ML20030A446

Chapter 5 to Preliminary Hazards Summary Rept for Big Rock Point, Site & Environ

ML20030A446
Person / Time
Site:	Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png
Issue date:	01/18/1960
From:	CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
To:
References
NUDOCS 8101090523
Download: ML20030A446 (14)

Text

.

l i

1 L

SEC TION V SITE AND ENVIRONMENT A.

GENERAL GEOGRAPHY The Big Rock Point site is located in Charlevoix County, between the towns of Charlevoix and Petoskey, on the northern shore of Michigan's lower peninsula. The land site includes about 600 acres of gently sloping wooded and cleared land on the shore of Lake Michigan at the western extremity of the southern shore of Little Traverse Bay. The site is 228 miles NNW of Detroit, and 262 miles NNE of Chicago.

Figure V-1 shows an aerial photo of the site area, and Figure V-2 shows the location of the site with respect to the overall view of the state of Michigan and its surroundings.

Figure V-3 indicates the detailed location of the site with respect to adjacent and near'ay bodies of water.

Figure V-4, Site Map, indicates the property owned by Consumers Power Company and the area's association with the nearby highway and railroad. The Site Map also indicates the currently proposed location of the reactor plant.

B.

IMMEDIATE ENVIRONS The immediate environs of the site are typified by relatively sparsely occupied and utilized partly wooded land. The gentle sloping land with no significant topographic features found on the site itself, continues for several nJ1es. To the south, at a minimum distance of about three miles, is Lake Charlevoix, an inland exten-sion of Lake Michigan of significant size.

Access to the site area is available by US-Michigan Route #31 and the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway, both of which pass the site region at a distance of one-half to one mile from the proposed re-actor location, and connect the cities of Charlevoix and Petoskey.

The site size, shape, and planned reactor enclosure location pro-vide the ability to insure that no residences are within one-half mile of the reactor. Only scattered rural residences and a few commercial facilities are found within several miles of the site.

Commercial and cultural facilities and important residential areas are found in Charlevoix, about four miles southwest of the

(

8/0/090503

V-2 site; and 'at Petoskey, about twelve miles east of the site. Outside of such cities, there are no nearby sign'#icant industrial operations, ex-4 cept for a cement plant about nine triles to the east.

J Charlevoix County, with a land area of about 400 square miles, has a gross agricultural yield of about $1-1/2 million per year, with about 40% of its land area in agricultural use. Produce is principally dairy and poultry products, and fruit. Statistics on the economy of the three counties around the site (the approximate thirty mile radius), are shown in the following table:

TABLE V-1 STATISTICS OF SURROUNDING AREA COUNTIES Antrim Charlevoix

' Emmet Land Area, sq. mi.

477 414 461 Population 1950 10,721 13,475 16, 534 Population /sq. mi.

23 33 36 Manufacturing Establishments, 1954 23 32 26 Employment 1-19 15 24 15 i

20-99 7

6 10 l

100-Over 1

2 1

Average Annual Manufacturing Employment 1954 541 699 813 Farm s, 1954 836 758 837 I

Average Size Farms, Acres 164 147 148 Value of Farm Products Sold, (in $1,000's) 2,209 1,446 1,715 Including:

Crops 828 340 801 Livestock 389 315 258 Dairy 655 558 562 Poultry 305 205 62 1

,--mm

V-3 Typical of most cif the northern portion of the southern peninsula of Michigan, and because of comparatively moderate summer climate and i

abundant lake frontage, the general region of the site is an important summe r vacationiand. However, this summer occupancy is not a sig-nificant factor within about two miles cf the plant site.

Figure V-7 has been prepared from U. S. Geological Survey maps covering the quadrangles in the site area. The map shows the outline of the plant property and mileage circles out to a radius of 5 miles from the proposed. reactor location. This figure indicates the topo-graphy of the surrounding land.

C.

ENVIRONS POPULATION The site is remote from any large metropolitan areas, and has general-ly favorable low surrcunding population, both from the short-range and long-range isc.lation viewpoints. This is indicated by the estimated total population within various radii:

Radius, Miles Total Population 1/2 None 1

Less than 5 1

2 70 3

577 4

1430 5

4964 10 9000 20 26,700 40 52,000 60

' 135,000 The principal urban areas within 60 miles are:

Distance Direction

_ Urban Center Population from Site from Site Charlevoix 2,700 4 miles SW Harbor Springs 1,700 11 NNE Petcskey 6,500 11 E

Boyne City 3,000 14 SE East Jordan 1,800 14 SSE l

Gaylord 2,300 33 SE Cheboygan 5,700 40 NNE St. Ignace 3,000 42 NE

' Traverse City 17,000 45 SSW

(

Grayling 2,100 52 SSE The permar.ent population cf the several counties near the site does not appear to have.any significant upward trend, probably due, in pa rt,

V-4 to the significant numbers of retired individualo fcund es rosidants.

t Study of the difference in sales tax receipts between winter and summer pericds for the counties of Antrim, Charlevoix, and Emmet (the ap-proximate 30 mile radius) indicates that the number of temporary summe r residents at any time is nct more than 50 percent of the per-manent population indicated above. Frcm this it may be reasonable to infer that the pcpulations for varicus radii shown will not be doubled in the summer period.

Figure V-5 indicates the estimated distribution of the local population.

This information was established from a count of the dwellings in the area in 1959 with the assumption that there is an average of 3-1/2 perscns per dwelling. The prependerance of population toward the southwest coincides with a mir.imum wind direction probability.

Figure V-6 indicates the populat'en found within a 60-miles radius of the proposed site based on the 1950 census. Both the populations of significant urban centers and the average pcpulation densities of the nearby counties are indicated.

D.

METEOROLOGY Present indications are that the meteorology of the site region will produce n, significant limitaticns cn plant design and operation. Gen-erally prevailing winds are from the western half of the compass and there are no significant population centers downwind for a distance 6f over 19 miles.

Due to the relatively low use and cccupancy of th general area, little meteorclogical data applying directly to the ' site are currently avail-able. General climatclogical data are available from many points in Michigan, and included as Appendix 1 are the Climatological Summary Sheets fc,r the four Iccatiens of Cheboygar., Grayling, Manistee, and Traverse City which generally surrcund the site area.

Prcgessor E. Wendell Hews:.n, University of Michigan, has been re-tained as consultant. A report of the preliminary analysis of the mete-orcic,gy cf the site is attached as Appendix 2.

E.

GEOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY Profess r James H. Zumberge of the University of Michigan has bee-retained as a censultant on the geology and hydrology'of the proposed reactor site and its envirens. His preliminary findings are attached as Appendix 3.

L5 In general, the preliminary findings are favorable. The surface drain-age of the immediate area cf the proposed reactor plant building is

(-

from the building locatiens directly to Lake Michigan rather than inland towards inhabited areas and local wells. There appears to be a high probability that any accidental release of material at the immediate lo-cation of the plant buildings which penetrated to ground water would also be drhined directly into Lake Michigar..

The surface scils are of types which generally have low permeability and might be expected to have fair to good ion exchange capacity.

The principal currents in Lake Michigan important to the site for con-siderations of liquid waste disposal are generally favorable. Most of

~

the time it is indicated that the current alcng the plant shore will be from east to west, with significant rapid diffusion into the main body of upper Lake Michigan. Preliminary estimates of lake diffusion at~

the site are given in Appendix 4, by J. C. Ayers.

A most recent survey was made of the use of ground water in the vicinity of the site. It was found that within one mile of the proposed location of the reactor plant buildings, there are currently no water wells existing. Within a radius af one to two miles, a total of 30 domestic wells use grcund water. At greater distances, particularly toward Charlevoix, much greater numbers certainly exist. The nearby wells are plotted on a portion of a U. S. G. S. map included as Figure V-8.

k Due to the copiously available grcund water in this region, no permits or other record making requirements for wells are available for reference.

F.

SEISMOLOGY The seismicity of the proposed site area has been investigated by Pro-fessor James T. Wilson, Professor of Geology, University of Michigan, who has been retained as a consultant for this purpose, and his prelim-inary findings are attached in Appendix E.

The probability that earth-1 quakes of significant intensity will occur in the general site area appears to be very low.

The important.e of earthquakes to plant design has been independently investigated by_the Bechtel Corporation. Their summary statement

~

of findings is:

"An investigation of the seismic history indicates that this is a region of low seismic activity. The Coast and Geodetic Survey publication, Serial 609, Earthquake History of the United States, lists earthquakes in the Michigan area as shown below. All of these are classified as intermediate cr minor. The nearest recorded. earthquake was the one centered near Menominee, apprcximately 110 miles from the plant site.

(

4

+

e

---r

--9

V6 Ro s si-Forel Date Locality Intensity i

Feb. 6,1872 Winona, Michigan 5*

Aug. 17, 1877 Southeast Michigan 4-5 Feb. 4,1883 -

Indiana & Michigan 6

March 13,1905 Menominee. Michigan 5

July 26,1905 Calumet, Michigan 8

May 26,1906 Keewenaw Peninsula, Michigan 8-9 Jan. 22,1909 Houghton, Michigan 5*

• Locally felt only.

Since no recorded eartMuakes have centered near the plant site, and there is no knowledge of earth tremors having been felt near the site, elaborate or special seismic design features art. ot considered neces-sary. However, in keeping with good engineering practice, all struc-tures will be designed to resist nominal seismic loading. Structural design of the plant will comply with the Uniform Building Code. Hori-zontal forces based on Zone 1 will be used, i

The UBC does not clearly cover the reactor containment vessel or the concrete structure and equipment within. In view of their high degree of rigidity, it appears prudent to use a seismic factor equal to the maximum expected ground acceleration at the site. A study of the i

brief earthquake history of the region leads to the conclusion that an intensity of 7 on the Rossi-Forel scale is a reasonably conservative a s sumption. This would correspond roughly to a ground acceleration of 0. 05 gravity. Therefore, a seismic factor of 0,05 will be used for this portion of the plant. This is twice the factor required by the UBC for tanks and similar structures, and appears to be reasonable in view of the high rigidity already mentioned.

For the containment vessel itself, earthquake forces will not govern the design, since the wind force on the vessel at the design velocity of 100 miles per hour is greater than 0. 05 times its weight. "

G.

REGIONAL MONITORING A continuing regional monitoring program, starting a significant time interval before plant operations commence, and of a scope compatible with the environmental features, is planned.

The purposes of this environs monitoring program in the vicinity of the nuclear power station are to:

(

V-7 1.

Establish pre-operational radiation levels from sourcss cthar than the proposed operation.

t 2.

Determine radiation levels during entire period of plant opera-

. tion.

3.

Relate results to plant effluent monitor results to refine pre-viously established safe operating procedures, or to indicate that results are 'not of plant origin.

4.

Provide a record to indicate compliance with public health and safety regulations.

The environs monitoring program for the Big Rock Point Plant may in-clude the following types of measurements:

1.

Atmospheric background radiation level, so that the contribu-tion to environs dose from emission of radiogases may be de-te rmine d.

2.

Airborne particulate monitoring, to establish the concentra-tions of fallout material in the air. It is considered highly unlikely that the plant itself will emit any significant quantity of particulate airborne radioactive material.

3.

Sampling of vegetation, rain gauge, or snow samples, as is appropriate seasonally.

4.

Monitoring of representative water wells in the vicinity.

This would include any wells available on the plant site in addition to a nurnber of domestic well,s at nearby farms, which would be selected to surround the plant with regard to possible ground water movement from the plant sit'e..

5.

The lake will be sampled at appropriate locations in order to establish the general background and so that the dilution of any liquid wastes released may be followed.

6.

Consideration will be given to the feasibility of sampling bio-logical specimens, both aquatic and terrestrial.

FIGURE V-l J

j"y - f j y n.., <

4 i

n. x-wm..s w m, x., yr w

m a

4 5. <W s.' t.^4.'t " e

% R,w. r.---~~*%.

3 o

s'

y. %

sl l 1,-

• */.r

{p-s

. cy. g.

+.

,l 8 M(*,&'4.p e-6

[

s.

,'g : > 3

's.

n.n

., L.

,~

+Q.. :., Q:<. *;* s y g*

.f,,/.

~~

-Cl. --

e' w.

t,.i.. a

,s.g X-t

.~

,, 4 s

, - &m. f,.': s yN!.9T.w ' ll. h.,*.

5 Q,.i j~/.'.

r,..

..b'.,,

W,'~.*-s

,.*.,- % \\ ~*

H-.-

A 4'r *

1. . g

..

• y, s l ^.

E

. ;'*.A g f^ ' \\ * *'; N',,, Y y.'.' Q g %

- me %

n k

,,m 4y(

[,

M

[ ~

• • '?

eI . ' M.'

? ",yI g,.

ik

[ **

~

m(g.f,-

m a,..-.w-.. _ -.

.T*...,.....4

'., e,;

• .7,,.w

'g

.. -.. ~ +

.'W,*

I, J *. /

.,'.Q'.

<* 4 s6*

. Y" e, *.. g\\.0l Q *).R 4

~

(*

.'5,

"N NS, 'd* %* Y.

% Y.** *s y;i,* t. ~t"" 7.'Fr*~

- ;'. s A,;- ', j :. ~.*. ? '. %k,?

. 5

$^W s,s~

l,*

y.* ? c e

e

~-y

.w.

w-

. !.,;'f<. 4 ",

T y 3 ~;., r v -,

6 g.

.,, 4,A y

s 4-g

• s g,i.

J..J*s e-

... ", '

• Q.'y. :* '.' [-

j

..hd '.

h ' k $ '

i a

n v.

-. n %

pti"; n @h b & l ;_.,-- [ ;.l I

]:- s'y&

T $.

/

'f N

. O n.y, '*r...,'s:.'.,~..;.~.;c %n4. a",. 2.y',

M.

~.:

,ny ',, y.

,..s

.*w.- %

Q r,s.

g e,.b*~* ;,*

p.

j' 9

Q._. -

d-d* #,* y*=/ j '4 %ab

., ~ '

,.;,wc;.,'h e

..l

%$' *D-L. s..

,.s

.="r~

• " ~.*

s n~

- p

[

g-p-me.gaa.y

. ~'

, p.

n73.s,

&p?i.a

.t.,w. -

y*

$lQV...

m, E b e., W.. :. ~L s,.

.J,...O n g

. W*

4 s]*

. 4 m &1.

V.

~.

e

+

r

..% ' y., an I g. !:

e ~.;

y

. j,#w%4,, j,./ **

• e.,.

'.s g-r-m=>;.

t '...

,m-

- - ' p r*

g-A

.- s-~~'s 6

^

3.*

e,sP#8*

F -

, 't

• Q, ; s.yr ? "

• g' s

A 4

.4 i _. L.. g

( e-e es A,.[ '

.*s,

,,,. g m

je.

3,,, w,

.,,f rygg

,,,1 gw;, y' *',, ', p,,.* (.f,W- % A,fQ, Yp ',, * '

s<

f . p6

• s.

\\'

o /*

%.[:?

,, t?;c 4

~,~ 4*

4, *gJ.,,f

,.. y ;.y..,p q....,

p '

r,; t

.,,, n..n..,,.ssssamma-t

-9,...

6,....,

a n,/e,. f;

. t

/.*f V,l.'.h r : ;e-*.m ;.- -h.,

W', ~ }; ',,_ '

....m.. q.

>. '3-L f;,.

• s,

~%..:s N

^ '.:

a

, Y:

• = A... k, /* -

E.(

. i-A'.A s

'y,.<.

'. (,,

)

p,,

j g ;-

'.m ',i r g'r e s u m a m e n 6..

• g.,;

m

~,

,'.e

.s.

.p y

O v

, S V.,., :^ *w;.

7'.;

g j. g.,:p,,,g.g.M,

a a

7,- e,-

m ;. e,.-s.

- s.

..e., (,

-,- m.

rp.

~*.g

\\ ' g...y..

s w...a.= ;;m.,'..'g m'*.'.. b

,,., -~

• d "' y' 4

'#~

8 r

.,,e

~ 9 E*

z' v.

y.~ q.

n?<

+5,

. zA 43, v

~,: f _

pr. \\..$,:1

..c.,.t**,--

,,~

W,,*

..('*

._ m - e ' '

,g

'se.-.

,s.

h, ' '.y 'y..,.. s-[ '

1 e.g.*

r Qs

' t,), O '.

,*-'f

,d 4'

~*

1

'f

-v..'

e',y

- n.,,f.;'.t

<s"*'

"1,

.=.

. c,g a 3

r q(.

ga s s e n s m a n e s s'}.,.

?? l"* T '. ' y.*

~ Q 4'

..j

-o..

e

~ -

.O.

• -(

< 8 4.,

.e

,e g

. r.W y,

..e

. :'. *}9

.'N

• ~

s

• • s 9

.i.

/

m

.e, ye

. - - : r y

i

. '.;--;.Y*&

'"(5.'..

• .. ' y ?..,*

• 5..

^ *..

s

• =\\

i V

..ne Q

s' 1

g*

.* f,/,

,t f-E.

~

. _g

~

i

^*

'm tg

=-

Y(...,, - sh.

L i*

g

,.1 * '

[

U,,., g..j *y E f_y_ AM,. _, !,

t ',,,,c-

~ N

~

. ' ' * - *g[

m,,,a t n

,aw a

j

~h. g ' *

]%

$*- 4

.s

~

I i' ly

'~

g h_. G.

- ~

t 1

(

=,.. -.

k,:. M % -

r a-O (f) o l

W C, w.

.'R.

.,,c.

N.

o l

O s:

F-

.,Qp..s, M.l. %

i i

g-b, Z

O

_y, u

. p;

.e__

g.

m

}

7,,,

p 7.

43, a

'#1 l

c) 2 I>

'M,d.*

1 t

f[..

,, g.;.&_.,,

, x,

-I

_< J

%'1 & '?

@ d g(

] ;;'

sy s

C W y%

L 1 s

+

j i

) C' O, W v

4

,p M ' n h _ _. ;~

, mRe,,y g'j ;k y g,4 P00R ORIGINAL

FIGURE V-2

,; eau;o&}o T

~' '

LOCATION MAP

/

BIG ROCK PLANT SITE

's CONSUMERS POWER CO.

S g

u, p.

E s

4cx3on uics.

/

x

.e t

+

\\

s.-

y

.l

-3 w

- oarre

~

V... }

s, I c p

p5 g

.gb z

\\.

/

~ c

/

.y

.-. =

n 9

o m

6 k

Q s

y TM VER3r C/TY g'

l

+

~

. ora n RA M '

u sarn,. me iur

\\

.,+ v rm.,

$'f r.....

P00R OR GINAL

g

- DO1

\\

M O

j l

1 l

'N 7I01090 5 2 3 i

1 NO. OF PAGES i

h?

REASON O PAGE ILLEGIBLE.

O HARD COPY FILED AT.

PDR CF OTHER

/

1 O BETTER COFY REQUESTED ON E PAGE TOO LARGE TO RLM.

[HARD COPY FILED AT.

CF OTHER ILMED ON APERTURE CARD NO S/O/ 09d23 i

I i

l b WA7s(Llyg i

• e y

P

, / __ s -

1

/

=

8 E

i g-8 7

,/ %.

-67g

?g pt"T SITE e

7

-t.m

.,m,,,,,

f

.y.

/g, g

s-

/

s i

I Y

. Jlf m f 1

U' gf'?A

.)

cuautevo,,JAiPJMire;rhy P(0R ORIGINil

~

FIGURE V-6

(

I 1

1 Y

I w

\\

\\

8

?

B f

2 si am 4

5 *!

mi w

O 3

2 s

a.

[' -

i, 3

,/

5 0

+

[

e g5 2

a

~

m r

j V

1 e

a

/

/

z r

o ai a

m

+a a

o 9

O 5

M o

T y

o E

y J

m N

5 1

e n

(

P00R ORIGINAL

l FIGURE V-6 i

POPULATION WITHIN 6O MILE RADIUS OF PROPOSED NUCLEAR POWER PLANT SITE 60 ul

' ~~

?-

f,

'# ;.5::.

ee.oooi

- ! ? ;. -

MANISTIQUEL r

'E 40 ui N SIllGNACE 4

d!!fD cr

' (., #

2oua

s N.CH.EBOYGAN I '

P' a,w I.

[OIG OCK c

P PETOSKEY

~^

f g

.Juseoi '

^

CH@goet

. 12 7.iool.

LEVOlX i

7 7

.. ~.,,

- v=

,,, :..\\ -

~

en..-->--

.m h

G AY LORD g ~. '

~'

J Y'

+ _

-~ ".J Q 83 - '

. I 66,7ool I I

i Eelv,. a.;gr,2

~;'

_ s :..!

.. l

• (f. - ',,

• l~-, '

'"-N

' [. '

.TRA 'RSE 2:

c'O' Gk g,

.~GR Y

'. 4 7, 7,.g 7

.,9,,,

+,,

' T,' ~

POP PER SQ. MI.

. j:

C 'nti'.'i:sl:'!"i SCALE Mi l

i ustEs

****"'""""*'us e MANISTEE CADI

(

b oo.LL AC a,soos nooi g,35.2001 P00R ORIGINAL

OCU

~

~

h

,~

O. u nsu NO. OF PAGES J Th A,4 REASON O PAGE ILLEGIBLE.

O HARD COP ( FILED AT.

PDR CF OTHER

/

/

O BETTER COP ( REOJESTED ON Q PAGE 100 LARGE TO RLM.

gMARD COP ( RLED AT. h CF OTHER LMED ON APERTURE CARD NO I / O / O 7CEM-f I

--m

-r

m--

• +--

m_

e

-e--

-- -,-+

,_..__-w, Wy.,'

=.- = m s + ~* m e w,.

l I

m[

,iT 3 w-Nq[w$n3 m.+ se,W s1 r

~

e i

b

~

l'.

$$? h l lE.

l

.n[ & v.mw e

QNe.

• MY g

• WWh O

lQ[pm&?}YE(p i

~

~, _ ~

/

E'-

f Y,'~

s

.g.

N*N i

ftff

^.

Ylt o

)

A.

_'o. r c3 <*i.Q, m n

?

,, nw i

j V

~ ;.

/

s N

g i

i

[

f),)

k? "

.i

\\

s,

1. m 1;

.;x

-,%()~

/s, il

\\-

M k

,1.*y'- s 'j M

g, s

a p

i

.- qq,

si 1

j k'

nll, J..)

i

' 3, _y.

e. -

4 i'v. ' _,_ :4

~c. p h a

L 4

-g,4s/

. m 3D-

_. _w ew.

J,

?

4 l

' %sk' g,/Jj J N'%];

._.dp

,/)S G)-

a.

q S/

~

o

.n -

g' '"

4)

(

l

' pg $![" bg fp%q

.J ymta

..y.

~

l

'\\ j M;! '

(,,

t

]

P00R ORIGINAL ((l p

gh 4W:t i

j

-