ML20100G645
| ML20100G645 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 11/30/1984 |
| From: | Gleason E NEW YORK, STATE OF, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20100G638 | List: |
| References | |
| OL-4, NUDOCS 8412070342 | |
| Download: ML20100G645 (14) | |
Text
_
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COM'iISSION Before the Commission
)
In the. Matter of
)
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY
)
)
Docket No. 50-322-OL-4 (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,
)
f Unit 1)
)
)
)
[
AFFIDAVIT OF EUGENE J. GLEASON, DIRECTOR, NEW YORK STATE ENERGY OFFICE, BUREAU OF PLANNING EUGENE J. GLEASON, being duly sworn, deposes and says 1.
I am Eugene J. Gleason.
I have prepared this affidavit for use in Case Docket #50-322 which is presently pending before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
2.
I am presently employed by the New York State Energy Office as Director, Bureau of Planning, a position I have held since December,1980.
3.
As part of my official duties for the State Energy Office, I am responsible for the management of electricity supply planning studies.
4.
A part of the analytical work that is conducted in electricity supply planning studies is the development and review of electricity reserve margin calculations.
l h h 0$$3 i
e PDR
n-a-
Pega 2-
/
5.
Electricity reserve margin calculations are a ' measure of the relative
. reliability of :the electricity system's : ability to provide electricity.
Reserve
- margins are. calculated by dividing net' electricity generation capability less
. peak electricity demand by peak electricity demand.
To calculate electricity
. reserve margins for future years it'is necessary to estimate the availability of electricity ' capability and peak electricity demand.in those future years.
Electricity reserve. margins can be calculated either - for an integrated electricity system which consists of several electric utility companies, such as the member systems of the New York Power Pool (NYPP), or for a single electric utility service territory, such as the Long Island Lighting Company.
A-NYPP ' minimum reserve margin - of 22 percent is generally considered appropriate for the purposes of ensuring the reliability of electricity supply on a statewide basis within New York State.
An individual electric utility minimum reserve margin of 18 percent is. generally considered appropriate for the purposes of ensuring the reliability of electricity supply for an individual
~ lectric utility service territory within New York State.
e 6.
It is my professional opinion that the electricity capacity represented l
by the Shoreham nuclear power plant does not appear to be needed to meet anticipated near term electricityj demand, either on a statewide or individual electric service territory basis.
7.
My conclusion is based upon three analyses performed by the electricity planning staff of the State Energy Office under my supervision.
My conclusion is further supported by analyses which were conducted by the Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO) and Energy Systems Research Group (ESRG) and reviewed by the members of the New York State Fact Finding Panel On The Shoreham Nuclear Power Facility, chaired by Dr. John Marburger (The Marburger Commission).
Pcg3 3 8.
Exhibit EJG-1, which is attached, shows statewide reserve margin 1
calculations developed by the electric plannin g staff of the State Energy Office under my supervision for the second State Energy Master Plan (SEMP II) and the 1983 update of the State Energy Master Plan (draft SEMP III).
Each statewide reserve margin calculation was developed for the final year of the planning period in each plan, 1996 for SEMP II and 1999 for draft SEMP III, respectively.
9.
The SEMP II statewide reserve margin calculations reported in Table 1 are based upon the electricity capability data contained in Figure IV-D-58 of Volume 2 of SEMP II (p. 188).
A copy of Figure IV-D-58 is attached to Exhibit EJG-1.
The draft SEMP III statewide reserve margin calculations reported in Table 2 are based upon the electricity capability data contained in Figure IV-D-11 of Volume 2 of draft SEMP III (p. 378).
A copy of Figure IV-D-11 is attached to Exhibit EJG-1.
10.
The data reported in Table 1 is based upon the electricity peak demand forecast developed by the State Energy Office and adopted by the Energy Plahning Board for SEMP II.
The SEMP 11 forecast projects total statewide electricity peak demand to increase at an annual average rate of 1.5 percent and projects LILCO's electricity peak demand to increase at an annual average rate of 1.4 percent.
The electricity peak demand forecast data is presented in Figure III-8 of Volume 1 of SEMP II (p.15).
A copy of Figure III-8 is attached to Exhibit EJG-1.
11.
The data reported in Table 2 is based upon the electricity peak demand forecast developed by the State Energy Office and reported in draft SEMP III.
The draft SEMP III forecast projects total statewide electricity peak demand to increase at an annual average rate of 0.9 percent and projects LILCO's electricity peak demand to increase at an annual average
Pcga 4 rate of 1.1 percent.
The electricity peak demand forecast data is presented in Figure III-5 of Volume 1 of draft SEMP III (p. 25).
A copy of Figure III-5 is attached to Exhibit EJG-1.
- 12. Table 1 shows that the statewide electricity reserve margin would be adequate through 19% if the Shoreham nuclear power plant were not in commercial operation. Without operation of the Shoreham nuclear power plant, the statewide reserve margin would be 33.13 percent in 1996 according to the SEMP II analysis.
A minimum statewide reserve margin of 22 percent is generally considered appropriate to meet statewide electricity requirements, as stated earlier.
13.
Table 2 shows that the statewide electricity reserve margin would be adequate through 1999 if the Shoreham nuclear power plant were not in commercial operation.
Without operation of the Shoreham nuclear power plant, the statewide reserve margin would be 42.19 percent in 1999 according to the draft SEMP III analysis. A minimum statewide reserve margin of 22 percent is generally considered appropriate to meet statewide electricity requirements, as stated earlier.
14.
Exhibit EJG-2, which is attached, is a reproduction of Table 7 which was prepared by the electric planning staff of the State Energy Office under my supervision as part of the STAFF ANALYSES performed by the combined staffs of the Energy Office, Department of Public Service and Consumer Protection Board for the Marburger Commission.
The entire STAFF ANALYSES conducted for the Marburger Commission is reported in Appendix 6a, titled " Staff Report on Economics" of the REPORT OF THE NEW YORK STATE FACT FINDING PANEL ON THE SHOREHAM NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, dated December,1983.
n
~
Pega 5 i
15.
Exhibit EJG-2 shows that the electricity _ reserve margin ' for-the LILCO" electric service territory would be adequate through 1997 - without commercial operation of the Shoreham nuclear power plant. The Exhibit shows that LILCO's electricity reserve margin would generally exceed 18 percent without commercial operation of.the Shoreham nuclear power plant through 1997.
A minimum reserve margin of 18 percent is generally considered -
appropriate when estimating electricity capacity requirements on the basis of a single electric service territory within New York State, as stated earlier.
The data presented in Exhibit EJG-2 incorporates an annual average peak electricity demand growth rate of 1.1 percent for the LILCO electric service territory.
16.
Analyses conducted' by LILCO and ESRG and reviewed by the Marburger Commission also, support my conclusion that the electricity capacity represented by the Shoreham nuclear power plant does not appear to be necessary to meet anticipated near term peak electricity demand in the LILCO electric service territory.
17.
LILCO prepared a study, entitled Shoreham Operation Verses Abandonment (An Economic Analysis) in June, 1983.
Studies were also prepared by Energy Systems Research Group (ESRG), a consultant to Suffolk County.
The LILOO and ESRG studies were reviewed by the members of the Marburger Commission.
'18.
With respect to the findings of the LILCO and ESRG studies, the Marburger Commission report states:
"None of the projections done by LILCO, Suffolk County or the Commission staff indicate a near term need for Shoreham to meet demand.
w Paga 6 LILCO projects that two 400 Mw coal units would be nececsary, one in 1994 and : another. in - 1996, if Shoreham' is abandoned, using their load
- forecast of approximately 1.6 percent per year ' growth in peak demand.
ESRG, a consultant to Suffolk County, projects that the first replacement l
coal unit, presuming. Shoreham is abandoned, will not be needed until 1998 using a forecasted peak load growth rate of out 0.8 pepcent per year." (p. 33) fi kbh Euge J.-
Tetson s
Sworn to before me this
'$D day of November,1984.
i i, l
(
r::::m x n.t n
- her, A..e
' se
.o Arli
- . 45U '1/
Q.,h,si.n A'tr.., ? s.'f (c r,
- v r h,,:s, W.ar.t. M. i 9 1'
t h
{
l l
1
~-
EXIIIBIT EJG-1 g
J
.t.
- q, f
./'
r TABLE 1 h
NEW YORK STATE ELECTRICITY R] SERVE MARGIN CALCULATION BASED ON FINAL SEMP II (1996) j_.
With Shoreham-Without Shoreham Capacity (Mw) 36,618 35,805 Out of State Sales (Mw) 173 173 Net Capacity (Mw) 36,445 35,632 Peak Load (Mw) 26,765 26,765 Reserve Margin (Mw) 9,680 8,867 Reserve Margin- (%)
36.17 33.13
- k, r-,
TABLE 2 J
lfL NEW YORK STATE ELECTRICITY RESERVE MARGIN CALCULATION-BASED ON DRAFT SEMP III (1999)
UI With Shoreham Without Shoreham
.c
.fGapacity (Mw) 35,063 34,254-Out of State Purchases (Mw) 800 800 Out of State Sales (Mw) 168 168 Net Capability (Mw) 35,695 34,886 Peak Load (Mw) 24,534 24,534 Margin (Mw) 11.161 10,352
[Y-Reserve Margin -(t) 45.49 42.19 i-g r
j, 4
h s
t
r
~$ 9d;. ;n- - % - - - - H- _-
g, :, y. -- g. _ ?. ~ r * ~_.. h, (.
~
._g, 3,
.;2.
7 FIGURE IV-D-54 CAPACITY ADDITION AND RESERVE MARGINS FOR THE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY PLAN
't i
1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 L$
ti Indian Pt.
110
{l'-
Shoreham 813 d.t iludson Ave.
17 tr Somerset 625
! }:b?
9 Mile Pt.2 1,080
[: :j/
Pump Store 1,000 700
.I '
Arthur Kill 800 lamesport
.. h.b Lake Erie 850 jf g
flydro 3
9 8
89 27 65 47 51 11 86 86 18 27 51 26 16 105 a
Cogene;ater 27 45 50 32 41 36 24 26 11 10 17 10 15 10 10 10 Solid Waste 32 3
38 69 28 154 30 42 Wind 0
0 0
0 0
0 4
0 0
0 0
8 1
1 1
1 43
(
I Oil Convert
-12
-2
-4 16
- 64
(
Retirements
-93
- 38
~ 61
- 70
- 284 112
- 68
- 33
- 170
- 74 39 Net Added 62 9
72 919 34 797 61 2,725
~ 67 835 29 840 37 108
- 113
-48 69
'q Capacity 30,393 30,340 30,412 31,331 31,365 32,162 32,222 34,948 34,881 35,716 35,745 36,584 36,622 36,730 36,597 36,549 36,618
(
Purchases 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 Sales 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 173 Net Capability 31,020 30, % 7 31,039 31,958 31,992 32,789 32,849 34,775 34,708 35,543 35,572 36,411 36,449 36,557 36,424 36,376 36,445 Peak Load 20,801 20,938 21,076 21,216 21,356 21,497 21,618 22,008 22,385 22,768 23,157 23,553 24,163 24,789 25,431 26.089 26,765 Res. Margin 10,219 10,028 9,%1 10,743 10,636 11,292 11,211 17,766 12,323 12,776 12,415 12.859 12.286 11,768 10.993 10,287 9,680
% Reserve 49.13 47.90 47.27 50.54 49.81 52.53 51.81 58.01 55.05 56.11 53.61 54.59 50.85 47.47 43.23 39.43 36.17
- i I
m
\\
FICURE IV-D-Il SDHHER NYPP RESERVE AND CAPACITY TABLE UNDER ELECTRICITY SUPPLY FLAN Plant Name 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 Mitchell Cardens 32 Sl.oreham 809 somerset 625 1080 1
Nine Mile Point 2 2000 Fa a t t sv ille 20 NYPA Wood solid Waste 60.8 54.5 106.6 95.5 28 30 42 42 19 20 L
Small llydro 13 17.5 75.6 78.5 77.8 125.2 161.6 53 83.5 37.1 34.9 50 25 25 122.2 25 25 Cogeneratlon 47.8 57.8 56 51.8 121.6 33.6 73.8 73.1 63.I 48.2 46.4 41.5 41.4 48.5 47.7 24.9 Wind Ceneration 0.3 4.5 4.1 6
5.2 12.3 19.6 23.6 28.5 25.6 30.6 46 61 61 61 66 h
Landfill Cas 3.1 2.5 1.5 7
4 3
I I
5 5
e Coal Conversion
-12 7
3 Plant Itpratings 25 199 kettre & Derate
-79
-149
-29
-74
-68
-6
-48
-48
-6
-814
-312 Total Additions
-38 323 1622 202 1883 329 165 1090 205 156 114 t4l 128 121 245
-675
-242 Capability 29957 30280 31942 32104 33288 33686 33781 34788 35076 35232 35346 35487 35614 35736 35981 35305 35063 ruscleases 800 800 E00 600 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 800 000 Gales 173 17J 168 168 168 168 168 1 68 1 68 1 66 1 63 lb8 1 68 1 68 1 68 L68 168 g.
Total Capability 305n4 30907 325 4 32736 33920 34248 344f 35503 35708 35864 35978 36119 36246 36368 36613 35937 35695 Peak Load 21295 21456 21610 21708 21826 21966 2211*
11356 22669 22926 23181 23361 23664 23840 24058 24242 24534 Hargin 92H9 9451 10924 18028 12094 12282 12L. '3147 13039 12938 12797 12758 12582 1252s I:555 18695 tiltl 1 kamerve Margin 43.6 44.0 50.6 50.8 55.4 55.9 55 58.8 57.5 56.4 55.2 54.6 53.2 52.5 52.2 48.2 45.5
.n a n m.m-As-1
--A.w.a+.
=+--a 5-:r4: +W.
FIGURE Ill-8 NEW YORK STATE ELECTRICITY PEAK DEMANDS AND CROWTH RATES BY UTILITY, 1980-1996a/
Summer Peak (MW)
Winter Peak (MW)
System Crowth Crowth Peak Rate (%)-
Rate (%)
Crowth 1980 1996 1981-1996 1980 1996 1981 1996 1980 96 CHE&C 640 867 1.9
' 6f1 904 2.2 2.2 CON ED 6.980 7,140 0.1 5,005 4,968 0.0 0.1 LILCO 2.975 3.717 1.4 2,504 3,407 1.9 1.4 NYSEC 1.830 2.788 2.7 2,170 3,776 3.6 3.6 NMPC 4,844 6.067 1.4 5,444 7,808 2.3 2.3 O&R 690
%3 2.1 519 805 2.8 2.1 RC&E
- - 1.001 1 512 2.6 946 1,854 4.3 3.9 PASNY 2.403 3,430 2.2 2,602 3,941 2.6 2.6 NYPP Coingident Peak !
20.889 25,618 1.3 19,381 26,657 2.0 1.5 a! Based upon weather normalized 1980 peak demands where available.
b/ Includes the Village of Freeport and City of Jamestown: these loads are included in the PASNY forecast beginning in the winter of 198485.
FIGURE lil-9 NEW YORK STATE NATURAL GAS CONSUMPTION (SALES) BY SECTOR, 1980-1996 Average Annual Trillion BTU Percent Change Sector 1980 1996 198G-19%
Residential 324.7 248.9
- 1.6 Commercial 144.5 146.8 0.1 Industrial 123.4 145.9 1.1 Total Natural Gas Consumption 592.6 541.6
- 0.6 FIGURE Ill-10 NEW YORK STATE END-USE PETROLEUM PRODUCT CONSUMPTION BY SECTOR, 1980-1996 Average Annual Trillion B'd Percer.t Change Sector 1980 19 %
1980-1996 Residential 299.1 179.8
- 3.1 Commercial 243.4 182.0
- 1.8 Industrial 195.4 266.8 2.0 Transportation 1,045.3 1,011.1
- 0.2 Total End-Use Petroleum Product Consumption 1,783.2 1,639.7
-0.5 3
10 FIGURE lil-11 NEW YORK STATE INDUSTRIAL COAL CONSUMPTION, 1980-1966 Average Annual t
Trillion BTU Percent Change Sector 1980 1996 1980-1996 Industrial 60.2 83.3 2.1 15
y s m.% -n m4;LW M'. R; 25 Figure III-5 NEW YORK STATE ELECTRICITY PEAK DDfAND AND GROWTH RATES BY UTILITY.
1982-1999 Summer Peak (Mw)
Winter Peak (Mw)
System Growth Growth Peak Rate (%)
Rate (%)
Growth Utility 1982_
1999 1982-1999 1982 1999 1983-1999 1982-99 CHE&G 666 833 1.3 630 883 2.0 1.7 4
CON ED 7326 7044
-0,2 4920 4895 0.1
-0.2 LILCO 3045 3646 1.1 2471 2921 1.0 1.1 NYSEG 1771 2645 2.4 2090 3396 2.9 2.9 NMPC 4708 5513 0.9 5223 6493 1.3 1.3 O&R 712 850 1.0 509 662 1.6 1.1 RG&E 996 1420 2.1 945 1354 2.1 2.1 NYPA 2377 3108 1.6 2488 3410 1.9 1.9 NYPP 21252 24543 0.9 19320 23862 1.3 0.9 Peak"ydent Coinc a/ Includes the Village of Freeport and City of Jamestown; these loads are included in the NY?A forecast beginning in September, 1988.
l
{
l k
i s
o 0
EXHIBIT EJG-2 TABLE 7 CAPACITT EIPANSION PLAN
.NEW CAPACITY ADDITIONS (Mw) SHOREHAM-OUT Excess New Capseity' Additions (Mw)
Total Peak Reserve Deficit Year Bas aload Peaking Ccpability (Mw) Load Margin Capacity 1983 3782 3154 19.9%
60 1984 3847 3204 20.1%
67 1985 3860 3198 20.7%
86-1986 3877 3159 22.7%
149 1987 4101 3123 31.3%
416 1988 4125 3048 35.3%
528 1989 4136 3057 35.3%
529 1990 4149 3097 34.0%
495 1991 4161 3156 31.8%
437 1992 4211 3216 30.9%
416 1993 4184 3278 27.6%
316 1994 4168 3330 25.2%
239 1995 4134 3402 21.5%
120 1996 4146 3460 19.8%
63 1997 4055 3477 16.6%
-48 1998 400 4347 3536 22.9%
174 1999 4232 3555 19.1%
38 2000 4171 3515 17.4%
-94
'2001 400 4366 3676 18.8%
29 2002 4238 3737 13.4%
-173 2003 4 00 4454 3800 17.2%
-30 2004 4454 3864 15.3%
-105 2005 400 5-50 4764 3929 21.3%
129 2006 3-50 4718 3994 18.1%
5 2007 50 4770 4061 17.5%
-22 2008 400 4983 4129 20.7%
111 2009 3-50 4955 4198* 18.0%
2 2010 4972 4268 16.5%
-64 2011 4975 4339 14.7%
-145 2012 10-50 5009 4412 13.5%
-197 2013 400 9-50 5491 4485 22.4%
199 2014 5495 4560 20.5%
114 TOTAL 2400 1750 4
STAFF ANALYSIS
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY. COMMISSION Before The Commission pgggg USNRC
'84 DEC -5 P5 :14 In the Matter of
)
LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY Docket No. 50-3hkIYENV1h
^
)
(Low Power)
BRANCH (Shoreham Nuclear Power Station,
)
Unit 1)
)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of NEW YORK STATE AND SUFFOLK COUNTY SUPPLEMENTARY AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF CO CIENTS FILED NOVE:iBER 29 AND REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT FILED NOVEv.BER 29, dated December 5, 1984, have baen served to the following this 5th day of December 1984 by U.S. mail, first class, except as otherwise indicated.
Judge Marshali E.
Miller, Chairman Edwin Reis, Esq.
- Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Counsel for NRC Staff U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the Executive Legal Wcshington, D.C.
20555 Director
-U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Judge Glenn O.
Bright Washington, D.C.
20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Edward M.
Barrett, Esq.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Long Island Lighting Company 250 Old Country Road Judge Elizabeth.B. Johnson Mineola, New York 11501 Ook Ridge National Laboratory
-P.O.
Box X, Building 3500 Honorable Peter F.
Cohalan Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 Suffolk County Executive H.
Lee Dennison Building l
Eleanor L.
Frucci, Esq.
Veterans Memorial Highway i
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Hauppauge, New York 11788.
l
.U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
{
l
Frbian Palomino, Esq. #
James B. Dougherty, Esq.
Special. Counsel to the Governor
-3045 Porter-Street, N.W.
Executive Chamber Washington, D.C.
20008 Room 229 S. tate Capitol Mr.. Brian McCaffrey
~ lbany, New York 12224 Long Island Lighting Company A
Shoreham Nuclear Power Station W.-Taylor Reveley, III, Esq.0 P.O. Box'618-
- Anthony F.
Earley, Jr., Esq.
North Country Road Robert M.ERolfe, Esq.
Wading River, New York 11792 Hunton & Williams P.O.? Box-1535 Jay Dunkleberger, Esq.
707 East' Main Street-New York State Energy Office Richmond,' Virginia-23212 Agency Building 2 Empire State Plaza Mr. Martin Suubert Albany, New York 12223 c/o Congressman Wi.lliam Carney 1113 Longworth House Office Bldg.
Stephen B.
Latham, Esq.
Washington, D.C.
-20515 John F.
Shea, Esq.
Twomey, Latham and Shea Martin.Bradley Ashare, Esq.
33 West Second-Street Suffolk' County Attorney Riverhead, New York 11901
- H.
Lee Dennison Building
- Voterans Memorial' Highway Docketing and Service Branch Hauppauge, New York' 11788 Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Nunzio J.
Palladino, Chairman Commission U.S._ Nuclear Regulatory Washington, D.C.
20555 Commission 1717 H Street, N.W.,
Room 1114 Commissioner Lando W.
Zech, Jr.*
Washington, D.C.
20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commissioner Thomas M. Roberts -
- 1717 H Street, N.W.,
Room 1103 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Washington, D.C.
20555 Commission 1717 H Street, N.W., Room 1113 Commissioner James K.
Asselstine
' Washington, D.C.
20555
.U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commissioner Frederick-M. Bernthal 1717 H Street, N.W.,
Room ll49 U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Washing ton,
D.C.
20555 l
Commission 1717 H Street, N.W.,
Room 1156 I
Washington, D.C.
20555
., ,- /
_./
l", -f
-/$~
Herbert H. Brown l'
KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART l
1900 M Street, N.W.,
Suite 800 Washington, D.C.
20036 I
DATE:
December 5, 1984
' l 1,
e y
,y--s
.-.,..y9 y-
-m.
,n-.,n-._%-y.,
-,-,.m_
m-,.,-_y-r-,
,----,,y,.,
.w y,,_,.y
-y
,,y_.-,-.,-s,,,,,_,7,,y-_.-_y_,_-_-,