.1.4 Exte rnal Supporting Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1-39
- 1. 2 ' OTHER OBJECTIVES ..................................
3 1.2-1
- .3 CONSEQUENCES OF DELAY..............................
i 2
1.3-1 -,
j A,
(v) ~
. REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER'1980 ~1-1.
= a
G CHAPTER 1 LIST OF TABLES Table Description 1.1-1 SUMMER AND WINTER PEAK DEMAND -- 1966-1995 1.1-2 ENERGY REQUIREMENTS -- 1966-1995 2 1.1-3 MAIN SYSTEM ENERGY SALES -- 1966-1995 -- CONSUMERS P0hTR 1.1-4 REGRESSION MODELS USED FOR MAIN SYSTEM ELECTRIC SALES PROJECTIONS (BY MAJOR CUSTOMERS) -- CONSUMERS POWER 1.1-5 ACTUAL MONTHLY PEAK LOADS -- 1972 THROUGH 1979 -- CONSL71ERS P0kTR 1.1-6 FORECAST OF MONTHLY PEAK LOADS AND PERCEST DEVIATION FROM ACTUAL -- 1972 THROUGH 1979 -- CONSQiERS PnWER 11 1.1-7 ACTUAL MONTHLY ELECTRIC SALES -- 1972 THRos 3H 1979 --
CONSUMERS POWER 1.1-8 FORECAST OF MONTHLY ELECTRIC SALES AND PERCENT DEVIATION FROM ACTUAL -- 1972 THROUGH 1979 1.1-9 CAPACITY AT ANNUAL PEAK 1.1-10 GENERATING CAPABILITY AT TIME OF PEAK -- 1971 -- CONSDIERS P0hTR 2 1.1-11 HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED CAPABILITY CHANGES AND LONG-TERM TRANSACTIONS -- CONSL?fERS POWER-DETROIT EDISON 1.1-12 CAPACITY FACTORS OF UNITS PROJECTED FOR SERVICE IN 1982 --
CONSUMERS P0kTR 11 1.1-13 GENERATING UNIT AVAILABILITIES AND MAIN ~1TNANCE -- 1984 --
CONSUMERS P0hTR 2 1.1-14 MONTHLY LOAD MODEL USED IN RELIABILITY ASSESSMENTS --
CONSUMERS POWER
/
1.3-1 EFFEC'. OF MIDLAND DELAY ON RESERVES -- CONSUMERS POWER COMPANT 1.3-2 EFFECT OF MIDLAND DELAY ON RESERVES -- CONSUMERS POWER COMPANT-DETROIT EDISON s
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1-11 k
n- .
4..
e c
7 CHAPTER 1 .1 i .
LIST OF FIGURES i Fiauro Description
!, 1.1-1 MAIN SYSTEM 1978 LOAD DURATION CURVE -- CONSUMERS POWER !
11 1.1-2 IRS SUPPORTIVE LOLE VS AIRS NEGATIVE DAYS .
l 1.1-3 AIRS NEGATIVE DAYS CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY PER CENT RESERVES -!
t J
l 3,
t
{.'
t
'l 1
f 1
k 4
d/
4 4
[
REVISION'11.- SEPTEMBER 1980' '1-111 e
bl - . - $. . . . . , , . . . . . , -
..-.:- ,-...,.a . .
- . , . . - - . . , . . - , , , - - . - - , --n., -
. . __ . 7 1
--MIDLAND ~1&2'ER(OLS)
_.p ;
'( ;
1 PURPOSE OF THE FACILITY AND ASSOCIATED TRANSMISSION 2 1.1 ' SYSTEM DEMAND AND RELIABILITY In 1975, Consumers Power. Company served.22.1 billion kWh to approximately 1.2 Il lmillion' electric customers in the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. By'1984,' when Midland Units.1-and 2 are expected to be in service, Consumers Power estimates 2 that it'will' have 1.4 million. electric customers on .its system and that they .
11 will uso'30.1. billion kWh.
Consumers Power is interconnected with several utility systems within the .
State of Michigan as well as in neighboring states and- the Province of Ontario, Canada. The, operation of its system is closely coordinated with that of The Detroit Edison Company.. In addition, it exchanges generation planning data with Detroit Edison. ' Consumers. Power Detroit Edison and other systen.s from several states.are members of the East Central Area Reliability Agreement group (ECAR). The purpose of ECAR'is to further augment the reliability of
.2 Its member' systems' bulk power supply through coordination of generation and .-
transmission planning and operation.
i 1.1.0 ' Consumers Power Company Energy Conservation Program l
Consumers-Power Company has been involved in-diverse activities relating to I energy.conservat_on. These activities include both.' extensive work with customers as' well as i' nternal actions.- The Company has been and is involved in.many research activities and rate' studies. Details of these activities- ,
_ l follow.
' O o kJ-6 LREVISIONs11.~- SEP".7.MBER 1980 - 1.1-1s 1
~
,,fr.
, ~ -
'f9,
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O 1.1.0.1 Elimination of Sales Promotion Practices In October 1970, the Company discontinued all efforts related to promotion of sales of electric energy. The Lompany also discontinued the merchandising of appliances on Decembar 31, 1972.
2 1.1.0.2 Promotion of Conservation of Electric Energy The Company has strongly encouraged builders and customers to install substantial ceiling, wall and floor or slab insulation as well as storm windows and storm doors in electric-heated dws111ngs. The Michigan Public 11l Service Commission (MPSC) has determined the Company's insulatsn program for 2lresidentialgascustomerstobethemostcostefficient in the State. As of 11 l July 1,1980, over 185,000 homes have had insulation installed since the 7 l inception of the program in November 1973. In Case U-5331 dated July 31, 11l1978, the MPSC established minimum insulation standards required of new customers to qualify for electric space heating service. They include R-35 in 7 ceilings, R-11 in sidewalls, R-19 in floors above unheated areas, and R-11 in basement walls if used as living area.
The Company presently has before the MPSC an Expanded Gas Conservation Program that would provide interest free financing to eligible customers who wish to install ceiling insulation. This program, when approved, is expected to 11 significantly increase the number of dwellings insulated. Adding insulation to gas heated homes reduces the need for electric energy to operate heat system auxiliaries such as fan motors or pumps.
A Thermoscan flyover program was held in Jackson, Michigan in spring 1977.
2 This program demonstrates the relative heat loss by building coloration on an REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-2 L __
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) .
js aerial photograph. The photo was publicized in the media and displayed at the Jackson Cour.ty Fair and Company offices.to acquaint Jackson residents with their relative insulation needs.
Company personnel work with _" Community Action" agency programs on home insulation for the poor and elderly and similar energy conservation problems of thase people. The Company's Energy Management Services Department, which currently includes approximately 160 energy management consultants and-2 additional General Office specialists, has assisted customers in energy conservation practices. In June 1977, a separate section was created in the General Office Energy Management Services Department which has complete responsibility for energy conservation. Customer assistance has included
.- 5f~%
meetings with residential customers on efficient use of' appliances, in-plant visits with commercial and industrial customers, partir ipation in a State-wide and Regional Energy Conservation Expositions, and distribution of a quarterly 11 " Energy Newsletter" to a wide variety of commercial and industrial customers as well as architects and engineers'. In 1976, the Company began publishing a quarterly newsletter designed specifically for builders. It provides timely information on energy supply,-application and conservation of interest to 2 resioential homebuilders, larvi o0velopers and other related businesses such as banking and lending institutions and building material suppliers.
To assist in providing customers with information on energy conservation, the Company has developed and made available a ~ wide variety of brochures including 11 the following:
D A Home Insulation' Service Program Why Insulate?
REVISION'11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-3 4
s d . .im _a.
MIDLAND 152-ER(OLS)
O Saving Energy Is A Family Affair The Electric Heat Pump Selection and Use of Fireplaces and Woodburning Stoves ,
Solar Energy Energy Use and Buyers Guide Room Air Conditionar Energy Use and Buyers Guide Water Heaters 11 Energy Use and Buyers Guide Dishwasher Energy Use and Buyers Guide Ranges Energy Use and Buyers Guide Refrigerators & Freezers Building Energy Efficient Homes Saving Energy and Keeping Cool How To Prepare Your Home For The Coming Heating Season Since 1973 approximately 4,500,000 brochures have been distributed.
In November 1978, the Company implemented a $500,000 Residential Electric 7 Customer Information Program which includes mailing conservation information to customers along with their bills for electric service. The first of four mailings scheduled for 1979 was completed in February in which 1,150,000 copies of the booklet, "Saving Energy Is A Family Affair," were mailed. Three 11 additional mailings in 1979 covered air conditioning, preparation for the heating season and the National Energy Watch Program. Also, as a part of this program, the Company has appointed a solar energy specialist in each of its operating regions to offer advice and assistance to customers on all forms of 7 solar energy.
To further promote conservation, in 1978 the Company participated in the National Energy Watch Program which is carried out in conjunction with the
! REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-4 I
i~
i E J
4 A
~
-MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)'
.R l
Edison Electric Institute. The basic concept' of this program is to publicly l
~7 recognize energy efficient homes'in order to encourage both builders and
~
, owners'of existing homes to bring their. dwellings up to desired energy
), 11 effit.iency standards. ~As stated,'one mailing in 1979 promoted participation in this program.
In addition,=' energy conservation is promoted through newspapers, radio and television. A column islnow-offered to weekly newspapers called " Crossways" and discusses efficient use of~ energy and related issues.
4 2 Efforts to conserve energy'in Company buildings show 29.4*. savings in electric energy and 29.7*. in gas energy in the first year of that program following the
, 1973 oil. embargo. H is conservation program is a continuing activity.
In 1976, the Company implemented a program for the conversion of its incandescent streetlighting to more efficient light sources. The Company offers incentives to its streetlighting customers to convert incandescent luminaires _ to the more efficient mercury vapor and high pressure sodium types. 1 High produre -soda un units are now a standard for new installations with -
mercury vapor available on request. New installations of incandescent il streetlighting are no-longer allowed. High pressure; sodium units offer an energy savings of about 80 percent over incandescents. Mercury vapor luminaires cut energy use about-60 percent when compared to incandescents.
~
Total incandescent units at the beginning of 1977 numbered nearly 45,000. As a result of the conversion program this number has been reduced by one-half.
Total kWh sales for streetlighting peaked in 1977 at-166,633,000 kWh. In 1979IstreetligNingsalesLwere 160,828,000-kWh even though_the total number AM 'f.luminaires o on the. Company's system grew from.124,072-to 130,665'. The REVISION 117- SEPTEMBER'1980 1.1 _
'. -s U"
L m .
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) t O
Company encourages its customers to use more efficient lighting types in streetlighting applications.
As part of its conservation efforts the Company tests new products to determine their potential to help conserve energy. In 1979 and 1980 the 11 Company tested the heat puap water heater, NASA motor controller and hydrotherm pulse combustion boilers. As a result the Company recommends to its customers the replacement of electric resistance water heaters with the heat pump water heater to reduce energy requirements by up to 50%.
As stated in Section 1.1.1.2, Consumers Power has factored its energy conservation experience into its forecasts as well as further energy conservation savings which it anticipates.
1.1.0.3 Energy Conservation Studies 2 The Company was one of 12 utility ccmpanies in the nation that participated in a national heat pump study sponsored by Electric Power Research Institute and the Association of Edison Illuminating Companies. The Company had 10 customers with heat pumps extensively submetered to assess the costs and benefits of the heat pump as compared with alternative heating and air-conditioning systems. Results showed the operating costs of heat pumps in the Company test to be approximately 30*.' more efficient than comparable resistance 7 electric heating. The national study showed better results in warmer climat.es, which was expected.
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-6
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
)
.J 2 1.1.0.4 Measuring the Effect of Energy Conservation Measurements have been made on an annual basis of samples of residential space heating customers concerning their energy conservation efforts since November 1973. Electric and gas residential space heating customers continue to 11 exhibit conservation efforts since the first few months following the Arab oil embargo, but not at the same level experienced in the winter of 1973-1974.
A special study among industrial customers, ordered by the MPSC in Case U-4576, was made to determine the potential for reduced customer usage. hany had effected some conservation prior to the survey in early 1976, all of which has been reflected in the Company's Long-Range Forecast.
[)
Q,,1 2 1.1.0.5 Conservation Efforts Through Rate Design The Company in recent years has been ordered by the Commission to institute a flat-type rate for residential customers (November 1973) and for small 11 l commercial and industrial customers (January 1975). In April 1976, the MPSC g ordered inverted rates for residential customers except residential electric heat during the heating season. The effects of this rate on customer usage were studied. To measure the effect of the inverted rate design, customer usage patterns were studied following both the 1975 rate increase when a flat-2 type rate was applied before and after the rate increase, and the 1976 rate increase when the flat-type rate was succeeded by the inverted rate. After both rate increases, usage patterns declined slightly,-but the results did not indicate that the decrease following the imposition of the inverted rate was any more significaut than the decreate following the rate increase with no j
( change in rate design.
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-7
!~ . . - .
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O The inverted rate concept may influence the residential customer to reduce his 2 energy consumption level, but it probably will have little or no effect on system demand on the day of the summer system peak demand. In June 1980, the Governor signed into effect a bill which mandates the MPSC to implement a lifeline rate within one year for residential customers. While the stated 11 purpose of this bill is to " provide for an adequate amount of electricity for basic household needs at a lower cost" and to " provide an economic incentive to conserve energy resources," it remains to be seen whether these objectives will be met.
2jTime-of-dayrateshavebeenofferedforyearstolargecommercialand 11 industrial customers by disregarding off-peak demands in the determination of the on-peak billing demand. Of the approximately 1,600 customers eligible for this rate, only 11 customers have consciously shifted some load to off peak periods, accounting for a reduction of some 100,000 kW in demand, which is already reflected in system demand. Based on a survey conducted by Consumers Power in early 1976 (and discussed in Section 1.1.0.4)'of its large primary commercial and industrial customers, many of them indicated that there was little likelihood that they wculd shift load from peak load periods. With the cost of electric energy generally being less than 5*. of their total product or 2 operating cost, there is little incentive to make the changes necessary to sulft load.
Consumers Power Company's annual load factor is among the highest of utility companies in tha country. In addition, the Ludington Pumped Storage Plant provides a further improvement to the Company's load profile so that the benefits of shifting load from on peak to off peak may be substantially less REVIJION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-8
m- -
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OI.S) :
3, for Consumers Power Company compared with othar, more typical utility ,
2 companies without pumped storage facilitles.
' lll In April:1976, the NPSC. ordered time-of-day energy pricing for the energy -
purchases of the primary commercial and industrial customers. "'he Company attempted.co determine the impact of this rate on the affected customers.
While modest _ improvements occurred in load factor and percent on-peak consumption, there were so many other factors impinging on customers affected
~
by this-rate.that ascribing this improvement to the introduction of time-of-
~
2 day rates is of douotful validity. In comparing the periods before and after ,
implementation of tiime-of-day rates, it should be noted that the on-peak period covers a different number of hours and some differences in time periods during the day. In addition, econcsic conditions improved from one period to the next and the energy cost differer.tial amounted to only 0.2 cent /kWh.
(This differential was_ increased to 0.3 cent /kWh in 1978.) -
11
'In April 1977, the MPSC approved ari extensive experimental program for nessuring residential and small commercial and industrial customers' responses 2 to time-of-day. pricing proposed by the Company. This program involves approximately.210 residential customers and 265 small commercial and
'7.lindustrialcustomersandiscoveringa24-monthperiod. During this time the test customers were actually.be billed on the special time-of-day rates. The test included 'a subsample of large use farm customers and the installation and I
' ll testing of'-electric-storage heat concepts in eight residential dwellings. At 1
the' conclusion of these studies the sample customers' usage patterns were i compared with those of a control group billed on the standard rates. This has
[tO provided some : insight -into how sensitive custcmers are to altering their l REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980. l1.1-9
\
.a t
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O currsnt pattern of electric usage for the purpose of saving on their utility 2 bill. This will also allow the Company to measure the benefits, if any, that might be realized from this pricing mechanism against the costs of implementation. Such cost / benefit analyses are currently underway. This test program and the ccatrolled load experiment discussed below cost some 11 $1,200,000 to complete. The Company will be submitting evidence and testimony concerning the cost effectiveness of time-of-day rates for residential and small commercial customers in the next filed rate case as mandated in the MPSC Order in Case U-6490 issued May 2, 1980.
Incorporated in the above program is a controlled load experiment. This 2 involves an on-line experiment for controlling customer loads during peaks of system electric demand. The experiment, conducted in the Jackson area, demonstrated that water heating loads can be controlled for up to four hours without customer dissatisfaction. The payback load is approxicately twice the load reduction. Average diversified water heating loads range from 0.5 to 0.75 kW during peak hours. The use of 15 minute per hour controls for central air conditioning and space heating did not result in significant load 11 reductions due to the cyclic nature of these loads. However, modest reductions in large commercial air-conditioning loads can be achieved when outdoor temperatures exceed 76 degrees. The Company will be submitting evidence and testimony concerning the cost effectiveness of interruptible air conditioning and water heating rates for residential and small commercial customers in the next filed rate case as mandated in MPSC Order in Case U-6490 issued May 2, 1980.
O
- REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-10
p -- -
y+.
MIDIAND 1&2-ER(OLS)-
'11lThe IMPSC ordered the Company and Detroit Edison as follows (Cases U-4576 and
.?
U-4570,'respectively)i
' Residential loads shall be analyzed with respect.to price elasticity on average'for applicants'; service area. The analysis shall consider -
breakdowns for loads -of less than 500 kWh per month, for' loads of 500 to 1,000 kWh per month,' and for loads in excess'of l'000 kWh per month. In
. addition,;-ir.terstate' comparisons of residential loads at different price 2 levels shallsbe submitted.
The two' companies hired Econamic Analysts, a division of Equitable Environmental Health,.Inc from Park Ridge, Illindis as consultants.
There have been many stud'ies in the past.15 to 20 years to determine the numerical magnitude. of the elasticity coefficients. These studies have 11 l resulta'd in a viriety or short-run and long-run elasticities. There are numerous problems in applying the results of these studies to current conditions.and to the Consumers Power system. The primary problems are:
fiist,;it is questionable to use aggregate data covering many utility areas, rather than specific systems; second, that the data included and the resulting '
elasticities were measured during periods of declining energy prices and thus indicated the amount of increase in energy consumption per decrease in price,-
2 there being inadequate evidence'to establish that once tbs customer's usage pattern has been sati-'at a. higher -level,' he would decrease consumption due to -
higher! energy prices at the same rate at which ensumption was increased; third, that. elasticities have not bean developed for customers at differing levels of el'ectricity consumption;- and finally,' questions of how to measure the price variable.
I D
.The. findings of the consultantW while developing short-run price coefficients-which were-in close agreement 'for the two companies andLin the: general range
" ~
- ' REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-11.
-s.
x.
~
. l g- S g
~-
l
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O of values found in other studies, could not shcw that these price coefficients were true measures of price elasticity. Because of the declining block rate structure and little variation in price during the period under study, the consultants could not establish a measure of price elasticity.
Marginal Cost Pricing attempts to provide the customer with information 2 regarding his cost of the next unit of energy purchased. The customer cost would reflect the utility's cost of adding a new generating facility or purchasing high-cost power. One of the many problems is that utilities are governed by historical revenue constraints and once marginal cost rates are scaled back to fit this constraint, the reeulting rate really is not priced at 11lmargiaalcosts. The MPSC, in Order U-4840, stated that this method of pricing
". . .in a practical sense can accomplish little more in the way of providing correct price signals to the consumer than the current revenue requirement method."
Those advocates of marginal cost pricing anticipate that energy users faced with the higher ma ainal costs may reduce their energy consumption. Hewever, on sunmer system peak demand days, which generally occur on the hottest weekday of the summer, customers are likely to run their air-conditioners and 2 other cooling 1.oads with little regard for the price. The Company will in all probability enperience what are commonly referred to as " needle peaks" that would be essentially of the same magnitude as peaks created under conventional embedded cost ratemaking philosophy.
In December 1974, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARCC) at its annual convention passed Resolution 9 which called for the Edison Electric Institute (EEI) and the Electric Power Research Institute REVI!! ION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-12 I
L-__ _
-)
(.
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
(EPRI) to conduct a joint study "of the technology and cost of time-of-day metering ~and~ electronic methods of controlling peak-period usage of electricity and also a study of the feasibility and cost of shifting various types of usage from peak to off-peak periods."
2 The first phase of this project was funded by EPRI at approximately $1,000,000 and was directed by the Project Committee through a full-time executive director. The study representation came from investor-owned utilities, Americt Public Power Association, National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners and others.
11 V
All of the task force findings have been published and a summary report was issued in early November 1977. There were four recommendations for the future as follows, with certain members of the Project Committee exhibiting 1 disagreement in general and specific disagreement with Item d:
(a) Additional research is needed.
2 (b) Regulators and utility managers should evaluate the. cost-effectiveness of time-differentiated rates and load controls.
(c) When an evaluation shows that benefits exceed costs, load management strategies normally sheuld be implemented gradually.
.(d) . Rates should reflect marginal costs to the extent possible.
(Q
.V REVISION SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-13
MDLAND 152-ER(OLS)
O Most of the Project Committee rejected Item d on the basis that the research 2 in the report did not support the recommendation.
A second phase of the study calling for a more in-depth study of certain phases of the issues has been completed and while no additional conclusions have been drawn, many of the issues being studied were mandated by the .
National Energy Act and mors specifically PURPA (Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act). This legislation, passed in November 1978, covered every electric utility with retail sales in excess of 500 million kWh annually. It stipulated that each utility should study and/or implement certain ratemaking standards. These were:
(a) Cost of service based rates (b) Prohibition of declining block rates except wehre cost justified 11 (c) Implement time-of-day rates where cost justified (d) Implement seasonal rates where cost justified (e) Implement interruptible rate (f) Implament load management where cost effective (g) Implement a lifeline rate unless determined through an evidentiary hearing that it should not be. .
In addition to the above ratemaking standards each utility must meet certain standards related to master metering, automatic adjustment clauses, customer information termination of service and advertising. While Michigan and Consumers Power Company are already essentially in ccepliance with each of REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-14 o __
~
. .- A i
I MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) i V .
' ll these standards it will remain to ba seen what transpires as a result of the
~
.=
state ordered generic hearings dealing with'each of these standards.
Customer reaction to changes in design of rates as.well as changes in' levels.
of rates is an extremely complex subject and'cannot be simplistically
-2 resolved. Given a-residential customer's six of appliances, it is difficult to change his patterns of use unless he perceives significant benefits. An
~
annual study at Consumers Power shows the average residential nonelectric 11l heating customer is~ currently using only 1.42 percent of his effective buying
~
7Iincomeforhisannualelectricitypurchases. This ratio has varied since 1961 11l from a' low of 1.14 percent in 1968 and 1972 to a high of 1.55-percent in 1961.
This means that electricity is not a major cost item in his budget nor has it 2 increased'significantly in' relationship to his effective buying income over the past 18 years.
11 The Company's study of time-of-day rates, which has just been completed, should show the customer's propensity to voluntarily defer use of a portion of his' electric' consumption to an off peak period. However, there are many who ,
view with scepticism the ability of a customer to voluntarily defer loads such as air conditioning,' cooking, television .-lighting and water heating. That customer may defer some loads or.may reduce his level of use but either of 2- these actions may have little or no effect on his use of electricity at the time of-the.'ut111ty systom peak-demand.
1.1.0.6 ' Implications of Energy Conservation for Consumers Pcwer Load Forecast- '
1 Consumers' Power has-been involved'in many projects, which are discussed above, to-encourage energy conservation among its customers. Beginning in 1973, !
REVISION:l1'.- SEPTEMBER-1980' -1.1-15
~
d
MIDIAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O there has been evidence chat customers are responding to such programs. The effect of those efforts has been incorporated in the Company's current long-2 range forecast. Additional rate design incentives to conserve energy and reduce peak loads have also been instituted during this period, including the flat-rate concept for small commercial and industrial customers, time-of-day 11 pricing for residential space heating, large farms and large commercial and industrial customers ind, more recently, an inverted rate structure for 2 residantial customers. Significant increases in overall rate levels have also occurred during this period. Such stimuli have modified the increase in 11 consumption levels which has been reflected in the Company's forecasts.
Only through radical increases in rate levels, along with the application of radically new rate structures which dramatically changs historical price / usage relationships, are further significant changes in usage patterns likely to occur. The Michigan Public Service Commission is unlikely to permit radical price increases and its concern with the effect that radical changes in rate 2 structures may have on the economy of the State, particularly its concern that industry could be driven out of Michigan, will in all likelihood cause it to take a cautious and moderate approach toward such changes. Consequently, Consumers Power believes that consumption patterns are very unlikelv to deviate substantially from those currently projected and reflected in its ,
l forecasts for the period through the early 1980s. l l
l l
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-16
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) 1.1.1 ' Load Characteristics t
1.1.1.1 Load Analysis
.2' Historical peah load data and forecasted peak loads are listed in Table 1.1-1 for the years 1966 through 1995. Data are shown for Consumers Power alone, combined with Detroit Edison, and for ECAR. Table 1.1-2 lists historical and projected energy requirements for the same period.
11 Figure 1.1-1 shows Con sumers Power's load duration curve for the year 1978.
2lCurrentpeakdemandadenergyforecastssupporttheextensionofthisdatato 11 1983 and 1984 conditions without significant modification.
1.1.1.2 Demand Projections The projections of peak' demand and energy requireesats appearing in Tables 1.1-1 and 1.1-2 are based upon forecasted energy sales to customers. Table 1.1-3 lists historical and projected sales to ultimate customers for the period 1966 through'1995.
>1.1.1.2.1 Consumers Power Company Forecasting Policy and Procedures General The official forecasts of both future energy sa' a nd peak demand for
. Consumers-Power Company are approved and issued by -ae Energy Forecast Executive Review Committee (EFERC). The membership of the committee consists
_of the Company president as committee chairman and several other. Company
' f~h 4j . officers as committee members. Thc approved forecasts which are used in' REVISION 11'--SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-17 T +*+t "'
T + - $ $ 'T
- yN
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O budget preparation and other planning activities are updated ar.nually and on interim bases as required. The data are documented and distributed by means of a forecast data book and recorded in the minutes of the EFERC meetings.
Any Company document or study utilizing future projections of energy sales or demand should reference the forecast currently in effect or should explicitly state that the official forecast was not utilized and what assumptions were.
Long-term and short-term forecasts are prepared separately and treated independently because of their different end uses. The gas and electric forecasts are prepared and reviewed in a generally similar manner except that gas demand is currently not considered to exert any major constraints on the Company's operations. However, the long-term ferecast must examine gas demand as well as any possible supply limitations.
Short-Term Forecast Short-term forecasts for the next two years are prepared for gas sales and both electric sales and demand. The short-term forecast encompasses the upcoming budget year and the planning year beyond, and has as its starting point the current sales and demand data at the time the forecast is submitted for review. The 'early update of the short-term forecast is presented to the EFERC in August in order that the new short-term forecast can be incorporated in the detailed budget review and corporate revenue projections that follow.
The short-term forecast is divided into monthly segments and as such, includes monthly variations due to the seasonal effacts as established by the average weather trends over the last 30 years. Also included would be any cyclic variations in the business cycle as predicted by whatever short-term economic projections are being utilized. Tn addition, the short-term forecasr
' REVISION 11 - SEPTEL3ER 1980 1.1-18 l
. . _ _ _ y
' MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
. incorporates information obtained from the most recent planning projections from the Company's sejor. customers.
The' Customer Services Department has the' responsibility for the preparation of
'the short-term forecast. The System Planning Department provides the load
' factor. projections as input for converting the sales forecast data to peak demand.
Lorm-Ters Forecast-The long-term forecast currently extends 15 years into the future on an official basis for the projections of electric and gas energy sales and electric peak demand. This forecast is' extended further on an unofficial basis in order to support certain very long-range planning activities.
The long-term forecast is-constructed.by identifying the factors which determine the major trends in average, annual growth rate. These trends-may be expressed:over, intervals of 5,10, or 15 years depending on the assessment of major variations in future conditions. By employing a general trending approach, the-long-term forecast does not include yearly-fluctuation's due to business cycle effects. .In addition, since the time increment-of the long-
. term forecast'is years,~no' seasonal weather variations are included. The long-term forecast' takes 'as its . point of departure the Company's current . send-
- t. .
.out and demandLdata' at the' time the forecast is prepared and, therefore, there will be some overlap with the short-term forecast. 'Since each forecast has its own specific uses and techniques,:the separate results for the overlap period are not' expected to be identical. However,-the comparison of this.
D
' sf
_ JREVISION 11;- SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-19 s
5 m #
^C.
J '__
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O common data can be used as a rough, independent cross-check of consistency between the two forecast methodologies.
Preparation of the long-term forecast is the responsibility of the Energy Planning Department which obtains inputs and specific analyses from various n sources within and outside the Company as required. For example, projections of future system load factors are supplied by the Energy Control Department and genersi economic forecasts are provided by the Economic and Fincncial Planning Department. The long-term forecast is reviewed by the EFERC in January in order to provide a current long-term forecast for the initiation of the Company's yearly long-term planning update.
Interim Analyses Because of the year-long interval between revisions of the Company's forecasts, events will occur in the interim which have a potential impact on 2 the forecast. Necessarily, various departments within the Company will undertake analyses of these events. These analyses are not published as new forecasts but only as situations which could pctentially change the Company's forecasts. All such information is available to the members of the EFERC and to the departments having the responsibility for preparing the forecasts. If in the opinion of the EFERC or other members of the Company's top management the new developments are of a sufficient significance, a new forecast may be undertaken immediately. If not, the inforo ion from these interim analyses is retained for inclusion in the next annual forecast update.
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-20 O
. .~ -
. MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
- f 97 12 1.1.1.2.2 l Electric Sales Projections '
The' Company's current sales projections are developed in two separate departments using different though similar methodologies. Each is developed ty major class of service and is in-part the result of applying regression.
g equations to forecasted. economic and othe'r factors which have been important
, in explaining historica1' levels of customer consumption. Some differences, however, do exist in methodology and the resulting projections due to a difference in purpose. Since the short-range forecast is to be used as a 1
basis for the Company's planning of specific years, it reflects the most accurate monthly forecast;available for these years. The long-range forecast consists of annual projections which are to be used as a strategic planning tool and as such reflects the most 11,kely levels of consumption over a period
~
of several years 'as a whole.
11 Briefly, the short-range projections are developed through the use of a !
reiterative multi-equation'model which incorporates a forecast of economic -l 1
activity as well-as other. variables such as price-per kWh to the customer and weather indicators, with results from direct customer contacts. Normally this forecast is approved ~in August of each year extending out 29 months to the end-of'the; planning year.
i
~
Projections shown on Table 1.1-3 reflect the current short-range forecast'for the' current _and following years and the long range thereafter.
'Since-this report is most concerned with years beyond which the short-range
. ferecast has been developed, the remaining discussion in this section focuses D' 'on the.long-range methodology. .
l --
r
% ; REVISION 1 lic- SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-21
~ , l
-as -
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O 7 lThe EFERC has reviewed and approved a revised long-term forecast of electric energy sales and peak demand as of December 1979. This update supersedes the previous long-term forecast approved by the EFERC in December of 1978. The new forecast projects a 15-year 1979-1994 average annual compound rate of growth (AAR) of 2.75"..
11 Peak demand for the years 1980 through 1994 was calculated assuming a load factor of 68.5* and a system efficiency of 91.5*..
2lArangeofuncertaintieswasdevelopedforthenowforecast. Expressed as a percentage of the 1979 sales, the high range (having a 15*. probability of occurrence) shows a 107". increase by 1994, while the low range (also having a 11 15* probability of occurrence) exhibits a 4*. decrease from current levels over the same period. The expected value for 1994, which has a 70*. probability of occurrence, was projected to increase by 50" from the 1979 level.
7 The forecast represents a downward revision from historic growth rates. It was prepared by combining regression analysis of the past sales data with specific investigations of certain " forward looking" items which were 2 identified as likely to influence future sales. The future state of the economy was the most important determinant of future energy sales, but considerable. impact was exerted by the projected price of energy and the 7 multiple factors predicted to be the outcome of the National Energy Policy.
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1 - 2 ".
L.
. MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)-
[V ,
2]SalesForecastMethodolony lll The current ' sales forecast was.. developed utilizing a methodology which
~
combinos regression analysis with specific investigations of factors which could influence' f' uture . sales but are not present in the past data. The i
independent variables int the regression' analysis were, in large measure, I economic variables which were projected by the use of a separate economic forecast. The forecast was also characterized'by preparing a separate 2 forecast for each sales. category and, where appropriate, breaking down certain of the more important categories into more detail. Where possible, data from direct customer contact was employed. An uncertainty range for the forecast was built up by developing the uncertainties associated with the individual forecast components. This was done by means of encoding techniques which were l
used to develop subjective probabilities from the various contributors to the forecast.
Ill The starting point of the December 1979 forecast was a detailed regression
~
analysis which attempts to capture the significant causal factors from the ;
1 2 past 10-15 years of electric sales data. Many possible independent variables l and model forms were tested until the final models, as presented in Table 1.1-4; uere selected based on statistical. evaluation and inspection for 7.llogicalconsistency. The independent variables in the various models are generally comprised of economic parameters and the price of energy. The projections.o'f-the. economic parameters were obtained from a national economic 2L forecast which was, in~1arge part, based on the econometric models utilized by Data- Resources Incorporated (DRI), one of the major national economic 7/ 7 con'sultingEfirms. L The:use of national economic projections instead of local k)
REVISION 11 J- SEPTEMBER'.1980 1.1-23
..A
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O 11 data was selected for three reasons. -First, the Michigan economy, which includes the economy of Consumers Power Company's service area, is highly influenced by the automotive industry and has historically followed national 2 trends. Secondly, there is currently no long-term " bottom up" projection of the Michigan economy available. There are some generalized regional models based on adjusted national trends, but this is essentially what the regression 11 analysis achieves. Third, the quality of historic national economic data is much better than the quality and consistency of local economic data. The 2 projections for the cost of electricity and gas for use in the regression models were developed from the 15-year corporate planning analysis prepared in 11l 1979 using the Consumers Power Company planning model.
The impact of future factors or " forward-looking" items was developed from individual analyses which were directly applied as adjustments to the regression model results. Because of the over' r. . ping of many of the factors relating to the general categor'es of conservati>n and the National Energy Policy, care was taken to avoid, to the extent possible, double counting of 2 the same effect. Specific investigations or factors were developed for appliance efficiency improvements, cogeneration, industrial and commercial conservation and conversions to alternate fuels, electric vehicles and solar energy utilization.
Where possible, the fo>acast employed data directly obtained from various 11 customer samples. Foremost in this category was a major study conducted by the SRI International (SRI) in 1977 of the energy end use of the Company's 2 major industrial and commercial customers. This study resulted in an assessment by SRI of the potential in these two sales sectors for additional REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-N j
7
. ~< .
~
f['
c MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OIS)- ,
- :)
' conservation and' conversion to and'from alternate energy sources. The major
'2
'new finding-from the-SRI study in relation to electric sales is that there is '
e . .
only a modest-potential in the next 10 years for switching from gas or other 11 fossil: fuels into . electricity. An in-house update of this SRI study was conducted in:1979-and is also used in'the forecast. In addition, there were l: several 'irect.'
d interviews by Consumers Power Company personnel with our a
2 customers or other Michigan sources ht regard to various aspects of the
- - forecast. These included discussions with Dow on-their electricity usage 11 projections, General Motors'on their economic and sales forecast's-and views on i electric vehicles, DRI on their economic forecast, various sources-(GM, Ford, 2 l EPRI-and DOE)' on the ' general status of. electric vehicles, a major heating ELl equipment distributor on market projections for the heat pump, and several
- \ industrial customers on their-cogeneration potential.
r The- range ;of uncertainty ' developed as part of .the forecast utilized the technique of probability encoding. In this method the information source or knowledgeable person' is interviewed about possible' swings in the future value j 2' of. the variable under study. The result of the interview is a cumulative ~I 4-probability distribution for that variable. . With similar information for the I, majorfforecast inputs,- the- data can ba statistically combined and a h probability range established for.the dependent variable, ie, the sales forecast.
g
?2{ThA-resultsareidiscussedinthefollowingsections:
1-n.%/
LREVISION 11.- SEPTEMBER 1980 ~ 1.1 '
h$(
E
, , , x -y 4 y b
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O Residential Sales The forecast of residential sales is divided into two parts: Residential 2 space heating sales and residential domestic sales. To develop the forecast, three regression models were prepared: models for average usage in each category and a single model for residential customer gain. The independent variables include an appliance index and a measure of people per household in 11 the domestic usage model, a measure of disposable faceme in the space heating usage model, the price of electricity in both usage models, and housing stock and population in the customer model.
The two average use model's each contain a price term which is a downward force on the growth rate and, as such, represents the general conservation trend currently being experienced. Depending c,n the mathematical form of the 2 specific model, some form of implied price elasticity can be derived from 'che regression models and comparison with published data shows at least general agreement with what is defined as " shore term" eiasticity in the literature.
However, the price coefficients are derived quantities from the regression 11l analysis , not input parameters. As such they represent something other than 2 pure price elasticity effects, particularly in a regression model utilizing only a few independent variables. For example, it can reasonably be argued 11l that the price term in the residential models represents, at least in part, 2 all aspects of conservation of electricity through reduced usage, whether from patriotic, peer pressure, media influence or strictly economic motiver.
7 REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-26 O
L_
m , .,
s -
~MIDIAND 1&2-ER(OLS) y~
' 'N The results produced by'the regression.models'were modified to reflect future 2 factors not present in the'past sales data. Domestic average use was adjusted to. reflect projected improvements in appliance efficiency. This adjustment and a factor to reflect the increasing _use of the' heat pump were applied to
~
7 l the space-heating category. Finally, ' adjustments to the total residential 2- sales were made to reflect the advent. of solar heating and cooling and the electric vehicle. in the latter part of the forecast period.
11l A relatively significant downward adjustment in average usage results from the 7 l projectiotof improvements in appliance efficiency. Based on the National 2 l Energy Act, mandatory appliance efficiency. standards will be implemented and lllare.assumedtobeineffectstartinginthemid-1980s. Calculations were made based on predictions of what' the improvements in efficiency would be,
_2. projected appliance saturations, and a' calculation of the percentage penetration.each year'into the general appliance population by the new, me e efficient appliances. The resultant impact on overall average use per 11l domestic customer amounted to about 6". by the latter part of the forecast 2 l~ period.
4 In addition-to the adjustment for appliance efficiency improvements, an additional downward adjustment to reflect the increased use of the heat pump was applied to the' space-heating average use category. Based on current 2 improvements in heat pump technology and the relative improvement in the economics of the: heat pump, -vis-a-vis -other heme heating alternatives when
. . __ _ examined on a-life cycle heating cost basis, it was concluded that the heat-
<-- D:
(f pump would make_' inroads into the home heating market. .Therefore, even though REVISION 11 --SEPTESBER 1980 1.1-27
?
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O the number of electric space-heating customers was projected to increase over 2 the forecast period, the average use of electricity for space heating was decreasing based on the projected mix of heat pumps and resistance heating 4 customers.
2 l An adjustment to total residential sales to reflect the impact of solar 11 heating and cooling was made. This assessment predicted about a 7% drop in residential sales, mainly in the area of water heating, by 1994 7
2 A second adjustment to total residential sales was the potential impact of the commerciali:ation of electric vehicles. Based on a survey of current activity in this area, it was concluded that the electric vehicle is expected to increase residential electric sales by about 9% by 1994.
11 I i
The expected value for the growth in residential sales over the next 15 years is 2.5% per year in the current forecast. This is a considerable reduction 7 from pre-embargo trends in this sales sector and reflects the downward l
2lpressurefromincreasingenergycosts, improvements in applianca. efficiency, general ~ conservation in domestic usage, improvements in space-heating 11 efficiency due to the heat pump, and the impacts of solar energy and the electric vehicle.
7 O
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-28
'MIDIAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
(*p )L r
Commercial-Sales I The. approach used to_ project commercial sales was to establish a base forecast .
2 using a regression model (refer _to Table-1.1-4) and to apply analyses of the potential impact of specific " forward-looking" items to this base forecast.
The' economic: variables used in the regression model were dispos'a ble income per 11I capita, the real price of electricity and the real price of gas. Disposable 2 l income per capita was by far the most significant variable. The specific forward-looking items for.which adjustments were made were solar energy and
.11 the electric vehicle. The results of the 1977 SRI energy end use study of the Company's industrial and commercial customers and the internal 1979 update 7]wereusedtoprojectconservation. Since the regression model contained a 11 price of' electricity term, it was necessary to reconcile the SKI projections
\
of expected conservation with those inferred from the model analysis. Incre-2 mental conservation was reflected by. adjusting the expected value of the SRI probability curve downward to avoid' double counting the conservation already reflected in the model. This approach led us to-conclude that the model is adequately reflecting the expected level of future commercial conservation.
The projection of the' impact of solar energy, amounting to about a 260 million n kWh reduction by 1994,- is an ' adjustment to sthe commercial sales forecast. In addition, the electric vehicles were assumed to add about 130 million kWh to 1994 commercial-sales.
The regression _models, economic forecast and the Company's.1979 projections of 2'l. future l electric and gas : prices -result in a-growth rate in commercial sales of
- 11
- 2.8*/ year between 1979-1994. The forward-looking' items have the net effect of p~
b
~
-( -reducing this-1979.-1994 average _ annual growth rate slightly to 2.7*..
- v
, ?REVISIONI11'.- SEPTEMBER 1980 1:1-29
\
...v,- , . :, ,
.J. _ r.. . .- _ - , . , - , , , , , - , , , , -
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O 11 Industrial Sales 2 The approach used to project future industrial sales was to develop a regression model base forecast (refer to Table 1.1-4) and then to modify the base forecast for specific forward-looking items. Separate regression models 7 were developed for both GM sales and for industrial sales to other than Dow 2 and GM. Sales to Dow were forecast by direct consultation with Dow.
Industrial sales to GM accounts are projected as a function of GM auto 11l Production, motor vehicle real gross capital stock, and the price of 7 electricity.
O The regression model used to forecast industrial sales excluding GM and Dow is 2 based on GNP and the price of electricity as the independent variables. The' forecast was much more sensitive to variations in GNP than to changes in the 7 price of electricity.
2lBasedonlyontheDowcommunicationsandtheregressionmodelprojections, total industrial sales would be projected to grow at a 1979-1994 AAR of 3.2*..
11 Several forward-looking items are believed to be significant to the industrial sales forecast. These were: conservation, conversion, cogeneration and self-generation, solar energy and electric vehicles. Conservation and price 2-lelasticitywerealsoreflectedthroughtheinclusionofapriceterminthe REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-30 L..
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) f') .
V 2lregressionmodels. .Therefore, the industrial conservation estimate from the .
SRI study and the 1979 update of-the study was modified to avoid double counting. -The SRI and Consumers Power 1979 update estimates of conversions were used essentially as defined in the SRI report and the Consumers Power' construction and conversion analysis report. The electric vehicle impact was estimated to be relatively small, about.130 million kWh by 1994. The solar-impact is also relatively small, about 100 million kWh by 1994.
'11 Cogeneration and self-generation were estimated by a 1979 Consumers Power Company study and a 1979 external analysis. The expected impact of additional cogeneration and self-generation is to reduce 1994 potential industrial sales by 480 million kWh.
.f
( The expected value of 1994 sales forecast for industrial sales, combining the regression model results-with forward-looking items, translates to a 3.07. AAR.
2lOtherSales Streetlighting - The December 1979 forecast of streetlighting sales was 2ldevelopedbasedonthecurrentprogramtoconverttheexistingincandescent 7 and fluorescent luminaires to high pressure sodium. This results in declining 11 annual sales through 1991, even though the total system:luminaires are assumed ~
to. increase.
7 i
i L1 Sales-to Other Utilities.- Sales to other utilities were projected in December
(')
l T / - 11l of 1979 to grow at about .the same rate as Consumers Power Company sales i
l l
-REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-31 l
'J
l-MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) 0 11 .through 1982. Beyond 1982, an AAR of about 75*. of the Consumers Pcwer rate is 2lassumedtoreflectthepossibleconetructionofgeneratingfacilitiesby 7 groups of our wholesale customers.
2 l Interdepartmental - Interdepartmental sales are assumed to hold constant at 11l about 75 million kWh level for all years after 1979.
1.1.1.2.3 Generation Requirements and Peak Load Projections Consumers Power's peak load projections are developed from its sales forecasts. Since the sales forecasts measure energy requirements at the point of sale and energy losses take place between the generation facilities and the point of sale, the sales forecasts must be divided by an efficiency factor to determine the amount of generation necessary to meet the sales forecasts. The efficiency factor is a ratio of sales to generation calculated on the basis of historical trends, modified to reflect known or expected factors that will 2 influence efficiency. Application of the efficiency factor results in an estimatr, of ti total generation requirement in kWh necessary to meet the annual sales forecast. The expected peak load is calculated by dividing the average demand (ie, the total generation requirement divided by the hours in the year) by the estimated annual load factor for the year. The annual load factor is a ratio of. average demand to peak demand.
Annual load factors are developed from historical relationships of load factors based on summer maximum demands and winter maximum demsnds. In projecting future load factors, consideration is given to the impact of such things as energy conservation, pricing of energy, availability of gas with the REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-32
+ . , -
w MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)'
% );;
resultant'effect.on the use of electricity for heating, 1oad management.and'
~
'2. general economic conditions. -Since some of these factors tend to improve load s
factor and others tend to decrease-load factor, the load factor.for future-11l years has been projected at-a constant 68.5*,, realizing that in any given year the actual load factor can deviate from the projected' load factor in either
~
~2- direction.
Monthly Peak Loads
.11 Table 1.1-5: lists Consumers Power's actual monthly peak load data through the most r'ecent month for which data are available. Table 1.1-6 lists forecast monthly peak loads for the same period and the percentage deviation of the forecasted load from actual. Tables 1.1-7 and 1.1-8 list similar data on monthly energy sales for the same period.
Response to FPC Order 496 -
Consumers Power's response to FPC Order 496 is included as Exhibit B to the 2 Environmental Report Supplement. ,
1.1.1.3 Power Exchanges l
Consumers Power does not include power exchanges with other utilities as a y
.\
, part of.'its. load. Such exchanges are reflected in the capacity availability j figures and are: treated under Section 1.1.2.
1.1.2 System Capacity-Table 1.1-9 summarizes Consumers. Power's projected installed capability over 11[ annual peak load for:1971 through 1986. Also shown are the most recently v.-
^
1 REVISION 11 ' SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1 .
.[
,- 1
- +.n, ,- -- ,:, , , , , - , , ,
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O available data for the combined Consumers Power-Detroit Edison system and for 2 ECAR. Not included in the tables, but an important factor in capability assessment, are estimated deratings to the capabilities shown due to higher cooling medium temperatures in summer. These are listed below for 1983 and 11 1984 when the Midland units are projected to be placed in service.
2l Derating - MW 1983 1984 Consumer.; Power 225 266 11 Consumers Power-Detroit Edison 375 422 ECAR 1852 1943 Also shown in Table 1.1-f are actual and projected capacity sa?e at time of peak. Shown separately is the lease of capacity to the Commonwealth Edison Company from the Ludington Pumped Storage Plant, which is jointly owned by 2lConsumersPowerandDetroitEdison. Included in the installed capability listed is the anticipated net ownership from Consumers Power's Campbell Unit 3 11 and from Detroit Edison's Enrico Fermi Unit 2. Purchase of portions of these units is anticipated by rural electric cooperatives and municipal systems within the State of Michigan. Capacity from these units not immediately 2 l needed by the purchasing systems is expected to be sold back as unit power and is also shown. The details of the expected transactions and purchases are:
O REVISION 11 - 6EPTEMBER 1980 1.1-34
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) j'-- .
J'w)
.4 Capacity Sold - % of Plant 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 7i Cooperatives:
. Campbell 3 3.16 3.16 3.16 3.16 :3.16 3.16 11 Campbell 3 Sell Back to CP 2.62 2.33 2.04 1.74 1.45 1.16
. E Fermi 2 0 20.c0 20.00' 20.00 20.00 20.00 E Fermi Sell Back to DE O 16.29 14.46 l12.63 10.89 9.06 2l Municipals:
Campbell.3 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 4.80 n Campbell Sell Back to CP 2.92 2.70 2.35 1.77 2.82 2.72 Table 1.1-10 lis'ts the; composition of Consumers Power's generating system for-2 the initial year reported in Table 1.1-9 (1971). Table 1.1-11 lists changes in capability, unit additions, and long-term transactions in chronological nl order through -1986. Data are given for both Consumers Power and Detroit q 2 l Edison.
=Q 11l The composition .of Consumers Power's generating system for 1984, including the 2 l expected range of unit capacity factors, is shown in Table 1.1-12.
11 1.1.3 Reserve Margins Consumers Power determines installed generating capacity requirements and 2 reserve margins based on a generation planning reliability design guide which recognizes that Consumers Power, being a part of the integrated regional system, will as'a minimum plan to install equitable generating capacity such
- 11l that a loss of lead expectation (LOLE) index of 1 day /10 years is maintained.
2 Included in these assessments are consideration of peak load levels throughout the year,-generating unit maintenance, and reductions in unit capacity due to j p)-
a
. REVISION.11-- SEPTEM3ER 1980- 1.1-35 l
l
{
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O hot weather, statistical treatment of random unit outages, and mutual assistance within the integrated regional system.
1.1.3.1 Maintenance For probability assessment purposes, generating unit maintenance is assumed scheduled so as to levelize the risk of outage over tha entire year. To do 2 this, scheduled maintenance on units is preferentially grouced to the extent possible, in periods of the year when the level of loads is lower (ie, autu=n and spring).
1.1.3.2 Loss of Load Probability Methods Application of the generation planning reliability design guide requires that a loss of load probability (LOLP) method be applied to an integrated regional 11l system of companies. The actual determination of the LOLE index for the integrated system is completed with the use of computer simulations. For the purposes of this computation, the year is modeled by monthly intervals.
2 Within each month maintenance is considered constant. Based on projected generating unit maintenance requirements and peak loads for each month, a schedule of unit outages is developed. Then, for each month, a normal capacity outage distribution is determined using standard techniques. The projected weekday peak loads are convolved with the normal capacity outage 11 distribution to yield a capacity surplus or deficiency and its probability of occurrence.
This simulation is first performed for a system with a peak load equal to the eastern United Stated and Ontario Hydro (called the integrated regional system) but with a load shape and generating unit characteristics and mix REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-36
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
\g#
which is equivalent to the combined systems of the East Central Area Reliability system and Ontario Hydro. Generation capacity is then adjusted until a 1 day /10 years LOLE is obtained. This simulation indicates the aggregate generation capacity requirements of the utilities in the eastern United States and Ontario Hydro. An additional simulation is then performed in ocder to allocate the capacity requirement to each utility. The philosophy is that each utility must supply an equitable capacity contribution to the integrated regional system (IRS). Given any reliability goal for the IRS, '
11 Consumers Power Company should,.therefore, receive support (measured by negative days) from the IRS ~ members equal to the support received by an Average Integrated Regional System (AIRS). The AIRS for Consumers may be defined as one whose peak demand is equal to Consumers' peak demand and whose v load shape and generating units characteristics and mix is equivalent to the IRS. Consumers Power Company required generating capacity is then determined by adjusting Consumers Power's reserve to maintain the negative day count of an AIRS to support the established 1 day /10 years LOLE index.
2 l Consumers Power's. generating unit capacities for purposes of reliability 11l. studies are as shown in Table 1.1-9. Unit availability and maintenance 2 l projections - for the first year of service of Midland units are shown in Table 1.1-13. The monthly load model for Consumers Power for the same year is shown in Table'1.1-14 The systems in ECAR are modeled from information taken from i 1
11 reports entitled " Regional Reliability Council Coordinated Bulk Power Supply Program" ERA-411, April 1,-1980 and " Appraisal of ECAR-WIDE Installed Reserves for the Period 1979-1988", 79-GRP-57. Ontario Hydro's unit information was obtained from a report by the Resourc u Planning Department, System Planning A.-) .
REVISION 11'- SEPTEMBER.1980 1.1-37 h
~~
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O Division of OH entitled " January 1980 Forecast of Reliability Indices For Use in Corporate Planning Studies".
Results of the analysis for a AIRS load of 5150 MW appear in Figure 1.1-2.
This figure presents the relationship between the required negative days for an AIRS and the supported LOLE index for the IRS. As can be seen, for an LOLE 11 index of I day /10 years Consumers Power would be required to install capacity so that external support would be requested for no more than 46 days / year.
Figure 1.1-3 translates this negative day requirement into a capcity requirement at 23". unit unavailability. The graph indicates a reserve level of 25.5% would be necessary.
1.1.3.3 Capacity Suoport Whenever capacity is added *o a system, the amount of reserves in megawatts O
2 needed to cover outages increases. In terms of percent of peak load, however, the generation reserves required remain nearly constant. This is due to the fact that the capacity is not added until load has increased to the point 11l where it is need.d. The impact of the addition of a generating unit or units to a system is always to enhance its reliability.
With respect to its interconnections, Consumers Pcwer's policy is to provide 2 sufficient transmission capability so that, under credible contingencies, the full amount of capacity support needed from outside sources can be imported.
1.1.3.4 Reserve Responsibility ECAR has established the following objectives:
O
-REVISION 11 - SEPTEM3ER 1980 1.1-38
.~
' MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
's. /. .
~(a) : Assure an abundant supply of electric energy to meet present and future.needs.
(b) . Achieve maximum reliability and continuity of service.
(c) Accomplish the first two objectives while protecting and preserving the environment.
2 Under.th's terms of Consumers Power's coordination agreement with Detroit Edison, Consumers Power .s not obligated to maintain a particular. reserve level; instead it has agreed to provide an adequate amount of reserve to meet operating reserves. It is Consumers Power's judgment that its reliability assessment methodology adequately meets both of these requirements.
n 1.1.4 External Suoporting Studies Based on an." Appraisal of ECAR-Wide Installed Reserves for the Period 1980-1989", Report No 80-GRP-57, reserve levels will be less than desired if the average generating unit unavailability continues at the current level and if the load and capacity conditions reported in the 1980 ECAR response to DOE / ERA 11 materialize.
For the years 1983 and-1984, assuming a 30*. unavailability for existing units, ECAR's system of companies will operate at an LOLP index of approximately 1
25 day / year. It should be noted that this study assumed all units presently scheduled for operation by 1983.and 1984 are in service. Delays in the in-service dates of these units would change the LOLP index.
D:
\.); -
REVISION'11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.1-39
~
e.-_.
~
ri L, MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
TABLE 1.1-1
[]
(j SUMMER AND WINTER PEAK DEMMDS 1966-1995 (MW)
, Combined Consumers Power -
Consumers Power Detroit Edison ECAR
-Year Summer- Winter Summer Winter Summer Winter 1966 2,522 2,660 6,530- 7,099 - -
1967- 2,673 2,941 1,080 7,280 -
33,651 1968' 2,979 3,180 7,808 7,833 .36,564 35,890 1969 3,184 3,377 8,320s 8,435 37,918 39,248 1970 3,343 3,458~ 8,75 1 8,494 40,020 41,021-1971 3,604 3,711 9,573 9,010 43,825 41,985 2 1972 3,808 4,080 9,743 9,709 46,769 45,365 1973 4,394 4,105 11,265 9,630 51,932 46,140 1974 4,109 4,033 10,709 9,417 '49,648 46,529 1975 4,134 4,194 10,454 10,019 50,338 51,269 1976 4,185 4,282 '10,798 10,207 53,178 53,289 1977 4,542 4,281 11,923- 10,339 62,306 59,136 1978 4,588 4,436 11,756 10,657 62,454 63,297.
1979 4,479 4,343 11,224 10,027 62,182 59,263 1980 4,560 4,470 11,665 10,334 64,628 -66,476
[\- 1981 4,560 4,450 11,942 10,495 68,176 70,390 1982 5,220 5,080 12,753 11,237 71,752 73,264 1983 5,380 5,230 13,284 11,671 74,649 76,338 1984 5,490 5,330 '13,702 12,014 77,404 79,414 11 1985 5,640 5,460 14,176 12,380 80,246 82,534 1986 5,800 5,610 14,663 12,762 83,177 85,655 1987 5,970 5,750 15,143 13,108 86,056 88,704 1988 -6,140 5,910 15,615- 13,507 89,012 92,234 1989 6,240 5,990 16,032 13,815 92,042 95,621 1990 6,340 6,080 16,448 14,127 NA 99,500 1991 6,530 6,240 16,908 14,484 NA 103,000 1992 6,720- 6,420 17,368 -14,836 NA 107,000 1993- 6,920 6,610- 17,857 15,246 NA 110,800
-1994 7,130 6,790 18,371 15,621 NA 114,700 1995 7,330- 6,970 18,880 16,020 NA 118,700 Notes: Data prior to Summer 1980 are actual for Consumers Power and Detroit Edison.
2l ECAR was-organized in January 1967.
ECAR data are based.on~ report entitled " Regional Reliability Council Coordinated Bulk Power-Supply Program", ERA-411, April 1, 1980, Volume I.
->n l l(%.-;) 4l. 1 NA =-Not Available. I 1
~
REVISIONI 11 --SEPTEMBER 1980 j
l L. _ __ r_ '
J
- m. __
MIDLAND M2-ER(OLS)
TABLE 1.1-2 ENERGY REQUIREMLNTS 1966-1995 (GWh)
Combined Consumers Power -
Year Consumers Power Detroit Edison ECAR 1966 15,891 40,595 NA 1967 16,665 42,276 205,679 1968 18,111 46,286 223,567 1969 19,435 49,738 240,049 1970 20,095 51,253 250,863 2 1971. 21,509 54,571 263,715 1972 23,330 58,946 285,368 1973 25,212 63,047 308,819 1974 24,626 60,620 305,601 1975 24,282 59,316 308,153 1976 25,995 64,041 331,800 1977 26,830 66,066 365,526 1978 27,493 67,423 369,108 1979 27,906 67,499 379,018 1980 27,386 65,228 384,200 1981 27,338 67,042 406,400 1982 31,310 71,876 427,600 1983 32,280 74,686 444,500 1984 32,940 77,114 461,400 1985 33,860 79,516 478,900 11 1986 34~,830 82,070 496,100 1987 35,800 84,483 513,400 1988 36,860 87,286 532,000 1989 37,440 89,250 550,000 1990 38,040 91,329 NA 1991 39,170 93,774 NA 1992 40,340 96,236 NA 1993 41,550 98,761 NA 1994 42,800 101,296 NA 1995 43,980 104,030 NA Notes: Data prior to Winter 1980 are actual for Consumers Power and Detroit Edison.
ECAR data are based on report entitled " Regional Reliability Council Coordinated Bulk Power Supply Program", ERA-411, April 1, 1980, Volume I.
4 2l NA = Not Available.
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 I
l
,y1
~
. MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OIS)
[(--}~
m ,
l TABLE 1.1-3 MAIN SYSTEM ENERGY SALES 1966-1995 CONSUMERS POWER-(GWh)
Year Annual Sales 1966 14,405 1967 15,097
.1968 16,415 1969 17,667
~1970 18,154 1971 19,632 2 1972 21,133 1973 22,995
- 1974 22,507 1975 22,145 1976 23,794 1977 24,551' 1978 25,234 C-) ~ 7 1979' 25,707 1980 25,058 1981 25,014
- 1982 28,650 1983 29,540 1984 30,140 1985 30,980
~ 11 1986- 31,870 1987 32,760 1988 33,730 1989 34,260
.1990 34,810 1991 35,840.
1992 36,910
. 1993 38,020 1994 '39,160
- 1995 40,240
<.' 4 Lq REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980
!!IDL'JfD 1&2-ER(0I.S)
TABLE 1.1-4 REGRESSION MOLZ15 USED FOR ffAIN SYSTEM ELECTRIC SAIIS PROJECTIONS 4 (By Major Customers)
CCNSUfERS PokIR Residential Domestic Average Use (RDU)
RDU = 13232.3 + 3984.17
- appliance indez per household
- people per household (12.17) (32.78)
-1115.00
- In (real price of electricity)
(-8.332) n -557.498
- In (lagged real price of electricity) 8.332)
R{=.9889 DW = 1.6101 4)ResidentialSpaceHeatinaAverageUse(RSHU)
In (RSHU) = 3.81793 + 0.538710
- In (lagged RSHU) -0.231046
- In (current elec price /
(4.009) (5.065) n current disposable income per capita)
R2 = .8921 DW = 2.0469 4lResidentialcustomerCain Res Cust Gain = -14,863.6 + 800,149 change of MS adult population
(-3.713) (6.118)
+ 7868.72
- housing demand proxy (4.812) 1; + 7234.56
- change in national housing stock 4.538)
R 2(= .8442 Note: Housing Demand Proxy = 1 for 61 to DW = 2.1711 73 and 0 for 74 to 94 4lCommercialSales(COM)
COM = -66904.2 + 8095.03
- In (real disposable income per capita) + 1527.80
- In
(-21.66) (16.90) (5.390)
(real price of gas) -1565.79
- In (real price of elec) -1043.86
- In (lagged 1,^ (-6.231) (-6.231) price of elec) -521.931
- In (2 yr lagged real price of elec)
R2. ,9963 DW = 2.0999 4lIndustrialOtherSales(INDO) lINDO=-844.716+5.77816* real GNP -0.311796
- real price of electricity
(-5.920) (41.35) (-5.817)
-0.207864
- lagged real price of electricity - 0.103932
- 2-yr
(-5.817) (5.817) l' lagged real price of elec R 2 = .9926 DW = 1.8998 4lGMSales aGW Sales = 0.282854
- a GM vehicle production + 47.3045
- In (real gross capital stock -
(12.69) (6.123)
,. motor vehicle) -0.811099
- A real price of electricity
~
(3.779)
R2 = .9513 DW = 2.1657 3] Notes: Values in parentheses are T statistics.
2 Coefficient of Determination 7l R:
CW: Durbon-Watson Statistic GNP: Gross National Product 3 *: Multiplication 7' MS: Main Systes l REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1979 i
l t i L
,o '
p q MIDLAND G7R(OLS) . .
TABLE 1.1-5 ACTUAL MONTHLY PEAK LOADS 11 l ^ 1972 THROUGH 1979 (MW)
CONSUMERS POWER Honth- 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 January 4010 3903- 3889 4058 4196 4281 4436 4224'-
February 3931 3797 3848 3938 4023 4176 4329- 4140 March 3718 3746 3629 3938 3833 3918 4210 4087 April '3783 3688 3576 3697 3761 3862 4063 May- '3573 3641 3743 3737 4127 4204 4196 June 4005 3753 4016 4124 4193 4306 4292 11 -July 3908 4109 3995 4160 4542 4556- 4479 August 4394 4077 4134 4185 4133 4546 4452 Scutember 4289 3884 3683 3979 4059 4588 _ 4218 October. 3704 3965 3840 3751 3937 3945 4076 4091 November 3829 4105 4033 3951 4231 4151 4326 4161 December 4080 3949 4020 4194 4282 4268 4390 4343 REVISION I1 - SEPTEHilER 1980 - ,
Q_x ._ = - _ .
_ x HIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
TABLE 1.1-6 4 FORECAST OF HONTi!LY PEAK LOADS AND PERCENT DEVIATION FROM ACTUAL
- 10. 1972 THROUG11 1979 CONSUMERS POWER 4l 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 Honth HW % Dev HW % Dev _HW % Dev HW % Dev HW % Dev MW % Dev HW % Dev January 3890 (3.0) 3920 0.4 3980 2.3 4170 2.8 4196 0.0 4440 3.7 February 3850 (2.1) 3870 1.9 3940 2.4 e 4110 4.4 4061 0.9 4320 3.4 Harch 3700 (0.5) 3710 (1.0) c 3770 '9
.. 3990 1.3 3902 1.8 4210 7.5 April 3620 (4.3) 3650 (1.0) 3700 3.5 3880 4.9 3990 6.1 4130 6.9 May 3590 0.5 3570 (2.0) 3630 (3.0) 3850 3.0 g 3970 (3.8) .4160 (1.0) i 10 June 4110 2.6 h 4330 15.4 4140 3.1 4180 1.4 4250 1.4 h 4470 3.8 July 4130 5.7 4330 5.4 4290 7.4 f 4380 5.3 4510 (0.7) 4740 4.0 August 4130 (6.0) 4330 6.2 4290 3.8 4380 4.7 4510 9.1 4740 4.3 September 3870 (9.8) 4050 4.3 d 4080 10.8 4300 8.1 4330 6.7 4500 (1.9)
October 3620 (2.3) 3910 (1.4) 3950 2.9 3980 6.1 4180 6.2 4240 7.5 4450 9.2 November 3810 (0.5) a 4110 0.1 4140 2.7 4170 5.5 4340 2.6 4450 7.2 4670 8.0 December 3990 (2.2) 4310 9.1 4330 7.7 4360 4.0 4380 2.3 h 4540 6.4 4750 8.2
__Honth 1979 1980 Notes: Positive deviation indicates that forecast was higher than actual.
HW % Dev NW % Dev ;
Date Forecast Made: a - January 1972 January 4440 0.1 4550 7.7 b - January 1973 l February 4330 0.0 4430 7.0 k e - January 1974 March 4210 0.0 4270 4.5 d - May 1974 April 4110 1.2 e - December 1974 May 4260 1.5 f - March 1975 11 June 4550 6.0 j g - November 1975 July 4740 5.8 h - September 1976 August 4740 6.5 i - August 1977 September 4390 4.1 j - December 1978 October 4330 5.8 k - August 1979 November 4550 9.3 December 4630 6.6 R 10N 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 0 0
4
' MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
. f)
'- TABLE 1.1-7 ACTUAL MONTHLY ELECTRIC SALES (*}
11l 1972 THROUGH 1979 CONSUMERS POWER (GWh)
Month 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 January. -1891 1885 1886 1971 2099 2122 2245 2141 February 1970 1884 1899 2053 2141 2173 2296 2127 i
March 1931 1841 1781 .1899 1998 205o 2207 2103 April 1859 1819 1841 1881 1939 1191 2112 May 1821 1782 1658 1905 1886 1895 2041 11 June 1849' 1801 1774 1886 2016 2033 2104 July 1920 1859 1867 1970 2061 2061 2115 August 1879 1952 1914 1904 2046 2082 2093.
~
September 2025 1932 1905 2021 2016 2189 2119-Octoter .1774 ' 1900 1895 1800 1916 1999 2095 2039 November '1907 1996 1910 1888 2127 2143 2194 2154 December 1935 1954 1948 1959 2189 2227 2314 2182 t
) 3dl f" Sales exclude adjustment for unbilled sales.
REVISION 11'- SEPTE.1BER 1980
. . . _ _ . ? .
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(Oili)
TABLE 1.1-8 FORECAST OF HONTilLY ELECTRIC SALES AND PERCENT DEVIATION FROM ACTUAL 1972 TIIROUGli 1979 CONSUMERS POWER 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 Honth GWh % Dev GWh % Dev GWh % Dev GWh %'Dev CWh % Dev GWh % Dev CWh % Dev GWh % Dev GWh % Dev January 1880 (0.6) 2001 6.2 1964 4.1 1963 (0.4) 2044 (2.6) 2105 (0.8) 2175 ~(3.1) 2232 4.3 February 1959 (0.6) 2082 10.5 2042 7.5 2000 (2.6) 2116 (1.2 ) 2186 0.6 2210 (3.8) 2284 7.4 March 1883 (2.5) 2018 9.6 1968 10.5 1930 1.6 2020 1.1 2120 1.6 2130 (3.5) 2198 4.5 April 1868 0.5 1985 9.1 1931 6.4 1916 1.9 2003 3.3 2107 5.8 2094 (0.8)'
n May 1797 (1.3) 1925 8.0 1888 13.9 1860 (2.4) 1899 0.7 2003 5.7 2039 (0.1) .
June 1836 (0.7) 1956 8.6 7.6 1957 (2.9) 2080 1909 1889 0.2 2.3 2081 (1.1)
July- 1817 (5.4) 1995 7.3 1933 3.5 1937 (1.7) 2003 (2.8) 2105 2.1 2141 1.2 August 1887 0.4 2036 4.3 1970 2.9 1926 1.2 1976 (3.4) 2082 0.0 2122 1.4 September 1922 (5.1) 204S 6.0 2027 6.4 1992 (1.4) 2051 1.8 2223 1.5 2190 3.3 October 1797 1.3 1906 0.3 2057 8.6 2022 12.4 1959 2.3 1997 (0.1) 2083 (0.6) 2104 3.2 November 1825 (4.3) 1951 (2.3) 2106 10.3 2104 11.4 2066 (2.9) 2093 (2.3) 2167 (1.2) 2237 3.9 December 1880 (2.9) 2003 2.5 2142 10.0 2123 8.3 2077 (5.1) 2165 (2.8) 2252 (2.7) 2301 5.4 O Notes: Positive deviation indicates that forecast was higher than actual. .
Monthly gigawatthour forecasts are made in Augast of the preceding year.
{-
REVISION SEPTEMBER 1980
u MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) 1 TABLE 1.1-9 CAPABILITY AT ANNUAL PEAK (Seasonal Deratings Not Included)
(HW)
Consumers Power Consumers Power-Detroit Edison' ECAR Net Net . Net ' Net-
- Installed. Ludington Purchases _Capa-Installed _ Ludington Purchases capa- _ Installed Inter- Capa-
- Year: Capability' Lease '(Sales) bility Capability Lease -(Sales) bility. Capability change _bility;
~1971' 3,828 -
766 4.594 10,617 -
185 =10,802 ~ 51,359- 148 51,507-1972.' 4,153- --
481 .4,634 11,166 --_ 764 11,930 -57,138 .(653) 56,485'
. 1973 5,230 -(255) (71) .4,904 14,294 .0) 1,069 15,063 63,776 (154) 63,622-1974" ~5,364 - :(76) 60 .5,348' 14,711 so) 312 14,873 67,753 624 68,377-5,742'
' 2 l '1975 ' (306). '(28) 5,408 14,817 .50) .1,207 15,574' ;74,188 (1,537) 72,651' '
1976 5,742 '(318) 20 5,444 14,940 1(624) 520 14,836- .75,713 :(1,380) 74,333 1 1977 5,721 .- (318) .270 5,673 14,483- (624) ~620 14,479- 79,326 (1,775)' 77,551.
1978 6,488 (318) 20 6,190- .15,540 (624) 620 15,536 86,012 (1,183) 84,829-1979- ,6,240 (318) 220' 6,142 15,384 (624) 420 15,180 90,328 (197) 90,131:
1980 . 6,146 (318) 245 6,073- 14,649 (624) 720 14,745 92,679 (105) 92,574 1981 6,894 (318) 64 6,640 16,429 (624) 64 15,899 ~95,043 (276) 94,767- ,
1982 6,894 (318) 60 6,636 17,303 (624) 238 16,917 99,316 (278) . '99,038 11 1983 7,101 (318) 55 6,838 17,510_ (624) 213 17,099 102,309 -(39) 102,270 1984 8,430 (159)- 48 :8,319 h19,503 (312) 186 19,377.' 108,181 (48) - 108,133' 1985 7,932 (159) 54 7,827 ' 19,669 (312) 173 19,530 111,729 (33) '111,696' 1986 ~ 7,932 (159) 51 7,824 19,669 (312) 150 19,507 115,415 (339) . 115,076 i
2l'(a) Consumers.Powerhasbeenwinterpeakinggenerally,butexperiencedsummerpeaksin1973and1974. Data'
'for 1978-1984 are for summer critical load season.
'll
'(b)_ECAR data is based on report entitled regional reliability council coordinated bulk supply Program, ERA-411, April 1, 1980, Volume I.
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 ,
MIDLAND I&2-ER(OLS)
B TABLE 1,1-10 1 of 2 GENERATING CAPABILITY AT TIME OF PEAK-1971 CONSUMERS P0bIR Unit MW Type Function Campbell 1 275 Coal-Steam Base Load Campbell 2 372 Coal-Steam Base Load Cobb 1 68 Coal-Steam Base Load Cobb 2 68 Coal-Steam Base Load Cobb 3 68 Coal-Steam Base Load Cobb 4 162 Coal-Steam Base Lead Cobb 5, 165 Coal-Steam Base Load Elm Street 32 Coal-Steam Intermediate Kalamazoo 23 Coal-Steam Intermediate Karn 1 275 Coal-Steam Base Load Karn 2 275 Coal Steam Dase Load 2 Morrow 1 41 Oil-Steam Intermediate Morrow 2 41 Oil-Steam Intermediate Morrow 3 60 Oil-Steam Intermediate Morrow 4 68 qil-Eteam Intermediate Saginaw River 3 Coal-Steam Intermediate Saginaw River 4 34)(a)
- 46) Coal-Ste u Intermediate Saginaw River 5 41) Coal-Steam Intermedi.ste Weadock 1 42) Oil-Steam Intermediate Weadock 2 42) Oil-Steam Intermediate Weadock 3 Oil-Steam Intermediate Weadock 4 62)(b)
- 62) Oil-Steam Intermediate Weadock 5 72) Oil-Steam Intermediate Weadock 6 72) Oil-Steam Intermediate Weadock 7 162 Coal-Steam Base Load Weadock 8 165 Coal-Steam Base Load Wealthy Street 23 Coal-Steam Intermediate khiting 1 106 Coal-Steam Base Load khiting 2 106 Coal-Steam Base Load khiting 3 133 Coal-Steam Base Load O
REVISION 2 - JUNE 1978
r
./ss. . l TABLE 1.1-10 2 of 2
- Unit' MW Type Functior Big: Rock 71 Nuclear Base Load-2 Hydro 134(c) Run of River Hydro Inte rmediate Diesels and Peakers $23(d) Internal Combustics
& Combustion Turbine- Peaking TOTAL 3828 Notes: (a) Saginaw River 3-5 were boiler limited at 80 MW.
(b) Weadock 1-6 were boiler limited at 332 MW.
(c) 35 hydro units ranging from 0.4 MW to 10.8 MW.
(d) 20 combustion turbines ranging-from 20 MW to 44 MW plus one diesel of 1 MW.
O .
S g 5
- I a
a -
REVISION 2 -! JUNE 1978
. . . ]
( -
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
TABLE 1.1-11 1 of 5 HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED CAPABILITY CHANGES AND LONG-TERM TRANSACTIONS CONSUMERS POWER - DETROIT EDISON Year Date Item MW Change 1971 As of Total Installed Capability (1972 ECAR 10,866 Dec 31 Respcase (dated 4/78) to FPC Docket R-362, Order 383-2)
CP Purchase: Dow Chemical Co-Ludington 4 CP Purchase: Wolverine Power Coro 11 D2 Purchase: Ford Motor Co 45 Ontario Hydro Diversity (200) 1972 Feb 1 Saginaw River Plant Retired (CP-Coal) (80)
Feb 13 OH Diversity Ends 200 Mar 7 Palisades Initial Rating (CP-Nuclear) 80 Apr 1 Conners Creek Plant (12)
Apr 7 Palisades Uprate 315 May 1 DECO System Rerate (3) 2 May 29 OH Diversity Begins 200 Sept 17 OH Diversity Ends (200)
Oct 30 OH Diversity Begins (300)
Nov 1 Palisades Uprate 10 Dec 16 Palisades Uprate 93 Dec 22 Palisades Uprate 87 Dec 31 Allegan Diesel Retired (CP) (1)
Dec 31 Kalamazoo Retired (CP-Coal) (23)
Dec 31 Wealthy St Retired (CP-Coal) (23)
Dec 31 Conners Creek Plant (17)
Dec 31 Marysville Plant (134) 1973 Jan 18 Ludington 1 (CP/DE) 325 Jan 19 Monroe 2 770 Feb 6 Trenton Channel Retirement (47)
Feb 18 OH Diversity Ends 300 Feb 26 Trenton Channel Retirement (27)
Mar 19 Ludington 2 (CP/DE) 325 Mar 31 Palisades Uprate (CP-Nuclear) 70 Apr 5 Monroe 3 470 Apr 7 Palisades Uprate (CP) 39 Apr 13 Palisades Uprate (CP) 6 May 1 Ludington 3 (CP/DE) 325 May 28 OH Diversity Begins 100 June 1 Dow Ludington 5 June 11 Ludington 4 (CP/DE) 300 0
REVISION 11. - SEPTEMBER 1980 l
11l TABLE 1.1 2 of 5
'l J G
Year Date ,
Item MW Change 1973 June 18 Ludington 4 Uprate (CP/DE) 25 July.-3 Monroe 3 Uprate 80 July 5 Monroe 3 Uprate 70 July 14 Monroe 3 Uprate
~
80 Aug. 7 Ludington 5 (CP/DE) 325 Aug 7 Lease of 1/3 of Ludington Capability to CE Begins (541)
Aug 31 Elm St Plant (CP-Coal) (32)
Sept 16 OH Diversity Ends (100)
Sept 30 Conners Creek Plant (66)
Sept 30 Trenton Channel' Plant' (142)
Oct 1 Sale to TECo Begins (200)
Oct 1 Ludington 6 (CP/DE) 325 Oct 1 Lease of 1/3 of Additional Ludington Capability to CE (108)
Nov 1 DECO-System Rerate (372) 1974 May 1. Deco System Rerate, (46)
May 8 Monroe 4 750 Oct 1 Palisades-Cooling Tower Rerate (CP) (14)
Oct '1' Trenton Channel 2 & 4 Retired (108)
(~'T Oct 1 Trenton Channel 7 & 8 Rerated (44)
\_) 2 Oct 6 Sale to TEco Terminated 200 Nov. 1 Deco System Rerate. 47 Nov 1 DE Purchase From Ford Motor Co No Longer Counted (45) 1975 Jan 26 .Karn 3 Initial Rating (CP-Oil) 450 May 1 CPCo System Rerate (107)
May. 1 DECO System Rerate 22 May 1 Karn 3 Derate (CP) (50)
July 1 Marysville Plant Derate (44)
July 16 Kart 3 Uprate (CP) 100' Aug- 1 Deco System Rerate (146)
Oct -20 Wyandotte South Returned to Customer (15)
Nov 1 -Delray Plant Rerate 30 1976 'Jan 1 Purchase of Gavin Unit Power Begins'(CP) 250' Mar. 31- Purchase of Gavin Unit Power Terminated (CP) (250)
'Apr 1 -Purchase of Gavin Unit Power Begins (CP/DE) 500 May 1 Deco System Rerate .
112 Sept 30_ Purchase of Gavin Unit Power Terminated (CP/DE) (500)
Nov. 1.- DECO System Rerate 73 1977 'Jan 1 Big Rock'Derate.(CP) (10)
(h Jan' 1 Palisades (CP) (11)
(_,/J LJan; I River Rouge & St Clair Rerate (DE) (434)
-Mar '1. Trenton Channel Rerate (DE)' 5 REVISION 11:- SEPTEM3ER 1930
_' J L' i
TABLE 1.1-11 3 of 5 yy Year Date Item MW Change 1977 May 1 Conners Creek & Delray Rerate (DE) (80)
Sept 6 Wyandotte North Returned to Customer (DE) (23)
Sept 30 Karn 4 (CP-Oil) 620 Nov 1 DE System Rerate 312 Dec 1 Palisades Uprate (CP) 55 Dec 1 Morrow Uprete (CP) 10 1978 Jan 1 Karn 4 Derate (CP) (120)
Feb' 1 Campbell 1 Derate (CP) (4)
Apr 1 Karn 1 Derate (CP) (3)
Apr 1 Karn 2 Derate (CP) (3)
Apr 1-Sept 30 Unit Pwr (DE) 200 Apr 1-Oct 31 Unit Pwr (DE) 200 May 1 Karn 3 Uprate (CP) 100 May 1 Karn 4 Uprate (CP) 100 May 1 Palisades Uprate (CP) 10 May 1 Big Rock Uprate (CP) 2 May 12 - Short Term (DE) 200 11 Sept 17 Nov 1 Derate St Clair 5-7 (DE) (155) 1979 Jan 1 Campbell 2 Derate (CP) (20)
Jan 1 Fermi 1 Economy Reserve (DE) (161) 7 Jan 1 Delray LP Economy Reserve (DE) (151)
Apr 1 Morrow 1-4 Economy Reserve (CP) (76)
Apr 1 Weadock 1-6 Economy Reserve (CP) (131) g Apr 1 Whiting 1 (CP) (21)
May 1 Trenton Ch 9 (DE) (40)
May 21- Short Term (DE) 200 Sept 16 10 June 4- Short Term (CP) 200 Oct 28 July 5 Greenwood 1 (DE) 780 Oct 1 CP System Rerate (107)
Nov 1 Greenwood 1 Uprate (EE) 50 Dec 1 Greenwood 1 Uprate (DE) 75 1980 Jan 1 Greenwoo'd 1 Uprate (DE) 35 Jan 1 Karn 4 Uprate (CP) 13 11 Jan 1 Conners Creek LP Economy Reserve (DE) (175)
Feb. 1 River Rouge 1 Economy Reserve (DE) (206)
Feb 1 St Clair 5 Economy Reserve (DE) (250)
Apr 1 Delay 16 Economy Reserve (DE) (69)
May 1 DE System Rerate (101)
May 1 Short Term (DE) 200 Oct 31 May 5- Short Term (DE) 100 Aug 31 May 5- Limited Term (CP) 50 REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 L
11 TABLE 1.1-11 .4 of 5
. .t Year- 'Date Ites MW Change 1980, Sept -4
'May 5~ Short Tera (CP) 175 Sept 14 May. 5- Short Term-(DE) 175 Sept:14 . _
Oct Campbell (CP-Coal) 791 Oct Sale of Campbell:3: (63)
Oct . Buy Back of Excess Campbell-3 47 1981~ Jan' l' Campbell 2 Uprate (CP) 20
'Jan 1 Greenwood 1 Uprate (DE) 20 Jan 1 Buy Back Campbell 3 (3)
Changed.to 44 MW Jan 1 DE Units Returned From Economy Reverse 1,012 1982 Jan Buy'Back~ Campbell'3 (4)
Changed to 40 MW Mar . Fermi 2-(DE) 1,093 Mar Sale of Fermi 2 (219)
Mar -Buy Back of Excess Fermi 2 178 1983 Jan Morrow 1-2 and Weadock.1-3 207 L 7 Returned from Economy Reserve
. Jan Buy Back Campbell 3 (5)
Changed to 35 MW
{
- 11 Jan Buy Back Fermi 2- (20)
Changed to 158 MW
.Aug. 7, Lease of 1/6 'of Lydington Capability to 312 CE Ends Dec -Midland 2-(CP) 807
-1984 Jan Buy Back Campbell 3 (7)
Changed to 28 MW Jan- Buy.Back Fermi.2 (20)
Changed to 138 MW Mar Belle River l'.(DE) 664 July Midland 1 (CP) 522 1985 -Jan Buy Back Campbell 3 6
' Changed to 34 hW
.Jan Buy Back Fermi 2. (19)
-Changed to.119 MW Jan. Moctow 1-4'and Weadock 1-6 (510)
Placed on Economy Reserve Mar . Belle River 2.(DE) -664
! l~ , ~ June Wood Demo-(CP) 12 bDh
%l '
E' REVISION 11 - SEPTI.MBER' 1980 4: .
a .s : _ - .-
+
11 TABLE 1.1-11 5 of 5 Year Date Item W Change 1986 Jan Buy Back Campbell 3 (3)
Changed to 31 W 11 Jan Buy Back Fermi 2 (20)
Changed to 99 W O
Consumers Power owns 51% of the Ludington Pumped Storage Plant and Detroit 11 Edison owns 49%.
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980
__ = - --
' MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)~
. TABLE 1.1 CAPACITY FACTORS OF UNITS 11l . PROJECTED FOR SERVICE IN 1984 2l' . CONSUMERS POWER
. . Range of Unit MW _
Type- Function Capacity Factor ~ '
-Campbell 1 .253 Coal-Steam Base Load 65-80 Campbell 2(,y 349 Coal-Steam Base Load 65-80.
Campbell ~3 728. Coal-Steam Base Load 65-75 Cobb 1-3 180 Coal-Steam Base Load 50-65
-Cobb 4 151 Coal-Steam Base Load 65-80
.Cobb 5 152 Coal-Steam Base Load 65-80 Karn 1 255 Coal-Steam Base Load 65-80 11 Karn 2 257 Coal-Steam Base Load 65-80 Karn 3 638 Oil-Steam Intermediate 5-30 Karn 4- 613 Oil-Steam. Intermediate 5-30 Midland 1(a) 522 Nuclear Base Lead 60-75 Midland 2 (a) 807 Nuclear Base. Load 60-75 Morrow 1-4 190 (b) Oil-Steam Intermeditte 5-30 Palisades 740~ Nuclear Base Load 60-75 2l Weadock' 1-6 320 (b) Oil-Steam- Intermediate 20-40 Weadock 7 155' Coal-Steas; Base Load 65-80 Weadock 8- 155 Coal-Steam Base Load 65-80 Whiting 1 95 Coal-Steam Base Load 65-80 Whiting 2 95- Coal-Steam Base Load 65-80 11 Whiting 3 120 Coal-Steam Base Load 65-80 B'ig Rock 63 Nuclear- Base: Load- 60-75 Hydro' 134 (c) Run of River Hydro . Intermediate 25-35
.Ludington 1-6 955 (d) p 3 eor,g,
. Hydro Peaking 15-20 Peakere '504(*) Jet or Comb Turbine- Peaking- 5-20 (a) Units not existing in 1976 b' ut projected for operation.by 1984.
'(b) . Boiler. limitation.
(c) 35.' units _ ranging fros.0.4 MW to 10.8 MW.
(d) 6 units of 312 MW each. Consumers Power Company-share 51"..
-(e) 20 turbines ranging from 19 MW to 42 MW.~
j]
.Q -
\
, REVISION _11 - SEPTEMBER-1980
=
' 1 Lif ..
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
TABLE 1.1-13 GENERATING UNIT AVAILABILITIES AND MAINTENANCE 11l 1984 CONSUMERS POWER Periodic Availability Maintenance Unit (s) % Weeks Campbell 1 68.0 10 Campbell 2 76.8 3 Campbell 3 79.4 4 Cobb 1-3 83.2 4 Cobb 4 83.4 3 Cobb 5 85.1 3 Karn 1 74.0 4 Karn 2 79.0 3 Karn 3 76.2 4 Karn 4 74.3 4 11 Morrow 1-4 84.3 3 Weadock 1-6 78.0 4 Weadock 7 76.8 3 Weadock 8 77.6 3 Whiting 1 79.7 6 Whit.ica 2 90.1 2 Whiting 3 86.4 2 Big Rock 84.9 6 Palisades 62.2 9 Midland 1 34.8 2 Midland 2 54.0 9 4l Hydro 95.5 1 Comb Turbines 81.0 3 10 Ludington Pumped Storage 94.0 2 O
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980
r
-J i
) 1- i 9
a J 2 A
m
.2
]
l
{l . 4 . .
s : s 2 : =
2 :
. .I .a .S .s .3 gl tass -
i i. !.Ii.i.!!.!i- a e<<--n, . . . a. .
c:==a q .l g .! !. .I .! .a. .a..i s .I .I aI I
. i '
c)c=a==
7 .
s I. a..e
.. . s s I. a....- i s . 1 i. s.
0cm
..s..n.
= -
. s s..a s..s s I 1 .s .s =
@ss yli.iillil.I!!.!
g . . .... ...
(EEER) q.Ii1!!!!Ii!..l.!
1a 2
.s . ..I.
I ass
$s=s.I; a
i I
1e 1
J[]l[.f!l.f...
n.a.... 22}
i s !.
a 1.3]
I 1
. qii.iii.!!ii.i!I
) I=!
p y' E
I st 2 i
--.i.I.iI.
!I .
..i.3 .
I-.
.3i. .I 35 a p l]i
. .sa:.s. .s I a.: 11.i:
.....a.. agg 8 = -
.I2ssI:
. . . . .a =ceaass a. a :...sa ...
II I.
i.i.2i f
1iiII.4
- ..I.,
3i
. . . .s .I .S.!i,.--. . . .i 2.. 5 se : -
a s .i .ss ..i .:a. .I:.I.:..e a
+
a==~
=gg 2 . .. I....!.a1.. . a .a :.ai ..
e:
..aa.I::.3eI:
a .: :
. . aa.
!.e . I...E. 2. .I. .2* s:. s..* I$ .i i .
.e . . .
Ji l.i. . i!.!I--..-- .4 I 2 3 I .i .!
3
+
.I.eeIga==I1.=I-
.s . :.. 3s.:
- ]
e 2
dIIi..iii1.1IIi.i-
.dv.j~,j -
~ '- ' :isliJ j
- JalgyE,1. 2. 5. i. !. I. ;I i, !. i. 2.-3
'k b $ $ $: $3 $$5
- T?I1TT i
.c l
_ . - - 4 - . ~ . .
- m .w.
O -
100 90 k_
N O
o 70 N
-\ \
w
< 60 'N n'
50 N
- 40 30
' 20 10 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 PER CENT OF TIME l
FIGURE l'.1-1 i MAIN SYSTEM 1978 LOAD DURATION CURVE C1 CONSUMERS POWER G/ ..
MIDLAND PLANT UNITS 1& 2 CONSUMERS PCWER COMPANY j l
REVISION 11 SEPTEMBER 1980 1 l
7 100 8
6 l l 4
[
10
/f I
6 2
D e
< 2 8
"I o
l' 8
$6 G
c 4 O
I o 2 e
m e
~
t
.I 8
6 4
AIRS LOAD LEVEL 5150mw .
2
. 01_ , ,,, , , ,
NEGATlVE DAYS AIRS (DAYS /YR)
FIGURE I.1-2 IRS SUPPORTIVE LOLE VS AIRS NEGATIVE DAYS MIDLAND PLANT UNITS la 2 CONSUMERS PCWER COMPANY REVISION ll SEPTEMBER 1980
s iju
.-(n l
\ !
8 \
k g 6
\ -
l l y< 5 +
!2 g
i <
jO !
m E 3 m
O i m
2 2: t w .
0 W .
z l
10 10 20 30 40 50 60 CPCo. CAPACITY REQUIREMENTS
(% ANNUAL PEAK LOAD) 1 f
FIGURE 1.1-3 ps AIRS NEGATIVE DAYS
[ () CPCo. PER CENT RESERVES MIDLAND PLANT UNITS 1& 2
.(BASEDONPROJECTEDCONDITIONS ccNsuuens PCWER COMPANY
.WITH23%UNITUNAVAILABILITY)
REVISION ll SEPTEMBER 1980
~. .. .
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
()
l 1.3 CONSEQUENCES OF DELAY 2l Yhe effect of a , delay in the in-service dates of the Midland Plant Units 1 and 4 2 would have adverse consequences on the reliability of the Consumers Power system as well as the groups of which it is a member. Assuming a one , two-2 or three-year delay in the commercialJoperation dates. of the Midland Plant results in the following reserve percentages .for the Consumers Power system:
l .1-Year 2-Year 3-Year 41 Year No Delay Delay Delay Delay 1984 46.7 23.2 23.2 23.2 1] 1985 34.1 34.1 20.3 20.3 1986 30.3 30.3 30.3 16.9 2l Similar data for the Consumers Power-Detroit Edison system are:
1-Year 2-Year 3-Year 4 Year No Delay Delay Delay Delay
'1984 38.3 28.9 28.9 28.9 11 1985 34.8 34.8 29.3 .'9.3 1986 30.2 30.2 30.2 24.9 2l Tables 1.3-1 and 1.3-2 detail the development of the above data.
11 In the 1984 through 1986 period considered, ECAR's indicated reserves (including interruptible load) and the estimated effect of the above delays on those reserves are:
c
~
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.3-1
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O 1-Year 2-Year 3-Year Year No Delay Delay Delay Delay 11 1984 33.4 31.8 31.8 31.8 1985 35.1 35.1 34.2 34.2 1986 34.7 34.7 34.7 33.8 2l Based on an " Appraisal of ECAR-wide Installed Reserves for the Period 1980-11 1989" Report #80-GRP-57, the delay of the Midland units would worsen an 4lalready"lessthandesired" situation. This report projects that additional 11l capacity of 7,000 MW or more, above that already projected, would be required by the early 1980s and thereafter to supply the projected load requirements in a reliable manner.
O O
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 1.3-2
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
TABLE 1.3-1 EFFECT OF MIDLAND DELAY ON RESERVES ("I CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY (Summer; in MW) 11l As Delay Delay (b) Delay (c)
Year Scheduled 1 Year 2 Years 3 Years
-10 1984 Cap 8025. .6737 6737 6737 Purch 28- 28 28 28 Net Cap 8053 6765 6765 6765 Load 5490 5490 5490 5490 Res 2563 2563 2563 2563
% Res 46.7 23.2 23.2 23.2 1983 Cap 7527 7527 6749 6749 Purch '34 34 34 34 11 Net Cap 7561 7561 6783 6783 Load 5640 5640 5640 5640 0 .Res
% Res 1921 34.1 1921 34.1 1143 20.3 1143 20.3 1984 Cap 7527 7527 7527 6749 Purch 31 31 31 .31 Net Cap 7558 7558 7558 6780 Load 5800 5800 5800 5800 Res 1758 1758 1758 980
% Res 30.3 30.3 30.3 16.9 4l(a)' Assumes 1.5x10 6 lb/h steam flow to The Dow Chemical company.
(b) Economy Reserve Weadock 1-6 and Morrow 1-4 delayed until December 1985.
'll (c) Economy Reserve Weadock 1-6 -and Morrow 1-4 delayed until December 1986.
J w,-
'; REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 :
6- .
.y G L? t _ , _
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
TABLE 1.3-2 EFFECT OF MIDLAND DELAY ON RESERVES
- CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY-DETROIT EDISON (Summer; in MW) 111 As Delay Delay (b) Delay 10l Year Scheduled 1 Year ,2 Years 3 Years 1984 Cap 18790 17502 17502 17502 Purch 166 166 166 166 Net Cap 18956 17668 17668 17668 Load 13702 13702 13702 13702 Res 5254 3966 .3966 3966
% Res 38.3 28.9 28.9 28.9 1985 Cap 18956 18956 18178 18178 Purch 153 153 153 153 Net Cap 19109 19109 18331 18331 11 Load 14176 14176 14176 14176 Res 4933 4933 4155 4155
% Res 34.8 34.8 29.3 29.3 1986 Cap 18956 18956 18956 18178 Purch 130 130 130 130 Net Cap 19086 19086 19086 - 18308 Load 14663 14663 14663 14663 Res 4423 4423 4423 3645
% Res 30.2 30.2 30.2 24.9 4l(a) Assumes 1.5 x 10 lb/h steam flow to The Dow Chemical Company.
(b) Economy Reserve Weadock 1-6 and Morrow 1-4 delayed until December 1985.
(c) Economy Reserve Weadock 1-6 and Morrow 1-4 delayed until December 1986.
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 E
,m i .
\
CHAPTER 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page No 2 THE SITE AND ENVIRONMENTAL INTERFACES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1-1 2.1 GEOGRAPHY AND DEMOGRAPHY .......................... 2.1-1 2.1.1 Plant Location ...i................................ 2.1 1 2.1.1.1 Specification of Location.......................... 2.1-1 2.1.1.2 Site Area Map...................................... 2.1-3 2.1.1.3 Boundaries for Establishing Effluent Release Limits............................................ 2.1-4 2.1.1.3.1 Dow Chemical Company Property...................... 2.1-5 2.1.1.3.2 Exclusion Area Description ........................ 2.1-5 2.1.2 Population Distribution............................ 2.1-6 2.1.2.1 Populatica Within 10 Miles ........................ 2.1-6 2.1.2.2 Population Between 10 and 50 Miles ................ 2.1-8 2.1.2.3 Transient Populat. ion .............................. 2.1-9 2.1.3 Uses~of Adjacent Lande and Waters.................. 2.1-10 2.1.3.1 Land Use Immadiately Adja. cent to the Midland
{)s y
2.1.3.2 P1 ant..............................................
Agriculture Data ..................................
2.1-10 2.1-11 2.1.3.3 Land Use in the Plant Vicinity .................... 2.1-13 2.1.3.3.1 Land Use Within 5 Miles of Midland Plant .......... 2.1-13
-2.1.3.3.2 Coordination of Plant Activities With Adjacent Uses of Land and Water ............................ 2.1-16 2.1.3.4 Water Use.......................................... 2.1-19 2.1.3.4.1 Surface Water Uses ................................ 2.1-21 2.1.3.4.2 Groundwater Uses .................................. 2.1-27 2.1.3.5 Commercial and Recreational Fish Catch and Hunter Harvest .................................... 2.1-31 2.1.3.5.1 Surface Waters - Recreational...................... 2.1-31 2.1.3.5.2 Commercial Fish Catches............................ 2.1-32 2.1.3.5.3 Hunter Harvest .................................... 2.1-33 2.1R REFERENCE- ........................................ 2.1R-1 2.2 EC0 LOGY............................................ 2.2-1 2.2.1 Terrestrial Ecology................................ 2.2-1 2,2.2 Aquatic Ecology.................................... 2.2-3 2.2.2.1 Fish .............................................. 2.2-3 2.2.2.1.1 Distribution ...................................... 2.2-4 2.2.2.1.2 Importance of Local Species........................ 2.2-5 2.2.2.1.3 -Spawning Seasons and Feeding Habits................ 2.2-6 2.2.2.1.4 Temperature Tolerances ............................ 2.2-11 2.2.2.2 Primary Producers.................................. 2.2-12 2.2-13 Macroinvertebrates ................................
2.2.2.4 ~ Consumers Power Company's Pilot Investigations .... 2.2-15 (v}<f . 11l 2. 2. 2. 3 REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER .1980 - 2-1
~ ,
O Section Title Page No 2.2.2.5 Summary of Consumers Power Company's Preoperational Monitoring During 1979.............. 2.2-16 2.2.2.5.1 Phytoplankton...................................... 2.2-16 2.2.2.5.2 Periphyton ........................................ 2.2-17 2.2.2.5.3 Zooplankton........................................ 2.2-17 2.2.2.5.4 Macro invert ebrat es . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2-18 2.2.2.5.5 I cht hyop 1 ankton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2-20 11 2.2.2.5.6 Fisheries.......................................... 2.2-21 2.2.2.5.7 Water Quality...................................... 2.2-22 2.2.2.5.8 Bottom Sediments .................................. 2.2-22 2.2.2.5.9 Imp ingement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2-23 2.2.2.5.10 Fish Migration .................................... 2.2-24 2.2R REFERENCES ........................................ 2.2R-1 Appendix 2.2A FISH SURVEY OF THE SAGINAW RIVER WATERSHED WITH EMPHASIS ON THE TI'ITABAWASSEE RIVER, 1973 2.2B ECOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE SAGINAW RIVER AND ITS MAJOR TRIBUTARIES WITH SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON THE TI'ITABAWASSEE RIVER 2.2C A PRELIMINARY SURVEY AND EVALUATION OF MONITORING TECHNIQUES FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS OF THE WATER QUALITY OF THE TI'ITABAWASSEE RIVER NEAR MIDLAND, MICHIGAN.
2.3 METEOROLOGY........................................ 2.3-1 2.3.1 Regional Climatology .............................. 2.3-1 2.3.1.1 General Climate......................... .......... 2.3-1 2.3.1.2 Data Sources ...................................... 2.3-2 2.3.1.3 Rainfall Extremes.................................. 2.3-3 2.3.1.4 Snowfall Extremes.................... ............. 2.3-4 2 . 3.1. 5 Hailstorms ........................ ............... 2.3-4 2.3.1.6 Ice Storms ........................................ 2.3-5 2.3.1.7 Thundersto rms and Lightning. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3-6 2.3.1.8 Tornadoes.......................................... 2.3-6 2 . 3 .1. 9 Hurricanes ................................ ....... 2.3-8 2.3.1.10 Extreme Winds...................................... 2.3-8 2.3.1.11 High Air Pollution Potential ..... ............. .. 2.3-9 2.3.2 Local Meteorology.................................. 2.3-10 2.3.2.1 Data Sources ...................................... 2.3-10 2.3.2.2 Air Temperature................................ ... 2.3-10 2.3.2.3 Humidity and Dew Point ............................ 2.3-11 2.3.2.4 Wind Direction and Speed ........ ............ .... 2.3-12 2.3.2.5 Atmospheric Stability.................... ........ 2.3-13 2.3.2.6 Precipitation......................... ............ 2.3-14 2.3.2.7 Monthly Mixing Depths . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............ .. 2.3-15 2.3.3 Topographical Description........ . ............... 2.3-16 2.3.4 Representativeness of Meteorological Data Collection Period Compared to Expected Long-Term Conditions ............................. . ....... 2.3-16 2.3.4.1 National Weather Service Station Description ..... 2.3-16 REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 2-11 L _
_ i
O
~
4
, j ,
, CHAPTER 2 LIST OF TABLES I
Table Description i
2.1-1_ . CENSUS POPULATION AND PROJECTIONS.-- BY COUNTIES WITHIN 10 MILES 2.1-2 RESIDENT POPULATION WITHIN'10 MILES 2.1-3. AGE DISTRIBUTION BY COUNTIES WITHIN'10 MILES ,
2.1-4. ' INCORPORATED CITIES WITH POPULATION OVER 1,000 WITHIN 50 MILES
~2.1-5 CENSUS POPULATION AND PROJECTIONS -- BY COUNTIES WITHIN 50 MILES 2.1-6. RESIDENT POPULATION WITHIN 50 MILES -
2.1-7 : AGE DISTRIBUTION BY COUNTIES WITHIN 50 MILES
, 2.1-8 ESTIMATED DAILY TRANSIENT WITHIN 5 MILES t
2.1-9 -TOTAL' ESTIMATED POPULATION DISTRIBUTION INCLUDING DAILY INCREASES WITHIN 0-10 MILES i
2 .1-10 NEAREST RESIDENT / GARDEN, MILK ANIMAL'AND MEAT ANIMAL TO p ld MIDLAND NUCLEAR. UNITS'l&2 -- SURVEY OF AUGUST.1979 i 2.1-11 DISTANCES FROM THE NORTH EDGE OF THE CLOSEST NUCLEAR UNIT p 2.1-12 BEET CATTLE PRODUCED WITHIN 50 MILES,1974 2.'l-13 HOG MEAT PRODUCED WITHIN 50 MILES, 1974' !
2.1-14 MILE PRODUCED WITHIN 50 MILES, 1975 i
, 2.1-15 -FRESH MAREET VEGETABLES PRODUCED WITHIN 50 MILES, 1969 1
2.1-16 l
4 RESERVOIRS AND LAKES WITHIN A 50-MILE RADIUS -- (MINIMUM SURFACE !
AREA - 100 ACRES) . .
2.1-17 DOMESTIC SURFACE WATER SUPPLY. INTAKES LOCATED WITHIN THE ECMPDR STUDY AREA , .. .
2.1-18 LOWER LAEE HURON BASIN-SAGINAW RIVER-ENTIRE MAIN BRANCH -
. DESIGNATED USES: A2, B2, C2,'D,' E 2.1-19' SOURCES OF WATER'FOR SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION -- SYSTEMS IN THE
, . .ECM/DR STUDY AREA 2.1-20' IRRIGATION IN THE ECMPDR' STUDY AREA 2.1-21 MICHIGAN SPORT FISHING SURVEY ESTIMATES FOR BAY, MIDLAND AND 1
SAGINAW COUNTIES'(NUMBER OF FISH) 2.1-22' SPORT FISH CATCES WITHIN THE 50-MILE RADIUS OF THE MIDLAND 4
PLANT f: 2.1-23 JSALMONID PLANTINGS WITHIN 50 MILES OF TE MIDIMD PLANT,
'1975-1977 2.1-24 COMMERCIAL CATCH' RECORDS---; DISTRICT.MH-4 'SAGINAW BAY.
2.'l-25 ANNUAL. AVERAGE HUNTER HARVEST '-- SIX-YEAR PERIOD 1970-1975 -- ,
., 21. COUNTIES
-2.2-1 FISK SPECIES PRESENT AT DIFFERENT LOCATIONS IN THE TITTf3AWASSEE
. RIVER IN.TE VICINITY OF THE MIDLAND PLANT
'2.2-la IMPORTANT SPECIES WHICH MAY BE FOUND ON OR NEAR TE MIDLAND
'4 -PLANT'S 345 kV RIGHT-OF-WAY
- ~2.2-2 -PREFEPRED TEMPERATURE AND, LETHAL' TEMPERATURES OF DIFFERENT FISH SPECILS FOUND IN TE TITTABAWASSEE RIVER IN THE VICINITY CF THE MIDLAND PLANT'-
REVISION 11 SEPTEMBER 1980 :
2-v
,,.4
.p E p ,-
+
L s
, g. . , . , , #l', . E -- e -+.-d'r- ~ *+4* -
O Table Description 2.2-3 TEMPERATURE CRITERIA 0F SPAWNING AND EMBRYOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT OF VARIOUS FISH SPECIES THAT WERE FOUND IN THE VICINITY OF THE MIDLAND PLANT 2.2-4 PLANKTON ALGAE FOUND IN LITER GRAB SAMPLES FROM THE CHIPPEWA, PINE AND TITTABAWASSEE RIVERS, AUGUST 18, 1971 2.2-5
SUMMARY
OF TE RELATED ABUNDANCE (UNITS /ML) 0F TE DIATOMS, GREEN AND BLUE-GREEN ALGAE AND FLAGELLATES AT VARIOUS STATIONS IN TE TITIABAWASSEE RIVER 2.2-6
SUMMARY
OF THE RELATIVE ABUNDANCE MD PERCENTAGE OF STANDING CROPS OF TE PERIPHYTON POPULATION ACCOUNTED FOR BY DIATOMS, GREEN AND BLUE-GREEN ALGAE AT VARIOUS STATIONS IN THE TITTABAWASSEE RIVER 2.2-7 COLONIZATION OF ESTER-DENDY ARTIFICIAL SUBSTRATES BY AQUATIC ANIMAL LIFE FOLLOWING PLACEMENT IN THE TITTABAWASSEE RIVER, VICINITY OF MIDLAND, MICHIGAN, JULY 7-AUGUST 17, 1971 2.2-8
SUMMARY
OF BIOLOGICAL DATA OBTAIED FROM ARTIFICIAL SUBSTRATES PLACED IN TE TITTABAWASSEE RIVER, VICINITY OF MIDLAND, MICHIGAN, JULY 7-AUGUST 17, 1971 2.3-1 MAXIMUM SHORT-PERIOD RAINFALL FOR SAGINAW AND LANSING, MICHIGAN 2.3-2 . ESTIMATED MAXIdUM POINT RAINFALL EXTRAPOLATED FOR TE MIDLAND AREA 2.3-3 NORMALS, MEANS, AND EXTREMES -- MIDLAND, MICHIGAN 2.3-4 NORMALS, MEANS, AND EXTLEMES -- SAGINAW, MICHIGAN 2.3-5 NORMALS, MEANS, AND EXTEMES -- FLINT, MICHIGAN 2.3-6 SEASONAL MEANS OF DAILY MIXING DEPTHS AND AVERAGE WIND SPEED (FLINT, MICHIGAN) 1960-1964 2.3-7 MONTHLY AND ANN ~UAL AVERAGE EXTREME TEMPERATURES FOR TE MIDLAND PLAh7 2.3-8 VARIATION OF SEASONAL AND BIENNIAL AVERAGE HOURLY TEMPERATLTE FOR THE MIDLAND PLANT 2.3-9 MONTHLY AND ANNUAL AVERAGE RELATIVE HUMIDITY FOR THE MIDLAND PLANT 2.3-10 MONTHLY AND ANh"JAL AVERAGE DEW POINT TEMPERATURE FOR FLINT AND TIC MIDLA"_! I'I.tJ;T 2.2-11 t10NIHLY AND ANNUAL AVERAGE AND EXTREME DEW POINT TEMPERATURES FOR TE MIDLAND PLANT 2.3-12 DIURNAL VARIATION 0F ANNUAL AVERAGE HOURLY DEW POINT TEMPERATLTES FOR TE MIDLAND PLANT 2.3-13 JOINT WIND FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION BY STABILITY CLASS AT FLINT, MICHIGAN, FOR TE PERIOD 1966-1975 2.3-14 MONTHLY MEANS OF DAILY AFTERNOON ATMOSPHERIC MIXING DEPTHS (FLINT, MICHIGAN) 1960-1964 2.3-15 EPA INVERSION STUDY - FLINT, MICHIGAN -- 1960-1964 -- AVERAGE ANNUAL FRACTIONAL OCCURRENCE 2.3-16 STABILITY CLASS FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION IN PERCENT -- FLINT, MICHIGAN I 2-vi O
MIDIAND 1&2-ER(OLS) ps.
O TABLE 2.1-9 TOTALESTIMATEDPOPULATIONDISTRIBUTI0gIgCyING
DAILY INCREASES WITHIN 0-10 MILES l
ANNULI TOTALS 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 202C 0-1 Mile 2,154 2,297 2,361 2,394 2,479 2,544 1-2 17,407 18,462 18,984 19,491 20,021 20,543 2-3 30,113 31,922. 32,828 33,723 34,628 35,405 3-4 18,000 19,077 19,604 20,156 20,698 21,232 4-5 11,310 11,978 12,310 12,640 12,971 13,295 5-10 24,205 25,432 25,906 26,542 27,100 27,599 Cumulative 0-1 Mile 2,154 2,297- 2,361 2,394 2,479 2,544 0-2 19,561' 20,759 21,345 21,885 22,500 23,087 0-3 49,674 52,681 54,173 55,608 57,128 58,492 0-4 67,674 71,758 73,777- 75,764 77,826 79,724 0-5 78,984 83,736 86,087 88,404 90,797 93,019 0-10 103,189 109,168 111,993 114,946 117,897 120,618
. NOTE: . Projections of population acsume that this area will retain its respective percentage of 1970 census population of the counties involved as shown on Table 2.1-1.
Total daily population includes resident population as shown on Table 2.1-2 and Figures 2.1-3 through 2.1-8 plus the daily business loading from Table 2.1-8.
(a) Electric Distribution Map (1) .
(b) United States Census o'f Population (3) .
(c) Population Projections of the Counties of Michigan (4) .
in. '
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O TABLE 2.1-10 NEAREST RESIDENT / GARDEN (a) , MILK ANIMAL (b) m EAT MIm(*)
TO MIDLAND NUCLEAR UNITS 1 & 2 11l SURVEY OF AUGUST, 1979 NEAREST LOCATION SECTOR RESIDENT / GARDEN MILK ANIMAL MEAT ANIMAL (feet) (feet) (type) (feet) (type)
N 8,000 >26,400 ----
>26,400 ----
NNE 7,400 >26,400 ----
>26,400 ----
NE 6,800 25,300 Cow 25,900 Beef ENE 12,300 >26,400 ----
19,200 Beef E 9,100 >26,400 ---- 18,500 Beef ESE 9,600 >26,400 ---- 20,600 Beef SE 9,100 21,000 Cow 21,000 Hog SSE 13,200 >26,400 ----
>26,400 ----
11 S 6,600 >26,400 ----
>26,400 ----
SSW 6,800 25,000 Goat 25,000 Beef SW 5,400 >26,400 ----
19,100 Beef VSW 4,200 14,200 Goat 22,200 Hog W 4,600 18,900 Goat >26,400 ----
Whv 7,400 22,200 Goat 22.300 Hog SV 11,1.00 >26,400 ----
>26,400 ----
Nhv 9,800 >26,400 ---- >26,400 ----
1 l (a) The nearest vegetable garden (500 ft2) is assumed to be located at the nearest residence.
(b) Milk cows and milk goats.
(c) Beef cattle (including young feeder stock) and hogs.
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
Above the Dow Dam, the presence of a diverse and well-balanced macroinvertebrate community indicated clean water conditions. Below the dam, the areas that received The Dow Chemical Company and general wastewater treatment plant discharges had severely degraded water quality conditions.
Macroinvertebrates were limited to midges and sludgeworms. Some recovery was observed from the Freeland Station downstream.
The MWRC(14) 1974 survey yielded data indicating a substantial recovery and biological recuperation at the Smith's Crossing and Freeland Stations and a pronounced improvement below the Midland wastewater treatment plant since 1971. Figure 2.2-4 shows these differences as reflected by biotic index values (14).
u 11 l 2.2.2.4 Consumers Power Company's Pilot Investigations v
Consumers Power Company, Department of Environmental Services, contracted the 11 l Department of Biology of Central Michigan University during 1977 and 1978 to survey the biological communities of the Tittabawassee River near Midland and examine various methodologies for future monitoring of these communities. The biological communities investigated were: primary producers (phytoplankton, periphyton, chlorophyll, autotrophic index), macroinvertebrates (including zooplankton), and fish (fish-Isrvae, juvenile and adult). The 1977 effort is 11 included as Appendix-2.2C while 1978 data is available in the report, Survey and Evaluation of the Water Quality, Tittabawassee River, Near Midland, Michigan, 1978-1979, prepared by Central Michigen University, April 1979.
f)
V REVISION.11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 2.2-15 cs
MIDLAND 152-ER(OLS) 2.2.2.5 Summary of Consumers Power Company's Preocerational Monitoring During O
1979 During 1979, Lawler, Matusky and Skelly Engineers were contracted by Consumers Power Company, Depart =ent of Environmental Services, to assess the 1977-1978 pilot investigation data and develop an experimental design for long-term ecological monitorin;; in the Tittabawassee River. Lawler, Matusky and Skelly Engineers accomplished these tasks through preparatien of the reports:
Assessment of 1977-78 Data (14b) and Experimental Design of the Long-Term Ecological Monitoring Program of the Tittabawassee River Near the Midland Nuclear Plant (14c). The State of Michigan Water Resources Commission approved the experimental design for long-term monitoring in October 1919. The initial preoperational year of ecological monitoring using the appraved experimental design, as described in Section 6.1.1, was conducted by Lawler, Matusky and Skelly during 1979 and is available in the report, Acuatic Assessment of the Tittsbawassee River in the Vicinity of Midland, Michigan (14d). A summary of 12 this preoperational data is presented below. Refer to Figure 6.1.la to identify transect and sampling station locations.
2.2.2.5.1 Phytoolankton Whole water phytoplankton samples were collected four times during 1979 on 8 May, 19 June, 10 August, and 12 October at two river stations. The community was composed mainly of three groups: diatoms, green algae, and blue-green algae.
Total phytoplankton abundance fluctuated over time and generally followed a classical pattern of abundance for the latitude of the area sampled. No consistent differences in abundance between stations were detected. Fiovolume Ol l REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 2.2-16 l
l l
MIDLAND 11,2-ER(OLS)
{ -
As}- information.was included in the report as. an aid in determining the relative photosynthetic potential of each. dominant taxon.
2.2.2.5.2 Perichyton The periphyton community in the Midland vicinity of the Tittabawassee River is composed primarily of diatoes (Chrysophyta), green algae (Chlorophyta), blue-green algae (Cyanophyta), and Euglenophyta. Statistical analyses were conducted using the abundance data to detect possible differences between sampling dates, transects, and stations.
A statistical rationale for reducing the' number of transects to be sampled in -i future studies at the Midland Plant site was developed. The technique involved a comparison of the complete data set using the 15-station design vs the minimal two-station design to determine how reduction of the sampling strategy would affect the conclusions. The results showed that the only 11 conclusions lost by the 87*. reduction of the data are the significant seasonality of Chlorophyta and Euglenophyta and the station differences of the latter. The seasonality is' expected and therefore the reduction is not a major loss'to the antlysis. In addition, Euglenophyta never account for more than 10* of the organisms ~at any station on any date so detectability of such station differences does not justify the 13 additional stations.
2.2.2.5.3: Zooplankton Three: taxonomic groups' dominated the Tittabawassee River microzooplankten:
rotifers,.cladocerans,~and copepods. The community structure of river microzooplankton' depends on the following factors: the reproductive strategy of the variousitaxa, feeding behavior, competition, predation, and the i J REVISION 11 -:SEPTENBER 1980 2.2 n
,._m f 1 ' Y 1 e %
MIDIAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O capacity of populationa to increase. The observations serve as a valuable data base for future comparisons. Bosmina coregoni was tha most abundant cladoceran species identified in the Tittabawassee River.
Temporal and spatial trends in distribution and abundance were examined visually and statistically through the me of analysis of variance (ANOVA).
Seasonality was confirmed in every analysis with a Bonierroni comparison, but spatial heterogeneity was not readily apparent, although Station 2A ' I" midstream above the Midland Plant intake, tended to have higher densities of microzooplankton. Community analysis revealed that Station D , below the 2
Midland Plant intake, had consistently higher diversity (Shannon-Weaver) than A2, but the small sample size involved may be an incomplete representation of the community structure.
2.2.2.5.4 Macroinvertebrates O
11 Macroinvertebrates were collected by Ponar grab samples and artificial substrates in the Midland vicinity of the Tittabawassee River. The results of the Ponar grab samples show that the Lanthic community is not well established and is most likely sustained by continued colonization from upstream population epicenters. The June 1979 benthic invertebrats data covered five g transects of three atations each for a total of 15 collection sites. To I
determine significant differences among replicates, transects, or stations, the data were analyzed statistically using split plot and whole plot analysis of variance following log transformation of the data.
Significant differences were found only for ephemeropterans, and were among l transects. Examination of the June data for each station reveals that a major l l
influence of this transeat heterogeneity was the absence of ephemeropterans at l REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 2.2-18
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O -
one transect. .For the total benthos and individual groups, mean abundances ,
were available. Considering that reported abundance values included all macroinvertebrates retained in the Ponar grab, it would seem that, as suggested by the sediment analysis, the benthos community in the river is depauperate.
The number of taxa identified in artificial substrate collections was not much higher than that of the Ponar grab samplers, although the taxa occurred in greater densities. .Thus, a more diverse and abundant community of macroinvertebrates was able to develop on the samplers during the approximate six-week immersion periods.
Macroinvertebrates collected on , artificial substrates were evaluated for seasonal differences in abundance. The tests revealed tilat there wete significant date differences for all groups tested; one of the major changes n in abundance over time involved low densities in October, primarily at Station D2 downstream of the plant intaks, It would appear that, given identical substrates, the two areas (A upstream 2
and D2downstream) were able to support similar densities of the dominant matroinvertebrace groups. This is probably releted, in part, to colonization from upstream populations so that the two sets of artificial substrate samplers were exposed to the same stock of drifting organisms.
J Shannon diversity indices were computed at the taxonomic level of genus. In May and June, the diversity at A 2was somewhat higher than at D2 . Although 4
this cannot bs accounted for in terms of number of genera, the evenness index and abundances show that there was a more even~ distribution of organisms among l
.p \
~v
- . REVISION-11~- SEPTEMBER 1980 2.2-19
7-MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) the genera.
O In August and October, diversity was higher at 2D than at A2 '
partly as a result of the increased evenness index at Station D .
The groups of macroinvertebrates (total benthos, Chironomidae, Oligochaeta) examined were consistently more abundant in artificial substrate samples than in Ponar grab samples. This difference was most pronounced for oligochaetes, which suggests that the unstable sandy river bottom was unfavorable for these infaunal taxa. This was tentatively attributed to bottom sediment particle size distributioa and low organic content, but the possibility of toxic substances is not ruled out.
2.2.2.5.5 Ichthyoplankton The families Cyprinidae, Centrarchidae, and Percidae were represented by the largest number of species captured in the Tittabawassee River with five, four, and three species collected, respectively. The larval data for cyprinids, centrarchids, emerald shiner, yellow perch, black crappie and white sucker were statistically analyzed by an analysis of variance. Factors which were tested included date sampled, time period of sampling, collection gear, and station location.
The results of the analysis of variance performed on Cyprinidae showed
~
significant differences-in abundance due to date sampled, gear, and station.
Centrarchid abundance was significantly different by date, period sampled (day or night), gear used, and a gear x period interaction. Analysis ot black crappie data revealed a significant effect on catch due to date and period sampled. Emerald shiner and white sucker abundances showed no significant effect due to main factors or interactions. Yellow perch data analysis showed
, significant effects on catch due to gear, station, and a period by station REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 2.2-20
-n
g
_g,_
, '.L ,
4 -4s.
, 1 MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS):
g ?7 7 )
f&
interaction.' The nonsignificance_of the period.and date of the above species h maylbe a result of'the low. statistical. power of che A test becauce capture occurred on only a few dates.
u' 2.2.2.5.6L Fisheries.
~
z.
A total of 11,704--fishes representing Il families and 41 species were collected by electrofishing, seiningc arid trap netting from the Tittabawassee River in the~ vicinity of the Consumers Power Midland Plant-in 1979.
The. fish community is dominated by warswater species, primarily of the families Cyprinidae and Centrarchidae. Electrofishing was the most successful collection technique, followed by seining and trap netting. Eight selected species of interest.were analyzed by a log transformed split plot analysis of variance:for each collection' gear to define _ changes at the species level over space and time.
n An analysis of community structure was performed using four acasures of
, diversity: the number of taxa, the number of individuals, the evenness of' distribution-of individuals among.the taxa, and a Shannon-Weaver diversity
- statistic (H'). Species diversity between transects, sampling dates, and gear types.showed no consistent trends'. However, electrofishing samples had generally higher diversity values.than other gear types and September and October 1 collections. tended to have. higher diversity values. It would appear i
that electroshocking is the.most overall effective collection device, but trap nettingLand' seining captured species not collected by electroshocking. The use of the Shannon-Weavereinformation' statistic in defining aquatic community structure was discussed.
$h.. * ,
j
?REVISIONzill- SEPTEMBER;1980' 2.2-21 t
.I "1 ^
w.
r ,
h '
ga
, y ___
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O 2.2.2.5.7 Water Quality Comparison of water quality program results with the State of Michigan Water Quality Standards were not made because the standards were undergoing revisions. In general, water quality was sufficient to support biological communities.
Two trends are evident in the water quality data. The first is the influence that Lingle Drain exerts on Station D3 (immediately downstream of Lingle Drain), especially during icw flow periods when Station D 3is isolated from the rest of the river by a large sandbar. There is no indication that this sandbar will disappear in the future; therefore, the influence of Lingle Drain on Station D3 can be expected to recur as long as the sandbar is present. The second trend is the influence or Dow discharge (downstream of the plant intake) on sampling stations (Transects B, C, and D). Flow characteristics of the river seem to determine which stations are affected. During periods of 11 low flow, shoreline and midstream sampling stations are influenced by Dow's discharge. However, as flow increases, the " plume" appears to hug the shoreline and does not influence midstream areas.
2.2.2.5.8 Bottom Sediments Comparison of the data indicates that silver, arsenic, beryllium, cadmium, and nickel were fcund in low concentrations at all stations except A upstream t
of the plant anc generally decreased in value between June and October. Copper, zinc, and total organic carbon (TOC) concentrations increased between sampling dates while lead values remained fairly constant between June and October.
One parameter, manganese, exhibited wide variations between sampling dates.
The October manganese concentrations are abnormally high and should be l
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 2.0-22 ,
l
g - - - _ - -
'h s f
+-
~
- MIDLAND 182-ER(OLS)'
d interpreted cautiously, although no procedural or computational errors were detected during the investigation.
The particle l size distribution data' indicate that the bottom sediments were
. composed mainly of larger fractionsi medium sand to gravel,-with medium sand dominating 73% of all samples and silt and clay comprising less than 10%,- by weight, of most samples. These_ larger grain sizes necessarily reduce the-available area for absorption by the various ions. This helps explain the low.
values of certain parameters'and reinforces the caution with which the manganese levels _should be viewed. Seasonal redistribution of sediment composition was 'noted, but deeper. water stations exhibited fewer seasonal changes than the shallower stations. Organic content has been shown to be inversely:related to grain size,'thus the observed low TOC recorded in the river sediments is consistent with the coarse grained substrate found there.
~
.11 2.2.2.5.9 Impinsement' l
Impingement'of_ fishes occurred during.a three-day period in March 1979 when 255 x 10 gal of water was pumped from the Tittabawassee River into the s
Mid' land Plant" cooling pond. The flow in the river at this time was moderately high.
A three-day compilatien of. data cannot be extrapolated to make any prediction concerning the-annual.13pingement rate. 'However, it can be postulated from .
thesejdsta that yearling yellow perch:will probably-dominate future impingemen' t coll' actions'.taken during similar time periods and that the total ~
number of fish: impinged will-likely be low in a two-sump mode of operation j
( Uhen' river' flows are moderately high; -j t
.h -
REVISION;11[- SEPTE5BER.-19802: ~2.2-23~
Wm M
'l 1 - N'k -- ,,, [ i_] _
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O 2.2.2.S.10 Fish Migration.
The impingement of high numbers of young-of-the-year yellow perch during the fall 1978 portion of the filling of the Midland Plant cooling pond raised questions regarding the origin of the yellow perch involved. More precisely, information was required to determine whether this was a one-year phenomenon 11 resulting from the 1978 Sanford Lake drawdown or an expected annual occurrence. In addition, the study attempted to determine if the yellow perch were the progeny of a residential population or the result of the Laflux of young-of-the-year individuals from other spawning areas such as Sanford Lake or Saginaw Bay. The conclusions of the study suggest that high impingement rates of yellow perch can be expected during the fall season.
O F
f 1
O REVISION 11 SEPTEMBER 1930 2.2-24 E . m. .
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS).
.O >
2.2R REFERENCES
- 1. Consumers Power Company (compiler), Midland Plant Units 1 and 2,
- Applicant's Supplement to' the Environmental Report (as amended), Section
- 3.1 (October 1975 h Consumers Power Company.
L
- 2. Bechtel: Power Corporation (compiler),-Icing and Contamination Study for
~
Midland Plant Units--I and 2 Trans'a ission Lines, (1973), Bechtel Power
~
Corporation.
N 3. US Geological Survey (compiler), Water Data Report, MI-76-1 (1976), US
' Department of Interior .
- 4. D Jude, .J Ervin, and G Ervin, An Ecological-Evaluation of Sanford Lake.
-(1977),-Freshwater Physicians, Inc.
N.
- 5. J A Zillich, Ecological Survey of the Saginaw River and Its Maior
. Tributaries With Special-Emphasis on the Tittabawassee River, (1973), Dow Chemical Company.
~
- 6. T L Batchelder and H C Alexander, Fish Survey of the:Saginaw River 7
Watershed-With Emphasis on the Tittabawassee River, 1973, (1974), Dow ]
Chemical Company.
I
- 7. Water Resources Commission (compiler), Biological Survey of the Tittabawas'see River 1971-1972, (December 1972),' Michigan Department of Natural. Resources. t (8. -The _Chester Engineers,. Assessment of Current Water Quality Conditions and p (FactorsResponsibieforThoseConditions,.(September 1976), report
~
a-x ~
prepared for' East Central-Michigan Planning and Development Region.
- REVISION 7; -
MARCH 1979' 2.2R-1.
r- L s
""n. a. k r . . '- T
, , . , , ;,, ,_ .,e eay v +.-**v*'rm-* k -* ' " - ' * ~"*
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
- 9. Dow Chemical Company, Tittabawassee River Water Quality Studies, e
Unpublished (1976), Dow Chemical Company.
- 10. W B Scott and E J Crossman, Freshwater Fishes of Canada, Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Ottawa, 1973.
- 11. W A Brungs and B R Jones, Temoerature Criteria for Freshwater Fish:
Protocol and Procedures, in press (1977), US Environmental Protection
. Agency.
- 12. J R Stauffer, Jr, K L Dickson, J Cairns, Jr, and D S Cherry, Tha Potential and Realized Influences of Temeerature on the Distribution of Fishes in the New River, Glen Lvn, Virginia, (1976), Wildlife Monographs No 50.
- 13. F E Brown, The Biology of the Algae, Edward Arnold, London, 1965.
4
- 14. Water Resources Commission, Water Quality Survey of the Tittabawassee River, in press (1974), Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
14a. H L Lenon, et al, Survey and Evaluation of the Water Quality, Tittabawassee River, Near Midland, Michigan, 1978-79, Technical Report No 2 (1979), Report prepared by Central Michigan University for Consumers-Power Company.
14b. Lawler, Matusky and Skelly, Assessment of 1977-78 Data, (1979),
11 Report prepared for Consumers Power Company.
14c. Lawler, Matusky and Skelly, Excerimental Design of the Long-Term Ecological Monitoring Program of the Tittabawassee River Near the Midland Plant, (1979), Report prepared for Consumers Power Coopany.
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMPER 1980 2.2R-2 4
MIDLAND.1&2-ER(OLS) e
,~
t p -
, ;{
v .
14d. Lawler,LMatusky and'Skelly, Aquatic Assessment of the Tittabawassee
~ 11 River in the Vicinity of Midland Michigan, (1980), Report prepared for Consumers: Power Company.
I:
- 15. - K D Carlander, Handbook of Freshwater Fishery Biology, Volume ~1, The : Iowa State University Press ~ Ames, Iowa,-1969.
T b
i 1
J f
i e
I i
j-i.
1 d-l l
.c y bj r
y REVISION 11'- SEPTEMBER 1980' 2i2R-3 .
_ . 4 19_ ,-
- ' . ) - m
,\.
. MIDLAND ~1&2-ER(OLS)
- N
- i
'V .- , .
~ Dow Chemical Company has monitored surface elevations over the mined zones since 1958. To the present no measurable subsidence has-been observed at'any
. location monitored (2) . The possibility of subsidence due to salt mining has been investigated (2,3) and it is concluded that in will not be significant to
.the Midland Plant. -A subsurface subsidence monitoring program has been implemented at the Plant site to measure any unexpected localized subsidence occurring beneath the ~ Plant site (Section 6.1.4.1.3) .
Figure 2.5-6 shows.the locations of all exploratory, abandoned, and productive oil wells in- the vicinity of the Plant. The Larkin field, 5 miles (24 km) .
north of the Plant, covers about 20 acres (8.1 ha) and is the closest area from which oil was produced. This field was abandoned in 1945, however,:some 11- additional activity has taken place recently (1970-1975) but the outcome has
( )- .been dry holes. It consisted of only twoLwells which pumped a total of about 7,000' barrels (4).
4 The most extensive oil producing' field in the Plant vicinity is the Porter oil field, about 10 miles (16 km) southwest of the Plant. The latest available information in 1975 states that nearly 100,000 barrels were extracted from the 129 active wells in this field's 6,690 acres (27 km2)(4),
Wildcat wells shown in Figure 2.5-6, near the Plant, indicate that no potential oil' reserves are known beneath or near the Plant site.
l Coal deposits of commercial' quantity and thickness are present in 10 eastern Michigan.' counties with some lesser reserves in a few other eastern counties.
Coal production ht the State has been exclusively from the Saginaw' Formation l
' and mainly where the coal' seams are less than 200- feet (61 m) from the es I
)' ; . surface (5). ECoal mining' has been decreasing almost continually within
. REVISION 11 --SEPTEMBER 1980 2.5-5
&-': _ ^ . g
4 _.-s:
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
Michigan since 1907. Presently, a singie itall surface coal mine is in O
operation in the State, located about 60 miles (97 km) south of the Plant.
Figure 2.5-7 shows the locations of known commercial coal reserves in the Plant vicinity. No reserves are present beneath the Plant.
The unloading associated with the retreat of glacial ice is apparently responsible for crustal uplift in the northeastern United States and Canada.
Correlations of glacial lake shorelines, in conjunction with radiocarbon dating, indicate 7 hat rebound began at a fairly rapid rate with the greatest adjustment occurring from 8,000 to 4,500 years ago. Since that time, uplift has been slight. Recent studies indicate that Michigan is experiencing a vertical movement upward ranging from 1 foot (30 cm) per 100 years in the northern portion of the State to static conditions in the southern portion.
In the Plant area at a rate of rise of 0.25 foot (7.5 cm) per 100 years is estimated.
Minor crustal movement in the form of rebound is ocen ring in the Plant area at a decreasing rate. Crustal uplift is occurrir A. .h a s'.sw rate and over such a broad area that it will have no efft't ,
.he Midland Plant.
s O
REVISION 11 - SEPTDiBER 1980 2.5-6
x .
~,
' MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O Q; TABLE 2.5-1 STAITJS OF, SALT, BRINE, AND DISPOSAL ~
WELLS WITHIN ONE. MILE OF THE MIDLAND PLANT (a)
Well. Total-Salt . Current
' Number (b) Extracted -Status ~ Comments
-(103 tons)
Salt Wells 9 -372 Plugged.in 1972 No production'since 1964
'10 325 Plugged in'1968 .
No production since 1961 11 450 Standby =since 1971' 14' 523 Standby ~since 1970 15 555 Plugged in 1973 No production since 1969 11l 16 375 Plugged in 1979 No production since 1969 17 607 Plugged in 1973 No production since 1970 *
- 19 274 Plu2ged in 1973 No' production since 1968 20 354 Plugged la_1973 No production since 1967 Brine Wells I
1 -
Plu.gged in 1973 No production since 1970 11 3 -
Plugged in 1977 No production since-1970 5- -
-Plugged in 1977 0s 28 -
' Operating No production since 1971 Disposal Wells 11l 1 -
Plugged in 1979 No production since 1972 7 494 Operating Originally drilled for use as-a salt well; no salt has been extracted since 1970; now used as a disposal well in gallery with Well 18.
8 -
. Operating Originally drilled for use- !
18 426' Operating as a salt well; no salt has been extracted since'1972; .l- '
now used as'a disposal wall in' gallery with Well 7. I (a). Status of wells based on -latest available data received from Dow Chemical 11l -Company in. February 1980.
(b) See Figure 2.5-5.
- [
'Ll
.. ' REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 -
u I-
D1 6
l l
l 1
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)~
G On August'29, 1978 Consumers Power Company representatives and the State 3 Archeologist toured the Midland Plant site. .A survey of the Tittabawassee River floodplain (including the route of the proposed blowdown discharge line)-
was initiated in October 1978. .Two previously. identified archeological significant sites which contain historic and'prehis' toric artifacts were 6 identified during the survey and are discussed in the report, Archeological and Historical Investigations of- the Floodplain Area, hidland Plant Site, Midland, Michigan. This report describing the results was. submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on February 8, 1979.
2.6.3 Transmissica Line Right-of-Way Archeological Features Appendix 2.6C a copy of the archeologicaI survey of the transmission line v
) 3 right-of-way associated with the-Midland Plant. A detailed plan for the mitigation or avoidance of the identified archeological sites that could be disturbed by the construction and operation of the Plant's associated 4 l transmission facilities is presented in Section 4.2.2.
In 1979, the nine archeological sites that cor id not be avoided during transmission line construction were mitigated by recovery of materials to preserve the sites on paper. The recovered cultural material of the sites and recorded details of its context-are preserved for future study. Site 20SA318 11 -is an Early Archaic (seventh or eighth millenium BC, based on projectile points), low intensity campsite which could have been recurrently occupied during the cold season. Hunting, butchering, wood and plant processing and cooking were probable activities. Similarly, site 20SA108 is an Early Archaic
~ 1ow intensity campsite which could have been recurrently ' occupied during the warm' season.'(based on different patterns'of lithic technology and fire cracked REVISION 11' - SEPTEMBER 1980 2.6-5
~
.~ v
_ - . _ue
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) 1 1
0' rock use). Similar activities probably occurred at this site. The only other possible Early Archaic site is 20SA337 which was perhaps a kill and butchering station for large game and was used for a very short curation. Insufficient data were recovered from 20MD394 to date the occupation, but the consultant speculates that an Archaic component was destroyed by sand removal. Site 20SA325 is of Late Archaic age (about 1900 BC) and was probably a warm season camp. A Woodland component, probably early Late Woodland, is (AD 600-800) also present. Nearby site 20SA326 may represent a contemporary single episode Late Archaic eccupation. A well known local site, 20MD116, also represents a warm season encampment of the early Late Archaic. This site additionally has a pre-Civil War historic component (domestic household). Site 20SA322 is 11 predominantly a Late Archaic site with a minor Late Woodland component (occupied 1500 BC - AD 1000). The site was likely used for brief encampments during the warm season. The last site, 20SA329, is totally historic and was probably a rural farm homestead from about 1880-1920.
The University of Michigan, Museum of Anthropology, report on this arche-ological mitigation (Report of Archaeological Mitigarion and Avoidance on a ConsuLers Power Comoany Right of Vay in Saginaw and Midland Counties, Michigan, February 18, 1980) has been provided to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The mitigation of these nine sites on the transmission line right-of-way has preserved these cultural resources on paper, as in the University's report, in the site file and field notes, and in the curated cultural material recovered during field work. These materials preserve the sites for future generations of students and for further study as changing theoretical interests require.
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 2.6-6 L
- x y e
_W
4 y ,
--MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) 1 (
v .
t Additionally,.an archeological' survey was conducted in May:1979 on the tie line right of way:fron'the Midland Plant'to the Tittabawassee Substation.
This survey area ~is'not owned-by Consumers Power Company and no construction
- L.
activity for these ~ tie lines has taken place. One prehistoric and two L .
2 hist'oricl sites were found. The two historic sites appear to be.of modern or recent-age and the archeological consultant did not recommend mitigation-for
'either of these sites. The prehistoric site represented a small, probably diffuse, prehistoric site likely~ occupied for a rather short time for specialized purposes, possibly hunting. Six pieces of fire.-cracked rock and seven chert spalls were recovered. Even though it was impossible to estimate its period of occupation ~or importance, the archeological consultant
- 10. recommended avoidance'or mitigation. However, when the site was revisited in .j July 1979,:the portion of the-sandy. ridge containing the site had been
, destroyed by; removal of the soil. Consequently, mitigation or~ avoidance is no j 1
longer a consideration for this prehistoric archeological site.
Six copies of the consultant's report,- Report of a Preliminarv Archaeological Survey of a Transmission Right of Way from the Midland Plant to the ~
f Tittabawassee !Substatio'n for Consumers Power Cc:npany, by Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, July 1979, were provided to the NRC on November' 29,.1979.
l
'{.
m u
+
= REVISION.11:-~ SEPTEMBER ^1980 2.6-7
.4- .x fQ' ,
s -+
- y '_ ';_ _g ,
M
-MIDLAND ' l&2-ER(OLS)
- 2.7. NOISE A noise survey was. conducted on May 23 and 24,:l'973 to provide baseline i
environmental noise levels surrounding the area of the Midland Plant. Another' survey will be performed in the year preceeding commercial operation to o
A 11 document changes in -ambient levels that may have occurred in the intervening 1
years due to construction of the Plant and due to changes in industrial -
operations on adjacent land. This survey in will be more comprehensive in that it will include ' permanent magnetic tape recordings of samples obtained.
11- Methodology used in the 1973' survey as well as that to be used in the future ambient survey is detailed in Section 6.1.3. A Plant map of the site showing the- 13 test points sampled in 1973 is presented in Figure 2.7-1. "A" weighted
\ and/or octave band measurements were taken at three different times over a 24-hour. period: 1630-1920 hours,-2100-2300 hours, and 0300-0500 hours.
Extraneous noise sources were identified when possible and noted along with
- local weather conditions. Measurements were confined to the immediate area of the Plant and its property lines due to the industrial nature of the area.
Figure 2.7-2 summarizes the "A" weighted noise levels during each measurement perica. A graphical comparison of octave band levels at tuo points-for the 1630- to 1920-hour period is' presented in Figure 2.7-3. Test Point 11 was on the south property line of the site.over one mile (1600 meters) from Test Point 2_ near the Plant' location.' Increased levels at Test Point 2 were due to noise' sources at The:DowLChemical-Company complex to the north.
l
' Data sheets containing all measurements are pres.ented as Figures 2.7-4 through
.s,
, ;g 2.7-6.
l
. REVISION 111-~. SEPTEMBER 1980- 2.7-1 f-.4 %
}
0 ~.6
f i
l MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) )
O Background noise level without traffic or other intermittent sources might be considered moderate. The level averages approximately 44 dBA during the daytime to approximately 48 dBA during the 0300- to 0500-hour measurement period.
O O
2.7-2
't o
-Section Title- Page No 3.7.1.2 Fire Water Diesel Pumps............................ 3.7-2 3.7.1.3 Auxiliary Boilers.................................. 3.7-2 3.7.2 Liquid Effluents .................................. 3.7-3' 3.7.2.1 Laundry Waste...................................... 3.7-3 3.7.2.2 Storm Drainage .................................... 3.7-3 '
Sanitary Waste .................................... 3.7-4 11l3.7.2.3 3,7.2.4 Laboratory Wastes.................................. 3.7-5 3.7.3 So l id Was t e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.7-5 3.8 RADI0AC*IVE MATERIAL MOVEMENT...................... 3.8-1 3.8R REFERENCES ........................................ 3.8R-1 3.9 TRANSMISSION FACILITIES............................ 3.9-1 3.9.1 Implementation of Environmental Guidelines ........ 3.9-1 3.9.2 Regulations and Controls .......................... 3.9-1 3.9.3 Land Usage ........................................ 3.9-3 3.9.4 Environmental Assessment .......................... 3.9 3.9.4.1 Te rm ina l Po int s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.9-4 3.9.4.2 Midland 138 kV Start-Up Lines...................... 3.9-5 3.9.4.3 Midland 1 and 2 to Tittabawassee 345 kV Lines...... 3.9-7 f -~ 3.9.4.4 Tittabawassee to Kenowa/Thetford 345 kV Lines...... 3.9-7
.(' . 3.9.5 3.9.6 Railroad and Highway Cross ings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Environmental Effects of Electrical-Fields ........
3.9-12 3.9-12 3.9.6.1 Genera 1............................................ 3.9-12 3.9.6.2 Electrostatic and Electromagnetic Induction Effects............................................ 3.9-13 3.9.6.3 Radio and-Television Interference.................. 3.9-14 Audible
~
3.9.6.4 Noise...................................... 3.9-14 3.9.6.5 Ozone Production .................................. 3.9-14 3.9R REFERENCES ........................................ 3.9R-l'
[ 1 J[ } !
\_t x
1 l
JREVISIONJil:- SEPTEMBER 1980' 3-111
.,0 i
~I' L
i r
LM - : - -
, p ,,y- ,
CHAPTER 3 LIST OF TABLES Table Description 3.1-1 LIQUID AND GASEOUS WASTES RELEASE POINTS 3.3-1 WATER USAGE 3.3-2 EXPECTED SEASONAL VARIATIONS IN WATER USAGE AT MAXIMUM DOWER 3.4-1 CIRCULATING WATER SYSTEM DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS 3.4-2 SERVICE WATER SYSTEM DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS 3.4-3 AVEEAGE MONTHLY METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS USED IN POND THERMAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 3.4-4 MONTHLY COOLING POND PERFORMANCE FOR ONE UNIT OPERATING 3.4-5 MONTHLY COOLING POND PERFORMANCE FOR BOTH UNITS OPERATING 6l3.4-6 MAKEUP WATER WITHDRAWAL REGIME 3.4-7 MAKEUP WATER APPROACH VELOCITIES FOR VARIOUS WITHDRAWAL RATES 2l3.4-8 MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM TEMPERATURES DURING HOURLY SIMULATIONS FOR 40-DAY PERIOD 3.5-1 PARAMETERS USED TO CALCULATE EXPECTED REACTOR AND MAIN STEAM SOURCE TERMS PER NUREG-0017 3.5-2 EXPECTED REACTOR COOLANT ACTIVITY CALCULATED 3.5-3 EXPECTED SECONDARY COOLANT CONCENTRATIONS 3.5-4 NITROGEN-16 ACTIVITY IN REACTOR COOLANT 3.5-5 AVERAGE PROCESSING RATE THROUGH PURIFICATION DEMINERALIZERS AND BLEED PROCESSING SYSTEM 3.5-6 TRITIUM PRODUCTION 3.5-7 REFUELING CANAL AND FUEL POOL CONCENTRATIONS 3.5-8 PARAMETERS USEn IN THE CALCULATION OF GASEOUS RADI0 ACTIVITY RELEASES 3.5-9 POTENTIAL ANNUAL RELEASES IN GASEOUS EFFLUENTS 3.5-10 EXPECTED LWS COMPONENT RADIONUCLIDE IhTT.NTORIES 3.5-11 RADWASTE GAS SYSTEM -- ESTIMATES OF GASEOUS WASTES GENERATED PER YEAR DURING NORMAL OPERATION 3.5-12 PROCESS SYSTEM DESIGN CAPACITY 3.5-13 CONTINUOUS PROCESS AND EFFLUENT RADIATION MONITORING 3.6-1 MIDLAND MUNICIPAL CITY WATER CHARACTERISTICS 3.6-2 EXPECTED CHARACTERISTICS OF WASTE STREAMS 3.6-3 EXPECTED TITTABAWASSEE RIVER WATER QUALITY AT THE MIDLAND PLANT RIVER INTAKE STRUCTLTE 3.6-4 EXPECTED CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF COOLING POND BLOWDOWN I
AND COMBINED PLANT DISCHARGE j 3.6-5 PROCESS STEAM SYSTEM BLOWDOWN VOLUME AND QUALITY 3.6-6 EXPECTED ANNUAL CHEMICAL USAGE 3.9-1 ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION FACILITIES 3.9-2 LAND TYPES CROSSED BY TITTABAWASSEE TO KENOWA/THETFORD )
345 kV LINE i REVISION 6 - FEBRUARY 1979 3-iv g f
p
c MIDIAND ' 1&2-ER(OLS)
- p J
3.3 PIANT WATER USE The sources, uses, and discharges of water for Midland Units 1 and 2 are shown on Figure 3.3-1 and quantified in Tables 3.3-1 aad 3.3-2.
- Ground water is not intended or planned to be utilized as a source of water during Plant operation.
3.3.1- Process Vater All water for use as process water is provided as follows:
- a. The-Dow Chemical Company provides feedwater to the evaporators in the process staam system. The.stsam thus produced is returned to The Dow Chemical Company for use in their process systems.
- b. Makeup for the Midland Plant demineralizer system will be taken from either of two sources. The Dow Chemical Company _ demineralized water 10 supplied by Dow as a portion of the makeup supply to the evaporators can be used as makeup to the demineralizer system or the Plant has the option of using the Midland Muncipal Water District supply. Normally, 11 the Plant will use the Midland municipal water as the preferred supply with Dow domineralized water as backup.
2 l It is estis ' :d that on an-annual basis the water use rate from the city water 8 l system will average approximately 50 million gallons per year over the life'of 2_ l the Plant.
.. Treatment and discharge of process wastewater is discussed in Section 3.5 and
% .Section 3.6.
'(
A.f)
- REVISION 11.- SEPTEMBER 1980 3.3 J
- 1 +
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) 3.3.2 Cooling and Condensing Water Water for use as cooling and condensing water is withdrawn from the Tittabawassee River and pumped to the 880-acre (356 ha) recirculating cooling Pond. The makeup pumps are capable of withdrawing water from the O
O REVISION 2 - JUNE 1978 3.3-la l
l
m -;- ,
-MIDLAND'1&2-ER(OLS)-
q
.--TABLE 3.4-7 MAKEUP WATER APPROACH VELOCITIES FOR VARIOUS WITHDRAWAL-RATES No of Water Surface Average River Withdrawal- Total (a) Pumps- Elevation at Approach Flow ffor Makeupi : Recirculation Pumpi_ng-
_n Operating Intake Velocity (d)
'6 l (cfs) - .(cfs) (cfs) -(cfs) (ft (ms1)) (ft/s) 10l 350 0 67-(b) 1 588.8 0.42 6 l' 390 40 40 (c) 80. 1 589.0 0.24-700 80 0 80 1 589.4 0.50
-10 744 134 22 (c) 15 6 2 589.5 .0.73 1000- 158 0 158- 2 590.0 0.79 t
11l 1565 (e) -226 'O 226 3 590.8 1.00 c
4 11 lo (a) Pump output for makeup ~and recirculation to makeup pump inlet is a function of
.the river water surface elevation. Maximum pump.cutput is 270 cfs at a water
' ~
surface elevation of 608.0 ft.
- (b).' Recirculation to the blowdown.line is for radwaste d11ution only. Pump cutput a for radwaste dilution'is 67 cfs and is not a function of the river water surface elevation. Radwast'e dilution.mayfalso be provided by cooling pond blowdown-
. where-available.
- 6 l(c) Recirculation"to makeup pump inlet.
(d) Calculated cne foot'in-front of screen face.
. '10 (e): For river ' flows : exceeding 1565 E.fs, the average approach > velocity will be less than : 11- f t/s . -
~
- 1 ft' = 0.3048 n-'
.Ijft/s = 30.5 cm/s-
' u{ .
, REVISION :ll?- SEPTEMBER J 1980.
'~-'
'i ; j,-
2'% w: ' . , ~
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O TABLE 3.4-8 MAXIML'M AND MINIMUM TEMPERATURES DURING HOURLY SIMULATIONS FOR 40-DAY PERIOD (*F)
Equilibrium Condenser Iglet Temperature (a) Temperature (b)
Max Min Max Min Hourly 113.2 35.9 97.7 87.6 Daily Average 80.2 59.9 97.0 88.3 2 6-Day Average 75.1 65.7 95.1 90.4 Period Average (40 days) 71.0 89.9 Average - last 30 days 72.5 92.0 (a) Equilibrium temperature is the temperature of a water body at which there is no net heat transfer across the water surface. Equilibrium tempera-ture is determined solely by meteorological conditions.
(b) Figures represent last 30 days of simulation period to allow for adjust-ment9 tc assumed initial conditions. The heat load in Btu /hr was 7.61 x 10 . ,
O REVISION 2 - JUNE 1978 ,
1 I
l l
l E
L Je-p MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) 3.6- CHEMICAL AND BIOCIDE WASTES Chemical' and biocide usage and discharge in wastewater streams are discussed
-.below. 'The. interrelationship and water usage of Plant' water systems are presented in' Section 3.3.
Radwaste systems are discussed in Section 3.5.
[ Sanitary and laundry wastes are discussed abi Section 3.7. The effects of Plant ~ chemical and biocide discharges on the Tittabawassee River'are discussed in Section 5.3.
3.6.1 Low Volume Wastewater Makeup lfor the Midland Plant demineralizer system will be taken from either of
- 10 two sources. The Dow Chemical Company demineralized water supplied by Dow as a portion of the makeup supply to the evaporators can be used as makeup to the
~
demineralizar system or the Plant has the option of using the Midland Municipal Water District supply. Normally, the Plant will use the Midland i 'll municipal water as the preferred supply with Dow demineralized water as backup.' Since the Dow Chemical Company water is domineralized, the Midland municipal water' represents a worst case basis for waste characterization and e
is used throughout this Environmental Report. Midland municipal water quality is shown in Table 3.6-1.
t 3.6.l'1 ' Plant Makeup Water Treatment System Midland municipal lwaterLis pumped;from the makeup water system storage tank through: activated carbon filters for residual chlorine removal and then through either one-of'two ion' exchange trains. Each train censists of-a c
- strong adid cation vessel,ja strong base anion vessel and a' strong acid / strong -
'~~ I i base ^ mixed' bed . vessel.'
REVISION ~ll SEPTEMBER:19801 3.6 ,_
, l, l , 4. - . ~ -_
1
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O The activated carbon filter removes residual chlorine from the Midland municipal water. No significant accumulation of suspended solids is expected since the Midland municipal water is clarified and filtered prior to delivery to the Plant. The activated carbon filters are h-ckwashed as necessary to condition the bed. This creates a maximum of 4,700 galloas (17.8 k1) of
~
8 backwash water per day assuming each filter is backwashed once per day. This backwash water is routed to the evaporator building neutralization sump.
Each makeup demineralizer train is designed to produce 253,350 gallons (959 kl) of demineralized water between regenerations. During normal operation one train is in service, and the other train is either in regeneration or on standby. Both trains, however, may be used during periods of high water demand.
The cation resins are regenerated with a sulfuric acid solution and the anion resins with a sodium hydroxide solution. All backwash, rinse, and chemical regenerant wastes from the makeup demineralizers are routed to the makeup evaporator neutralizing sump where the pH is adjusted as required to a range within 6.5 and 9.5 by addition of sulfuric acid or sodium hydroxide. Waste characteristics and volumes for the carbon filters and ion exchange trains are ,
shown in Table 3.6-2.
3.6.1.2 Condensate Polishers The high purity water required for operation of the once-through steam generators is maintained by the use of ammonia, hydrazine and full flow l condensate polishing ion exchangers. The condensate polishers remove corrosion products and other impurities from the steam generator feedwater.
f l
REVISION 8 - APRIL 1979 3.6-2 l 1
bi
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
'(y 3.7.2 Liquid Effluents 3.7.2.1 Laundry Waste The' laundry waste consists of personnel decontamination solutions, emergency shower water, and liquid waste generated from washing clothing which is potentially contaminated.with radioactive particulates. This waste contains detergents and is not processed through demineralizers or evaporators, but is filtered for gross solids removal and collected in the laundry drain tank where the radioactivity level is monitored. Under normal conditions, laundry waste does not require treatment for radioactive contamination. From this
~
drain tank the waste is filtered again for fine solids removal and released through the discharge structure to the Tittabawassee River. If the
( ) radioactivity level exceeds discharge limits, the waste will be diverted to the liquid waste system evaporator for processing as discussed in Section 3.5.2.
The~ quantity of laundry waste for the Midland Plant is eatimated at a daily- I output of between 450 and 600 gallons. A non-phosphate synthetic detergent is used that allows the Plant to meet the NPDES Permit requirements for l discharges to the Tittabawassee River.
3.7.2.2 Storm Drainage The storm drainage system collects precipitation runoff from most of the building roofs and areaways, paved and unpaved surfaces of-the power block l area, and' conveys the watee to the cooling pond. The drainage from the j;-i evaporator building, combination shop, and part of the service water cooling.
5 )
N.-(~ ..
3.7-3 J G
-1 ji -
- g. '(
4 .
t
$><?>R+
f> ..AeE EvA<eA1,em v//f9 -
TEST. TARGET (MT-3) t i
1.0 582 L24 ES mm En l-l 5
- bb i.25 i.4 ii i.6
_ n=-
4 6" -
~
MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART p+
- ?Q+V>/)/f
,, pga h<>g C
1
,y - 4. w ,, ,+.. _ _ o,
- e. - - - - -
r ,'
\
-l MAGE EVALUATlON' TEST TARGET (MT-3)
.s NNNY l.0 "EaE4 e '8 En nm l-l 5 e.:
- $N
\1 1.25 1.4 1.6
< 6" - *-
MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART
~
1 <
%V+,,bi _
stg?
s y -
n3 y[;ggg ng:3
- u. L ' 'yy: M ; .;j - , =
==;a-
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O tower area is discharged directly into the Tittabawassee River via drainage ditches.
Precipitation falling on areas which may be contaminated by oil is collected and treated in the oily waste system (refer to Section 3.6).
3.7.2.3 Sanitarv Vaste The sanitary waste collection system provides for sewage collection and the 11 conveyance of these wastes and the blowdown and continuous sample flow from the process steam evaporators to The Dow Chemical Company Waste Treatment Plant. The system consists of a gravity sewer which collects the effluent 11 from all building sanitary plumbing systems. The sewage, evaporator blowdown and continuous sample flow are pumped by a sewage lift station to Dow via force main.
Administrative control, design, and restricted access to contaminated areas are provided to prevent radioactive materials from entering the domestic sanitary waste water collection system.
The maximum expected load during Plant operation is based on a population of 300 at 50 gallons per capita per day or 15,000 gallons per day.
The Dew treatment facility consists of storage equalization, and tertiary treatment under continuous licensed supervision. The tertiary treatment includes preliminary treatment through trickling filters followed by two-stage activated sludge and final sedimentation.
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEM3ER 1980 3.7-4
MIDIAND 1&2-ER(OLS) c O
3.7.2.4 Laboratory Wastes.
All laboratory waste drainages are routed as follows:
- a. The dirty radwaste system collects laboratory and other wastes which contain potentially radioactive substances.
l 1
- b. The detergent radwaste system collects laboratory and other wastes l which can contain detergent and radioactive substances.
- c. The turbine building laboratory wastes are routed to the turbine building neutralizing sump. ,
11
. d. The evaporator building laboratory wastes are routed to the evaporator building neutralizing sump.
The dirty radwaste and detergent radweste systems are discussed in Section 3.5.2. Neutralizing sumps are discussed in Section 3.6.
3.7.3 Solid Wasta Solid waste includes trash, garbage, and other solid materials, such as materials from the trash racks and water screens in the water intake structures. These solid wastes are re,oved to a sanitary landfill by a licensed waste disposal company as discussed in Section 5.6.3. The estimated quantities of such wastes are presented in Table 5.6-2.
I i
l l
G REVISICN 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 3.7-5 ;
-- - - . - - _ , , - , - - - , _ . _ . _ . , _ _ , , _ , . - _ , _ _ _ . . . _ . - . _ , - _ - ~ . , . . . _ . - _ _ . ,
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
/
4
'[
i 'prebuilt tower line, is 2.7 miles (4.35 km) long. The environmental effects of this line are discussed in detail in Section 4.2 of the Environmental Report Supplement (ERS)(121 These line routes are shown on Figure 3.9-2.
3.9.4.3 Midland 1 and 2 to Tittabawassee 345 kV Lines Two 345 kV bus tie lines originate at the south turbine building wall of the Midland Plant and exter' coss the north pond area with structures located adjacent to the dikes (Figure 3.9-2). Single circuit towers shown on Figure i
3.9-8 will be utilized for these lines. The lines parallel an existing 138 kV j tower line on 100-foot (30.5-m) centers along the toe of the dike to a point southerl'; of the railroad bridge. The lines cross the Tittabawassee River and South Sacinaw Road along the south side of Salzburg Road. Vegetation along
+
I
[N--)/ the riverbank was not disturbed. A small woodlot between the river and the dike was cleared. The area under the lines between South Saginaw Road and the 4
4 railroad is used for industrial settling ponds. The remainder of the route along the northeasterly side of the railroad right-of-way is undeveloped industrial land which is covered by sapling and shrub vegetation. Tie area adjacent to the lines will be partially cleared for construction work. Both 11 l lines will _ be 2.3 miles (3.7 km) long. The environmental eff.ects of this line are discussed in the Applicant's Supplemental Environmental Report (ASER)(.131 and the Final Environmental Statement (FES)Clkl.
A 3.9.4.4 Tittabawassee to Kenowa/Thetford 345 kV Line The Tittabawassee-Kenowa/Thetford 345 kV line was also addressed briefly in the ASER(13) and the FES(lk). A more detailed analysis follows.
V REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 3.9-7
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O The Tittabawassee to Kenowa/Thetford line is located in an existing corridor that was purchased prior to 1972. Double circuit towers, shown on Figure 3.9-9, were utilized. The corridor, excluding the wider, I mile (1.6 km) long exit at Tittabawassee, will accommodate two 345 kV tower lines. The first 8.0 miles (12.9 km) south from the Tittabawassee exit also accommodates two 138 kV tower lines and the nevt 7.6 miles (12.2 km) acccmmodates one 138 kV tower line. A 138 kV line was built in the north 8.0 miles (12.9 km) of the corridor in 1972. The 345 kV line is located 100 feet (30.5 m) east of the existing 138 kV line. The relative location of lines and the width of the corridor are indicated on Figures 3.9-2 and 3.9-3A through 3.9-3H.
The transmission line crosses numerous drains and creeks in addition to the Tittabawassee River and both forks of the Bad River. The Tittabawassee flood plain in the area of the proposed river crossing is approximately 0.5 mile %
(0.8 km) wide. Two structures are located in the low area northerly of the river with one of the towers placed within 200 feet (61 m) of the riverbank to provide clearance enough to allow riverbank vegetation to remain undisturbed.
The tower on the southerly side of the crossing is placed at the top of an embankment to allow all except the largest trees to r<. main. Other river and creek banks are left undisturbed except for the removal of larger trees. The majority of the land along the route is cultivated. Wooded areas are generally a composite of immature trees, saplings and shrubs. Nearly 60% of the route lies along property lines. The alignment was adjusted in several locations to asoid the removal of residences. The 345 kV line utilizes 333 REVISION 1 - APRIL 1978 3.9-8 l i
l l
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) 4.2 TRANSMISSION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION i
Transmission lines associated with the Midland Nuclear Plant construction consist of two 345 kV lines running 2.3 miles (3.7 km) to Tittabawassee Substation and one 345 kV line running 27.5 miles (44.2 km) from Tittabawassee Substation to interconnect with the existing Kenowa-Thetford 345 kV line. The line route between the Plant and the substation crosses flat land identified as industrial or wasteland. The 27.5-mile (44.2 km) section of line running south out of the substation crosses farmlands mixed with occasional woodlots.
Another line associated with the project is a 138 kV start-up line running south along the east side of the cooling pond and east along the north side of Gordonville Road. This line crosses the Tittabawassee River and Saginaw Road approximately 1 mile (1.6 km) south of the 345 kV line crossings and then
)
continues northeast into Tittabawassee Substation. The clearing at the river is for construction access with a majority of the right-of-way selectively cleared to preserve low growing species. There is an ample amount of roadside trees along Saginaw Road to obstruct views to the line at the crossing location. l l
, Routing of the 138 kV start-up line and the two 345 kV lines judiciously utilizes existing vegetation. An insignificant amount of clearing is required between the Midland Plant and Tittabawassee Substation. The Tittabawassee to Kenowa-Thetford 345 kV line requires clearing only 110.9 acres (45 ha) of scattered fencerows and woodlots at a width of 142 feet (43.3 m). Additional 1 trees outside the cleared right-of-way which endanger the line are selectively removed, n
v 4.2-1
_ _ _. _. _ ~ _ _ - . - , - - _ . . - _ . - - . . _ . . _
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
The most visually sensitive area affected by new transmission lines is the O
northern one-third of the Tittabawassee to Kenewa-Thetford right-of-way(l) .
In this area, the flat terrain is nearly lacking of arborescent vegetation.
Agriculture in this area is practiced up to roadsides and ditch banks. The predominance of row crops also has eliminated fencerows and the vegetation that usually is present along fencerows. Although the transmission towers are exposed for long distances, the rural nature of the surrounding area reduces the effects of this exposure.
The remaining portion of the Tittabawassee to Kenowa-Thetford 345 kV line route has a moderate sensitivity. In some areas the'line will be screened by existing woodlots and stream valleys.
Design, routing, construction and maintenance of these transmission lines is done in accordance with Environmental Criteria for Electric Transmission Systems (2) developed by the US Departments of Interior and Agriculture, and Guidelines for the Protection of Natural, Historic, Scenic and Recreational Values in the Design and Location of Rights-of-Way and Transmission Facilities (3) published by the Federal Pcwer Commission. In addition, the Applicant has engaged landscape architects to develop guidelines (4) for minimizing impact of transmission lines and facilities on aesthetic values. These criteria have been applied in design of the transmission lines from the Midland Plant to the substation, and from the substation to the Kenowa-Thetford line.
11 Approval of the Corps of Engineers was obtained for erecting the transmission lines across the Tittabawassee River, Bad River and Beaver Creek.
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 4.2-2 O
i l
MILLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) '
i 4.2.1 i
Clearing Techn(ques and Changes to Physical and Biological Processes i
Construction clearing practices of selective cutting, keeping the width of the !
i cleared strip to a minimum, clearing to a variable width within spans and l preservation of existing small trees and shrubs are followed when possible to l l
reduce visual impact. Merchantable timber is salvaged and slash windrowed or j disposed of. Windrowing provides habitat for many species of birds and !
4 mammals and is the method accepted by the Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
I l
Construction activities along the transmission line route will require removal of all trees and brush to at least 45 feet (13.6 m) on either side of the 4
tower center line. Additional trees tall enough to endanger the reliability of the operating line will be removed up to 115 feet (34.7 m) from the tower i
j center line. Clearing activities began on September 10, 1979 on the southern i
end of the right-of-way. This date coincided with comp 1'etion of field work 1
f for the ecological survey on this segment of the right-of-way. The ecological i
- survey for the entire right-of-way, which was completed on September 14, 1979, )
1 l revealed no threatened or endangered species or other significant impediments 2
10 to construction. Clearing activities were completed by November 15, 1979.
Clearing crews were transported in small pickup trucks. Small crawler type 1
4 tractors windrowed brush along the right-of-way.
1
, In wooded . reas that required clearing, the physical structure of the forest was well as the biotic succession was reduced to herbaceous ground cover.
These conditions are the results of clearing the corridor, grading where required for a construction road in the right-of-way, grading and excavating 1
Ox t
REVISION 10 - NOVEMBER 1979 , 4.2-3 1
1 i
t -+w'- + y y --%-- y . m " ry ytre v yw' iia-gr y-i.,+e3y y v eL4---9t t--*ht- -&~'gw- Mttv *.-va*'e' gp9- a- -t-eiy-*g* '1e
r.
MIDLAND 1&2-EF(OLS) for tower bases, construction of towers, and heavy equipment moving across the O
terrain.
The cleared wooded areas are changed structurally and compositionally from areas supporting at least three vegetative strata and wildlife nesting areas to areas of one or two vegetative. strata. While floral and faunal species requiring a forest habitat in this stage of succession have been negatively 10 impacted, floral and faunal species favoring earlier successional stages will be benefitted. Important game species such as deer, rabbits, and grouse should benefit from the erection and maintenance of this right-of-way.
Topographical and hydrolog. cal changes are minimal due to the little relief in this area. Hence, disrupt: 2n of drainage patterns or topographical features by line construction has a negligible effect on biological processes.
4.2.2 Erecting Towers and Stringing Conductors Construction of towers ar.d stringing conductors cause minor disruption to the enviretment. At each tower, work activities travel across the shortest and most practical access roads. Work activites which impact the right-of-way for 4 the Tittabawassee to Kenewa/Thetford transmission line follow based, on the current construction schedule.
11 l Shipments of tower anchor steel were delivered to railhead storage sites by 10l November 1979. Contractor's equipment will be set up and excavatior for tower I
11 l foundations is scheduled to begin in August 1982. Heavy tracked equipment or I truck-mounted power augers will be required to bore four-foot diameter holes 10 to depths from 10 feet (3 m) to 20 feet (6 m) depending on soil conditions. A 30-foot (9 m) long, trailer-mounted, vibra-hammer, owed by a truck or tractor 4lwillberequiredtodrivecaissonsforthefoundationateachofthefour REVISION 11 - SEPTE"BER 1980 4.2-4
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O V
tower legs. A stump-free access road to each tangent tower site will be .
required for the front-end dump, 12-1/2 yard concrete trucks to supply concrete for the pier type foundations. A tracked front-end loader and a soil 4 compactor will be used at each angle tower to excavate and cover the 12-15 foot square (3.7-4.6 m) reinforced concrete pads for the four tower anchors.
A 15-man crew transported by light t. rucks will be used at each tower site. l I
With allewance for inclement weather and unusual access problems, foundation 10l work will progress ahead of tower erection crews to a scheduled completion date of August 1983.
11 Tower steel delivery is scheduled to begin by August 1982 by 10-ton multi-wheeled trucks from the railhead to the tower sites and will continue as 10 l required, except for the period 'when spring, load restricticas are placed on roads. Approximately 2,200 tons of tower steel or an average of 15 tons per 4 tower will be required. Sorting and partial assembly of tower steel will be 10 done by a 15-man crew. A 70-tor., self propelled, tracked crane, supported by a 12-man crew, is scheduled for delivery to start erection of towers on
'll completed foundations by November 1982. Tower erection is scheduled for completion by May 1983.
Conductor reels are usually placed at four-mile intervals with tensioner equipment located at t'.e midpoint between them. Conductor stringing operations start approximately one month after tower erection starts. A light 4 caterpillar tractor will be used to pull the lead line along the approximate tower center line between the conductor reels and the tensioner. Conductors are tension strung so that they do not touch the ground. Two reels of 10 l conductor per phase are p'illed from each direction and joined with splices n
() 4 l before the equipment is moved to the next station where the process is REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 4.2-5
~
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) repeated. The heavy equipment along with the caterpillar tractors used for O
4 transportation and anchorage are located as near to roadways as practical.
Wire installatior. is scheduled to begin in January 1983 and for completion by 11 July 1983.
Project completion is scheduled for August 1, 1983. Two weeks are allowed for 10 l testing of substation equipment prior to the service date. Site cleanup, 11 l grounding and fence restoration will be completed before October 1,1983.
The Tittabawassee to Kenawa/Thetford 345 kV line route crosses 14 agricultural drainage ditches and 5 streams (l). Most of the drainage ditches are small and lack arborescent vegetation; therefore, transmission line construction does not create much impact. Construction equipment generally uses existing roads and culverts in crossing ditches to prevent erosion and siltation.
All stream and river crossings will be accomplished in accordance with 10 specifications that are conditions for permit approvals by the Michigan Department of Natural Re3ot.rces under the Inland Lakes and Streams Act, Act 346 of Public Acts of 1972 and br the Cor ; of Engineers under Section 404 of 11 l the Federal Water Pollution Control ! t (PL 92-500 as amended).
The 25 archeological / historic sites reporten (Appendix 2.6C) along the Tittabawassee to Kenewa/Thetford 345 kV transaission line route can, in general, be avoided and left intact on the right-of-way. An avoidance and 4 mitigation plan was finalx2ed at a Consumers Power meeting with Dr Doreen Ozker, Archeologist for the Great Lakes Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, and Dr John Halsey, State Archeologist, on November 29, 1978. This i
plan is summarized on Table 4.2-1.
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 ..:-6 L
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) t
\_
11 Five of the archeological sites were removed from consideration because prior 4lsandremovalandgradingbyothershaddestroyedthearcheologicalmaterials 11lorbecausetheywerenotarcheologicalsitesintheROW. Eleven of the archeological sites can be avoided because their locations are such that they 4 can be posted to direct construction activities around them. Tower locations will be adjusted to span the archeological sites.
10 l Nina of the archeological sites required mitigation because they conflicted 4 l with line construction plans for structure location or access along the right-10 of-way. Phase I field reconnaissance of all these archeological sites was conducted in the spring of 1979. This phase of archeological mitigation 11 l involved plowing, surface collection of artifacts and shovel probing to detarmine whether the site was significant enough to require detailed Phase II
(/ mitigation. Phase I reconnaissance was generally restricted to the part of 10 the right-of-way impacted by construction activities. If the results were negative, that area was then cleared for unrestricted construction activity. I Phase II excavation, conducted in the spring of 1979, involved plotting the concentrations of artifacts recovered in Phase I, analysis of their significance, division of the site into a grid for controlled surface collection, and further excavation to the archeological horizon in areas that j 11 were productive in Phase I. Phase III analysis involved documentation, interpretation and reporting ot the results of the mitigation activities. As indicated in Section 2.6.3, a report has been provided to the NRC on the findings of this analysis.
4 l The Herber Site, 20SA318, located south of Ring Road in the southwest one-10 l quarter of Section 15, Brart Township, Saginaw County, involved Phase I, II l O)
(. 4 l and III activities. The 31g Mapleton Site, 20MDil6, located in the floodplain REVISION 11 - SEPTFMBER 1980 4.2-7 1
MIDIAND 1&2-ER(OLS) i 10 j north of the Tittabawassee River in the southwest one quarter of Section 1, 11 Ingersoll Town. ip, Midland County, also required the same treat =ent. Phase II excavation also occurred at other sites after the Phase I field reconnaissance. Following archeological fieldwork completed in July 1979, 10 sites listed for mitigation were clear for unrestricted construction activity, pending the September completion of the concurrent ecological study discussed in Section 4.2.1.
4.2.3 Access and Service Roads During construction, access to the right-of-way generally is along established 10 l farm lanes and temporary drives near the line. New access roads to the right-of-way are constructed only when absolutely necessary. New roads and temporary drives are returned to their original use upon complet. ion of construction.
4.2.4 Erosion Due to Transmission Line Construction Soil erosion is controlled in compliance with Michigan Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Act (5). Temporary measures are implemented during construction to eliminate soil erosion associated with construction activittes and the use of heavy equipment. Upon completion of construction, disturbed areas are regraded and per=anent erosion control measures are administered to preserve the water quality of the watershed.
Construction activities on agricultural lands subject these areas to some wind erosion. Agriculture is extensively practiced close to roads, ditches and streams, leaving vast areas devoid of windireaks and shelterbeits. During construction, this condition exists for o te growing season. Following construction, the land again is available for agricultural practices. If
. REVISICN 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 4.2-8
MIDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS)
O TABLE 4.2-1
-AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES ON TITTABAWASSEE TO KENOWA/THETFORD TRANSMISSION LINE RIGHT-OF-WAY 11 l .
1979 Michigan Archaeological Mitigation Site Number (a) Activity Phase (b) 20SA207 Omit (c) .
4I 20SA321 Avoid, use west 1/3 of R0W -
20SA320 Avoid, use sides of ROW to avoid knoll -
20SA337 Mitigate I, II, III 11 20SA108 Mitigate I, II, III 20SA322 Mitigate I, II, III 20SA323 Avoid, use west 1/3 of ROW -
4 20SA318 Miti ate I, II, III 20SA324 Omi. d) -
11 20SA325 Mitigate . I, II, III 20SA326 Mitigate + I, II i
Cjg 4l 20SA327 20SA328 20SA329 Avoid, use east 1/2 of ROW Avoid, use west 1/2 of R0W 11 l Mitigate I, III 20SA330 Omit (C) -
4l 20SA319 Avoid, use west 1/2 of ROW -
20SA331 Avoid use west side of ROW -
11 l 20SA332 Omit (e) -
20SA333 Avoid, use west 1/2 of ROW -
4 20MD391 Avoid, n e east 1/3 of ROW -
20MD392 Avoid, use east 1/2 of ROW -
3l 20MD393 Avoid, use west 1/2 of ROW -
20MD116 Mitigate I, II, III 11 20MD394 Mitigate I, II, III 20MD39S Omitsc) .
4 (a) Refer to Appendix 2.6C.
(b) I = Reconnaissance; II = Excavation; III = Analysis; refer to Section 4.2.2.
(c) Original site was previously destroyed by mining.
11 (d) Sito is on a tree easement rather than the'RU4.
(e) On reconsideration this is not an archeological site.
U REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) i s
TABLE 5.8-1 l 1
l 6l ESTIMATED DECOMMISSIONING (a) AND RESTORATION COSTS 11 1 (Millions of 1984 Dollars) {
s )
6l Activity Estimate
, Mobilization, Demobilization and Temporary Facilities $ 4.8 Supplies, Power, Contractor Services, Nuclear Insurance 23.6 Equipment 5.4 11 Staff Labor 33.2 Demolition Services 54.9 Disposal (Radioactive Waste) 46.6 Overheads 16.3 Subtotal Decommissioning $184.8 i
6lReboiler, Diesel-Generator, Administration,-Service i Water and Circulating Water Structures Demolition 8.9 11 Site Specific Restoration 41.9
, Rounding (0.6)
- 6l Total Decommissioning, Demolition and 11 l Site Restoration $235.0 6 (a) Prompt removal / dismantling based on Battelle Pacific Northwest Study (la)and Atomic Industrial Forum Study (2) .
1 l
l l
s REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 t
_44. , . . . . m m --w - _ - ------- --- - - - - - - - - - - -
J J
J v
I f
4 4
i a
1 i, .
, , , , , _._-...--__ . . -m_-_-,- _--,-- --.._,- --~_---- , - -.._m_-- - , , _ _ . . --_.
/%
i!
v CHAPTER 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title page No 6
EFFLUENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PR0 GRAMS.............................. 6.1-1 6.1 APPLICANT'S PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL 6.1.1 PROGRAMS ........................................ 6.1-1 6.1.1.1
' Surface Waters .................................. 6.1-1 '
Physical and Chemical Parameters ................ 6.1-2 l 10 6.1.1.2 Biological Parameters.............. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1-3 6.1.1.2.1 Entrainment Sampling for Fish Eggs and Larvae. . . . 6.1-3 6.1.1.2.2 Impingement Ss.noling .............. . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1-4 6.1.1.2.3 Biological Sampling in the Tittabawa n e River .. 6.1-5 6.1.2 Ground Water .................................... 6.1-5 6.1.2.1 Preoperational Groundwater Monitoring Program.... 6.1-6 6.1.2.2 Supplementary Preoperational Groundwater Q
h 6.1.2.2.1 Monitoring Program ..............................
Description................................... .
6.1-7 l
6.1.2.2.2 6.1-7 6.1.2.2.3 G ro undwa te r Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1-8 G ro undwa te r Q ua l i ty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1-9 6.1.2.3 Models ...................................... ... . . 6.1-9 6.1.3 6.1.3.1 Air.............................................. . 6.1-9 Onsite Meteorological Measurements Program ...... 6.1-9 6.1.3.1.1 Meteorological Site Characteristics.............. 6.1-9 6.1.3.1.2 Meteorological Data Aquisition System............ 6.1-11 6.1.3.1.3 Ca l ib ra t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1-14 6.1.3.1.4 Service'and Maintenance.......................... 6.1-16 6.1.3.1.5 Data Reduction Procedures........................ 6.1-17 6.1.3.1.6 Meteorological Data Recovery .................... 6.1-18 6.1.3.1.7 Joint Frequency Distributions of Wind Direction and Speed by Atmospheric Stability Class ........ 6.1-18 6.1.3.1.8 Fog and I ce Moni to ring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1-18 2l6.1.3.2 Models .......................................... 6.1-18b 6.1.3.3 Preoperational Noise Survey................. .... 6.1-19 6.1.3.3.1 Instrumentatica.................................. 6.1-19 6.1.3.3.2 Calibration...................................... 6.1-21 6.1.3.3.3 Methodology of La ta Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1-21 Il6.1.4 Land ............................................ 6.1-22 6.1.4.1 Geology and Soils................................ 6.1-22 6.1.4.1.1 Exploration Programs ............................ 6.1-23 6.1.4.1.2 Soil and Rock Sampling Methods .................. 6.1-24 6.1.4.1.3 Subsidence Monitoring Program............... 6.1-25 6.1.4.2 Land Use and Demographic Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.1-26
- j V
6.1.4.3 6.1.4.4 Ecological Parameters............................
6.1-26 -
Archeology .............................. . . . . . . . 6.1-27a 7 6.1.5 Radiological Monitoring.......................... 6.1-27b REVISION 10 - NOVEMBER 1979 6-i
,, c--- - - . ., -
.--.n -
_nn - - , . -
O Section Title Page No 6.1R REFERENCES ...................................... 6.1R-1 6.2 APPLICANT'S PROPOSED OPERATIONAL MONITORING PROGRAMS ........................................ 6.2-1 6.2.1 Surface Waters .................................. 6.2-1 6.2.1.1 Physical and Chemical Parameters ................ 6.2-1 6.2.1.2 Biological Parameters............................ 6.2-2 6.2.2 Ground Water .................................... 6.2-2 6.2.3 Air.............................................. 6.2-3 6.2.3.1 Meteorology...................................... 6.22 6.2.3.1.1 Operational Meteorological Monitoring Program.... 6.2-3 2l6.2.3.1.2 Operatioral Fog and Ice Monitoring Program ...... 6.2-3a 6.2.3.2 Noise............................................ 6.2-4 6.2.4 Land ............................................ 6.2-4 6.2.4.1 Geology and Soils................................ 6.2-4 6.2.4.1.1 Exploratorv...................................... 6.2-4 6.2.4.1.2 Subsidence ...................................... 6.2-5 6.2.4.2 Land Use and Demography.......................... 6.2-5 6.2.4.3 Ecological Parameters........................ ... 6.2-5 6.2.5 Radiological Monitoring........................ . 6.2-6 6.2R REFERENCES ...................................... 6.2R-1 6.2A ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS 6.3 RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENT AND MONITORING PROGRAMS ........................................ 6.3-1 6.3.1 Terrestrial Ecological Programs.................. 6.3-1 6.3.2 Related Aquatic Ecological Programs.... ...... . 6.3-1 6.3.2.1 Dow Chemical Company Study (Zillich) ........ .. 6.3-1 6.3.2.2 Michigan Department of Natural Resources Study............................................ 6.3-2 6.3.2.3 Dow Chemical Company Study (Batchelder &
Alexander) ............. ... ...... ...... ...... 6.3-2 6.3.2.4 Great Lakes Basin Framework Study......... .. 6.3-3 6.3.2.5 Great Lakes Resource Management Program.... .. .. 6.3-3 6.3.3 Meteorological Programs.......................... 6.3-4 6.3.4 Hydrological Programs................. .......... 6.3-4 6.3.4.1 The Dow Chemical Study ... .. ..... .. ......... 6.3-4 6.3.4.2 US Geological Survey ..... ............ ... .. 6.3-5 6.3.4.3 East Central Michigan Planning and Development Region .......... . .. ......... . 6.3-6 6.3.4.4 STORET Data................ ...... .......... .. 6.3-7 6.3.4.5 Water Quality Management Plan for Lower Lake Huron Basin ......... ... ...... ... ... 6.3-7 6.3.4.6 Other Programs ......... .... .... . .. . ...... 6.3-8 6.3.5 Geological Programs....... ....... .......... ... o.3-8 6.3.6 Archaeological Programs........ ............. . . 6.3-8 5l6.3.7 Lise Programs ......... ... .... .... . . ... 6.3-9 6.3.8 Radiological Programs. . .... ........ .. .. . 6.3-9 6.3R REFERENCES ............ . ... .... . . .. . . 6.3R-1 9
REVISION 5 - JANUARY 1979 6-ii
. . - . . ~ . . . . . . , _ . - . . . . . - - . . . . - - - . .- - _ .- ... . - - .-. .. .. - - . . . . - _ . . - - -
i
. 1
- t. ,
l' l
l i
i i
8 l Section Title Page No l
i 6.4 - PREOPERATIOFAL ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL ll i
MONITORING DATA.................................. 6.4-1
(
l i
l i
1-l@-
1 1
1, I
I.
4 i
t 4,
1' T
l i
I 1
i i
i-REVISION 5 - JANUARY 1979 6-iii .
> , - , , - - -, ,,v---,wwe-www~~ +,--we-mv< , we.,,---e** www-e wo-e ~ ~ ~ -'~~~~*~~'-w=~=-~~*'~'"**" * * " " ~ ' -- - * " ~ ~ " * " " ~ '
O CHAPTER 6 LIST OF TABLES Table Description 6.1-1 PREOPERATIONAL PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PARAMETERS MONITORED IN THE TITTABAVASSEE RIVER 10 6.1.2 PREOPERATIONAL BIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS MONITORED IN TE TITTABAWASSEE RIVER 6.1-3 SENSORS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND SYSTEM ACCURACY OF INSTRUMENTS USED ON 91.5-METER METEOROLOGICAL TOWER 6.1-4 SENSORS, SPECIFICATIONS, AND SYSTEM ACCURACY OF INSTRUMENTS USED ON EACH 10-METER TOWER STATION 6.1-5 PERCENTAGE OF METEOROLOGICAL DATA RECOVERED FOR THE MIDIAND PIANT 6.1-6 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM AS DESCRIBED IN PREVIOUS DOCUMENTS 7l 6.1-8 PREOPERATIONAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM SCHEDULE 7l 6.4-1
SUMMARY
OF LABORATORY RESULTS 11 6.4-2 ENVIR0hENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM
SUMMARY
- MIDIAVD PIANT O
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMEER 1980 6-iv
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)-
~p
% ,)
6.1.3.3 Precoerational Noise Survey
- During May of 1973, an environmental sound survey was conducted in the area of the Midland Plant and surrounding property. The survey provided baseline environmental noise levels for the area surrounding the Plant prior to construction such that the noise impact of construction and operation could be determined. The baseline data collected in this survey are presented in _
Section 2.7.
i.
11l Another survey will be conducted in the yer.r prior to ccamercial operation, when most Plant construction is complete, following the same procedures and techniques as used in the 1973 survey. At that time, any additional ambient
~
noise sources, such as those from The Dow Chemical Company complex, the major
) source of noise in the 1973 survey, can be identified.
6.1.3.3.1 Instrumentation The following equipment was used in the May 1973 ambient sound level survey of the Midland Plant site:
- a. General Radio Model 1558-BP Octave Band Analyzer
- b. General Radio Mcdel 1560-P6 1-Inch Ceramic Microphone
- c. General Radio Model 1560 - P40 Microphone Preamplifier
- d. General Radio Model 1562A Microphone Calibrator
- e. Bruel and Kjaer Windscreen The Octave Band Analyzer (sound level meter) used conforms to ANSI Standard Sl.4-1971(7) for a Class II sound level meter which complies with ANSI O
\ l
. N_s/
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 6.1-19
MIDLAND M2-ER(OLS)
O Standard Sl.13-197f 8) , Section 5.4.1, concerning instrument accuracy for field environment use, nlInfutureenvironmentalnoisesurveysattheMidlandPlantsite,thefollowing general equipment specifications will be adhered to:
- a. Sound Level Meter - conforms to ANSI Standard S1.4-1971(7) for a Class I Precision Sound Level Meter.
- b. Octave Filter Set - conforms to ANSI Standard Sl.ll-1966 (R1971)(9) for octave, half octave, and third octava filters. The filter set can be a part of the Precision Sound Level Meter.
- c. Microphone - conforms to ANSI Standard S1.4-1971 W and satisfies the requirements of the Class I Precision Sound Level Meter. A windscreen was used to minimize the effect of wind noise,
- d. Calibrator - capable of calibrating the sound level meter used.
Other general equipment will be required:
- e. Tape Recorder - will be used when a nonrepeatable, short duration noise is to be measured. Tape recorder will meet specifications set forth in ASSI Standard Sl.13-197$8) .
- f. Temperature, humidity and wind speed measuring equipment.
Barometric pressure will be obtained from the nearest airport.
- g. Measuring Tape or Measuring Wheel - for determining distances to locate data collection points.
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 6.1-20 O
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
N
)
6.1.3.3.2 Calibration The system was calibrated prior to each measurament period to ensure consistent and accurate measurements. . Battery condition was monitored and i 11 batteries replaced when necessary. These procedures will be followed in all i future sound level surveys at the site.
6.1.3.3.3 Methodology of Data Collection During the May 1973 environmental sound survey, "A" weighted and/or octave band measurements were taken at 13 locations in the area of the Midland Plant structures and the perimeter of the Plant property boundary. Measurements
! were taken at the nearest residence as well as along the access roads to the
(N Plant. Measurements were taken during three different time intervals over a
\'j 24-hour period; (1) the first period (1630 to 1930 hr) encompassed the highest ambient. noise time period in the general vicinity of the Plant due to the elevated levels of traffic noise on adjacent roads; (2) the second period i
(2100 to 2300 hr) was chosen as typical of those hours when the majority of persons residing near the Plant would be active within their homes and levels
, of ambient sources other than the Midland Plant would be minimal; (3) the third period (0300 to 0500 hr) represented the extreme condition when i
virtually all community noise should be at its lowest value. The number and location of sampling points and the sampling periods were chosen to provide an accurate measure of existing ambient levels. Sound level measurements were taken with the sound level meter in the slow-response position. Each
- measurement represents a 15-second e"erage of the sound level meter J
indication. During each measurement, weather data and general traffic n,g_, conditions were observed and recorded. A B&K Windscreen.was always used on REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 6.1-21
_ _ - _ _ _ _ - - - _ = - _ _ _ _ . .:__. - - - - - - _ _ _ . - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ . _ - _ _ . _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - _ - _ _ _ . _ _ _ - - . _ - - . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ - .
MIDLANE 1&2-ER(OLS)
O the microphone. However, no data were collected when the wind velocity exceeded 10 mph.
11 Essentially the same procedure will be followed in the ambient survey per-formed just prior to ecmmercial operation with the exception that a number of measurement points will be added to the existing 13, -in the area north of the Plant extending into The Dow Chemical Company complex, and beyond the ?lant -
property lines to the south and west to include the residential areas nearest to the Plant.
In addition, the amount of data taken at each measurement point will be expanded by recording a sample of the ambient sound level and subsequently analyzing this sample on a real-time analyzer. Not only will this provide a permanent record of the data, but will allow more meaningful comparisons to be made between data points and between preoperational and postoperational s
levels. Due to the industrial nature of the rea directly north and east of the Midland Plant, it is also expected that the noise impact of the Midland Plant will be difficult to quantify without a spectral analysis of the sound levels at these points. The recording and real-time analysis of these measurements will greatly enhance the accuracy and reliability of the data.
1l6.1.4 Land 6.1.4.1 Geology and Soils Numerous site exp N rtto.' programs have been co=pleted since the initial investigation began in 1936. The primary purposes of these studies were to determine the site glacial t.< ldrock geology conditions, evaluate the foundation conditions, and det. ermine the environmental impact of Plant REVISION 11 - SEPTEM3ER 1980 6.1-22
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O U
construction and operation on the geology and soils in the Flant area. The l 1
major conclusions of these investigations are presented in Section 2.5. These l
programs are summarized in the following sections.
6.1.4.1.1 Exoloration Programs l
Power Block Aret. Borings
, A total of 117 borings ranging up to 432 feet in depth and 22 probes were performed in the. power block area between 1956 and 1974. Two of the borings passed through the glacial deposits and penetrated into rock. Boring I was drilled about 10 feet into rock, and Boring 1A was drilled about 75 feet into rock. ,
() Twenty-two probes ranging in depth from 10 to 45 feet were also performed in
] chis area by truck-mounted rotary continuous flight auger equipment. The soil cuttings from the augers were used to identify soil types for the log of the soil profile.
Dike Perimeter Area Borings l
/ total of 167 borings are attributable to exploratory work for the dike system. Sixty-one of the borings were done for site exploration and the rest were subsequently drilled in conjunction with dike construction. The borings 4
ranged in depth from 3.5 to 70 feet.
i O1
(~/
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 6.1-23
, .. . - = . . - . . , - . - . . , - - - - - _ . - . .
MIDIA'D 1&2-ER(OLS)
O Borrow Area Borings A total of 90 borings were made in tha borrow area inside the dike system.
Twenty-one of the borings were made in the area that is now the emergency cooling water pond. These borings ranga in depth from 10 to 15 feet.
O O
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 6-1-23a
-- o ,
a-s, A.u w.p 6- -
+a2 M - m - .A _& ,e . ea. a - - .- + a e s --. - --
MIDIAND 1&2-ER(OLS) 4 1
I 4
4 6 a
f
}
l f
f 4
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 6-1-23b i
-,-,--a,,._,. - ,- , , , , . , - -
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O Forty-nine borings were drilled at various locations within the cooling pond area to determine a source of borrow material. They ranged in depth from 5 to 60 feet.
Borings for Structures Outside Power Block Area Additional exploration was conducted for three structures away from the main Plant area. Nine explora'cory borings were drilled at the railroad bridge site and one in the embankment area. These ranged in depth between 25 and 70 feet.
A total of eight borings with depths ranging from 60 to 75 feet were made in the vicinity of the Bullock Creek bridge. Sixteen borings ranging in depth between 9 and 60 feet were made in the vicinity of the spillway through the east leg of the dike.
6.1.4.1.2 Soil and Rock Sampling Methoda No preoperational studies have been conducted to determine the impact of construction activities on productivity of soils; however, the surface soil types that are found on the site have been discussed in the Ecological Survey of the Midland Site (10) ,
Physical properties of the glacial surficial materials were determined. Both dist"rbed and undisturbed soil samples were taken. The disturbed samples were of three types: those from the standard penetration test sampler, bulk samples from auger cuttings, and wash samples from the rotary wash drilling process. The undisturbed samples were obtained by using Dames and Moore soil samplers or coriag methods.
O REVISION 1 - APRIL 1978 6 1-24
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) f- y b
The rock cores were taken by an NX size core barrel with a diamond bit.
6.1.4.1.3 Subsidence Monitoring Program The subsidence benchmark program is designed to monitor any subsidence of the 2lgroundsurfacewhichcouldoccuradjacenttothePlantduetosaltmining.
The program is considered as precautionary because no actual subsidence is anticipated as a result of the salt mining. l Two studies, one of which includes 10 years of tround surface monitoring data, l prepared by independent engineering consulting firms and referenced in Section 2.5 of this report, conclude there will be no surficial effects due to salt removal from the rock strata located over 4,100 feet beneath the ground
[/)
surface. Since the issuance of these reports, a number of previously active I wells used in the subsidence analysis have either been plugged or are now inactive. In fact, within a one-mile radius of the power block area, there 11l are no active salt solution mining wells (see Table 2.5-1 and Figure 2.5-5).
, One brine removal well is still in service but it is over 2,000 feet southwest of the containment buildings.
The subsidence monitor'r,, system consists of 25 shallow benchmarks anchored in 2 till at a depth of 15 to 60 feet (4.5 to 18 m) below the ground surface and 2 deep benchmarks anchored in rock 320 and 413 feet (98 and 126 m) belcw the ground. Figure 6.1-8 shows the location and design of these benchmarks.
2 4
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER laSO 6.1-25 W
,- - -- ,,~,, e . -+ , - a - ,, - , - , ,w-- ---
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) 9.
First order surveys will be made at least annually for the operational life of the Plant to detect any subsidence near the Plant.
6.1.4.2 Land-Use and Demographic Surveys Land-use information and data were obtained by the Applicant's staff from field surveys of the area surrounding the Midland Plant site, and from the Environmental Inventory (11) .
Recent aerial photographs were used to locate the nearest residence in each of the 16 sectors. Consumers Power Company's Electrical Service Distribution maps were used to verify these residences. The nearest vegetable gardens were assumed to be lv ated at the nearest residences. Field surveys of the area within 5 miles of the Midlac4 Plant consisted of driving all the public roads to physically locate the milking cows, milking goats and also to verify the nearest residences.
Methods for collection and analysis of demographic data are discussed in Section 2.1.2.
6.1.4.3 Ecological Parameters The 1971 terrestrial ecological survey (10) that was conducted by Michigan State University personnel is the only terrestrial ecological survey that has been cespleted on the Midland Plant site. The report described and discussed 3 relationships between the vegetation and wildlife that existed on the cite prior to and after preliminary Plant site preparation activities. Most of the vegetation and wildlife habitat on the 1235-acre Plant site have been either '
eliminated or altered as a result of construction activities.
REVISION 3 - NOVEMBER 1976 6.1-26 h
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) .
O O
6.2A-1 DEFINITIONS 11 l annually - See frequency, atmospheric AT - A normalized measure of stmospheric stability obtained from the vertical temperature gradient between wo levels (eg, 10m and 60m). The ,
corresponding values between the magnitude of .emperature gradient and type of stability are given in Regulatory Guide 1.23.
i
, batch release - The discharge of fluid wastes of a discrete volume.
J calendar quarter - Periods of three consecutive months beginning with January, i
April, July, and October.
1
( calibration - The process whereby a position on the scale of an instrument is identified with the magnitude of the signal actuating that instrument.
i check - A qualitative determination of acceptable operability by observation of instrument behavior during normal operation.
commercial operation - When the unit is declared commercial by Consumers Power Company.
composite samole - A sample made up of several grab samples collected and mixed to represent the average over a period of time.
confirmed measurement - A measuremer.a that has been verified by re-analysis of the original, analysis of a duplicase, or analysis of a new sample.
O V
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 6.2A-1-1
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O continuous - As applied to monitors, samplers and indicators, does not prevent the devices from periodically being taken out of service for calibration or maintenance.
contincous release - The discharge of fluid waste of a nordiscrete volume, eg, fro- a volume or system that has an input floc during the continuous release.
cooling pona - The approximately 880-acre impoundment (operating capacity of about 12,600 acre feet) for the dissipation of waste heat, storage of emergency service water and storage of some limited process wastes until discharge to the river.
11l daily - See frequency.
daily average concentration - Arithmetic average of two or more quantities totaled over a cekndar day; arithmetic average of all daily determinations of concentration made during a calendar month, d_bt! - Diameter at breast height.
drift -
Small droplets of the cooling water and dissolved salts that are carried aloft by convection and wind.
[ - Average beta or gamma energy per disintegration of a radionuclide mixture.
emergency service water intake channel and reservoir - That depressed portion of the cooling pond which provides cooling water for the ultimate heat sink following an analyzed accident requiring operation of Plant emergency systems.
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 6.2A-1-2
-. . .- . . .~. . _ .. . -
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O i
frequency - Required intervals are defined as:
Annually - At least once per 12 months.
Daily - At least once per 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.
Monthly - At least :s per 31 days.
n Quarterly ,At less nce per 92 days.
. Semiannually - At is t once per 6 months.
Weekly - At least once per 7 days.
- Interval extensions are allowable if the extension does not exceed the specified interval by more than 25% and if any three consecutive intervals do not exceed 325% of the specified interval. l functional test - Injection of a simulated signal inte the instrument to verify that it is operable, including any alarm and/or trip initiated action.
, grab sample - Sample taken to be a near-instantaneous representation of a i
well-mixed flow or uniform body of material. Sampling occurs ever a distribution that is small in comparison to the total distributed quantity.
habitat - The environment which a plant or animal natively occupies. l l
herbaceous vegetation - The low-growing plants that occupy the lower stratum !
\
in natural plant communities such as grasses and forbs.
l
- (subscript) - Refers to individual radionuclide.
1 initial criticality - The first attainment of a self-sustaining fission reaction within the reactor core.
REVISICN 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 6.2A-1-3
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) ,
O K - Th- total body dose factor due to gamma emissions (rem /yr per C1/s) obtained from the product of the gamma-body dose factor for exposure to a semi-infinite cloud (Table B-1, Regulatory Guide 1.109)(1) and the most 3
limiting y/Q value. For K s X/Qs equals 2.72E-06 s/m and for Kv, X/Q, equals 2.51E-05 s/m3 .
L - The skin dose factor due to beta emissions (rem /yr per C1/s) calculated using the following formula:
Lg = 1.0E+09 X/Q (DFSt + 1.1 DFYi) where X/Q, = 2.72E-06 s/m 3 X/Q y = 2.51E-05 s/m 3 DFSi = beta skin dose factor (mrem /m3 per pCi/yr) from Table B-1, Regulatory Guide 1.109 (1) 1.1 = average ratio of tissue to air energy absorption coefficients DFY i = gamma air dose factor (mrad /m3 per pCi/yr) from Table B-1, Regulatory Guide 1.109(1) 1.0E+09 = units conversion from mrem /pci to rem /Ci g - Limiting Condition for Operation.
Iower limit of detection (LLD) - The smallest amount of sample radioactivity that would yield a net count (above system background) for which there is a 93*. confidence that radioactivity is present. LLDs are calculated assuming a single gamma-emitting isotope is present in the sample. Therefore, LLDs are objectives only and are not rigid sensitivity limits for multicomponent gamma spectrometry.
O REVISICN 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 6.2A-1-4
. ~
l' MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) 4 N
11l monthly-Seefrequency.
mosses - Low-growing primitive plants that lack true roots, stems, leaves and r
vascular systems.
MPC - maximum permissible concentration values specified in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B Table II.
noble sases - The following radionuclides are considered noble gases:
Ar-41 Kr-88 Xe-135m i
Kr-83m Xe-131m Xe-135 Kr-85m Xe-133m Kr-85 Xe-133 O
normal operation - Oparation to perform the intended function without an associated abnormal condition such as an alarm, a nonroutine valve . lineup or other off-standard condition.
NPDES Permit - National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit issued by the State of Michigan to Consumers Power Company. This permit authorizes Consumers Power Company to discharge, from tne Midland Plant, into the waters of the State of Michigan.
phytosociology - The branch of ecology devoted to the consideration of
, vegetational arrangement or pattern.
Plant - The total Midland Plant Units 1 and 2 including all structures, the cooling pond and all associated land within the site boundary.
(< ,
=
\
_g - Average annual release rate in curies per second.
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 o.2A-1-5
-_.____----__z_-
MIDI.AND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O 11l quarterly - See frequency.
- (subscript) - stack or elevated.
s 11l semiannually - See frequency.
significant gamma emitter - radionuclide emitting electromagnetic radiation of nuclear origin with an energy greater than 0.1 MeV, a gamma intensity greater than 10*.' and a physical half-life greater than one day but including the following radienuclides:
Ar-41 I-131 11-54 Kr-85 I-133 Cr-51 Kr-85m I-135 Zr-Nb-65 Kr-87 Cs-134 Mo-99 Kr-88 Cs-137 Tc-99m Xe-133 Co-58 Ba-La-140 Xe-135 Co-60 Ce-141 Xe-135m re-59 Xe-138 Zn-65 site - Midland Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 and all associated property and structures.
- (subscript) - vent or ground level.
vegetation composition - The makeup of plant species in an area or sampling plot.
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 6.2A-1-6 L j
- ~ . _ - . . _ - . - . .-. . _. - -. - _. . - . .-- - .-
1 I
i MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) l l
l vegetation structure - An expression of vegetative life forms of an area in relation to their spatial o ganization.
l 11l weekly - See frequency.
l l
JLQ - Ratio of the concentration at the receptor (curies per cubic meter) to i i
the radioactivity release rate (curies per second). The term denotes the degree of dirpersion of the radioactivity as it is transported from the source I
to the receptor. Open terrain correction factors are included wheri used to ,
i calculate K. l l
1 i
j 4
).
i a
f REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 6.2A-1-7
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O O
. d. Instrumentation meets the following general specifications:
1
- 1. Sound Level Meter - Conforms to ANSI Standard SI.4-1971(3) for a Class I Precision Sound Level Meter.
- 2. Octave Filter Set - Conforms to ANSI Standard St.11-1966(R1971)(4) j fo. octave, half octave and third octave filters. The filter set can be a part of the sound level meter. l l
i
- 3. Microphone - Conforms to ANSI Standard S1.4-1971(3) and satisfies the requirements of the Class I sound level meter. A windscreen 1
{
l is used ;o minimize the effect of wind noise.
l
- 4. Calibrator - Capable of calibrating the sound level meter used.
- 5. Tape Recorder - Meets specifications set forth in ANSI Standard St.13-1971 .
- e. Meteorological and Plant operating conditions are documented during the surveillance periods.
Reporting Requirements
- a. Results of the operational noise survey are presented in the Annual Report according to Section 6.2A-5.6.1 of che Environmental Technical Specifications.
- b. Deviations from the schedule in Table 6.2A-3-4 are described in the Annual Report.
r
. 6.2A-3-7
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O Bases This operational noise survey is for verification of the predicted noise impact of those features of the Midland Plant considered to produce significant noise levels.
Although several noise criteria have been published by various agencies (6,7,8),
they are not particularly adaptable to sampling techniques as outlined in this survey program. Each crii..ia differs sufficieu ly from the others to prevent a common level criteria to be established. Most methods are based on annoyance limits and are, therefore, very subjective. Noise levels that are considered safety hazards (9} greatly exceed any community noise level resulting from operation of the Midland Plant.
The winter and summer seasons chosen for the survey represent the best and worst case conditions, respectively, due to higher sensitivity of the general population to outdoor noises during the summer months and vice versa.
11] As many test points as possible coincide with those used in the preoperational ambient survey such that meaningful comparisons can be made to determine what .
envirenmental impact is attributed to Plant operation. In addition, instrn-11 menta.. ion used is, as much as practical, the same as that used in the preoperational ambient survey.
6.2A-3.1.2 Biotic Surveillance 6.2A-3.1.2.1 Aquatic Surveys Biotic aspects of aquatic environments are surveyed in accordance with the NPDES Permit which specifies effluent and instream monitoring requirements REVISION 11.- SEPTEMBER 1980 6.2A-3-8
MIDLA 0 1ES-ER(OLS) m (v)
Section 2.6.1. These investigations are also part of the archeological 5 background of the report noted above.
6.3.7 Noise Programs At the present time, the only other ' arty p conducting any sound level surveys in the vicinity of the Midland Plant is The Dow Chemical Company. Using field measurement techniques, these surveys are done occasionally around the perimeter of The Dow Che=ical complex by the environmental quality control group and are intended for informational purposes only. Past surveys by Dow Chemical did not include the southern property along the Tittabawassee River.
Therefore, no data have been obtained for the areas immediately adjacent to ex the Midland Plant. The nearest data point is on Saginaw Road approximately k l 4,000 feet (1,219 m) east of the Midland Plant. This point and others are 11 within the area that Consumers Power Company' personnel will survey prior to commercial operation of the Mb' land Plant. All survey data will be made available to 1:oth companies and correlation will be done upon completion of 11l the preoperational ambient survey which is described in detail in Section 6.1.3.1.
6.3.8 Radiological Programs There are no public agencies, currently known to the Applicant, conducting any radiological environmental monitoring programs in the vicinity of the Plant. l The Michigan Department of Public Health does plan to conduct an environmental monitoring program in the vicinity of the Plant similar to those currently conducted by that agency at operating reactors within the State (12,13),
,7
) However, no definite date has been established for initiation of this program.
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 6.3-9
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) l' l
\~
6.4 PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING DATA
'11l A limited amount of radiological data are available en rae Lake Huron water (Whitestone Point) and Midland municipal water. Samples are composites c f daily (Monday through Friday) grab samples. Analyses were performed by three independent laboratories over a one-year period. Gross beta and tritium i 11l results are provided in Table 6.4-1. Monthly composites of the weekly samples were analyzed for gamma emitting isotopes. Within the detection limits (approximately 10 pCi/1) no gamma activity was observed in any of the samples.
The preoperational environmental radiological monitoring program as described in Section 6.1.5 started in November 1978. The schedule for all phases of the 11 preoperational program is presented in Table 6.1-8. The first full calendar year of data are presented in Table 6.4-2.
T D
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEM3ER 1980 6.4-1
.m _, _
-m.,-. , . , . , , _ _ 7. ,<,....e, . . , w,. - --g <
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
/"g
's TABIZ 6.4-1 SLTEiARY OF LABORATORY RESULTS GROSS BETA ANALYSIS Results (pCi/1)
Collection No of Error Laboratory Sample Location Period Samples Max Min Mean (2 c)
A Treated City Water 7/76 - 3/77 31 7 1 2.7 2.8 Raw Lake Water 7/76 - 3/77 31 9 1 3.0 3.5 B Treated City Water 7/76 - 4/77 37 2.4 0.3 1.7 1.1 Raw Lake Water 7/76 - 4/77 38 3.9 1.0 1.7 0.6 C Treated City Water 2/77 - 6/77 24 2.3 1.1 1.7 0.5 Raw Lake Water 2/77 - 6/77 17 2.7 1.3 2.1 0.7
- TRITIUM ANALYSIS
/' Results (oCi/1)
( Collection No of Error Laboratory Samole Location Period Samples Max Min Mean (2 c) 11 A Treated City Water 7/76 - 3/77 31 700 110 393 303 Ra" 'ake Water 7/76 - 3/77 31 700 170 413 284 B Treated City Water 7/76 - 1/77 10 369 184 340 130 Raw Lake Water 7/76 - 1/77 10 424 232 310 110 C Treated City Water 2/77 - 7/77 23 360 <150 250 110 Raw Lake Water 2/77 - 7/77 23 360 <150 270 '98 i
(a) Mean of all samples with samples indicating less than detectable activity presumed at detection limit.
'N s_-)
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 n -4w ,u g smr r -
wm-r we w- ~ p- .n-4 -wamp vm< w -
33 mwsm'w,- y me-
HIDIMD 1&2 ER(OLS) I i y TABLE G.4-2 ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL McNITCRING FROGENt 512.AAT - MIDLAND PLANT January 1,1979 to Cecember 31. 1979 Aaalysis and Lower Limit All All Medium or Total haber of of !adtcator C-atrol Pathway $amples Analyses Performed Cetection Location locatics With Hi eest Anrual "eae . Location Mame Me an"' '
O.att of Measureazar.) Range M Me an"M taege N"I' Mess Distance and Direction Range Surface hater Gross 8 eta 30 1.0 5.1 (23/24) River Discharge 11.0 (1/t) 5.7 (6/6)
(2.0-13.0) Il40 Teet SE (11.0-11.0) (3.0 12.0)
PC 1/I) 3.0 (1/1) 2.0 (1/2)
Gross Alpha 11 1.0 2.3 (4/9) il Discharge
( 1. 0- 3,0 ) 650 Feet SSE (3.0 3.0) (2.0-2.0)
Treeland Road Bridge 3.0 (1/2) 11 Miles SE (3.0-3 0)
Tritium (Qtr)(,) 12 100.0 201 (9/10) Cooling Pond - CW !atake 270 (2/2) 140 (2/2)
(110-280) 650 feet SE (260 280) (90-190) 1.0 <!24 - - < LID
! 131(e) 30
<LLD Fe-59; 2a-65(,) 30 30.0 <tLD - -
30 15.0 <1TD
- - <LLD Ma-Ses Co-58-601 2r-Mb-$51 Ba-La-140 Ca*134-137(C) 30 10.0 < L*.D - - <LD G rountwa te r Gaass Aeta 18 1.0 44.7 (15/18) East Dita / Wells 6, 7 & 8 86.2 (6/6) None (pci/1) (3.0-170.0) 4800 Teet SE (14.0-170.0)
Gross Alpha 12 1.0 4.4 (5/12) West Dike / Wells 16, 17 & 18 4.7 (3/3) None (2.0-8.0) 4600 Teet SE (2.0-8.0)
Tritium (C) 4 100.0 340 (2/4) East Dike / Wells 6. 7 & 8 340 (2/2) None (330-380) 4800 Feet SE (3C0-380) 1.0 - - None
! 131(C) 18 <LLD Fe-59; 2a-65(') 18 30.0 <LLD - - None Ma-54; Co-58-64 18 15.0 <LLD - - None 2r-Mb-95;(C) 8a-La-140 Cs 134-137(*) 15 10.0 < LD - - None Gamma Dose (d**) TLD (Monthly) 74 1 6.3 (59/59) Pole - SE Dow Fence 10.4 (5/5) 5.2 (10/10)
(mR/ Month) (3.8-30.2) 2400 Feet ENE (4.9-30.2) (3.7-6.2) 11 (sa/ Quarter) TLD (Quarterly) 59 1 13.3 (47/47) Dow Chemical 15.1 (4/4) 12.3 (8/S)
(13.3 17.3) 1750 Feet NE (14.4-16.8) (11.0-15.0)
Crops Gross 8 eta 34 1.0 1.4 (20/34) G-10 2.0 (1/2) None (PCL/s Wet) ( 1.0- 2. 0 ) 12.700 feet N (2.0-2.0)
G-11 2.0 (1/2) 11.540 Teet NME (2.0-2.0)
!-131(C) 34 0.06 <LD - - None Ca-134-137(*) 38 0.08 4 7.D - - Nene Sr-89 (c) 38 0.025 <!23 - - None St-90 38 0.005 0.098 (34/38) G-6 0.174 (3/4) None (0.006-0.31) 11.700 feet ENE (0.086-0.31)
Gross 8 eta 8 1.0 2.0 (3/8) Treeland Road Bridge 4.0 (1/2) None l Sediment (PCi/g Def) (1.0-4.0) 11 Miles SE (4.0-4.0)
Cs 134 137h) 8 0.15 <tD - - None l None i St-89 8 0.025 <tLD - -
St 90 8 0.005 <tLD - - None Fist Gross 8 eta 13 1.0 1.5 (10;L3) Railroad Bridge - River 1.93 (3/4) None (pCi/g Wet) (1.0-2.8) 3150 Feet ESE (1.0-2.8)
Fe 59; 2a-65(c) 13 0.26 <tLD - - vone Ma 54; Cs-134 13 0.13 < LLD - - None
> Co 56-@C b Ca*13748# 13 0.13 0.14 (6/13) Rat 1 road 8rtJge - River 0.19 (1/4) None (0.06-0.19) 3950 Teet ESE (0.19-0.19)
River Discharge 0.19 (1/2) j 1100 Feet NE (0.19-0.19) 0.025 <lD - - None i Sr-69 13 Sr-90 13 0.005 <LD - - None i
(a) Ncetaal lower Itait of detectica (LD) er defined in liASL-300. Pages D-C8-01, 02 and 03.
(b) Mesa and range based upos detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable sessurements at specified 1scations is indicated ir.
paratheses.
(c) Proposed Technical Specificattoos requireaant.
(d) Includes transit dose which averages approstaately 2.5 na per round tri?.
(a) Additional Data: Cosmounity TLD (acothly) - Nese and Range of 4.8 (5/5) and (3.7-5.5) - 2.5 miles N.
Cossuatty TD (quarterly) *ean and Range of 11.0 U./4) and (10.0-11.8).
RIVISICN 11 - SEPTE'.2E21980 O
.sh -
,~,
CHAPTER 8 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page No 8 ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS OF FLANT CONSTRUCTION AND 0PERATION..................................... 8.1-1 8.1 BENEFITS FROM THE FACILITY ....................... 8.1-1 8.1.1 Expected Annual Average Generation ............... 8.1-1 8.1.2 Expected Use of Generated Electricity............. 8.1-1 8.1.3 Process Steam Sa1es............................... 8.1-1 8.1.4 Income and Property Taxes......................... 8.1-1 7l8.1.5 Direct Socioeconomic Benefits..................... 8.1-la 2 l 8.1.6 Indirect Socioeconomic Benefits................... 8.1-2a 8.1.7 Environmental Benefits ........................... 8.1-3 8.1R REFERENCES ....................................... 8.1R-1 8.2 COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FACILITY ............... 8.2-1 8.2.1 Capital Costs of Facility Construction ........... 8.2-1 8.2.2 Capital Costs of Transmission Facilities ......... 8.2-2 8.2.3 Fuel Costs ....................................... 8.2-2 l 11 8.2.4 Operating and Maintenance Costs................... 8.2-2 8.2.5 Costs of Decommissioning and Dismantling ......... 8.2-2 8.2.6 Cost of Income and Property Taxes................. 8.2-3 8.2.7 Socioeconomic Costs............................... 8.2-3 8.2.8 Environmental Costs............................... 8.2-4 l
l l
v I
. s_ -
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 8i
O CHAPTER 8 LIST OF TABLES Table Description 11 8.1-1 SALES E0 RECAST 8.2-1 ESTIMATED GENERATING COSTS FOR THE MIDLAND PLANT 8.2-2 COST INFORMATION FOR NUCLEAR POWER GENERATION METHOD O
l REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 0-11
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) 8 ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS OF PLANT CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION 8.1 BENEFITS FROM THE FACILITY 8.1.1 Expected Annual Average Generation The Midland Station is designed as a dual-purpose plant to provide electrical energy to the customers of Consumers Power and process steam to The Dow Chem-ical Company. The electrical energy output will vary from 1,263 MW (net) at design up to 1,344 MW (net) depending on the process steam outflow to Dow. As such, the estimated net average annual generation will range from 7.7 billion to 8.2 billion kilowatthours, based on a 70 percent capacity factor.
8.1.2 Excected Use of Generated Electricity i
Because the output of Midland Units 1 and 2 is transmitted by the total power i
11 network of Consumers Power's transmission and distribution system, it must be l
assumed that the sales to a particular customer class are in the sa=e pro- i 1
portion as that customer class proportion of total system usage. The sales forecast for each customer class is listed for the period 1984 through 1988 I and for 1993 in Table 8.1-1.
'The average electric customer rate is estimated to be 7.5 cents per kilo-watthour which includes generation, transmission and distribution costs for all of Consumers Power customers in 1984 Over Midland's plant life, electric customers' rates are estimated to increase at an average annual rate of 8.24 percent per year. The levelized annual revenues received from Midland's generation based on a design net rating of 1263 MV at a 70 percent capacity
\
/,
l factor are estimated to be $1.3 billion per year in 1984 dollars. The present REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 8.1-1
n MIDLAND 1&2 FR(OLS)
O 11 worth revenues in 1984 dollars are estimated to be $10.8 billion over the 34-year life of the plant.
8.1.3 Process Steam Sales Process steam sales to The Dow Chemical Company will generate revenues for the lli 35-year period of the current contract. Based on the expected hours of process steam availability, 38,839 billion Btus per year will be converted to process steam for sale to Dow. The Midland Plant Units 1 and 2 will supply from 1.4 to 4.05 million pounds per hour of process steam which equals 14,121 3 to 40,962 billion Btus per year at a 100*. capacity factor.
The steam sales provisions of the 1978 Dow-Consumers general agreement are proprietary information.
8.1.* Income and Pronerty Taxes 7 l Income and property taxes expected to flow to Federal, State, and local 11l governments because of the Midland Plant are estimated to be $166 million per 7 l year. The present worth of this payment stream over the 34-year economic life 11 is $1,382 million. The effect on taxes of decommissioning and restoration are not reflected in these data.
8.1.5 Direct Socioeconomic Benefits The operation of the Midland Plant provides certain direct and indirect economic benefits to the Midland region. A portion of the direct benefits originates with the operating personnel employed at the Plant. Present plans O
REVISION 11 - SEPTEM3ER 1980 8.1-la
I i i i '
l MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) 1 i
l I
2 4
4.
4 i
i 4
i 1
I 1
- 9 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 4
J
+
l i
l i
1 f
i 4
L O
REVISION 11 - SEPmBER' 198C 8.1-1b i
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O 11lcallforabout550operatingpersonneltobeemployedattheMidlandPlant.
The presentation of the direct benefits associated with the operating personnel is based on a study (5) prepared for the US Chamber of Commerce.
This study measures the impact of 100 manufacturing and nonmanufacturing employee entering a region. Using this information, the following effects are projected for the Midland region:
1,350 more peopl, 380 more families 440 more schoolchildren 11 and the following resultant benefits (1984 dollars) are projected for the Midland region:
$7,973,000 more annual personal income (a)
O
$3,612,000 more annual retail sales
$4,398,000 more bank deposits The increased number of families will not create any major lasting i= pact on housing or real estate values in the area. The additien31 schoolchildren should be easily absorbed within the region without the need for new facilities. The increased personal income will help to provide indirect benefits within the region.
11 (a) Total annual salary for Midland Plant staff in 1984 is estimated to be approximately $16,000,000 in 1984 dollars. The retail sales and bank deposits may be correspondingly higher.
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 8.1-2
4 MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) 4 The projected annual employment schedule of the Midland Plant staff for
[ commercial operation is: I i
2l End of Year Total Employment 1981 309 1982 445 l
1983-to end of 40-year Plant life 550 11 It is estimated that approximately 85% or 468 of the projected 550 operating 1 a
l personnel will be newcomers to the Midland area. Of these newcomers, it is projected that approximately 70% or 327 will establish residence within the City of Midland or in the immediate surrounding townships. The remaining l
, 141 newcomers are expected to be randomly located in outlying townships at
\s_
2 l distances up to approximately 40 miles. l
{
l 4 l Locally contracted services and merchandise (ie, consumables) will result in !
' 1 11l expenditures of not more than $6 million (in 198' dollars) in the three 4
counties of Midland, Saginaw and Bay. This is exclusive of all wages for Midland Plant Operations personnel. !
I i
i 8.1.6 Indirect Socioeconomic Benefits Indirect benefits ara derived as a consequence of tne Plant employees spending
, their earnings. Through their consumption of housing services, retail goods 4
and the like, the direct employees will create the demand for secondary jobs.
To assess the indirect employment benefits, a regional employment multipliec
,_ , may be implemented. A multiplier of 1 would indicate no secondary employment (V
\
7 REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 8.1-2a l
~
l MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O effects and usually applies to a sparsely populated rural area. Values of 3.0 or enre apply to heavily urbani::ed environs (6) . Although a re.gional O
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 8.1-2b l
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) multiplier for Midland is not known, a value of 2 would be a conservative 11l estimate. This would imply that a minimum of 470 servico jobs would result from the operation of the Plant. Many of these jobs would be filled by local I
personnel which would favorably contribute to the Midland social and economic environment.
8.1.7 Environmental Benefits i The environmental studies described in Chapter 6 will result in increased knowledge of the environment in the fo11cwing areas:
- a. Monitoring of the ecological and water quality rehabilitation of the Tittabawassee River;
)
l l
d
- b. Effects of attracting waterfowl to an artificial water body which 7 potentially remains ice-free the year round during Plant operation;
, c. Cooling pond induced fog occurrence;
- d. Icing effects on trees.
i vO REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 8.1-3
- - - - - - - e- -w-- ,-
vy,w-, .,- . , , - y**- g y -
-+wr+,e
- y 7e-y w- -1y9-
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O The ice-free pond may attract a resident population of waterfowl, shore birds and marsh birds. Any increase in the number of these birds would improve the natural and aesthetic amenities of this generally industrialized area.
The heated discharge from cooling pond blowdown to the Tittabawassee River may improve sport fishing in the river during the colder months of the year.
The river intake structure, riprap along the river shore, and river channelization near the intake structure will provide improved shelter and feeding habitat for fishes in the vicinity.
In addition, the atmospheric emissions from the existing fossil-fueled units of Dow Chemical Company will be greatly reduced and eventually cease.
O O
8.1-4
. . . _ _ . . . __ _ _ _ - . . _ _ __ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . ._ . - ~ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. . _ . .
+
i
, MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
) /h 2
V 3 TABLE 8.1-1 1
4 SALES FORECAST j Percent of Gales by Class by Year Class t 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1993 Residential 29.7 29.6 29.6 29.5 29.4 29.7
, Commercial 22.8 22.8 22.7 22.7 22.6 23.0 i Industrial 43.5 43.6 43.8 - 44.0 44.2 43.6 Streetlighting 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4
, Other 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.3 11 This breakdown is based on the following projection of long-term grcwth ratas by class of service:
i Percent by Year i .
Residential 2.5 Commercial 2.7 Industrial 3.0 i Streetlighting -1.3 i
! Other 1.9 1
i Total 2.75 i
i i
1 I
i O
i REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980
.~. _.
. .. ... . _ _ , - , - . . , . . . , _ . , _ - . . . - _ , _ - , , _ _ , , , . , - . . - . . . . . _ . . . . ~ - . . . , _ . . , _ _ . - .
. . - _ . . _ . . . . . _ ____ - .__ _ __ _ _ . _ . . .. . _ .__.__ .. _ . _ _. ..__ . ..-_ __ . . _ - .~ . . . _
l l
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) l
- i i
i J l 1 l
} 8.1R REFERENCES i
l i
4
.: 11 1
4 i
i 1
i 7 i S. US Chamber of Commerce, "'4 hat New Jobs Mean to a Community," Booklet 2928 i
! (1973), US Chamber of Commerce, p 10.
4
- 6. Harry M Bridgeman, " Assessing the Economic and Social Impacts of Major
'\.
Development Projects," Dames & Moore Engineering Bulletin, July 1976, p 6.
i i
i i
t i
l i '
j I I
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 8.1R-1 n
s
, + , < , . , - - , - . - ,e , - . ,_,_- , , . - , , . ,y,,, .,~.,yw .,,y- ,, ems,,.,,.mw.._m.,w.,3 - , . . .,,w w .- ,w c y . .m, w m . me e . 4
i MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) l 8.2 COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FACILITY l l
I All of.the costs listed in this section are reported in 1984 dollars in l I
accordance with the following construction completion schedule:
Unit 1 Unit 2 11 Construction CompletionI ") 8/83 3/83 Fuel Load 12/83 7/83 Commercial Operation 7/84 12/83 I
The present worth of each of the costs in 1984 is calculated using a discount rate of 11.75 percent and a 34-year economic life.
Estimated levelized annual costs of electric energy production from the N l Midland Plent are shown in Table 8.2-1.
("k'hereconstructioncompletionisdefinedasthelastsystemturnoverto Consumers Power Company.
8.2.1 Caoital Costs of Facility Construction The capital cost of ccustructing Midland Units 1 tid 2, including the costs of the approximately 1,235-acre site, is estimated to be S3.1 billion as shown in 11 Table 8.2-2. This amount includes anticipated escalation in labor and mate-rial costs over the period of construction as well as interest on investment over the same period, b4
%-)
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER !.980 8.2-1
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(0Z,f)
O 8.2.2 Capital Costs of Transmission Facilities
!Thecostofconstructingthetransmissionlinesandsubstationfacilities necessary to connect the Midland Units 1 and 2 into the Michigan Bulk Power 11 system is estimated to be $19.5 million. This amount includes anticipated escalation in labor and material over the period of construction as well as interest on investment over the same period.
8.2.3 Fuel Costs Fuel costs associated with the production of electrical and steam energy over the 34-year economic life of the Plant will not vary with the process steam outflow to The Dow Chemical Company. Based on two power only units, the 11 levelized annual cost is currently estimated to be approximately 18.4 mills per kilowatthour. The present worth in 1984 dollars of coat of fuel associated with the production of electrical energy is estimated to be
$1,103.0 million.
8.2.4 Operating and Maintenance Costs 7 The uniform annual equivalent operating and maintenance costs, including
, annual license fees but excluding nuclear insurance, are estimated to be
$136.3 million, equalling a present worth of $1,133.7 million in 1984 dollars.
11 Nuclear insurance is estimated to be $12.1 million in 1984, equalling a present worth of $195.1 million.
8.2.5 Costs of Decommissioning and Dismantling 11 Decommissioning and dismantling the main power structure, which is an NRC requirement, is estimated to cost $235.0 million in 1984 dollars. Of this REVISION 11 - SEP1 EMBER 1980 8.2-2
~ ,.
m.~
-h.-
Y MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OI.S)
O IL total, removal of the pond and intake structures, and relandscaping of the Nantsitewhicharelocalrequirements,areestimatedtocost$41.9million.
3 Section 5,8 is a discussion and cost breakdown for decommissioning and dismantling the Midland Plant.
' 8.2.6 Cost of Income and Property Taxes e 7 l Incoc.e and property taxes expected to flow to Federal, State and local governm7n5sbecauseoftheMidlandPlantareestimatedtobe$166millionper year. Th's present worth of this payment stream is $1,382 million. The effect on taxes of decommissioning and restoration are not reflected in these data.
N g
8.2.7 Socioeconomic Costs m D)
,, Additional municipal services would be required to support the Plant operating p
' ersonnel who live in the area; however, th'a property taxes incurred by the idland Plant will more than offset the increase in service costs.
Public service impacts attributable to the immigration of newcomers due to operation of the Plant are expected to be minimal. For example, the 380 additional-schoolchildren would represent approximately 4.0*. of the total projected Midland school 1982-83 enrollment of 9,506 if all were to be 3 _ enrolled in Midland schools. !
- 11. -
Regarding traffic services, the vehicles introducet ,y Midland Plant sta'ff x
personnel who are newcomers would represent 1*.' of 1 registered vehicles in
%. j
)
q the Midland area. This figure is based on an average of 1.7 vehicles per {
staff member (790 vehicles) and the 1978-79 registration of 64,000 vehicles
% 1 Q_, ' '
total.
j
,IREVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 8.2-3
... A
.l.
x=
-t
~
w, , - 1
MfDIAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O 8.2.8 Environmental Costs Only minor environmental costs are associated with the operation of the Midland Plant:
- a. Preemption of 1,235 (500 ha) acres of land from other uses during the life of the Plant;
- b. An increase in local fogging and icing;
- c. Entrainment of planktonic organisms (phytoplankton, zooplankton, ichthyoplankton, and invertebrates) from approximately 5% of the river flow during the initial filling of the cooling pond and intermittent makeup pumping;
- d. Possible impingement losres of some resident and migrant fish species O
during intermittent makeup pumping;
- e. Temperatures elevated above normal river temperature fluctuations during blowdown.
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 8.2-4
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
V)
[ .
TABLE 8.2-1 ESTIMATED GENERATING COSTS FOR TIIE MIDLAND PLANT (Levelized Annual Mills /kWh Equated to 1984 Dollars)
Fixed Charges Cost of Money 39.0 Depreciation (a) o,9 Taxes (a) 17.8 l
Nuclear Fuel Cycle Costs Fuel Depletion Charge 12.2 Fabrication Depletion Charge 2.6 Fuel Carrying Charge 2.5
(~~h
( _) 11 Spent Fuel Storage Charge 1.1 Cost of Operation and Maintenance Fixed Component 14.1 Variable Component 0.0 Cost of Insurance Property Insurance 2.2 Liability Insurance 0.2 Total 92.6 (a)The effect of decommissioning and restoration are not reflected in these data.
l (vb .
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980
. I
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
TABLE 8.2-2 COST INFORMATION FOR NUCLEAR POWER GENERATION METHOD
- 1. Interest During Construction 8.5%/ Year, 1980 10%/ Year, 1981 and 1982 10.5%/ Year, 1983 and Beyond
- 2. Length of Construction Workweek 40 Hours / Week
- 3. Estimated Site Labor Requirement 20.4 Manhour/kWe
- 4. Escalation Rates Site Labor 10.0%/ Year in 80-81 and 8.0%/ Year Thereafter Materials 10.0%/ Year in 80-81 and 8.0%/ Year Thereafter Comprsite 10.0%/ Year in 80-81 and 8.0%/ Year Thereafter
- 5. Power Station Cost ($1,000)
Direct Costs Unit 1 Unit 2
- a. Land and Landrights S 0* $ 5,883
- b. Structures and Site Facilities 143,698 206,586
- c. Reactor Plant Equipment 140,955 231,296 11 d. Turbine Plant Equipment, Not Including Heat Rejection 61,671 75,380
- e. Heat Rejection System 8,972 12,538
- f. Electric Plant Equipment 42,659 94,444
- g. Miscellaneous Equipment 33,075 11,198 L. Spare Parts Allowance 0* 4,000
- i. Continger cy Allowance 0* 80,000
- j. Trended Costs Since Last Forecast (1/80) 0* 35,108 Subtotal $431,030 $ 756,433 Indirect Costs
- a. Construction Facilities, Equipment and Services 0* 369,127
- b. Trended Costs Since Last Forecast (1/80) 0* 33,892
- c. Engineering and Construction Management Services 0* 272,401
- d. Other Costs 0* 352,117
- e. Interest During Construction (@ Rates Above) 0* 885,000 Escalation Escalation During Conatruction Included Above Total Cost Total Station Costs, @ Start of Commercial Operation $431,030 $2,668,970
- Included With Unit 2 REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980
CHAPTER 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS W
Section Title Page No 11
SUMMARY
COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS...................... 11 1 i
l l
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 11-i
i O.
CHAPTER 11 LIST OF TABLES Table Description 11-1
SUMMARY
OF COSTS AND BENEFITS 11 11-2
SUMMARY
-- SOCIOECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS AND COST OF MIDLAND PLANT OPERATION O
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 11-ii
1 1
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) i j
i 11
SUMMARY
COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS I
The primary costs'and benefits of the Midland Plant Units 1 and 2 are t
l- summarized in Table 11-1.
l t 11 1
4 r
Table 11-2 outlines the socioeconomic and environmental costs and benefits i associated with the Midland Plant. '
1 i
i i
!O t
4 l
4 4
1-
}
I t
t i'
i j .
i 1
I 4:
i . .
4 REVISION'11 - SEPTEMBER-1980 11-1 I
J 4
9-r - w y, -
e t -e-wsw = -m ymem r m a-ww w - . * *-e -w-se-w esw* ee - - -- ---- - - * *
- MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
,a TABLE 11-1
SUMMARY
OF COSTS AND BEhIFITS Steam Outflow Direct Benefits (Annual) @ 4.05 x 106 Lb/Hr Energy Generated (at 70% Capacity Factor) Kilowatthours 7.7 x 109 Capacity, Kilowatts 1,263 x 103 Proportional Distribution of Electrical Energy _(Expected Annual Delivery in Kilowatthours 1984)
Industrial 3.3 x 109 Commercial 1.8 x 109 Residential 2.3 x 109 Streetlighting 0.1 x 109 Other 0.2 x 109 Energy to Steam Sold From the Facility, Btu x 106 38,839 x 10 3 Expected Average Annual Delivery of Other Beneficial Products O Revenues From Delivered Benefits, S/Yr Electrical Energy Sold 1.3 x 109 Steam Sold Proprietary Other Products 0 Indirect Benefits (Annual)
) Taxes, S/ Year Local 62.0 x 106 State 3.4 x 106 Federal 100.8 x 106 Direct Benefits (Present Worth in Millions of Dollars) 11 Revenues Electrical Energy Sold 10,843 Steam Sold (35-Year Period) Proprietary Indirect Benefits (Present Worth in Millions of Dollars)
Taxes Local 315.6 State 28.3 Federal 838.2 i Total Direct and Indirect Benefits 12,225.1 Primary Internal Costs (Present Worth in Millions of Dollars)
Capital Investment 3,100.0 Transmission Facilities 19.5 Fuel 1,103.0 Operating, Maintenance and Insurance 1,328.8 Decommissioning and Dismantling 235.0 Income and Property Taxes 1,382.1
(s Total 7168.4 NOTE: All dollars are in 1984 dollars.
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 l
r MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O TABLE 11-2
SUMMARY
SOCIOECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS AST COSTS OF MIDLANT PLANT OPERATION Benefits Socioeconomic Consumables $6,000,000(3)
Annual Personal Income 7,973,000 Annual Retail Sales 3,612,000 Bank Deposits 4,398,000 Environmental Knowledge of the Environment as a Result of Research and Monitoring Increase Waterfowl Population Possible Increase River Sport Fishing Possible Improvement Fish Shelter and Feeding Habitat Increase Atmospheric Emissions From Dow Fossil-Fueled Units Reduction Costs 1^1 Socioeconomic Municipal Services Required Increase (b)
Environmental Land Use Loss of 1,235 Acres From Other Uses Fogging and Icing Increase Plankton Small Entrainment Loss During Makeup Periods Resident and Migrant Fish Some Impingement Loss During Makeup Periods River Temperatures Increase Above Ambient During Blowdown Periods (a) Total annual salary for Midland Plant staff in 1984 is estimated to be approximately $16,000,000 in 1984 dollars. The retail sales and bank deposits may be corraspondingly higher.
(b) Property taxes incurred by the Midland Plant will more than of fset the increase in service costs.
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
Hosford, M, NUS Corporation, conversation with Wilbur Carl, Chairman, Homer Township, July 12, 1977.
Hosford, M, NUS Corporation, conversation with Bob Chatterton, Supervisor, Midland Township, July 12, 1977.
Hosford, M . NUS Corporation, conversation with Mike McPhillips, Zoning Administrator, Williams Township, July 12,19's , .
Hosler, C R, " Low Level Inversion Frequency in the Contiguous United States,"
Monthly Weather Review, 98a, (1961),
f Hydrologic Engineering Center, HEC-2, Water Surf. e Profiles, Gene alized Computer Program, (December 1968), US Army Corps of Engineers, Dav.s, a
Jude, D, J Ervin, and G Ervin, An Ecological Evaluation of Sanford i ake, (1977), Freshwater Physicians, Inc.
Kelly, R W, Bedrock of Michigan, Small Scale Map of No 2 (1968), Geological Survey Division, Michigan Department of Conservation.
King, P B, The Evolution of North America, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1959.
Lawler, Macusky and Skelly, Assessment of 1977-78 Data, (1979), Report prepared for Consumers Power Company.
11 Lawler, Matusky and Skelly, Experimental Design of the Long-Term Ecological
(N Monitoring Program of the Tittabawassee River Near the Midland 'lant, (1979),
\--
Report prepared for Censumers Power Company.
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 13.2-7
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O Lawler, MM.usky and Skelly, Aquatic Assessment of the Tittabawassee River in the Vicinity of Midland, Michigan, (1980), Report. prepared for Consumers Power Company.
11 Lenon, H L, et al, Survey and Evaluation of the Water Quality, Tittabawassee River, Near Midland, Michigan, 1978-79, Technical Report No 2 (1979), Report prepared for Consumers Power Company.
Midland Planning Commission, Comprehensive Development Plan, City of Midland, Michigan, (June 1972), City of Midland.
Midland County Planning Commission, Existing Land Use. Midland County, (April 1970), County of Midland.
Midland County Planning Commission, General Development Plan, Midland County, Ol Michigan - A Summary Report, (May 1974), County of Midland.
Midland County Planning Commission, Ingersoll Township Zoning Mao, (April 1976), County of Midland.
Midland County Planning Commission, Larkin Township Zoning Mao, (March 1977),
County of Midland.
Midland County Planning Commission, Midland Township, Zoning Map, (December 1972), County of .idland.
Mills, Raymond W and Associates, Zoning Man for Tittabawassee Township.
Saginaw County, Michigan, , December 1, 1976), Raymond Mills and Associates.
National Climatic Center, Daily Mixing Deaths, Flint, Michigan, (1967), US Department of Commerce, Asheville, North Carolina.
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 13.2-8 L
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
(O
%.s
/
National Climatic Center, Monthly and Annual Wind Distribution of Pasquill Stability Classes (STAR Program), Flint, Michigan (March 1975-February 1977),
data obtained from US Department of Commerce, Asheville, North Carolina, 4
analysis made by EG&G Environmental Consultants, Waltham, Massachusetts.
National Oce nic and Atmospheric Administration, United States Great Lakes Pilot, Lakes Ontario, Erie, Huron, Michigan and Superior and St Lawrence River, National Ocean Survey, US Department of Commerce, April 1977.
4 Office of the District Engineer, Survey Report on the Saginaw River, Michigan, and Its Tributaries With a View to Imorovement for the Control of Floods and Other Purposes, (January 1954), Detroit District, US Army Corps of Engineers.
Pautz, M E, " Severe Local Storm Occurrences 1955-1967," ESSA Technical Memo, (dh x
WBTM FCST 12, (1969), Office of Meteorological Operations, Silver Spring, Maryland.
Planning and Policy Analysis Division, Poculation Projections of the Counties of Michigan, (October 1974), Bureau of the Budget, Michigan Department of
- Management and Budget.
Portman, D J, Atmosoheric Diffusion Potential for Michigan's Lower Peninsula, (1973), Consumers Power Company.
3 Sanford, B V, (compiler), Geology, Toronto-Windsor Area, Ontario, (1969),
Geological Survey of Canada, Department of Energy, Mines and Resources.
n.,
v)
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 13.2-9
MIDLAST; 1&2-ER(OLS)
O Saginaw County Metropolitan Planning Commission, 1972 Land Use Mao, County of Saginaw.
Saginaw County Metropolitan Planning Commission, 1990 Land Use Plan, (July 1972), County of Saginaw.
Scott 4 B and E J Crossman, Freshwater Fishes of Canada, Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Ottawa, 1973.
Severe Storms Forecast Center, Tornado Data and History of Occurrences, Tornado Breakdown by Counties, State of Michigan, 1951-1977, (1977), US Department of Commerce, Kansas City, Missouri.
Stark, N, Dow Chemical Company, letter to W E Joyces, NUS Corporation, June 21, 1977.
Stauffer, J R, Jr, K L Dickson, J Cairns, Jr, and D S Cherry, "The Potential and Realized Influences of Temperature on the Distribution of Fishes in the New River, Glen Lyn, Virginia," Wildlife Monograchs, No 50, (November 1976).
Surface Water Hydrology Work Group, Great Lakes Basin Framework Study, (1975),
Great Lakes Basin Commission, Ann Arbor, MI.
Thom, H C S, "New Distribution of Extreme Winds in the United States," Journal sr Struct'iral Division, ASCE, Vol 94, No ST7, (1968).
Thom, H C S, " Tornado Probability," Monthly Weather Review, No 91 (1963).
Todd, D K, Ground Water Hydrology, J Wiley & Sons, 1959.
Twenter, F R, Southeastern Michigan Water Resources Study, Groundwater and Geology, US Geological Survey, 1975.
REVISICN 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 13.2-10
- ...~ _ - . .. .-- - . - - __
4
. MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
L ('
\s J
US Congress, Federal Water Pollution Contreal Act Amendments of 1972, Public Law 92-500, October 1972.
US Geological Survey (compiler), Water Data Report, MI-76-1 (1976), US Department of Interior.
1 US Geological S,urvey, Water Supply Papers, No 1307, 1677, 1727, 1911 and Water Resources Data for Michigan, Part 1 - Surface Water Records, 1966 to 1975, US Department of Interior.
US Weather Bureau, Maximum Recorded United States Point Rainfall for 5 Minutes to 24 Hours for 296 First Order Stations, Technical Paper No 2 (1963), US Department of Commerce, f
US Weather Bureau, Rainfa11' Frequency Atlas of the United States for Durations From 30 Minutes to 24 Hours and Return Periods From 1 to 100 Years, Technical j Paper 40 (1961), US Department of Commerce.
l US Weather Bureau, Seasonal Variation of Probable Maximum Precipitation East i' of the 105th Meridian, Hydrometeorological Report No 33 (April 1956), US Department of Commerce.
i l Water Resources Commission, Biological Survey of the Tittabawassee River 3
1 (1971-1972), (December-1972), Bureau of Water Management, Michigan Department j of Natural Resources, 98 pp.
1
- Water Resources Commission (compiler), STORET DATA, (1974), Michigan I \
l ' Department of Natural Resources.
) Water Resources Commission, Water Resource Conditions and Uses in the Tittabawassee River Basin, (1960), Michigan Dapartment of Natural Resources.
REVISION SEPTEMBER 1980 13.2-1I
-w e + y'stv.v= c .--m'4y ,- gm- - + y-vr"'"-T* *v'T vrt-TT*r- vve r t ' w' e t7 -w * - V--'a"TY"--"N w 9w'W-rv'w*-'*-*'"'7v~~*+-*~***"-W- ~ ' ~ W"--
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O Water Resources Commission, Water Quality Management Plan for the Lower Lake Huron Basin, (1974), Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
Water Resources Commission, Water Quality Standards - Ganeral Rules: Part 4, (1975), Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
Water Resources Commission, Water Quality Study of the Saginaw River, July and October 1965, (1968), Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
Water Resources Commission, Water Quality Survey of the Tittabawassee River, in press (1974), Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
Wherley, P L, NUS Corporation, conversation with D M Cotner, Senior Planner, Saginaw County Metropolitan Planning Commission, June 30, 1977.
Williams and Works, Williams Township, Bay County, Michigan, General O
Development Plan - A Land Use Plan for the Design Year, 1995, (August 1975),
Williams and Works.
Woodward - Clyde and Associates, Investigation of Possible Surface Subsidence at Midland, Michigan, (July 1969), Woodward - Clyda and Associates, Oakland, California.
Zillich, J A, Ecological Survey of the Saginaw River and Its Maior Tributaries With Special Emphasis on the Tittabawassee River, (1973), Dow Chemical Company, 114 pp.
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 13.2-12
, .. .- .- . _ . . .~ . - . . . . . . . . . . . _ . _ . . - . -- .-
, MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) i t
f, Chapter 8 i
Bridgeman, H M, " Assessing the Economic and Social Impacts of Major Development Projects," Dames & Moore Engineering Bulletin, (July 1976).
11 i !
US Chamber of Commerce, "What New Jobs Mean to a Community," Bookle 2928 (1973), US Chamber of Commerce.
4 i
f e
W
=
d i
3 e
}
i 1
a T
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 13.8-1 I
e k.
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
() .
NRC QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES TABLE OF CONTENTS Question ID NRC Request ER Revision Page No
. Aquatic Ecology 1 May 22, 1978 2 AEC 1-1 2 May 22, 1978 2, 9 AEC 2-1 3 May 22, 1978 2, 10 AEC 3-1 4 May 22, 1978 2 AEC 4-1 5 May 22, 1978 2 AEC 5-1 6 May 22, 1978 2 AEC 6-1 7 May 22, 1978 2 AEC 7-1 8 May 22, 1978 2, 8 AEC 8-1 9 May 22, 1978 2 AEC 9-1 10 Mir .2, 1978 2, 9 AEC 10-1 11 October 11, 1978 3 AEC 11-1 12 October 11, 1978 3, 9 AEC 12-1 13 October 11, 1978 3, 10 AEC 13-1 Archaeology
, 2 1 May 22, 1978 May 22, 1978 2, 3 2, 3 ARC ARC 1-1 2-1 3 October 11, 1978 3,5,6 ARC 3-1 4 October 11, 1978 3 ARC 4-1 5 October 11, 1978 3 ARC 5-1 6 October 11, 1978 3 ARC 6-1 7 0ctober. 11, 1978 3 ARC 7-1 8 October 11, 1978 3 ARC 8-1 9 October 11, 1978 3, 6 ARC 9-1 10 October 11, 1978 3, 6 ARC 10-1 11 .0ctober 11, 1978 3, 4, 11 ARC 11-1 1
Benefit-Cost Analyses and Need for Power la May 22, 1978 2, 11 B-C la-1 lb May 22, 1978 2, 3, 7, 11 B-C lb-1 ic May 22, 1978 2, 3, 11 B-C Ic-1 2 May 22, 1078 2, 11 B-C 2-1 3 May 22, 1978 2, 3, 11 B-C 3-1 4 May 22, 1978 2 B-C 4-1 5 May 22, 1978 2 B-C 5-1 6 May 22, 1978 i B-C 6-1 7a May 22, 1978 2 B-C 7a-1 7b May 22, 1978 2 B-C 7b-1 8 May 22, 1978 2, 10, 11 B-C 8-1
! 9a May 22, 1978 2, 10 B-C 9a-1 l
9b May 22, 1978 2, 11 B-C 9b-1
- 9c May 22, 1978 2 B-C 9c-1
( .
10 May 22, 1978 2 E-C 10-1 l
l REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980- Q&R-i l'
o
, .. - _ _ _ _ _ . . ~ . _ _ . - - . . _ . _ _ , ._, ,. , . . . _ - . _ _ . . . _ . _ _ _ - . . . . - _ _ _ . - . . . ,
- n. -- -
7 MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS) f%
U Question ID NRC Request ER Revision Page No 10a May 22, 1978 ?, 3 B-C 10a-1 11 May 22, 1978 2, 11 B-C 11-1 12 May 22, 1978 2 B-C 12-1 13 May 22, 1978 2, 3 B-C 13-1 14a May 22, 1978 2 B-C 14a-1 14b May 22, 1978 2 B-C 14b-1 15 October 18, 1978 3,4,7 B-C 15-1 Endangered Species 1 October 11, 1978 3, 4, 10, 11 END 1-1 2 October 11, 1978 3, 4 END 2-1 3 October 11, 1978 3, 4 END 3-1 4 October 11, 1978 3, 4 END 4-1 5 December 22, 1978 5 END 5-1 6 December 22, 1978 5, 11 END 6-1 Floodplain Management 1 January 31, 1979 6, 7 FPM- 1-1 2 Januaty 31, 1979 6, 7 FPM 2-1 3 January 31, 1979 6, 7 FPM 3-1 j Heat Dissipation .
1 May 22, 1978 2 HDS 1-1 2 May 22, 1978 2 HDS 2-1 3 May 22, 1978 2 HDS 3-1 4 May 22, 1978 2 HDS 4-1 Hydrology, Water Use and Water Quality 1 May 22, 1978 2 HYD 1-1 2 May 22, 1978 2. 10 HYD 2-1 3 May 22, 1978 2 HYD 3-1 4 October 11, 1978 3, 10, 11 HYD 4-1 5 October 11, 1978 3, 9 HYD 5-1 6 October 11, 1978 3, 9 HYD 6-1 7 October 11, 1978 3 HYD 7-1 8 October 11, 1578 3, 4, 10 HYD 8-1 9 October 11, 1978 3, 4, 5, 10 HYD 9-1 10 October 11, 1978 3, 4 HYD 10-1 11 October 11, 1978 3, 10 HYD 11-1 12 October 11, 1978 3 ICD 12-1 13 October 11, 1978 3, 4 HYD 13-1 14 October 11, 1978 3 HYD 14-1 Meteorology 1 May 22, 1978 2 MZT 1-1 2 May 22, 1978 2 MET 2-1 (N 3 May 22, 1978 2 MET 3-1
(') 4 5
May 22, 1978 May 22, 1978 2, 3 2
MET MET 4-1 5-1 REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 Q&R-ii
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
O V -
Question ID NRC Regaest ER Revision Page No 6b May 22, 1978 2 MET 6b-1 7 May 22, 1978 2 MET 7-1 8 May 22, 1978 2 MET 8-1 9 May 22, 1978 2 MET 9-1 10 May 22, 1978 2 MET 10-1 11 May 22, 1978 2 MET 11-1 12 May 22, 1978 2 MET 12-1 13 October 11, 1978 3 MET 13-1 14 October 11, 1978 3 MET 14-1 15 October 11, 1978 3 MET 15-1 16 October 11, 1978 3 MET 16-1 17 October 11, 1978 3 MET 17-1 Plant Effluent Chemistry 1 May 22, 1978 2, 9 PEC 1-1 2 May 22, 1978 2,3,4 PEC 2-1 3 May 22, 1978 2 PEC 3-1 4 May 22, 1978 2, 9 PEC 4-1 5 May 22, 1978 2 PEC 5-1 6 May 22, 1978 2, 9 PEC 6-1 7 May 22, 1978 2 PEC 7-1 8 May 22. 1978 2 PEC 8-1 (O) 9 May 22, 1978 2 PEC 9-1 Radiological 1 November 16, 1978 4, 5 RAD 1-1 2 November 16, 1978 4 RAD 2-1 3 November 16, 1978 4 RAD 3-1 4 November 16, 1978 4 RAD 4-1 5 November 16, 1978 4 RAD 5-1 6 November 16, 1978 4, 5 RAD 6-1 7 November 16, 1978 4 RAD 7-1 8 November 16, 1978 4 RAD 8-1 Socioeconomics 1 May 22, 1978 2 SOC 1-1 2 May 22, 1978 2 SOC 2-1 3 May 22, 1978 2,3,4 SOC 3-1 4 P y 22, 1978 2 SOC 4-1 5 Jay 22, 1978 2 SOC 5-1 6 May 22, 1978 2, 3 SOC 6-1 7 May 22, 1978 2 SOC 7-1 8 October 11, 1978 3, 4 S0C 8-1 9 October 11, 1978 3 S0C 9-1 10 October 11, 1978 3, 4 SOC 10-1 l
11 October 11, 1978 3 SOC 11-1 12 October 11, 1978 3, 4, 11 SOC 12-1 13 October 11, 1978 3, 4 SOC 13-1 14- October 11, 1978 3, 4 S0C 14-1 v 15 October 11,- 1978 3 S0C 15-1
-REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 Q&R-iii
- w , m , n#>e gy
MIDLAND 152 - ER(OLS)
/~N 4
h ARCEAEOLOGY QUESTION 11 Provide a detailed plan for the mitigation or avoidance of sites that will be disturbed by the construction and operation of the plant site and the transmission corridor.
RESPONSE
3 Dr John Halsey, State Archaeologist, and Dr Doreen Ozker, Archaeologist for the Great Lakes Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, met with 4 Consumers Power staff on November 29, 1978; the plan for the avoidance and (d) mitigation or archaeological sites on the transmission line right-of-way was finalized at this meeting. Refer to revised ER Sections 3.s.4.4 and 4.2.2.
Six copies of the following report were provided under separate cover to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on September 15, 1980: l i
11 02ker, Doreen, and David W Taggart, Report of Archaeological Mitigation and Avoidance on a Consumers Power Ccmoany Right of Way in Saginaw and Midland Counties. Michigan, Great Lakes Division, Museum of Anthropology, University of Michigan, February 18, 1980.
1 1
1 n
\_.J REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 -ARC 11-1 l
MIDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS)
-k BENEFIT-COST ANALYSES AND NEED FOR POWER
, QUESTION la If Midland did not operate in the first year of planned operation, and Consumers Power Company had to find replacement energy from the sources in the table below, what is your best estimate of the numbers for the following table (1978 dollars)?
High Low Sulfur Sulfur Gas Coal Coal Oil Turbine Nuclear Hydro Purchased
- 1) Fuel Costs j (Mills /kWh)
,j Ope;ating ard
( , Maintenance
- Cost (Mills /kWh) 2 3) Other Cost (Mills /kWh)
- 4) Total Operating Cost
(#1+2+3) '
(Mills /kWh)
- 5) Percent of i Replacement
, Energy Generated
RESPONSE
11l Replacement energy costs in 1983 dollars are:
4 1
4 i
REVISION 11 - SEPTEM3ER 1980 3-C la-1 1
4
-.e,,,..-- , ., - ,- ,,-,er,--- , ,.,,.,g,--,4, -. ..e.,g..,,e, -n n,,w,-s ,- - . - ,--m-,,,n
1 t
Low g~
4 Sulfur Gas !
Coal (a) 03 Turbine Nuclear Hydro Purchased j
- 1) Fuel Costs 28 94 72 - - -
(Mills /kWh)
- 2) Operating and 2 2 6 - - -
, Maintenance Cost
, (Mills /kWh)
- 3) Other Cost - - - - - -
11 (Mills /kWh)
- 4) Total 30 96 78 - - 44 Operating i Cost !
l'
(#1+2+3) j (Mills /kWh) 1 i 5) Percent of 17 2 2 0 0 79 ,
Replacement Energy Generated i.
1 1
A 11 l(a) Includes small percentage of high sulfur coal.
I i
l 4
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 5 -C la-2
.f k
, . . - , ,- n m.-- - _
4.- %. , . e,,, ,,,..,-,,b,,.-..w...~,._,,-__.....,,__m.__.-..,. ..,,,-ww.
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
)
. BENEFIT-COST ANALYSES AND NEED FOR POWER QUESTION lb j Assuming Midland is operating in fiscal 1981, give the following costs:
- 1) fuel, 2) operating and maintenance, 3) other, 4) total. If Midland nuclear costs are different than the nuclear costs in Question #1a, please explain, t
Use 1978 dollars.
1 4
RESPONSE
{ 2 l Since the project involves two units and both units are assumed to operate in 1 ,
1111984, the costs of operation will be given for that year. The costs in 1984 '
l.
- 2 dollars are estimated as follows
i f' . ($ x 106 ) Mills /kWh Fuel = S 56.0 9.2 1
O&M = 47.6 7.9 11 Fixed Charges = 410.3 67.7 Total $513.9 84.8 i
Includes electric costs only.
J 4
i pO .
j REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 B-C lb-1 L-
~ . . _ . . _ __ . . . , . . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . . _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ , , . _ . _
MIDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS)
BENEFIT-COST ANALYSES AND NEED FOR POWER QUESTION Ic Give the dollar amount lost per year of delay by not operating Midland and 2 using replacement energy and a rough breakdown of those costs.
RESPONSE
The amounts lost per year of delay in $ million in the year incurred are:
1-Year Delay 1983 1984 1985 1986 >
1987 A Replacement Power L[4 212 11 60 17 A Midland Fuel (9) (45) 7 (5) (2)
(Electric Only) a Midland O&M (3) (47) (13) 0 0
'(Total Plant &
Overheads) ;
a Insurance (1) (9) . (2) 0 0 (Total Plant)
Net Difference 31 111 (19) 55 (15) 11 2-Year Delay a Replacement Power 44 257 242 44 90 a Midland Fuel '(9) (56) (41) 2 (8)
(Electric Only) a Midland O&M (3) (50) (64) (14) 0 (Total Plant Overhead) a Insurance (1) (10) (12) (2) 0 (Total Plant)
Net Difference 31 141 125 30 82 2 The following tables illustrate the breakdown of replacement power costs in
\- - - the year incurred. l l
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 B-C Ic-1 l
l
~ _ _ _ _ .. . _ _ . . ._
1 MIDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS) i i
i' -11 l 1983 4
i Low Sulfur Gas 1
CoalCA) Oil Turbine Nuclear Hydro Purchased i
- 1) Fuel Costs 28 94 72 - - -
j (Mills /kWh) 4
- 2) Operating 2 2 6 - - -
and Mainte-
. nance Cost
- (Mills /kWh) 1
- 11 3) Other Cost - - - - - -
i (Mills /kWh) i
- 4) Total Oper- 30 96 78 - - 44 ating Cost
- (#1+2+3) l (Mills /kWh)
- 5) Percent of 17 2 2 0 0 79 Replacement Energy Generated i
J i
4 (a) Includes small percentage of high sulfur coal.
J i
t I
?
l REVISION. ll -' SEPTEMBER 1980 - B-C le-2
,, . - , , ~ _ , . . .
, - - - - , - , , - - - - ,c ..~.._._-m-,,.~,.-,_...-m.-..,,,_....._-,. ,-,,,-y.-,,--% - . , . - . . .
j.
MIDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS) i i
11l 1984 l
4 4
Low Sulfus Gas Coal (a) M Turbine Nuclear Hydro Purchased
- 1) Fuel Costs 31 118 86 - - -
(Mills /kVh)
I 2) Operating 2 2 6 - - -
l and Mainte-
, ' nance Cost
. (Mills /kWh)
- 3) Other Cost - - - - - -
l I
(Mills /kWh) 11 4) Total Oper- 33 120 92 - -
42 ating Cost
(#1+2+3)
! (Mills /kWh)
- 5) Percent of 19 1 1 0 0 79 Replacement i Energy Generated i
J.
d i
]
i i
l I
j l(a)Includessmallpercentageofhighsulfurcoal.
i j
1 j
. REVISION 11~- SEPTEMBER 1980 B-C Ic-3 i
a 6
,g---- w9- --
-,.y-,-.ey,. ,,,,-wo-y- .- -- c..,,y,.-%rw, ,,.%.,e,e,,,,wy-m,,- -,,,,wg,.q,w%,rm,-.-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _mw.m
_ m-- r, w w. m g ay w _,
I l ' MIDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS) 1 l
+
l 1
i 11l 1985 I i i Low i
Sulfur Gas
{ CoalCa} Oil Turbine Nuclear Fvdro Purchased 4
- 1) Fuel Costs 35 95 100 - - -
(Mills /kWh) 1=
- 2) Operating 2 2 6 - - -
- and Mainte-nance Cost i (Mills /kWh) i
- 3) Other Cost - - - - - -
(Mills /kWh) 11 4) Total Oper- 37 97 106 - -
33 ating Cost
? (#1+2+3)
(Mills /kWh)
- 5) Percent of 29 5 0 -
-1 67 j
Replacemeht
. Energy ,
- Generated i
(
1 l
l _
l.
t a
I f l (a) Includes small percentage of high sulfur coal.
4 .
! I l
1 i
i i'
l r REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 3-C ic-4 w- ,- e- y vr,-* --
y v -- -- p wl,y -
wp % 3 i-- yppq j7q-g7 -
,,9,& % ,q,p wyyy ww,yyyww.g qaym y- y ggm We gp ggw= 9W w ww yv gwer
y _ . . . ~ . _ . ._ _. . ._ _ __ _ __ .
. MIDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS) 11l 1986 i
I Low
, Sulfur Gas Coal (A} Oil Turbine Nuclear Hvdro Purchased
- 1) Fuel Costs 39 103 135 - - -
j ~(Mills /kWh) l i 2) Operating. 2 2 7 - - -
and Mainte-nance Cost (Mills /kWh)
- 3) Other Cost - - - - - -
{ (Mills /kWh) 11 4) Total Oper- 41 105 142 - -
56 ating Cost
(#1+2+3)
! (Mills /kWh)
- 5) Percent of 33 3 0 0 -1 65 Replacement
-Energy Generated
.i.
, b l(a)Includessmall'percentageofhighsulfurcoal.
J l
i . REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 B-C ic-3 1 -g -g--3,-v--- e- e p *-y e gr-va-M +m w1&h.+w--%-m -ww-aw* wag +- t e 4--9m- T m73 =wm e - wy p-+-%-W-9"FPT-*W 'q W E v'FW7"'WW'***"TNFF"'"-
- .. - . . . . .. - ~ -- - ... .. . . . - -_
8
. . - _ . . y g, ,
n MIDLANi['1h2 - ER(OI.S) ;
s
_ s . ;
11l - sC
- 1987 '
l
._ I$w !
~ Sulfur '
Gas t Coal (a) Of Turbine Nuclear Hydro Purchased
- 1) Tuoibosts 45 114 162 - - - !
(hills /kWh)
- 2) Operating 2 2 7 - - -
and Mainte-nance Cost
=(Mills /kWh)
- 3) Other Cost - - - - - -
' (Mills /kWh) ,
e 11 4) I thi Oper- 47 116 169 - -
72 sting Cost ,
Uf1+2+3)
(Mills /kWh) i
- 5) ' Percent of -
19 10 1 -
-2 ' 72
' Replacement Energy Generated g
s.
4 i
i
. l s.
I s ,
i i
l(a)Includestsmallpercentageofhighsulfurcoal.
( )
s 9 .\
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 B-C ic-6
MIDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS)
BENEFIT-COST ANALYSES AND NEED FOR PCWER i
QUESTION 2 Assume CPS does operate but does not sell any electricity to Dow Chemical in the 1980's. Under this scenario, answer questions la., Ib.,, and Ic.
i 2 RESPONSE
- Dow Chemical Company is presently a customer of Consumers Power Company and '
has, in fact, contracted to purchase power from the Company in the future.
Making the unrealistic and purely hypothetical assumption that these purchases would not occur, the replacement powar cost components identified in the 11 responses to Questions la and Ic might be reduced by 4%. Note that the 1
- response to Question ib would be unchanged.
The distribution of sources identified in the response to Question la would i shift siightly, reflecting more generation from lower cost resources. For example, a 3* increase in the proportion of low sulfur coal generation, and 2 equal decrease in oil generation would result in the above noted decrease in overall cost of replacement power from Consumers Power Company's units.
The table supplied in response to Question Ic would appear as follows:
i-
. O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 3-C 2-1
MIDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS)
(\
%.)
AMOUNT LOST PER YEAR OF DELAY 2 ASSUMING NO DOW PURCHASE
($ Million in the Year Incurred) 1-Year _ Delay 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 a Replacement Power 47 198 (11) 62 12 a Midland Fuel (9) (45) 7 (5) (2)
(Electric Only) 11 a Midland O&M (3) (47) (13) 0 0 (Total Plant
& Overheads) a Insurance (1) (9) (2) 0 0 (Total Plant)
Net Difference 34 97 (19) 57 10 2 2-Year Delay a Replacement Power 47 240 236 43 84 A Midland Fuel (9) (56) (41) 2 (8)
(Electric Only) 11 a Midland O&M (3) (50) (64) (14) 0 (Total Plant
& Overheads)
A Insurance (1) (10) (12) (2) 0 (Total Plant)
Net Difference 34 124 119 39 76
/^N V
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 3-C 2-2
MIDIAND 1&2-ER(OLS) l BENEFIT-COST ANALYSES AND NEED FOR POWER
- QUESTION 3 Staff wishes to determine what fraction of the capital costs of Midland should !
! be considered not sunk. Should an OL be delayed 1 to 5 years or not granted l
then, excepting fuel and operation and maintenance, can any of the costs of Midland be recovered? If yes, please explain in what way and the amounts of money involved. For example, if the plant never ran how much less than $83.5 million (ERS, Amendment 1, p. 8.2-2) would decommissioning costs be?
i
RESPONSE
Sections 5.8 and 8.2.5 of the ER(OLS) have been revised to present the dis-cussion on costs of decommissioning and dismantling, which are now estimated 11
- in 1984 dollars to be $235 million.
A review was made of this estimate to determine the costs of removal if the Plant were never to be operated. It is assumed that fuel loading does not 1 2 take place, therefore, there are no contaminated elements. Based on the 1
f reevaluation under the described conditions, the costs of removal would be l
j $145 million. Since the equipment is assumed to be clean (uncontaminated), a
, salvage value has been attached of $31 million. Hence, if the site is 11 restored before fuel loading occurs, the net loss due to restoration is estimated to be $114 million in 1984.
.O v
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 3-C 3-1 i
. - . . , , . . _ , . . . - .. , . , , . _ , , . . _ _ . , _ . . _ , . , - , . . , , , - . _ , . , , ,. .._,-,---r
-4
MIDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS) -
(m
\ )
%./
BENEFIT-COST ANALYSES AND NEED FOR POWER QUESTION 8 Please provide the forced outage rates for each size of units, or alternatively, provide forced outage rate data for each unit (by type and size 2 for the system).
RESPONSE
Following is a list of the ROR (random outage rates) projected for the period 11l 1984-85. ROR is defined as:
F+U g } ROR =
V T-P 2 where: T = Installed Capability x Time, (W x Time)
F = Forced Outage (Actual) x Time, (W x Time)
P = Period Outages (Actual) x Time, (W x Time)
U = Unforeseen Outages (Actual) x Time, (W x Time) 11l 1984 1985 2 l Coal Size (W) ROR ROR
! Campbell 1 253 15.3 13.0 Campbell 2 349 18.0 16.0 Campbell 3 791 13.5 15.0 Cobb 1-3 180 9.9 10.0 Cobb 4 151 11.0 12.0 Cobb 5 152 9.2 13.0 Karn 1 255 19.4 19.0 REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 B-C 8-1
MIDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS) o s
11 1584 1985 l l 2 Coal Size (MW) ROR ROR Karn 2 257 15.6 16.0 o Weadock 7 155 .1.0 20.0 i
) 11 Weadock 8 155 17.2 16.0 i
j Whiting 1 95 9.4 7.4 Whiting 2 95 5.7 5.7 j Whiting 3 120 9.6 10.0
- 2 l gil Karn 3 638 18.0 15.0 l Karn 4 613 20.0 16.0 11 Morrow 1-4 ,
114 10.0 0.0 i' Veadock 1-6 . 189 15.0 0.0 2 l Nuclear Big Rock- 63 3.4 3.3 Palisades 740 24.2 25.4 1
Midland 1 522 30.9 31.2
- Midland 2 807 34.7 42.1 2 l Peakers
] 304 14.0 16.2 11 I (20 Units) 2 l Ludington Pumped Storage (a) 3, 954 3.0 3.0
- l(6 Units) 2 l Hydro
7 '
uI(35unie.)
2 (a) Reflects CP Co 51*. share.
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 3-C 8-2
- - _. -. . . ~ . . . . . - . . . - - .. . . - . . .. . _ . - . . - . . . -_ .. _ - _ _ __
MIDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS) i O
. BENEFIT-COST ANALYSES AND NEED FOR POWER l g"ESTIbN9b Please provide the anticipated loading order of units available to CPS for 2 each of the seasons of the year.
RESPONSE
t i
Units are dispatched on an economic priority basis regardless of season. The anticipated loading of steam-electric and combusticn-turbine units available to Consumers Power Coepany in 1984 is:
1 I
) PAL
- BIG R
! COBBS COBB4'
, KARN2 KARN1
.i WHIT 3 WHIT 1 WHIT 2 CAMP 3 11 EAD7 WEAD8 COBB3
- COBB2 COBB1 KARN4 KARN3 i TH5-9 i WEADA GAYLD
- i TH1-4 MORRA MORRB MORR2 MORR1 WEAD1 O WEAD2 REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 B-C 9b-1
3 ;
1 1
- MIDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS) i 4 .
l -
4 WEAD3 4
STRAT l MORR3 i i MORR4
} 11 WEAD4
- WEAD6
} WEAD5 ,
i WHITA :
! CAMPA
' i i
i
! Hydroelectric units are typically dispatched run-of-river with regard to i I
j- 2 regulations established for their operation. Pumped-storage units are i
j dispatched on,an economic and enersy-related criteria. Therefore, exact
! loading cannot be depicted.
1 i
a l
3 1
1 e
i t
i i
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 3-C 9b-2
_ _ . _ _ _ ._. _ _ _ ... .__ _ ..s _..... .._ _ . _ _ _ _ .. _ , - --
hlDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS)
O BENEFIT-COST ANALYSES AND NEED FOR POWER QUESTION 11 Explain the interval by interval load model and the meaning of Table 1.1-11.
RESPONSE
?
The phrase " interval by interval load model" as used in the ERS has been replaced by the more descriptive phrase " monthly load model" in added ER 2 Section 1.1.3.2 which updates the information in the ERS. The purpose of both is to describe the daily, peak hour load scaling factors that are used to l
obtain a daily, peak hour load for years in the future. These scaling factors are based on historical loads modified by projected differences.
O ER Table 1.1-14 indicates the factors that when applied to projected r Sasonal >
peak load will yield the peak hour load for each weekday of the year under consideration.
11 l
l l
l l
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 B-C 11-1 l
A MIDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS) b D
The scope of this study shall require the identification and' elaboration of major soil series and quantitative and qualitative assessment of the natural biota.
B. Data Requirements - Midland Nuclear Plant - Tittabawassee Substation Gary Road Substation 345 kV Transmission Right-of-Way
- 1. Soils and Topography The Consultant shall:
(a) Map soil series traversed by the corridor.
(b) Identify soils of economic importance.
1 t
g 4 (c) Discuss the suitability of various soil types for various practices (eg, agriculture, forestry, recreation).
(d) Include topographical summary for the corridor.
- 2. Vegetation The Consultant shall:
(a) Describe, identify, and map major community types within the existing right-of-way.
(b) Use standard plot and/or plotless methods to quantitatively describe the vegetation of a representative sample of all natural compartments traversed by the proposed transmission line.
l
/T e
REVISION 10 - NOVEMBER 1979 END 1-4
-,- - - . . ,,, .rn, ,
- , , , , , , .. -- --- r-
TA&LE END l-1 1 of 2 I'
EUDANGERID AND Th*1DTf.OED FI.OQ CJfD FoLlaa CF TH SQGIO21, MIDLAND AND &AT C0(UTIES AREA Q ] '
aw, .
,.,,:3 FIANTS(a) _ _ . .
Saginaw County Midlene County Bay County carea glatyghylla (Carey) Cyprape_daus eryetinue (A. Sr.) hbenarse rilaarts Threatened - Marhages here - Machigan; Threatened = US Threatened - Michagea Sedge Rae's head lady-slapper Orsage fsanged orchad Eabitat Rich deciduous woods and rocky slopes. Habitat: Damp, mossy woods; begs, h batat: Boss er awsop sandy seal Late April - June. 4. ate May - June. an wonds, thic kets, etc.
Habenaria flava (L.) Caren scorsa ( hwe) liebena_rj a_leucophaea (ht t . )
Bare - Michsges; Threatened - US Threatened - Mathigan Threatened - Machigan, t?S Tubercled orchid Sedge Prairie f ranged orchad
, Mabitstr Sweepy woods, bottoelands. Habstat- bet woods; sweeps. hba t at : het praivae; open Jwse - September. Apr61
- easty July. (tamarac k) sweeps; boga.
M.d-June - August .
hbemerna leucophaes (Nutt.) Sisyrtrwhnies atlant acum (Backa.) bec ksama t a J e, a n gac.hae (Steudet . ) f e ra Threatened - Machigan, US Threatened - Machagea Threatened - Ma<higan Prairie f ringed archid t!.e-eyed grass Slough grass hbat at - Wet prairie; opea (tamarack) s asps; bogs, h batat: Deep-dry meadows; earsbea; low woods. Mabitat: bet areas.
Mid-Juac - A.aust. hy . July.
Trailium viende (Sech.) Diarrhema anserscana (beauv.) St ate speat a (Traa b her.)
Threatened - Mackagen Threatened - Machagan Threatened - Rachagan Trallaus Habatet: Shaded s averbanks and woods. Feathergrass, spearasass July - !-eptember.
Blab a ta t : Rath woods. Apral - h y. hb a tat : Dry soil.
1.a nde r a n s as. age l l__a des (Machaum.) Asilega_as hs.rtella (Pennell) boodson Threatened - Machagan Threatened - Machassa False pampermel Malkweed H4batat: Damp shores, sands. Habatat: (Ten aseas, praarnes, June - October. fields, waste ground.
ANIMALS MA"l*tALS BIRpS _Rt.Ql!KS_AhQ,,49PM,l BI ANS_
Synaptoeye coopera (Battd) Falco perege_sous (Tunstall) hlaaeet us leucocephalus (L. ) Eleph_e o_bs3 1 et s (Say)
Threatened - Machigan Endangered - Michigan, US Threatened - Michigan, US Threatened - Machagan Southere bog leessing Pesegrane fairoe Bald eagle Blas k rat snake h bitat: Monst, grassy areas; hbatat: Msgrates south a'ong Habatat: Seldom found far troe Nabatat: Habatat heavy grasa cover.(b) beaches, huats over wooded water (eg, takes, large verses tros rocky, areas, open count ry and coastal rivers, coastal areas). Large t ambered balls & des to areas; f eeds on ba rds; trees are used for mestans, flat farmlands and magrant oaty. food staple sa fash. Feedaag coastal pleans. boodlots habitat may be f ound on or near and agratultural landa Plant nate. Nests sa Sagenaw as the study ares could County, provide habstat for thas spec aea.(b)
Microt us panetorum (LeCoate) Dand ro a c e k a r t land a a (Baird) Ca ra us cyaneus (L.)
Threatened - Removed proposed 1979 Endangered
- Mache gan,175 Threatened - Machagan Michigan last Nortland's warbler Marsh hawk Pane vele Habatat: Very specafic h batat! hrshes, grassy swales hbatat: Grassy areas at edges mestans requirescats which and open fields are requared for
_ a maw w w_ . a- __ . - - - - u- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - -
___ _ y_y _ _ _ - , _ .y - .my_ . - - -
with tback Jack pane on Graylang sand, f rogs, snakes, c rayfish, large errhards.(bgayerofd=ff, suitable nestleg habitat as ansects and some small bards.
act found at the Madland sate. Low acadows and marshy areas are May possibly see this b ard as aus g able for mestang sites, a sagrant, but untakely. where abrubs and tall weedy Browth afford coneesleest.
Seen se engratar.a on the tranneassaon raght-of-way.
Phalasro$oras aur atus ( Le s son ) PanMn halaaetus (L,)
Endansered - Proposed 1979 Marbogan Thr eat ened - M at ha gea last Osprey Double-crested (ormorant Habitat: heats an areas wath Habatst: Inhabats areas with estensive bodaes of clear water large bodaes of water, where at wath elevated aest sites. Food feeds piso4raly on tash and staple is fash. No sustahle c rust ac eans . Has beca seen at nest ing sa tes appear to esist sa Plant sate. the study area. Observed dur ang 1971 et elcatral survey.
Sterne harundo (L.) Lanius ludovacaanus (L.)
Ladangered - Psoposed 1979 Mattigen Threatened - Machagea last l-ggerhead shrahe Coma.,e tera Habatat: Inhabats open country Habatat: Abuedsat coastelly and wath woody growth f or nest ang over large taland lases. (May sates sad lookout perches (eg, be f ound et Midland site. / b) hedgerown, s(sttered trees, tente and ut ality poles soJ wa res) .
Food c ons a st s of a nsc< t s , some mace and ba rds. t,eneral habitat requa renest s are met throughout t he Madland Flant a rea .t d )
At_r ap a t e_ r r oope_r a ( Bon a pa r t e ) Hyfsoprogne gespas (Pallsel Threatened - Machagen Threatened - Proposed 1979 Mathagan last Loope r 's hawk Caspaan terk Habatat- Perches an dense, leafy crowns, hunts birds and Habatat: f ound both c oastelly small meeals an open farmlanJ. and anland Robs other sea Favora scattered woodlots anter- birds, eats eggs, fish is maan spersed with open farmland for dact. Could be fount s. ear nestang. Has been seen near cool acA PeJ (b) the Madland site.
But e$ 1, a_nca t_.as (Gmetta)
Threatened - Mac'agan Red-shouldered hawk Hab2 tat: Nests and feeds se and arousid swamps, r aver bottoms, and other wet wa ,isods, and as co m e an e .eans count ry an small woos...s, wheth provide acceptable (but not preferred) nest sites. Madland plant are4 could prevaie nestang sites and food sources. hesta in Sagaaew County.
(a) Occurrence based on historacal records f or the tri-toonty area.
(b) May be f ound na the tr6-county area on the basas of habitat requarceents.
ItEVISION II - SEPTDtBER 1980 s *~
%s imms
_m M
MIDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS)
O i ENDANGERED SPECIES QUESTION __6 Please supply the interim biological survey report (November 15, 1978) referenced in the Scope Statement (Endangered Species Question 1, Revision 4, December 1978).
5 RESPONSE i
Six copies of IS"rERIM REPORT, Terrestrial Ecological Survey - Midland Nuclear 4 Plant - Tittabawassee Substation - Gary Road Substation 345 kV Transmission ROW, prepared for Consumers Power Company by Asplundh Environmental Services and S & R Environmental Consulting, Nc- ier 15, 1978, were provided to the i Nuclear Regulatory Commission under separate cover on January 10, 1979. Six I
11 Copies of the final report, completed November 10, 1979, were provided to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission on September 15, 1980.
1 1
1 i
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 END 6-1
MIDLAND 1&2 - ER(OLS)
HYDROLOGY, WATER USE AND WATER QUALITY QUESTION 4 Provide an estimate of the maximum amount of city water to be used on an annual basis at MNP, both dircetly and indirectly from DOW. What percentage 3 of the total city water provided 'to the community would this be?
RESPONSE
The City of Midland Water Department provided the following information on the city water system:
Avg Peak 10 Design Annual Use Present capacity of City water system (MGD)
(a) City Filtered (Potable). Water 20 9 20 (b) Raw Huron Water Supplied to Dow 17 12 15 11 1982 capacity of City water system (MGD)
, (a) City Filtered (Potable) Water 31 11 24 t
(b) City Filtered (Industrial) Water 17 13 16 Total 48 24 40 Contracts with CP Co (MGD) 1.0 max 10 (720 gpm) 1981 Contracts with Dow (MGD) 17 max - -
(a) Separate system (nonfiltered). Should not be totaled with potable 11 water capacity or use.
(b) The Dow Chemical Company currently uses about 13 MGD of which about 3 10l 'MGD is used for makeup to the process steam system. These quantities 11l are not expected to change significantly in the next few years.
V REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 HYD 4-1
l l
MIDLAND 152 - ER(OLS) j O
Based on this information, Midland Plant Units 1 & 2 will use the following 3 percentages of City water on a daily basis:
Domestic use and makeup demineralizers - avg 0.3% of 1982 Design Capacity 11 *
]' - Max 1.7* of 1982 Design Capacity i s Makeup by Dow to process steam system - Avg 4.6*. of 1982 Design Capacity j - Max
- 9.7*. of 1982 Design Capacity 1
'l j
10 (a) Based on 40". makeup to process steam feedwater. Makeup water is g used l 'by the Midland Plant. All feedwater supplied by Dow is returned to Dow A either as process steam or evaporator blowdown; le, Dow supplies the U fluid transfer medium required for the Midland Plant to supply heat energy to Dow.
(b) 1982 reserved flow rate of 1.9 x 106 lb/hr.
(c) Design flow rate of 4.05 x 106 lb/hr. -
O REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 HYD l.-2 i
MIDLAND 1&2-ER(OLS)
-~
SOCI0 ECONOMICS QUESTION 12 Provide an estimate of property and income tax payable to local and state jurisdiction. during the operating life of the Midland Plant (update Page 8-1 of Enclosure 1 in the April 1, 1977 letter to William H Regan, if necessary).
The estimates should indicate these taxes, in 1978 dollars, for each operating year along with the total taxes paid during the operating life of the plant.
RESPONSE
3 The estimates of State and local taxes applicable to the Midland Plant are provided by employing those components of a fixed charge rate based on the g Consumers Power currently authorized rate of return. Since these estimates are levelized annual values, they should not be used for planning purposes.
They are not site specific, rather, they are system average estimates. ,
l
- a. Michigan Single Business Tax id 1984 Levelized Annual Payment = $3.4 million j
l 4l t
- b. Property Taxes 11l 1984 Levelized Annual Payment = $62.0 million 4l c. No special district taxes 11l Refer to revised ER(OLS) Sections 8.1. 4, 8. 2. 6 and 11.
l O
REVISION 11 - SEPTEMBER 1980 SCC 12-1
. _ _ . _ _ . . _ . - _ . . _ _ _ , _ , _ _ . ..