ML20079E444
| ML20079E444 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 03/24/1980 |
| From: | FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17208A471 | List: |
| References | |
| ENVR-800324, NUDOCS 8004220317 | |
| Download: ML20079E444 (700) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:' SL2-ER-OL p IWO DIGIT TABLE OF CONTENTS i . J.- Section Title 1.1 SYSTEM DEMAND AND RELIABILIIY 1.lA SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCII 1.2 OTHER OBJECTIVES 1.3 CONSEQUENCE,S_0F DELAY 2.1 GEOGRAPHY AND DEMOGRAPHY 2.2 ECOLOGY 2.2A AQUATIC ECOLOGY 2.3 METEOROLOGY 2.4 HYDROLOGY 2.5 CEOLOGY 2.6 REGIONAL HISTORIC, ARCHE 0IDGICAL, ARCHITECTURAL, SCENIC, g CULTURAL, AND NATURAL FEATURES
'n/ 2.7 NOISE 3.1 EXTERNAL APPEARANCE 3.2 REACTOR AND STEAM ELECTRIC SYSTEM 3.3 PIANT WATER USES 3.4 HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM 3.5 RADWASTE SYSTEMS AND SOURCE TERMS 3.6 CHEMICAL AND BIOCIDE WASTES 3.7 SANITARY AND OTHER WASTE SYSTEMS 3.8 REPORTING RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL MOVEMENT 3.9 TRANSMISSION FACILITIES 4.1 SITE PREPARATION AND PLANT CONSTRUCTION 4.2 TRANSMISSION FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION
{ { Q)f f j I a o o 4 22 0317
)
l l SL2-ER-OL IWO DIGIT TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) Section Title O 4.3 RESOURCES COMMITTED 4.4 RADIOACTIVITY 4.5 CONSTRUCTICN IMPACT CONTROL PROGRAM 4.5A SITE QUALITY PROCEDURE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CONTROL 5.1 EFFECTS OF OPERATION OF HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM 5.2 RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT FROM ROUTINE OPERATION 5.3 EFFECTS OF CHEMICAL AND BIOCIDE DISCHARGES 5.4 EFFECTS OF SANITARY WASTE DISCHARGE 5.5 EFFECTS OF OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE TRANSMISSION SYSTEMS 5.6 OTHER FFFECTS 5.7 RESOURCES COMMITTED 5.8 DECOMMISSIONING AND DISMANTLING 6.1 PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM 6.2 APPLICANT'S PROPOSED OPERATIONAL MONITORING PROGRAMS 6.3 RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENT AND MONITORING PROGRAMS 6.4 PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL SURVEILLANCE DATA 6.4A ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING REPORT - JANUARY 1977 - DECEMBER 1978 7.1 STATION ACCIDENT INVOLVING RADIOACTIVITY 7.2 OTHER ACCIDENTS l 8.1 BENEFITS 1 l 8.2 COSTS 9.0 ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SOURCES AND SITES O II
SL2-ER-OL WO DIGIT TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) Section Title 10.0 STATION DESIGN ALTERNATIVES 11.0
SUMMARY
COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS 12.0 STATUS OF LICENSES, PERMITS AND APPROVALS 1 r l l III
1 SL2-ER-OL PURPOSE 1 CHAPTER 1 , 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page
- 1.1 SYSTEM DEMAND-AND RELIABILITY 1.1-1 1.1.1 LOAD CHARACTERISTICS 1.1-1 1
' .l.1.2 SYSTEM CAPABILITY 1.1-11
- 1.1.3 RESERVE MARGINS 1.1-11 i- 1.1.4 EXTERNAL SUPPORTING STUDIES 1.1-13
.l .1 - REFERENCES 1.1-15' i
j 1.1A SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL 1.1A-1 i j 1.2 OTHER OBJECTIVES 1.2-1 1 j 1.3 CONSEQUENCES OF DELAY 1.3-1 1 l.3.1 EFFECTS ON FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY SYSTEM 1,3-1 1.3.2 EFFECTS ON FLORIDA SUBREGION 1.3-1 4 1.3.3 CONSEQUENCES OF NO INCREASE IN CAPACITY 1.3-1 4 1 1 i 1 I ) 1 i i
~
L 1- 1
SL2-ER-OL ( PURPOSE CHAPTER 1 l LIST OF TABLES
- Table Title 1.1-1 MEMBERS OF THE SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL (SERC) 1.1-2 HISTORY AND FORECAST OF ENERGY CONSUMPTION i 1.1-3 HISTORY AND FORECAST OF SEASONAL PEAK DEMAND AND ANNUAL ENERGY REQUIREMENTS 1.1-4 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY NET SUMMER CAPABILITY AND UNIT ADDITIONS 1.1-5 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY EXISTING GENERATING FACILITIES 1.1-6 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY CAPACITY FACTORS AND TYPE OF USE 1.1-7 SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL - FLORILA SUBREGION
-1,1-8 SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL - FLORIDA SUBREGION l.1-9 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY FORECAST OF CAPACITY, DEMAND, AND SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE AT TIME OF SUMMER PEAK 1.1-10 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY SYSTEM LOAD, CAPACITY AND RESERVE 1.3-1 EFFECTS OF DELAY ON FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY'S SYSTEM F
i %) 4 1-11
SL2-ER-OL PURPOSE CHAPTER 1 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title i 1.1-1 National Electric Reliability Council 1.1-2 Ten Year Forecast Net Summer Peak Load (60 Minute Net) 1.1-3 Ten Year Forecast Net Winter Peak Load (60 Minute Net) 1.1-4 Ten Year Forecast Net Energy 1.1-5 System Summer Net Capability 1.1-6 Florida Power & Light Reserve Margin 1.1-7 System Load & Summer Net Capability 1-111
SL2-ER-OL 1.1 SYSTEM DEMAND AND RELIABILITY
/
( -
/ Florida Power and Light has prepared the St Lucie Unit 2 Environmental Repor t - Operating License as part of the application to the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a St Lucie Unit 2 Operating License. Cha pter 1 of this document presents updated and additional information which has been derived since the submittal of the St Lucie Unit 2 Environmental Report -
Construction Permit , and supports the need for St Lucie Unit 2. The requirement for new generating capacity from St Lucie U. tit 2 is based 4 on the histcrical and projected growth of power requirements within Florida Po we r & Ligh t 's s ys t em . To meet this growth, the current 1979 system capability of 10,957 MW must be expanded to meet the forecasted 1983 peak demand (most probable) of 10,715 MW plus an adequate reserve to maintain system capability and reliability. The addition of St Lucie 3 Unit 2 in 1983 with net summer capability of 802 MW* is necessary to provide generating capacity to serve the projected loads. 1.1.1 LOAD CHARACTERISTICS l.1.1.1 Florida Power and Light System Florida Power & Light Company was incorporated in 1925 to manufacture, 4 distribute and sell electricity. Service is provided to approximately 650 communities along most of the east and lower west coasts of Florida, the area around southern and eastern Lake Okeechobee, and portions of north and north-central Florida. Th e territory covers 27,650 square miles , and has 2,032,300 customers. The population in the service area represents
,__ 50 percent of the populat ion of Florida.
Florida Power & Light , with 13 other operating utilities comprise the Florida Subregion of the Southeastern Electric Reliability Council (SERC). SERC (in toto) consists of 28 members from the greater portion of the southeastern states. The member utilities are from Florida, Georgia, Alabama , Tennessee , North and South Carolina, as well as portions of Mississippi, Kentucky, and Virginia. Table 1.1-1 presents a comalete i listing of SERC members with their respective subregions. SERC is one of the council members of the National Electric Reliability Council (NERC) formed in 1968 with the stated purpose : "
...further to augment the Reliability and Adequacy of bulk power supply in the electric utility systems of North America."
NERC consists of the nine Regional Reliability Councils presented in Figure 1.1-1 and encompasses essentially all of the power systems of the United St ates, as well as Canadian systems in Ontario, British Columbia, and Manitoba. The stated goals of SERC fall directly in line with those
- of NERC and the other member councils , all with the view to encourage development of reliability and adequacy among the systems within the region. The agreement by which all SERC members abide is presented in Appendix 1.lA.
- Actual rating is 802 MW, however, 55 MW have been of fered for sale to
, other utilities.
\m /
f 1.1-1
,_ , - . _ . . . , . , . _ - . _ _ - _ ~ . . . . . _ _ . , - - . . . , ,
SL2-ER-OL 1.1.1.2 Load Forecast The load fo rec as t portion of the load forecast plan is presented in five sections. The first two sections describe the basic statistical metho-dology used in the development of the present net energy and peak load forecasts , respect ively. Part three describes how the ef fects of con-servation on FP&L's expected growth are modeled . Part four is a dis-cussion of the development of the high , most probable, and low estimates wh ich determine the fo rec as t band through the use of simulation methods. Part five is a summary of the principal assumptions used in the preparation of the peak load and energy forecasts. 1.1.1.2.1 Energy Forecast bbdel The economy of Florida Power & Light Company's service area is dominated by tourism, construction, agricult ure , service industries, and light manufacturing. To adequately forecast the energy requirements for the area, this unique mix had to be recognized. In order to more accurately evaluate and project the patterns of growth for the coming years, separate forecasting equations were developed for each of the major classes of users: residential, commercial, and indust rial, which account for about 93 percent of total energy sales. The remainder of total sales is fore-cast by extrapolation of historical data. These models are a combination of econometric and engineering methodologies. a) Residential The residential energy forecast begins with an estimate of the factors that influence the residential sector. The model was developed by using regression analysis over 12 years of energy sales data on a per customer basis. The forecast of total re-sidential energy is equal to the product of residential energy per customer and the number of residential customers. Th is total is then reduced for the ef fects of conservation (described in 1.1.1.2.3). Residential energy sales per customer are represented in the equation as functions of the following:
- Real per capita pe rso nal income in Florida
- Real price per resident tal kilowatt-hour (kM1) l l - Air condit ioning sat urat ion
- Electric hear ing sat urat ion l - Cooling and heating degree days Yearly increment al growt h rates for all of the above variables we re used to eliminate variable i n t e rde pendenc y .
O 1.1-2
5 SL2-ER-OL
/
l k]} , b) Commercial The commercial sector in Florida is comprised primarily of tourist
- I and service industries. Af ter considerable study, a model was I derived in which commercial sales are a function of total employ-ment in Florida and FP&L's residential customers from the previous l
year. Using the previous year's residential customers accounts for the
- delay in the opening of such commercial ventures as shopping centers and restaurants following the occupancy'of new residential homes.
The total employment variable is used as a measure of the general i economic conditions because it tracks the business cycle.
.c) Industrial Industrial energy use represents about eigh t percent of the total j energy sales and is incorporated into the forecast by considering ; two factors . First, industrial sales are correlated against y
employment in an incremental growth rate model. This gives a general impression of how present industry is developing. Second ly , I, new industry is forecasted by direct cor. tact with the companies a themselves. All new industrial customers whose projected use is i at least 20 megawat t s (MW) are entered into the forecast directly. l Coordination of these new industrial loads is accomplished through the divisions that encompass Florida Power & Light Company's
\ _/ service area.
1.1.1.2.2 Peak Load Model 1 Unpredictable variations in weather conditions can result in considerable variation in the use of air conditioning during the summer and electric - heat during the winter. For analytical purposes , the peak load was separated into two components ; non-weather sensitive and weather sensitive. This approach was taken in developing both a summer and a winter peak load model. ] Die non-weather sensitive component is defined as the average of the peak load for those weekdays (excluding holidays) when the average temperature for the day was between 65 and 75 degrees inclusive, and reflects the growth in load over time. This demand is predominantly determined by the j economic environment and shows the average load when weather sensitive - appliances are least used. This portion is forecast on a per customer level by using real price of electricity, Florida employment, and real per capita personal income in Florida. The weather sensitive component is defined as the difference between the
- actual peak and the base lo ad for the period. It represents the ' load in excess of the base load which is primarily a function of weather condi-tions. The summer and winter weather sensitive components are forecast on a per customer level and are related to average daily temperature, the
('~' real price of electricity, the saturation of air conditioners (summer) and ( 'j electric heaters (winter) on the FP&L system. i i 1.1-3
l ( SL2-ER-OL Regression analysts was used to develop the non-weather sensitive load and the separate summer and winter weather sensitive load models. Itav ing developed the regression equations, the relevant variables were then projected and combined with the project ions of the number of customers to determine the non-weather and weather sensitive load fo rec as t s . The forecasts for these two components were then summed to produce total s umme r and winter pe ak load fo rec as t s . Dits peak load forecast is then reduced by the ef fects ot certain types of conservation. The impact of conservation, as desc ribed below, is calculated from FP&L studies on residential lo ad f actor and demand reduction associated with energy efficient homes. 1.1.1.2.3 Conservation The regression techniques described previously are used to derive equations that forecast long term energy and peak demand. These equations are based solely on history and cannot predict the ef fects of future changes in technology or consumer li fe-st yle. In order to forecast accurately, future changes must be predic ted and incorporated into the forec as t separately from the regression equations. These changes must be identi-fied, assumptions made about the signi fic ant parameters, and the results subsequently entered into the forec as t . In addressing conservation, three areas have been identi fied as signi-ficant and having a high probability of occurrence: they are appli-ance efficiency improvements, solar water heating, and energy efficient homes. a) Appliance Efficiency Th e Department of Energy, in the Federal Register of October 12, 1978, mandates that by January 1, 1980, all new appliance sold must meet specified ef ficiency improvement targets. The overall e f ficiancy improvement target is set at approximately 20 percent over 1972 levels. To incorporate the effects of these regulations, FP&L developed an appliance af ficiency model. Th e appliance efficiency model is an end use engineering model c omprised of 11 s ub-models . There is one sub-model for each of l ten major appliances plus a miscellaneous appliance sub model . Input data include the ef ficiency improvement target for each appliance, the energy consumption per appliance fo r 1977 (weather l adjusted), the 1977 appliance saturations, the growth rates for those saturations, and the number of residential customers for each year. The usage fo rec as t for each of the 11 sub models is summed to give the total usage per residential customer. This usage per customer is not used directly because this appliance efficiency model does not account for price and income e f fects as does the econometric model. For this reason, a reference case is run on the appliance ef ficiency model with the ef ficiency improvements set to zero. The ratio of usage pe r residential customer with more efficient 1.1-4
SL2-ER-OL
- m
?[5 h
N- '/ appliances to usage ter residential customer without appliance efficiency improvement is then entered into the econometric model as a multiplier of usage per residential customer. b) Solar Water Heating Solar water heating is an established technology as evidenced by the numerous manufacturers offering solar water heating systems. The only assumption needed to assess its impact is the rate at which solar water heaters will penetrate the market. This penetration rate is estimated by using a life-cycle curve and reinforced by a l Delphi technique. In order to incorporate the ef fects into the fo rec ast , the solar water heating model is combined with the appliance ef ficiency model. i This is done by reducing the saturation of electric water heaters l from what it would be in the absence of replacement of solar water heaters under the appliance efficiency model. c) Energy Efficient Homes Florida Power & Light Company has, as have other utilities in the j United States , developed an energy ef ficient home program. This program, known as Watt-Wise Living, will encourage home buyers and l[N
;(,)
builders to insist on permanently installed conservation features in new homes. The primary emphasis is placed on structural improve-ments such as insulation and utilization of a rectangular floor plan. By definition, a home qualifying as a Watt-Wise home uses 4. one-third less energy than a comparable " standard" home. To assess the impact of this energy reduction on residential sales and system peak, the percentage of residential customers that will use single f amily homes is forecas t . Nex t , the percentage of energy e f ficient single f amily homes is forecast. For each of these Watt-Wise homes, 7,290 kWh (the one-third reduction mentioned above) is a subtracted from the preliminary energy sales fo rec a s t . For many years , FP&L has actively maintained a program to provide its customers maximum benefits from the use of electric energy, by reducing waste and unnecessary losses. Through many thousands of field representative contacts with residential, commercial and industrial customers, FP&L has helped improve the efficiency of energy use and ultimately reduce the customer's bill. Long before the oil embargo and subsequent " energy crisis", hundreds of l thousands of " Helpful Hints" booklet s had been distributed on the i use of major appliances and air conditioning, including promotion of home insulation. FP&L intensified its public awareness and conservation ef forts in 7 ~s, 1973 by inst ituting the broad based " Wise Energy Management" program. The philosophy of the program is that with the inevitable (s_ /) increase in energy usage with economic growth, FP&L has a public 1.1-5 m
SL2-ER-OL mandate to advise its customers in the most efficient use of energy through reestablishment of direct c ommun ic a t ion . FP&L promotes its conservation measures through television advertisements, rad io commercials , newspaper advertisements , bill insert messages , brochures , consumer educ at ion programs , personal counseling fo r commerc ial , home and civic groups , and the "Wat t-Wise Living" Program, primarily aimed at new single-family construction. The concept behind these ef forts is to create a high degree of public awareness of the " Wise Energy Management" Program by making in-formation readily available. FP&L established their Marketing and Conservation Department to develop and coordinate the activities of the " Wise Energy Manage-ment" program. It s duties are devoted exclusively to the energy conservation ef fort in each of the six operating divisions. De par t-ment members give demonstrations and counseling to schools, home and civic groups on the ef ficient use of home appliances, and advise commercial businesses on building management to encourage wise energy usage. Many brochures have been prepared and distributed by FP&L dealing with hints on energy conservation, with particular note given to the use of insulation as a means to increase energy e f fic ienc y . An innovative pos t e r wa s instituted to better inform the general public about the uses and benefits of solar energy. The De par tmen t also has the responsibility of developing and dis-tributing information on wise energy management within the various divisions and departments of FP&L. FP&L has incorporated many new programs into their conservation e f fort s , dealing primarily with current and f ut ure energy use at the res id en t ial level. Th e " Watt-Wise Living" program was developed to encourage builders and consumers alike to select a new home which was designed and constructed with energy ef ficiency in mind. Clear cut guidelines are provid ed for selecting energy saving options such as increased insulation, appliances, heating and cooling equipment , wind ows and hot water systems. By assigning each option a relative po in t value, the builder, the buyer and FP&L will know how energy ef ficient that h ome actually is. FP&L also c ond uc t s energy audits to determine and recommend conservation methods to exist ing home owners . FP&L's fut ure energy conservation plans inc lud e : 1) cooperation in the construction of a 495 MW solid waste fueled electric power facility; 2) expansion of the " Watt-Wise Living" program to inc lud e t o wnhous e s , attached dwellings and eventually multi-f amily re-s id enc es ; 3) Residential Energy Audit / Retrofit Program ; and
- 4) Expansion of Audit / Retrofit Program to i nc l ud e c omme rc ial , in-dustrial and non-residential structures.
1.1.1.2.4 Simulation To achieve the flexibility to meet unc er t a in future events, Florida Power & Light Company has moved away from discrete forecasts. Plans made on the basis of a single cet of forecast numbers do not have the flexibility necessary for unforeseen economic and technologic al growth . 1.1-6
SL2-ER-OL p ( The simulation approach is designed to allow: 1) individual and/or x, simultaneous evaluation of a large number of alternatives; and 2) the internal development of probabilities for these alternatives. Using this approach requires that a probability distribution be assigned to each independent variable. For example, a weather variable has been shown to be uniformly distributed through a range of values. The price variables might be described quite dif ferently. Suppose there are only two logical values for the price in the upcoming year, corresponding to
" rate relief" and "no rate relie f". A probability would then be assigned to each value. ; Using the forecasting model and the appropriate distributions for the independent variables, the dependent variables are arrived at by probabi-listic simulation using a computer program based on Monte Carlo techniques.
I 1.1.1.2.5 Principal Assumptions In this section, the assumptions used in the preparation of the peak load and net energy forecasts are developed. a) Population and Customer Growth Population in the Florida Power & Light Company service area will continue to grow throughout the period 1979-1988, but at a rate r- s lowe cast {ghaninthepast. According to a recent US Government fo re-Florida will be one of the fastest growing states in the US through the year 2000. The growth is concentrated in the 25 and older age group. There are three forecasted factors which help to explain this. First, I Florida will continue to remain an attractive place to retire. Secondly, the large segment of the population that resulted from post-war baby boom will be moving from the prime household fo rming years of 18-24 and into the more established age group of 25-34. This group, which was partly responsible for the rapid customer growth experienced over the past decade, will give way to a much smaller number, the result being a slower rate of customer growth. j Finally, the fertility rate has dropped to 1.8 children per woman age 18-45. Although this will have little impact on FP&L until 1985, by 1990 the ef fects of today's depressed birth rate will i begin to appear. Sources for the population forecast have been drawn from federal, state, and local govenment ; universities ; and consulting services such as the National Planning Association. The University of Florida's populat ion forecast is presently being used and is pre-sented as a range. The p>pulation growt h projections for the next
- decade are average annual rates of 1.5 to 3.3 percent. This com-pares with the 3. 7 percent average annual growth experienced from J \
1969 through 1978.
%s 1.1-7 i
. _ . . . , _ _ _ . _ . . , _ _ _ . - , _ - _ . . - _ _ . . . ~ _ . . . _ - _ , . , . - _ _ _ . . . . _ ._, _ . - - - - ,
SL2-ER-OL Historically, the number of Florida Power & Light Campany customers has grown at a rate faster than the population. From 1969 to 1978, customers increased at an average annual rate of 5.9 percent. Re-sidential customers, which currently form about 90 percent of total customers, have accounted for most of this increase. In 1950, there were 4. 2 people for every residential customer. By 1978, this ratio had dropped to 2.6, and is projected to be 2.4 by 1988. Factors which contribute to this reduced ratio are the continued increase in second homes, the tendency of more people to remain single longer, and the lower fertility rate. All of these factors contribute to a smaller average family size and will result in a household fo rmation rate higher than the population growth rate. b) Price Th e price forecast is prepared by the Finance Department and is the result of the lo ad forecast and the planned generation additions. The revenue required to support the generation plan is calculated and then coverted to the real price per kilowatt-hour. Historically, the average real price per kilowatt-hour for Florida Power & Light Company's customers fell at an average annual rate of 4.6 percent from 1965 through 1972. Howev e r , from 1972 through 1978, the real price increased at an average annual rate of 4.7 percent. This variation was caused by several unusual and coinci-dent circumstances which caused the cost of operating an electric utility to increase at a rate faster than inflation. The reoccur-rence of the previous circumstances is not expected to be of the magnitude which would be necessary to cause an increase in price above inflation over the next decade. There fore , the projected average annual rate for the real average price per kilowatt-hour for all of FP&L's customers is zero. c) Economic Growth As mentioned previously, real per capita income and Florida employ-ment were used in the appropriate models in order to adequately re-present the impact on both the individual and the community. Through 1988, inc ome is forecast to grow at an average annual rate in the range of 2.8 to 3.6 percent. The corresponding rates fo r employmen t are 2.5 to 3.9 percent. Several basic areas of economic st rength continue to characterize the State of Florida. One of these is the tourist sector which experienced 34 million visitors in 1978. Th i s is an increase over 1970 of 10.8 million. This increase can be largely attributed to new trends in the tourist industry. First, there has been an in-crease in the number of second homes. These people are not counted in Florida's census when occupying their homes for only parts of the year; second, there is an increasing number of tourists who arrive by automobile which typically visit central Florida; third , the in-crease in the number of cruise passengers passing through Florida ports ; and last, the increase in the number of Latin American tourists, particularly noticeable in Mi ami . 1.1-8
SL2-ER-OL (O) A second significant growth factor is the role of manufacturing in the State. While construction has been the dominant source of em-ployment opportunities in Florida, it will be _ of lessening relative i importance as growth in manufacturing industries increases. Another new development has been the increased movement in Florida of sub-sidiaries of some of America's largest corporations, specifically set up to conduct business outside the United States. These sub-sidiary corporations , frequently characterized by the word " inter-national" with the name of the parent company, are largely centered in the Miami area. d) Other Assumpt ions Appliance Efficiency The model incorporates approximately 50 percent of the ef ficiency improvement targets set by the DOE for all appliances except air conditioners , where 100 percent was assumed. Watt-Wise Marke t Penet ration The degree to which new single family homes will qualify for Watt-Wise is projected to increase from 1,972 homes in 1978 to 134,435 in 1988, a compound average annual growth of 53 percent.
'(v Solar Water Heating The saturation of solar water heaters ie projected to increase at l a ten year average annual growth rate of 30 percent. Solar water heaters will impact peak demand by needing no electric back-up at the time of the summer peak but will need 90 percent back-up at
- the time of the winter peak.
Air Conditioning Saturation The air conditioning saturation in the FP&L service area is currently estimated at 84 percent. The saturation is expected to continue to slowly increase to the low 90's by 1988. Heating Saturation The number of customers using electricity to heat their homes and , apartments is expected to grow as the price and availability of gas continues to depress gas usage and central units boosted by heat strips bec ome " standard" appliances for new homes. The saturation of electric heat in 1988 is expected to be 73 percent. Weather The cooling degree days , heating degree days , summer peak day aver-
- f} age temperature , and winter peak day average temperature are fore-i
('/ casted probabilistically on the basis of 30 years of data to include not only average but some of the variability of extremes. i l 1.1-9
SL2-ER-OL 1.1.1.2.6 Load Management Accurate forecasts of fut ure electrical demand require careful considera-tion of the potential impact of conservation. The price of electricity is an important " conservation" variable since it af fects the customer's de-cision to consume or conserve electricity. Economic activity also a f fects the consumption of electricity. Improved appliance ef ficiency, solar water heating, and the energy e f ficient homes would also tend to reduce the rate of growth of electricity use. These variables are considered in the load forecast and were previously discussed. In addi tion , Florida Power 6 Light Company is currently looking into alter-native load =anagement that will help reduce the peak load while improving load factor. By slowing the pe ak load growt h , additional high cost capa-city can be de ferred. By improving load factor, facilities can be utilized to the maximum extent po s s ib le . If this is done, rates can be kept as low as possible wh ile still insuring an adequate and reliable supply of elec-tric power, both of which are vital for maintaining a healthy economy. One type of load management technique involves direct control of load and is usually aimed at controlling speci fic appliance loads such as water heaters, air conditioning, and electric heating. Another technique in-volves application of time-of-use rates. With t ime-o f-use ra tes , the price of electricity is varied according to the time-of-day and season of the year. h1 theory, the application of time-of-use rate should cause some consumpt ion to shif t from peak to of f peak hours. In order to determine the feasibility of both techniques , FP&L has ini-ttated several test progr ams involving residential customers. By 1980, FP&L plans to have 1,125 customers involved in load control and time-of-use rate tests. The se tests are sched ul ed to be c om ple t ed by 1982 and the re-sults will be used to determine the feasibility of applying these tech-niques on a large scale basis. In Summary: Bie use of a range of forecast values representing upper and lower bounds for each of the explanatory variables resulted in the development of banded peak load and energy forec ast s . The fo rec as t of summer peak load projects an annual growth rate in the 1978-1988 period ranging from 3.4 to 5.7 per-cent. The wintar peak load ranges fr om 3. 2 t o 4. 9 pe rcent . Die energy forecast has a low annual rate of 3.0 percent and a high annual rate of
- 4. 3 pe rcent . Figures 1.1-2, 1.1-3 and 1.1-4 are graphical representations of these bands.
Die forecast s provided in Tables 1.1-2 and 1.1-3 represent only the number for which there is equal probability for the peak load and net energy fore-casts to be above or below this number and is to be used only where a sin-gular forecast is required. Ili s t or ic al peak demands represent actual loads served. O 1.1-10
4 SL2-ER-OL j 1.1.1.3 Power Exchanges Section 1.1.1.3 is based on the Ten Year Power Plant Site Plan 1979-1988
- and information current to May 1979.
Florida Power & Light Company is not currently involved in any firm power purchases or sales and none are planned for the next ten years, through , 1989. However, FP&L is currently negotiating for the possible purchase of unit power from Tampa Electric Company's Big Bend Unit 4. FP&L would share in the unit's output as fo llows : Capacity Year M) Did 1985 70 292 l 1996 50 203 1937 25 104 { l.1.2 SYSTEM CAPABILITY ! All parts of Section 1.1.2 are based on the Ten Year Power Plant Site Plan
- 1979-1988 and information current to May 1979.
) 1 1.1.2.1 Tabulated System Capacity 1 Generation planning is a continuous process. There is always an existing plan which is updated and revised as new information is gained. Table 1.1-4 shows actual and planned generating capability by category for the years 1973-1939. The capabilities listed are " net summer continuous" i ratings expected at the time of summer peak. This is also shown graphical-
-ly on Figure 1.1-5. Also, Table 1.1-5 lists Florida Power & Light Com-i pany's existing generating facilities and Table 1.1-6 shows historical capacity factors and type of use for those facilities.
1.1.2.2 Tabulated System Capacity - SERC Florida Power & Light Company is a member of the Florida Subregion of the , Southeastern Electric Reliability Council (SERC). PP&L's Generation Plan,
'as well as the plans of the other member utilities impact the reserves and
! reliability of the Florida Subregion and thus SERC. Each member of the Florida Fubregion provides annually detailed information about its existing system and planned changes. Tables 1.1- 7 and 1.1-8 present the existing generating capability and planned and prospective additions, retirements, and changes of generation facilities of the Florida Subregion members for the years 1979-1939. 1.1.3 RESERVE MARGINS I i I Florida Power & Light Company is required by law to " meet all reasonable j demands for service and provide a reasonable reserve for emergencies".
- Section 25-6.35 of the FloYida Administrative Code, " Adequacy of Supply",
- ( defines this responsibility. Developing . this . . . " reasonable reserve for j eme rgencies" . . . becomes a multifaceted process where FP&L must look at l
l l i 1.1-11 I
. . . . . . . - , . . . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ . . . . , , . . . - _ , , _ _ _ _ . , _ . . . _ _ . , _ , ,,.,_,.m.__,.,,......_.,,,_,,m.. . . . . , . , , . . _ . _ _ , .
1 1 S L2-ER- OL I im po r t a n t factors such as planned and forced maintenance outages, load forecast uncertainty, operating reserve requirements, and system reliabil-ity. These system related variables along with economic , financial, and regulatory inputs must all be considered when formulating a generation expansion plan. The following discussions will outline how each of the system related variables, as mentioned above, are considered for the final canposition of an expansion scenario. Forced and planned maintenance outages are maior considerations when planning for re se rve margins. FP&L must design for sufficient generation reserves to allow for planned maintenance outages without jeopardizing the system's ability to meet the demand while st ill maintaining suf ficient available capacity to allow for eme rgencies. Table 1.1-9 shows the ten year forecast of capacity, most probable demand, reserves, and scheduled maintenance at the time of the s umme r pe ak . Also shown is the e f fect of the maintenance outages on available reserves. As discussed in Sect ion 1.1.1.2, FP&L develops a banded fo rec a s t . The re se r ve margins shown in Tables 1.1-9, 1.1-10 and 1.3-1 are computed on the most probable fo reca s t for which there is equal probability for the peak load to be above or below that value. However, should the actual peak load be higher than expected, due to short term e f fect s such as extreme weather conditions, FP&L must still be able to provide generation plus adequate re s e rve s for eme rgencies. Due to the long construction lead times for generation facilities, the sensitivity of projected generation reserves increases due to uncertaint ie s inherent in the load fo re ca s t . FP&L must there fore consider this sensitivity when developing a generation expansion plan to prevent the occurrence of insufficient reserves needed to com-pensate for unexpected high peak demand. Another major consideration in the development of n generation plan is FP&L's responsibilities to the Florida Subregion of the Southeastern Electric Reliability Council (SERC). FP&L and other members voluntarily share operat ing rese rve requirements for spinning reserve and supplemental re se rve . FP&L's reserve requirements represent its ability to react to system emergencies and forced maintenance outages. They must be maintained i f FP& L i s to provide adequate and reliable generation to its customers and to SERC. Spinning reserve ts the reserve generating capability connected to the bus, ready to pick up load immediately, and capable of becoming fully applicable l when frequency declines to 59.5 Hz. Supplemental reserve is any generating capability and/or load reltef measure which can be made fully applicable within 30 minutes. The total Subregion spinning reserve requirement is equal to the peak capability of the largest unit on line. The spinning reserve r eq u i reme n t for each member utility is allocated in proportion to ! the participant's maximum demand in the preceding year and the peak l capability of its largest unit. The total Subregion supplemental reserve requirement is equal to the second largest unit on line and each member uttlity's requirement is allocated in the same manner. 1.1-12
SL2-ER-OL
,,m The installed generation reserve margin must be consistent with good i operating practices and acceptable reliability criteria. To establish an acceptable criterion, FP&L has examined historic reserve levels and the degree of generation reliability provided by these reserves.
This relationship is dependent upon system characteristics such as unit additions and retirements , unit sizes, unit forced and planned outages and timing of unit additions. Due to dif ficulty in planning for such variables, predicting future reserve / reliability relationships is done by simulation models. This modeling is done on a peninsular Florida basis since each of the inter-connected utilities share operating reserve requirements and thus share the responsibility for generation reliability. FP&L annually participates with other members of the Florida Subregion to analyze peninsular Florida generation reliability and produces a report, "The Peninsular Florida Generation Reliability Assessment St udy", that outlines its findings (see Section 1.1.4). This study takes a large in t egrat ed look at peninsular Florida's generation reliability and assesses i the reliability dien outage rates and timing of unit additions become sensitivit y variables. The index of reliability used is loss-of-load probability (LOLP) which measures the frequency in number of days per year that the available generation will be insufficient to meet the firm peak load . FP&L, as an individual utility, examines a combination of reserve margins (g) and reliability levels that have proven ef fective historically and relates L/' them to the reserve / reliability results of modeling for future plans. By comparing the historical and future reserve / reliability relationships and examining other factors such as economics , financing, and environmental obstacles, FP&L develops the optimal generation plan. Table 1.1-10 presents historical and forecasted values of net capability, peak demand, and the resulting reserve margins, and shows these values for both cases "with St Lucie Unit 2" and "without St Lucie Unit 2". Figure 1.1-6 is a graphic illustration of the reserve margins from Table 1.1-10. Also, Figure 1.1-7 graphically presents historical and forecasted values of net capability and peak demand for both cases. l.1.4 EXTERNAL SUPPORTING STUDIES Florida Power & Light Company is a member of the Florida Subregion of the Southeastern Electric Reliability Council (SERC). In response to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Order 383-44, SERC annually submits a
" Coordinated Bulk Power Supply Program" report. This report presents peak load , generation capability, and transmission capability data for all utilities responsible to SERC. The data is reported by subregion, of which there are four, and consists of all existing facilities plus planned and prospective future additions and retirements.
FP&L actively participates in Florida Subregion activities, one of
/O which is the Peninsular Florida Generation Reliability Assessment 1.1-13 l i
J
S L2- ER- OL Study *. This study takes a large integrated look at Peninsular Florida's generat ton reliability and assesses the reliability when outage rates and timing of unit additions become sensitivity variables. The results of the study show that under the proposed generation plans of the participating utilities, the reliability levels (LOLP) fluctuate within a reasonable range of the industry standard of 0.1 days / year for the 1979-19 88 period. Reserves in this time frame were shown to range from 21 percent to 26 percent. With unit in-service dates as a sensitivity va r t able (one year delay in all base load units in the 1983-1998 pe riod ) , a significant shift in Florida's reliability was shown. The LOLP index increased by a factor of two to seven, depending upon unit characteristics and number of units which were delayed. A significant impact in system LOLP was also realized by a ten percent (overalli decrease in unit avail-ability.
*The Peninsular Florida Generation Reliability Assessment Study is based on information more recent than that re flected in this St Lucie Unit 2 Enviromnental Report and therefore some results might be di f ferent .
O 1 0 1.1-14
l I SL2-ER-OL l SECTION 1.1: REFERENCES
- 1. Bureau of the Census , 1978. Population Estimates and Projections.
Series P-25, No. 735. U S Department of Commerce. f ' i t I f i l l I l 1 l 1.1-15 _rw,_ _y Wy$ __
SL2-ER-OL m I . TABLE 1.1-1 Siee t 1 of 2 MEMBERS OF THE SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL (SERC) 4 1 Subregion Utility A
- Southern Companies Alabama Electric Cooperative, Inc.
i Southern Companies Alabama Power Company i 4 Virginia - Carolinas Carolina Power and Light Company I j Southern Companies Crisp County Power Commission Virginia Carolinas Duke Power Company i Florida Florida Power Corporation Florida Florida Power and Light Company i Florida Fo rt Pierce Utilities Authority Florida Cainesville/Alachua Co Reg Utility , Board
- Southern Companies Georgia Power Company i
i Southern Companies Gulf Power Company Florida Jacksonville Electric Authority ! Florida City of Lakeland - Department of Electric j and Water Utilities Southern Companies Mississippi Power Company j TVA Nantabala Power and Light Company i i Florida Orlando Utilities Commission Southern Companies Savannah Electric and Power Company Virginia - Carolinas Southeastern Power Administration Virginia - Carolina 6 South Carolina Electric and Gas Company h Virginia - Carolinas South Carolina Public Service Authority f Southern Companies South Mississippi. Electric Power Association i
I i 1 i
. SL2-ER-OL i
i i@ l TABLE 1.1-1 Shee t 2 of 2 l Subregion Utility
- Florida City of Tallahasse ,
t I' i j Florida Tampa Electric Company i 1 I ! TVA Ta poc o . Inc l l TVA Tennessee Valley Authority j l 4 i Florida Vero Beach Hunicipal Power System ! 1 l Virginia - Carolina Virginia Electric and Power Company ! l TVA Yadkin, Inc i I i : l 1 1
@ 1 i
I i i ! r i 1 l t e } I L ! r l i 1 i 1 i .I 1 l@ . T 1 -! s
. - - - .. .- ~- - . . . . - - n---..- - - .. .. . - - - . - . - . - . _ - - _ - _
SL2-ER-OL TABLE 1.1-2 HISTORY AND FORECAST OF ENERCY CONSUM_PYION Sheet I of 2 Rural & Residential Cossnercial Industrial Average Average KWH Average Average , No. of Consumption No. of No. of ' Year CWH Customers Per Customer 6WH Customers GWH Customers [ 1969*. 10,278 1,045,744 9,828 5,689 115,712 1,814 4,924 1970 11,814 1,115,070 10,595 6,476 121,353 2,044 5,055 1971 13,080 1,194,015 10,955 7.395 129,371 2,236 5,116 1972 14,653 1,289,027 11,367 8,389 139,743 2.468 5,208 1973* 16,823 1,397,228 12,040 10,180 158,977 2,755 5,275
+
1974* 16,802 1,498,262 11,214 11,041 168,991 2,646 7,147 1975 17,313 1,555,834 11,128 11,851 171,575 2,534 8,977 1976 17,625 1,607,015 10,968 12,117 177,046 2,596 9,994 r 1977 19,074 1,677,532 11,370 12,885 184,676 2,756 11,796 ! 1978 20,736 1,758,838 11,790 13,748 192,850 2,993 13,799 t 1979 21,085 1,842,000 11,447 14,117 200,000 3,468 15,000 1980 22,257 1,915,000 11,622 15,187 213,000 3.207 15,250 . 1981 23,164 1,982,000 11,687 16,000 220,000 3,265 15,500 ! 1982 23,941 2,054,000 11,656 16,685 229,000 3.322 15,750 l 1983 24,508 2,124,000 11,539 17,736 238,000 3.455 16,000 l l 1984 25,014 2,193,000 11,406 18,595 247,000 3,566 17,000 f l 1985 25.653 2.261,000 11,346 19,384 254,000 3,687 17,500 I l 1986 26,293 2,324,000 !!.314 20,155 260,000 3,803 18,000 , l 1987 26,736 2,391,000 11.182 20.739 268,000 3,891 18,500 2,466,000 1988 27,363 11,096 21,627 277,000 4,073 19,000 l
- _ i i ,
- Reclassification of Accounts I . _- ._, _ ~ -
- . . -. _- .I
(3 N N (,) V SL2-ER-OL TABLE 1.1-2
- HISTORY AND FORECAST OF ENERGY CONSUMPTION Sheet 2 of 2 j
Ot her Total Total Street & Sales to Sales to Sales Utility Net I Highway Ult ima t e Ult ima t e For Uses Energy , Lighting Con sume rs Consumers Resale Losses Consumption Year CWH CWH CWH CWH CWH CWH 1969* 175 I,840 19,796 649 1,773 22,218 1970 185 1,810 22,329 786 1,998 25.113 d 1971 204 1,927 24,842 947 2,095 27,884 , 1972 216 2,080 27,806 1,122 2,570 31,498 1973* 240 1,119 31,117 1,350 2,718 35,185 1974* 257 490 31,236 1,475 2.754 35,465 J 1975 285 524 32,507 1,6 04 3.040 37,151 1976 308 482 33,128 1,801 3,096 38,025 1977 329 474 35,518 2,012 3,182 40,712 1978 343 478 38,298 2,304 3,104 43,706
- 1979 372 495 39,537 2,463 3,495 45,495 i 1980 401 487 41,539 2,361 3.820 47,720 1981 434 485 43,348 2,521 3,991 49,860 1982 469 483 44,900 2,560 4,125 51,585 1983 506 481 46,686 2,665 4,289 53,640 ;
1984 546 480 48,201 2,744 4,430 55.375 1985 590 480 49,794 2,881 4,580 57,255 1986 638 481 51,370 2,956 4,724 59,050 ) 1987 689 483 52,588 2,997 4,835 60,420 1988 744 485 54,292 3,073 4,990 62,355 1 l i
- Reclassification of Accounts
~3 % g t
t v b v
)
{v SL2-ER-OL TABLE 1.1-3 HISTORY AND FORECAST OF SEASONAL PEAK DEMAND AND ANNUAL ENERGY REOUIREMENTS
* * " Summer Peak Demand Load Winter Peak Demand Net MW Net Energy
- Factor Net MW Year Interruptible** Total
- For Lnad - CWH I Year Interruptible** Total
- 1969 0 4,329 22,218 59 1969-70 0 4,716 1970 30 5,001 25.113 57 1970-71 0 5,059 1971 118 5,378 27.884 59 1971-72 0 4,676 1972 0 6,011 31,498 60 1972-73 0 5,853 1973 0 6,894 35,185 58 1973-74 0 6,258 1974 0 7,235 35,465 56 1974-75 0 5,P07 1975 0 7.076 37,151 60 1975-76 0 7,287 1976 0 7,598 38,025 57 1976-77 177 8,606 1977 0 7,841 40,712 59 1977-78 0 8,617 i 1978 0 8.345 43,706 60 1978-79 0 8,791 l l
1979 167 8,975 45,495 58 1979-80 178 9,540 l 1980 178 9,540 47,720 57 1980-81 185 9,930 ! 1981 185 9,930 49,860 57 1981-82 192 10.320 l 1982 192 10,320 51,585 57 1982-83 199 10.715 1983 199 10,715 53,640 57 1983-84 206 11,105 1984 206 11,105 55,375 57 1984-85 213 11.435 1985 213 11,495 57,255 57 1985-86 220 11,885 1986 220 11,885 59,050 57 1986-87 227 12,275 l 1987 227 12,275 60,420 56 1987-88 2 34 12,670 1988 234 12,670 62,355 56 1988-89 241 13,060 l l l I
- This represents the number for which there is equal probability for the peak load and net energy forecasts to be above or below this number and is to be used only where a singular forecast is required. Historical peak demands represent actual loads served.
** Historical values represent actual load curtailed.
\
O x SL2-ER-OL ; 4 TABLE 1.1-4 f FLORIDA POWER & LICHT COMPANY NET SUMMER CAPABILITY AND UNIT ADDITIONS System Capability (MW) Fossil Capability Nuclear Oil Gas Coal Total : i Year Unit Additions (MW) Fuel Steam Steam Turbine St es:a Capacity a
- 1973 693 5,225 1,359 0 7,277 l 1974 1,332 5,652 2,031 0 9,015
{ 1975 1,332 5,652 2,031 0 9,015 1976 1,332 5,283 2,031 0 8,646 2,109 5,552 1,977 0 )i 1977 9.638 , i I 1978 2,109 6,316 2.423 0 10,848 l_ 1979 Riviera #1*** 40 Oil 2.109 6,425 2,423 0 10,957 l 3 Riviera #2 69 Oil 1 i 1980 Martin #1 775 Oil 2,109 7,200 2,423 0 11,732 l 1981 Martin #2 775 011 2,109 8,015 2,423 0 12,547 {- Dade 40 Solid Waste i 1982 - - - 2,109 8.015 2,423 0 12,547 1 3 1983 St. Lucie #2 747** Nuclear 2,855 8,015 2,423 0 13,294 , j 1984 - - - 2,856 8,015 2,423 0 13,294 1985 Martin Coal #3 700 Coal 2,856 8,015 2,423 700 13,994 1986 - - - 2,856 8,015 2,423 700 13,094 t
- 1987 JEA/FPL #1 300 Coal 2,856 8,015 2,423 1,700 14,994 Martin Coal #4 700 Coal a 1988 - - -
2,856 8,015 2,423 1,700 14,994 , i j 1989 Unknown 700 Coal 2,856 8,015 2,423 2,700 15,994 l l JEA/FPL #2 300 Coal 1
- Putnam #1 and #2 are Combined Cycle units and their capabilities are included in the figures for Fossil Gas Turbines. t t
** Actual rating of this unit is 802 MW, however 55 MW have been of fered for sale to other utilities. ; *** Riviera Units I & 2 were reactivated from Extended Cold Standby December 29, 1978.
4 5 _
,__r__ , , _
._.___._,._m. __ . ,- . .. .._
_ . , . - ._. . _ . _ -_ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ . . , _.-___._.-.._..____.m _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . f D
-U .
SL2-ER-OL TABLE I.1-5 FLORIDA POWER & LICHT COMPANY Sheer 1 of 4 EXISTING CENERATING FACILI_T_I_ES j Cne'l In- Emptd Cen Max Net Capability *
- Unit Fuel Service Ret rant Nameplate Summer Winter
, Plant Name Nn. Lncation Type Pri Alt Mn/Yr Mn/Yr kW MW MW Turkey Paint Dade County 2,117,790 2079.5 2145._5 27/575/40E 1 F HO NC 4/67 Unknnwn 402,050 167.0 170.0 2 F HO NG 4/68 Unknnwn 402,050 167.0 170.0 1 N N nn 12/72 Unknnwn 759,970 666.0 696.0 , 4 N N nn 9/71 Unknnwn 759,970 666.0 696.0 l , 1-5 D LO nn 4/68 Unknnwn 11,750 11.5 13.5 i I Lauderdale Broward Cn. 1,111,972 1826.0 1250.0 ' 10/50s/42E i 4 F HO NG 9/57 Unkanwn 156,250 137.0 119.0 i . 5 F Ho NG 4/58 Unknnwn 156,250 117.0 139.0 1-12 CT LO NG 8/70 Unknnwn 410,716 426.0 486.0 < 11-24 CT LO NG 8/72 Unknnwn 410,716 426.0 486.0 1,679,086 1581.5 1651.5 i Port Evergladen Cit y of Hn11ywnnd 21/50S/42E l [ 1 F Ho NG 6/60 Unknown 225,250 204.0 206.0 2 F HO NG 4/61 Unkanwn 225,250 204.0 206.0 1 F HO NC 7/64 Unknnwn 402,050 167.0 170.0
. 4 F HO NG 4/65 Unknnwn 402,050 167.0 170.0 1 1-12 CT LO NG 8/71 Unknnwn 410,716 426.0 486.0 l-5 D LO nn 4/68 Unknnwn 11,750 11.5 11.5 i i
1 i Rivera City nf Rivera 719,590 651.0 6_62.0 ,
- Beach j 11/42S/43E
. 1 F HO NG 11/46 Unknnwn 41,750 40.0 41.0 2 F Ho NG 18/51 Unknnwn 75,000 69.0 71.0 4 1 F Ho NG 6/62 Unknnwn 110,420 272.0 275.0 4 F Ho NG 1/61 Unknown 110,420 272.0 275.0 ; 4 I
- Capabilitien are specified in accordance with "SERC Guideline Number 2 fnr the Unifnra Generarnr i Ratings for Repart ing." ,
. _ . . - . . . _ . _ . . _ _ _ . . - . . _ . _ _ . _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ . . . . _ . - _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . ~ _ _
f i c a s l SL2-ER-OL I TABLE I.1-5 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY Sheet 2 of 4 EXISTINd GENERATING FACILITIES Com'l In- Exptd Can Max Net Capability
- Unit Fuel Service Retrant Nameplate Summer Winter Plant Name No. Location Tg Pri Alt Mo/Yr Mo/Yr kW MW MW St. Lucie St. Lucie Co. 850,000 777.0 795.0 16/36S/41E I N N no 12/76 Unknown 850,000 777.0 795.0
[ i Cape Canaveral Brevard Co. 804,100 729.0 736.0 ' 19/24S/36E I 4/65 367.0 370.0 1 F HO NC Unknown 402.050 2 F HO NG 5/69 Unknown 402,050 362.0 366.0 i Sanford volusia Co. 1,028,450 861.0 871.0 I
- 16/19S/30E 4 .
! 3 F HO NG 5/59 Unknown 156,250 137.0 139.0 4 F HO no 7/72 Unknown 436,100 362.0 366.0
- 5 F HO no 6/73 Unknown 436,100 362.0 366.0
., Putnam Putnam Co. 580,000 446.0 518.0
- . -16/IOS/27E i
j I CC HO LO 4/78 Unknown 290,000 223.0 259.0 2 CC HO LO 8/77 Unknown 290,000 223.0 259.0 Ft. Myers Lee Co. 1,302,300 1876.0 1337.0 35/43S/25E 1 i ! F HO no 12/58 Unknown 156,250- 137.0 139.0 ' 2 F HO no 7/69 Unknown 402,050 367.0 370.0 1-12 CT LO no 6/74 Unknown 744,000 672.0 828.0 l Manatee. Manatee Co. 1,726,600 1528.0- 1550.0 i' 18/33S/20E , 1 F HO no 10/76 Unknown 863,300 764.0 775.0 2 F H0 no 12/77 Unknown 863,300 764.0 775.0 4 Total System as of December 31, 1978 = 10957.0 11516.0 i i 4
- Capabilities are specified in accordance with "SERC Guideline Number 2 for Uniform Cenerator i Ratings for Reporting."
\ /
u %/ SL2-ER-OL TABLE 1.1-5 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY Sheet 3 of 4 EXISTING CENERATING FACILITIES Com'l In- Exptd Cen Max Net Capability
- Unit Fuel Service Ret rant Nameplate Summer Winter Plant Name No. Location Type Pri Alt Fo/Yr Mo/Yr kW MW MW Cutler ** Dade County 305,500 264.0 272.0 24/55S/40E 4 F HO NG 11/52 Unknown 69,000 67.0 70.0 5 F H0 NG 11/54 Unknown 75,000 67.0 70.0 6 F HO NG 9/55 Unknown 161,500 130.0 132.0 Palatka** Put nam Co. 109,500 107.0 111.0
- ~ ~ ~ ~
16/10S/27E l F H0 NG 8/51 Unknown 34,500 32.0 34.0 2 F HO NG 8/56 Unknown 75,000 75.0 77.0
- Capabilities are specified in accordance with "SERC Guidelines Number 2 for Uniform Generator Ratings for Reporting."
** The Company currently has five fossil fuel units on extended cold standby (ECS) statun (reactivation of these units would require 8 months to 14 months).
I SL2-ER-OL TABLE 1.1-5 Sheer 4 of 4 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY EXISTING GENERATING FACILITIES l UNIT TYPE _ FUEL F - Fnaail C - Coal N - Nuclear HO - Heavy Oil CT - Combuntion Turbine LO - Light Oil D - Dieael N - Nuclear CC - Combined Cycle SW - Solid Waare NG - Natural Gaa 8
. . _ _ _ . _ . . . .__ _ . . __ ._.._ ..m .. -. . . . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . .-- . - - . .
A
]
'd SL2-ER-OL TABLE 1.1-6 FLORIDA POWER & LICHT COMPANY Sheet 1 of 2 CAPACITY FACTORS AND TYPE OF USE Unit Annual Capacity Factors * '
Plant Number 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 Type of Use i Turkey Point 1 59.8 69.8 61.3 63.4 50.1 60.0 Base / Inter. 2 69.7 67.4 65.8 64.6 59.3 59.4 Base / Inter. 3 49.5 54.0 65.8 65.4 67.2 66.9 Base 4 20.8 64.3 59.9 56.4 55.1 57.4 Base Cutler (Ret.12-15-75) 3 26.3 13.1 13.9 -- -- -- Intermediate 4 4** 63.9 32.6 40.7 25.2 ECS ECS Intermediate 5** $2.1 32.6 26.6 20.4 ECS ECS Int e rmediate t 6** 50.1 41.2 5.8 30.4 ECS ECS Intermediate
- Miami (Ret.12-15-75) 8 22.5 0.2 -- -- -- --
! Lauderdale 4 61.4 49.0 45.4 39.1 30.2 33.9 Int e rmediat e j 5 61.2 48.2 45.1 52.9 37.4 48.8 Intermediate
- Port Everglades I 66,5 57.I 49.6 57.7 44.0 57.4 Int e rmeda ate j 67.1
' 2 54.1 51.3 59.2 53.8 56.2 Intermediate 3 65.3 66.8 64.0 58.0 61.3 47.2 Bane / Inter.
- 4 67.7 55.3 66.0 69.6 54.8 61.2 Base / Inter.
l' Riviera 1** 31.6 21.3 20.6 15.9 ECS ECS Intermediate { 2** 28.3 24.0 29.4 22.7 ECS ECS Intermediate 3 66.0 46.8 65.9 57.1 39.2 56.3 Int e rmediat e 4 66.5 51.1 50.6 58.6 51.3 43.2 Intermediate St Lucie 1 -- -- -- 6.9 71.4 67.2 Base Cape Canaveral 1 66.1 63.4 70.2 66.2 62.6 56.6 i Base / Inter. 2 64.7 52.2 64.9 67.4 56.4 65.8 Base / Inter. Sanford 3 52.9 52.7 36.2 35.3 23.9 39.7 Int e rmedi at e i 4 29,1 30.4 43.5 48.4 36.4 31.6 Base / Inter. 5 26.6 30.6 37.0 47.4 38.3 48.5 Base / Inter.
. Palatka 1** 30.7 19.6 17.9 14.4 ECS ECS Ir.t e rmediat e 2** 70.7 66.7 $6.1 21.2 ECS ECS Intermediate a $
i Manatee 1 -- -- -- 9.4 37.0 40.0 Base / Inter. i 2 -- -- -- 3.5 32,0 Base / Inter. I
- Capacity Factors were computed using nameplate ratings.
( ,
** ECS; Extended Cold Standby 1
4 _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ i . - - - -,,
._____ . _ _ _ _ - - - . _ _ . - - _. __ - =_ ,_- ._,.
@ @ 9 S L2-ER- OL TABLE 1. I-6 FLORIDA _ POWER & LIGHT COMPANY Sheet 2 of 2 CAPACITY FACTORS AND TYPE OF USE Unit Annual Capacity Factors
- Plant Number 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 Type of Use Ft Myers 1 44.3 35.9 48.2 46.6 38.2 36.8 Int ermediat e !
2 63.2 53.3 56.1 48.7 68.2 54.1 Base / Inter. Lauderdale cas Turbines 3.9 3.0 2.6 2.3 3.6 5.1 Peak ' l Port Everglades Gas Turbines 8.3 4.0 6.7 2.4 4.0 5.4 Peak Ft Myers Gas Turbines -- 7.4 11.0 9.2 5.1 2.3 Peak j Putnam Combined Cycles -- - -- -- 7.2 11.2 Int e rmediat e i
- i l
I 1 1 i , . .-- ._ - ___
/D [T N SL2-ER-OL TABLE 1.1-7 Sheet I of 8 SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL - FLORIDA SUBREGION EXISTING GENERATING CAFABILITY (as of January 1.1979)
Primary Fuel Alternate Fuel Net Unit Capability-MW Fuel Fuel # Sysg Station Name Unit No. Type Summer Winter g M Florida Power and Light FLPL Cape Canaveral I ST 367 370 F06 NG FLPL Cape Canaveral 2 ST 362 366 F06 NG FLPL Cutler 1/ 4 ST 67 70 F06 NG FLPL Cutler I/ 5 ST 67 70 F06 NG FLFL Cutler I/ 6 ST 130 132 F06 NG FLPL Fr Myers 1 ST 137 139 F06 - FLPL- Ft Myers 2 ST 367 370 F06 - FLPL' Ft Myers 1-12 GT 672 828 F02 - l 1 FLPL Ft Lauderdale 4 ST 137 139 F06 NG l FLPL Ft Lauderdale 5 ST 137 139 F06 NG FLPL Ft Lauderdale 1-12 GT 426 486 F02 NG FLPL Ft Lauderdale 13-24 GT 426 486 F02 NG l FLPL Manatee 1 ST 764 775 F06 - FLPL Manatee 2 ST 764 775 F06 - FLPL Palatka I/ 1 ST 32 34 F06 NG FLPL Palatka 1/ 2 ST 75 77 F06 NG FLPL Port Everglades 1 ST 204 206 F06 NG FLPL Port Everglades 2 ST 204 206 F06 NG FLPL Port Everglades 3 ST 367 370 F06 NG FLPL Port Everglades 4 ST 367 370 F06 NG FLPL Port Everglades 1-12 GT 426 486 F02 NG FLPL Port Everglades 1 -5 IC 14 14 F02 -
.FLPL Putnam 1 CT/CA 118/97 138/l13 F06 F02 FLPL Putnam 2 CT/CA 118/97 138/113 F06 F02 FLPL Riviera I ST 40 41 TO6 NG FLPL Riviera 2 ST 69 69 F06 NG ELPL Riviera 3 ST 272 275 F06 NG FLPL Riviera 4 ST 272 275 F06 NG FLPL Sanford 3 ST 137 139 F06 NG FLPL .Sanford 4 ST 362 366 F06 -
FLPL Sanford 5 ST 362 366 F06 - FLPL St Lucie 1 NP. 777 795 UR - FLPL Turkey Point 1 ST 367 370 F06 NG FLPL Turkey Point 2 ST 367 370 F06 NG FLPL Turkey Point 3 NP 666 696 UR - FLPL' Turkey Point 4 NP 666 6% UR - FLPL Turkey Point 1-5 IC 13 13 F02 - TOTAL 10941 11500
. , ~ . pn 7\
/ \ / I / i
\% '/ \ /
(v/ Ns SL2-ER-OL TABLE 1.1-7 Sheet 2 of 8 SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL - FLORIDA SUBREGION EXISTING GENERATING CAPABILITY (as of January 1, 1979) Primary Fuel Alternate Fuel Net Unit Capability-MW Fuel Fuel System Station Name Unit No. Type Summer Winter Tyge Type Florida Power Corporation FLPC Anclote I ST 466 506 F06 - FLPC Anclote 3/ 2 ST 466 506 F06 - FLPC Avon Park 2 ST 42 44 F06 NG FLPC Avon Park I GT 26 35 F02 NG FLPC Avon Park 2 GT 26 35 F02 NG FLPC Bart ow 1 ST 114 114 F06 - FLPC Barrow 2 ST 116 116 F06 NG FLPC Bartow 3 ST 210 215 FD6 NG FLPC Bartow 1- 4 GT 168 204 F02 - FLPC Bayboro 1- 4 GT 160 208 F02 - FLPC Crystal River 4/ 1 ST 383 383 F06 - FLPC Crystal River 2 ST 383 413 BIT - FLPC Crystal River 3 NP 717 731 UR - FLPC DeBary 1 GT 42 52 F06 F02 FLPC De Bary 2 GT 42 52 F06 F02 FLPC DeBary 3 GT 42 52 F06 F02 FLPC DeBary 4 GT 42 52 F06 F02 FLPC DeBary 5 GT 42 52 F06 F02 FLPC DeBary 6 GT 42 52 F06 F02 FLPC Higgins 1 ST 39 40 F06 NG FLPC Higgins 2 ST 39 41 F06 NG FLPC Higgins 3 ST 41 42 F06 - FLPC Higgins 1 GI 27 30 F02 NG FLPC Higgins 2 GT 27 30 F02 .tG FLPC Higgins 3 GT 30 35 F02 NG FLPC Higgins 4 GT 30 35 F02 NG FLPC Intercession 1- 6 GT 264 330 F02 - FLPC Port St Joe 1 GT 14 17 F02 - FLPC Rio Pinar 1 GT 14 17 F02 - FLPC Suwannee River 1 ST 34 34 F06 NG FLPC Suwannee River 2 ST 33 33 F06 NG FLPC Suwanee River 3 ST 80 80 F06 NG FLPC Turner 3 ST 71 72 F06 NG FLPC Turner 4 ST 72 75 F06 NG FLPC Turner I- 2 GT 28 34 F02 - FLPC Turner 3 -4 GT 124 162 F02 - TOTAL 4030 4423
~
%. 'N N -
%/
SL2-ER-OL TABLE I.1-7 Sheet 3 of 8 SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIF RELI ABILITY COUNCIL - FLORIDA SUBREGION EXISTING GENERATING CAPABILITY (as of Jaauary 1. 1979) Primary Fuel Alternate Fuel Net Unit Capability-MW Fuel Transp. Fuel System Station Name Unit No. Tm Summer Winter g Method Type Fort Pierce Ut ilit ies Authority TOPC King 5 ST 7 7 F06 WA NG FOPC King 6 ST 18 18 F06 WA - FOPC King 7 ST 35 35 F06 WA NG FOPC King 8 ST 51 51 F06 WA NG FOPC King 1 IC 2 2 F02 H - FOPC King 2 IC 3 3 F02 TK - TOTAL 116 116 Gainsville/Alachua County Regional Utilities Board GAMW Crystal River 2/~ 3 NP 12 12 UR - - CAMW Deerhave n l ST 81 83 F06 W NG GAMW Dee rhaven I GT 20 26 F02 TK NG GAMW Deerhaven 2 GT 20 26 F02 H NG GAMd J. R. Kelly 6 ST 14 14 F06 R NG GAMW J. R. Kelly 7 ST 23 23 F06 TK NG GAMW J. R. Kelly 8 ST 44 45 F06 TK NG GAMW J. R. Kelly 1 GT 14 15 F02 TK NG GAMW J. R. Kelly 2 GT 14 15 F02 TK NG GAMW J. R. Kelly 3 GT 14 15 F02 TK NG GA.*W J. R. Kelly 1 IC 1 1 F02 TK - TOTAL 257 275 4 i
/
(
)
(' t
\ -}J Q,!
'w '!
I S L2-ER-OL TABLE 1.1-7 Sheet 4 of 8 SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL - FLORIDA SUBREGION EIISTING GENERATING CAPABILITY (as of January 1,1979) l Primary Fuel Alternat e Fuel Net Unit Capability-MW Fuel Fuel System Station Name Unit No. Type Summer Winter Type Tyge Ci t y o f !!ome st ead HSTX G. W. Ivey 1- 3 IC 6 6 F02 NG HSTX G. W. Ivey 7 IC 1 1 F02 NC HSTX G. W. Ivey 8-10 IC 9 9 F02 NG HSTX G. W. Ivey 11-12 IC 8 8 F02 NG HSTX G. W. Ivey 13-17 IC 10 10 F02 NG HSTX G. W. Ivey 18-19 IC 18 18 F02 NG TOTAL 52 52 Jacksonville Electric Authority i JACO Kennedy 8 ST 43 45 F06 l JACO Kennedy 9 ST 43 45 F06 JACO Kennedy 10 ST 130 134 F06 l JACO Kennedy 5/ I- 2 GT 25 26 F02 JACO Kennedy 5/ 3- 6 GT 216 216 F02 l JACO Northside 1 ST 262 262 F06 JACO Northside 2 ST 262 262 F06 JACO Northside 3 ST 460 460 F06 JACO Northside 5/ l- 2 GT 23 28 F02 JACO Northside - 3- 6 GT 206 244 F02 JACO Southside I ST 27 27 F06 JACO Southside 2 ST 29 32 F06 JACO Southside 3 ST 46 48 F06 JACO Southside 4 ST 70 72 F06 JACO Southside 5 ST 144 146 F06 t JACO Southside 5/ 1- 2 GT 25 30 F02 TOTAL 1884 1939 Lake Worth Utilities Authority LWUA Smith 1 ST 7 8 NG F06 LWUA Smith 2 ST 7 8 NG F06 LVUA Smith 3 ST 25 26 NG F06 LWUA Smith 4 ST 33 35 NG F06 LWUA Smith 5 CT/CW 20/10 23/12 NG F02 LWUA Smith 1 GT 29 32 F02 - ! LWUA Smith I- 5 IC 10 10 F02 - TOTAL I41 154
s~ f
,/ ,
?
S L2- E R-OL TABLE 1.1-7 Sheet 5 of 8 SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL - FLORIDA SUBREGION EXISTING GENERATING CAPABILITY (as of January 1,1979) Primary Fuel Alternate Fuel Net Unit Capability-MW Fuel Fuel System Station Name Unit No. Tm Summer Winter Tm Type City of Lakeland LALW Larsen 4 ST 19 19 NG LALW Larsen 5 ST 25 25 NG 1ALW Larsen 6 ST 25 25 NG LALW Larsen 7 ST 40 52 NG 1ALW Larsen 1- 3 GT 33 39 NG LALW McIntosh 1 ST 92 93 NG LALW McIntosh 2 ST 104 102 - LALW McIntosh ! GT 20 23 - LALW McIntosh 1- 2 IC 5 6 - TOTAL 372 384 Orlando Utilities Commission ORLA Crystal River 2/ 3 NP 13 13 UR - ORIA Indian Rivar 1 ST 90 92 F06 NG ORLA Indian River 2 ST 204 208 F06 NG ORLA Indian River 3 ST 318 321 F06 NG ORLA Lake Highland I ST 30 31 F06 NG ORLA Lake Highland 2 ST 30 31 F06 NG ORLA Lake Highland 3 ST 30 31 F06 NG ORIA Lake Highland A-B GT 26 32 F02 NG ORLA Lake Highland 1 IC 1 1 F02 - TOTAL 742 760 Seminole Electric Cooperative SECI Crystal River 2] 3 NP 14 14 UR - TOTAL 14 14 City of Tallahasse TALL Crystal River 2/ 3 NP 11 11 UR - TALL Hopkins 1 ST 78 80 F06 NG TALL Hopkins 2 ST 225 238 F06 NG TALL Hopkins i GT 14 16 F02 NG TALL Hopkins 2 GT 27 30 F02 NG TALL Purdom I- 2 ST 14 16 F06 - TALL Purdom 3 ST 7 8 F06 NG TALL Purdom 4 ST 7 8 F06 NG TALL Purdom 5 ST 22 22 F06 NG
4 ' i e-
+
+
A . I , S L2-E R-OL ) TABLE l.1-7 Sheet 6 of 8 SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL - FLORIDA SUBREGION 3 j EXISTING CENERATING CAPABILITY t (as of January 1,1979) i i Primary Fuel Alternate Fuel I j Net Unit Capabili t y-MW Fuel Fuel ! System Station Name Unit No. Type Summer Winter Tyge Type ! City of Tallahasse (Cont'd) - TALL Purdom 6 ST 22 22 F06 NG I TALL Purd om 7 ST 46 45 F06 NG l TALL Purdom 1 CT 11 11 F02 NG
- j. TALL Purdom 2- CT 11 11 F02 NG 1
i , (
- TOTAL 459 518 !
1. Tampa Electric Company j 4 TAEC Big Bend 1 ST 362 362 BIT TAEC Big Bend 2 ST 338 338 BIT ' } TAEC Big Bend 3 ST 362 362 BIT Big Bend TAEC 1 GT 14 14 F02 j TAEC Big Bend 2- 3 GT 130 130 F02 1 TAEC Gannon I ST 98 98 F06 i TAEC Cannon 2 ST 108 108 I F06 ! TAEC Gannon 3 ST 150 150 F06
- i TAEC Gannon 4 ST 169 169 F06
$ TAEC Gannon 5 ST 229 229 BIT 3- TAEC Cannon 6 1 ST 338 338 BIT ! TAEC Cannon ] GT 14' 14 F02 f j .TAEC Hookers Point 1 ST 28 28 F06 [
}
TAEC Hookers Point 2 ST 29 29 F06
^
TAEC Hookers Point 3 ST 23 28 F06 TAEC Hookera Point- 4' ST 42 42 F06 -
. TAEC Hookers Point 5 ST 66 66 F06 ! \ '
l TOTAL 2505 2505 i i 1 1 1.
- -r I
i 1 1
p O rs Q, , / S L2- E R-OL TABLE 1.1-7 Sheet 7 of 8 SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL - FLORIDA SUBREGION l EXISTING CENERATING CAPABILITY (as of January 1, 1979) Primary Fuel Alternate Fuel Net I: nit Capability-MW Fuel Fuel System St at ion Name Unit No. Type Summer Winter Type 3pe I I City of Vero Beach VEBM Municipal Plant 1 ST 12 12 F06 NG VEBM Municipal Plant 2 ST 17 17 F06 NG VEBM Municipal Plant 3 ST 33 33 F06 NG VEBM Municipal Plant 4 ST 56 56 F04 NG VEBM Municipal Plant J- 6 IC 15 15 F02 NG TOTAL 133 133 ( I/ I' nit s on cold standby. Capacity of these units is g included in total resources for Subregion. l Reactivation of these units would require steeral month. 2/ Total Capability: 797/812 MW, 80/81 MW owned by various Municipal and REA utilities. 3/ Operation of Anclote 2 is contingent upon the result of proceedings with the U. S. Environmental Protection l Agency concerning thermal discharge. The unit is allowed to operate only during declared emergency conditions. 4_/ Being converted to coal per ESECA; expected to return to service in May of 1979. l 5/ The following units are unavailable until 1980 and are excluded from the Existing Generating Capability Total: Kennedy CT 1,2,6; Northside GT I,2; Southside GT 1,2 (total MW = 127-S, 108-W).
SL2-ER-OL
,~
/ l ( / TABLE 1.1-7 Sheet 8 of 8 v SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL-FLORIDA SUBREGION EXISTING GENERATING CAPABILITY UTILITY SYSTEMS COMPRISING REPORTING PARTY FLPL Florida Power & Light Company FLPC Florida Power Corporation FOPC Fort Pierce Utilities Authority GAMW Gainesville/Alachua County Regional Utilities Board HSTX City of Homestead JACO Jacksonville Electric Authority LWUA Lake Worth Utilities Authority LALW City of Lakeland ORLA Orlando Utilities Commission SECI Seminole Electric Cooperative SEPA Southeastern Power Administration TALL City of Tallahassee TAEC Tampa Elect ric Company VEBM City of Vero Beach UNIT TYPE ABBREVIATIONS FUEL TYPE ABBREVIATIONS
,~_,
NP = PWR Nuclear BIT = Bituminous Coal / Sr = Steam Turbine /Non-Nuclear NG = Natural Gas (s_,)) IC = Internal Combustion F02 = No. 2 Fuel Oil GT = Combustion Turbine (Gas Turbine) F06 = No. 6 Fuel Oil CT/CW= Combined-Cycle: UR = Uranium Combustion Turbine Portion / Steam Portion - Waste Heat Only CT/CA= Combined-Cycle: Combustion Turbine Port ion / Steam Portion - Auxiliary Fired jf '% V
,_, ~ - . .. .. . . . . . _ . -- . _ . . _ . - . _ _ . _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . - . m_ __ _ _ _ . . - - . . m . _ _ . . _ -
\
v ' SL2-ER 0L TABLE 1.1-8 SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL-FLORIDA SUBREGION Sheet I of 4 i FUTURE CENERATING CAPABILITY INSTALLATIONS AND REMOVALS (January 1,1979 through December 31. 1988)
- I I
i Alternate < i Primary Fuel Fuel Net . Unit Capability-MW Fuel Fuel Effective System Station Name Unit No. Type Summer Winter Type Type Date Status i
- . FLPC Crystal River 1/ I ST 383 383 BIT -
5/79 ; JACO Nort h side 3 ST 58 58 F06 -
/79 A .
TAEC Big Bend 2 ST 24 24 BIT - 5/79 A ! FLPC -Crystal River 3 NP 27 27 UR - 6/79 A TOTAL 492 492 VEBM . Municipal Plant 1-2,4-6 IC -15 -15 F02 - 1/80 R i JACO ICennedy 6 GT 54 54 F02 - 3/80 S ! 1 HSTX G. W. Ivey 20-21 IC 14 14 Unk Unk 4/80 P JACO Northside 1- 2 GT 23 28 F02 - 4/80 S I FLPC Crystal River ~2 ST 50 50 BIT - 5/80 A FLPL Martin 1 ST 775 787 F06 -
/80 V
} FLPL Solid Waste l- 2 ST 40 40 SW -
/80 P JACO Kennedy l- 2 GT 25 26 F06 -
7/80 S i- FLPC Suwannee 1- 3 GT 153 195 F02 - 10/80 L
.JACO Southside 1- 2 GT 25 30 F02 -
10/80 S
- TOIAL 1144 1209 i GAMW Deerhaven 2 ST 235 235 BIT -
1/81 U , 3 CAMW J. R. Kelly 6 ST -14 -14 F06 - 1/81 R ' . FLPL Martin 2 ST 775 787 F06 -
/81 U j FLPC Higgins l- 3 ST -119 -123 F06 -
10/81 R , FLPC Higgins2f 1- 3 CT/CA 305/119 353/123 F06 - 10/81 L - LALW McIntosh 3 ST 200 200 BIT - 11/81 U 1~ ORLA McIntosh 3 ST 134 134 BIT - 11/81 U , e : 2 TOTAL. 1635 1695 !' ? i j. i' j *RR is probably better to use. 1 1 i - - _ _
(} h (c~h) G J S L2-E R- OL TABLE 1.1-8 SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILTY COUNCIL-FLORIDA SUBRECION Sheet 2 of 4 FUTURE CENERATING CAPABILITY INSTALLATIONS AND REMOVALS (January 1, 1979 through December 31, 1988) Alt ernat e Primary Fuel Fuel Net Unit Capability-MW Fuel Fuel Effective System Station Name Unit No. Tyge Summer Winter Tyge Tyge Date Status FLPC Crystal River 4 ST 640 640 BIT - 12/82 U ORLA Lake Highland l- 3 ST -9_0 -93 F06 NG 12/82 R TOTAL 550 547 LALW Larsen 4 ST -19 -19 F06 - 1/83 R TAEC Big Bend 4- 5 CT 100 100 F02 - 3/83 L FLPL St. Lucie 2 NP 747 764 UR -
/83 U SECI St. Lucie 2 NP 48 48 UR -
/P3 U OTHER St. Lucie 2 NP 7 8 UR -
/83 U JACO Unknown 1- 3 CT 150 180 F02 -
5/83 P SEC1 Seminole 1 ST 600 600 BIT - 5/83 L FLPC Simple Cycle I CT 100 100 F02 - 10/83 P FOPC King 5 ST -7 ~7 F06 - 12/83 R TOTAL 1726 1774 TAEC Big Bend 6- 7 GT 100 100 P02 - 3/84 L FLPC Crystal River 5 ST 640 640 BIT - 5/84 U TALL Purdom I- 4 ST -28 -28 F06 NC 5/84 R TOTAL 712 712 TAEC Big Bend 4 ST 417 417 BIT - 3/85 L FLPL Martin Coal 1 ST 700 720 BIT -
/85 P JACO Unknown CT 150 180 F02 -
5/85 P SECI Seminole 2 ST 600 600 BIT - 5/85 L
/
f~- t [\ j /r\ 4 N
% Nv/ N v Y S L2- E R-OL TABLE 1.1-8 SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL-FLORIDA SUBRECION Sheet 3 of 4 FUTURE CENERATING CAPABILITY INSTALLATIONS AND REMOVALS (January 1,1979 through December 31, 1988)
Alternate Primary Fuel Fuel Net Unit Capability-MW Fuel Fuel Effective System Station Name Unit No. Tyge Summer Winter Tgge Type Date Status TALL Hopkins 3 GT 50 50 F02 - 5/85 P FLPC Avon Park 2 ST -42 -44 F06 - 6/85 R FLPC Fossil-Coal 1 ST 660 660 FIT - 10/85 P TOTAL 2535 2583 LWUA Smith 1 ST -7 -8 NG - 1/86 R FLPC Suwannee 1- 2 ST -67 -67 F06 - 6/86 R ORLA Lake Highland A-B GT -26 -32 F02 - 12/86 R TOTAL -100 -107 l TALL Unknown 3/ Unk 200 200 Unk - 4/87 P FLPL Coal A ~ l ST 300 300 Unk -
/87 P JACO Coal A 1 ST 300 300 Unk -
/87 P FLPL Martin Coal 2 ST 700 720 BIT -
/87 P 4/
LALW Unknown 3/ ST 200 200 Unk - 5/87 P-ORLA Unknown 3/ ST 150 150 BIT - 5/87 P FLPC Fossil-Coal 2 ST 640 640 BIT - 10/87 P TOTAL 2490 2490 LALW Larsen 1- 3 GT -33 -39 F02 - 1/88 R LWUA Smith 2 ST -7 -8 NG - 3/88 R FOPC King 6 ST -18 -18 F06 - 12/88 R TOTAL -58 ~65 1/ Conversion from oil to coal complete. 2/ Conversion of Higgins 1-3 f rom steam to combined cycle. 3/ Possible joint participation unit. 4/ Certain initial activities have been authorized for this unit.
4 SL2-ER- OL
\ ; TABLE 1.1-8 Sheet 4 of 4
! SOUTHEASTERN ELECTRIC RELIABILITY COUNCIL-FLORIDA SUBREGION i EXISTING GENERATING CAPABILITY i UTILITY SYSTEMS COMPRISING REPORTING PARTY l FLPL Florida Power & Light Company j FLPC Florida Power Corporation
, FOPC Fort Pierce Utilitien Authority GAMW Gainesville/Alachua County Regional Utilitien Board HSTX City of Homentead
- JACO Jacksonville Electric Authority i LWUA Lake Worth Utilitien Authority
! LALW City of Lakeland ORLA Orlando Utilitien Comminnion SECI Seminole Electric Cooperative i SEPA Southeastern Power Administration TALL City of Tallahannee
, TAEC Tampa Electric Company
', VEBM City of Vern Beach UNIT TYPE ABBREVIATIONS FUEL TYPE ABBREVIATIONS NP = PWR Nuclear BIT = Bituminnun Coal ST = Steam Turbine /Non-Nuclear NG = Natural Gan IC = Internal Combuncinn F02 = No. 2 Fuel Oil GT = Combustion Turbine (Gas Turbine) F06 = No. 6 Fuel Oil CT/CW= Combined-Cycle: UR = Uranium Combuntion Turbine Portion / Steam Portion - Wante Heat Only CT/CA= Combined-Cycle: Combuntion Turbine Portion / Steam Partion - Auxiliary Fired
- FUTURE UNIT STATUS ABBREVIATIONS P = Planned L = Regulatory Approved Pending; not under ennstruction U = Under Construction, lean than 50% complete
! V = Under Construction, more than I 50% complete T = Regulatory Approved Received, but not under construction A =_ Capability Increase i D = Capability Decrease I M = Inactive Reserve S = Reactivated from M
~
R = Permanently Removed k
f*~ \ f ( )
'%)
) (
%) fQ)
S L2- EP- OL TABLE 1.1-9 FLORIDA POWER & LICHT COMPANY FORECAST OF CAPACITY, DEMAND, AND SCHEDj((D MAINTENANCE AT TIME OF SUMMER PEAK Total Fi rm Tntal inatalled Capacity Available Peak Margin Before Sched. Margin Af ter Capacity Maintenance Maintenance Capa{ y Import DemA Maint. Year MW MW MW NW MW 2 of PK. MW MW I of PK, 1979 10,957 0 10,957 8,975 I,982 22 450 1,532 17 1980 11,732 0 11,732 9,540 2,192 23 250 1,942 20 1981 12,547 0 12,547 9,930 2,617 26 250 2,367 24 1982 12,547 0 12,547 10,120 2,227 22 250 I,977 19 1983 13,294 0 13,294 10,715 2,579 24 250 2,329 22 1984 13,294 0 11,294 11,105 2,189 20 250 1,939 17 1985 13,994 0 13,994 11,495 2,499 22 250 2,249 20 1986 13,994 0 13,994 11,885 2,109 18 250 1,859 16 1987 14.994 0 14,994 12,275 2,719 22 250 2,469 20
- 1988 14.994 0 14,994 12,670 2,124 18 250 2,074 16 (a)Ccpacity addi t iona and changen muur be made by June to be canaidered in ef fect at the time nf the Summer peak. All values are Summer net MW.
(b)This represents the number for which there in equal prnbability fnr the peak inad forecant en be abnve nr below this number and in to be used nnly where a ningular forecant in required. I#) Actual ratieg nf St. Lucie Unit #2 in 802 PW however, 55 MW have been nffered far male to other utilitien. Capacity values reflect 747 MW.
1 SL2-ER-OL
]
G l TABLE 1.1-10 FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY SYSTEM LOAD, CAPACITY AND RESERVE Net Suma,er Peak Reserve withopC) t Peak Demand Capability (b) Reserve with(* St. Lucie #2 St. Lucie #2 Year (MW) (MW) (MW) (%) (MW) Q 1973 6,894 7,277 383 6 1974 7,235 9,015 1,780 25 1975 7,076 9,015 1,939 27 1 1976 7,598 8,646 1,048 14 1977 7,841 9,638 1,797 23 1978 8,345 10,848 2,503 30 1979 8,975 10,957 1,982 22
< 1980 9,540 11,732 2,192 23 J
1981 9,930 12,547 2,517 26 1982 10,320 12,547 2,227 22 1983 10,715 13,294 2,579 24 1,832 17 1984~~ 11,105 13,294 2,189 20 1,442 13
, EJ85 11,495 13,994 2,499 22 1,052 9 1986 i 11,883 13,994 2,109 18 662 6
(* Same as "without St Lucie 2" except where
,,- indicated.
Actual rating of St Lucie Unit 2 is 802 MW
, however, 55 MW have been offered for sale to
,,j
- other utilities, i, jr l
(*}" Reserve without St Lucie 2" also assumes that l' '( ,, i the planned Martin Coal 3 unit will not be added i 7, 2
;i , (planned for 1985).
h gj
/
1 3-l} , i o'
.: v .
y . 1 t h ,, f u l. - At- m d " - . . L >
,j, ,
b 'PI " d
^~
os
- i g East Central Area '
g ECAR Reliability Coordination Agreement { ERCOT Electric Reliability Council of Texas - MAAC M ' d'A *"' A"' Council M 'd 'A**** . . . . ..--' MN interpool Network -- Mid@ntinent Area k" l MARCA Reliability Coordination _ Agreement '_
' \S NPCC Northeast Power p Coordinatoring Council , _ -
= = ;
Iyl!' SERC Southeastern Electric P.eliability Council , i-f .===:= SPP Southwest Power Pool _ I WSCC W" SY** Coordinating Council
, __ g
?
L. O:- L
,: _..g i,
,t q , . . . . .
3 a b ;
~
' '[
%j!i!h# l j s*'
- Qh y!!h!lle*mg:.... y L2 . '[my ..o w p h bh i
- !0 If, 2.~
. _; ; = & l ( , ,. j bof
(: == R i c&lf,h s FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE PLANT UNIT 2 RELIA IL TY UNC L { FIGURE 1.1-1
t ' . I 0 9 g T S A C T S A C I 8 8 E E R R O O F F I 6 8 D D N N A A B B H W I 4 8 GI O H L I 2 8 I 0 8 R I 8 A 7 E Y g _ I 6 7 I 4 7 I 2 7 I 0 7 I 8 6
- - - - - - - - - 6 -
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 6 2 0 8 6 5 4 3 2 2 1 1 1 g ? @ Y a w g
^* cOm ? zH ea* "
Mz<-Q j @mnB
- p. C OI~
o4 %<-
$s 5$
s z Q-aogm PTw
; 1 {lii'i!i1i, . -
l
! l 8
8
'/
7 8 O T T S S A A C C E E R 6 R 8 O O
' /
5 F F 8 D N 7 D A N B A B H G
- W 4 8
I O ' / H L 3 8 2 8
/
1 8 0 8
/
9 7 R A E Y 8 7
' /
7 7 O 6 7
/
5 7 3 7
/
2 7 1 7
' /
0 7 9 I 6
/
8 6 8
/
6
- - - - - - - - - 7 6
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 09 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 01 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 6 2 0 8 6 5 4 3 2 2 1 1 1 W M b@5>bM= 9" raf hy z<- O 4*rCh yr$ - czhm tmZN>x n o=b> zmt- :EEHmx = , r o 8 I zcim - z - T6c2m , N j;!jl ;- 4' .: . ,I;
4 O O O i t 95,000 - HIGH BAND FORECAST 75,000 - i 55,000 45,000 g]4$l f fffY ' j 35'000 i LOW BAND FORECAST 3 . a z . i j 25.000 -
=!
! :s 20,000 - 4 I r i 15,000 1 1 i , r- ! @ 10,000 -
-4 46
! 2! O z$ Ei mm c [m> = 5,000 i i i i i i i i i i , , 5 z" {> 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 YEAR i CBS 5h .j k -< A n e i > Z O
" !8 Z
4
i 16 - 15 - TOTAL CAPABILITY-NUCLEAR, COAL, I OIL AND GAS TURBINE ,___j I p -- J 13 - I p--- J e---- 12 - I ! a ,--- J 1 I I 11 -
-J p. -J m
I
$ io -
r--- '
= '
< ~
eJ O L ,,,, _ ] CAPABILITY-NUCLEAR, COAL AND OlL 2 8 o l 8 ja 7 J L--
~ ' @ CAPABILITY-NUCLEAR AND H COAL 5 -
4 p_- __j CAPABILITY-NUCLEAR p_ 3 - I p ..__A--- _ -_- I
-- --- a v"ST. LUCIE UNIT 2 I
' -J .
0 I ' ' ' ' 1973 1976 1979 1982 1985 1988 YEARS
--- FORECASTED HISTORICAL 4
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE PLANT UNIT 2 SYSTEM SUMMER NET CAPABILITY FIGURE 1.15
O !
. 32 -
30 - 28 - WITH ST. LUCIE UNIT 2 26 -
-PLUS OTHER CAPACITY ADDITIONS 24 -
A
/ %
22 -
\
4
% / g 20 -
V g
$ 18 -
g 6 y 16 - a:
$ 14 -
d WITHOUT ST. LUCIE O @ 12 UNIT 2, ASSUMING A
- c. DELAY IN MARTIN COAL 10 - UNIT 1 8 -
6 - 4 - 2 - I 0 I I I I I I I I l- 1 I I I 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 YEAR FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE PLANT UNIT 2 FLORID POWER & LIGHT RESERVE MARGIN FIGURE 1.1-6
l l l l l l 16 - NET CAPABILITY INCLUDING 15 - ST. LUCIE UNIT 2 14 - c----- I l
,___ s >
[.YI EX5E'lD
~
I NET CAP 12 ST. LUCIE UNIT 2 AND f MARTIN COAL us 11 -
-J UNIT 1 #,e#
4 10 - k #p# C 9 - 2 NET ONE HOUR g8 - PEAK DEMAND 8 7 z - N 6 O
@ LEGEND:
z 5 -
---- FORECASTED HISTORICAL 4 -
-.- WITHOUT ST. LUCIE UNIT 2 3 -
2 - 1 I I I I i 0 1973 1976 1979 1982 1985 1988 YEAR FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY O ST. LUCIE PLANT UNIT 2 SYSTEM LOAD & SUMMER NET CAPABILITY FIGURE 1.17
----.a.-, .-m.m_-.__._ __-. . - _._. .m. .. _m_-..... .---_, s.. i 1 $
, S L2-ER- OL . l I t i J i l a l l. l i 1 I APPENDIX 1.1A l I l I i i l l l 1 -1 , i 1 . 1 l l l I, a i 4 1 l ) l 4 l@ l 1.1 A,-1 1 1-
,.,,.n. , , _ - ,,..--,_.. . __.- _ . _ _ _ , ,, , , _ , ,,__n
1 SOUTH E ASTERN E LECTRIC R ELI A BI LITY CO U NCIL l AGREEMENT Dated as of January 14,1970 Amended October 10,1973 l I i
- ' 1 l
1.1A-2
l CONTENTS 1 Artide Page 1 Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............... .......... . . . . I 2 Purpose of Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . I 3 Membership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................2 4 Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . .................2 5 Regulatory Commission Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 6 Expense . . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 7 Term . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 9 i l l i f 1.1A-3 !
- -e -,, c., , - - - - , - , ,,,r,
, ,--, -. - - - - , _-,,-,-g--. -- ,,.n,+,,, - , , ,,,-,,m~~-m.-----n,w-v -e
1 (j AGREEMENT, dated as of January 14,1970, between ALABAMA ELECTRIC COOPERA-TIVE, INC., ALABAMA POWER COMPANY, CAROLINA POWER AND LIGIIT COMPANY, CRISP COUNTY POWER COMMISSION, DUKE POWER COMPANY, FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION, FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, GEORGIA POWER COM-PANY, GULF POWER COMPANY, THE JACKSONVILLE ELECTRIC AUTHORITY, CITY OF LAKELAND-DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRIC & WATER ITTILITIES, MISSISSIPPI POWER COMPANY, NANTAHALA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, ORLANDO UTill-TIES COMMISSION, SAVANNAH ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY, SOUTilEASTERN POWER ADMINISTRATION, SOUTli CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS COMPANY, SOUTII CAROLINA PUBLIC SERVICE ALTTHORITY, CITY OF TALLAHASSEE, TAMPA ELEC-TRIC COMPANY, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY, AND VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY, and amended by action of the Board on April I,1970, to include TAPOCO, INC., and YADKIN, INC.; by Board action on October 6,1971, to include SOUTil l MISSISSIPPI ELECTRIC POWER ASSOCIATION, BIG RIVERS ELECTRIC CORPORATION of HENDERSON, KENTUCKY, and MUNICIPAL POWER AND LIGIIT DEPARTMENT of IIENDERSON, KENTUCKY; by Board action on October 10, 1973, to include GAINES-l VILLE/ALACilUA COUNTY REGIONAL UTILITIES SYSTEM; and by Board action on I November 29, 1973, to include FORT PIERCE MUNICIPAL POWER SYSTEM and VERO l BEACil MUNICIPAL POWER SYSTEM; as parties to the Agreement,(Ilereafter referred to l separately as a Member System, collectively as Member Systems.) t W I T N E S S E T il: v Each Member System is concerned with the reliability and adequacy of bulk power supply in the area in which it serves. ARTICLE I l NAME 1.01 This organization shall be known as the Southeastern Electric Reliability Council. (Council). ARTICLE 2 PURPOSE OF AGREEMENT 2.01 The purpose of this Agreement is to augment further the reliability and adequacy of bulk power supply in the areas sersed by the Member Systems. To this end, the Council will; (a) encourage the development of reliability and adequacy arrangements among the systems within the region; (b) exchang information with respect to planning and operating matters relating to the reliability and adequacy of bulk power supplies; ( (J 1.1A-4
, . -. . . . . ~ , _ - . -
f 4 i v (c) review periodically activities within the region on reliability and adequacy; (d) provide inforn,ation with respect to matters considered by the Council, where appro-priate, to the Federal Power Commission and to other Federal and state agencies concerned with reliability and adequacy. { l J ARTICLE 3 MEMBERSHIP 3.01 Any power supply entity operating or otherwise having responsibility for the opera-tion of facilities normally connected with the interconnected power system in the general area encompassed by the Member Systems, and providing bulk power supply with normally con-nected generating capacity of 25 mw or more may become a member. 3.02 The Board shall designate as associate members of the Council up to four represent-alives from each of the following categories of distribution systems (including any with gen-erating capacity of less than 25mw)w hich are not members of the Council but are connected to the Member Systems: (a) municipal and other publicly owned systems and (b) rural electric cooperatives. Such associate members may be chosen by the Board from names suggested by .[ \ the systems in such categories, giving due regard to geographic location. Associate members may participate in meetings of the Board but shall not be entitled to vote. 4 ARTICLE 4 ORGANIZATION 4.01 The affairs of the Council shall be administered by an Executive Board (Board) which snall consist of the principal officer or other authorized representative of each Member
- System.
4.02 Any member of the lloard may designate an alternate to represent him at any
. meeting. Voting shall be in proportion to installed generating capacity and a vote of nine-tenths of the total voting rights of the membership shall be required for action by the Board.
Installed generating capacity shall be determined as nameplate value is reported on FpCForm 1. 4.03 Regul.ir meetings of the lloard shall be held on the first Wednesday of April and October in each year; special meetings may be called by the Chairman on his own initiatise , and shall be c;dled upon request of two or more members. As far in advance of c.ich meeting as practical, an agenda therefor shall be distributed to the members. lO v 1 1.1 A-5 w * --e ,, ,m- ..- -,.t n- ~e wrr v er w y ..-. ~ , , . % . ,s ,3--s - .we r y s r---+14 e-y
3
/D 4.04 Bienially at the April meeting the members of the Board shall select one of their members to serve as Chairman, one as Vice Chairman, and one as Secretary-Treasurer, each for a term of two years.
4.05 The Chairman shall conduct all meetings and shall be responsible for the preparation of the agenda therefor. In his absence, the Vice Chairman shall serve in his place. 4.06 The Secte ry-Treasurer shall sign or countersign checks, arrange audits of financial - records, sign appropriate documents, and perform such other duties normally performed by Secretary-Treasurer except duties of the Administrative Manager. 4.07 The Executive Committee shall consist of the Chairman, Vice Chairman, Secretary-Treasurer, and Ex Officio Chairman of the Technical Advisory Committee. It is empowered to make such decisions and take such actions as are deemed to be required between meetings of the Executive Board. 4.08 The Board may appoint such committees and task forces as it deems necessary to carry out the purposes of this Agreement. 4.09 The Executive Committee shall arrange for the sersices of an Administrative Mana-ger. Under general direction, he shall manage the operations of the Council to the end that its i
' purposes will be accomplished. Among his duties are to assist in and coordinate the prepa-ration of testirnony and reports, coordination of Subregional activities and Interregional affairs, initiation of agendas for Boani and TAC meetings, arranging for meetings, handling financial l affairs, keeping minutes of Board meetings, securing office space and other services as needed.
j p) ( He will nonnally attend all Board and standing committee meetings of SERC and the Tech-nical Advisory Committee racetings of NERC. He shall provide otherassistance to SERC and (/ NERC as appropriate. 4.10 The Board shall, within the scope of Article 2, paragraph 2.01, periodically review principles and procedures with respect to matters affecting the reliability and adequacy of bulk power supply of the region. + ARTICLE 5 REGULATORY COMMISSION PAltTICIPATION 5.01- To implement the purpose of this organization, the Chairman of the Federal Power Conunission and the Chairman or President of any State Utility Commission in a state in which 1 electric service is provided by a member of this Council shall each be inv;ted to designate a l representative to attend meetings of the Board. l l I (v) i 1.1A-6 ! l
i l 1 4 p/ ( ARTICLE 6 EXPENSE i 6.01 The expenses of each member or associate member, appointed committees and task forces, and of the Secretary-Treasurer shall be borne by the party by whom he is regularly employed. Administrative expenses of the Council itself will be authorized by the Board through the adoption of an annual budget. Such administrative expenses shall be shared in proportion to voting rights by the systems which are members of the Council. The commit-ment of Southeastern Power Administration to share in the administrative expenses of the Council it dependent upon the availability of appropriations for such purpose.
! ARTICLE 7 TERM 7.01 This Agreement shall continue until terminated by unanimous agreement of the parties, but any party to this Agreement may cease to be such by giving the others at least 30 days written notice ofits intention. Any such party shall nevertheless continue to be liable for i any obligation it may have had to pay a share of the expenses of the Councilincurred prior to the end of the calendar year in which such notice is given.
[ 5 executed. IN WITNESS WIIEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be duly . ALABAMA ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. GAINES R. JEFFCOAT President AI.AHAMA POWER COMPANY JOSEPli M. FARI EY President r 1.1A-7
, . , ,.,e.-. - - , . -
..nn,--- . , , - , . - . , , , . ,g ,, .,, ,. ,.. , . , , , , y., . , , - m,-
1 ; l SL2-ER- OL . 1.2 OTHER OBJECTIVES l t , The single primary objective of St Lucie Unit 2 is to assure FP&L's ability l ! to produce efficient, low cost electricity to meet the demands of its customers and to provide a level of reserve power to the system as a whole. j i > l 1 r 1 i i 4 1 i ! 4 ! l 4 6 1 i i I l 4' O
- 4. i i
l i 1 i ' I i i i ) 4 h I i 1 l i l 1 i i 1.2-1 4 f 1 ' . - . ~ _ _ _ . _ . . , _ . _ . , _ . _ . , , _ . . . _ , . _ . . . _ _ , . . . _ _ . _ . _ . . .
SL2-ER-OL 4 i gg 1.3 CONSEQUENCES OF DELAY f
\ _s/ All parts of Section 1.3 are based on the Ten Year Power Plant Site Plan 1979-1988 and information current to May 1979.
1.3.1 EFFECTS ON FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY SYSTEM The effects of delays of St Lucia Unit 2 on the generation reserve margins for Florida Power & Light Company are shown in Table 1.3-1. This table il-lustrates the effects of delays of one, two, and three years to 1983, 1984, and 1985. Since it is likely that a delay in St Lucie 2 would precipitate a delay in Martin Coal Unit 3, the reserve margin analysis accounts for this. This analysis was based on the most probable forecast and the current generation expansion plan other than the delays of the above men-tioned units. It is apparent that one, two, and three year delays of the commercial date for St Lucie 2 significantly reduce Florida Power & Light Company's gener-ation reserves to 17 percent, 13 percent, and 9 percent in 1983, 1984, and 1985, respectively. These reserve margins are dangerously low and directly reduce Florida Power & Light Company's system reliability and ability to
" meet all reasonable demands for service and provide a reasonable reserve for emergencies."
1.3.2 EFFECTS ON FLORIDA SUBREGION Delays of one, two, and three years in the commercial operation of St Lucie ['~']/ t, 2 will produce the following effects on the reserve margins of the Florida Subregion of SERC. (Delay of St Lucie 2 causes an equivalent delay of Martin Coal 3.) Delay Time % Reserve % Reserve Year (Years) Without Delay With Delay 1983 1 24.4% 20.7%
- 1984 2 22.6% 19.0%
1985 3 25.3% 18.9% Note: The above values are based on generatioa capacity of the Florida Subregion, excluding Florida Power Corporation's Anclote Unit 2 since that unit is currently allowed to operate only during de-clared emergency conditions awaiting proceedings with the United States EPA. 1.3.3 CONSEQUENCES OF NO INCREASE IN CAPACITY If Florida Power & Light Company added no- generation in 1983 or beyond, the Company's ability to maintain suf ficient reserves will rapidly dimin-ish. As indicated below, by 1988, the forecasted load will exceed the Company's generating capability. This would mean that Florida Power & Light Company could not meet the system load and would be in conflict with Florida Law. i s m 1.3-1
SL2-ER-OL Net Summer 7, Year Capacity Reserves 1984 12,547 13 1985 12,547 9 1986 12.547 6 1987 12,547 2 1988 12,547 (1) i e [ 1.3-2
- .- . .. . - - = - .. - - - - . . -
S L2-ER- OL
'\ TABLE I.3-1
[O EFFECTS OF DELAY ON FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY'S SYSTEM Net Summer Capability Load Reserve Unir Addition Year (MW) (MW) (MW) (%) St Lucie Unit 2 on Schedule l St Lucie 2 1983 13,294 10,715 2,579 24 Nn' Addition 1984 13,294 11,105 2,189 20 Martin Coal 3 1985 13,994 11,495 2,499 22 }. St Lucie Unit 2 Delayed One Year i Na Additinn 1981 12,547 10,715 1,832 17 St Lucie 2 1984 13,294 ~l1,105 2,189 20
' No Addition
- 1985 13,294 11,495 1,799 16 St Lucie Unit 2 Delayed Two Years No Addition 1981 12,547 10,715 1,832 17 Nn Addition 1984 12,547 11,105 1,442 13 Sr Lucie 2* 1985 13,294 11,495 1,799 16 i
i St Lucie Unir 2 Delayed Three Years Na Addition 1983 12,547 10,715 1,832 17 No Addition 1984 12,547 11,105 1,442 13 i Nn Addition 1985 12,547 11,495 1,052 9 i l 4 i l It in aasumed that if Sr Lucie Unit 2 la delayed, then Martin Coal Unit 3 will be delayed and in therefore nnt ahnwn in-service in 1985 an currently pl anned , f so i7 -L)
- - - . . _ _ _ _ - - . _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ . . ~ . . - _ - - . _ . - - _ . . _ , _ , , _ . . - . . . _ , - _ _ _ . _ _ . . . . _ . , - - . . . . . -
M SL2-ER- OL THE SITE AND ENVIRONMENTAL INTERFACES CHAPTER 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 2.1 GEOGRAPHY AND DEMOGRAPHY 2.1-1 2.1.1 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 2.1-1 4 2.1.2 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION 2.1-2 2.1.3 USES OF ADJACENT LANDS AND WATERS 2.1-21
2.1 REFERENCES
2.1-39 i
- 2.2 ECOLOGY 2.2-1 i
- 2.2.1 TERRESTRIAL VEGETATION AND WILDLIFE 2.2-1
! 2.2.2 AQUATIC ECOLOGY 2.2-9
2.2 REFERENCES
2.2-30 2.2A # AQUATIC ECOLOGY 2.2A-1 2.3 METEOROLOGY 2.3-1 1 I 2.3.1 REGIONAL CLIMATOLOGY 2.3-1 } 2.3.2 LOCAL METEOROLOGY 2.3-3 i
2.3 REFERENCES
- 2. 3- 6
! 2.4 HYDROLOGY 2.4-1 i
i 2.
4.1 INTRODUCTION
- 2. 4- 1 2.4.2 SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGY 2. 4- 1 2.4.3 GROUNDWATER 2.4-3 2.4.4 SURFACE WATER QUALITY 2.4-3 f
f
2.4 REFERENCES
2.4-6 2.5 GEOLOGY 2.5-1 4
.c ).
L/ 4 as _ _ ~ .. . _ _ . ,. .__ _ _ . . , _ _
SL2-ER-OL CHAPIER 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont ' d) Title Page Section 2.6 REGIONAL HISTORIC, ARCHEOLOGICAL, 2. 6-1 ARCHITECTURAL, SCENIC, CULTURAL. AND RATURAL FEATURES 2.6.1 HISTORIC, ARCIE0 LOGICAL, ARCHITECTURAL 2. 6- 1 FEATURES 2.6.2 SCENIC, NATURAL AND MAN-MADE FEATURES 2. 6- 1 2.6.3 EFFECTS ON NEARBY RESIDENTS AND MOTORISTS 2. 6- 1 2.6.4 EFFECTS ON VIEWS FROM OCEAN BEACHES 2. 6- 2 2.6.5 EFFECTS ON VIEWS FROM BRIDGES 2. 6- 3 2.6.6 EFFECTS ON VIEWS FROM OTHER AREAS 2. 6-4 2.6.7
SUMMARY
OF EFFECTS 2. 6-4
2.6 REFERENCES
- 2. 6- 5 2.7 NOISE 2.7-1 2.7.1 NOISE SURVEY IN THE ST LUCIE UNIT 2 VICINITY 2.7-1 2.7.2 AMBIENT NOISE LEVELS NEAR THE ST LUCIE SITE 2.7-2 0,
2-11
SL2-ER-OL THE SITE AND ENVIRONMENTAL INTERFACES
/ s k, CHAPTER 2 LIST OF TABLES Table Title 2.1-1 RESIDENT POPULATION WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 2.1-2 AGE DISTRTBUTION OF THE PROJECTED POPULATION FOR THE YEAR 2000 WITHIN TEN MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 2.1- 3 CITIES, TOWNS AND C0tIMUNITIES OF OVER 5000 PERSONS i
WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 ESTIMATED FOR 1978 2.1-4 AGE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PROJECTED POPULATION FOR THE YEAR 2000 BETWEEN TEN AND 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 2.1-5 PEAK DAILY TOURISTS AND SEASONAL VISITORS WITHIN 30 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 l 2.1- 6 TRANSIENT POPULATION: ATTENDANCE AT ATTRACTIONS AND EVENTS 1978-2030 j]' 2.1-7 TRANSIENT POPULATDN: MAJOR INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYERS AND Q COLLEGES 1978-2030 2.1- 8 TRANSIENT POPULATION: AVERAGE DAILY PASSENGERS ON MAJOR ROADS WITHIN 30 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 1978-2030 2.1-9 TRANSIENT POPULATION: AVERAGE DAILY PASSENGERS BY RAIL AND AIR WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIF UNIT 2 1978-2030 2.1-10 TRANSIENT POPULATION: AVERAGE DAr.Y PASSENGERS ON WATERWAYS WITHIN 30 MILES OF ST LUCIE 2 1978-2030 2.1-11 LOCATI3N BY ANNULAR SECTOR OF PARAMETERS NEAREST TO ST LUCIE UTIT 2, NOVEMBER, 1978 2.1-12 LAND USES AND LAND COVER WITHIN FIVE MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 2.1-13 TOIAL BEEF CATTLE SLAUGHTER WITHIN 0-50 MILES OF SITE 2.1-14 DAIRY HERDS AND MILK PRODUCTION WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 2.1-15 MILK UTILIZATION FROM DAIRY HZRDS - WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 v 2-111'
SL2-ER-OL CHAPIER 2 LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd) Table Title 2.1-16 EGG PRODUCTION WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 2.1-17 FLORIDA COMMERCIAL VEGETABLES PRODUCTION IN 0-50 MILE RADIUS STUDY AREA 2.1-18 FLORIDA COMMERCIAL VEGETABLE ACREAGE AND PRODUCTION SOUTHEAST COUNTIES 1976-1977 2.1-19 FLORIDA COMMERCIAL VEGETABLE PRODUCTION, CROP YEAR 1976-1977 2.1-20 FLORIDA CITRUS ACREAGE AND PRODUCTION 1976-1977 2.1-21 SUGARCANE PRODUCI]DN WITHlN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 2.1-22 FLORIDA MARINE LANDINGS: FOOD FISH, SHRIMP AND SHELLFISH MARINE LANDINGS BY COUNTY,1976 2.1-23 CaDIERCIAL MARINE LANDINGS OF COUNTIES WITHIN 0-50 MILE 3 RADIUS (10 gg) 2.1-24
SUMMARY
OF MARINE LANDINGS BY COUNTY, 1976 2.1-25 J W CORBETT WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREA HUhTING DATA 2.1-26 RECREATIONAL WATER USE WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 2.2-1 VEGETATIVE COMPOSITION OF FP&L PROPERTY 2.2-2 COVER / ABUNDANCE ESTIMATES FOR PLANT SPECIES OCCURRING IN MANGROVE SWAMP HABITAT 2.2-3 COVER / ABUNDANCE ESTIMATES FOR DUNE FLORA: AREA 0F UNIT 1 DISCHARGE PIPELINE 2.2-4 COVER / ABUNDANCE ESTIMATES FOR DUNE FLORA: AREA 0F UNIT 2 DISCHARGE PIPELINE l 2.2-5 MAMMALS OF HUTCHINSON ISLAND 2.2-6 LOCAL BIRD SPECIES i 2.2-7 SUMMARIZED RESULTS OF PHYTOPLANKTON SAMPLES FRGi BASELINE i AND ST LUCIE UNIT 1 OPERATIONAL MONITORING PROGRAMS 2-iv
, SL2-ER- OL CHAPTER 2 ( LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd) V Table Title 2.2-8 RESULTS OF SIGNIFICANT STATISTICAL TESTS PERFORMED ON PHYTOPLANKTON DATA FROM ST LUCIE UNIT 1 OPERATIONAL MONITORING (MARCH 1976-DECEMBER 1978) 2.2-9 RESULTS OF SIGNIFICANT ANOVA PERFORMED ON PHYTOPLANKION ST LUCIE UNIT 1 ST LUCIE OPERATIONAL DATA (POOLED DATA INCLUDING MARCH 1976-DECDiBER 1978) 2.2-10 SUFBIARIZED RESULTS OF ZOOPLANKION SAMPLES FROM BASELINE
~
AND ST LUCIE UNIT 1 OPERATIONAL MONITORING PROGRAMS 2.2-11 RESULTS OF SIGNIFICANT . STATISTICAL TESTS PERFORMED ON ZOOPLANKTON OPERATIONAL MONITORING DATA (MARCH 1976-DECDiBER 1978) 2.2-12 SUFDIARIZED RESULTS OF MACROPHYTE OPERATIONAL MONITORING SAMPLES 41 ARCH 1976-DECEMBER 1978) 2.2-13 MANN -- WRITNEY U-TEST COMPARISONS BETWEEN 1971-1973 AND 1977-1978 GRAB DATA ST LUCIE PLANT 2.2-14' SUFBIARIZED' RESULTS OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 OPERATIONAL
'v MONITORING DATA: MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE GRAB SAMPLES 2.2-15 RESULTS OF STATISTICAL TESTS APPLIED TO UNIT 1 OPERATIONAL i
MONITORING DATA: MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE GRAB SAMPLES 2.2-16 SUMMARIZED RESULTS OF UNIT 1 OPERATIONAL MONITORING DATA: MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE TRAWL SAMPLES a . 2.2-17 RESULTS OF STATISTICAL TESTS APPLIED TO UNIT 1 OPERATIONAL MONITORING DATA: MACR 0 INVERTEBRATE TRAWL SAMPLES 2.2-18 SUMMARIZED RESULTS OF FISH SAMPLING CONDUCTED FOR BASELINE MONITORING (SEPIDiBER 1971-JULY 1973) 2.2-19 SUMMARIZED RESULTS OF BEACH SEINE SAMPLING ST LUCIE UNIT 1 OPERATIONAL MONITORING (MARCH 1976-DECEMBER 1978) 1 2.2-20 SUFDIARIZED RESULTS OF 0FFSHORE GILL NET SAMPLING ST LUCIE UNIT 1, OPERATIONAL MONITORING (MARCH 1976-DECEMBER 1978) 2.2-21 SUFDIARIZED RESULTS OF FISH TRAWL SAMPLING ST LUCIE UNIT 1 OPERATIONAL MONITORING (MARCH 1976-DECDiBER 1978) . i p) v 4 2-v
SL2-ER- OL CHAPTER 2 LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd) Table Title 2.2-22 SUMMARIZED RESULTS OF FISH EGG DATA FRCM ICHTHY 0 PLANKTON MONITORING PROGRAM MARCH 1976-DECEMBER 1978 (APPLIED BIOLOGY, 1977, 1978 AND 1979) 2.2-23 SUMMARIZED RESULTS OF LARVAL DATA FROM ICHTHYOPLANKTON MONITORING PROGRAM, MARCH 1976 - DECEMBER 1978 2.2-24 FLORIDA COMMERCIAL FISHERIES DATA 2.3-1 AVERAGE MONTHLY AND ANNUAL THUNDERSTORM STATISTICS 2.3-2 MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF WATER SPOUTS WITHIN 25 MILES OFFSHORE
- 2. 3- 3 MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF TOPICAL CYCLONES AFFECTING THE FLORIDA PENINSULA (1900-1963) 2.3-4 STATE OF FLORIDA AND NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS 2.3-5 AVAILABLE AIR QUALITY MONITORING DATA AT FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA 2.3-6 LONG TERM AVERAGE WIND SPEED AND PREVAILING DIRECTION AT WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 2.3-7 AVERAGE WIND SPEED AND PPIVAILIUG DIRECTION AT THE ST LUCIE SITE 2.3-8 ST LUCIE UNIT 2 MEAN WIND SPEED (MPS) 10.00 METERS 2.3-9 ST LUCIE UNIT 2 MEAN WIND SPEED (MPS) 57.91 METERS 2.3-10 ST LUCIE UNIT 2 ' PREDOMINANT DIRECTION 10,00 METERS 2.3-11 ST LUCIE UNIT 2 PREDOMINANT DIPICTION 57.91 METERS 2.3-12 LONG TERM AVERAGE AND EXTREME TEMPERATURES AND AVERAGE RELATIVE HUMIDITY AT WEST PADI BEACH, FLORIDA 2.3-13 AVERAGE AND EXTREME TEMPERATURES AND AVERAGE PILATIVE HUMIDITY AT THE ST LUCIE SITE 2.3-14 PRECIPITATION DATA AT WEST PADI BEACH, FLORIDA 2.3-15 PRECIPITATION DATA AT THE ST LUCIE SITE 2.3-16 MEAN NUMBER OF DAYS WITH HEAVY FOG AND VISIBILITY LESS THAN 1/4 MILE AT WEST PADI BEACH, FLORIDA O
2-vi
SL2-ER- OL CHAPIER 2 LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd) Table Title 2.3-17 ST LUCIE UNIT 2 PERCENT TOTAL OCCURRENCES OF EACH STABILITY CLASS 10 METERS 2.3-18 ST LUCIE UNIT 2 PERCENT TOTAL OCCURRENCES OF EACH STABILITY CLASS 57.91 METERS 2.3-19 PERSISTENCE OF INVERSION CONDITIONS (ALL STABLE CASES) 2.3-20 PERSISTENCE OF INVERSION CONDITIONS (ALL STABLE CASES) 2.3-21 PERSISTENCE OF INVERSION CONDITIONS (ALL STABLE CASES) , 2.3-22 MEAN MORNING AND AFTERNOON MIXING HEIGHTS AT MIAMI, FLORIDA 2.4-1 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF SURFACE CURRENT DIRECTION MONTHLY i AND ANNUAL AVERAGES WITH 30 DEGREE SECTORS (PERCENT) ! 2.4-2 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF BOITOM CURRENT DIRECTION MONTHLY l AND ANNUAL AVERAGES WITHIN 30 DEGREE SECTORS - (PERCENI) 2.4-3 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF SURFACE CURRENT SPEED MONTHLY
.O AND ANNUAL AVERAGES WITHIN 0.1 FPS INCREMENTS (PERCENT) iV 2.4-4 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF BOTTOM CURRENT SPEED MONTHLY
{ AND ANNUAL AVERAGES WITHIN 0.1 FPS INCREMENTS (PERCENT) l 2.4-5 ST LUCIE PLANT SITE - WATER QUALITY MONITORING DATA
- 2.4-6 INDIAN RIVER WATER QUALITY DATA - SUMMER,1974 i
2.4-7 DISTRIBUTION OF MEASURED DISSOLVED OXYGEN DATA }
- 2. 4- 8 REPORTED RANGES OF NUTRIENT IN COASTAL OCEAN AREAS
- 2. 6- 1 SR ALA - POINTS FROM WHICH ST LUCIE PIANT (2 UNITS)
CAN BE OBSERVED
! 2.7- 1 WEATHER OBSERVATIONS IN VICINITY ST LUCIE 2 WEEK DAY
{ (07:00 TO 22:00) 2.7-2 WEATHER OBSERVATIONS IN VICINITY ST LUCIE 2 WEEK DAY NIGHT (22:00 TO 07:00) x, O ; l I , 2-vii ? l. l
SL2-ER-OL CHAPTER 2 LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd) Table Title 2.7-3 WEATHER OBSERVATIONS IN VICINITY ST LUCIE 2 WEEKEND DAY (07:00 TO 22:00) 2.7-4 WEATHER OBSERVATIONS IN VICINITY ST LUCIE 2 WEEKEND NIGHT (22:00 TO 07:00) 2.7-5 SOUND LEVEL OBSERVATIONS IN ST LUCIE 2 AREA ON WEEKDAY DAY (07:00 TO 22:00) SOUND LEVELS DB(A) 2.7-6 SOUND LEVEL OBSERVATIONS IN ST LUCIE 2 AREA ON WEEKDAY NIGHT (22:00 TO 07:00) SOUND LEVELS DB(A)
- 2. 7- 7 SOUND LEVEL OBSERVATIONS IN ST LUCIE 2 AREA ON WEEKEND DAY (07:00 TO 22:00) IN SOUND LEVELS DB(A) 2.7-8 SOUND LEVEL OBSERVATIONS IN ST LUCIE 2 AREA ON WEEKEND NIGHI (22'f 00 TO 07 :00) SOUND LEVELS DB(A) 2.7-9 RESIDUAL SOUND LEVEL 03SERVATIONS MADE WITH GR 1933 SOUND LEVEL METER ON WEEKDAY DAY (07:00 TO 22:00) 2,7-10 RESIDUAL SOUND LEVEL OBSERVATIONS MADE WITH GR 1933 SOUND LEVEL METER OS WEEKDAY GR 1933 SOUND LEVEL METER ON WEEKDAY NIGHT (22:00 TO 07:00) 2.7-11 RESIDUAL SOUND LEVEL OBSERVATIONS MADE WITH GR 1933 SOUND LEVEL METER ON WEE 1TKD DAY (07:00 TO 22:00) 2.7-12 RESIDUAL SOU'TD LEVEL OBSERVATICNS MADE WITH GR 1933 SOUND LE\T.L METER ON WEEKEND NIGHT (22:00 -70 07:00)
O 2-viii l
71,
.#g; ... .,
p -
. }g. , ,
../ SL2-ER-OL
, f THE SITE AND ENVIRONMENTAL INTERFACES [ D: ( '
^
CHAPTER 2
/ LIST OF FIGURES
(
/
Figure .. Title 2.1-1 'Ihe Regional Within 50 Miles of St Lucie Unit 2 2.1-2, Ihe Area Within 5 Miles of St Lucie Unit 2 2.1-3' Site Area Map 2.1-4 . Pronerty Plan 2.1 Enlarged IPite Plot Plan s. 2.1-6 1973 Retident Population Within 10 Miles (Sheets 1 thru 8) 2.1-7 Cites, Towns and Settlements 2.1-8 1978 Resident Population Within 50 Miles (Sheets 1 thru 8) 2.1-9 Cities, Towns and Communities of Over 5000 Within 50 Miles [ 2.1 1978 Peak - Daily & Seasonal Transient Population Within (,j 3 10' Miles.(Sheets 1 thru 8) 2.1-11, '1978 Peak ~~ Daily & Seasonal Transient Population 30 l,E.iles (Shests 1 thru 8) 2.1-12. Location of Major Attractions and Events Location of Major Industrial Employers and Collages 2.k-14 Passengers on Highways, Waterways, Rail and At Airports 2.1-15 Average Daily Passengers on Major Roads 2.1-16_ , Land Uses Within Five Miles of St Lucie Unit 2 2.1-17 Land Use Plar. Hutchinson Island Plan 2.1-18 . Land Use Pian Savannas Area - 2.1-19 .Public Eeaches, Beach Access Points, Marinas 2.2-1 ' Vegetntion Map St Lucie Site 2.2-2 ' Locat-lons of Turtle Sample Areas 2.2-3 Number of Loggerhead Turtle Nests and Crawls lG l - o' !. 2-ix l
- . . , , - . - - - . - , . . . . ~ . . .- _- -
. , . , , , - . , . . . _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ . . ~ - _ - _ _ -
SL2-ER-OL CHAPTER 2 LIST OF FIGURES (Cont'd) Figure Title 2.2-4 Percentage of Marine Turtle Nests Destroyed by Predation 2.2-5 Average Monthly Phytoplankton Density & Mean of Surface and Bottom Offshore Stations 2.2-6 Comparison of Annual Mean Phytoplankton Density At Offshore Surface Stations 2.2-7 Comparison of Annual Mean Phytoplankton Density At Offshore Bottom Stations 2.2-8 Average Zoo Plankton Density At Offshore Stations 2.2-9 Density and Diversity of Benthic Macroinvertebrates Collected By Grabs At Stations O&I 2.2-10 Density & Diversity of Benthic Macroinvertebrates Collected By Grabs At Stations 2, 3, 4 & 5 2.2-11 Total No. of Macroinvertebrates Collected by Other Travel at Each Offshore Station 2.2-12 Mean Fish Egg & Larval Densities (Number /M ), Stations 0 through 5 2.3-1 Site Topography Within A 5 Mile Radius 2.3-2 Site Topography Within A 50 Mile Radius 2.4-1 Bathymetric Profiles Offshore Hutchinson Island 2.4-2 High and Low Tide Elevations At St Lucie Site 2.4-3 Frequency Occurrence of Nearshore Current Direction 2.4-4 Frequency Occurrence of Nearshore Current Speed 2.4-5 Current Rose - All Measurements March 25 - April 4,1977 2.4-6 Location of Offshore Sampling Stations 2.4-7 Station 2 - Surface Water Temperature 2.4-8 Dissolved Oxygen Values by Month Stations 1 through 5, Pooled O 2-x
SL2-ER-OL CHAPTER 2 . \ LIST OF FIGURES (Cont'd) i
- Figure Title 4
2.6-1 Location of Historic Sites & Index of Plant Photographs 2.6-2 Locations of Viewpoints Along State Route A1A I 2.6-3 View of Power Plant Complex About 1000 Feet South on i Route A1A i 2.6-4 View of Power Plant on Route A1A, About 2000 Feet North of Plant 2.6-5 View From Route A1A, Looking Across Big Mud Creek ' to the Power Plant I 2.6-6 View of Power Plant & Transmission Lines From Route 707 2.6-7 View From Route 707A (Jensen Beach Bridge Road) i a l 2.6-8 View of Power Plant From Indian River Memorial Park in i Fort Pierce 2.6-9 Typical Intermittent View of Plant From Route 707
\
2.6-10 View of Power Plant From Trailer #639 in the Venture 3 Trailer Park j 2.7-1 Sound Level - Measurement Locations - St Lucie Unit 2 Area i I l l l l O 2-xi i
, - -n- - . . - . , , . - , - , - -,, ,,.,- ...., , , ,n- .-- -,., .,..~,-,,.n.s-,,--- , - - r-n,..- , - - - - - ,
S L2-ER-OL p 2.1 GEOGRAPilY AND DEMOGRAPHY 2.1.1 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION < 2.1.1.1 Speci ficat ion and Location ; Florida Power & Light Company's (FP&L) St Lucie site is located on llutchinson Island, St Lucie County, Florida. St Lucie Unit 2 is located at latitude 27" 20' 55" north and longitude 80" 14' 47" west; the Universal Trans-verse Mercator (UTM) coordinates are 3025150 meters north and 574500 meters 4 east in Zone 17. Approximately 300 feet to the north of St Lucie Unit 2 is j FP&L's St Lucie Unit 1, which has been operational since 1976. The coordi-nates fo r St Lucie Unit 1 are latitude 27 20' 58" north and longitude l 80 14' 48" west; the UTM coordinates are 3025250 meters north and 574450
- meters east.
i
- The eastern boundary of the site in the Atlantic Ocean and the western
- boundary is the Indian River, a tidal lagoon. Other prominent natural l features within 50 miles of the site include Lake Okeechobee, 30 miles l to the west-southwest of the site and a portion of the Everglades approxi-mately 24 males to the south of the site. Figure 2.1-1 shows the site in relation to the region wi thin 50 miles. Figure 2.1-2 shows the area within five miles of the site.
Praannent cities wi thin ten miles of the site include Fort Pierce, approxi-mately seven miles to the northwest of the site; Port St Lucie, 4.5 miles to O the sout h-southwest of the site; and Stuart, 8.0 miles to the south of the site. The largest urbanized area within 50 miles of the site is West Palm Beach located 36 miles to the south southeast . All di stances are straight line measurements from the site to the closest boundary of each city or area. ' i , Transportation facilities within five miles of the site include U S Highway 1; State Roads (SR) A1A, 712 and 707; the Florida East Coast Railroad, ship-j pang on the Atlantic Ocean and the Intracoastal Waterway which is located in the Indian River. SR AI A, the major north-south route on Hutchinson Island, t raverses FP&L's property to the east of St Lucie Units 1 and 2. Figure 2.1-2 shows the location of these t ransportation facilities. 2.1.1.2 Site Description l A nap of FP&L's St Lucie site is shown in Figure 2.1-3, enti tled Site Area , Map. This map includes plant property lines, site boundary, principle plant - structures and boundary lines of the exclusion area and low population zone. FP&L owns approximately 1132 acres of land. The site is generally flat , and ! has dense vegetation characteristic of Florida coastal mangrove swamps. At the ocean shore, the land rises slightly to a dune or ridge approximately 19 4 feet above mean sea . level . Figure 3.1-1 shows the locat ion and orient ation of the principal plant facilities for St Lucie Units 1 and 2. The area preempted by the plant ta about 300 acres, or 27 percent of the total land owned by FP&L. Oi
- V 2.1- 1
SL2-ER-OL There are no indust ri al , comme rci al , i nst i t ut i onal , rec reat ional or resi-dent ial st ruct ures within the plant area. SR AIA traverses FPt.L's property approximat ely 1,000 feet east of t he St Lucie Unit 2 containment building. The exclusion area and the low populat ion zone are shown in Figure 2.1-3. The radius of the exclusion area is 0.97 miles fran t he St Lucie Unit 2 c ont a i nme nt butiding. The low population zone includes that area wi thin approximately one mile of the St Lucie Unit 2 reactor. 2.1.1.3 Boundaries for Establishing Effluent Release Limits The minimum boundary di stance for est abli shing gaseous e f fluent release limits is that not ed on Figure 2.1-4, Propert y Plan, direc tly nort h of the St Lucie Unit 2 reactor containment building. Also indicated in Figure 2.1-4 are other boundary line distances fran plant liquid and gasesous re-lease poi nt s. The restricted area, as defined in 10CFR20 includes the fenced area shown in Figure 2.1-5. 2.1.2 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION 2.1.2.1 Population Within Ten Miles Table 2.1-1 and Figure 2.1-6 show t he di st ribut ion .1f present and project ed populat ion within ten miles of St Lucie Unit 2. The estimated 1978 popula-t ion wi thin ten miles of the plant i s 71,051 persons , concentrated in the cities of Fort Pierce and St uart which are the seat s of government and centers of act s vi ty for St Luc ie and Mart i n Count ies, respectively. Most of the area within ten miles of St Lucie Unit 2 is in St Lucie County; only annular sectors S and SSW between the five and ten mile radi s , fall within Martin County. The g al population in 1973 for St Lucie County is estimated to be 75,300 persons . The 58,095 residents of St Lucie Count y, wi thi n the ten mile radius, represent 75.9 percent of the county t ot al. In the same manner, t he 12,956 resident s of Martin County, within the ten mile radius, ennp 24.4 percent of the total est imated county populat ion of 53,100 in 1978 2.1.2.1.1 Cities, Town s and Settlements Cities, towns and sutlements wi t hin t en miles of St Lucte Unit 2 are shown in Figure 2.1-7. All or part of several incorporated areas fall within the t en mile rad i us. The largest of these is the city of Fort Pierce , wi th an estamated 1978 population of 33,083. The mainiand portion of Fort Pierce falls in sectors NW and NNJ, while the sect s on of Fort Pierce on the northern end of Ilutchinson Island is in sector NNW. This area, called South Beach, is linked to the mainland by South Bridge, a cont inuation of State Route (SR) AIA. Nearly all of Fort Pierce's populat ion is locat ed wi tna n tne tive to ten mile annulus. A part of t he Fort Pierce i ncorporat ed area, a long narrow extension to t he sout heast , e nne s wi t hin 4.1 miles 1f St Lucie Unit 2. How-ever, most of this area consists of t he Savannahs Recreat ion Area and has few resident s. O 2.1-2
l SL2-ER- OL The second incorporated area in St Lucie County within the ten mile radius 18 the city of Port St Lucie. yhe total population for Port St Lucie in 1978 is estimated to be 6,465 . Approximately 75 percent of the in-corporated area falls within ten miles of St Lucie Unit 2, extending from the S to W sectors. Although lots have been platted and sold in many sec-tions, residential development ig3}978isconcentratedinannularsectorSW five to ten and WSW five to ten . In 1978, that part of Port St Lucie east of US Highwa tial development (4h, (US 1) within five miles of the site, has no residen-A portion of the incorporated area of the city of Stuart falls wi thin an-nular five Sector to ten. 'Ihe estimated 1978 population for the city of St ua r t is 10,760 persons. An in the Fort Pierce area, the city of Stuart of fers residents services and employment, proximity to the Atlantic Ocean and beaches, and access to Hutchinson Island. Two of the three means of access to Hutchinson Island, the Jensen Beach Bridge and Stuart Causeway, are located an annular sector SSE five to ten. The town of Ocean Breeze Park is located in Martin County, north of the city of Stuart, on the western shore of the Indian River in annular sector SSE five to ten. Ocean Breeze Park adjoins the ennmunity of Jensen Beach, located at the intersection of SR 707 and the Jensen Beach Causeway (SR A1A) to Hutchinson Island. Also, in the SSE sector is a portion of the Town of Sewa11's Point, which occupies the peninsula separating the St ',ucie River from the Indian River. C Along the western shoreline of the Indian River (paralleling Sg7 east of 4 5 the Florida East Coast Railroad) is a ridge of dry sandy soils . This area, which is predominately low density residential throughout the five male radius, includes the unincorporated settlements of Eden, Walton, and Ankona. A development called Indian River Estates is located in sectors W and WNW, between three and five miles of St Lucie Unit 2. Ap p ximately 40 percent of its land was developed for residential une in 1973 . Collins Park Estates, also in annular sector WNW four to five, is west of Indian River Estates and is smaller in area but more densely settled. Together, these developments contain about 500 dwelling unit s. Spanish Lakes is another major development in the unincorporated county insigthe five mile radius. This mobile home community, which has 1387 lots , is located an annular sector WSW four to five, east of US 1. To the west of US 1, in sector WSW, the developers of Spanish Lakes have ennpigd a second pro',act called Riverfront, which has a total of 620 units . In both project s, a significant proportion of dwelling units are owned or occupied by seasonal vi stors rather than resident s. There are extensive areas of vacant land south of Indian River Estates bet ween US 1 and the coastal ridge. Portionsofthisareaarebeg acquired by the State of Florida for the Savannaha State Preserve . On ilutchinson Island , in 1978, all resident population within the five mile I l radius was limited to annular sector SSE four to five. The 1928 persons in l l SSE four g f tve included residents of Net tles Island, a trailer park of t 1583 lots , most of which are located in a man-made island reached by 2.1- 3
SL2-ER- OL a short causeway. Many of the lots are owned or cented by persons who are seasonal vistors. 2.1.2.1.2 Populatnon by Annular Sectors The most heavily populated annular sectors are those which cover the towns and developments mentioned above. The most heavily populated annular sector in 1978 was NW five to ten, which includes much of the city of Fort Pierce with an estimated 36,483 residents. 2.1.2.1.3 Population by Annuli In 1978, the annulus between five and ten miles of St Lucie Unit 2 was more densely populated than the area within five miles. Population density for the five to ten mile annulus (excluding the seven sectors over the Atlantic Ocean) has 473 persons per square mile. Inside five miles, the four to five mile annulus has a density of 427 persons per square mile. In 1978, the area within four miles of the plant was sparsely populated , wi th an overall density of 46.1 persons per square mile (excluding the five sec-tors over the Atlantic Ocean). Within two miles of St Lucie Unit 2, there was an estimated total of 97 resident s, a population density of approx-imately 11 persons per square mile. The entire area within one mile of the plant is owned by FP&L and is included in the exclusion area and low popula-tion zone. Much of the area in the one to two mile annulus is over water. 2.1.2.1.4 Population by Sectors The most populous sector within ten miles of St Lucie Unit 2 is the NW sector which, because of the large concentration of resident population in the city of Fort Pierce, contains 36,657 persons. The second most heavily populated sector is SSE, which has 8140 persons and includes Hutchinson Island, the Atlantic Coast in the vicinity of Stuart, and Nettles Island. The adjacent sector, S, is third highest with 7179 residents in 1978. 2.1.2.1.5 Proj ected Population The population wi thin ten miles of St Lucie Unit 2 is expected to more than double during the life of the plant, from 71,051 in 1978 to 158,851 in 2030. This represents an increase of 123.6 percent over the 52 year period , an average annual rate of growth of 2.4 percent. The State of Florida is expected to grow by an average annYTf 8pate of 2.1 percent, or by 88 percent over the period from 1978 to 2020 , as discussed in Section 2.1.2.2.5. It ts expected that in the year 2030, as in 1978, sector NW will have the highest population of all sectors, 54,756 persans, but will have the slow-est rate of growt h, 49.4 percent over 52 years. Likewi se , annular sector NW fi ve to t en i s expected to grow from 36,483 to 54,497, a gain of 49.4 percent. In 2030, the second highest population by sector is expected to , be in sector WSW, which will grow by 268.7 percent from 6691 residents in ! 1978 to 24,669 in 2030. 2.1-4 O
- - - . _ . . _- -_ - . _ - - . - - - . _ - - ~ _ -- ---__ - - . .
SL2-ER-OL ( Within tne ten mile radius, the sectors expected to experience the highest growth rate are sectors SW and SSW. They are estimated to grow by more than 1200 percent, from 812 to 13,971 residents, and from 1,434 to 19,127, ' respectively. Both sectors will show an increase fran the expect ed con-t a nued growt h of Port St Lucie. The Fort Pterce area will maintain a significant share of the tot al popula-i tion within ten miles of St Lucie Unit 2. However, Port St Lucie will gain ! in its share of total county resident s as absentee lot owners build homes and move to Port St Lucie, as promotion of lot and home sales ca.ninues, and as long as Port St Lucie of fers more moderately priced housing than traditionally available at beach front locations. 3 Port St Lucie is one of the strongest growt h areas in St Luc ia County. To illustrate, between 1970 and 1978, Fort Pierce grew from 29,721 persons to
- 33,083, an increase of 11 percent . During the same period, Port St Lucie
! grew from 330 to 6465 persons, an increase of approximately 1900 percent.
- If building permi t activities of 1975, 1976 and 1977 were to continue, it
! is possibgthat Port St Lucie would reach a populat ion of 36,000 by the , year 2000 1 l Within the city ilmits of Port g Lucie, a proposed development of 2,200 dwelling unit s, called Midport , has befi0agg ved under State Develop-ment of Regional Impact (DRI) regulations It s est imated populat ion i of approximately 5000 people will reside in annular sectors SSW and SW be-tween 3.5 and 5.5 miles of St Lucie Unit 2. It i s expected that Mid po rt wi ll
- be enapleted and fully occupied by 1983. There fore , the 1983 population
] est amates include the Midport proj ect . 4 Also, the developers of Spanish Lakes and Riverfront have started development of a third mobile home community called Golf Village. The development as i planned will add 740 dwelling units to annular sector SW fcur to five. As in , many of the residential developments in this region, many of the homes will . be occupied by seasonal vi sitors rather than residents. The part of Hutchinson Island which falls within the five mile radius i s
- another area expected to undergo considerable growth. In 1978, there was i . a total of 1,928 residents; this population is expected to reach 2,678 by
- j. 2030, a gain of 39 percent. These residents will propaoly represent only
- a fraction of the island's future population since .aany new dwelling units for seasonal visitors and tourist accommodations will be constructed on this highly valued beach front property.
In annular sector SE one to two, a project called Sand Dollar Villas is under const ruction and schedg for complet ion in 1980. It will have 203 apartments and 32 townhouses . While it is likely that development wi ll cont i n'ue to occ ur in t he fann of projects such as Sand Dollar Villas, it is ;
- smpossible to predict the size and location of such projects until they are j inattated.
l j County planning of ficials have ' indicated that congestion of the bggg fran the mainland to Hutchinson Island could restrict development . A bridge has been proposed which would cross the Indian River at SR 712 . 2.1- 5 y - - . - ,a p.- -e-,- , .,e. --y., ,,n ..p #, w ,- - - . . .-.y.y.--. ww,.--.--_,.--.,v_ee -
.~r-. -
1 S L2-E R- OL l andlayg3 1, the Florida Turnpike, and Interstate 95 to Hutchts.aon Island An additional river crossing would induce development on the Island. However , i t s's uncertain a f, when, or Acre another river crossing will be const ructed because the g a of the indi an i ver i n this area are part of an aquatic preserve 2.1.2.1.6 Age Distribution The age di st ribut ion of t he proj ect ed populat ion for the year 2000, wi thin ten males of St Lucie Unit 2, is present ed i n Table 2.1-2. In each annular sector, the number of people under 11 years of age; between 12 and 18; and over 18 have been estimated, d on the distribution of these age groups in the United States in 19 70 2.1.2.2 Population Between Ten and 50 Miles Table 2.1-1 and Figure 2.1-8 show the di st ribution of the estimated 1978 population between ten and 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2. The estimated 1978 population is 412,714 persons (see Section 6.1.4.2, Methodology) and repre-sents 85.3 percent of the total population wit hin 50 milea of the plant . This population is confined to sectorc SSE through NNW since sectors N through SE, beyond the ten mile radius, include only the Atlantic Ocean. The taajor concent rat ion of populat ion occurs in annular sector SSE 40-50, which includes the city of West Palm Beach. West Palm Beach is the northern limit of the Florida Gold Coast development extending north from Miami through Dade and Broward Counties into Palm Beach County. The 126,615 resi-dents in annular sector SSE 40-50 live on approximately 48 square miles of land (the eastern three quarters of annular sector SSE 40-50 extends over the Atlantic Ocean). Annular sectors S 40-50 and SSE 3)-40 have the sacond and third highest populations, respectively, per annular sector, and reflect that Palm Beach County is more highly developed than any other nart of the region. In the 1970 Census, Palm Beach County was one of the nine Standard Metropolitan Stati st ical Areas (SMSA's) in Florida. Of the total 525,200 residents of Palm Beach County in 1978, 277,881 lived within 50 miles of St Luele Unit 2. 2.1.2.2.1 Cities and Towns Between Ten and 50 Miles Table 2.1-3 li st s towns, cities, and cmmunit ies wi th a 1978 population of more than 5,000 persons (see Figure 2.1-9). There are eight towns with a populat ion of more than 10,000, the largest of which i s West Palm Beach, wi th a 1978 population of 62,616 (see Methodology, Section 6.1.4.2). The second largest is the city of Fort Pierce, wi th 33,083 persons; the third largest is Riviera Beach in Palm Beach County, with 27,735 persons; and the fourth largest as Vero Beach, seat of government for Indian River County, wi th 16,800 persons. Of the eight largest towns gve are in the West Palm Beach Urbanized Area (as defined by the US Census ). In addi t ion to West Palm Beach and Riviera Beach, the five include Nort h Palm Beach (15,014 persons), Palm Springs (11,300 persons), and Palm Beach Gardens (10,792 persons). Stuart, the largest ci ty in Martin County, has an est imated 1973 population of 10,760. O 2.1- 6
t SL2-ER- OL i of the eight towns with populations between 5,000 and 10,000, four are l within the West Palm Beach Urbanized Area. These include the towns of Palm Beach, with 9,952 persons; Lake Park, wi th 8,652 persons; Greenacres City, j with 6,773 persons; and Royal Palm Beach, with 5,598 persons. Pahokee, ! wt th an estimated 1978 population of 5,864, is also in Palm Beach County but is located in the northwestern quarter of the county, on the shore of j Lake Okeechobee. ! There are three other towns wi th populations between 5,000 and 10,000 I persons. These include Gifford, located in Indian River County, with an
- estimated 1978 population of 9,485; Jupiter in Palm Beach County wi th 9,156(g9ople; and Port St Lucie, in St Lucie County with 6,465 resi-
- dents . 3 i l 4 4 f
+
f ( 2.1-7 l
~ -, - _ _ - . - - - _
S L2- E R- OL 2.1.2.2.2 Population by Annular Sectors The imst heavily populated annular sectors between ten and 50 miles fr om St Lucie Unit 2 are those whi ch encompass the cities and towns wi th t he greatest populat i ons as di scussed in Section 2.1.2.3.1. The anst populou s annular sector, SSE 40-50, includes West Palm Beach, Palm Beach Shores, Riviera Beach, and Palm Beach (see Figure 2.1-8). Immedi at ely t o t he we st of annular sector SSE 40-50 lies the second most populous annular sector, S 40-50, including Greenacres City (6, 73 persons) and Haverhill (1,004 persons est imat ed fo r 1978), aggggil as numerous large resident ial development s of up to 7,400 acres . The t hi rd most populous annular sector between ten and 50 miles fr om St Lucie Unit 2 lies north of West Palm Beach on the Atlantic Coast (SSE 30-40). Although its land area is less than half of the 137 square miles which c omprise t he annular sec t or, it includes Lake Park, North Palm Beach, Juno Beach, po rt i ons of Riviera Beach, Palm Beach Cardens, and the town of Jupiter, all of which are heavily populated. When the above three annular sectors are canbined , they canpet se 59.6 percent of the total population between ten and 50 miles of the St Lucie Unit 2, 2.1.2.2.3 Population by Annuli Populations by annu11 between ten and 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2 range in number of residents from the largest, with a total of 211,061 persons (the 40-50 miles annulus), to the smallest, wi th 51,504 persons (the ten to 20 mtle annulus). The annulus between 30 and 40 miles has the second largest p>pulation of 33,240, Misle the annulus between 20 and 30 miles contains 66,909 persons (see Figure 2.1-8). The 40-50 mile annulus has not only the largest popi 1at ion (211,061 ) and the greatest overall area (approximately 1,590 square miles, excluding the seven sectors over the Atlant ic Ocean), but also the highest popula t i on density in the region. The populat ion densi ty of the 40-50 mile annulus is 133 persons per square mile. Ni nety-one pe rcent of the populat ion i s located on 22 percent of the tot al annulus area, in sectors SSE and S, which include West Palm Beach and envi rons. 2.1.2.2.4 Popula t i on by Sect ors The most po pulou s sectors between ten and 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2 are those which cover the West Palm Beach area and t he At lant i c Coast . Sectors SSE and S have estimated 19 78 populat ions of 206,199 and 90,040, respective-ly, and densi t ies of 483 persons per square mile and 183 persons per square mtle, respec t ive ly. Sector NNW has a population of 51,541, and a density of 109 persons per square mile; sector NW, the next one inland, has a total populat ion of 19,037 and a density of 40 persons per square mile. The five remaining sectors have densi t ies whi ch range fran two to 31 persons per square mtle. The sparseness of populat ion in the five interior sectors can be attributed to extensive acreage covered by wet lands and surface water (Lake Okeechobee), 2 .1- 8
S L2-ER- OL inaccessibility to population centers, and the extent of range and cropland. [m) Proj ect ed Populat ion (/ 2.1.2.2.5 Figur e 2.1-8 shows the projected residential population between ten and 50 mtles of St Lucie Unit 2. Total population between ten and 50 miles is expected to grow by 121.3 percent between 1978 and 2030, or from 412,714 to 913,463. The average annual growth rate for this area would be 2.14 percent for the 52 year period. This rate of growth can be compared to the rate for the Statgo{Flortda, which is expected to be 2.1 percent per year from 19 78 to and 0.76 percent pe r ye ar fo r t he Un i t ed S t a t e s fr om 19 78 to 2025( Flortda is presently one of the most rapidly growing states in the US. Between 1970 and 1977, the state grew by 28 percent , a net addttion of almost two mill people. Ninety percent of this growth was attributed to net migration 2.1.2.2.6 Areas of Development The principal area of development between ten and 5 ) miles of St Lucie Unit 2 occurs in Palm Beach County in the sectors including and adjacent to the Atlantic Coast. Maj or development activity outside of Palm Beach is con-centrated in what can be called the " Atlantic Corridor", the five to ten mile area between ~ the Atlantic Ocean and either Interstate 95 or the Florida Turnpike in Martin, St Lucie, Indian River, and southern Brevard Counties. Land to the west of this region is mostly used for pasture, agricultural . (T production (citrus, sugar cane, and t ruck farming), or remains un-(V) developed. Access is limited and population sparse. In a few widely scat tered si tes, tracts of land have been platted and sold as home sites or proposed for such development . No significant developme nt of any of these project s which lie west of the Atlantic corridor has yet taken place. Deve lopme nt is focu sed in the Atlantic corridor for reasons such as the following:
- 1) Proximi ty to exist ing populat ion centers and services;
- 2) Access to the Atlant te Ocean and Indian River, and the amentttes they provide: scenic beauty, sport s and re-creation, t our t st industry potential;
- 3) Presence of sotis suitable for development on the coastal ridge;
- 4) Zoning and planning policies developed by county and regional agencies which permit development in these areas; and
- 5) Availabili ty of land sui t able for development .
Only three significant clust ers of development occur outside the Atlantic corridor between ten and 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2. Two are on or near the
'm shores of Lake Okeechobee (which covers 400 square miles in sectors SW and
/ h ( ,/ WSW between 30 and 50 miles of the plant). On the southeastern shore of the 2.1-9
S L2- E R- OL lake in Palm Beach County, the canmunity of Pahokee serves the agricult ural c ommuni t y of t he we s t e rn sec t i on a s well at the sport fi shing communi ty using the lake. A few miles north of the lake in Okeechobee County , a regional center has developed at Okeechobee City. The t hird locat ion where signi-ficant deve lopme nt is occurring is Ind t a nt own , in south cent ral Mart in County, at the intersection of the St Lucie Canal and t he Seaboard Coast Rail Line. The fo llowi ng is a summary of development trends by county within 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2. a) Palm Beach County The principal area of growt h wi thin 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2 is in t he nort heastern quadrant of Palm Beach County, which lies south of the plant, at a distance of more than 27 miles. About 40 percent of Palm Beach County falls within 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2; the total populat ion of t hi s area is expected to increase from 277,881 i n 19 7 3 to 617,422 in 2030. This increase represent s a growth of 122 percent ove r t he ent i re pe riod , or 2. 3 percent averaged annually. The cor-ridor tn Palm Beach County between the Atlantic Ocean and the Florida Turnpike is intensively developed wi t h cont iguous towns and cit ies such as Palm Beach, West Palm Beach, Riviera Beach and Lake Park. Resident ial development activity in 1977 included a sizable number of dwelltng ggit s under construction west of the Turnpi ke in sectors S and SSW Development is expect ed to cont inue in this area because of st rong growth to date and its reputation as a desirable place to live. Many developments include sel f-cont ained rec reat ion amenittes. The Professional Golfers' has recently located i t s headquarters Associa[ inPalmBeachCounty'{gg(PCA) . Another area of growt h exi st s in the northwe st ern quad rant of Palm Beach County where Pahokee is locat ed on t he shore of Lake Okeechobee . Pahokee is one of t he 15 largest cit ies and towns m tnin 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2 (see Table 2.1-3). It has an estimatei population for 1973 of 5,364. b) Martin County While Palm Beach County has the greatest populat ion, Mart in County has the highest rate of growt h. Nearly all (75 percent) of Martin County's 1973 population resided between ten and 50 miles of the plant. The remaini ng res ident s were wit hin ten miles of St Lucie Unit 2. The 1973 tot al of 39,359 persons between ten and 50 miles is ex pec t ed t o grow by 139 percent to 94,359 by the year 2030. This represent s an ave rage annual growt h rat e of 2.7 percent . The city of St uart is the major populatton center for the count y; in 1973, i t s est ima t ed p,pulat ion of 10,760 represents 20 percent of the total county population of 53,100. Population is expected to grow in and around the city of St uart (ggy on the barrier beaches in the Atlantic Corridor in Mart in Count y Ind i a n t o wn , witii an estimated 19 73 populat ion of 3,411, is an in-corporat ed area locat ed approximat ely 26 miles sout hwest of St Lucie 2.1-10
SL2-ER-OL Unit 2, at the intersection of SR 710 and SR 76. FP&L i s presently constructing at the Martin County site two generating units and a [] (j 6,600 acre cooling lake w g of Indiantown. Two additional units will be constructed there . a The western part of Martin County is largely range and cropland, with few permanent residents outside of Indiantown. A project fo rmerly known as " Rotunda", and now called Palm Beach Height s, was proposed for land west of the Turnpike and was platted and sold for home sites. To date, there has been no act ual development of these properties, and the wetness of sotis is eggted to limit . the development of many lot s which have been sold c) St Lucie County St Lucie County extends from the plant site west to the 30 mile radtus. Of the County's total estimated population of 76,500 in 1978, approximately one quarter, or 19,131 persons, are estimated to reside outside the ten mile radius. This number is expected to grow at the rate of 120 percent (or 2.3 percent average annual rate) to a population of 42,226 in 2030. St Lucie County's major populat ion center is the city of Fort Pierce, with an estimated 1978 population of 33,083, located 2nside and out of' the ten mile radius. While the county as a whole grew 29.4 percent between g 0 and 1970, the city of Fort Pierce grew only 17.7 percent As Fort Pierce is built up, development is expec $ ) to occur within the Atlantic corridor, out side the city limits ' .
/m s Q) 8 In St Lucie County, the only coast al area out side the ten mile radius lies north of the St Lucie Unit 2. Sectors NNW and NW con-tain more than 85 percent of t he 19 78 St Lucie County population out-side of ten miles. The western port ion of St Lucie County is dominat-ed by pasture and croplands.
In 19 74, Ashland Oil proposed a refinery and new town fggghe north-west corner of the county where the Turnpike runs NW-SE No firm plans or schedules exist for the development of this area. d) Indian River County All of Indian River County falls within the ten to 50 mile radius. The county populat ion, gimat ed at 50,776 in 1978, is expected to grow to 109,270 by 2030 . This overall growt h of 115 percent represents an annual average growt'h of 2.2 percent. The principal cmmunity in the Atlantic corridor is the county seat, Vero Beach, wtth an estimated 1978 population of 16,765 persons (one-third of t he tot al county populat ion) . Other cities and towns include Gi f ford, 9,475 persons for 1978; Sebast ian , 1,556 persons in li,78; and Indian River Shores, 1,013 persons in 1978. Only one settlement, the Town of Fellsmere, with a 1978 population of 1,056, is locatea out side t he Atlantic corridor. Aside from t he cmmun i t y at "ellsmere 'NW 30-40), the area west of Interstate 95 is for the most part protected wetlands p_ which are part of the St Johns River Flood Cont rol Di st rict . 2.1-11
SL2-E R- OL e) Brevard County The portion of Brevard County (about 18 percent of total county land area) which ites within the 50 mile radius of the St Lucie Unit 2 has a 1978 population of 3,185. This number, which represents 1.2 percent of the county's total 1978 population is expect ed to increase by 80 percent, to 6,023 by 2030. Brevard has the slowest expected growth rate of the nine counties included in the 50 mile radius. Major development is Brevard County has taken place at Cape Canaveral, Cocoa Beach, Merrit Island, and Melbourne, all aorth of tue 50 mile radius. In southern Brevard County, development has occurred along the Indian River and Atlantic Coast. Small communities include Micco, Melbourne Shores, and Floridana. The only incorporated town ent i rely wi thin the 50 mile radtus of St Lucie Unit 2 is Malabar, which in 1970 had a population of 625. The town of Palm Bay lies to the north of Malabar, j ust outside the 50 mile radius, on the Indian River. However, part of Palm Bay's incorporated area falls within the 50 mile radius. In this portion, a large-scale development called Port Malabar has been proposed. Because of lot sales and promotion, development will be directed to this area, but there is no definitive schedule which could be incorporated into project ions made at the present time. In southern Brevard, as in Indian River County, development will be confined to the eastern coastal area because of restrictions impo sed in the western region by the St Johns River Flood Control District. f) Okeechobee County Located inland of Mart in, St Lucie, and Indian River Counties, Okeechobee County account s for approximately 4.5 percent of the residents between ten and 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2. About 98 percent of it s est imated 1978 population, or 18,629 persons , reside wi thin the ten to 50 mile area. By the year 2030, this number is expected to increase by 130 percent to 42,762. With t his rate of growt h, averaged annually to 2.5 percent , Okeechobee County ranks second (behind Martin, with a 2.7 perceat annual growt h rate) in rate of growt h of all counties within 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2. Okeechobee's population is concentrated in and around the county seat of Oke echobee Ci ty. The county seat is at the convergence of US 98 and US 441 and SR 70, SR 78 and SR 710, less than five miles north of Lake Okeechobee. This accessibility is ex-pected to ensure its continued growth as a regional center. The city's 19 78 populat ion of 4,490 represent ed about 24 percent of the county total. The adjacent town of Cypress Quarters has a population of approximately 2,176. In 1978, these towns together comprised 35 percent of the total county populat ion. A large scale deg ment has been proposed for sectors W and WNW at the 50 mile radius 2.1-12
SL2-ER-OL g) Glades, Osceola, and Highlands Counties n) (V Three counties on the periphery of the 50 mile study area contribute a total of only 739 persons to the 1978 population between ten and 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2. In Glades County, on the northwest shore of Lake Okeechobee, a community known as Buckhead Ridge has developed since 1970. Although only 12 percent of Glades County's land area
** "** "E #" E # "#"
fallswithinthey*g1'365". in this location The only other aettlement of greater size is the county seat ofMoreHaven, whig da 1970 population of 974, an increase of 23.3 percent from 1960 Buckhead Ridge's 566 permanent residents represen g proximately ten percent of the total county population for 1978 Osceola County is included in the 50 mile radius in sectors NW and 1 WNW. Approximately three percent of the county's 1,313 square miles are included in the 50 mile radius. There, the small se g ment of Yeehaw Junction is estimated to have 119 persons in 1978 The population is expected to increase by 123 percent to 265 in 2030, which is an average annual growth rate of 2.37 percent, Like Osceola, Highlands County has roughly three percent of its land area within theon50 mi1T35$di""- I" thi" *** ' * ""*ll **" l***"' has developed SR 70 . Its 1978 estimated population of 100 is expected to grow by 106 percent, to 206 in 2030. The average annual growth rate is expected to be two percent. Highlanda County's predominant growth is expected to continue outside of the 50 mile { g radius in the vicinity of {e) g33pvon Pad and pab H a d , in th central part of the county All three interior counties reflect the low levels of development taking place in Florida's central regions, which are not adjacent to the Atlantic or Gulf coasts. 2.1.2.2.7 Projected Growth Rates Between Ten and 50 Miles The total population between ten and 50 miles is expected to grow by 121.3 pe rcent from an estimated 412,714 persons in 1978 to 913,463 in 2030. The area of greatest growth between ten and 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2 is in Palm Beach County, in the three annular sectors surrounding West Palm Beach. Annular sector S 40-50 is expected to experience the highest rate of growth, wtth its 1978 populat ton growing by 183.4 percent from 65,250 to 176,411 in 2030. Annular sectors SSE 30-40 and S 30-40 are each expected to grow by 170 percent over the entire 52 year period. In contrast, a relatively low rate of growth is expected for annular sector SSE 40-50 which contains the city of West Palm Beach. This can be attributed to the shift in development from heavily urbantzed areas to vacant land in the north and west as_well as to the recognized tendency of heavily populated areas to exhibit low growth ! rates ge surrounding areas with low densities undergo high rates of J growt h i Another area showing relatively intensive growth is located south and south-west of the plant between ten and 30 miles. This includes Martin County's Atlantic corridor and the etty of Stuart . Because the method for est imating growth by annular sector is based on projected growth far each county, the v 2.1-13 l
S L2- ER-OL annular sectors reflect the growt h rates for the county occupyi ng the major portion of the sector. The fastest growing annulus is expected to be between 30 to 40 miles of St Lucie Unit 2. This band is influenced by the high rates of growth expected for south and southeast sec t o rs located just north of West Palm Beach. The greatest growth by sector is expected to occur in sector S which includes the expanding area west of the Turnpike in Palm Beach County as well as the area surrounding Stuart in Martin County. 2.1.2.2.8 Age Di st ribut ion The age distribution of the projected population for the year 2000, between ten and 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2, is present ed i n Table 2.1-4. In each annular sector, t he nuttbers of persons unde r 12 between 12 and 18, and over 18 were estimated basggn the distribution of these ace erouns in the United States in 19 70 2.1.2.3 Transient Population Transient population within 30 miles of St Lucie is estimated to be 74,368 persons in 1978. This figure is based on estimates in each annular sector of peak daily tourist s and seasonal vi sitors. These estimates are presented i n Table 2.1-5 and in Figures 2.1-10 and 2.1-11, and represent both daily and seasonal variations in the movement of persons or their temporary redistribution within the 30 mile radius. As in much of Florida , this region experiences signi ficant fluc t ua t i ons in populatton as t housands come to the area for the winter season (generally from Christmas /New Year to Easter) or fo r s umme r o r wi n t e r va c a t i on . Many attractions and events are held throughout the year which draw thousands of people. Although few in number, major indust ries and colleges draw many workers and students every day. The population from each of these sources has been est imated , and proj ected for the required years through 2030. Est imates and project ions for these three components are presented in Tables 2.1-6, -7 and -8, and di scussed i n the sect i ons Mitch fo l low. Transtent' populat ion result t ng from t ransportation by road , rail, water-way, and air is est imat ed by calculating the average daily passengers at locations diere vehicles or passenger count s have been made. To avoid double counting, passenger est imates have not been incorporated into transient totals by annular sector. Throughout the region, Atlantic Coast beaches are enjoyed for their scenic beauty and recreat ion pot ent i al . Both St Lucie and Martin Counties provide pub li c access strips to the beaches, and State sovereignty guagees public access to all lands seaward of the mean high water line . Because of the lack of enaprehensive data concerning both the use of the beaches and the number of users, estimates were not included in peak daily transient totals. The only data available on beach usage is as fo llows : 2.1-14
l SL2-ER-OL Best estimates available from St Lucie County (36) indicate that average
,m
) daily beach usage was 656 persons at four guarded beaches on Hutchinson (s / Island. Between October 1,1977 and September 30, 1978, a cumulat ive total of approximately 239,000 persons attended all four beaches in sec-t o r N NW . If beach usage were to grow at the same rate of growth as resi-dent and seasonal populat ion, average daily beach usage would reach 1,503 by t he year 2030.
In Martin County, there were two guarded beaches wi thin ten miles of St Lucie Unit 2 (in sector SSE 2,340 persons in 1973{y7) This . Average number daily usage could for bothtowas be expected estimated at reach 5,362 by 2030. At tendance is the greatest in the summer. It was estimated that as many as 2,000 persons attend Jensen Beach, at the j unct ion of 42nd Street (from the Jensen Beach Bridge) ggg SR A1A on bolidays such as Memorial Day, Fourth of July and Labor Day 2.1.2.3.1 Tourist s and Seasonal Vi sitors The total of tourists and seasonal vi si tors wi thin t en miles of St Lucie Unit 2, in 1978, is estimated to be 28,179 (see Table 2.1-5). This figure includes persons st aying in tourist accommodat ions , campgrounds , dwelli ng units occupied by seasonal visitors, and vi si tors staying with friends and relatives. Inside the ten mile radius, the following annular sectors had the highest transient population totals in 1978: , /~ x
/ '
a) NW, ze ro to t en, had an est imat ed 7,804 touri st s
\s_
b) SSE, ze ro to ten, had an est imated 11,572 tourists These numbers reflect the fact that both sectors have the greatest number of tcurist accommodations as compared with the other annular sectors. Sector SSE, for instance, contains three campgrounds on Hutchinson Island: Vent ure Out ; Windmill Village and Holiday Out - St Lucie. Sector NW has a high resident populat ion which presumably houses out-of-town vi si tors. Between ten and 30 miles of St Lucie Unit 2, the greatest number of tourists in 1978 were located in sectors NNW, with an est imated 19,460 visitors, and SSE, wi th an est imated 11,755 vi si t ors. These numbers reflect the fact that between ten and 30 miles of St Lucie Unit 2, these sectors af forded the largest number of tourist ac c ommoda t i on s , s uch a s mo t e l s , campgrounds and permanent resident s ' homes. Estimates for the 1978 tourist population and proj e c t s through 2030 are presented in Table 2.1-5. 2.1.2.3.2 At t ract ions and Event s Many at t ract ions and event s draw large crowds in thi s part of Florida; they include high school football games, major Icague exhibition games, county fairs, jat alas frontons and a dog track, tournament s, rodeos, and fe s t i-vals. At tendance at events within 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2 is presented in Table 2.1-6 for the years 19 78 to 2030. S k
\
\~ /
2.1-15
S L2- E R- OL Within the ten mile rad i u s , peak daily attendance in 1978 occurred at two walk t hrough event s. Each lasts two days, and has a tot al est imated at t endance of 40,000 persons. The Art-on-the-Green Festival brought 20,0gggersons per day to the Indian River Memorial Park in January of 1973 In March, 20,000 persons walked through(g auto Snow, neld at the St Lucie County Civic Center in Fort Pierce . The third largest eve nt wa s the Jensen h Fireworks, held an the Jensen Beach Causeway each Fourth of July ( Other attractions include g'high school football games held at Lawnwood Stadium in Fort Pi e rce , and annual event gch as the Sailfish Regat ta (a hydroplane event on tN09 Luc ie Rive r) , the October Art Festival in Jensen Beach in March , the Sandy Shoes Festival (a weekg) events with a count ry and west ern theme) in Fort Pierce in January Jensen Beach on liutchingIsland in June (40)the , SeaErikson and Leif Turtle Watch at Day in Jensen Beach in October . In February of 19 78, got al of 20,800 persons at t ended the week long St Luese County Fair , which is held at the County Fairgrounds in Fort Pierce, toeg approximat ely 12 miles from St Lucie Unit 2. The Mart in County Fair , held at the fai rgrounds in Stuart, had a peak daily at tendance of 7,559 and a t ot al at t endance of 2 7,000 persons. Other attractions and events include the football games at Vero Beach High School S t ad i um a nd a t Martin County liigh School, exhibi tion games by the Los Andeles Dodgers at Dodgertown Sport s Complex in Vero Beach, and at t endance at jat alas game s i n Fo r t Pierce. Between 30 and 50 miles from St Lucie Unit 2, t here are several at t ract n ons and event s held annually. The highest daily attendance at any event (in fact, for the ent ire 50 mile radius) took place at the South Florida Fair, at the Palm Beach County Fairgrounds. In g 8, 470,752 people attended the Fair, wi t h 88,000 persons on t he peak day . Other events, such as fireworks, football games, and festivals, may draw froa 1,033 to 13,000 persons on a single day. These are li st ed in Table 2.1-6, P'rt C, and shown on Figure 2.1-12. 2.1.2.3.3 Major Indust rial Employe rs Most indust rial employe rs wi t hi n t he 30 mile radius have fewer than 50 workers each and are involved in cit rus growi ng , packing and processing; construction materials; or marine industries. Major employers are included in Table 2.1-7 and in Figure 2.1-13. Three employers in the 50 mile radius employ 500 or more workers per shi f t ; none i s wi t hi n t en mi les of St Lucie Unit 2. 1 Between the 20 and 30 mile rad a i , two employers are considered signi fi-cant. The fi rst , Piper Aircraf t , at t he Vero Beach Ai rport in Indian River County in sector NNJ, has a total em g ment of 2,887 persons and a peak i dailf shi f t of 2,000 persons in 1978 The second, Grumman Aerospace, i n 19 78 oyed 731 workers at i t s St uart plant near the Mart in County Airport The peak daily shi f t is 700 workers. Crumman is located in sector SW, between ten and 20 miles of St Lucie Unit 2. 2.1-16 O
SL2-ER- OL p Between the 30 and 50 mile radii, Pratt & Whitney Aircraft is located on SR 710 in Palm Beach County. ( Total employg is 7,261 at the plant, wi th a peak shi ft of 6,094 persons in 1978 2.1.2.3.4 Enrollment at Major Colleges Two major colleges are located inside the 30 mile radius. Estimates and projections of their enrollments are presented in Table 2.1-7. In annular sectorgF yfive to ten, Florida Institute of Technology-Jensen Beach Campus has a peak enrollment of 900 students with dormitories ac-candating approxtmately 300 student s. Enrollment ranges from 200 in the summer trimester to 800 in the fall trimester and 900 in the winter ses-ston. The Jensen Beach Campus has a capacig r 1,200 student s, which administrators expect to be reached by 1982 Indt an River Cominunity College (IRCC) has a total enrollment of 16,000 students on four campuses within the 50 mile radius. The main campus is located in Fort Pi e rc e , in sector NW between the ten and 20 mile radtt. Seventy percent of the student s, who come from St Lucie, Martin, Indian River and Okeechobee Counties, attend classes in Fort Pierce. Peak daily attendance in 1978 is an estimated 1,500 stud. tnt a. Between ten and 30 miles of St Lucie Unit 2, there are campuses in /ero Beach and Stuart. In Stuart (SSW 10-20), approximately 1,280 students, or a wak daily esti-mate of 171, attended class in 19 78, while in Vero Beach, the total is 3,200 student s, or an estimated peak daily at tendance of 428. Only two percent of the students attended class on the Okeechobee Campus, located outside the 30 mile radius with peak daily enrollment est imated at 43 st u-dent s. Proj ect i ons for IRCC, included in Table 2.1-7, incorporate the ten percent annual _ rate of growth expected through 1983 (expansion of facilities under-way in 1978); in subsequent ye a rs , it is assumed that enrollment would drow at an annual average rate of 2.4 percent, the rate for the 50 mile radius area. 2.1.2.3.5 Transporation Sources of Transient Population The tranatent population result ing from the four basic modes of transporta-tion is estimated by calculating the average daily number of passengers at locations on roads, waterways, rails, and airports where vehicles, vessels or passengers are counted. Since there is no way to know which or how many annular sectors people have t raveled through and to avoid count-ing people as both residents and as passengers, transient population re-sult ing from transporation has not been incorporated into the transient population totals by annular sector (Section 2.1.2.3). Estimates and projections of passengers for 1978 through 2030 are presented in Tables 2.1-8, 2.1-9 and 2.1-10; estimates for 1978 also appear in Figures 2.1-14 and 2.1-15. 2.1.2.3.5.1 Highway Traf fic Within ten miles of St Lucie Unit 2, highways and roads are a major source i of transient population. SR A1 A, SR 707, and US 1 are major north-N.,/ south arterials. SR A1A passes wi thin approximately 1000 feet of St Lucie 2.1-17
S L2-ER- OL Unit 2 on Hutchinson Island. SR 707 along the mainland coast is less than two miles frm the St Lucie site at its nearest point. US 1 i s not only a major arterial north and sout h, but also a focus of commercial act ivi ty in St Lucie County. At its closest point, US 1 is approximately 4.8 miles from St Lucie Unit 2. At or near the ten mile radius, four major river crossings concent rat e t ra f fic over the St Lucie and Indian Rivers (Figure 2.1-14). These include the Sout h Bridge, Jensen Beach Bridge and Stuart Causeway from t he mainland to Hutchinson Island and the Roosevelt Bri ige on Ur 1 in St uart . In February and March, traf fic congestion in the Fort Pierce area and at the access points to HutchingIsland is a severe problem; in fact, it is considered a 1tmit t a growt h . Ree mme nda t i ons for an addi t iona1 bridge crossing the Indian River have been made for the nort hern end og Hutchinson Island, wi thin Fort Pierce City limit s or in adjacent areas . Traffte frm the larger rcgton comes within ten miles of St Lucie Unit 2 on Florida's Turnpike , Interstate 91. At its closest point, the Florida Turn-ptke is approxtmately 7.5 miles from St Lucie Unit 2. At Interchange 56, in sector NW at the ten mile r g s, the southbound average daily t raf fic ( ADT) count was 5,920 vehicles in 1977. Nort hbound t ra f fic on the Turnpike in sector SSW had an ADT count of 9,980 vehicles. Passenger est i-mates for major state roads and interstates within ten miles of St Lucie Unit 2 in 19 78 are di splayed in Table 2.1-8 and in Figures 2.1-14 and 2.1-15. Between ten and 30 miles, in sector NW, Int e rs t at e 95 (I-95 ) t e rmi nat es ap-proximately one mile east of the Florida Turnpike at SR 70. At the 30 mile rad i u s , sout hbound t raf fic on I-95 had an ADT count in 1977 of 3,896, while the Turnpi ke , in sector WNW at t he 30 mile radius, had a sout hbound ADT c oun t of 5,920. To the south, in sector SSE, the northbound t raf fic on the Florida Turnpike had an ADT count of 10,365. In 19 7 3, I-95 was a g ximately 85 percent complete from the Georgia state line tc South Miamt . The 55 miles of I-95 remaining to be built are located in St Luc i e , Mart i n and Palm Beach Count i es. In St Lucie County, an eight mile section bet ween SR 614 and SR 70 is under construction and scheduled t o ope n i n 19 79. The remaining 47 miles sout h of SR 70 to cru-pleted sect tons in Palm Beach County are in the plaaning and/or design s t age s . In St Lucie County, the proposed corridor is located west of the T ur npi ke . In Mart (35gounty, serveral alt ernate routes have been considered at pub it e hearings , but as of early 1979 no decision had been reached. Ave rage daily t raf fic c ou n t s fo r int erst at e highways have been converted into average daily passengers (2.5 passengers per vehicle) i n Table 2.1-8 and on Figures 2.1-14 and 2.1-15. (See Met hodology, Sect ion 6.1.4.2) . 2.1.2.3.5.2 Waterwaf Tra f fi c The potential total of average daily passengers on waterways wi thin ten miles of St Lucie Unit 2 in 1978 is 1,999 persons. This total is derived from available vessel or passenger count s for cmmercial and pleasure craf t (see Table 2.1-10). As in the case of highways, the figure represents an approximation of potential passengers because there i s no wa y t o know i n 2.1-18
- - --= . - - - .- . -. -
SL2-ER-OL ) which or through how many annular sectors persons on the waterways may have traveled. The St Lucie site on Hutchinson Island is bounded to the west by the Indian River, in which is located the Intracoastal Waterway, a major north-south route for ennmercial and pleasure craft along the eastern seaboard. Be-tween Jacksonville and Miami, the US Army Cor i total of 518,841 excursion passengers in 1976[S6gf , Engineers or an estimatedest mated a average daily passenger count in 1978 of 1,490 passengers. This number is j for the total length of the Intracoastal Waterway section between Jackson-valle and Miami and therefore is a conservative estimate of the actual number of passengers within one mile of St Lucie Unit 2. There is no way to estimate how many passengers actually pass within one mile of the site from the data available. 4 Located in sector NW at the ten mile radius, Fort Pierce Harbor is the only shipping port within 30 miles of St Lucie Unit 2. The harbor is reached fran the Atlantic Ocean shipping lanes via Fort Pierce Inlet, at the northern end of Hutchinson Island. Fort Pierce Harbor is a US Army Corps I of Engineers project; in 1976, thg$ggrps recorded a total of 7,800 passen-gers on ships entering the harbor . The Florida peninsula is transversed from Fort Mye rs to Stuart by t he Okeechobee Waterway, a cross-land lock system providing access fraa the Culf of Mexico to the Atlantic Ocean and Intracoastal Waterway. Jgyg g- September 1977 to September 1978, 9,671 vessels usel tue Waterway . ,f These vessels were pleasure craf t , cargo ships, and shrimpers un de r
\ eight foot draft (maximum draf t on Lake Okeechobee in 1978). The Waterway runs from Fort Myers Harbor to Lake Okeechobee. At Port Mayaca in Martin County, the Waterway enters the St Lucie Canal. Heading north and east through Indiantown, the Canal connect s wi th the South Fork of the St ,l Lucie River in Stuart. This eastern terminus of the Waterway lies within t he t en mi le rad i us in sectors S and SSE. In 1973, the average daily num-ber of passengers on ships going through the locks was estimated to be 108 4
persons. Wi thin the ten mile radius, in sectors NW, S and SSE, five l drawbridges must be opened for large vessels on the St Lucie and Indian Rive rs . In 1973, bridge openings represent an average daily est imate of 379 passenger the Intracoastal Waterway data [$6)These which includepassenger only estcommercialimates supplement vessels. Although there are no data available on the numbers of small craft passing under the b rid ge s , it is itkely that those passengers are local residents or transient populat ion account ed for in estimates of resident and seasonal pop ula t i on . Estimates and projections of waterborne passengers are
- presented in Table 2.1-10. Figure 2.1-14 shows est imates for 1973 and the locations diere passenger and vessel counts were taken.
j 2.1.2.3.5.3 Rail Passengers Within ten miles of St Lucie Unit 2, the Florida East Coast Rail Line passes at adistance(gg)approximatelytwomiles from St Lucie Unit 2. It carries no passengers . To t he sout hwe st , Amt rak t rains on the Seaboard Coast Line carried a total of 135,336 passengers between 3ctnber 1, 1976 to Sept embe r 30, 1977. At its closest po i nt , the Seaboard Coast Line is approximately 26 miles from St Lucie Unit 2. Peak daily c,pacity, which 2.1-19
S L2- E R- OL means all segg.g) available on all six trains on the li ne , wa s 2,474 in As indicat ed in Table 2.1-9 and Figure 2.1-14, t he August, 1978 Seaboard Coast Li ne , wh ich passes through the 30, 40 and 50 mile annuli, had a daily average of 389 passengers in 1973 between Sebring, Florida and West Palm Beach. A cutback in the nugggy of passenger t rains is expected , to reduce passenger totals after 1978 2.1.2.3.5.4 Ai rpo rt Passengers No regularly scheduled airline passenger service was available at any of the atrports within 30 miles of St Lucie Unit 2 in 1978. Although no air-po rt s exi st wi t hi n t he t en mi le rad i us, both St Lucie and Martin Counties have airport s located between the ten and 20 mile radii . The St Lucie County Airport is located north of the city of Fort Pierce ta sector NW. St Lucie as a landing rights airport with complete :N Ois r om a facilities. In 19 79, a small caamut er airline known as Golden Sout h expect s to begin operation with five round t ri p fit ght s to West Palm Beach, Melbourne, and Orlando. Longer range plans (1982-1935) include expansion of t he acc oamodat e DC-9 's and improvement s of the tower to meet FAA Standards runwfE0$". In developing scheduled passenger service, St Lucie County Ai rport has the advant ages of suf ficient land area for runway expansion and US Cust om Se rv i c e facilities for non-US dest inat ions in the Bahamas or the Caribbean. i The St uart / Mart in County Airport is locat ed sout h of St ua rt in annular sector S ten to 20. As of 1973, its use was limi t ed primarily to test flights for Grumman Aeros pace . No plans ex i st for expansion of st ruct ures or factisties. Between 20 and 30 miles of St Lucie Unit 2, in Indian River County, the Vero Beach Munte r pal Ai rport will resume scheduled passenger service in 1979. Eastern Airlines di sc ont inued its service into Vero Beach in 1973. Allegheny Commuter Service will of fer round t rip service for 150 passengers datly between Vero Beach and Orlando. Allegheny has found a good frequen-cy/small at reraf t type of gg{vgg$ a success in other parts of the US, and expec t s st rong growt h here The West Palm Beach International Airport is located in sector SSE, inside the 50 mile radius (Figure 2.1-14). In 197 7, a t ot al of 1,603,971 arrivi ng and depart ing passengers used t he ai rport . In 1978, the average daily number of passengers is est imat ed to be 4,878. Alt hough the number of landi ngs grows at a rate of only two percent per year (see Sect ion 2.2), the use of larger ai rcraf t accommodates the i ncreasi ng damand fnr seats. It is expected that at least 4,4 74, ggg)pa s senge rs wi l l use t he We st Palm Beach Internat ional Ai rport in 1990 Plans are underway for con-s t ruc t ion of new t ermi nal , runway , and road facilities. In addition to passeagers, a i rport of ficials estimated that in 1978 there were 1,800 worke rs at the ai rport on a peak day, and that passengers were accompanied on the average by two persons each prior to depart ure and upon arrival. If passengers, wo rke rs and pe rsons accanpanyi ng passengers are totalled fo r 1978, t he average daily number of persons at the West Palm Beach Interna-tional Airport fo r 19 73 would be 6,992. Est imat es and proj ect i ons of average daily passengers are included in Table 2.1-9. 2.1-20
SL2-ER-OL 2.1.3 USES OF ADJACENT LANDS AND WATERS ') 2.1.3.1 Existing Land Uses on Applicant's Property (v) The St Lucie site boundaries, exclusion area boundary, and station perimeter, are shown in Figures 2.1-3 and 2.1-5. A map showing existing land uses on this property is given in Figure 2.2-1. Acreages of each category of land use within the property boundaries are given in Table 2.2-1. Table 4.1-1 lists the various uses and the respective acreages required for the St Lucie site. A detailed discussion of the site area breakdown is given in Section 4.1. 2.1.3.2 Land Uses Within The Exclusion Area The exclusion area falls within FP&L property boundaries, and encompasses the area within a one mile radius of the plant (See Figure 2.1-3). Apart from the utility facility itself, the only other principsl land uses/ land cover within the exclusion area are SR A1A, undeveloped mangrove, sandy beaches and dirt trails along the eastern coast of Hutchinson Island. 2.1.3.3 Future Land Use on the Applicant's Property There are no proposed land uses within the applicant's property boundaries other than the structures and f acilities related to St Lucie Unit 2. Apart from the three acres required for the discharge canal extension and head-wall, no disturbance to existing land is expected. Power generated by St
)
Lucie Unit 2 wilL be transmitted by existing switchyard and transmission x v
/ lines constructed for St Lucie Unit 1.
Therefore, land use changes on the applicant's property will be minimal. 2.1.3.4 Nearest Residences and Agricultural Activities Table 2.1-11 gives the location of the nearest cow, goat, meat animal, vegetable garden (greater than 500 square feet in area), and residence found within five miles of 3t Lucie Unit 2. '1he location of these items is gi The following is a discussion of this Table {gg'g'ggularsector. The nearest milk cows are located outside the five mile radius,14 miles W of the site. These milk cows are found in a dairy opera-tion close to the Martin County line. The dairy is one of four in St Lucie County. The nearest milk goat is located 2.2 miles SW from the site. It is also the nearest grazing animal to the plant. The nearest meat animal is located 3.2 miles W of St Lucie Unit 2. The ground survey showed the nearest vegetable garden of 500 square feet or greater to be located 1.9 miles WSW of the facility. rw - The nearest residence lies 1.9 miles WSW of the plant site. l La'i 2.1-21
1 l l S L2- E R- OL 2.1.3.5 Existing Land Uses Within Five Miles of St Lucie Unit 2 Table 2.1-12 lists each land use found within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2 with the acreage involved for each categogggure 2.1-16 is a map showing the distribution of these land uses . The site survey and land use classification methodologies are discussed in Section 6.1.4.2.1. A detailed discussion of existing land uses within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2 is given below. 2.1.3.5.1 Land Use/ Land Cover by USGS Categories a) Residential The residential category of land use includes single family units, m'11tiple f amily units , group quarters , mobile home parks, and tran-sient lodgings, (motels and hotels). Permanent residents live, for the most part, in single family units consisting of free standing houses and mobile homes. Transient accommodations include residential units which are rented out, mote is, hotels and individual housing units which are visited by f riends or relatives. Housing developments on the mainland are clustered along US Highway 1 (US 1) and SR 707 (along the western coast of Indian River). Housing facilities on Hutchinson Island are located at the shoreline and are, for the most part, transient accommodations. These residential units are used by seasonal visitors throughout the year and include motel rooms, condominiums and mobile home park facilities. Residential developments within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2 are discussed below. See Figure 2.1-7 for their location. Mainland Residential Units Indian River Estates, located between three and five miles of St Lucie Unit 2, east of US 1, and just south of Fort Pierce, is a single f ag housing development designed primarily for permanent residents . Althouth streets and plots were laid out for - this development muy years ago, only roughly 40 percent of the land within Indian River Estates was occupied in early 1978. Collins Park Estates, just west of Indian River Estates, occupies much less land area than does Indian River Estates , bug more densely settled. Most of the residents are permanent Taken together, these developments contain more than 500 dwelling units (Section 2.1.2). Spanish La is a mobile home community east of US I and contains 1,387 lots Although most of the occupants are permanent residents, a significant number of dwelling units are owned or occupied by seasonal visitors. West of Spanish Lakes and US 1 is a mobile home project known as Riverfront. A small portion of this development extends into the area within five miles of St Lucie Unit
- 2. Like Spanish Lakes, it accommodates both permanent and transient residents.
2.1-22
S L2-ER-OL Along US 1, there are a number of individual dwelling units which are [N scattered between, adjacent to, or atop commercial establishments. (
) These residential units are used by both permanent residents and seasonal visitors.
ParallelingSIl7h6 a strip of individual houses on the shore of the Indian River Typically, these houses sit on lots which extend back from the shoreline approximately 1000 ft. Most of the people residing in this area are permanent residents. The area is primarily low density and includes the settlements of Ankona, Walton, and Eden. There are a few isolated houses in the largely undeveloped area between the Florida East Coast Railroad and the housing developments adjacent to US 1. These are also predominantly owned and occupied by permanent residents. The multiple housing units built on the mainland are primarily located alongside US 1. Hutchinson Island Residential Units In February 1978, most of the residential units on Hutchinson Island were concentrated in an area four to five miles from St Lucie Unit 2. The principal residential developments on the Island are described below. Extending into the Indian River is a large, densely populated, mo-7 bile home park knogy Nettles Island. It has 1588 lots (see Section 2.1.2.1.1) / T . Many of the lots are used by seasonal (j visitors. Across from Nettles Island on the ocean are three lodg-ings: Hutchinson Island Inn (21 room aton Resort Inn (122 rooms) and Oceana (126 condominiums) g_ Under construction are a housing development called Sand Dollar Villas and an expansion of Oceana. Sand Dollar Villas is 1.4 miles from the plant site and will contain 203 apartments and 32 town-houses on the ocean. It isexpectedtoattractseasong0pshors. Sand Dollar Villas is scheduled for completion in 1980 . The condominium development known as Oceana is currently being expanded to add another 160 condomig . This expansion is scheduled for com-pletion by December, 1979 b) Commercial and Services The commercial and service category includes areas used for the sale of products and services as well as institutions such as schools, medical centers and churches. A total of 28 acres within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2 fall within this category. Commercial Of the total area under consideration, only 22 acres consist of commercial and service est 4blishments. Most of these facilities, (x such as drycleaners and supermarkets, serve local residents. There ( ) are two shopping centers within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2, w/ 2.1-23
SL2-E R-OL located on US 1. Most other commercial establishments are related to the automotive industry (gas stations, used car lots, mechanic's shops) or tourists. Tnere are few commercial snd service establishments on Hutchinson Island. For the most part, they are specialized facilities such as beauty shops, and bait and tackle shops. As a result, people on the island have to cross over to the mainland for most supplies and ser-vices required. The principsl commercial centers serving the area are Fort Pierce and Stuart. A smaller commercial center is located in Jensen Beach. All three centers are located outside the five mile radius. Instituti_onal - Schools, Medical _ Facilities, Churches The classification of commercial and services, includes institutional land uses such as schools and hospitals. There are no schools located within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2. The nearest school, White City Elementary School, is about six miles WNW from St Lucie Unit 2. There is one medical facility, approximately five miles WSW from the plant site, called the Port St Lucie Medical Center. Several churches fall within the five mile radius and include the Kingdom Hall of the Jehovah's Witnesses and the New Testament Baptist Church. Roughly six acres fall within this category. c) Industrial The General Development Corporation (GDC) owns approximately 32 acres, used as a small industrial park located of f US 1, roughly four and a half miles WSW of the plant. One of the tenants is FP&L, one is a surgical and dental equipment firm and one is a plumbing supplier. The 18 acres leased by FP&L is classified as utility use. The remaining 14 acres, leased by other firms is classified as light industrial. d) Transportation, Communications, and Utilities This category encompasses major transportation routes, such as high-ways and railways, and communications and utilit es areas, "such as those involved in processg t eatment, and transportation of water, gas, oil, and electricity Within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2, 964 acres can be classified as transportation, communications, or utility use, representing about two percent of the total acreage. Nearly three quarters of this (704 acres) is given over to utility structures and f acilities. . All of these are owned and operated by FP&L. Most of this acreage supports St Lucie Units I and 2, and related structures. However, as mentioned above, FP&L leases an 18 acre storage and maintenance yard in GDC's Industrial Park. O 2.1-24
S L2-ER-OL Transportatiot. p The principal transportation corridors on the mainland are US 1, i SR 707, and the Florida East Coast Railroad. US 1 is a four lane k divided highway which runs' from north to south. SR 707 is a two lane road which parallels the Indian River. The Florida East Coast Railroad is a two track installation for. most of its length, except for a section between Ankona and a point approximately 1.3 miles south of Weatherbec Road, where it narrows to a single track. Secon-dary transportatian routes on the mainland include Walton Road (two lane), which runs due west from Walton; Weatherbee Road, (two lane) which runs due west from White City Station; and Route 712, also known as White City Road (two lane), which also runs east to west (Figure 2.1-2). The only major paved road on liutchinson Island is SR AI A. It has a width of two to three lanes and transects the entire length of the island. Communications With the exception of an underground telephone line which transects the western rim of the five mile area, there are no communications areas within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2. There are no major pipelines located within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2. O Utilities Roughly 704 acres fall within the utilities category. Of this total, approximately 300 acres on liutchinson Island are coc:mitted to FP&L's Units 1 and 2 and their related structures. Roughly 386 acres accommodate the transmission lines which extend from the plant site to the circumference of the area within five miles. For most of its length, the transmission line right of way is 660 feet in width; however, for a short distance iately adjacent to the Indian River, the width is 1,200 feet The remaining 18 acres support a utility storage area within the GDC Industrial Park. e) Urban or Built-Up Land Included in this category are miscellaneous urban land uses such as cemeteries, urban parks, undeveloped urban land, and recreational facilities. Approximately 235 acras (or less than 1/2 percent) have been classified as urban or built up land. Forty-seven of these acres comprise both a cemetery 'of f SR 707, and pockets of undeveloped urban land contingent to US 1. A total of 188 acres are given over to both public and private recreational facilities. The private f acilities consist of the golf course within the Spanish Lakes com-pound and the Tu Bahd Saddle Club. The public establishments are the southern end of the Savannahs Recreational Area (a park in the NW quadrant, owned bv the City of Fort Pierce and used for picnicking, boating and camping) and public picnicking and beach facilities on l 2.1-25 1 l I l
SL2-ER- OL 11utchinson Ialand. Recreational beach usage is discussed in Section 2.1.3.9.7. f) Agricultural Land Approximately 541 acres of agricultural land (or less than one per-cent) f all within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2. Most of this land supports citrus groves. InIg37 1977, 73,912 acres were in citrus production in St Lucie County . Several nurseries comprise part of the agri.:ultural acreage and produce ornamentals for local use. g) Forest Land and Wattsnds Apnroximately 16 percent of the area under consideration can be identified as pine flatwood forest /f resh water marsh. This land cover consists of a mixture of pine, sawgrass marsh, and palmetto. The soils underlying this area are nearly level, poorly draineg ) sandy, and belong to the Myakka-Immokalee-Basinger Association Much of the undeveloped land between the Florida East Coast Railroad and US 1 is marshy, and supports a scattering of pine trees. The ridge along SR 707 has drig ils and supports a denser forest canopy consisting mostly of pines The foresk8y hin five miles of St Lucie Unit 2 is not commercially logged The other principal vegetation community within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2 is che mangrove community located on Hutchinson Island. For i discussion of this community, see Section 2.2.1. h) Water Most of the area within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2 is covered with water, and accounts for more than two-thirds of the total area; most of this consists of the Atlantic Ocean. One-third is a section of the Indian River, and the remainder is mainland water bodies. The Indian River is a brackish tidal lagoon. Most of the water on the maininad is concentrated in a string of lakes running from north to south at the eastern edge of the Savannahs. The boundaries of these lakes vacillate with seasonal flooding and of ten merge with the surrounding marsh. The rest of the water is concentrated in small ma.n made ponds and canals located towards the western boundary of the five mile perimeter. i) Barren Land The classification system considers barren land as land which has a limited ability to support life. Beaches are an example. There are three types of barren land within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2. The first type is located at the site of the sand mining operation, just west of the Florida East Coast Railroad tracks and on either side of Weatherbee Road. Roughly 195 acres serve this ex-traction operation. O 2.1-26
, - .-~ . - --. . _ _ - - . ._ .. . . - . . - - --
SL2-ER-OL The second type of barren land is found along the Atlantic Coast of
~
n f Hutchinson Island in the fann of beaches. Almost 100 acres of * [ k[) f beaches occur within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2. The third type of barren land is found within the so-called transi-I' tional areas. "The Transitional Areas category is intended for those ag "diich are in transition from one land use activity to another . There are three transitional areas within five b miles of St Lucie Unit 2. Two of these are located north of l Weatherb'ee Road and appear to have once supported agricultural ; activity. The third is located near the southern boundary of the
'five mile circumference. It contains land which has been cleared anddraing r a commercial / residential development known as "Midport" t
+ 2.1.3.6 Future Land Uses Within Five Miles of St Lucie Unit 2 4 ~ To determine future land uses within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2, the St Lucie County Growth Management Plan (ThePlan)andothercriticalgag,ng l documents, such as The Plan for Hutchinson Island, were examined ' i In addition,- projects under construction or in the process of obtaining per-I' mits were considered, as well' as growth trends in St Lucie County, and local site suitability characteristics. Figures 2.1-17 and 2.1-18 present the pro-posed land uses. The Plan states, "After adopting a plan, local. governments and their agen-f cies may not issue building permit s, approve zoning changes or subdivision i\
'N req ue s t s , undertake public development project s or approve development actions that are inconsistent with the plan for the area. In addition, the adoption or amendment of land development regulations (e.g. , zoning, sub-division regulations) sh e consistent with the adopted comprehensive i plan or element thereof" i
Anticipated future land 1uses, by USGS land use categories, are discussed j1 below: Residential The' greatest increase in land use is expected to occur in residential , ~ development. Projected population ' increases suggest that- housing con-struction ' activity will be necessary to accommodate ' population erawth. , '(See Tables 2.1-1 and 2.1-5), f Most of the land area within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2 is undeveloped pane ; flatwood/ fresh water : marsh. It is ant icipated ' that with the projected l increase in population, much of thin land will be cleared and drained to ' accommodate new dwelling ' units. In the following discussion of future residential development , separate consideration-is given to 'the mainland and to Hutchinson Island.
. y-u
- k. pg )
j .: 2.1' 27 li '
- k y NM
_ _ i Je . _ _. . _ _ _ _ . . _, . -,_ ___ _ ... _ _,-.,c,--.
SL2- ER- OL a) Future Residential Development on the Mainland According to The Plan, land abutting the eastern right of way of US 1, south of General Development Corporation's (GDC) Industrial Park, will be set aside for medium and low density residential use . It a s expected that those areas designated for residential develop-ment by The Plan will support dwelling uni t s in the fut ure . In addttton, residential development is anticipated in other areas. Most of the undeveloped land extending from US 1 to the west ern border of the Flortda East Coast Railroad right of way is designated in The Plan for Agricultural Use. In pract ice , however , portions of this "agricult ural" land have already been commi t t ed for residential use. Colf Vs11 age, fo r example , as an approved proj ect of 740 mobile home un t t s which wil Lakes and Riverf ront { g const ructed by the managers of Spanish It will be located south of GDC's Industrial Park and east of US 1. Another example of the pressure being placed on "agricult ural" land for residential use is the project known as Midport. Madport is located north and south of Walton Road and east of US 1 'see Section 2.1.2.1.5). It will int roduce 2,201 gling units which will be both single and mult tple family units . Much of the Madport development will fall within the five mile area, although it is di f ficult to speci fy exact ly how many residential units wi ll be but it within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2. The Midport Pg t has been a ssued a DRI (Development of Regional Impact) permit The locations of both Golf Vt11 age and Midport are shown on Figure 2.1-7. b) Future Residential Development on Hutchinson Island That portion of Hutchinson Island whtch falls within the five mile radius ts expected to experience considerable development. Specif-acally, the 1973 estimated population of 1,928 is expected to grow to 2,678 by the year 2030 (see Table 2.1-1). These projections reflect the fact that most of the Atlantic Coast of Hutchinson Island is undeveloped, and the demand for beach front property is growing. In recognition of this, The Plan has designated most of the land area within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2 as low or medium density residential. However, there are some considerations which may affect the rate at which demand for Hutchinson Island property will increase. For example, there are no fresh water wells on Hutchinson Island; therefore, all potable water has to be piped in from the mainland. In the past, the city of Fort Pierce has supplied potable water to the Island. However, at this time, the distribution system supply-ing the island has reached its capacity. Untti this( g tem is expanded, development on the i sland will be hampered . 2.1-28
, - - - . .- .._ .=. . . . . . . . _ _ _ - . _ - . _ -
k SL2-E R-OL In general, it is anticipated that resident ial development wi thi n five miles of St Lucie Unit 2 will consist of a mixture of single
-l f amily and mult iple family unit s. It is also expected that these units will house both permanent residents and seasonal visitors.
Commercial and Services
't 4
a) Commercial Cammercial establishments on the mainland are concentrated along US 1. It is expected that there will be an increase in commercial land uses in conj unct ion with the predicted increase in residential land use, and that this increase will occur adjacent to US 1 on the mainland. As is currently the case, it is anticipated that new l commercial establishments will serve both local residents and high-way travellers. Two car dealers, Buick and Cadillac, are planning to move (jgjo the area, and other automotive related services may follow
; On Hutchinson Island, it i s expected that the new residential pro-t jects will house commercial establishments such as beauty shops, sport s equi pment outlets, etc. In addition, other commercial es- , ! tabitshments may be const ruct ed along SR A1A. In fact, Th,e Plan has zoned pockets of land on Hutchinson Island for such commercial dcvelopment.
I b) Institutions r
;I "i At the present time, there are to plans to construct any schools or medical facilities within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2. How-ever, pressure has been brought by local citizens on the General
. Development Corporation and other developers to provide school facilities for children residing within developments. For example ,
Port St Lucie, a development run by the CDC, hi schools be built to accommodate their children's needs )43sked . GDC has pro- that
, vided land for three schools within the Midport development. If i these schools are built , a middle school-high school will be located about 3.5 miles south-west of St Lucie Unit 2, and an elementary school will be located about 4.5 miles south southwest of the plant.
Industrial Currently there is very little industrial land use (roughly 14 acresi within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2. It is not expected that a signifi-cant amount of new industrial activity will be initiated in this area. l According to The Plan, only the arca currently abutting the CDC Industrial
- Park' (roughly 180 acres) will be zoned light industrial. According to local planning officials, there a re- ,
4 locate within the ISO zoned acres {g79o new firms currently seeking to , m V' 2.1-29 l n
%- r-, c- F w. . --n,yebw6.r- --.ww_ r- y q p yw y- y p, pyy .-,_e-,,. c , g g y ,. ..-m s,, y
S L2-ER-OL Transportation, Communication, and Utilities Within the transportation, communications and utilities classification, limited growth is anticipated. The Plan calls for the widening of roads currently intersecting with limited access highways. The Plan indicates that these roads could be expanded to four lanes. Within the five mile area, this objective would af fect White City Road and SR AI A. In June 1978, a traf fic study of Hutchinson Ia land was published for the St Lucie Board of County Commissioners. The report concluded that the three existing connecting structures - South Bridge, Jensen Causeway, and Stuart Bridge - were inadequate to handle existing traf fic volumes. The report recommended that a fourth bridge be constructed at SR 712 (White City Road) which wouggpnk US 1, the Florida Turnpike, and Interstate 95 co Hutchinson Island . However, it is uncertain if, when, or where another river crossing will be constructed becauseg waters of the Indian River in this area are part of an aTiatic preserve No expansion of the communications category is anticipated at this time. Future utility land use associated with the construction of St Lucie Unit 2 is discussed in Section 2.1.3.3. Other Urban and Built-Up Land The other urban and built-up land category encompasses miscellaneous urban land uses, such as urban parks, and recreational facilities. A major land use change which will occur is the establishment of the State Savannahs Preserve. Using state funds, 3372 acres of land located at the western edge of the Florida East Coast Railroad right of way gparal-1eling SR 707 have been purchased for a conservation preserve . It is intended that the property which is eventually included in this preserve will be restricted to public access, and will serve primarily as a wildlife refuge. According to the Recreation and Parks Division of the Natural Resources Department, most of the landwhichwg)beincluded in the State Savannahs Preserve has been purchased to date With the increase in residential and commercial land uses, it is expected that some growth in private recreational f acilities will also occur. New residential complexes will probably include such recreational amenities as tennis courts, swimming pools, and possibly golf courses. Other urban land uses will probably increase as the area becomes more developed. For example, it can be expected that urban land, such as that given over to urban parks and water control structures, may be expanded in the future. At this time, there are no specific plans for such development; therefore, it is not possible to predict where suen development will occur. However, it is likely that most of this type of development will occur along US I and other major roads, such as White City Road and Walton Road. Agricultural Land There are currently roughly 450 acres of actively used agricultural land within five miles of St Lucie Unit 2. It is unlikely that there will be an expansion of agricultural activities in the future. According to the 2.1-30
SL2-E R-OL m local County Agricultural Agent, the expansion of agricultural activities [ ) isIgytooccurtothewestofUSIandnotwithinthefivemile Q area The soils found within five miles of the plant, belonging to the Myakka-Immokolee-Basinger Association, have low potential for citrus production, gh is the primary agricultural activity within five miles of the plant According to The' Plan, " Prime agricultural, especially citrus, Land should be preserved for cow inued production and benefit to the County economy". In spite of this stated concern for the preservation of agricultural land, it is expected that pressure to develop this land for residential or commercial use will be intense. Typically, the agricultural land within five miles of the plant which has been drained, is located near existing transportation corridors, and is easy u develop. Therefore, it is prime developable land in an area which will experience considerable development pressure in the future. Other Land Uses Little change is expected to occur in the future in the following USGS land cover / land use categories: forest land, water, and barren land. Some of the pine forest scattered on the mainland will probably be cleared to accommodate new residential and commercial development. However, it is not anticipated that a significant percentage of the total forested acre-age will be affected. ,n,
) At this time, no major changes are projected within the barren land cate-d gory. The transitional areas will eventually support one or more other land uses. Specifically, the transitional land north of Weatherbee Road, which was once agricultural, will probably evolve back into forested land.
2.1.3.7 Agriculture and Fisheries Within 50 Miles of St Lucie Unit 2 2.1.3.7.1 Introduction This section consists principally of tabulated data concerning agricul-tural, livestock, and commercial and recreational marine landings within 50 miles of the St Lucie Unit 2 nuclear generating facility. Data have been compiled on a county basis from field surveys and from in-formation provided by federal, state, and county agencies, and reporting services. All or parts of ten counties are included within the 50 mile radius. These are St Lucie, Indian River, Brevard, Martin, Palm Beach, Okeechobee, Osceola, Glades, Highlands and Hendry counties. All of Indian River, St Lucie and Martin counties f all within the fif ty mile radius. Approximately 75 percent of Okeechobee County, 50 percent of Palm Beach County and 20 percent of Brevard County fall within the 50 mile radius. Less than five percent of Osceola, Highlands, Glades and Hendry Counties are contained within the 50 mile area. Agricultural data for those counties whose land area is not completely
/ i within the 50 mile area was allocated to the 50 mile area in the following l
_/ manner: ) 2.1-31 l l
SL2-E R- OL The area of the entire county was analyzed using 1972 US Geological Survey Haps (Scale 1:250,000) to exclude those areas where agriculture or live-stock farming could not occur. This would include water, wetland, urban recreation or " forested areas". The remaining "open" lands have been analyzed to determine what percentage falls within the 50 mile radius. This percentage is then applied to the county data to calculate what pro-portion of agricultural production falls within 50 miles of the site. For fisheries production, data on marine landings for each county are used since data on fishing locations are not available. 2.1.3.7.2 Beef Production Beef cattle production is one of the primary agricultural activities in southeastern Florida counties, with a production of approximately 137,000 head within the 50 mile study area. Table 2.1-13showsOkeechobee,Martjn and St Lucie coung as the major beef producers, producing 10,020 x 10 kilograms in 1977 Presently there are 77 beef cattle ranches in St Lucie County, occupying 200,000 acres or 57 percent of the county area. Of this, 80,000 are im-proved pasture and 45,000 acres are highly improved pasture. By 1980-85, it is expected that beef cattle production will increase in the county along an intensification in the cultivation of improved grasses and clover The grazing season for beef cattle in the study area begins in February, peaks in April, May and June, and ends by mid-November. During this period, bahia and pangola grasses are the princg pasture feeds; hay grasses rank second, and bermuda grasses, third . In the cooler months from mid-November through January, small grains, hay and grass silage are necessary feed supplements, thoughinsomearef553h****""~ bility of white clover allows year around pasture feeding 2.1.3.7.3 Milk Production 6 Milk production wgn the study area totaled approximately 151 x 10 kilograms in 1977 . Okeechobec gonnty accounted fo{9 gout two-thirds of this total, producing 102.5 x 10 kilograms in 1977 . Within the Okeechobee area, corn and grass silage are the principal dairy cow fe ed s , although State figures show that commercial mixed feeds consisting of corn, cotton seed meal, wheat br(963 h orts and alf alfa pellets, are fed on the average at 16 pounds per day Table 2.1-14 identifies dairy herds and milk production within 50 miles of the proposed facility. Table 2.1-15 shows that approximately 97.5 percent of the annual milk produced within the 0-50 mile radius study area is sold to plants for manufacturing dairy products. Of the remaining, approxi-mately 0.6 percent is used raw on the farm for mi ream and butter; 0.3 is fed to calves; and 1.5 percent is sold locally 9 2.1-32
i ! S L2-ER- OL 2.1.3.7.4 Egg Production t Egg production, from poultry farms w{ggjn the study area, accounts for less thanninepercentofthesgatetotal Within thg study area there are approximately 109 x 10 layers producing 26 x 10 eggs. Indian River, Martin and St Lucie counties are the largest egg producers in the 50 mile area. Each of these counties has 25,000 layers producing on the average of 16,250 eggs per day. Table 2.1-16 is a breakdown by county of the egg production within 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2. J I 1 i .i } U h l i s { 1 i 2.1-33 i
S L2-E R- OL 2.1.3.7.5 Commercial Vegetables, Fruit and Sugarcane Crops Commercial vegetables and citrus fruits are the main agricultural product s in the area. Table 2.1-17 provides vegetable harvest statistics for the 0-50 mile radius area. Tomatoes and watermelon are the principal produce within 50 miles of the site, accounting for agl harvests of approxi-mately 3,000 acres and 650 acres respectively . Table 2.1-18 pro-vides yield statistics for those count ies in the southeastern part of the state; Table 2.1-19 shows st ate-wide yield stati st ics. Citrus crops are grown throughout the study area. Table 2.1-20 li st s, by county, the amount s and types of cit rus crops grown in the 50 mile area. St Lucie and Indian River Counties are the largest produc ers in the area. In 1977,8St Lucie County produced 3.7 x 10 kilograms of oranges and 3.3 x 10 kilograms of grape frui t . In the same year Indian River pro-8 duced g x 10 kilograms of oranges and 3.3 x 10 kilograms of grape-fruit These two counties accounted for 73 percent of the totakl00) c i t rus produced in the study area and 13 percent of the state total . Florida statistics show a net decline in Florida citrus acreage since 1970. In 1977, 21,538 acres we e removed from production. St Lucie and Martin Count ies we re major contr ibutors to the decline, while Hendry and Palm Beach Counties were the only two counties within the study area (and two of threggnties within the State) showing signi ficant gains in citrus acreage . Sugarcane is produced in the Everglades in the south and sout hwest po rt i on of the study area in Glades, Martin, and Palm Beach counties. Table 2.1-21 list g arcane production in Florida was produced in the 50 mile study area . 2.1.3.7.6 Commercial Fish and Shellfish Landings Comme rc i al landing stat i st ics of fi sh and shellfi sh for the coastal coun-ties within 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2 (Brevard, Indian River, St Lucie, Martin, and Palm Beach counties) are pr esented by total landing in 1976 and principal species i n Table 2.1-22. Wh g lorida east coast landings in 1976 dropped by four percent from 1975 , total fi sh and shellfi sh landings for the coastal counties within 50 miles of the site showed a marked i nc rea se . Total land i ng s for these count ies were up approximately 18.6 percent from 1975 (See Table 2.1-23). The increage was the result of a 33.6 percent igerease in fish landings from 7.1 x 10' kilograms in 1975 to 9.5 x 10 kilograms in 1976. fotal shellfish landings howeveg, declined by 36.9 percent from 1.9 x 10 kilograms in 1975 to 1.2 x 10 in 1976. Brevard was the only county which experienced a decline in both fish and shellfish landings, wi th a 3.9 percent decrease in fi sh land-ings and 26.1 percent decrease in shellfish landings between 1975 and 1976. Table 2.1-23 compares 1976 to 1975 total fish and shellfish marine landings for Brevard, Indian River, St Lucie, Martin and Palm Beach counties. Ap-proximately 90 percent of the fish caught i s consumed by hgg (See Table 2.1-24). Twenty percent of fish catch is consumed locally . Princi-pal f a nfish species taken were black mullet , menhaden, Spanish mackeral, l b lue fi s h , pompano and red snapper. The major commercial ports within this 2.1-34
SL2-ER-OL i area include Fort Pierce in St Lucie County, Port Saler to in Martin County,
\j and Riveria Beach and Jupiter in Palm Beach County.
According to the National Marine Fisheries Service, future ennmercial fish and shellfish landings are difficult to project, since catch is dependent largely on weather condi t ions, and the statistics are influenced by report-sng estimates. Nonetheless, the trend in Florida marine landings over the past sggi years has been a decline of from two to four percent an-nually . 2.1.3.7.7 Recreational Fishing 4 Principal sport fishing areas within 50 miles of the plant site include the waters off Hutchinson Island, where pompano, blue fi sh, false albacore, ki ngfish, sailfi sh, dolphins, ambe rj ack , flounder, mackerel and barracuda are common, and the St LucieInlekl0 m ae y an , tarpon, red fi sh , spot ted sea trout and bottom fish Shore fishing occurs along the beaches of Hutchinson Island in the vicinity of St Lucie Unit 2. Access along the beach is not restricted, so it is possible for someone to fish directly on shore front of the discharge pipe-line. However, information is not available concerning the quality of the f ashing in the area. The variety of species of fish which may be caught wh h i ciude kingfish, pompano, palometa and spot fin mojarra((649 . ore fishing in-
~
2.1.3.7.8 Hunting Statistics Hunting statistics have been tabulated for the J W Corbett Wildlife Manage-ment Area and are shown in Table 2.1-25. The J W Corbett Wildlife Manage-ment Area occupies approximately 500 square miles of the western portion of the study area, mainly in Palm Beach County. Hunting season last s from September 10 through March 26; the second week ' of January through the end of February eacggr is small game season and the month of March is spring turkey season . Quail, snipe and duck are the most common fow1gn while deer, hogs and squirrels are the prin-ca pal wild animals taken The game biologist for the J W Corbett Wildli fe Management g assumes that 100 percent of the wild game harvest as consumed locally 2.1.3.8 Surface Water Use 2.1.3.8.1 Consumptive Use This is no potable water use ny water resource which would be affected by St Lucie Unit 2 discharge Since drinking water supplies are l b rough t to Hutchinson Island by pipeline and since groundwater flows are from west to east tog the ocean, no contamination of drinking water is considered plausible . Therefore, no analyses of consumptive surface water use were performed. [v} 2.1-35
SL2-E R- OL 2.1.3.8.2 Recreational Water Use Since the discharge of St Lucie Unit 2 is into the Atlantic Ocean, only those recreational uses associated with saltwater activities have been con-s id e red . These include beach activities, fishing , boat ing , and surfing , as defined in Outdoor Recreation in Florida 1976,)a publication of the State of Florida Department of Na t ural Resources'"" It i s di f ficult to estimate accurately the number and location of people involved in these activities because of the lack of information on the places at which people take part in recreaty g pursuits. However, by ut ilizi ng the results of state user surveys , a general order of magnitude estimate of saltwater recreational activities with 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2 can be generated. Statewide 1975 annual per capita par-treipation rates for each saltwater related activity were modified to re-flect average daily recreational use (see Table 2.1-26 for methodology). These average daily per capita participation rates were appliad to the projected population (resident and tourist) within 10 miles of St Lucie Unit 2 (see Section 2.1.2) to estimate the average daily number of recrea-tional saltwater users. The results of these calculations are shown in Table 2.1-26. These projections are based on the following assumptions: a) Recreational users will pursue their activities only within 50 mtles of St Lucie Unit 2. Residents and tourists in this area will sometimes journey out of the area for saltwater recreation, and, in t urn, people frcra outside this area will enter it fer these pur-poses. However, it is felt that these movements largely counter-balance one another, and because of the lack of more speci fic data, the numbers shown in Table 2.1-26 reflect a reasonable estimate of recreational saltwater use, b) Recreational participation rates will not change over time. As stated in Outdoor Recreation In Florida 197h)such factors "have not been accurately estimated and quantified"" . Because of this assumption, recreational use varies directly with the projected population. c) Participation rates for only Region X (southeast Florida from St Lucie to Dade Counties) would apply in the study area. Indian River and Brevard Counties fall in a different Region, where parti-cipation rates are considerably lower. However, it was felt that using the Region X rates would result in a more conservative esti-mate, taking into account possible future increases in participa-tion. A 1978 average daily total of 110,431 recreational saltwater users is est i-mated within 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2. This is expected to increase to 246,908 by 2030. Each category of saltwater recreational activity is di scussed in the following paragraphs: O 2.1-36
SL2-ER-OL Beach Activities
\ a V Beach activities include saltwater swimming, sunbathing, relaxing, beach-combing and shell collecting. These activities account for 60 percent of all saltwater related recreational use. The density of these users will vary according to whether or not access is available to the beach, and whether or not the beach is public (i .e., has li fggds) . For example ,
according to a survey of beaches in Martin County performed in 1978, guarded beaches had an average density of 0.9 persons per lineal foot , while unprotected areas had as few as 0.0036 people per linear foot. In a survey of gges within two miles of St Lucie Unit 2 conducted by FP&L in July, 1975 , the average density was 0.0122 people per lineal foot on the July 4th weekend. On other weekends this density was as low as 0.0025 people per lineal foot. The beaches near St Lucie Unit 2 have relatively few access points. The di fferences in user density along the coast wi thin 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2canbeshowngenerallybymappgg*g0 t *# ** "" "~ cess points. This is done in Figure 2.1-19 The public beaches closest to the St Lucie Unit 2 discharge are on Hutchinson Inland about four miles NNW of the plant. Average daily usage at tg) beaches was 656 persons between October 1, 1977 and September 30, 1978 . In general, the public beaches tend to be clustered near bridges over the Indian River. Saltwater Fishing O Saltwater fishing activities account for 18.4 percent of recreational water (j' users within 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2. These activities can include surf casting , crabbing, and deep sea fishing. No information on di stribu-tion of these users is available. Boating Boating includes both power boating and sailing. Power boating is a con-siderably more popular activity than sailing, occupying 17.9 percent of the recreational saltwater users, as opposed to only 1.4 percent for sailing. Boating activity takes place in conjunction with marinas and boat ramps, and the greatest density of this activity probably take place in the vicin-ity of these facilities. Marinas within 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2 are shown in Figure 2.1-19. Most of these facilities are located near the populated areas and the Indian River inlets. The nearest public marina to St Lug g nit 2 is approximately six miles south of the St Lucie plant . It can also be expected that extensive pleasure boating takes place in most other areas of the Indian River as well as the nearby areas of the Atlantic Ocean. Surfing Surfing is a relatively unimportant activity in this area, with only 1.8 percent of the recreational saltwater users involved in this pursuit . b U 2.1-37
1 SL2-E R- OL l 2.1.3.9 Groundwater Use Field permeablit ty test s at the plant site have indicated a seepage or flow of about 15,000 feet per year in the top 30 feet of the sand deposit s. Taking the highest permeabili ty coef ficient obtained and a hydraulic gra-t dient of 100 percent , any di scharge int rod uc ed into the ground at the plant site would reach the Indian River in about a day. The di scharge would then be greatly diluted. Because of the width of Indian River and presence of a continuous flow of groundwater toward the coastline, there is no possi-br it ty of subsurface flow fran the site to the mainland. This preclud g ) any intrusion of plant releases into the mainland groundwater supplies . Inaddg , no successful fresh water wells have been found on Hutchinson Island For these reasons, no analysis of groundwater users has been made. O l t i l 1 l l O 2.1-38
4 SL2-ER-OL i (~ SECTION 2.1: REFERENCES '\% l
- 1. -Smith, Stanley K. " Projections of Florida Population by County, l
' 1980-2020". Bureau of Economic and Business Research, Division of I Population Studies, Bulletin 44, July 1978 I l
- 2. City of Port St Lucia City Planning Department, Comprehensive Plan-
- ning Program, " Population Estimates and Pr'ojections", February 1978
- 3. Aerial Photograph Indices, Florida Department of Transportation, 1969, 1974
- - 4. Aerial Photographs by Aerial Cartographics Inc, Orlando, Florida,
! October 21 and November 2, 1978
- 5. Sales Office, Spanish Lakes, Port St Lucie, Florida, Letter Dated January 5, 1979
- 6. " Savannahs State Preserve", Base Map Prepared by Department of Natural Resources, Division of Recreation and Parks, October 12, 1978
- 7. Representative, Homer Colson Real Estate, Inc, Jensen Beach, Florida, Letter Dated December 5, 1978
)/
- 8. 1960 Population Census and Population Estimates 1970-1985, for Florida and Florida Counties, Issued June 9, 1978 - Florida Depart-ment of Administration, Tallahassee, Florida
- 9. " Master Development Plan, Midport - City of Port St Lucie, Florida,"
! (Map H4) Prepared by General Development Corp, Environmental Plann-ing Department, April 1978 1 10. Rules of the Department of Administration, Administration Commis-sion, Chapter 22F-2, Land Planning, Part II, Developments Presumed i to be of Regional Impact. Undated.
I
- 11. DRI Coordinator, Treasure Coast Reg. Planning Council, Stuart, Florida, Letter Dated January 29, 1979, and Personal Communication, May 22, 1979.
- 12. Sales Offices, Sand Dollar Villas, Personal Communication, January I
, 15, 1979. l
- 13. The Plan for Hutchinson Island - Prepared for the St Lucie Board of j County Commissioners bv RMBR Planning / Design Group, Tampa, Florida, 4- August 1973 n'
- 14. Tipton Associates, Inc., Hutchinson Island Traffic Study, Prepared for Board of County Commissioners, St Lucie County, Florida, June 1978 v
2.1-39 i-
-..-_.-c.- - .
SL2-ER-OL SECTION 2.1: REFERENCES (Cont'd)
- 15. US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, Florida; 1970 Census of Population, Number of Inhabitants. Issued July 1971
- 16. " Major Developments Activity (Residental Only)", - Map Prepared by Area Planning Board of Palm Beach County, March 1976, Revised April 1977,
- 17. US Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, " Projections of the Population of the US, 1977-2050". Current Population Reports (P-25), No. 704, July 1977. (Series II Projections Used)
- 18. P-M eet Manager - PGA Complex, Florida Realty Building Company, Letter Dated December 11, 1978
- 19. Regional Planner, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, Stuart, Florida, Meeting on October 13, 1978
- 20. Planner, Martin County, Planning and Zoning Department, Meeting on October 12, 1978
- 21. St Lucie County Area Coordinator, Fort Pierce, Florida, Personal Communication, September 18, 1978
- 22. Treasure Coast Regional Profile - 1977, Prepared by Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, Stuart, Florida, September 1977
- 23. Director of Building and Zoning Department, Okeechobee County, Okeechobee, Florida, Personal Communication, September 1978
- 24. Planner Responsible for Existing Land Use Map of Glades County, L G Smith & Associates, Tcmpa, Florida, Personal Communic'ation, September 13, 1978
- 25. Land Use Policy Plan Summary, Southwest Florida Regional Planning Council, Fort Myers, Florida, 1978. (Includes Glades County)
- 26. "Osceola County Development Areas Map", Osceola County, Board of County Commissioners. (No Date)
- 27. " Average Daily Beach Usage, Martin County, Florida", prepared by the Martin County Planning and Zoning Department, Stuart, Florida, November, 1978
- 28. Supervisor of Elections, Glades County More 11aven, Florida -
Letter Dated December 8, 1978
- 29. Planner, Osceola County Board of County Commissioners, Kissimmee, Florida, Letter Dated November 3, 1978
- 30. Planner Responsible for Existing Land Use Map of Highlands County; Candeub, Fleissig & Associates, Newark, New Jersey, Letter Dated Noveber 3, 1978 2,1-40
SL2-ER-OL g ~s ( } SECTION 2.1: REFERENCES (Cont'd)
</
- 31. " Existing Land Use, Highlands County, Florida", Prepared for High-lands County Zoning Department by Candenb, Fleissig & Associates, Planning Consultants, 1978
- 32. " General Development Plan, Highlands County, Florida - 1972", Pre-pared for the Highlands County Planning Commission by Candeub, Fleissig & Associates. Supplement to the Sebring News and Avon Park Sun, August 31, 1972
- 33. Central Florida Regional Planning Council, Existing and Projected _
Land Use, Central Florida Region, 1976-1955, June 1978
- 34. " Population Studies", in Waste Water Engineering, Metcalf & Eddy, Inc, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1972, pp 16-25
- 35. Outdoor Recreation in Florida, 1976 - State of Florida, Department of Natural Resources, Division of Recreation and Parks, Tallahassee, Florida, May 1976
- 36. Superintendent of Recreation, St Lucie County, Ft Pierce, Florida, Letter Dated December 5, 1978
- 37. Director of Lifeguards for Martin County, Hobe Sound, Florida,
[mj Personal Communication, November 16, 1978 'wl
- 38. Supervisor of Special Facilities, St Lucie County Civic Center, Fort Pierce, Florida, Letter Dated November 17, 1978
- 39. Chairman, Art-on-the-Green Festival, Fort Pierce, Florida, Letter Dated November 17, 1978
- 40. Executive Director, Jensen Beach Chamber of Commerce, Jensen Beach, Florida, Letter Dated November 17, 1978
- 41. Director, Stuart/ Martin County Chamber of Commerce, Stuart, Florida, Letter Dated November 22, 1978
- 42. Student Activities Office, Florida Institute of Technology - Jensen Beach Campus, Jensen Beach, Florida, Personal Communication, November 27, 1978
- 43. Finance Office, Indian River County Schools, Vero Beach, Florida, Letter Dated November 27, 1978
- 44. Of fice of the Vice President, Indian River Community College, Fort i Pierce Campus, Fort Pierce, Florida, Letter Dated November 28, 1978 l
- 45. Personnel Department, Piper Aircraft Corporation, Vero Beach, Florida, Letter Dated December 4, 1978 f
( ,
- 46. Fair Secretary, St Lucie County Fair, Fort Pierce, Florida, Letter Dated November 20, 1978 2.1-41 l
SL2-ER-OL SECTION 2.1: REFERENCES (Cont'd)
- 47. Fair Secretary, Martin County Fair Association, Stuart, Florida, Letter Dated November 20, 1978
- 48. Personnel Department, Gruman Aerospace , Stuart , Florida, Letter Dated November 30, 1978
- 49. Maintenance Foreman, St Lucie County School Board, Fort Pierce, Florida, Letter Dated November 28, 1978
- 50. Executive Secretary, Sandy Shoes Festival (1979), Fort Pierce, Florida, Letter Dated November 27, 1978
- 51. South Florida Fair, Palm Beach County Fairgrounds, West Palm Beach, Florida, Personal Communications, November 21 and 27, 1978
- 52. Employment Office, Pratt & Whitney Aircraft, Government Products Division, Palm Beach County, Florida, Personal Communication, November 30, 1978
- 53. Average Daily Traffic Counts, Bureau of Planning, State of Florida, Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, Florida, February 20, 1978
- 54. State of Florida, Department of Transportation, Division of Trans-portation Planning, Florida Interstate System Bi-Monthly Progress Report, Tallahassee, Florida, September 1978
- 55. State of Florida, Department of Transportation, Map of " Alternate Corridor Locations". (Undated)
- 56. U S Army Corps of Engineers, Waterborne Commerce, Jacksonville Dis-trict, pp 135, 137, 145, 197
- 57. Lockmaster, St Lucie Canal - Okeechobee Waterway, Personal Communi-cation, September 14 and October 10, 1978
- 58. Route Analyst - Eastern Routes Marketing Research, Amtrak, Washing-ton, D.C., Letter Dated November 30, 1978
- 59. Manager - Eastern Routes - Marketing Research, Amtrak, Washington D.C., Personal Communication, May 22, 1979
- 60. Airport Manager, St Lucie County Airport, Fort Pierce, Florida, Personal Communication, December 6, 1978
- 61. Director of Public Relations, Allegheny Airlines - Allegheny Com-muter Service, Washington National Airport, Washington, D.C., Letter Dated December 6, 1976
- 62. Allegheny Commuter Passenger Traffic Statistics, 1970 - 1977, Allegheny Airlines, Washington National Airport, Washington, D.C.
2.1-42
SL2-ER-OL SECTION 2.1: REFERENCES (Cont'd) [AV)
- 63. Director of Planning, Palm Beach International Airport, West Palm Beach, Florida, Letter Dated November 30, 1978
- 64. St Lucie County Development Coordinator - Map of Planning Units, Prepared for Population Count, 1978
- 65. U S Dept. of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. 1970 Census, Characteristics of the Population, U S Summary. Issued June, 1973
- 66. Letter L-76-416, to D L Ziemann, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #2 Division of Operating Reactors, USNRC, Washington D C, from R E Uhrig, Vice President of Florida Power and Light, December 7, 1976.
- 67. Letter FLO-1376, to L Tsakiris, Project Manager, Ebasco Services from C S Kent, Project Manager, Florida Power and Light, March 14, 1979.
- 68. Florida Power & Light Company, St Lucie Unit 1, Docket No 50-335, Annual Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report, 1978.
- 69. United States Geological Survey, "A Land Use and Land Cover Classi-fication System for Use with Remote Sensor Data." Geological Survey Profe:sional Paper 964. United States Government Printing Office,
[]) \
70.
Washington, 1976. U S Department of the Interior, Geological Survey, U S Department of Commerce, National Ocean Survey, Coastal Mapping Handbook, U S Government Printing Office, Washington, 1978.
- 71. Florida Department of Administration, Bureau of Comprehensive Plann-ing Generalized Soils Map of St Lucie County, Florida.
- 72. Davis, J, "The Natural Features of Southern Florida", Geological Survey Bulletin No. 25, Florida Department of Conservation, 1943.
- 73. Representative, Allen Real Estate, Port St Lucie, Personal Communi-cation, February 27, 1979.
- 74. Representative, Hoyt C Murphy Realty, Inc, Port St Lucie, Personal Communication, February 27, 1979.
- 75. Sales Office, Spanish Lakes, Port St Lucie, Florida, letter dated January 5, 1979.
- 76. Aerial Photographs by Aerial Cartographics Inc, Orlando, Florida, October 21 and November 2, 1978.
- 77. Representative, Hutchinson Island Inn, Hutchinson Island, Personal Communication, April 10, 1979.
(p) 78. Representative, Sheraton Resort Inn, Hutchinson Island, Personal n/ Communication, April 10, 1979. 2.1-43
SL2-ER-OL SECTION 2.1: REFERENCES (Cont'd)
- 79. Representative, Oceana, Hutchinson Island, Personal Communication, April 10, 1979.
- 80. Sales Office, Sand Dollar Villas, Personal Communication, January 15, 1979.
- 81. Florida Power and Light Company, St Lucie Plant Unit No. 2 Environmental Report - Construction Permit, Vol 1,1973.
- 82. Field Inspection, March 1979.
- 83. County Agricultural Agent, Personal Communication, April 4, 1979.
- 84. St Lucie County Growth Management Plan - Prepared for the St Lucie County Board of County Commissioners by the Planning / Design Group, Florida, 1978.
- 85. The Plan for Hutchinson Island - Prepared for the St Lucie Board of County Commissioners by RMBR Planning / Design Group, Tampa, Florida, August 1973.
- 86. The Savannas Plan - Prepared for the St Lucie Board of County Commissioners by the Planning / Design Group, Tampa, Florida, undated.
- 87. Representative, Treasttre Coast Regional Planning Council, Stuart, Florida, Personal Communication, April 10, 1979.
- 88. Superintendent, Water Distribution and Wastewater Collection, Fort Pierce, Florida, Personal Communication, March 12, 1979.
- 89. Tipton Associates, Inc. Hutchinson Island Traffic Study, Prepared for the Board of County Commissioners, St Lucie County, Florida, June, 1978.
- 90. " Savannas State Preserve", Base Map Prepared by the Department of Natural Resources, Division of Recreation and Parks, October 12, 1978.
- 91. Representative, Department of Natural Resources, Recreation and Parks Division, April 10, 1979.
- 92. County Agricultural Agent, St Lucie County, Personal Communication, March 12, 1979.
- 93. 1977 Florida and USDA of ficial estimates from, " Florida Agricultural Statistics - Livestock Summary, 1977", Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, Orlando, Florida.
- 94. South Florida Water Management District, Water Use Plan, Volume II, Appendix A, 1977.
2.1-44
SL2-ER-OL <t SECTION 2.1: REFERENCES (Cont'd) kj
- 95. University of Florida, Beef Cattle in Florida, Bulletin 28, "
provided by T Bordelon of Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Ser-vice in a personal communication to G Jandegian, Envirosphere Company, March 1979.
- 96. Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, " Florida Agricultural
! Statistics - Dairy Summary,1977", Orlando Florida.
- 97. Florida Crop and ' Livestock Reporting Service, " Poultry Summary 1977 - Agricultural Statistics," Orlando, Florida.
- 98. Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, " Vegetable Summary 1977 - Florida Agricultural Statistics," Orlando, Florida.
- 99. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, " Commercial Citrus Tree Inventory - Preliminary Report" Orlando, Florida, August i 25, 1978.
i 100. Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, " Field Crops Summary j 1977 - Florida Agricultural Statistics," Orlando, Florida, j 101. Florida Department of Natural Resources, Division of Marine Re-l sources, Summary of Florida Commercial Marine Landings, Tallahassee, f' 's Florid a , 1976. !k + 102. J E Snell, Supervisory Fishery Reporting Specialist, National Marine Fisheries Service, Miami, Florida, Personal Communication, January 1979. 103. Stuart/ Martin Co. Chamber of Commerce, Stuart Resort and Business Guide, 1978. 104. Applied Biology Inc, St Lucie Plant Annual Non-Radiological Moni- - toring Report, Vol II, 1978. 105. B Lusander, J W Corbett Wild Life Management District, Personal communication, January 1979. 166 Outdoor Recreation'in Florida 1976, State of Florida Department of 4 Natural Resources, Division of Recreation and Parks, Tallahassee, Florida, May 1976. 107. Martin County Planning and Zoning Department, "1978 Survey of Aver-
- age Beach Usage," Letter dated November 22, 1978.
108. Florida Power & Light Company, St Lucie Plant Unit No. 2-Environmental Report - Construction Permit, Amendment 8, p 10.7-40, June 4, 1976. 109. Regional Profile, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, Stuart, , /'~'\ t Florida, September, 1977. s _-] . 2.1-45 i i 4 i
,.ea-,--,~ .- , v -, n,--,,-,----,---w- , an-- ,m-- -,m--, , e 4m,e,,<
SL2-ER-OL SECTION 2.1: REFERENCES (Cont'd) 110. Florida Department of Natitral Resources, Division of Recreation and Parks, Letter Dated May 2, 1979. 111. Superintendent of Recreation, St Lucie County, Ft Pierce, Florida, letter dated December 5, 1978. 112. Boating Almanac, Vol 6, Boating Almanac Co., Inc Severna Park, Maryland, 1978. 113. Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, " Citrus Summary 1977 - Florida Agricultural Statistics," Orlando, Florida. O l l l I l l l 2.1-46
.. _ . . . _ . . . . . . . _ . . _ . . _ . - _ _. _ _ , .. _ _ _ , . _ _ _ . - , _ . _ _ ...m . . . _ _ . . . _ _ . . . . . _ _.. i SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-1 Sheet I of 8 R*SIDENT POPULATION WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 1978 Annular
- Total *
- Total
- Total Sector 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-10
- 0-10
- 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50
- 10-50
- 0-50 N O O O O O O
- 0* O O O O
- 0* O NNE O O O O O O
- 0* O O O O
- 0* O NE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O ENE O O O O O O
- 0* O O O O
- 0* 0 E O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O ESE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O SE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O f
SSE O O O O 1928 6212
- 8140
- 7508 18119 53957 126615
- 206199
- 214339 S 0 0 0 212 223 6744
- 7179
- 17948 568 6274 65250
- 90040
- 97219 SSW D 0 104 0 0 1330
- 1434
- 1752 3452 158 4044
- 9406
- 10840 SW 0 19 70 0 0 723
- 812
- 1752 1646 74 11029
- 14501
- 15313 WSW 0 59 0 11 2767 3854
- 6691
- 0 0 9120 566
- 9686
- 16377 W 0 19 44 532 517 482
- 1594
- 1913 0 8360 1223
- 11496
- 13090 WNW D 0 108 382 1229 3302
- 5021
- 689 0 0 119
- 808
- 5829 NW 0 0 0 33 141 36483
- 36657
- 15799 1079 2159 0
- 19037
- 55694 NNW 0 0 0 0 0 3523
- 3523
- 4143 42045 3138 2215
- 51541
- 55064 Total 0 97 326 1170 6805 62653
- 71051
- 51504 66909 83240 211061
- 412714
- 483765
o
- O SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-1 Sheet 2 of 8 RESIDENT POPULATION WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 1980 Annular -Total Total Total Sector ' 0- 1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-10
- 0-10
- 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50
- 10-50
- 0-50
.N O 17 0 0 0 0
- 17
- 0 0 0 0
- 0* 17 NNE O O O O O O
- 0* O O O O
- 0* O
-NE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O ENE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O E O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O ESE O O O O O O
- 0* O O O O
- 0* O SE O 15 0 0 0 0
- 15
- 0 0 0 0
- 0* 15 SSE O 10 0 29 1983 6487
- 8509
- 8385 19776 60385 132498
- 221044
- 229553 S 0 0 0 218 240 6965
- 7423
- 20043 633 7022 73024
- 100722
- 108145 SSW 0 0 112 208 520 2754
- 3594
- 1957 3885 171 4378
- 10391
- 13985 i
SW 0 20 74 93 2543 2717
- 5447
- 1957 1838 83 11941
- 15819
- 21266 WSW 0 63 5 22 2878 5938
- 8906
- O O 10032 608
- 10640
- 19546 W 0 20 51 560 559 738
- 1928
- 2070 0 9196 1343
- 12609
- 14537
.WNW D 0 114 402 1309 3414
- 5239
- 745 0 0 129
- 874
- 6113 NW 0 0 0 34 146 37962
- 38142
- 17084 1159 2318 0
- 20561
- 58703 NNW 0 8 12 10 16 3619
- 3665
- 4471 45154 3322 2272
- 55219
- 58884 Total 0 153 368' 1576 10194 70594
- 82885
- 56712 72445 92529 226193
- 447879
- 530764
. _ . . _ _ . . . _ . _ _ _ .. . - . . .. . _ _... ... , _ _ _ . - , . . . _ . , .m._ . _ _ . _ . . _ . . _ . . _ . - . . _ . - . . . _ . . . _ . _ _ _ . . . _ . . .- _ . .
i-
.t i i s
! SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-1 Sheet 3 of 8 1 RESIDENT POPULATION WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 i 1983 !. Annular Total Total Total. 5 . Sector 0-1 1-2 ,2-3 3-4 4-5 5-10
- 0-10 *- 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50
- 10-50
- 0-50
- i. t N O 25 0 0 0 0
- 25
- 0 0 0- 0
- 0* t 25 NNE .0 0 0 0 0 0
- 0* O O O O
- 0* 0
{ } NE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O ENE O l0 0 0 0 0
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* 0
+ 1 'E O O O O O O
- 0* O O O O
- 0* 0 ,
-i
- j. ESE' O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* 0
- SE' O 22 0 0 0 0 * -22
- 0 0 0 0
- 0* 22 4 SSE O 14 0 44 2006 6719
- 8783
- 9672 22043 68820 140290
- 240825
- 249608 S 0 0 0 221 248 7107
- 7576
- 23119 728 8002 83224
- 115073
- 122649
- SSW 0 0 115 218 549 3063
- 3945
- 2257 4446 188 4818
- 11709
- 15654 SW 0 21 76 102 2574 2886 .* 5659
- 2257 2120 96 13140
- 17613
- 23272 i .
j- WSW 0 65 8 27 2933 6834
- 9867
- O O 11232 670
- 11902
- 21769 I
W 0 20 54 573 578 850
- 2075
- 2278 0 10296 1501 '* 14075
- 16150 WNW 0 0 117 '412 1346 3496
- 5371
- 820 0 0 143
- 963
- 6334 i ' NW 0 0' O 35 ;148 38698
- 38881
- 18778 1264 2528 0
- 22570
- 61451 l'
- NNW 0 12 16 IS 23 3681
- 3746
- 4903 49244 3566 2349
- 60062
- 63808 Total 0 179 386 1646 10405 73334
- 85950
- 64084 79845 104728 246135
- 494792
- 580742 i
i
}
_ _ _ _ _ _ , _ . . _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ ._ _. . . . _ _ _ . _ ___ _ , _ ._ - . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . _ . . _ _ _ . . _ - _ _ _ . _ _ ..m . _m . _
~
i' \ I SL2-ER-OL ! TABLE 2.1-1 Sneet 4 of 8 !- RESIDENT POPULATION WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCI6 UNIT 2
- 1990
, Annular Total Total Total
; Sector 0-1 1-2. 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-10
- 0-10
- 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50
- 10-50
- 0-10 t
N O 68 0 0 0 0
- 68
- 0 0 0 0
- 0* 68 i 6 NNE O 0 0 0 0 0
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* 0 '
0 0 0 0 0
- 0*
- 0*
- f. NE 0 O O O O O t
ENE 0 0 0 0 0 0
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* 0 i
} E O O O O O O
- 0* O O O O
- 0* O l
, ESE O O O O O O
- 0* O O O O
- 0* O i SE O 60 0 0 0 0
- 60
- 0 0 0 0 *- 0* 60 SSE O 38 0 119 2144 7155
- 9456
- 11369 25837 84538 155048
- 276792 + 286248 S 0 0 0 237 291 7582
- 8110
- 27175 855 9830 102232
- 140092
- 148202 SSW 0 0 133 269 700 5022
- 6124
- 2653 5226 220 5641
- 13740
- 19864 SW 0 25 86 146 2730 3955
- 6942
- 2653 2492 113 15385
- 70643
- 27585 WSW 0 75 21 54 3214 12495
- 15859
- O O 13296 783
- 14079
- 29938 W 0 21 71 641 680 1563
- 2976
- 2668 0 12188 1774
- 16630
- 19606
). . WNW 0 0 133 461 1542 3685
- 5821
- 960 0 0 168
- 1128
- 6949 l - !
l NW 0 0 0 .39 160 41058
- 41257 * . 21980 1472 2944 0
- 26396
- 67653 1 !
i NNW 0 30 42 38 62 3898
- 4070
- 5731 5.7342 4115 2650
- 69838
- 73908 l 2
Total 0 317 486 2004 11523 86413
- 100743
- 75189 93224 127244 283681
- 579338
- 680081 N
]
f r\ (%, f~%)
% (%s/ J
)
SL2-ER-OL TA8LE 2.1-1 Sheet 5 of S RESIDENT POPULATION WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 2000 Annular Total Total Total Sector 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-10
- 0-10
- 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50
- 10-50
- 0-50 N O 115 0 0 0 0
- 115
- 0 0 0 0
- 0* 115 NNE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O NE O O O C 0 0
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O ENE O O O O O O
- 0* O O O O
- 0* O E O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O ESE O O O O O O
- 0* O O O O
- 0* O SE O 102 0 0 0 0
- 102
- 0 0 0 0
- 0* 102 SSE O 64 0 201 2295 7345
- 9905
- 13207 30012 101810 171690
- 316719
- 326624 S 0 0 0 254 335 7712
- 8301
- 31569 994 11838 123119
- 167520
- 175821 SSW 0 0 154 326 867 8010
- 9357
- 3082 6071 255 6552
- 15960
- 25317 SW 0 28 97 195 2904 5523
- 8747
- 3082 2895 131 17870
- 23987
- 32725 WSW 0 86 37 84 3525 20000
- 23732
- 0 0 15447 911
- 16358
- 40090 W 0 23 90 71 7 792 2702
- 4324
- 3099 0 14160 2062
- 19321
- 23645 WNW 0 0 150 516 1758 3790
- 6214
- 1115 0 0 195
- 1310
- 7524 KW 0 0 0 42 173 41806
- 42021
- 25533 1711 3422 0
- 30666
- 72687 NNW 0 52 70 64 105 3927
- 4219
- 6658 66653 4782 3078
- 81171
- 85390 Total 0 470 598 2399 12755 100815
- 117037
- 87345 108336 151845 325477 673003 790040
,x (~ m
\
SL2-ER-0! TABLE 2.1-1 Sheet 6 of 8 RESIDENT POPULATION WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 2010 Annular Total Total Total Sector 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-10
- 0-10
- 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50
- 10-50
- 0-50 N O 155 0 0 0 0
- 155
- 0 0 0 0
- 0* 155 NNE O O O O O O
- 0* O O O O
- 0* O NE O O O O O O
- 0* O O O O
- 0* O ENE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O E O O O O O O
- 0* O O O O
- 0* 0 ESE O O O O O O
- 0* O O O O
- 0* O SE O 137 0 0 0 0
- 137
- O O O O
- 0* 137 SSE O 85 0 272 2421 8163
- 10941
- 14758 33537 116302 185967
- 350564
- 361505 S 0 0 0 268 375 8551
- 9194
- 35277 1111 13524 140645
- 190557
- 199751 SSW 0 0 172 374 1009 81103
- 12658
- 3444 6784 285 7322
- 17835
- 30493 SW 0 32 107 237 3049 6863
- 10288
- 3444 3236 146 19969
- 26795
- 37083 WSW 0 96 49 110 3788 20000
- 24043
- O O 17262 1019
- 1E281
- 42324 W 0 25 106 781 887 3343
- 5142
- 3463 0 15823 2304
- 21590
- 26732 WNW 0 0 164 562 1942 4200
- 6868
- 1247 0 0 218
- 1465
- 8333 NW 0 0 0 46 183 46391
- 46620
- 28533 1912 3824 0
- 34269
- 80889 NNW 0 70 94 85 140 4348
- 4737
- 7441 74482 5344 3439
- 90706
- 95443 Total 0 600 692 2735 13794 112962
- 130783
- 97607 121062 172510 360883
- 752062
- 882845
rs j'% R i / \ x_)
)
D) O SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-1 Sheet 7 of 8 RESIDENT POPULATION WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 2020 Annular Total Total Total Sector 0-t 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-10
- 0-10
- 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50
- 10-50
- 0-50 N O 194 0 0 0 0
- 194
- O O O O
- 0* 194 NNE O O O O O O
- 0* O O O O = 0* O NE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O ENE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O E O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O ESE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* 0 SE O 171 0 0 0 0
- 171
- 0 0 0 0
- 0* 171 SSE O 106 0 339 2543 8865
- 11853
- 16266 36964 13d364 199908
- 383502
- 395355 S 0 0 0 282 413 9272
- 9967
- 38882 1223 15159 157649
- 212913
- 222880 SSW 0 0 189 421 1146 14126
- 15882
- 3796 7477 314 8070
- 19657
- 35539 '
SW 0 35 116 277 3191 8500
- 12119
- 3796 3566 161 22010
- 29533
- 41652 WSW 0 105 62 135 4044 20000
- 24346
- 0 0 19026 1123
- 20149
- 44495 W 0 26 122 844 980 4424
- 6396
- 3816 0 17440 2539
- 23795
- 30191 kNW 0 0 178 607 2120 4555
- 7460
- 1374 0 0 240
- 1614
- 9074 NW 0 0 0 49 196 50317
- 50562
- 31449 2108 4215 0
- 37772
- 88334 NNW 0 87 117 106 175 4715
- 5200
- 8201 82094 5890 3791
- 99976
- 105176 Total 0 724 784 3060 14808 124774
- 144150
- 107580 133432 192569 395330
- 828911
- 973061
. /,, ~ ~ -\
(q) i s /
\
)
% v %/
SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-1 Sheet 8 of 8 RESIDENT POPULATION WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 2030 Annular Total Total Total Sector 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-10
- 0-10
- 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50
- 10-50
- 0-50 N O 237 0 0 0 0
- 237
- O O O O
- 0* 237 NNE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O NE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O ENE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O E O O O O O O
- 0* O O O O
- 0* O ESE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0 0 0
- 0* O SE O 209 0 0 0 0
- 209
- 0 0 0 0
- 0* 209 SSE O 129 0 414 2678 9869
- 13090
- 17925 40735 145878 215143
- 419681
- 432771 S 0 0 0 298 456 10306
- 11060
- 42848 1349 16963 176411
- 237571
- 248631 SSW 0 0 208 473 1298 17148
- 19127
- 4183 8240 346 8893
- 21662
- 40789 SW 0 38 126 322 3349 10136
- 13971
- 4183 3930 177 24255
- 32545
- 46516 WSW 0 115 76 152 4326 20000
- 24669
- 0 0 20966 1237
- 22203'* 46872 W 0 28 139 912 1082 5506
- 7667
- 4206 0 19219 2798
- 26223
- 33890 WNW 0 0 194 656 2316 5066
- 8232
- 1514 0 0 265
- 1779
- 10011 NW 0 0 0 52 207 54497
- 54756
- 34657 2323 4645 0
- 41625
- 96381 NNW 0 108 143 129 214 5239
- 5833
- 9038 90468 6491 4177
- 110174 * !!6007 Total 0 864 886 3408 15926 137767
- 158851
- 118554 147045 214685 433179
- 913463
- 1072314 4
I
) ! I L-SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-2 ACE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PROJECTED POPULATION FOR THE YEAR 2000 yJTHIN TEN MILFS OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 Total Total 0-10 0-1 miles 1-2 miles 2-3 miles 3-4 miles 4-5 miles 5-10 miles 0-10 miles sites Sect"r 12* 12-18** 18*** 12 12-18 18 12 32-18 18 12 12-13 18 12 12-18 18 12 12-18 18 12 12-18 18 All ages N G 0 0 29 18 83 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 18 83 130 NNE O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O NE O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ENE O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O E O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ESE O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SE O O O 26 15 74 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 15 74 115 SSE O O O 16 10 45 0 0 0 51 30 146 521 316 1,500 1,731 1,048 4,982 2,119 1,404 6,673 10,396 S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 58 35 166 78 47 225 1,777 1,076 5.115 1,913 1,158 5,506 8,577 SSW 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 22 103 35 21 100 103 62 296 1,852 1,121 5,333 2,026 1,226 5,832 9,084 SW 0 0 0 6 4 19 22 14 65 30 18 87 107 64 307 1,078 652 3,102 1.243 752 3,580 5.575 WSW 0 0 0 20 12 58 9 6 27 21 13 60 808 489 2,327 4,460 2,700 12,840 5,318 3,220 15.312 23,850 W 0 0 0 5 3 16 21 13 62 165 100 475 184 112 531 767 465 2,210 1,142 693 3,294 5,129 WWW 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 21 99 119 72 342 407 246 1,172 878 531 2,528 1,439 870 4,141 6,450 NW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 6 28 39 24 114 9,618 5,822 27,689 9,666 5,852 27,831 43,349 NNW 0 0 0 13 8 38 17 11 50 16 9 46 27 16 77 901 545 2,593 974 589 2,804 4,367 0 0 0 115 70 333 140 87 406 504 304 1,450 2,274 1,376 6,549 23,062 13,960 66,392 26,095 15,797 75,130 117,022 (Parsons eleven years of age or younger. ** Parsons between and including twelve to eighteen years of age. **1 Parsons nineteen years of age or older.
sm /" /7
'l J
) (%
%)
\ f
( SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-3 CITIES, TOWNS AND COMMUNITIES OF OVER 5,000 PERSONS WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 ESTIMATED FOR 1978 a) Communities of over 10,000 Persons 1976 1978 1970 Population Population ,, City or Town County Population (Estimated) (Estimated) West Palm Beach *** Palm Beach 57,375 61,236 62.616
- Fort Pierce .St Lucie 29,721 32,182 33,083 Riviera Beach,,, Palm Beach 21,401 25,892 27,735 Vero Beach ,,, Indian River 11,908 15,303 16,800 North Palm Bg gh Palm Beach 9,035 13.026 15.014 Palm Springs ,,, Palm Beach 4,340 8,437 11,300 Palm Beach Cardens Palm Beach 6,102 9,182 10,792 Stuart Martin 4,820 8,479 10,760 b) Communities of between 5,000 and 10,000 Persons 1976 1978 1970 Population , Population ,,
County or Town Coenty Population, (Estimated) (Estimated) Palm Beach Palm Beach 9,086 9,724 9,952 Cifford Indian River 3,509 5,772 9,485 Lake Park ,,, Palm Beach 6,993 8,182 8,652 Creenacres City Palm Beach 1,731 4.447 6.773 Pahokee Palm Beach 5,663 5.813 5.864 Port St Lucie" St Lucie 330 4.463 6,465 Royal Palm Beach Palm Beach 475 2,380 5.598 Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, Regional Profile, September 1977, Table 30. Methodology discussed in Section 6.1.4.2. Part of West Palm Beach Urbanized Area,1970 census, Florida, Naber of Inhabitants. Table 11 and Figure 11-45. 1978 population estimated on basis of annual average growth rate from the 1960 population of 3,509 to the 1970 population of 5,772 (1970 Census. Florida Number of Inhabitants, Table 6) because 1976 estimate was not available.
" Population Estimates and Projections" Comprehensive Planning Program, prepared by the City Planning Dept, Port St Lucie, Florida, February 1978.
/ ) l i .
[ ( / s v
/ (ss /
SL2-ER-01. TABLE 2.1-4 AGE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PROJECTED POPULATION FOR THE YEAR 2000 BETWEEN TEN AND 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 Total 10-50 10-20 miles 20-30 miles 30-40 miles 40-50 miles Total 10-50 miles miles Sector 12* 12-18** 18*** 12 12-18 18 12 12-18 18 12 12-18 18 12 12-18 18 All ages N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O NNE O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O NE O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ECE O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O E O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ESE O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O SE O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O SSE 2.945 1,783 8,479 6,693 4,052 19,267 22,704 13,744 65,362 38,287 23,178 110,225 70,629 42.757 203,333 316,719 S 7,040 4,262 20,267 222 134 638 2,640 1,598 7,600 27,455 16,621 79,043 37,357 22,615 107,548 167,520 SSW 687 416 1.979 1,354 820 3,897 57 34 164 1,461 885 4,206 3,559 2.155 10,246 15.960 SW 687 416 1,979 646 391 1,858 29 18 84 3,985 2,412 11,473 5,347 3,237 15,394 23,978 ESW 0 0 0 0 0 0 3,445 2,085 9,917 203 123 585 3,648 2,208 10,502 16,358 W 691 418 1.990 0 0 0 3,158 1,912 9,090 460 278 1,324 4,309 2,608 12,404 19,321 WNW 249 150 716 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 26 126 292 176 842 1,310 NW 5,694 3.447 16,392 382 231 1,098 763 462 2,197 0 0 0 6.839 4,140 19,687 30,666 NNW 1,485 899 4,274 14,864 8,998 42,791 1,066 646 3,070 686 416 1,976 18,101 10,959 52,111 81,171 19,4'.8 11,791 56,076 24,161 14,626 69,549 33,862 20,499 97,484 72,580 43,939 208,958 150,081 90,855 432,067 673,003 CPersons eleven years of age or younger. MPersons between and including twelve to eighteen years of age.
*MPersons nineteen years of age or older.
. ,--m--..~ -. .-_,m. - - - - m .- m.-.. _ - , - ~ . _ . ~ . _- . _ . ---_ -_ - . _ , _.
f-aa_.-.__.m _ 1 I t- j I i' ! 'k i 4 i ir es.s a O } m a eO O O O O O O O N O #3 80 4 4 m '@ N e0
- u um N N N @ m 4 @ ep m @
W O t m N en N m m m o O M i W HO e ao m m a m N == 4 g N m N N 4 4 4 4 9 e e 4 4 4 4 4 # 9 4 9 9 4
=O O O O O O O O e 4 N e O 4 N O m i H um in O m O .e, m e0 e =
i M O t N O @ m w N N 4 @ ] E HO = = - N *e a 4 m 4 q D == m = s, An3 4 4 4 $ 9 e $ 4 4 9 4 4 4 4 9 4 4 4 a , f Q . I D oJ o } H 4 un O O O O O O O O a0 C en @ C O O N m m l M 4 m N m M m N ta. I m == == en 4 m @ Q O c0 m @ N j N = N Isa Y' =J m O O O O O O O O N 4 N N O m 4 en N O W. N O ** N N 4 m 4 @ @ t 4 a0 en en @ N eo 4 en O O m @ m N go m *= m E T m ) 'E H
! M 4 e e S e 5 4 e 9 8 4
- W 4 4 4 5 9 1 an 3 I #C O O O O O O O N @ == 0 4 en en 4 N m
) == U3 &= N @ 00 @ == m M O m N Q
- A5 40 0 t en N e0 .g M M N a0 @ m
, N O N HO == m m ** == N m c0 D H @ m's N g,C 3
*e .=
, e u3 e e g e e e e g e a e 5 5 $ e S $ e so ==
l
- h >A E O O O O O O O O m o a0 == N N en @ 4 N @
O -= m @ 4 en m @ 4 e0 @ v3 9 4 @ c0 .= N c0 @ O ) 4 en . @ pa a= W .en.e m
, haa N
- 1 V3 i O 1 2 en C C O O O O O m 4 O O 4 N M 4 O O 1 4 8 m 4 4 O N en en O 4
4 .ie en a N ** e0 E#3 en @ H v3 A' ., f es i D 4 O O O O O O O O N O O N en en @ Q O , I O I 4 O N m i H m == N l
.N o.J
.e i 4 m O O O O O O O O O O 4 O m == O Q[ 4@
l D 9 N ** N 8
> N 1 M N O O O O O O O O O O 4 m 4 O O of mm m l
.a.e
<1
-e O O O O O O O- O O O O O O O O O O 9
O 64 )
. w r ed O J J
3u as: C 43 - (a) %,c is) faj 3 3 H 1 ce E tal us tsa v3 ul 3 v3 3
< u) E E E lal EsJ , In3 . u) un v3 . V3 ul 3 3 E. .
O.e 4 r
-- - -=+ ,rt, = . cry.-%-w-, ,w. , , . , - - . . .r ..e hy., , , . , - e.w -. w . , ,w n .p w,- w w. r- e.-,y-,.,,,,, - , - - ~ . . , em--,---,,,ar--wm w w we w--w e-e-e- e..---,- --g - ~m
. ._ ,m . ._ .,.__.m _m m__ m ._.m -_m_.__1 _... _ _ _ . __ __ .__ ___ _ __ -
l t i ? 4 N se O N & m N N m e e N WO O O O O O O O O N e0 m u um N @ 4 N 4 N == N e0 et o e O m N en O @ m a0 en ' f e H g O M en m m N 4 m @ a j a m N W g > f e e . . e e e e e 4 e e o e e e e e 4 eO O O O O O O O 4 e e @ O O N = c m i um go en m m M N N en t H m N = N .= O e m og 4 N '. E NO M 00 m ** In N '\ Q m m N en l W e . . * * . e e e e e e e * * * . e m O +
.D2
! H m O O O O co e ao u O O O O O O O O 4 4 N e e0 m = e en en En* I O a == en 4 en m O O e em ao e 3 N = N 3 E4 i M N O O O O O O O O O N e e O O N m a en E N N e ao e q M e W @ 4 m en en w N @ 4 @ 4 O O 9 4 W 4 m N m == N E w
! - e e e e e e . e e e e e o e e e e e en 3 m r
g g af O C O O O O O O @ m e in N N N 00 m m j O " * * **
- O n * * * 'n ** * '
= as O "o *t 4 m e e en mm == 00 e
$ N O e HC N m m m N m m @
* ~ "
, W D e e e e e e e c
M m * . . < # e e e e . .
= g >
sc M 3 4 m m W e E O O O O O O O O c o en N m in
.O m N 4 co e ao .= m ao .= en ;' U3 i M 00 en m e0 m @ m W en 4 en W c#e == e0 m M i
hJ N M O en N R en O O O O O O O ') N O N 00 N an g I en 4 m .m
= m e O =
4 . 4 @ == m *= == O to O == m H *= m (4 as D 4 O O O O O O O O m O O N m ea N O e O I 4 N 00 @ H M m N ) > a 1 H i O O O O en 4 m O O O O O O O O O 4 h 4 N N ,' Q l N *= == N i bd 1-4 63 L N O O O O O O O O O O 4 m 4 O O O -= 0 ** N
=
,= 0 C O O .O O O O O O O O O O O O O I
C se EF La ed o e3 Du 4 W W Co 43 = R M W W W eM a3 3 3 3 3 2 lE lg H I I
\
[ a e -
%, - --,, - r-_---,----r r -r- et, e- e- , -a- c- 9 ,,a we --ww-- v--vt-we*--ter--v'--+=, d' *-
O SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.5-5 Sheet 3 of 8 PEAK DAILY TOURISTS AND SEASONAL VISITORS WITHIN 30 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 1983 Annular Total Tot al Total Sector 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-10
- 0-10
- 10-20 20-30
- 10-30
- 0-30 N O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0
- 0* O NNE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0
- 0* 0 NE O O O O O O
- 0* O O
- 0* O ENE O O O O O O
- 0* O O
- 0* O E D 0 0 0 0 0
- 0* O O
- 0* O ESE O O O O O O
- 0* O O
- 0* O SE O O O O O O
- 0* O O
- 0* O SSE O O O O 12799 9228
- 22027
- 5631 11355
- 16986
- 39013 S 0 0 0 62 65 2317
- 2444
- 10030 237
- 10267
- 12711 SSW 0 0 29 0 0 1997
- 2026
- 738 1453
- 2191
- 4217 )
SW 0 5' 21 0 564 210
- 800
- 738 692
- 1430
- 2230 WSW 0 16 0 3 804 1120
- 1943
- O O
- 0* 1943 W 0 5 13 156 151 140
- 465
- 831 0
- 831
- 1296 WNW 0 0 31 Ill 1681 1179
- 3002
- 299 0
- 299
- 3301 NW 0 0 0 9 168 11326
- 11503
- 5910 540
- 6450
- 17953 NNW 0 0 0 0 129 1919
- 2048
- 4372 21008
- 25380
- 27428 TOTAL 0 26 . 94 341 16361 29436'
- 46258
- 28549 35285
- 63834
- 110092
_ m .......m..
- ._ m. _ __ _ . .
_ . . . m _. . . ._ _ N SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-5 Sheet 4 of 8 PEAK DAILY TOURISTS AND SEASONAL VISITORS WITHIN 30 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 i 1990 Annular Total Total Total
\
Sector 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-10 .
- 0-10
- 10-20 20-30
- 10-30
- 0-30 N O O O O O O
- 0*
- i O O 0* O NNE O O O O O O
- 0*
- O O 0* O NE O O O O O O
- 0* 0
- 0 0* O ,
ENE O O O O O O
- 0* O
- O 0* O E O O O O O O
- 0* 0
- 0 0* O i ESE 0 0
- 0 0 0 0 0* 0 0
- 0* 0 SE O O O O O
- 0* 0
- O 0 0* 0 SSE O O O O 16562 !!941
- 28503
- 7286 14693
- 21979
- 50482 S 0 0 0 80 84 2998
- 3162
- 12978 316
- 13294
- 16456 SSW 0 0 38 0 0 2584
- 2622
- 955 1880
- 2835
- 5457 SW 0 7 27 0 730 271
- 1035
- 955 896
- 1851
- 2886
- MSW 0 21 0 4 1040 1449
- 2514
- O O
- 0* 2514 W 0 7 17 201 195 181
- 601
- 1075 0 1
- 1075
- 1676
) WNW 0 0 40 144 2176 1526
- 3886
- 388 0
- 388
- i 4274 NW 0 0 0 II. 217 14654
- 14882
- 7648 699
- 8347
- 23229 NNW 0 0 0 0 167 2484
- 2651
- 5658 27183
- 32841
- 35492 l
TOTAL 0 35 122 440 21171 38088
- 59856
- 36943 45667
- 82610
- 142466 1
i 4. 1
)
i k
, - - . . ~ > - . n -.~.+.s.w.. .-n., . - - - - - ~ . . - . . . . . .- . - - - - - . . .. - - - - - . . . ~ - . . - . . _ . - . . -
1 J l i i l # end 1 0 ' at% ** , 4O O - O O O o o O @ en @ m en 4 m N & en g aa wm m en ==
- e @ en m 00 m W O 9 ** N N en O O N en @ M W HD N O @ mm N en ao m en n @ N N 4 N s
t/3 en g # 4 4 4 9 4 4 4 9 4 4 5 4 9 4 4 9 5 WO o O o O O O o M M e m O 4 CD M M N H Wm en @ W N N N N N 00 N O I O m 4 N m 4 N 4 @ F. HO N @ M N == O O == D =m N e. == 4 O m 4 W # # # $ $ 4 4 $ $ 5 4 4 5 4 9 4 # 4 w ' O D
*J H
(A O M O O o O O O O en m m.a o m C O O O no e eo a0
- 9 en O tee f O M M m w 4 N O O eD N ** M @
N en M en to i W
.J w O o o O O O O O so 4 @ @ o 4 00 m en 4 E N @ N N N N ** @ N i
' 1 e m N.
. == m 4 4 m 4 O O e en = = = = == m @ en m m en 4 3
w
- . . . 4 . . . 4 . . . . . . 4 . . .
t en 3 ** m3 O 4 4 O O O O O O O m N N 4 en O == N m
.m in aa .O = ao e N N m 4 co m.
. @ N i
#
- dM O O f C eD N O N N M N @
M N O O HO en m m .N. m 4 co m M W be O m me N 4 N e w - w N
>J (A 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 $ 4
*J se M i
f 44 e
==
9 en o .o O O O O o e mm O m O ao
== m n
n ' c0
-, m N
N N N N C0 N m O N en O O 40 e i ina 4
==
** ** 0D
==
m @ in 4 1 o z in o O O O O O O en m o e O O co co in N 4 9 ao o e c0 4 N @ O en 4 M we CD N N @ N N O th O == N @ be N N to me es t
' O O O 4 O O O O O O m O O 4 N N 4 O **
O I e 4 N == 4 H m N ==e en
- i b
M i < Q M C O O O o o o O O N m O m e O Oli en O l 4 M N 4 N m m. N O O O O ' O O o O O o e N e C o Ol en i i N l 4-m
== o O o O O o O O O O O O O o O Ol o t 3 i O 1
9.s a le
** O .3 , ! DM g C u ta3 ta3 m ta3 3 3 g 4e g
I 2 k k h w w N $ e $ $ $ 3 3 k a h i l 3 l l l l I n - m - -w,- ,e,. v. m-,-,-. , n,.e..m.n',,-ena n.s,,.,-,m,w ,-w.,,a- m e..v-n,.. . . , . . . . .me,.- m- y- ---e w_wm w,,-w,,m ,.e mm .n a, --
I- } i l SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-5 Sheet 6 of 8 PEAK DAILY TOURISTS AND SEASONAL VISITORS WITHIN 30 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 4 2010 , i ! Annular Total Total Total I Sector 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-10
- 0-10
- 10-20 20-30
- 10-30
- 0-30 I
*
- i 1 N 0 3 0 0 0 0 0* 0 0 0* 0
! NNE O O O O O O
- 0* O O
- 0* O 1
NE O O O O O O
- 0* O O
- 0* O ENE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0
- 0* O a
1 E O O O O O O
- 0* O O
- 0* O j ESE O O O O O O
- 0* O O
- 0* O SE O O O O O O
- 0* O O
- 0* O ,
l
- SSE O O O O 25093 18090
- 43183
- 11039 22259
- 33298
- 76481 '
S 0 0 0 122 128 4542
- 4792
- 19661 479
- 20140
- 24932
$ SSW 0 0 58 0 0 3914
- 3972
- 1447 2849
- 4296
- 8268 SW 0 11 41 0 1105 411
- 1568
- 1447 1358
- 2805
- 4073 WSW 0 32 0 5 1576 2195
- 3808
- 0 0
- 0* 3808 W 0 11 26 304 296 275
- 912
- 1629 0
- 1629
- 2541 1
WNW 0 0 60 218 3297 2311
- 5886
- 587 0
- 587
- 6473 4
l NW 0 0 0 17 329 22201
- 22547
- 11587 1059
- 12646
- 35193 l
NNW 0 0 0 0 252 3762
- 4014
- 8572 41182
- 49754
- 53768 i
TOTAL 0 54 185 666 32076 57701
- 90682
- 55969 69186 *125155
- 215837 I
t i . l 4
SL2-E R- OL TABLE 2.1-5 Sheet 7 of 8
! PEAK DAILY TOURISTS AND SEASONAL VISITORS WITHIN 30 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 2020 Annular Total Total Total Sector 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-10
- 0-10
- 10-20 20-30
- 10-30
- 0-30 O O
- 0* O O
- 0* O
- N O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0
- 0* O NNE O O O O O O
- 0* O O
- 0* O
- NE O O O O t
- 0* O O
- 0* 0 ENE O O O O O O I' E O O O O O O
- 0* O O
- 0* O ,
O O O
- 0* O O
- 0* 0 ESE O O O t
O O O
- 0* 0 0
- 0* 0 SE O O O 1
SSE O O O O 30886 22268
- 53154
- 13586 27398
- 40985
- 94139 S 0 0 0 150 157 5591
- 5898
- 24200 589
- 24789
- 30687 I
l SSW 0 0 71 0 0 4818
- 4889
- 1781 3506
- 5287
- 10176 SW 0 13 50 0 1360 506
- 1929
- 1781 1670
- 3451
- 5380 0 40 0 7 1939 2702
- 4688
- O O
- 0* 4688 WSW 4
W 0 13 32 374 364 339
- 1122
- 2005 0
- 2005
- 3127 i
- WNW C 0 74 268 4057 2843
- 7242
- 723 0
- 723
- 7965 4
NW 0 0 0 21 405 27327
- 27753
- 14261 1303
- 15564
- 43317 NNW 0 _0 _0 310 4631
- 4941
- 10550 50692
- 61242
- 66183
_0 l TOTAL 0 66 227 820 39478 71025 *111616
- 68887 85158 *154046
- 265662 4
r ( \
.y t
SL2-ER-OL [ TABLE 2.1-5 Sheet 8 of 8 ' i PEAK DAILY TOURISTS AND SEASONAL VISITORS WITHIN 30 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 { 2030
' Annular Total Total Total
- Sector 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-10
- 0-10
- 10-20 20-30
- 10-30
- 0-30 ;
N 0 0 0 0 0 0
- 0* 0 0
- 0* O NNE O O O O O O
- 0* O O
- 0* O NE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0
- 0* O ENE 0 0 0 0 0 0
- 0* O O
- 0* O l
! E O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0
- 0* 0 ,
, ESE O O O O O O
- 0* O O
- 0* O SE O O O O O O
- 0* 0 0
- 0* O SSE O O O O 38014 27408
- 65422
- 16724 33723
- 50447
- 115869 S 0 0 0 185 193 6882
- 7260
- 29787 725
- 30512
- 37772 SSW D 0 88 0 0 5930
- 6018
- 2193 4315
- 6508
- 12526 i
!- SW 0 16 62 0 1674 623
- 2375
- 2193- 2056
- 4249
- 6624 WSW 0 49 0 8 2387 3325
- 5769
- O O
- 0* 5769 4
.W 0 16 39 461 448 417
- 1381
- 2468 0
- 2468
- 3849 '
WNW 0 0 91 330 4994 3501
- 8916
- 890 0
- 890
- 9806 l NW 0 0 0 26 499 33634
- 34159
- 17554 1604
- 19158
- 53317 NNW 0 0 0 0 383 5700
- 6083
- 12986 62391
- 75377
- 81460 TOTAL 0 81 280 1010 48592 87420 *137383
- 84795 104814 *189609
- 326992 1
l-a i I 4
7^y -{g g .; V V J S L2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-6 Sheet 1 of 4 TRANSIENT POPULATION: ATTENDANCE AT ATTRACTIONS AND EVENTS 1978-2030 Number of Persons 1978 Total for Events Annular Time of (of more' Peak Sector Location Year than one day) Daily Maximum 1980 1983 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 A. Attractions and Events Within 10 Miles of St Lucie Ur.1 2 i
- 1. Artontgg) green NW 5-10 Indian River January 40000 20000 20948 21422 25688 30428 35168 39908 44600 i Fastival Memorial Park, Fort Pierce
- 2. Jensenbegg} SSE 5-10 Jensen Beach July 4th 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 10000 Fireworks Causeway 7
- 3. Lawnwood Stadium NW 5-10 Fort Pierce Fall Football 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 (St Luci Schools){3founty
- 4. Leif2grikson S 5-10 Town of October 2000 2095 2142 2569 3043 3517 3991 4460 Day Jensen Beach
- 5. 'Outdoorgg3 S 5-10 Town of March 5000 2500 2619 2678 3211 3804 4396 4989 5575 Fastival Jensen Beach 4 6. Sailfisg) S 5-10 St Lucie_ May 10000 7000 7332 7498 8991 10650 12309 13968 15610 Rtgatta River
- 7. StLuc{g)CountyCivic NW 5-10 Fort Pierce March 40000 20000 5700** 20948 21422 25688 30428 35168 39908 44600 Center
- 8. Srndy Shygg NW 5-10 Fort Pierce January 7900 1500*** 1607 1713 1962 2318 2673 3029 3384 Fastival & Fairgrounds
- 9. SeaTy331e SSE 5-10 Jensen Beach June 1500 1571 1607 1927 2282 2638 2993 3345 i Wrtch
- See Sheet 4 for sources of information.
** Miximum seating capacity. Forty thousand attended an Auto Show on a walk-through basis over two days.
*** 1977 attendance. No festival was held in 1978 a
l s
- c - - . _- , . . _ . . - - . . - . - - - .
m
.p. f %.
A,
'% /
N% ,) S L2-ER- OL i TABLE 2.1-6 Sheet 2 of 4 TRANSIENT POPULATION: ATTENDANCE AT ATTRACTIONS AND EVENTS 1978-2030 Number of Persons i 1978 Total for Events Annular Time of (of more Peak Sector Location Year than one day) Daily Maximum 1980 1983 1990 2000 2010 - 2020 2030
'b. Attractions and Events Between 10 and 30 Miles of St Lucie Unit 2
- 10. Dodgert g Sports NNW 20-30 Vero beach March 7405 10000 7541 7712 9248 10000 10000 10000 10000 Complex
- 11. Jei Al of Fort WNW 10-20 Fort Pierce Year-Round 3200 4000 3352 3428 4000 4000 4000 4000 4000 Pierce
- 12. MirtgCounty S 10-20 Martin March 27000 7559 7917 8096 9709 11500 13292 15083 16857 Fair County Fair-grounds, in
- Stuart
- 13. Martin County g S 10-20 Stuart Fall Football 4500 4500 4500 4500 4500 4500 4500 4500 4
School Stadium
- 14. St L g County NW 20-30 St Lucie February 20800 8300 8693 8890 10660 12628 14595 16562 18509 Fair County Fair-grounds, in Fort Pierce j 15. VaroBeachSengHigh NW 20-30 Vero Beach Fall Football 8000 8000 8000 8000 8000 8000 8000 8000 School Stadium C. Attractions and Events Between 30 and 50 Miles of St Lucie Unit 2 l 16. Fish Fry, Volun g NW 40-50 Crant February 30000 15000 15711 16778 19266 22821 26375 29931 33450 Fire Department Brevard County
- 17. Horse S 40-50 Palm Beach Year-Round 2000 2095 2142 2569 3043 3517 3991 4460 Complex Fairgrounds
- 18. Labor Day Rodeo and (15) WSW 30-40 Okeechobee September 12000 10000 10474 10711 12844 15214 17584 19954 22300 Bluegrass Convention City
1 % (\ ) s
\
.J l
v/ v
)
SL2-ER- OL a table 2.1-6 Sheet 3 of 4 TRANSIENT POPULATION: ATTENDANCE AT ATTRACTIONS AND EVENTS 1978-2030 i Number of Persons 1978 Total for Events Annular Time of (of more Peak Sector Location Year than one day) Daily Maximum 1980 1983 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
,. C . . Attractions _and Events Between 30 and 50 Miles of St Lucie Unit 2 (Cont'd)
- 19. ' Lion C g gy S 40-50 Route 441 Year-Round - - - - - - - - - -
' Safari Palm Beach County 20.' OffshoreSgjggFishing NhW 30-40 Sebastian May-June 500 524 536 c52 761 879 998 1150 Tournament Inlet and Atlantic Ocean
- 21. P.G.A. SSE 30-40 Palm Beach Year-Round -under construction- 50000++50000 50000 50000 50000 50000 1 Complex IIO) Gardens
- 22. Pahokee SW 40-50 Hoover Dike July 4th 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 3000 t Fireworks IIN in Pahokee i
4
- 23. PalmBegAuto S 40-50 Plam Beach Year-Round 1000 1047 1071 1284 1521 1758 1995 2230
- l. Auction Faargrounds
, 24. PalmBeagairgrounds SSE 40-50 Palm Beach Year-Round 8000 8000 8000 8000 8000 8000 8000 8000 Speedway Fairgrounds
- 25. Palm g ch Kennel S 40-50 West Plam January-May 5800 6075 6212 7450 8824 10199 11573 12934 Club Beach
- 26. Soutgorida WSW 30-40 Palm Beach January- 470752 88000 92171 94257 113027 133883 154739 175595 196240 Fair Fairgrounds February
- 27. Speckled g ch WSW 30-40 Okeechobee March 5000 5237 5356 6422 7607 8792 9977 11150 Festival City
- 28. SSE 40-50 West Palm Year-Round 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 6000 West Palm g h Auditorium Beach
, 29. kestPalgach SSE 40-50 Mangonia Park September- 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 9000 Jai Alai Palm Beach County January
. 30. kest Palm Beach SSE 40-50 West Palm 6800 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 Municipal Stadium (25) Beach
- Attendance figures are confidential and not available for use in this report.
** First World Championship Tournament scheduled for 1982.
-\ j \v f !.
S L2- E R-OL TABLE 2.1-6 Sheet 4 of 4 TRANSIENT POPULATION - ATTENDANCE AT ATTRACTIONS AND EVENTS 1978-2030 SOLRCES OF INFORMATION (1) Chairman, Art-on-the-Creen Festival, Fort Pierce, Florida, Letter Dated November 17, 1978 , (2) Executive Director, Jensen Beach Chamber of Commerce, Jensen Beach, Florida, Letter Dated November 17, 1978 (3) Maintenance Foreman, St Lucie County School Board, Ft Pierce, Florida, Letter Dated November 28, 1978 (4) Director, Stuart/ Martin County Chamber of Commerce, Stuart, Florida, Letter Dated November 22, 1978 (5) Supervisor of Special Facilities, St Lucie County Civic Center, Ft Pierce, Florida Letter Dated November 17, 1978 (6) Executive Secretary, Sandy Shoes Festival (1979), Fort Pierce, Florida Letter Dated November 27, 1978 (7) Office of Eastern Division Manager, Los Angeles Dodgers Baseball Team, Dodgertown Sport and Conference Center, Vero Beach, Florida, Letter Dated November 17, 1978 (8) Assaciate Chief of Security, Jai Alai of Fort Pierce, Fort Pierce, Florida, Letter Dated November 17, 1978 (9) Fair'*ecretary, J Martin County Fair Association, Stuart, Florida, Letter Dated November 20, 1978 (10) Athletic Director, Martin County High School, Stuart, Florida, Letter Dated November 28, 1978 (11) Fair Secretary, St Lucie County Fair, Fort Pierce, Florida, Letter Dated November 20, 1978 (12) Finance Officer, Indian River County Schools, Vero Beach, Florida, Letter Dated November 27, 1978 (13) Chairman, Fish Fry in Grant, Melbourne, Florida, Personal Communication, December 14, 1978 (14) Horse Complex, Palm Beach County Fairgrounds, West Palm Beach, Florida, Personal Communication, November 21, 1978 1 (15) Okeechobee Chamber of Commerce, Okeechobee, Florida, Letter Dated November 17, 1978 > (16) Office of Public Relations, Lion County Safari, Royal Palm Beach, Florida, Letter Dated November 20, 1978 (17) Chairman, Offshore Sport Fishing Tournament, Sebastian, Florida, Letter Dated December 13, 1978 (18) Project Manager, PGA Complex, Florida Roalty Building Company, West Palm Beach, Florida, Letter Dated e December 11, 1978 (19) Of fice Manager, Pahokee Chamber of Commerce, Pahokee, Florida, Letter Dated November 20, 1978 (20) Palm Beach Auto Auction, Palm Beach County Fairgrounds, best Palm Beach, Florida Personal Communication. December 11, 1978 (21) South Florida Fair, Palm Beach County Fairgrounds, West Palm Beach, Florida, Personal Communications, November 21 and 27, 1978 (22) Palm Beach Kennel Club - Greyhound Racing, West Palm Beach, Florida, Letter Dated November 21, 1978 (23) West Palm Beach Auditorium, West Palm Beach, Florida, Letter Dated November 22, 1978 (24) Office of Public Relations, West Palm Beach Jai Alai, West Palm Beach, Florida, Letter Dated November 21, 1978 i (25) Spring Training Coordinator, Atlanta Braves, West Palm Beach Municipal Stadium, West Palm Beach, Florida, Letter Dated November 20, 1978 1
. s s s 7
s . S L2-E R-OL TABLE 2.1-7 TRANSIENT POPULATION: MAJOR ltIDUSTRIAL EMPLOYERS AND COLLECES 1978-2030 1978 Annular Total Peak Daily Sector Location Employment Employment 1980 1983 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 A. Major Industrial Employers
't. Grumman Aerospace ( ' S 10-20 Martin County Airport, Stuart 731 700 700 700 700 700 700 700 700
- 2. Piper' Aircraft (2) NW 10-20 Vero Beach Municipal Airport 2887 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000
, Indian River County Pratt & Whitney I)
- 3. S 30-40 Route 770, South of Route 710 7261 6094 6094 6094 6094 6094 6094 6094 6094 Government Palm Beach County Products Division Total Peak Daily Enrollment Enrollment B. Major Colleges ,
- 4. Florida Inggjtute of SSE 5-10 Jensen Beach Campus 90 0 1050 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 1200 Technology Martin County
- 5. Indian River NW 5-10 Fort Pierce Campus 11200 1500 2050 2417 2818 3486 4312 5334 6599 Community College (5) St Lucie County S 10-20 Stuart Campus, Martin 1230 171 234 276 322 398 492 609 753 County WSW 30-40 Okeechobee Campus, Okeechobee 320 43 59 69 80 100 123 152 188 B. Major Colleges County MNW 20-30 Vero Beach Campus, Indian 3200 428 585 691 806 997 1233 1526 1888 River County (1) ' Personal Communication, Personnel Department, Crumman Aerospace, November 30, 1978.
(2)' Personal Communication Personnel Department, Piper Aircraf t Corp, December 4,1978. (3) Personal Communication, Employment Of fice, Pratt & Whitney Aircraf t, llovember 30, 1978. (4) Personal Communication, Student Activities Of fice, Florida Institute of Technology, Jensen beach Campus, November 27, 1978. (5) Personal Communication, Office of the Vice President, Indian River Community College. Fort Pierce Campus, November 28, 1978. a 1 I I
- 7. s gy ,f~,.
f h f I ,'
\ ,l Q ,I \u.j SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-8 TRANSIENT POPULATION: AVERAGE DAILY PASSENGERS ON MAJOR ROADS WITHIN 30 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 1978-2030 Highways and State Roads Within 10 Miles of St Lucie Unit 2 Estimated Average Daily Number of Passengers Route County Station Number 1978 1980 1983 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 SR AIA St Lucie 114 2,802 2,935 3,134 3,599 4,259 4,926 5,590 6,248 (North Beach Causeway)
SR 605 St Lucie 268 2,505 2,624 2,802 3,217 3,808 4,404 4,997 5.586 US 1 St Lucie 121 14,357 15,038 16,058 18,440 21,823 25,240 28,642 32,016 SR 607A St Lucie 199 6,525 6,834 7,298 8,381 9,918 11,471 13,017 14.551 S2 68 St Lucie 151 8,271 8,663 9,251 10,623 12,572 14,540 16,501 18,444 SR 611 St Lucie 274 2,172 2,275 2,429 2,790 3,301 3,816 4.333 4,844 I SR 70 St Lucie 106 5,910 6,190 6,610 7,591 8,983 10,390 11,790 13,179 I-91/ St Lucie Southbound 15,151 15,869 16,946 19,460 23,030 26,635 30,226 33,787 Florida's Turnpike SR 709 St Lucie 279 990 1,037 1,107 1,272 1,505 1,740 1,975 2,208 I-91/ St Lucie Northbound 25,541 26,752 28,568 32,805 38,822 44,901 50,954 56,956 Florida's Turnpike US 1 Martin 113 20,922 21,911 23,399 26,862 31,778 36,767 41,731 46,647 (Roosevelt Bridge / Northbound) SR AIA Martin 144 8,516 8,920 9,525 10,938 12,944 14,971 16,989 16,991 Highways Within 30 Miles of St Lucie Unit 2 l 1 1-95 Indian River Southbound 9,971 10,444 11,153 12,807 15,156 17,529 19,892 22,235 I I-91/ Okeechobee Southbound 15,151 15,869 16,946 19,460 23,030 26,635 30,226 33,787 Florida's Turnpike I-95/ Palm Beach Northbound 26,527 27,782 29,668 34,059 40,292 46,616 52,911 59,144 Florida's Turnpike (1) State of Florida, Dept of Transportation, Bureau of Planning assigns code numbers to each station where average daily traffic (ADT) counts are taken in each county. (2) See bethodology, Section 2.1.3.8.2. ,
c
,n. m. y SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-9 TRANSIENT POPULATION: AVERACE DAILY PASSENGERS BY RAIL AND AIR WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 1978-2030 County Location 1978 1980 1983 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 A. Rail
- 1. Sebring - West Palm Beach 389(2) 195(3) 206 240 289 338 387 436 Amtrak-Sgoard -
I. Coast Line B. Ap
- 2. West Palm Beach Palm Beach West Palm Beach 4,878(2) 5,387 7,086 12,258 15,163 18,068 20,973 23,878
. International Airport IO)
II) Peak daily capacity'(that is, all seats available on all six trains on the line on one day) was 2,474 in 1978 (August). Personal Communication, Route Analyst, Eastern Routes, Marketing Research, Amtrak, Washington, DC, November 22, 1978. (2); See Methodology, Section 2.1.3.8. (3 In May, 1979, Congress accepted a Department of Transportation plan to reduce service to Florida from three trains each l day to one train. It is expected that ridership will be reduced to half the 1978 levels with this change in service. Sources: Personal Communication, Manager - Eastern Routes, Marketing Research, Amtrak, Washington, DC, May 22, 1979. . IO) Eata include implanements and deplanementa. Personal Communication, Director of Planning, Palm Beach International Airport, West Palm Beach, Florida, November 30, 1978. 1
( / (,, ' L-- N_- ; SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-10 TRANSIENT POPULATION: AVERACE DAILY PASSENGERS ON WATERWAYS WITHIN 30 MILES OF ST LUCIE 2 1978-2030 Cour.ty Location 1978 1980 1983 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 A. ytterways Within 30 Miles of St Lucie 2 l
- 1. Intracoastal Waterway (I) -
Jacksonville - Miami via Indian River 1,490 1,561 1,667 1,914 2,267 2,620 2,973 3,323
- 2. Fort Pierce Harbor (I) St Lucie Fort Pierce 22 23 25 28 33 39 44 49
- 3. St Lucie Canal (2) Martin Lake Okeechcbee/ Port Mayaca - Stuart 108 113 121 139 164 190 216 241 B. . Bridges Within 10 Miles of St Lucie 2 l
- 4. Jansen Beach Bridge (3) Martin Indian River at Jensen Beach 46 48 51 59 70 81 92 103
- 5. Roosevelt Br id ge (4) Martin St Lucie River in Stuart 89 93 100 114 135 157 176 198
- 6. St Lucie Bridge (5) Martin St Lucie River, Stuart-Seawall's Point 62 65 69 80 94 109 124 138
- 7. Stuart Causeway Martin Indian River, Sewall's Point - Hutchinson Island 60 63 67 77 91 106 120 134 (Indian River Bridge)
II) US Army Corps of Engineers, Waterborne Commerce of the United States, Part 1, 1976 Jacksonville District pp 135, 137 I2) Personal Communication, Lockmaster, St Lucie lack & Dam, Stuart, Florida, September 14 and October 10, 1976 I3} Personal Communication, Bridgetender, Jensen Beach Bridge, Jensen Beach, Florida, September 14 and November 10, 1978 I') Personal Communication, Engineering Department, Martin County Department of Transportation, September 14, 1978 (5) Parsonal Communication, Bridgetender, St Lucie Bridge, Stuart, Florida, September 14, 1978 (6) Pzrsonal Communication, Bridgetender, Stuart Causeway, Sewall's Point, Florida, September 14, 1978 l l l l l
-, 4 . _ - . _ . . ._ _ . - _ .__m_. ._._._.._-m _ __. . _ . _ . _ . . . _ . _ . _ . . _ .m ._ ___._m __ _ _._ __. _..~.._ . _ . _ .
i \ I a
- SL2-ER-OL 4
1 TABLE 2.1-11 L t !. LOCATION BY ANNULAR SECTOR OF PARAMETERS NEAREST TO ST. LUCIE UNIT 2, NOVEMBER, 1978(a,b c) CATEGORY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW l hilk Cows O O O O O O O L L L L L 14.0/ L L L
- 260' l i >
~ hilk Coats 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L L 5.95/ 2.2/ L L L L L t > 204' - 220' 1 i ? I1 eat Animal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L L 5.1/ 5.2/ L 3.2/ 4.5/ L L i 205' 209' 270' 290' Vegetable Gardens 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L L 2.3/ 2.0/ 1.9/ 3.5/ 3.0/ L L 208' 225' 249' 273 296* , Residences 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.0/ 4.1 2.3/ 2.0/ 1.9/ 2.1/ 2.6/ 4.8/ 5.0/ { 151' 180* 202 226' 247' 270* 292 311' 340' 4 4 i 1. .O = Ocean Areas - i 2. L = Land Areas: no numerical entry indicates that a ground survey of an established 22 1/2 degree radial sector showed no evidence of any activity.
- 3. 14.0/260 = 14.0 miles from the center of the reactor in the 260 direction, measured clockwise from north i
j Source: a) -Letter L-70-416 to D L Ziemann, Chief Operating Reactors Branch $2, Division of Operating Reactors, i USNRC, Washington, DC, from R E Uhrig, Vice President of Florida Power & Light on December 7,1976. , l i b) Letter FLO-1375, to L Tsakiris, Project Manager of Ebasco Services, from C S Kent. Project Manager, Florida '- Power and Light, March 14, 1979. 1 c) Florida Power & Light, St Lucie Unit 1, Docket No 50-335, Annual Rad'ological i Environmental Monitoring
- Report, 1978.
1-j L 5 I i 1 4 i i i
q g (A SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-12 Sheet I of 2 LAND USES AND LAND COVER WITHIN FIVE MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 Level 1 Land Use . Ac reage Level 11 Land Use Acreage Level III Land Use Ac reage
- Classification Percent of Total Classification Percent of Total Classification Percent of Total
- 1. URBAN OR BUILT-UP LAND 3,541 7. 0 11. Residential 2,300 4.6 111. Single-family Resi- 2,220 4.5 dences 112. Multiple-family 20
- Residences
? 116. Transient Lodgings 60 .1 l- 12. Commercial and Services 28 -
- 122. Retail, Commercial 22
- Services 123. Institutional Ser- 6
- vices
- 13. Industrial 14
- 131. Light Industrial 14
- 4 14. Trans port a tion , Communi- 964 2.0 141. Highway, Principal 210 .4 cations, and Utilities Road 142. Railroad 50 .1 '
143. St Lucie 1 & 2 300 .6 Facilities i 4 j 144. Transmission Lines 386 .8 , 145. Utility Storage 18
- i 17. Other Urban or Built-up 235 .5 171. Cemetery 10 *
; Land i
e 172. Undeveloped Land 37 .I a 173. Recreation Facilities 188 .4
- 2. ACR1 CULTURAL LAND 541 1.1 21. Cropland and Pasture 449 .9 212. Citrus Groves 449 .9
- 22. Other Agricultural Land 92 .2 221. Nurseries 9
- I 222. Old Field 83 .2
- 4. FOREST / MARSH COVER
- 10,653 21.2 41. Coniferous Forest / 7,910 15.6 410. Pine Flatwood Forest / 5,594 11.1 Freshwater Marsh Freshwater Marsh
-i 411. Freshwater Marsh 2.316 4.6 , 42. Other Forested Wetland 2,743 5.5 421. Mangrove 2,743 5.5
-s N .
SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-12 Sheet 2 of 2 Level 1 Land Use Acreage Level 11 Land Use Acreage Level III Land Use Ac reage Classification Percent of Total Classification Percent of Total Classification Percent of Total
- 5. kATER 34,649 69.3 51. Freshwater 1,243 2.5 510. Streams and Canals 113 .2 511. Lake s 1,130 2.3
- 52. Fresh / Salt Water 10,656 21.2 520. Estuary 10,656 21.2
- 55. Salt Water 22,950 45.6 550. Open Marine Water 22,950 45.6
- 7. BARREh LAND 662 1.4 71. Natural Barren Land 97 .2 710. Beaches 97 .2
- 74. Man-made Barren Land 585 1.2 740. Transitional Areas 390 .8 741. Extractive 195 .4 l
l 50,266 100: 50,266 100 50,266 1001 1
'The forest cover is to a great extent concentrated in a transitional area which is primarily marshy but includes relatively dry sites. In addition, the Florida land use/ cover classification system considers mangroves as a type of wetland - hardwood forest. To account for these considerations, the USGS categories of Forest and Wetlands were combined.
e Less than .1% l
SL2-ER-OL t TABLE 2.1-13 TOTAL BEEF CATTLE AND BEEF SLAUGHTER WITHIN 0-50 MILES OF SITE ** County Total No. of Head Total Slaughter /Yr Eg/yr (10 ) Brevard 2,250 675 231.5 Clades 3,000 900 308.6 Highlands 1,680 504 172.8 Indian River 15,000 4,500 1,543.1 Martin 35,000 10,500 3,600.7
'Okeechobee 36,400 10,920 3,744.7 Osceola* - - -
Palm beach 17,600 5,280 1,810.6 St. Lucie 26,000 7,800 2,674.8 136,930 41,079 14,086.8
*No beef production assumed since that portion of county within 0-50 miles of site is wetland, according to USGS maps.
T a) 1977 Florida and USDA of ficial estimates from, " Florida Agricultural Statistics-Livestock Summary 1977," Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, 1222 Woodward St., Orlando, Florida 32803. b) Only those portions of county within 0-50 mile radius of site considered, excluding wetland . areas. ! c) Estimated from county totals assuming equal distribution of cattle throughout county. i 4 1 4
o . O r l SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-14 l DAIRY HERDS AND MILK PRODUCTION "' , ^ WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 Heifers Heifers 1977 Annual Number of Over Under No. of Milk Production (1000 lb) County Dairies 500 lb 500 lb Milk Cows Brevard 1 85 75 300 3,000 Highlands 1 145 140 720 7,600 ] Indian River 3 445 310 1,830 15,900 l l Martin 6 800 710 2,710 25,400 Okeechobee 20 7,260 6,440 22,300 226,000 Palm Beach 6 430 590 4,140 33,900 St. Lucie 4 595 420 2,450 21,200 Total 41 9,760 8,685 34,450 333,000 4 (a) From " Dairy Summary 1977 - Florida Agricultural Statistics," Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service,1222 Woodward Street, Orlando, Florida 32803. l (b) Estimated from county totals for 0-50 mile radius, asstaming equal distribution of dairies l throughout county. I
SL2-ER-OL q TABLE 2.1-15 MILK UTILIZATION FROM DAIRY HERDS-WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST. LUCIE UNIT 2(a)
- 1. Average Annual Milk Production per Cow = 9,666 lbs = 4,385 kgs
- 2. Milk Fat (average) = 3.5%
- 3. 6 0 1977 Annual Milk Production (b) = 330.0 x 10 lbs = 151.0 x 10 kgs
- 4. Milk Utilization 0
(a) Used on Farm = 3.1 x 10 lbs = 1.4 x 106 kgs a 1) For milk, cream, butter = 2.0 x 106 lbs = 0.9 x 100 kgs 6 6
- 2) Fed to calves = 1.1 x 10 lbs = 0.5 x 10 kgs (b) Milk Sold Directly to Consumers 6
= 5.1 x 10 lbs = 2.3 x 106 kgs (c) Milk Sold to Plants for Manufacturing Dairy Products = 324.8 x 106 lbs = 147.3 x 10 6kgs
- 1) For frozen products-ice cream, ice milk, sherbert 6
= 7.6 x 10 gal
.b\ j' 2) For cottage cheese -curd,
= 8.9 x 10 lbs = 4.0 x 106 kgs creamed 6
- 3) For skim milk and butter milk products = 23.2 x 10 6
lbs = 10.5 x 10 0kgs
- 4) For whole milk products = 61.0 x 106 lbs = 27.7 x 100kgs (a) Estimated 1977 data from " Florida Agricultural Statistics - Dairy Summary,1977," prepared by Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, 1222 Woodward Street, Orlando, Florida 32803 (July 1978)
(b) Estimated from county data. Only accounts for those portions of county within 0-50 mile radius, l assuming equal distribution of dairy herds. i A,
i i i SL2-ER-CL ; TABLE 2.1-16 EGG PRODUCTION WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2(") County } Number of Layers Number of Eggs / Day . 4 Brevard 4,500 2,925 1 l Glades 750 468 3 Highlands 750 488 i Indian River 25,000 16,250 Martin 25,000 16,250 Okeechobee 16,250 10,563 ) Palm Beach 11,950 7,768 2 St. Lucie 25,000 16,250 (a) 1977 data from " Poultry Summary 1977 - Florida Agricultural Statistics", Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, t 1222 Woodward Street, Orlando, Florida 32803. f (b) Accounts only for those portions of county within 50 miles of plant site; assumes equal distribution of layers throughout . county. J ) l
- _ _ _ .~ . . _- . .-_ _ - -- -_ - ._
SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-17 Sheet 1 of 2 i FLORIDA COMMERCIAL VEGETABLES PRODUCTION IN 0-50 MILE RADIUS STUDY AREA (a,b) Principal Production Acres Harvested County Species Center 1976-77 1973-74 Brevard Tomatoes Fort Pierce (1) 126
- Watermelon (1) 36 Glades Tomatoes Pahokee 60 101 q Highlands Corn (1 ) (2)
Potatoes (1) (2) Indian River Tomatoes Fort Pierce (1) 700 Watermelon (1) 200 Okeechobee Tomatoes Pahokee 273 754 Wate rmelon 228 650 a Martin Potatoes Stuart 7503 (2) Tomatoes (1) 500 Watermelon (1) 200 Palm Beach Beans Pompano 6,070 7,816 i; Cabbage Pahokee (1) 404 Celery (1 ) 3,476 Corn (1) 16,280 Cucumbers 552 428 Eggplant 340 328 Escarole (2) 1,900 Lettuce (2) 2,272 Peppers 1,020 880 Potatoes (1) 480 Radishes (2) 5,320 Spinach (2) 520 Squash 560 540 Tomatoes 668 565 St Lucie Tomatoes Fort Pierce 745 875 2 Watermelon (1) 200 N
\
9 4 e
._.- _ _ . . _ ,_. - __ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ . . .~. . . . _ _ .
-_- .. . . _ _ .~ - .. -. . . ..- . - . . - - . _ _ _ - . . . -.._ - .
i SL2-ER-OL yr' TABLE 2.1-17 Sheet 2 of 2
\
Principal Production Acres Harvested i County Species Center 1976-77 1973-74 Other Counties (c) Snap Beans 1,270 1,190
- Cabbage 2,900 3,340
- Celery (2) (2) ;
- Sweet Corn (2) (2) ;
j Cucumber 2,550 2,190 i Eggplant 680 540 870 1,660 GreenPeggyrs 3,650 4,950 Potatoes ! Squash 3,000 2,180 ; t Strawberries 300 370 ; Tomatoes 870 1,165 ! Watermelon 4,000 800 l i } (1) Included with other counties 1 (2) Figures not available i~ (3) Winter harvest only (a) From " Vegetable Summary 1977 - Florida Agricultural Statistics", h Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, Orlando, Florida l 32803. (b) Estimated from county data. Accounts only for those portions i of county within 0-50 miles of site. Assumes equal distribu-
- ~
tion of vegetable crops within county. j (c) Counties throughout the state whose production was not large enough to warrant special statistics by individual county. i i t h s j 3
~
l 3 1 l
. 1
_ . - ;;. . _ ._ _ s. _ _ _ _ _ . , . . _ . . _ , _ _ _ _ . _. _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ . _ _ . . . . . _ _ . _ _ _
I SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-18 !\ FLORIDA COMMERCIAL VEGETABLE ACREAGE AND*} PRODUCTION - SOUTHEAST COUNTIES 1976-77' 1 Acreage Yield Per SE Production State Produc-Crop Planted Harvested Acre 1,000 Units tion 1,000 Units Snap Beans 34,550 24,600 125 3,073 3,680 3 Sweet Corn 17,600 9,500 210 1,995 11,990 Cucumbers 1,850 1,700 279 474 3,802 , Eggplant 1,350 1,175 760 893 1,367 Green Peppers 3,750 2,650 478 1,268 6,720 Potatoes (Winter) 7,900 7,700 184 1,434 1,602 4 Squash 5,600 5,300 155 822 1,893 Strawberries 100 100 1,200 120 2,127 1 Tomatoes 18,900 11,580 555 5,941 24,210
/
- ( (a) From " Vegetable Summary 1977-Florida Agricultural Statistics",
- ( Reporting Service, 1222 Woodward Street, Orlando, Florida 32803 i
4 4 4 i t
\
(~- / -
-- - - , - - . - - . . - . , - . _ , , . , . , , . , , , , 4,,.-,, ., . , . _ _ . . . , . . , ,
1 , _ . - . ~ . _ , . . , . . _ , . , - - . . . . . _ _ _ . . _ _.. . . . . . . . __m._..- . _. _._. .__ _ . . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . , . ._ . _ . . _ _ . _ , _ ._ . . . . ~ . _ . . [ , V.. O[N. U - t (
.SL2-ER-OL i
TABLE 2.1-19 i FLORIDA COMMERCIAL VECETABLE PRODUCTION, CROP YEAR 1976-77(a) Net Wt. Acreage' - Average Yield per Acre Production
'. Commodity- Unit Ib/ Unit- . Planted Harvested Units Ib L- 1.000 Units Beans Bushel 30 39,600 29,500 3,750 125 1,701 3,680 Cabbage Crate 50 17,100 16,300 - 453 22,650 10,274: 7,385. ~!
Celery Crate 60 10,700 10,100- 578 34,680 15,731 5,833 Eweet Corn crate '42 - 63,300 50,300 238 9,996 4,534 11,990 Cucumbers Bushel 48 16,100 15,000 253 12,144 5,509 3,802 Eggplant" Bushel 33 2,250 1,950 701 23,133 10,493 1,367 Escarole Crate 25 6,900 6,000 513 12,825 5,817 3,080 , Lettuce Cwt. 100 11,700 9,500 151 15,100 6,849 1,430 } Peppers . Bushel 25 21.100 16,800 400 10,000 4,536- 6,720 Potatoes Sack 100 30,500 30,100 206 20,600 9,344 6,207 Radishes Carton 11.5 31,000 27,300 291 3,347 1,578 7,933 - t Squash Bushel 42 12,600 12,000 158 6,636 3,010 1,893 Strawberries Flat 10.25 1,500 1,500 1,418 14,535 6,593. 2,127
' Tomatoes Carton 30 43,200 - 34,000 751 22,530 10,220 24,210 Watermelons- Cwt. 100 65,000 51,000 175 17,500 7,938 6,925
.- i I*I Prom " Vegetable Summary 1977 -' Florida Agricultural Statistics", Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service,
,. 1222 Woodward Street, Orlando, Florida 31803
+.
. SL2-E R-OL
/ TABLE 2.1-20 Sheet 1 of 2 O FLORIDA CITRUS ACREAGE AND PRODUCTION 1976-77(*
Est. Unit Prod. Harvest Wt, 1,000 Total County Fruit Unit Ib Boxes Acreage Brevard All Oranges Box 90 807 2,517 Early & Mids Box 90 507 1,351 Valencias Box 90 300 1,135 3 All Grapefruit Box 85 203 636 Seedy Box 85 9 53 Seedless Box 85 194 527 2 Specialty Fruit Box 90 39 201 All Citrus Box 1,049 3,354 Glades (D) All Oranges Box 90 33 96 Early & Mids Box 90 24 59 Valencias Box 90 9 37 I All Grapefruit Box 85 2 5 Seedy Box 85 0 0 Seedless Box 85 2 5 2 Specialty Fruit Box 90 1 12 All Citrus Box 36 113 !O [( Highlands (b) All Oranges Box 90 265 847 Early & Mids Box 90 98 225 Valencias Box 90 166 603 All Grapefruit Box 85 71 143 Seedy Box 85 24 57 Seedless Box 85 46 79 Specialty Fruit Box 90 25 131 All Citrus Box 361 1,121 Indian River All Oranges I Box 90 5,120 22,947 Early & Mids Box 90 2,937 10,972 Valencias Box 90 2,183 11,572 All Grapefruit I Box 85 8,537 30,477 Seedy Box 85 42 350 i Seedless Box 85 8,495 28,182 2 Specialty Fruit Box 90 427 2,782 1 All Citrus Box 90 14,084 56,206 ) Okeechobee All Oranges Box 90 482 1,872 i Early & Mids Box 90 284 864 Valencias Box 90 198 999 I Box All Grapefruit 85 170 636 , Seedy Box 85 1 3 l Seedless Box 85- 169 632 Specialty Fruit 2 Box 90 31 198 All Citrus ' Box 683 370
N i .- SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-20 Sheet 2 of 2 { Est. Unit Prod. Harvest Wt , 1,000 Total County Fruit Unit Ib Boxes Acreage Martin All Oranges I Box 90 6,297 29,849 Early & Mids Box 90 3,078 11,678 4 Valencias Box 90 3,219 17,580 All Grapefruit Box 85 1,901- 5,682 4~ Seedy Box 85 15 213 Seedless Box 85 1,886 5,340 Specialty Fruit 2 Box 90 288 4,733 All Citrus Box 8,486 40,264 Palm Beach (b) All Oranges Box 90 1,080 4,126 Early & Mids Box 90 726 2,390 Valencias Box 90 354 1,734 2 All Grapefruit Box 85 603 1,628 Seedy Box 85 15 119 Seedless Box 85 588 1,510 Specialty Fruit Box 90 229 1,912 All Citrus Box 1,912 7,669 St Lucie All Oranges l Box 90 8,984 36,619
. Early & Mids Box 90 4,668 14,997 Valencias Box 90 4,316 21,009 bj All Grapefruit 1
Box 85 9,306 30,050 Seedy Box 85 39 372 Seedless Box 85 9,267 27,746 2 1,072 7,243 - Specialty Fruit Box 90 All Citrus Box 19,362 73,912 State Total All Oranges Box 90 186,800 628,567 Early & Mids Box 90 115,000 318,832 Valencias Box 90 71,800 298,236 All Grapefruit Box 85 51,500 137,909 Seedy Box 85 9,100 23,296 c Seedless Box 85 42,400 107,944 Specialty 2 Box 90 13,830 85,893 All Citrus Box 252,130 852,369
- 1) Includes unidentified variety acreage
- 2) Includes temons, limes, tangelos and tangerines (a) From " Citrus Summary 1977 - Florida Agricultural Statistics",
Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, 1222 Woodward Street,' Orlando, Florida 32803
.f .(b)' Estimated from county citrus data for 0-50 mile radius assuming j( equal distribution of citrus throughout county.
/
.k (, N (M_Y
\
i i SL2-ER-OL j TABLE 2.1-21 SUGARCANE PRODUCTION WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2
- Acres Harvested Yield Per Acre (tons) Production (tons)
County 1976 1977 1976 1977 1976 1977 i 4 Glades 1,120 1,120 33.2 29.5 37,170 33,040 Martin 3,000 3,000 29.0 28.0 87,000 84,000 i Palm Beach 137,000 104,000 32.4 ,29.8 3,378,000 3,093,000 i State Total 2f,6,000 285,000 32.6 29.8 9,324,000 8,493,000 (a) From " Field Crops Summary 1977 - Florida Agricultural Statistics", , Florida Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, 1222 Woodward Street, 4 Orlando, Florida 32803. 4
SL2-ER-OL
- TABLE 2.1-22 Sheet 1 of 5
- 9
(_j FLORIDA MARINE LANDINGS: FOOD FISH, SHRIMF 4ND SHELLFISH MARINE LANDINGS BY COUNTY, 1976'"' Weight Weight County Fish (kg) Shellfish, et al (kg) Brevard Amberj ack 6,804 Clams 22,928 Angelfish 1,242 Crab, Blue (Hard) 715,338 Blue Runner 526 Crab, Blue (Soft) 107 Bluefish 70,760 Crab, Stone 1,378 Bonito 1,437 Lobster, Spiny 1,558 Catfish, Fresh-Water 710 Oysters 11,185 Catfish, Sea 1,374 Scallops 193,460 Cigarfish 9 Shrimp 237,673 Cobia 642 Squid 1,275 Crevalle (Jacks) 3,206 Total Shellfish, Croaker 865 et al 1,184,902 Dolphin 3,081 Drum, Black 5,369 Drum, Red 10,293 Flounder 6,031 Goatfish 5,107 Grouper and Scamp 49,031 Grunts 1,569 Jewfish 6,752 O' , King Mackeret King Whiting Menhaden 269,194 61,418 85,278 Mullet, Black 283,482 Mullet, Silver 57,654 Pe rmit 1,090 Pigfish 1,393 Pompano 41,118 Sand Perch (Mojarra) 803 Scup 762 Sea Bass 2,356 Sea Trout 46,001 Sharks 1,179 Sheepshead 24,232 Snapper 49,198 Spanish Mackeret 195,972 Spot 34,031 Swordfish 37,486 Tenpounder 159 Tilefish 9,091 Trigger Fish 1,402 Tripletail 406 Wahoo 405 Warsaw 3,797 I Unclassified for
g Food 17,948
[V 3
SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-22 Sheet 2 of 5 iO ik,,) s Weight . Weight
. County Fish (kg) Shellfish, et al (kg)
-Unclassified for Miscellaneous 29,778 Total Fish 1,430,449 Indian River Amberj ack 321 Clams, Hard 2,922 Angelfish 101 Crab,~ Blue (Hard) 4,137 Blue Runner 1,165 Lobster, Spiny 258 Bluefish 36,743 Oysters 452 Bonito 306 Total Shellfish, Catfish, Sea 60 et al 7,769 Cobia 1,482 Creville (Jack) 981 Croaker 15
, Dolphin 1,005 Drum, Black 464 Drum, Red 2,805
- Flounder 162 Goatfish 86 Grouper and Scamp 16,487 Jewfish 1,083 King Mackerel 374,212 King Whiting 3,043 Menhaden 373,970
\ Mullet, Black 105,069 Mullet, Silver 3,402 Permit 275 Pigfish 319 2 Pompano 49,539 ; Sea Bass 3,082 1
Sea Trout 27,850 , Sheepshead 607 Snapper 28,589 Spanish Mackerel 79,510 Spot 77,787 j Tilefish 5,582
; Trigger Fish 236 Tripletail 88 Wahoo 49 1
Unclassified for Food 13,416
; Total fish 1,209,890 Martin Amberj ack - 2,215 Lobster, Spiny 885 Angelfish 327 Total Shellfish, 885 Blue Runner 14,206 et a1 Bluefish 237,057 Bonito '47 i, gf Catfish, Fresh-Water Catfish, Sea:
503 5,644 4 s e -----w -
= ,-w, + , - - . - - --s -
# ., -n .---------.-~~-v..,y. . ,, -_, .c -,.-e-,,i,-.----,e--,w
--*w-~-
l SL2-ER-OL l
,s TABLE 2.1-22 Sheet 3 of 5 s_, Weight Weight Co *: Sty Fish (kg) Shellfish, et al (kg)
Martin Cigarfish 546 (Cont'd) Cobia 391 Crevalle (Jack) 15,742 Croaker 20,513
- Dolphin 129 Drum, Black 15,965 Drum, Red 580 Eel 14 Flounder 665 Goatfish 35,648 Grouper and Scamp 2,597 Grunts 1,178 Herring, Thread 26,095 Hogfish 20 Jewfish 7,161 King Mackerel 43,413 King Whiting 10,783 Menhaden 7,636 Mullet, Black 102,281
, Mullet, Silver 6,660 Permit 521 Pigfish 290
](7'~'g Pompano 37,419 Sand Perch 47,342 Scup 10 Sea Bass 532 Sea Trout 7,549 Shark 1,393 Sheepshead 45,711 Snapper 5,948 Spanti h Mackerel 1,441,118
, Spanish Sardines 7,278 Spot 16,477 4
Swordfish 3,037 Tilapia (Nile Perch) 136 Titefish 1,344 Trigger Fish 87 e Tripletail 604 Warsaw 38 Unclassified for Food 12,699 Unclassified for Miscellaneous 51,165 Total. Fish 2,238,715 Palm Beach Amberj ack 1,464 Crab, Blue (Hard) 953 Blue Runner 2,300 Lobster, Spiny 16,986 l (\g Bluefish 50,612 -Total Shellfish, s ,,/ Bonito 295 et al 17,939 i i i
- eer, - eer-ey -e-y ye -
SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-22 Sheet 4 of 5 1 Weight Weight ( (kg) County Fish (kg) Shellfish, et al i Palm Beach Catfish, Fresh-Water 81 (Cont'd) Catfish, Sea 78 Cigarfish 23 . Cobia 249 Crevalle (Jack) 199 4 Croakes 560 Dolphin 854 Drum, Black 10,229 Drum, Red 726 ' Flounder 6 Goatfish 1,037 l Grouper and Scamp 3,074 Grunt 363 Hogfish 11 ' Jewfish 35 King Mackerel 340,458 King Whiting 4,635 Mullet, Black 3,834 Mullet, Silver 1,316 Permit 106 Pigfish 11 Pompano 3,187
!/'~'N Sand Perch 4,458 Scup 20 Sea Bass 5
477 Sea Trcut Shark 81
! Sheepshead 4,465 Snapper 23,792 j; Spanish Mackerel 933,340 Spot 2,337 Tilefish 507 Tripletail 24 Wahoo 434 Warsaw 34 , Unclassified for Food . 5,433 Unclassified for Miscellaneous 77 Total Fish' 1,401,226 St Lucie Amberj ack 15,895 Crab, Blue (Hard) 1,633 Angelfish 489 Lobster, Spiny 3,110 . Barracuda 998 Total Shellfish, Blue Runner 10,795- et al 4,743 Bluefish 125,705 Bonito 6,592 i Cobia 2,294
'!I [ Crevalls (Jack) 4,132
s., j l
1 I l
SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-22 Sheet 5 of 5 A-Weight Weight County Fish (kg) Shellfish, et al (kg) St Lucie Croaker 1,067 (Cont'd) Dolphin 6,032 Drum, Black 4,534 { Drum, Red 1,227 Flounder 1,167 Goatfish 599 , Grouper and Scamp 32,929 f Grunts 52 Hogfish 12 Jewfish 2,642 King Mackeret 1,093,989 King Whiting 2,744 Menhaden' 16,815 Mullet, Black 63,329 Mullet, Silver 18,629 Permit 1,220 Pigfish 336 Pompano 44,037 Sand Perch 3,843 Scup 341 Sea Bass 694 Sea Trout 13,866
~s\ Shad 66 s_- Shark 72 Sheepshead 7,322 Snapper 24,859 Spanish Mackeret 1,636,766 Spot 31.125 Swordfish 3,701 Tenpounder 48,932 Tilefish 770 Tripletail 420 i
Wahoo 937 Warsaw 1,111 Unclassified for Food 22,497 Unclassified for Miscellaneous 323 Total Fish 3,255,905 (a) From " Summary of Florida Commercial Marine Landings, 1976", Florida Department of Natural Resources, Division of Marine Resources, Tallahassee, Florida. 4 c s_/ . i
, - .-, ,.#,___._..m, _..m.r# _, e--..- . _ - , _ ~ . _ ,.,,y , .-_-,,__e . - - .
..--+-'r-rwr---
- ,1-i"
SL2-E R-OL i q TABLE 2.1-23 w..- COMMERCIAL MARINE LANDINGS OF COUNTIES WITHIN 0-50 MILE RADIUS (10 kg)
- County 1976 1975 Percent Change Brevard Fish 1,430.5 1,571.1 - 8.9 Shellfish 1,184.9 1,854.1 -36.1 Total 2,615.4 3,425.2 -23.6
, Indian River Fish 1,209.9 1,155.5 + 4.7 Shellfish 7.8 27.7 -71.8 Total 1,217.7 1,183.2 + 2.9 St Lucie Fish 3,255.9 2,159.2 +50.8 Shellfish 4.7 7.2 -34.7 Total 3,260.6 2,166.4 +50.5 Martin Fish 2,238.7 1,380.7 +62.1 Shellfish 0.9 1.3 -31.8 Total 2,239.6 1,382.0 +62.1 Palm Beach (b)
Fish 1,401.2 873.2 +60.5 Shellfish 17.9 36.2 -50.5 Total 1,419.1 909.4 +56.0 Grand Total 10,752.4 9,066.2 +18.6 Fish 9,536.2 7,139.7 +33.6 Shellfish 1,216.2 1,926.5 -36.9 (a) From " Summary of Florida Commercial Marine Landings, 1976", Florida Department of Natural Resources, Division of Marine Resources, Tallahassee, Florida. O 4
__. _ . _ _ . . . . . _ . . . _ . . _ , . . . - - . _. . - - - -. . _ _ . ~ . . - . _ _ _ _ _ . . _ SL2-ER-OL
, TABLE 2.1-24 ;
SUMMARY
OF MARINE LANDINGS BY COUNTY, 1976(a) ; i Shellfish Food Fish Non-Food Fish (excluding Shrimp) Shrimp Total County Weight (kg) Weight (kg) Weight (kg) Weight (kg) Weight (kg) i Brevard 1,147,852 282,597 947,229 237,673 2,615,351 i Indian River 835,920 373,970 7,769 0 1,217,659~ Martin 221,863 16,853 885 0 239,601 Palm Beach 1,401,123 103 17,939 0 1,419,165 St Lucie 3,239,018 16,887 4,743 0 3,260,648
- Total 6,845,776 690,410 978,565 237,673 8,752,424 (a) From " Summary of Florida Commercial Marine Landings, 1976", Florida '
j Department of Natural Resources, Division of Marine Resources, l Tallahassee, Florida, i I. i i 1 l i
k . l SL2-ER-OL TABLE 2.1-25 i J.W. CORBETT WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT AREA HUNTING DATA (a) Species Number Taken Number Taken Common Name Sept 9, 1977 - Jan 7, 1978 Jan 8, 1978 - Mar 26, 1978 Deer 71 86 Dove 53 468 Duck 15 6 Hog 197 175 i Quail 658 10,569 Rabbit 8 82 Raccoon 13 7 Snipe 226 661 ' Squirrel 50 43 t Turkey 0 3 (a) From data provided by B. Lusander, J.W. Corbett Wildlife Management District, January, 1979.
~~ ^ -
e
.+
f y s)
/aQ o
s e g-
' % 'M ,
SL2-ER-OL - TABLE 2.1-26 RECREATIONAL WATER USE WITHIN SO MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 , Average Daily per Capita Participation Rate Average Daily Recreational Saltwater Users within 50 miles of St Lucie Unit 2 Recreational Activity Residents ('} Tourists 1978 1980 1983 1990 2000 _2010 2020 2030 .
! Beach Acti-vities (salt-
.3264 66,666 73.159 80,879 94,703 110,017 122,940 135,478 149,325 water) .1095 Fishing (saltwater) .0403 .0221 '20,423 22,227 24,574 28,777 33,430 37,357 41,172 45,374
+
Boating (saltwater) Power Soating .0362 .0550 19,820 21,650 23,936 28.029 32,560 36,385 40,099 44,194 . Sailing .0018 .0157 I,529 1,698 1,877 2,197 2,553 2,853 3,143 3,465 Surfing .0017 .0279 1,993 2,230 2,465 2,886 3,353 3,746 4,127 4,550 Population within 50 miles of , a St Lucie Unit 2 (see Section 2.1.2) Re sident 483,765 530,764 580,742 680,081 790,040 832,845 973,061 1,072,314
, Peak Daily Tourists and Seasonal visitors' 41,953 47,927 52,965 61,993 72,026 80,485 88,631 97.758 Notes:
(1) Assumes that daily usage of resident population is limited to weekends, May through October. Therefore, the annual per capita resident participation , rate (e.g. , 6.57 for s beach activities) is divided by 60, the number of weekend days from May through October, to get the average daily per capita participation rate (e.g., 0.1095 for beach activi-ties). Region I rates used. (2) Assumes that tourists stay 13 days. Annual per capita rates are therefore divided
'by 13. Region X rates used.
Source: Outdoor Recreation in Florida 1976. State of Florida Dept of Natural Resources, Division of Recreation and Parks,
< Tallahassee, Florida, May, 1976.
'1977 Florida Tourist Study, An Executive Summary, Florida Department of State, Division of Tourism, Tallahassee, Florida,1977, a
n
co Z :) O T a-o- N t LU l a i. k. 2 f- C. E i 0 0 o D i l 1 3C. 5
- 8
{, A o .. z L T - N. jl ,i 1 J 1 A
! n .. 47
<x -
u . j' 1 p, l ,4 t "1 f . , lo,jej-=$4rr,.)&p fP fd 4., g~r' > 2 t.. i
.- M ., u u ..H. , f. ..
W. p pa g,/..* -,. pp %4p @c f%}!) ':&,J .
- m i -
.. .4jg ..
,4 w% .E m ,e. , . .y . ,a~- g.
1 . - - r, i t x. .r .
~j3 j/ a_8 .
23 v 4-r. 14
,:"r,_.,i ,=:
g T g n ' "\ ' y
~
v n. . g9. lW yJ g 7'N;
.1.,,fc}.
k
,m i.c.1b. -
g4Ms.dt}jgggg 4
%r:' :' ci:9)g .r r
,,.h f8 @..,.;3. ..
r.: W;m. p p-(@.Mi,%,$p
,e.'.
o .- . .g. -.i , ..f, ,e :: . J. .ry.c
. ,, . .. . e. ::.s .h .1
,e. < n .
+ . ....: . ;. i~.m
- Af ._ - ..
(. W" . . M 4:.c , n." \ '* ik::'.~.'.*$d;,;?.5.# 3 ,,
,s % !Mi?VLe9 _ g . :..:... _?.
- hNI q . g,;j. hhka
- 5:
'- l :. ' ' , . / h
. Y:':[:h 'G : f.hf :is k: '
.b;:h.b
...h t.f. . h P*
r,.(,.4,4'.gm'-- ~ , 'o.z : H' . cf. $;;n. -- m -Eh ..cj.;;;.-@ l mig . ":;. :$' ;.:;:::c%.1::g;.g. ;c W..TXQh,. p;.'k;h .g:,::.
- '. .,@ .2 ,
', ' - E.- y;;3 r ;:p:fft.
[ .'
.',' 5 h 5 i
.,. .r+<:h.. e. ~. . $n,k..;,, , ..m.- . .'. .'
- 9. ;. $ %u . .;. .;. N.
..9,1 s
. }.. .g.,
u . m..w:.;
* 'd. $h- . .v.. .
- k.,, r n 4y :..,. . . 5 .y D
- 3. , . ..4 :. . .~"0..
E. ..;/.o: f;t c,3 '@ .. ... c , z;;;%m
,.v.
p_.-i. y;?.
%v .* .99 9.R::. . . . . .wl$
9ge.* ....
- p-
+ -
+ . . 3 y:d. .w.g...m.o .~
. . . _ < ..g: _ - .g: ;w,p.. a:.r. .:<.;m :. . .. . ~.&:
c". _
. .w .. .t:v :
/._ ._
7 ,., W; ...#ce, '. ' 32:" -:.d, : ':4 :%< . y 2. . .* ::z,b.gg':. i k h - f &. D ,W . h . ; 1, C.; W u ,? ' p ' /yp % ? V-6'.
>.,, k c / %u =j ~j ) AI hm.: . . ;x~
- ?
.'7-t7.lr). . %a. p..v
.e
.n i .
nr 1-
/;f c ..
i 4 x n,%)3 g ' 7-l ;':P . ..;} ;
;,.v.."..'. .. .
;;; b.k j. %,'h y s o($
ff' , 9
.g.,= y ,y!,f g g , - v ,
' ' ;- .;f M
Q' wt
.c f- ,30::
q
, o.; 4> .
e3t.M no . w.n -]: s m>. .s , ).e. .v
..y 1 s, 3
.g s .w.
,_c . e ,7..m, ug' m;v,ye} s e e< . ..f. ~. ; :..w I
sh. / ,;pr ;, ,.slg w ,, .dr, a yn
- w. ..} mv.. s :.:<; 2 44
- l
! -3 _
..c t ' zu 84 ! -
p c c i dr <w .Md j}u} "
.l ,
i . v 3. dW _ i'me -A lA
~
l14 , ~ , . 3
! %h kPY J W
+ j5 g6 p ' ' cf reh.f a .n. -- $ y.f@ y Qay '?N.8%m .5f .w Ji ill .IldiP! M r.x 3 ,
- **" .N 8 V
, A w.$%
+
- g. W 8
n- ,:
.. . xm.......kW,&g#w%y.e
.t.c. r.:.n. ..y::.:: .:.
m b. 7'.c-:.v u . .a
. x ~ ..
.s.-
, .4
.hn,.d.g V. %gL. .. y) n.e..
Sh ..d: . w.. %. .v . : .... c
. . .y. . e :.;
. )t yf' .. y&.n.V%'< , *y3a :_,l
. : , i .
., @ ': k,' :. j.. ,W- .Q~ .,,
y
- N;,: ,;;, . , ;;,*l. ,
.: y 4...' ...
f' f ... s - i .
- :__ .. *I . . 0
.. 6 ..o.
;,g:e.r.3+ . .'.:
. p., .,'..e..
m
, ,, .: 3 +:.- P.
m ",j;d.m.
. ,4}.;c.
;s.y % , p 4
kr-.j u b -
. 4 . s.. ,
i.,,..,.,,.,...c, ,._%- 4 _
.a __ 3 .
. * . g', e. ;. . . . . -3E nt .u:c:.H;... r-war *fr t- M 01"1..N_ Jf tm[ Z lg' [. 5
*x.1 z w 'r:,r.T. S D'S.
J -
;r: .
p y . n. ~~.d.,4. ".J N;!,:f': .o' I#' .' F 4.JTl '~' ".. i
- .e: ~ .t. '.' n . Ut~ M;3.y.G. ,u*/ H'2ujt "l
.'0';"'g
, [y[L mpM._. S, u
, s t.,. q j i c
.M t m. a,: b vf } :..;. : 2.,*t;
- ..t. , M a
~
'.4:#
.f* -.
- d. .'.:."...;/.*!T:...: < % -.4 L 7 4 ,,- . 4.,. _ L, [%
h e 2.,:,;. 4; n. k,;:;..,Q
- 4. . . . s: .. .. ,, _r -. qii-+T. _. _ g4_./ p_.1_
[ y ..c,:;:,.ify . N'h.:IM ,M. >Mrpi.7.,..l ,* . .\ y
'I d'.
.. M.. s ..'. . s,.; if
. '.. . . . . .,h,;. i1 ; . T*.
.~ kh [p i0 3EN g -
. [
....a y <
,g . -+ t fi%m e
e s. .; r. r:y~. 1*:;.t:1 ~:: .-
.v v;;; . .~+: a m _1
*mm[.:
., .y v.
t.1::..q; J .:! l-
. , +;: .dl9,;, : % .~ . 4.~;N.f")::
P , *:: . f..'s7 ,,v:: J *.. . ;' '
. .'y:... , * * ' .MP , - Q'r . 4+ l g
%.i, bf):N" b[
; .3
!'k;.':'.$
5 : . . Ni? I N' N.13 3 4 d A_b_y;d a ..
~
l, ,
. n .. . . . . s I s o . > a.
yc .: ,e ' K.; . !:".** ....- ' o :c q - u.,rtt 1I h g2 I1. LS g 9 4
- ,1:(/:N.&' 9:n,....
.~' ep::. .'N ;. .
s.t - w : a: 4, b
=%o 4
j,I 3o y. o t=-,.- 1 . Mc. .;h+.g. .
i x ::: I I
r U . 4J1 W 7- c a
'/6j;,'! Sh- ]jEM-])'jf.: A 3d~
s.. 1-J'5;yj
.. aV".Hd , .I y.e m .)d,P
.u.
6, 4: MI%, *[ZI -'v
\8s
;\ j . n 6 t- 5
$ ~
dwb:% I
,~N,fc::p}8W,
;3.
. ,:y, ,
1
';'. * ~' h- .. .)y:
c3
=_4:_
o
- , ' ' . '* W ~'~~.w :: w 2
.y . s K_ - ~ ~ ~ $
e.wam
, +a< ~p.fuJJ W y ,
, J&p- j ' ,. er. ; -l. ,;
.)*..,c?,r; 4._ ,,,/g/ \%' ff r }CO
. Wa. 3 a.,., ww sf . . t .' N, . :: .;;,*' I l.z.. ..: .
h Y l .: v. , L-k'*~ ' )~: H ' ,i
'"' - ~
%.V. d[."
==?>'.\*)?/'
' rq -
.a .'v. f ;J ],
i
- a. - ;
t(i -.. :
.e -
Am a~w a->s. ! .
= , . - wc Jp .., .g a _s.q ,.I <n w ; . s. 0. . , c ,+ o-
-r. . s.
\
- g. .., i - .-
r n. _ s.7 e,~%. g. s .c . r
.d.
t
,s
. . .g.y ..a .
3
.. L: ,
+=+J , ',ny .z m.z-(g 7-nr%
. c. N l $.3 - -
, ., n O
. .L 4
"n pal :}. .,,e o(s . . -. 7;)c . , =~r p 7\j I
. 4,w.g,:p.: '
. dz 3,w :4 A m. n .
O'4,C Q
, w ,
)
c - t
.. f w. T
- t. y @. L*' p}t:- : b : y 4 h,,sf_.
L3 k %; .,. A . , ... A..l Mf( n
~?
y ,s .jz $ 93- i[ e ,4~ eq a t <t,N , g .l,' ;4-J.r,j*- i..JML' -a. ?). 1;N.. ' f .G: :y b E f: s k Q Jy g C ,.l.' Q,@%.y. M [h;i ,h 3 '
\ ?$T
- f. i..h:: -y , kp. N't.7l, d .nP;.7 -- - m W ~ T?.*l.;;5.f.hNW 8 $% - Q:.l.h,*&r FLORIDA :, POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
. T[ &, N.I.$h..h THE REGION WITHIN 50 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 FIGURE 2.11 -
l W 2__ CI: O-3 a.
% O Su 3 .-
J
.o c5 c.
La. N
- E .. .
C 0 d
}
h ,
~
> wMb $.
W '^ A
,s" j
E[ Q ~
,'bbhlj t
, s '*
y I [ ,,' " -
'g as
'M %
7"
.#^
I\ g;#.g( ,r, . hh j p , 8 jm- J'. v s
. sy
. . +s. .d*.ki *O,.
.e'., *W
- e4 WCL g i[th j j
~~'~~
. ~
-c c.cy'.
a
. .. ,-k. r%. .
,\
[}u
*f %
_[
'\*'.J 1 ..
g 'kLJE A - g~
y r
,.[
- J. ' ',7 L i
}
pt ,- q cr
.,s w$. w . .
w ~= M M,<:i M } a Fj e;C uN, j al, . c ~gpha . , 3 w@i$h.s. w> ,, Mt W3 ],,' ~ ^ [g',o, ( 0- 1,/'---{.+p- n;Qi{
. 4fi-,. ,
- ; rill' ., 8
.i u ,, Q .m-- q- t rv e ,q:
-w .,._-
- g. .
w - i 1 T,\. w m
<c~ w.4 . q - () > =. ,, y,2_
W .
~__ .
i g* P -
'g E
a
+
' C g%l .
,E EpN . ,
*.=
ew
;; OC - ':) Y !
P!!
=S r o
iC
/ ,
's e i
%5 \ -
zz- f .l A gT .... . e. 3 el
. ll b
' - M ,,-
,/- 1!
p !s s.
,a Q...*
y . S. ra>
.i ,
,g;p i
a
.;s l ' ^
r 4 h# , A3w* '.. . *. *~. . . -
/. M .
~ ' . .', ,~~ h.3. B ss .
s, D. ~<.W..t,'i..'i.I.;.;.,; . k.' o.;og ~ Q h~
. ' t N - .y
, -f a ,g 6
' $ sj lf ,,s-ph* W - a t.& Y" Yy
, 1** .
s.; y* - . . < . . . -
/ e 5 ,
S / / p w '. .f-v . e,,u n c'* , , 3 l l 9,
. jW 3 *y ~~' ^ "
- ' :/ L , *
*Q;r
*^ ~ J ',
,u' g?/>Y~ % rJ . ;
'i e, :. G. ' cp ,.-fl:~~.-
;m ~
c'. . s .% 3 4 l s.hA;;p..v'm -w ;+u
/e c.t ; . .
w . r.. c, . a,
/ y'-
^. .
; -Q;r.-"'* he
.v e -
t.
.e-s t
_.E_.-__-
*. ?.
*i' c,; t q+ 's. fO
. }. .i. _ g '
3'
~'"A h I 's d, " 7. -Y ,f ' q
., -) ,.
i
' I
;. y1 4 s ; ,....
-,Q+n 'l\fq *s~ f *u
- ' J '; ,>
- gf* .
..b '
s V ,< ,, , ;
.a , ,, , .
'I4- I- ~)
hf,E .. 0 g' a'.8 5 / N i t- . M..~
~.. c : : 7 - ;
.+
/'
e.c.. ...'. /.. - k x7
-4 A:s .
NOTE.- Due to the Scale of the Figure the n .. .
,. . .@ ' i ,
ex .'. . r. i .
~ >
l Exclusion Area Radius (0.97mi.)and the Low 1.
._. - 4:.p~ -
~ $,v. _ - . -.
?
Population Zone (1 mile) Are Shown as
/ Being the So.ne Sire.
.3
%g,y j Og (o, - g-). /
. y' *f'. * : .%
-:t '
I, 5 2
<) .. ./ i
/ W. , M . 0i 1
2 :: ;, ' ;. j 9_ s. 1.l , _ i " SCALE IN MILES
- ' i .
+.,
, [. hb- , ,- %Yhd.; l l , d } I r a. d '
u O_u I s , - a '
'-Q . 4 Q u .. _ f -;. : uO.f . .. p% 1 .
g j, *
. o c ,
i 9-. wq j:
'u . 30 '
.g 'l- (
cf.( p{.lgN;
~ p' H'L , z."
e . 4
, FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY E
[i [o ,
< [ ,Iu h. . g WT, ,' { I u ST. LUCIE PLANT UNIT 2 THE AREA WITHIN 5 MILES OF ST LUCIE UNIT 2 FIGURE 2.1-2 .-
,7 i4 1 i J ll
'~ , 'M q>i
-)
O F P & L's ' f PROPERTY T l y,t , Q LINE <
@Qg q N
,s '
o%, ' t BLIND [ l I s -
) n N
- l. 1 k\ k h
q; . ~., ~ 9 c, 5 ( k- . s
, i x
*% % WEEK 4 of ~~'- ~
y
- y s
Z N v* ' . , j 4 j
'k o
f q
) -
j *.' - EXCLUSION AREA (0.97mi) - UNIT 1/ 'N AND LOW j s U NI T 2 '/ POPULATION ZONE (1mi)-- s y
' b l'
ik l A h ([ Q .. a g ?*9f , Ner
- o 1:
y' h l %
,, $ r r
((, i ' 5 1 (s [] 4 j. q
\
~-
F P 8 L's PROPERTY I( f [ g
/; d,d i {' LINE ',i ;
ff ]9
. - E
',"2 _ NOTE.-Due to the Scale of the Figure the Exclusion Areo & ,N
- Q
- , Rodius (0.97 miles)and the Low Population Zone j '
{,
},; . (Imile) Are Shown os Being the Some Size. .
,1; a iP h ._
s d
'? 'k $
z N FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY Q n, . I o
,,, , ST. LUCIE PLANT UNIT 2 scam , .,ms l 1(
., ,,cuae 2.i.3
l i 1
., n i I
'( 3027mmN M26M*N 3 T 36 S y 8 To CONTAINMEN y RELEASE AR_I PORT DIFFUL
/
M g 1
, g /J h
~
BOUNDARY y uNe og g d 5 5585't - ; ( w . e
= s -
f ~ jl - '
', \ x.~
s k - MIN. DISTANCE s e VENT STACK s N TO BOUNDARY K vi L 67 28' 54"
~
, .6s
- h , \ 138 3' / 'N 5257.49' e = =
- x. l BLIND CREEK I
, I
,s - j-x- BIG MUD
'k % [ CREEK BOUNDARY INDIAN I I l
l l
~o
l i N25#*N N 24000mN
~"~
BOUNDARY LINE 5 /
$ /
+ y g , -
T T3 LIQUID A VI A MULTI- y
- g "4, ,
l %
)j ,
r/ e n 171.39' 7 ( k / ,_' T 1468.54' f *** " h ' pt $ g
$ j i
610-01'47" , 1 l
\~ PLANT \ ,
VENT s PLANT SITE 7
'[ __ _. .. p661' ! _ g _ _ _ _
PM
-d s UNIT NO. 2
. i\
,T' SWITCHYARD do.1 ST. LUCIE COUNTY s TMS R 41 E
\
'^
5258.62'
$ U
+
AREA 1132 ! ACRES C: R lj o 1000 2000 3000 __~ 7 SCALE IN FEET 'i 9700'i ,l TO MAINLAND j; j SHORE v 1 l 1 i I FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ST. LUCIE PLANT UNIT 2 PROPERTY PLAN FIGURE 2.1-4
.J p.
p. _--.s.., ,_- .s 1; w g,-'-'
.l ~ {
, c;
=
Q.x
-ag (
t:::: piis_. p-__ t__,__2 ,___,_ 1,
- ,= i f- gr N.
CTZ E'-3C -- ] I D e\ u
" (b'pgl M
$j p 1 r:-~:; cx i F .. y J s
< = s:::
f .. - 7. u__ I; , y {=._:,
<::= gx ; f a_ ;.:. _;..a,, e "
= , = =
CZp; 7 : 0-' -l d d.. ah _ ~
%@dl..n-T$ .
$."::ylEii]
E51 h 3 GO ' Q~ [MR $ o% M cua :6_1.J t _ i _ .J m a i s _ [. l i n.3 ' YT i 8 O Mb M[0 k ,in.;3 8.a w .. - 4 [ 4 . dWA p 5
.hA : ! .ug g' gkI i
)
.\ gf14
; I.g3I w. T.. - ~ p I n gi;;
pxt:z ;:.m p:c l - j' v m c r.:1 t r.a t_,_- Lg d ;p .p :11> g.- p: ___J#
.g i# (_+ N T "
- 7 , g* {x s
i E r-. 2 g - -l ,
; m %, am ,-
C-
- 1- .a u
, t'-1,4 g:;4 c ,
t--
]l 3
, a
. .a -
I l' t\ ; - lI
,. , ,-. m..
- a ..
=
c- r- , r__r - 4 c u f-- i st r trl :3 a j; .r TJ_1.y-- - l l eg /,y g
% -^
- L'- 4 e -t--i 3 ,
8' a I '
"J C -$ -] d;!'E!O 8 pZ 1 3 .}._. - -----
}
1 g
!,I4,, '
3 4 : tt. ; n p p.;__ -dC f-d E,Z SE!j--d ;x l I.. t . L 7_a
- p. J >-- .44 k --
.L{
a a =.t n i* ., 8 a f.- w. ^ls,m, r-
%L ER i
F:1: t:t:_j t:'l p:pr.1 rj : n ..l g 1 p+~ ~ _ .M".tr--by u:; J, p g:1 ;-' 7@s 1 ly{y*/ i 1-- ..u.___
$E-3 E322$ E ::i I ' #M P h, L_' .[y' '
y _ __ . se :. _s == ,t go,./ l
,,g,{ .g
._ ruo i n.ma.x..
c,, _
..,,f, ff ur.W,fIto
% f p g U}
= --...mg J =JA u- t-o x ;p.. ip $,'arsqu<laIA- -g .m h e h,. g. f#NIf ,3 i
- , t -gm 3
tl s
)
.W w
~
I a O .
*'Q
( j g%., / c .
\d ,1q,V3 t L._,_
g
](" N' *' S u. M, , +-+ . , . _ . _
a; aft m m F I w- 4 he i,, t
, c w[pa%g.. p1TgiA -3 7gem- .r s ,
M.sM e
< -(3ggW, q& mgL+[ 6% wm y t ;f NQeqM.g;L & nig n f u N\ t g i. s ._ 3MT
-wsp
~ n m n .. c i
- f. p:1 py : atqv = .==p ,
- - i
/ pa ' .,w ..p -
x s p 7._. 3 7l , , bb/y&.3 G ! C
~
f +. '
~ m.n .
%. w =, _ , -
=
l
% g-, .__.
i (
.n"
) --
3- .
...-. i ,8 :
l, <n
\k . s
- i. /
/
\ w,.s'x
.m. s
' N .-w.. .-... < -
a / . ~; s wn* a .e
i
. J l f . . . I \ \ s mt .'.we... 9.. .a q' (g ca~5- \
2, gau wa n ,~.t _~ t < n \
- w. _re n _ _
3,
; ". . L a vt.:.:7 'j'UJ'"* '
* [ .-
E %;p* [-bp _ _j - - - s
- k. 4 1 = =. m g N _ ,i _
n m, . ,._m=. - r
;3 y-i
[Q g
- - -' _ 'ftn O-==.314,M.Na ,m .a(.,, p Y. dg 1"-
% - _. f T -
~
j' u.6, .: ,_'_';.t. i
* 'jNL , -'
;"j]g- .,
ww- t ;r a; o gr.utr m
. ... :-~ ._ J
,;9
- i -
j, l* " 7 hn M a e 'P l g- 4 l t l E.
}. .
'Wd l'\ Y h ,aa A ? Wl;l ll l
~ =;u.ent=_ra%, .t.--., %, >- av ,s. .w.__ [ W s c :l Es_ .h..
, hl w w. -q N @v.. -
~~[ll i.. , .
j 'u< jMg j I x j..___ l g 3 g* . %fp,,,\ __' 4
' - - lt
.r s / ' .
} *~~'t ' - - -- *~* s
=
(
$Q jb E g.
{__ l
}_-_ n i
-.---,_ f . g
' ' + *
- c ,". pv . , r
..l ).
f} l '
"" I 7'"" .~ :~~
u . q((f, j c3
----1_---- 9 H--..- s., . ,
' c:n I .' o' 4{
~
l r 2... s
]
i =. 0g. h/f'7;g , S i i ( th ha.-. . _ ** %- [~. ' -- h
~
k
.-q,- M %,.\ C ,, L.,l.Y(".7 .
r w .~, . . . ..
. sus 5
l i
\l Kj i i Sf:* '+ Hy* l
. m a/ . . - r-}u - -.,i r -- .s h_
. , t =':: . - - - -
_ _ . i 34 h, I t ~ ,. . _g.c3 }' ) - '
/ P w.) _.
l e.e t e.s.
' 4 l
- -- . /J'mo'ee w,E'.J
= ;5hL4 .rMs.cp, f r- e
_- --. i-i l +
.Ws%Pt:t I f..f. . __
i.. - l _%, 3 'F.. D*<,a O h'h f' N' aC"N5..?.t M '
f J T [ g " ' %' ,
~ ,. ... .
. lC-. h,ol l-
.T, ',
.3 -
- .J.-
e- 4,1 W; N,
- 4. ;3 3 ,
1 t' . - ' _' l t',-c" ,.-- s 3
-M LEGEND:
.L.1 v /* nl [- i,/ -
y : p l ll ./ x r - r - SECURITY FENCE i nT. .d
-- g [i; qw Lt% Q @
. y-V ,$ 22dy'
-T -T -.t - ~ V ;
, d. i,.
k.t.* m,._ Ni
, ,/ _\ l \
w.- _. ./ - , N, p,, p." i Kb / ;
=
l
.9 .,...,. ..,...
l 0 o, .
,, /,,i --"i3;'d; ,e' t .
P-- _ s (; :r - _1 / _
! =
r
- ._I __ g
*;W ; g'*"'"**"* >
Qiw ,
.l.
,, .-t .. l !
/
L -- - - _
-7 (
--- ~ l- --
\
j
- N _. FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
[' ..- - x
/
/
ST. LUCIE PLANT UNIT 2 I N x~_ _ .. { x /
'; .o,,. .
^
i ENLARGED SITE PLOT PLAN
.- u .a e, FIGURE 2.1.5 REF DWG: 299&G-059 (R EV. 3) c - :-
s
\ i e ,
I t l y l? f-} E{ M y El -[ I ,,. % ' . 4'\ ;.' i
~r t'
," p ;/
- M ., _t j % I. I ;
,. 3" k. (g
{ ;),
-s i ' \.. . ;'.1l. d :, A1 A,'
[
- c,
, ,[a h '
api c [ . T.- m [My L ~'.. ?C - . H! _ f ** , f'M -"h, . .,,f_ 'f S ...-
.s i .a N M b- -- 'i .f; L'.: c. ,.
s s- m .,., p\. t
- i. 4 < , .- . ;. -
s
, ,f , y
+v4 J : -
i y < ._
. 1,
.. t
{' L [ k J. O I 2____ 3 4
,, v
, y ;l-r .'.
-7e n
n 7' - 1 3. . ,' . MlLES
,,,,L,.
H ;.~. . nf 1( 1
.si L Jc4'%a[.,si , ;
' '[ '
- 27 .30' :3 y, ) '.2.f f ,e wjeg{/ ., < , s m.s
;i fa r 7 '" ' 3. """ * ' k- m. .
N
> a n.. ; , .! ., -s . .,
'f.* "a g.
V g L , Fa~ O ' N * * 't - i-? i di'i/*. ; Mg{
, [ - rj ,9 i . g,,,,;.j ,
' Q;s>hpM I! _/
~
- - te : _
%3; ,,
T) 4 gia .,,.
k m .,1 I t b N IU 3 ', .),'[ - nd - +
& L g 3,..j*n W W % h., /g %
t 3.- M W*v' c qe
,, . y uu w -x . : . - -
s
..y J. - p t- r ya *
?^ 4 ., pi,p y,'.?, -/A1 Aj. . ~.,J.,'.. E' p
- h. [ fd J k.h,* , b.!n . / ,_,, 'N-* i, 0 NE
- - a-
~/-
r ; y - i . . , ,, @ i _ K. m., m s A U
- ry
~,e ;'-
F, r .e 6a . ,g ,, \
- . ... .f. ; r n..} t ;f,7 g
. i i
,., ,i o l-J*
4 vi - - - * -
-+[p 4 ORT L," -
*L. .mt.. #J ' 3 * * -f .' _l 4; PIERCE - '.'s. \*g p '. ,
?j
- n #.g.- 2 . m.. p. ,.
... . . . m. ., -
3.g"t c. % 0 i
..g
. - %.. 'sa 7..
- 3. . .
-- f g 4
.,,., ~ z, . s 4.5 g 27e 2r # <fN 4 -
, .. e . . A .N., .d.. F -%a . k,'d
,, . p~ en m m
.=....,m-a -
s1 e 0 s
~ e .,v. v. e 4
s <h , \ , _0. ,a.i 0
~.,
, ; " w,. . . . m. . ,,, m , . . . , Ea . .p 7
- y. V;. .y
,w ,
',3e .> - .
s ~ , qw . g .. ., Q
.e 0
o
.e .~ i , 3; >. -
,.M. *' M : m. + *- z.
- , , . i.,,,, g 1 r . '"O c
- ,. 0 0 z ; 33pg h u,g, 4 ,x, .
g g; ~ g :,. . a -.
. .. . ; - e m .s ,,c.tm-w.y
,w .~..
p
, , w. , c. ,a " < . - e a
.. yn mg y.s .
s g -.7 382 ...
. bx . , - 8%
1. 7 . , 0 s
+ .* e. _
~~,m ..
> ,, e
~
4 y _
, fW 432 M'.517 532 ! @. T, e u. 0 0
. _. . ~ w ..n i s, dee ,
e 27 20' %v' ' s g - - e- --
.; , \ 11 ;e '; 1
, g
~... . J,
, -.,,. .,... , 0 p
.y q 0 t _ ,
- 0. J . 0
. . - . . 5.. 854~ \0 n\~ G 0
. , ,) I W A LTO N ^40 W-- 1% '
0 . V .. .
'% A &g , d'
. WSW -- "
A s ' Pc 5, Luc t O s. 4.--
' J, C
- 1.} ,. \. Q,.g g p. ,
1
\,. s
- . - .g .
^
L b-
- po n t st \' , , .,
D3 ___' . tu t etvo - '"T... .4
't .?E: L Ja. g.,J .* - ,
+-*-=.g
. ') -
. _ 4, x _ h y
~,f 4 < ,
- . f [,['r 4
c5r=,+ T - - * f' .
. ?, 3 3 .-ir.... ! ,s . . , s ,y .4 , ge- -27 15, .-
- 4 ,, a, w a ~ at r<
' i , ,. ,
.. . , 'g' 4 ,
s i
.. .sv ne
-* -( .==r. ,,,5 s
g j ava: v' . 139a fi' ,
>c t A r. t U, '. i ,t , ' - ;1gJU '.1 N44j +
e * , , <g 7 .s 4,, 949.M 'M,.e 7 S,W e i.). L % !., ' '.d ,! . g # . .. t. p g..W i ......'g
,\
.'.1
. [* .-
3 SE a.. , . . . _
- Q 3.'" .q'.. '
= '
,y,,_ u, s g. .
ye.. , ,M:f c- A@Q@) t' a,, . ~$ a g , , , .
. .. , . 1 i , \ 't
,, .4 _ q f u
g , **.gegy }
~,.a
, l t, Q t )ie. @ i - c. .; 4 + \. se, t-
, r- -
?.
t 4' .~ j . T1 4 1,,'., f Q. j,- :""J* ' '* l .( '., - ,, ,W . s*
$. a,
\ s\ POW siw Au f 5 t [. 4
( T- .s , I I - ,,,- n ' . J.L *
, ,, , , ,g_.. h't t v, j \
C .' f - ' " ' * ' b- $ 4
.,-t- . ,
j -] y, T
's* (fg'j~k}4lG ;t fig \ (%g Mw-w C, O .< ~ * -
,. u giq j ,> 5 n '~
a w\ Q .e ;
., .i aZgg n _
g s. . _ . cm m 4,aq.,:,w,. ow m" , , ; 5 1 -
, y ,
" g' ~
.hr,s, l
~ ~, - % . ",\
- n Q E m z . _. ; ; .
r i j. ,' 4 l m _., g -i ., 9' r- , L- - - . , 5 . ..' 0 4 \ 4 -- [#};a,4- . ; \,, b, ***'d' {i'l x;. ' i h3 > I- ~ I~~ U~ '. '.**
' ' "' '\ 4- ' .W AN
- S\ .\
OE 4 p '1 i: @ i5 ^ " -i "
. ,, .k *
'A-C '}'" MY{\-'$'2 d#"" ^ [l' ".\. ,ii- i))[')> ~. {,f,., _.. gh , ,
. . 1, .
*"$hy C Z .'
",'- s
' g' fl'b 4
(.
'# ' .". . s . *\(\j(j , s .s .. -)
'"S.
-4 ~g Oo ' ' ' > ' * ,' .k : { ,.f <
,",x' ht f
'M f I a ~ :
-.c . -
, ' " , ' 'll, . ,. i g,. 4-* , %. , ,., d ' ,",,N, _
,,,3 3:- 4
*3 f s 1
- , hs c 1 .
1 Z g g ,- *
*p.. . e. , . . ,,y ..a ,.$
- g.
-; r . ..
c*.'.t 3.>
> ., a . .3 .p ' ,
up#. , , . , ., , . p y
- 9 s ,
M... I .. < \%i I Z y / .%.. t . v, 't^^ 4 c,',- . ' s.,4
. *- s. .
, , ,., $ ~ ,, ty* ' ( . .. ' \ ~~
. [ [--./
*E " ' m "
-' JU '-
W 2 0 O 4s) 4-O [ O A c., I er' h W d
/ i je a Jj 2 y
\"' O
_ , O l l O 1 i V { o- O ' O g
\
C
=
*p q\ O O -
.N e
d if I C
#+
,i uu
$ 0 g.,cv <, 'e=4 h' *, .
1 3, .# k
',/,,/ ? .
"2 i d*4 3
4 g-z:
.~,-
'~
- W w=4 * '/t glir7 ' Q' ,g \ M 5
~, ; &g, .~ :
.g
"%z4' m. ,;z
; s. c <
.- /- @ ,
,n 5 ""
.'. % , }&
- g** ' " * *
.c,.
- .a y; a i' 7'" m o 'l - <
te._ , ::'
,y _i'. f.*'$ %y w ' g zI' . 1,- , -
'g4 y'/,,/ - . . -". . .' .v.. y eg . !k-
't
-.m,d gfl c *
.!,. 'e A . '.,/.., ',". .u . rr M*' ,,',' ,(;"i c#s,I
,. ii .'
- o..(r..
g} h I ' r
. A , . ' c ~,' ., ~a.
a
.r
.- ' . .- ( 1 ' , p, . .
_
- w _
a i;,'
- 7, 7 a;]: P ' t~ w
'?---
m " , ..- .< g g ' 4--*,- h[ ;, oxW r.1 /
. ' M M :<
-]
s: -
+,
. ,, . d " ' . , ,e. - ; 5 '
.p 8
,[,, -
,~
;25='
Li :i a- rpr'A * - M'p ?,r. . l 9
,, , *' ^' " ~
My4 7
. _ - ,4
,, ., i .- 'r :p .
u ,in.* y '1i
. ' ~
b r n1 c
. f FT:c. .e.k y .-
~..
i r ;, t 4
%r j_
(
, O_
r
,,.l
.+ . . * . . -... z t.
_., u + 4,,
, q
- , ,,t y"*****. * * * . ~,
pc , I _,t {. 3,
-e, n
n _ , m p , .. - g - - r ;,, ~ j{
- r - , . , , , ,
.>n.- 7 ,- 8 W j< .t,pI c /- _ ;_," '
s .x . m - y
$ ,.8
'3 -'*$ '.
, ., Jf, ., .
a t- - _ -- "'.,,m ~t , my s, .f , ' nt _ _ _ .; ;
- t. N ;;
, ,- + " .
-*7~'
,_ - s
. _ f,- . p4~, ' , L_ .' ; , .
-~~~ w , m1 -. _ - J. _=
y g'g k t 't55 1 N II e . a g-- 9T{T -...:m
, % 1 '
_ _ "2 ._ q' g
'.2'
^
W. g a~^ . -- 1,
- I ' ,'2 - ' ,
" 4
. .-~ . e. =, - Ui
'.3 ~
' t _
t , - t , : ,, i P A*'.'q"">._,
- .,. m.,3 .* ,-~...,.b=
5: , Y' "~,,,r,p,,r e
-** -ar4-9b
, .R Nn
,/
, , , . ; ,. , ,, , ,i,t g. ,
*}'
~ - N.
- L '
- 7. III - *E ' ,'1 '
g ~g ,s , ,t'o c s', * * #. ., _. , ,i2
*3~ -.1 0 ~ ^ ,s y, , p _.
+-
h,'..,.._, u
,,, w m .a p d >=*$
>~ -
,h.,
' ' I ;* , ' .A . . ,. .
- x w .5
[
- J W,
- i f f
- j g_ _
/. . . E2' ' , . ..
o -N
*. - S 3
gi,s,$ M -
..- o . s n .
]t
- y da o' r.
*C- *
0 N g (,
,,,.m.
.y; ,
- 4 3
e ~ f5 * *d * ' 7
. L, , N I ~ J.- . . 1 .g . .
b l*f*
,l , . U - w~ - " , . . , , r +
, g .? "
N, e .\ , > { en=== =e ( 1
o .- m ., . .
<=. c . -
- .; --~::
2 ? w 11 e,, - g- f. uv,4. 02- g, e,.
, ,,. g
- t. - . s .
~
r. __J p ~ m
.w . , e r w % 359-- 560 srs .
s . a. 0 0 0 4 T38 9 m ze .,' , . m es, c y g7 . 20 4
\
;, e 73 )s2 ,, ,, 0
~
~.
\ '
7g .
-. O
_ a c.. 4 , 2s , p y - 93 ' 0 d ~5938 ' s ~ -- v-
, 0 4- s m .
17 s 4 3
. u,c n 9g _
J,5 ^ 29-O
- 3.-
wsw u ~ 'a ' . - 3v - 1
, s1 om .,
; \ 520 . .o s
\: .d 88, .
g g 4 .A
-*'r3' '., % ) 1. .
+
a )t A% $.
~
~
- -- s* \
e, . , _- \ s vi ,y k-w _ .
~, 1iL - Uw , . s. - LQ - -
O g.3 ; ,
~; , , .g:;;.?
27w . v; g 7 g g , ,'.,7-1m .. um . . .gQ ag
- t. -
% n 1
e OCL AN BREftt (A*A-f.' * Y a-
,; '] , :; * ,. e i j 'y , '. P A RP , .,
'*-T *
. .. S.W g1.
.s. m F .
c , o. %. - 4
. . , SE 7 , e
- I h-d ,L .. .,'t . ,h , ' . ' -
4 y,p;\p.qjb:w.g.,
. . . . ,. c - -
a. C.
. i
, 1 47 e = v. I '
t yi ~ , ;;w"' ' , . : . , ,s.\ \ SE W*NAMT $+t" ~, o. 3.; QE 9" .,' ' .
**k\
i [ l i . . '4
'n.
o
- n ,L c n - ',i .
e
.? - . .
*?,, , ,Iwoe 3.
n* """ \\\\' -* o ...S- S~.I' ' + '
- SS W"..#* b
.o w- .
3$ U STUART
- i
~
'\
.~E -
{ * *s,.' ,,,, * q,. _. :._ .,', k. '. ",A*
- s m p __ c,e ,
a g,* sg.. gg m* n ,
. 'y ,._. m. _,
l ~ 'fi. . . x.;Aw- (..y,, e. 2, .m' G,R .y}, g yg ; j " ( _}u.
*e : .;f , . 3. y 4
m msu cZ>r_- 4 m s. ,..;~ , . .
~ ~. .
.. s. - - .
7' ; ~n S
-*ar\
T-* - '-: *
.u OE :}' #.e, S II/*: ' 5 -njo I
a yo Z
.g
['.,
. b ~-
,yI f. s j q i:' .
' T ,aia
' .< v Ts .g.
pf
,"\". -
.'.a, ,m . :5 . -
03 mC
- T. * , ,
's O
m r-- y C Z
-4 _:__
*2 '~
3 . ,,-
" -4 i s,
'.~,# rC1: '
i t;.6 s...., s A
,g)):,-)[ -
-..-s 7" y y -n - .,,
s- - g
?gi -
m ..... c.4. .. fi# - ~- .-
. 4. r u.c r suT o ,
m; N . ,. .t--C 1q. & g ~:*.. ; .,stu. M S T A T E P A i
- ., . .: ~
8 O wI ..,.
.. ; ! .... 'v 1. : ,
-- 4',; ? -
Z o 3
. . s . , ;p . -% '
.M) ,
q r-
, phg c',.3,. ,
) ' jfp g i
-' k; ; '
7 ' '
> .- .' 9". --g t A,i 4 4 g ; s * . i a.
,, 3 .,
.{ .e v.. - ,3 xx.n. g
+- \
\\m 1as:kv. y. ) ,t , ,3a ~,
i -
;. : - m.
e, . ,, , ., . . 3. 2 s ~
. ~, m. 3. .
4 8 1 k
\
^
j IfTf,%[
', p, s 7 g.a s [s. s\\ ' -4 \ 1- -qQt.: .. ,s
, ,, " : , ~ .f, i k ~
'\..
^
- i, )
i t i
*+
1a g.
-?
e.14
,.f1 Y4:n
- th a p
- h - .,
, . ; :;g
.. ;N \
e. 4 5 - W
* ,e, "*
') v .s4- T f
- e 's f*' .* '
4
;f.. s ,'. O - 2 3 4 1
-\,
"w a G" 1~ 4i
*y e k - ., 6 p.
7, .,. )'Q: -
,; *3gi ; p- l ~3 _.'
M MILES 7
,/ * ,
' r,,*
l, is mjj r .
\.>.,,_. s.
E, ?% ?
*) = ** * '; .
! V, .ST L UC :L ' U",,,-
-27 30' Ih f,, h 3 4 . - ,t <.r ;.
I b r' a
---s
' ~~
. s.
... m.
j.,b h.,.. . t , ' 3 y
F m.
s+ 4 n .. N
.L 'j i ! p: ' M. g %
O^ '"" . h , ,t '< h./ i;$[, %s'1 Ne.00, , "y dl N%- l i' ,-I,Y um -
! 8Q 3, . '.s .f We,,;. a. .
We
.,e""'* 5~ NNE
. h.
- 'i , ,C , , , - *
.b.Y .~O y ' '" = IQ
.we E c /5 .
h-i i4
~
.~ h. 1*. , . ' '
{ k ms g.. t"h_hw
-.Cana.l . .,...a .-. s . g 2 ,
i
>, .c 1pu e,), ('43 :-
x.
-~
~'
e
/32 L-
- s. ,
".,.)
a.
+
,,e PA ' [:q.h , ,n u-
-s ,g 4Q..
. F, - -
" .. * .,/
,_k,
. *1 L 1, ., , ) 3.s di,- } 1 's
!:. ,* _n ' - - - - - \** i.. ,.s ; -
0 r ~a si m. '.. e ', , u n ,. ,. u.{ i n, , . ,. ,-
~~ -
36,'1
...m
-\.
m, m. x.
- q ~, - . . . . . . .
e : 7.-+ J; j z -I t / FORT
1
\ p- "
a ' 4 ,Q, 5.. i"3 M-} 1 / PIERCE . .- e 'af. ,u. r!,w . M,
' .. _ _. L 'n _'h .a n _
t __. d' ' p/_.
]u pt
;$ .T .st?,
c ,
\ - i..r.N.,I ,, s.;v- -
O
~
l
~
.s { ', ._ ; 5 0 l
4,- p p' 1 C
-27 25, , " i ._ "r
, +
_3 -
,.s.--,- <--
2 *
.6 im- . ' N
,' , as. um
.-. c . rot
.=....,.,,,- .
.u.
- m. a . vmua g. ,
xx
\. ' ,F .e .w 0 0 .
s s ,, c ,, &. .n, ,; ~ I '. . a: e, 7. 2 t . : 1 . L1 "N, ,.,w, . .
.T .
n, .' s._., . 3,
- 4. '
4 'J >a VO'L. U
1 f.
n2B w ,- R mN .x1r 85 0 0 U . , L 1._4 ' , '-l ..t.J.?a i . ,1 4 5 g ;..m,a
*f W . '
.. 0
, .L# * - p - w j c.. i f ;. , ,,9:g
,;a.}yLw.e v '
_ q-3 r y s'@ .a e 0 a
. .f,. , 9 ' ., ,; 2 n rm - q :
ls.%" .*~ L) \ i On_
-4 : -'-
n ., ' t .nt + .
, a M* N n_
Me
- 25 '
~
,s.FA= a, f*..M..- 4-12~ ~ g'..e..
,,. e 0 4n
+ .
a, . .- .
. t 0
~.
a. s - w a..
., , ,, , /
-z_w - . . ,
ir ,. 3 : _. - 450 y - J, 7-8 573 W. e 78. 0 0 0
.._4 1 ._ _
x,A. oss ., e,e ,
,m.
g . ' g ,.20
\; \ 2 j ,, 0
. 1
- w 3 .
.ht. .
. 0 l r. - ,, g j . ; ',,,
A'- b'C r --
't .-102 -
0
; 34, -
d' "6834
- + -
*C 57h/91a+ .
0 ; g .)
' ~ ~
3 e A LTO ^ al 1 v-r,, 44;* 0 i 2 v.'c .' J* ' ~ . _ .. . .1 .
.wsw-c-
- 2 - .. r '
K - x s' mc4 c.e 549 i) s: ::20
-m;.y K,- s A
n -- s . , , ,,, \.
.... .4 3' .'
--2., . .
,o . sT \\. . .._ , ~ t
~-
'l' Z 555 e. '
s 4 eaa. ~-
.; e b,
. s.> ~~.
-m-3; s.....s,-
/j. .s .' - ~
~
_, y..' 4 9. . _ N._lQ F _ Q
. ,s - * .? . g,2,, . . *,'
>:e . r ,
. . . > .. 3-g ,* %s ..- ..
. 3h6 jlj
-27ols' ~
5-f s, .' ~."' ' v. . ;rt ..s,1 l.e 4 ; L: n ~. . x 9 L. O i Ti
.s k ' 'ar
. . , \, , g , g',
z ., n u , L; -: . , , ;, . <_
", , g_1 ., g([giggagggg.
, p a e.
SW , . r'#e cl.PD ' ii-> T'_ .
, . ,31..w,,n ,,' " .-'3,U : SE m .. y ,
~ .
z,
, 3 1 .
-t
;.~ ; 4
< , .y 4 ce,p, ;g fn,- m.x ;
.r .,
.s t
. , , . !r
, a;q y .,
. ,- L. e i r ;'\'. .:
g"e tq. I-Ly W. :A.3 ,.c-Yt -
. , Cw 4. . . ms \, ':* >*. .
.y\ st a a u sc. t. .
i . n t., . qAn* # . , .
- 1. -
r-O .., , ;
' : , _ . . , . ,w.
.g*\ (\ \\ 'c\ a t '
.A 4
- m s. u s nz .n, -
.ggy_... .. .. ';
x- Ins -
- =
;g e5 u32\(- y .
t STIJ ART ' ' . . - 3 + ,* S S E . ,. ' -
- u. y.
o Y ' .i -
?
El } .: u ,.~ _.. 9~k'.d s _ +4 .. .. . .. . a mzozH- Ow _ i ..-..._. . .,
. ; - 3a,.2, , a. . I' . a. *1 - .
Q, c m "mm -_',i . ( ' tc ge (.:i.. e.%q:, k T .-_j a*gg
.. p. \s--,45.w,"g , a, h.j.
f . .- .. : - '
-O -
? - !
m u _. o - 'r
- o -
.'r%'s .
M. . - r- _ t, .,- , > . . - -. ... , is \ . 4 .- b ,
$C r- Q ~ 5, s b,,.37 g -< '
[o m rQ 3- .-'.~~
'gA F#,e U3
,,7 ,
o HO
. .- . m" 1,2 .,.\, St .i.'.s N,- ' 4. . ~s -, - -' , . .
i . >-
- ; i,i - - % \- - --
o ommr mc I ~
- t. -
eu .
. .. s . _ -\. ~ m: - w - j
_, O *. . A. '
. p I , '-- -
_..- .-,N.~
'\
,,3 M ,' ' _> a o %.'
']'j.'.-'
_ .. . , . m' ***
-~~
O yI f, 7'
.*ij
;- -t t'Ai 5 _' . ' ,.' f'*.
5- aN74 m
' g].; 3s.7,,, mm. y o Z u . . . . , . .u.., z., . .y, a v e t >
Z
.4 .
- = .i.w.... .#,I t g bq/-.
. . . - ., w . -L p\.*g.s,*. ',v.
[
- ,- k t , ;', , _ J, g *-
y,' 6 ."',- **/~- H
.,,.,.-f-, '3.'*t-
~<
.- g.. %*
{
.1 a --
,-x-
' i il .i.
;; .;%:s. -s $^
. ,.n.-
I ( l i
m I I a .
\ 3 i
L y , y v .\',,.;:. . . . x. G .; , n:
,~4 .._a.. . _I n r!w J.. .i
.1 4.--
_. \- -r i[.][. [ h,. 3.,) J T ' 'gi ~.p' {.
', 5 h) h,*[,'*'j%f,_,4...
l1 QU
~
=:P J! p
- r. ; : L :.l\._. .
r.
?A t...
1-. t, ' a 4
;w.
.s...
G. . s
1 ,
Y
,h , ,, -
. ' .5 -.. 4 y
- 4. .
....,.,}a;M.._.
; t_i -
2 _3 4
.. ., .y 4 -
9,tcs e .\~" .. .! s:o
.J . urcc. Mcn,m
,s i ,.
$.p '
-27 30' .id..], . ;,..
f ,h 1
' "x.d
- w. /
w , , , , , , N
.,t ;, , i .-
, -.4 'i .. 4 . . t u s , , . ,. ....
4..: d' g StWN.E, .~*
." ^
~7
- NNE
- , . ~
m: -
, ,y , . .. r wp. i 5 ;. T S' [.kI,;, , '*k,[U" f , l .h . .,. . . M, 70 l
~ '
w ( swn . ,, (.,.> ${ - f,t i,N _c
- . h-;*
a - - - - 11 . 14f,,2 $ . , . , ,. . f-h(- g ... . v 6@
., . s . . . : . ,
vsge.-. qrtuu v e., , ,' t, .;s.
~- - -
3 .\ m>g ,
~ .. , ."-' -
< a r- . g, gAva
.,j ,0 1
NE
,..c .
.. Q .. . y
~
}: ,
_P p __
, ,' 7 -
u . :-
. e 3;
- . ' s Q
()
- e. < ~1 38p--8
\.,
.c .
c . : ,: ,. u o. t
. . . . . . . m, m.
~. *, 4(* J,i I 'i rFORT. \
".{
- 9. . F -
'r > PIERCE - '
....t.. i
.-q f. ';p e g, . 4. ;gs
- ] 7y. y/(, S
, 1
. '\ '
t- .. t s t ,*.'. s me g ,.
.w ..T. p
,' ,' Qy ) .
, y4( z
~ . . .
n
' ,,, awJqr
, s *.
- u. c .* y i
- v. '. -,d+- -
.. s s
.,7 1: ' 4
...'.m'\-\.
";\'.
-27* 25, 'i < - rig, ,
< w
-0 1 ,
en>:: , , r e ui- -- m, , n_u., s
=
s
,, .1, 0
, , ,s . . c. ..n. .
- c. , .
.a
, c i
; ,.. . , c'.,.' .*m 3. =i. m
,7 -
v mes
,4 3 ..n c t se& 0 n
. g r,2. 4 0'"\"
,-. r 4 -
_j ' h -f g. N : 2 4 ;' ) , e 4 O. _ c U j . s -% 0 ag,.. w * - r.,., . , , i 36854,ttlr c g 0
#,W
- . s ..a i =m :39 a .
e 0
.f-l-. V W?, T 2 QO m .
c- {}J:
} .*
j __ t 3.l f- _ri ti*- ' - + - .= I a s. . \.
~
[_ T ha y [ 7.... .n I e .- U e-30 m y - . . :4 . ~ - 7 e
.. -. _. n i
_e
-e T. . . .
e e y r
.e .
.-.c-- -;
a e e e e / e 1563
- eu _-li88 641
~7 1-
~.
21; . .e l e y- 0 0 0
. . i' d
- x. ,
e e 4( l 15 e e 27 2c.
-..q- '
- .ts 21 '- ' eee .
e p - - m . ,..- 25 a
> e. s 1, - 5 4~ 4-e as 0 s < 1f . ,
,n. se. .
e 0 s"..
.- -\ ~- .
m 3" Yx' 4 6 " ' \. ' \.t- O C
\. 0
. . .. .- J'24SS 730 2sn s.
11 0 e\- ~=
..- '3 5, \.wsw
~ < # %. 3 7"u - .--
- ss . ,
3.: s\\ 700 .q s 2 f4 . 1
~^
. - , . y.> . I'. -
y \ l
*g r *
, i* ' : *)'
.a.1
~
aa.
.. ,, \\ ._'6 .. - -
x g N y..-.
.. . + . ~ ,- c. , a . a '\.y -
- .; . \
~
~a... .,. 3...
; m ,, :
).
m
, ;o .. ,. :s,.. w;3 .
r , _gyo ,. f* A n ap
. . ~ . . .,*O\f g,.
m g .'. . . 3MLs
\..
,, $.)?r -
.t
. , . ,+ ;.,s*,: \
- v~.- - -
a
, .. s* ,-
m-.s...7 1 5
^
7".,. .;.y ~; v..<
- Cl ' P A Ea 3. s
- SW ' *( i c 'gi
's
- - +
'ag
, ' .bre f% .. .
t-
,+; t's t
g*, '*\ a *
... *s .-s 2 a s.
DC
'{(T .,,
r . .).
4 }}[: ,J-.-r:
- t. .
,, , f
?s s.*, -
- _ ,y 3e.... , _.Q J " * *- Q , . u ' - , , ~
- s. .
.i M.,ejm,.'-it 1w , ;. -
, . =
; .a. . ; -mA.
- A
, : n. : .a\ se a .att s:
\ +:.. ,
m r-e e.- ' x * . ., ,
. g..,t 4 sa .-
.1 '
(-"q . O ' ' *
,lU f eg. i N PO a.T '*
'..,".L fl -
* *+'"
J g g g-i f'*'u h_ >. ':'S .'STUART' f
- b"# ,n 5 23
- y' 4,**$gg, ' !*
i)"k
.o "O ; **
- v, '
*
- 2 ' , ;~ '
7
" -rr -. ,
';h- .
[ [ \ g . ** ,
- E m F7 Co , , ' g.
$', ,7)'.
, , ' a.4x *i
-- % 1
*- \ * \,.
*TI g m ,, , ,, . , _ _ ,
'.. I -. . . g. , J. e,.,
V , ._ ' NT * ' _ "'i','.,l..*. Or O :E t 4 ' a's C m -m O m- m .-
'~1 . ~ -
- g s.. , .
- b-i'i'
. '3EJ..
Q,,,\[ '\ .,c, 4, u~..
}.,--4 . . . .
gmZ 2 23 5 4 _. j f e . k w
' w-
".. 4 y[' X. . \; . ,e'=3 :
"U : - > -
- . - . - yj lq
,(., /_c;] ,;.
m -4 _4 p .
. t.M; . \ ,f P i .
A Og g. ,
'rQ e:
-. o it; o {z r-
,. -...m.,- i g ,
C y) l- 8l,I--
, 7 ,".,1 ,11 s.. , .
g . J- ;. < 7{} -4 g . , -. .
.i
. .. . g 7 . . . *; g 9, g 4 A 's g .w- C \. s
.g, me 1._ . -g y
cZ _4 .
'". . .,. , i
- 7. ,
;pt . ."
.s e, 5!
~
.O' .
ay*'d
,~'
-4 GO -
\ . -
..L lW'. . . w
- s
.. A * ,
, c
..
- p. l? ' '-0l?
- F._s h. - . '.s wc f + f '
o y@y m :, .-- 1*."O '."t y, L.Q.. , , , .s; 1. j(+ {, ~~~ y. 's , y m.
, 2 ,,
s 4,, .
.Q e y ,
. * *Y \\ g+y.".O 2
Z m
.it *""!'.- +=. - . ,L , .
v t e p- . M..++Yp [s ." li
,. . a y.
s
,;.'..-.e- ['
+
..~.../ m. .,
_j' ' .-;, A g= , , ,, $ ~ ,. k 54^,,,,, ; "h . "k . <, 4 , t i
s 1 4
\ s I \
3 a fg ... 4. s,. AtA 7 , . ( I 8, '-;r [.:, 2g , --- d.i ( ' *
- k. *i*%r ii ' ; , .
l .* --S , .
's ! - f. - ! l,t . g.d *
- . f.Ili l .;.- . '->'-
\ T h
a L;l '.. .s . (
,j
~
h 'S.- ;,.
.\_
, q
..i, j,.l,F . .~.- s.. . .,i ,
; r
,, .4 .. ~
.i
.g _p g
a r -. ,
..j \ (.-,1 O i
2 3 4
, e,
~ ~ - - - -_ ,
*. e.
3
.4- - '
- . . c, s
-.\
. \ . J':
si nc q u,4'd. 1; ..
~
MILES
- 27 30'
,' - - {. 4' ' }j'4 .v ,. ..... N
' - M . v ='s==~=
a g a t' _ . i,;.\
.,% x. * .' A
." -f k: ,'0 ,
. ~,- -
W.)( -' . w.'s .
~ . - 7 NNE
' r
- e, : . e *\,. .
1,l 3 . n.t ' 7 .,,-,' . . . .L
- 2
.. . ^. /O t, I
.1 . * ,I-'httm
- e ;- 5 N
->v y", x ,
., l [.**'_~** W ,}11 11, =s
. .Ga.wl . ,.u: . 3 C:s -[ y f ,.
s . -
- Y,
;;.JIIllif' ,. T , ~ X\ ^ p g
't-
* ' ,# % . 4 -** t,,'.,--\ J A t A .. ,
! g , , g' **
l f . m' , , ' . ---
,\
,\ . , .
, 4 .
I, . &* . . . /
~,..., a - . . . .
a NE
, n y ,
_r__
. , ~ , . .
\, , , . ,
./V
-( ,-f, M 0 3yg s- 6 g ,7 . ,
.g . .. .'F .i. . u ., -- ,. ,
q
- 7. 9 ' c% ' ,) ,- , - .
gOFhT . " ~
.k "
i / PIERCE
; g. ..< 7;, . . "> ' -q ' ' .e -f
=.u .q . "\
f -
, \ ;. t r, !2 .
p .m j g) 5: .., .,, ; . , h , - g - n
.\ .. % -, ..
O
\. .j;.,"~, .~ l fbi 1, . . ' '
^"5- U
, .. I. i .w-
-27 2 5 ' ." ' ~ "; #.
~
[- - M 7 Ju.
,.9 .\.
- n w s
.,, -2 _
. .: t. g . \-
0
,, ; c , r% .a
. - t c;.w s a T..,, . mJ e. t la e .-
- 0 w a. W). : Y- <
. , V,;; .
,, m. 4 :: . t r./ \p - - 0
.6 7 0 w1'ti % 3r
- 0
.4g ~ ~
r" 'i .' Jd790 , .;
.7
. c.
. ~ : -:
i l; g g 0
, .3 e
\"
g
- f. .
. g. ,. 3!- c. ,t , -
-. )
'"* -~ * U- I '*
7g . l -J b?
- S.T . : ~. i.
e a A__
, .'. . ? [ ,"' 15
-_.g . . . .
[$' B5 0 {"
. N( . . .
, 5 0'",
< / ' ,
S.
, m. .
. e, , 2
.. - - n - .
, ir .,. e
'w L 792 717 pp
,7 , , ,
e 3 0 0 0
. . _ 4 2702 . .. ,. ,
11 0 iee
. . . ~_ _ ._.,a ,
2 , m. a .
- n. 'S$s : ,
m =g g w
- g. -
84 4 23 , , ,. a2 0
~
2 h, , . . 0 (\1 ,
'i' \'o N-r -
i
' 195 ?' . * \ *- '
0 0 20 0001 'C- . F *' 90 't 9 1.A .i-20m 0 e.
,4 -
m A LTQ h ^ 3 5 ,-
\gwsw m ,-
eN .
- y. - s'-- > .\ 867
- ., x. . ~
- 13. 5. x. ' v .2 2 , , - . .
. S
'l A-h_
- -- en
),. _.~ s.o n . sv k .,
9
.- ' , . . y ,- r s..
wt e;va
=, \
0
--c. , Q , .', # , '
. i - == , =--dam-L
,J ,
I, . u ,. . , " ,\ y~.,* -
'~
Q , ,& . G .' l r - . , , .
-270'j O A9 # " " " ' ' '
W-*
".-Q' y '.-.%t'?
i < \ 9 . 't . D Ull l- - s i
,-4
.( , , ., ' 4.m.an.p --\~-
V
- * . . "g g,9 u ma.se - r'
- h. .ig 3. .
.....f..-. (
* .e . : y p a n,
,. .. s7 s
' ..--.i SW .c..
;t t. p
-. 3.) - w , % 'b 9
.. . . ., ,i, SE
= d, .
'- f W t,,
,t,
=
; . 3,. , 4 . :. . . e. m', , y ,- 9
.g
.- -t,. ;.m. --$y. / q.. ;x:r. '+ i r . ,<,
.i u. - . s ..
f - < ( .
,:4,
.r :
x r*
- i . M- -
v,.L_ .y* ' ' 't, ... -i. v. l
\. ps,... .
m 3; - s
- . o
. >\,s 5m.g 1a m.u ,g s . l.
r s - i n . ., *% .*'f.t.s l r* qi t * . 'N s *' I O n t. - .( .i '
-T= _ ____ t. -
/. . -
' o' . ,
@ ,3 "*j
~
M W .,, $ . ' 3 , k(- ' TUART
#<~ y s
' \.
. ,T *
*S' -.
.u?h
,g 21yy a zo Q
" ,=
L: -:- ; %. ,
- fh t ?; J. .:.x ~ * $. f.x'., 'Q t% _.
p .. . . . dk. p sg '
;g 1 -
ITI w O'
-i r 9' 1
d ,- T*';
~.s ...i ,
~
I a..'ik. k'.g.'
, , . , , . , / _. h 4
- d. f]la ..
2, , r
\
( .. a
.;:..jl /- 5) , 't)
( e .'
... ,d./
o e "O o z, pr_ g.g g.*.14. A.-"s. y y 4 . .
. . . . . y c\ . . ! , :. 1 A**
y,
- e,Qc-i z , ~. ;
P,- ;l Q
. ' . -t
}, ._a# , ,b. ' ,6\ . c.,.
'.c :
us r H -
~
- j. ') ; (--.+, - -\ {a d @n dO
, ,3
, g: . ..- t... +.
Ii" -[:. '.I . 5 ;);
\W
( .r.. '"
.3 ; , . - % . ~ @.' 5 U ' '% 17 s u ,' m .
o wco . - x;L . j,%i,y g) .'..'%k yy 53 Z : ~<=;-
;W
. - , ' 's % 5, . . -
is V c
> t s ;,
D .m. -c.
;i- i.* - -s ' '.
i 4 Z n{ \ . _ , ,. : ' ~ f
. .. i ;
~-
i
.\ s
; N )4 L / .' q \\-s . W. [ v. f s
'FI,,b gr1'pc.W',/\((h
.N i* 'a y- . . "
.F i . .... ,,. ,.\ , .s , .
1
\ *
\
\ f i 1 6
> , 1:
l :, m. ia. ,t1f {t^j: Y 'i"gt (,;Q, ' . ,,: '_'
. 1l. G A
f3 ; N [ .h,y
; - - ,o
- 4 . , . \ ~;:*!F% ::-:
h,~ '~
]}
- Q:
'<A
; \ Y~ f,. %)
} , -n 1
(
, -' ' . i% - s . .: 1 }.. . . . . s ( ,
. .V t . j ? 9. " . '. ...s '.\ . . .' N; J Y,
3.,.
.::I. ' t . u -
, Ia s~ e. -
, -,-\.
ea ; * 'e- -
. ' -~ : m ._~, ; ' .a ),. O, _ _ L __ _2 _ _ . 3 4
- k. <. . M
,f , . se 1
7 a' , .
~"
. ' , * ; # t J .' " i,
~
- ,., \3 .I,j .3 46LES
.. . ,g 3.- 1 i
if . ; .. 5T L L ; E ', + * }I,e; ,.- ,
-27 30' ],-l 9 ..
'*"*q s,
7 ,D
. 4'ths.
;; ;.w .s...........
N
~ -
- i .l; h. ,',:$,
., L .- r' ,
'. r : :
~
- u. v 'y NNE
- - G. . +. 9% N . , . . ~-s-
- c. ,,
'w, ...
.i
- ao 1,,- . . \,.t
_c a .w .. , . . yo S(( , c.[I
,y '-
.i
. . ..,'I IkkbMIilIk .
x:.x pc ,. A s v D .~ '
~
\
kps , yh. , c- b> - y-fQ )
,,,,. y;;\Q. an .. -
~
.r . , . .. . .+.,
m
. 3
.y...-~- y0 NE
. ; ha -
; +g . -
.. r.,,3
,g 1, g
.. .f. .
r
. a. 1, ,
y, ;, . r. .
- ;j m .._f
+. .
e 1
\.
1 44 ,s
> ' , s 9-"' --
;' _.- . ; ,rFORT, \ s '
. .s . , , . h a m,'.r~'[k*1
~
,w- .1 PIERCE
"\ , , . ~
Y
. s k.'}f g '_a O .,,,,,.~ , - . . . .
( / ~..,, .,1 .v ,,g L c' A
* ^
, r. r. , / . .. . tur
%n , ' .. '4 \ s .\ s 4o U 8 w -
f, f,. i 0 a i e ;,: 2 . , ,
. c. . .,
.,s. ., 9y. - 14. 0.
~ r41 s :. ; 1 7 n- w t , , .- \.3 O
y, g. ., V, -' (gI , e3 r.
,: n >
x,9 r:
.o 0
. As .' n. . 0
. . 4 '.
O l '* . ej R'A g g' g y +
,j .p .
, . . A' d
. .eut
. 4. ; ,
; ,,3
. e _-
, , .,,@.r r 7 g; ". -9 g4 g a- . j , . ., j 4 u. ;n i ,. s .
./ L 1., t , < ' a ."
A y p ""/'*.**1 M Mit ,*- gj *" t.. i b g g
-- M. . y ,y 5 g.2
,a ,, g -
f r e v, 7 e; 7 e g v.~
+ .
~ ~ = .. =t . - .
, 's 2_ m e e. s e >
~ - . . , _m _a : _,
e. lW b; 887 781 Res is;< 1 e e ~A 0 0 0 3,343 9, - ' n 1 e . 27 2 c' . 9' m 49- \ (e. ' e 4 - -
~
7: n%, ya3 11' X
. 0 i i n: ,. ' ' .e c e es 0
i S. e 0
- s. \s -
- > , - t2 e y- +
a # . - 237.-. .m 0 0 20000 t
'u, n a' e '- s
- p. .. w .3. 7 s
0 v.68 27.
- z. .e . . m wsw -- w< '
3, .
- s' =
. a.. . 009 , . , - . '~. v24 - .
'N w, .
3 . Q.
., \. .
s-
.,c..,.-
.a $ s .. , 4 1 -
e a o.s. - < , g\ . _
~
.'t , n
... r % . %- c:: , ' .Q A .' - - -
u' U
- g. ...
f.\ =._ s_ r _ 73 , , _ g' ' , ' . _ _g,3 ..
,..r ,
... %*;i,.t .,4. . . . m. . ...
r,
- 27w -1;11 3 G r
M. . . .
.. n u ,g;.3,. s Y'. y \ . . . g $ $ . x e. 9.6. =._816: . _
U. n a}i &. m c m.
.;wu .. -+ '
'M,.
S.W -
.< s.j. . 5_ 7. \ - SE
.;. s - ;
, . ~I
.~$,, : m N.
, , . e. v.mM.: .. _t . .w
. . .. . 1,
. c, D, '.s'
.(
~
s, , #.. ' ' A
,. .a '_,_,[. *** og. I ,,. i *:F'~
.r '
M.. -- . . , ,;d N - _ ne L.g g
\. *g-.L_ .
s
..y .
y, c. .g : 4.1 -
. , ;; -f ' ' s . ' ; . . ., s3,.\gsts apo, y; ! -
a.,ir t s ; /. , m r n .
,, s
! t Q 'g-.: = l . '_ 4
,r .
.1. .*% " , h*u , .
4
.L.
.g ,'. y;3- #
u o .- O n i. k , , s; .c:1. . , t. 3r,$-
'=
..o+
w q -
. "S - l.udd STUART L
' =
a i
. t
- -f
' ' -.' /"
I 2 -
\, *h .
cO . . . - . . . . u . ._. , s.
- t w4 t s .- m. 3. .
a *zn.g. g o, _m. .
', ~ m-.
a .. .vm.c... - ' T- ' w e.t sqN . . _ .
"
- d, jm-i Eg *" $
+ - f --- i i * .
{ (,7 'Qi , ,,0 ,@tQ.,.h -
- J. . . ,e' {a .,s
. lf gg, . -l' .a,- . .
o,----. r- e _a, .y .+ l g j -- e. . <}.%
.N og o
gr T- r
- . . %.m > . .
,-$/
" ' ~ ' ' rw{lM ,.
r.
-g*
.i , ' - ' - , ,-
~I m i= ]u-e Io 1 .,- >. - J.,
- -r . a <N. ~J , -* T ^ ^ ~s .i 3- .
O' co m rc
~
3 ,e k \ C
.. %' dV' W -
- - 7 -5 -
C --4
. F' .' * '}i m4 . , p .f c .u%I . 1 .-If;;'}\ .,y. W- -
i.
,,:*f:
q 3
,,,g n
., s, ,
, c=n
__ u
~ p\ .
(, <
-Y m
.~
r..., (. f :: ,
?-
$:,.f.s , a c p g g y O ,
, *+; . ,,. ...... ^,,,.. .
- ,% y u='r~*
Jg < Ah , . i.;g. h * % t v s . s t a n .> a s. O yg ,,
. l ; .o , . w7 e .,. - ---
Z
' . d c ,,- y etr .. , i :G I ms.. . - .- _ .
. . . 4- , , ., *. ,gtc , -,.yJ h .s it,v . ., @. ;.' 3, .
.. :. : e ... n
% !. g+_r. .
y -3; 7 .
.5
' 3 ' 2, .'g . 't. M .. , ..
d
. [\ . , , ,
,q. - ,, . s , r- .
....f 4, 2 ,
*= .'*A.. -
a
\
i
\
l 4
<- ; t-r - -4,- - %. h ^
+ +
i
. . .;: b i
- y }m 4- ,
f.T ;s ,
, , \,2*J[ : -
* '3
.l .4. ,1.s ~.m. , n s.
. \ ~*a -
}
l' . f "* * '
'j $.; 4
- r. s t , .
, . ,, . . . g q, ,1. .
I.
>>)' t '4 g
1* v t
- +
l
\.g.., a
- k. ., ?h)-. -
0_ _ __ i 2_ ___ 3 4
, .,,,+, ,
j
'\ . , ... -- VILES
-a ,
; - e, I ~m t c c r M. ... .p:.
.. +
sT
-27 30' 15d..y '
I. i -
-- " i.
.h,D.h.A. N L
y
. ' ~' "~.
';'. 4 & .cG: M. >. 4 ' , s . , ~. .
a > . . . . . .
'. - ~
dw y:WiiNWh y #4E n: -
,: 3
., , v .
8.
.. w w -
q '; ' ,;; ., f iA; "
" ,, ' 6 ' ' ". -
' yO
;}.,3g . Q" . -_ 'M.;? ;1, e,' 'y T' "
i -
'C. '[-pg" .a h. ;;'7fd,, e c.. s.m . . , . 3.a.
. - <. ,,l . - .
f Qp@ wu uu m- x, l
, . ,q. i;.ip ,,,..
3..v.-ga.
.. - ._- ~P 0 gg
. . . . . , . . , . .. ._. o 1.~.-...
^
_ r __ _ . r ~
\ s,.,
/. U
~ ~
.. .i i.: 3m ;,l , .,
. - M N. \. ' ' ' '? ' nr -
4
.,f.--
--.,fI i
i 1 ,
?u
'; ghs i A 7 - z - -j . M'O R T ..
4
. ,- 34 .
-\. t* -
,'g .i . , r'wy *4 4 i.
PIERCE l o n w
- g;;-
.; L, y x
s t ....
\ 9; g ,~ ~
. w u , r. .y c np' y, m 1 >.
d . .e.m'- ' p' Q p ., m .O..:n,5_ 1 311
- 27e 2 s. . . - ._ ~ , .
. .4 -
,.- \
i.n,
/ ,
l
\,
;iu g 6 3
y,
- >-1,
~ W ;y 4, ;;-ln., .a s 17 a <Q 0 l, 3, x. .
t . 4 as
- s. ; e . . : 2 ,,, <. . . , ( - .
1 . t . c- q,: y t.' ,
- t. ,t t -H<- ! , *
.2 e 4 c 5,
, i.
7 s
#.. ; ,s 9 ., x
. \.,-. a y; ge \._,,,
~1 0
.c 0 0
o g l 5 5 5;. . s._3c . - . ._ s, p. 0 c w - y, c. ..3i :.: .p: '.4. .
. , ..; p ,.
- 4.: - t gy o Q
. f,
,, l. , e ,., ? q ! ,,
. ., .t.; -
P C)0
- t "O ? I ; _f M !! r ..,:a M L- M h__O _s_ w n 0
4,'
/ /
\ y 0 s s N0 0 1.
t
'^
5
- ~.Q
,f, i
','- N g
0 , e, y
;,. .. g" . %
0 , i- ;.
*g 4._\.
3 I le 3 g 0 e ;.. ' . .3 ro, s\. 1 .
,s u 0 0 . .
*\ .
.\ h.'
- . z. - . .a , . ,,
- a. g * .' .. 2.
o. s .' ~ # (.vi kN . +_.r g:. e y .' z
.,~- . ' .
e 0 . s
, k ,,H:c
- w. g \
e7s yh. ' g ( ;\ ' . . s ag
. ,p -
.n .- '( h i ,
c,,
. 2 ::[y; .m .e;i .g' " %t e 5 ,
. . ' - '3 4 . x.. '
g ' ,- , ,
. .A. '
y *
>,t... ,
, s.
z1 7
' 3 :
\
\.
- T '. -
i
+
y
- ..a. :.n}7p,. "
4' _
- - 1
^ .
y w.W. n
. \ u m
-.7-i \ .. f .
T 3e , \ ... u.x. 2 i
,4N, T'b - , , .r(g \.g - ..i T , . .
T
'h 2/.
5 e. , \ c4T 2 ,~
- j v.,.,'.e ~ mX e.7.'s..- '. :
,t
.n
- e. :
.. 9 -
e s p[ mm{h.L,_4 9 -
- c. o -
.s '
s- 1 =3 - _=: iv
./w[*,.[..-.{,.*
6 ~ e ' e . .
. # 9-4 y4 ' ,,, -
fc.{M 3 i s n ' 4e .t 1
- sj'mmu ,; ',.,.y
,.. . ~
- i. ' .
- c. -
7 1 -
- . i
,a" 2
.c u I . . , b "
4 7 l 4; ; ,i 6 .
,y
- c. s /
.' 2 , 2 ,- . ,
i- - 5-1
- 9
\
1q,'
. c.
)A -
-\';L
- ' - . a s
3 .. 4._ - n, 4. Q e,,e 1 t m r . _4 j
. ij k
4 1 31 1 (
..... u 8 x i" ~.
\
L : g e.:~.0 E e: 4
,- .,.. .a y . -
g 1 '.,, Y 3, \\ : g
;, f -;
0 / g - .
.t ,
$cY Mn ,' a- -
.'N' .O
- i1 . "
L ' 4
-[
s ,s 5, - 8.+ - v- ;
+:t
_ 0 .- . W2 4 0 0 i , . f 0 - .w . - _ 4 - 2-s llL 11 . . t r * . a * ' - - g.
- u.
/-
w , ~ f - s s . w
\g h.
Qy 5o me@g> Q- @g - v * "f 5 m .a r mz4
~m i,
'0 . .* ~ , _
oSo e, semZ mcrDaZ -
.,s 2 ;
gyg - c mq, y. w4 7
~
2 i vxmm ,m 2oc;U iC P
, j ,1 , i.,I l !,l ill l
. i I
.i
,i 2
e 1 e.,3 [ .
, p. .ie m;1 yE .
9,. s :.
-g. e.g.- ' -
(Mx
;. ., . ~N. \
y[m.. y p; p .ip --
.. ( _ . 7. f . .
q)
=, . . .
s .
. .1 ..# i.
ep 4- l'
.r a e
.g
- k. 4 . _ ..' ..
~
_ -. . m . -
, , g,
' -. V8LES
.. . .. (. . .
1-
-w w ,
a .
.sr <x - .t.;- o..; pe d. n..
j , tt s.v N r.' sL l)
. y a s es .
.,- _a,N v: ;s G :p'un L.f'*.v t
*-2 '* *
- y ung
. g .. ..,..t . *Q ;, . .
y L, '
.i,' . , p-I sl
.[' . ~ , ; le, W.
fo
- s. * -v
.[_ . , s ou .. ,( ., -l .-r'w: l w ==: ' x - A. -
- - .xy ., -
4f v ,
.m x,. c4.. q .u es :
,4 o.
( /geg
.- .%. ,/' .
m
+{
' L. ,
g, , g
,r
.. . a jIAy4 .
+.
/
; y ... , . ;. M .
...s NE
\.
. - ,-+
. s ,,,,
w s. u__ g. y'~.:,:.u.n
-7p -..
(g . _i gORT o
- k 573 3
*- - \
0
'x '. ,. k
'3 '
.. ,A_e .:c...._'.,f' .
,. PIE RC E
.. c -
-- 3 -oq i J
- _.:. s 3
'-a a g
.J e f.jg <
, a-
.g .P
, , , p
.g70 7$' = ir
'--- + "'
*'T .,
491 . e
]
' 'g C 0
7.,,%, a
=.. / A .
C;;;u f
. m . w L. a . , '6. , -
s
\. ..
w 0 0 s e~. ,. ; w s
- h. 21.. ' 1-3 g c. - .
,, s ,
t- .w , a, . P
.a,.,s.N;J \9 y\$r.. ,12- t 0
~
0 0
, 54166n! /te w' y-1n3 y g i. ,
. .r-5'.2 r . 0 gs 7 .sMc : p f -. . m. . . 0 H. n. ..
- / . L . , , .t .
. \ . , .
-A y .1 ' .*" '" ' % .'r t - M mRt t -
gg , a
, h , h
- 7. w. ._ w
_ y __
;A a , , ,
y..q. .
- t. O
,, 5506 Y. 1082 912 13e.
2 3. . . . . a 0 0 0
~.
q ,,<~
. m .
- f. , - -
38.,8 33 n
. ' %.7, g aj }' g r. 1 g 129 U s
s 12s:- a _. 0
,, \~ g g.
o . ..- , 3 2:2 '. d 8 \ ax- 0 10000
- 0 "y
c 4.._,e n w 0
, , , . . ,n -"' . 80, 41
',\. wsw
~ '
\- -
\, \
- s ' " '
'(s 'p 1-298 6% .
, 14 6, .ys. . ..,.
.e s ___ .c. s, \\ v n ~'
\\ ,. v u .eep. .-' - e .mr .
c . .
.., ; \ r,- ,
0
~
. -m .
e ?- ', .
*4
[' , ,, , .,
-ms- =... 1114y : a .. T m..m.n.
- r
.7
,a A% 6 .s -
I.f ,A..- .* e GA & 2 , pg a, s .. .. ' ' } G .s. - '% s _. S.W .
- y. w, ;.
4 , L, q'.t-M. . 1.- SE
;- 3 t Q,... <. ;- '.
.N_f m .v ....
4- .
.y . g.
( t 1, ', ;'_
\.
-e n
zx . , , a, .;. - . .w . > . . .
- v. a u s , ,.
r"- .
.' ..u ..2-. g-u+** v. .. \. PO'N Y - ...;.,
o ,<
,. t .a ,, y-
. r twa.- q\ \ ..
$ e$ "i{
. 21.. dTUART # .
l 4. SSE.7[- 5]/7 s .. c Q h.y'N 'd.g. r ;
; -[ > .
s 'yi,
,ag s am-
.n ,m . . . .. -. m c o, 9.- ,. ,: -- w l . .,+ y - a z o a 3 .--- 1 s
. . - u.. .3
; sq...
8 . c m mm ,. .,... . .. x . %,. a .-. . .
.qm y g-
- m. c c-s
. # ,...w" e\~= . W . , w. ,
vo a -<aca 3,e. ..i. s,. s yg7.
~ .. .
a . .
- w.ym.
7nyo . . :,.. .u- .G ..mc x . 3 -4 t.. T '~.c:.
-em . gay.. -.
wr c .
;)- s4
-.4 z
.4 n s >
8 n m 1g j [7/ ,- 4 g@. n.'... .U. '}i < / u.
- J-[, d.d'J \-
- e. EN 9
- s '; ; ' '
l g , .;,, .
< .- . . . ; n e. . f ',' . 1, . 'g1
( ?
! s 6 l F
..; 3 s s . e. o e -u ; :Lq
- . -,- \ - sy n. m -
, s.a !a.t ,. /
..^ '
. rr m 1.< ', -\- -
1 f -- hi, j .., -
- ,.,. - ' '% _ 1. (g. , i.; ...
o ,- m . s .,.
' g., -
e -- i
,\ s 7
'- 3 A i
' .s - -
O I 2 3 4
- \. ._ w.
1 - y v - e >
- A us aS
\. > . < .s
# ,)
'.*. .* * \
r_ta.
. ~
,m". (J .
27 30' '
' -."'.g 5 W. m- . .
j .-n
.I 3.'...
. r
.T
.. n 1 . ..
W,*r$ ' . s.... *e.. a (e f., J
.p
. 2 .
- 6. , . q..; , %. v u. ~..
c . ..\\ . ;. : w .. @ 4 -
% '-. ~ .s. . Q.
=F
,,A, 3 n ,, r x.4 -n - -
4
.. .5-. .
.c. . , .ys.,]
,. w.
. m..te.
w ;6,. w ( , .
+- ., ;, ; . . .
r-- . . .(...
. . < / . ., . A 4 . > ,, .
$ $2t !,I- ,
.g -
, e um <.
t .2 -
. : x\ -
[ , [q[^Ni +"> l.'[L];,f:- SSfUTH BEACH F ~ "? ^ Ogg -
,y 7,. \. -
(PART OF FORT PIERCE)
- -(; :. a..t. .
- v. > C,I C, .
\-\.
w. L ... h , -. .
\ ~,
r . . . .. p. 1 o .A
... . p.;. . .:+: . 3 -
.e. u At l . . -
n y . .'! x, mp i M #0 si< .
\-\, .. m) . ) .. .
g
. .. . :.__,v.
-- ( ,
, . ' .Iyj
,: s ,
s gc 2r 2.,. ,
..-i e...._, .2 .
.r. \. ,
g y:p , - . , y, . . . g
- m. .
,o
. y ., ,y .oy-
- g. tw g,w 7;, ,?
.. ~ . \ ., 9 i ~ .. [, ,.c . , 4 - m '~m.g -.
-'1 . -Q} L
,A1A
.c
\~., .
P
.,e
! - J '; e
(
,M ,_..
,3(. 7- a ;j1- - - -,
is;.,
,s s. SA.
sv, hNNAS RECREATION AREA
+
tr ff s 2 _.:* e...A p ,.. \G
.'O
,y . . . , ,. c
- 3 . '.,,.3h,
* .,..j h. ' * '
' , . , ~~ ,
,,,, i e ?; I a 2 'f. : s
,'y C
@i<+......!i.~\c.
. . . r.
N
!ML RIV g ESTATES
_ ./ i
".m...-,,^
K. , . 4 ,',5,INDI .. ,; - ,,
- i g ,, ps.
^'
>j 't 4
L/
**'a g y i. .J 4 8
i i . .. - -
.., ,n r., m, n.. ,,., ,. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
7
,.f,-- , n- u- uzmum.__ __ . __-__ _ _ _ . - _ _ _ .
a,
.__, a, h
~.u to
- 6. ~ 7' y h.d . N ' ~,98,l,;
o
,. m$ -h- y
_; 2 q- = 4
,,p : m .) i .e(,
.g
, \p _ q;W .. .WT SLUCIE
s pg,u7 .Z
,. . , ,r
.i. My% , ,,
v . 3
=
..<" - . ;ANKONA 27 20' %.
.- * !~ l' \. ','O g
f,< . r: - y s f z..
.RI;.V g ,-
ERFRONT]N;\ ""
>[ s' -SPANI' - " ~ ' - ',
,.HS\'1 L AK :
( i o *., i-
}-'
7,1c Ms ~
\ g
.a
'~
4 L
'C.. .. '
N;s., PROPOSED [ GO.L.F . VILL AGE .y
, ,. g . : . . , ,
.s s. s. 'i WALTON
- a. .,h.\ PROPOSED. MIDPORT D.R.I.
5 _ _ _ _ _ - , . { E.. ,. C. 4 ~ s% - ITY - PORT 4 ST. LU IE h, . , N d ' ".was NETTLES ISLAND s a s s . , n.. \. ......y W .y
.s i
1 A o., sv \\ ; LU0if 9L,vD \. '
,' EDEN
' u t, . \\ f-cn . zu ~
1 7::m...y. ,, ' . t.,.;y&. ci.\ EN BEACH
+ . . . -. np e - ., . ; e v 27 l*/
2 ~
~i .y f
k'S ' O M F OCEAN / E , .. " e 4 y._g .g,g i ,l ' p% iy&_{.'f WBJtE E PARK
>a. ..
j 5. .
. ' 7- u ',
,3 4, '
's g_
1.. ggg yc;.f.. .g
- 6,. ,
\ _- ,
- a. , ,.e m ,5 . tse . 't
}. {!?Y[
'^
k ' f k .
- q'.
l . .' .s4%'n'b. / w > w# st. * ,->.M 'L.,,
' ~
g' "
\ 3e w
- Po.NattTs g /. , fe. y,
" ': .. . C I- T N D , 7 %g'1
~
, w-I cLo, ,. , ,,
3\ w a' __ Y N \
$ 'N t
.~ l> 7
, . jq r 'fi g M g p', : U d N .-g. M-isj!q}g,
,W OF
' ug1_}}