ML20127H005
| ML20127H005 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 09/28/1972 |
| From: | Muller D US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Dienhart A NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9211180358 | |
| Download: ML20127H005 (2) | |
Text
--. _ _ -
.. l tt ~-
bijtribution_:
Obcket Fjle (ENVIRON)
RP Rea Jg File e'
EP-3 Reading File '
i EP-3 File DRMuller, L:EP SEP 2 81972 RBBEvan,L:EP-3
/)
i Docket No. 50-263 KW30N 1
i Mr. Arthur V. Dienhart Vice President, Engineering Northern 5tates Power Company 414 Nicollet Hall Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 I
Dear Mr. Dienhart:
I The enclosed question list is presented to gain infomation needed to i
augment the scope of our environmental impact review of the Monticello j
i plant. This is in partial response to the Memorandum and Order issued 4
July 28,1972, by Hon. Miles W. Lord, U.S. District Judge District of l
Minnesota, Fourth Division.
Your reply should consist of three signed originals and 40 additional copics. An early response will expedite completion of our review.
Sincerely, j
Orla,inal signed by Geor e W. Knighton Daniel R. Muller, Assistant Director for Environmental Projects Directorate of Licensing i
{
Enclosure:
l Question List l
l i
l 9211180358 72092s
{DR ADOCK 05000263 PDR n"
.....l.i f L:
omer >
ansf.us.t~v n er...-
R Bsv.+.a..
9/.28/22_..
9/ h l2....._. 9 M L72 1
om,
....,<.,,,_,.s,,..
0 ha IllFORMAT1014 NEEDED TO AUGMENT MONTICELLO ENVIRONMEf4TAL STATEMENT IN RESPONSE TO COURT ORDER OF JULY 28, 1972 1.
If a decision had been made to build a 545 MWE coal-fired power plant, starting early in 1970, what would have been:
a.
The design basis for the rate of release of pollutants up the stack (or the estimated rate of release of 502, NO, and x
particulates), considering the existence or absance of any relevant EPA standards at that time?
b.
The estimated total construction cost for the plant?
c.
The estimated annual operating and maintenance cost?
d.
The estimated annual fuel cost?
2.
If a forecast of maximum demand through 1976 had been made in early 1970, what would be the forecast (on a yearly basis) of the average percent annual increase in demand?
3.
What was the escalation of construction costs at Monticello between 1/1/70 and 7/1/717 4.' In early 1970, what was the goal reserve requirement for NSP7 If it wasn't 12%, why was it different?
5.
In 1970, what would have been your estimate of annual fuel, operating, and maintenance cost for Monticel'.o for a typical year after startup?
6.
What was the forecast (in 1970) of the amount of electricity that could be purchased through 1976 by NSP7 7.
What was the schedule of additions to generating capacity for NSP in January 19707
.