ML20235D389
Text
_ _ - - _ - -
'L.
j b04;ZQ 7
pg 21972L llJ Q
Commissioner Ramey Commissioner Doub ACTION O*t 50% STATION POWER REQUEST TOR THE QUAD CITIES NUCLEAR
. POWER STATION
'L. Manning Huntzing's memorandum dated January 21 concerning the p
. subject matter stated that the staff was: preparing an evaluation report on the applicant's proposal for station operation up to SM.
The purpose of this memorandum is to advise you that we believe we should discontinue consideration of the proposed 50% license at
.this time and concentrate on full power license activities.
The Federal Power Comission has informed us that there is a l'
critical;need for the Ouad Cities Station (Units 1 and 2) to be in' operation'for the 1972 sumer load. A sumary of the need for power reflecting coments from the utility and FPC is attached.
The FPC-coments -identify the availability of Point Beach 2. in addition to Quad Cities, as an important factor in assessinq the capability of the-power system to meet the 1972 sumer peak demand.
Our current' schedule 1 for issuance of a full power license for Point Beach is. July 1,1972, assuming the. public hearing will take no more than 45 days..In addition the staff review for 20% operation L
has been completed and will be submitted shortly to the Board.
I We have.been proceeding on the basis of considering partial power licenses for 20% and 50% of station power without a full NEPA re-view and for full station power with a full NEPA review. The partial power considerations involve our review of environmental impacts reficcted in an appropriate staff report (" mini-NEPA') which is made public but not circulated for coment to federal and state agencies and others.
The efforts expended to date for the " mini-NEPA" reviews have detracted from completing the full NEPA review. Our current schedule for completing the full NEPA review (the final _ environ-mental-impact statement) is May 15,1972.
If we continue with our o m CE >
[-
SURNAME >
DATE >
Form AEC-St. (Rev.9-53) AECM 0240
- u o GOvtRNMENT PRINTING Orrect 3 7047 75a B709250211 870921?
PDR< FOIA MENZS7-111-PDR.
w s i 3' Cornissioner Pamey Commissioner Doub FEB 21972
' plan 'to complete a!" mini-NEPA" review' for the proposed 50% station
~
power, the completion date for the ~ full HEPA' review will be extended
' further to about June 15. Considering the normal 30 day waiting period from date of issuance of the final environment! statement' and assuming no hearing the earliest date of full power licensing will;be' June 15 if we dispense with the 50% " mini-HEPA" review.
If we continue'and complete the 50% review, the Connission could
- bo in a position to grant a 50% license in !! arch. However, if the Courts continue to preclude partial licensing without a full NEPA review the 50% review effort will have been in vain and the fullL tlEPA schedule will be extended to at least as stated above.
l Alternatively, if we direct our effort solely on the full NEPA review we need not preclude the potential for granting a 50% license (Court permitting). In this case the draft environmental statenent could be issued by March 15, 1972. From that time until the issuance'of a< full power license the Comission could issue a
' partial power license, assuming the Court appeal is successful.
A 50% license could be issued based on the draft statencnt plus.a brief supplemental; discussion of the interim 50% operation if warrented by emergency power needs. In the event the Court turns down the appeal there would still be the option to issue a partial license.after May 15, 1972 when the final environmental statement
- will be completed.
j' On balance, when considering the above factors, it appears that i
discontinuing efforts on the specific 50% case and concentrating on the full power tiEPA review will permit the most flexible approach for coping with the potential variables that may arise.
original signed by AnEelo Glarnbusso ter Rogers Director
} Division of Radiological and Environmental Protection DISTRIBUTION:
Enclosure:
Docket File LRogers Summary of Need for Power for Quad Cities Station DR/DREP Reading AGiambusso REP. Fil es Joe Knotts bec:
11rman Schle ger U4Muntzing RBoyd Con. ssi Johnson EJBloch MRowden, OGC Commi oner Larson CKBeck HShapar 0GC Ge al. ager (2)
CLHenderson PAfiorris, DRL neral Cou fl (2)
SHHanauer
' decreta y (REP.:DD.IR
_o
.... D D. REP.:.D1R......
omer >
W sunmr >
AG.
usso:se--LRogers-..-
om>
.2/2/72
. 2L..R2..
l Form AEC-SIS (Rev,9-M) AECM 0240 o u s covtRWENT PRWTWQ OMCE 1970-4W 750 L _.. _ _.- --
b
p.
StNMARY OF NEED FOR POWEP. FOR OUAD CITIES STATION i
For the summer of 1972, the Commonwealth Edison Company
)
estimates its peak load will be 12,520 Kl. This is subject to an
)
l increase of up to 440 MW if the summer is hotter than average.
j Without either of the 809 MW Quad-Cities units Commonweai,th's system capacity will be 13,189 MW, including firm purchases from other i
utilities. The reserve capacity would thus be 669 MW, only 5.4 per-l cent more than the estimated peak load. This is far below the applicant's nonnal target of 14 percent reserve and further below the 20 percent reserve generally recommended by the Federal Power Commission.
The FPC agrees with this assessment and has indicated, in its January 18th letter, that if the two Quad-Cities Units, each oper-ating at 50% power, and Point Beach Unit 2 (operated by the Wisconsin Electric Power Company) were available for the 1972 summer peak, the reserve margin for the florthern Illinois, Wisconsin, and Upper Michigan region would be 14.7%. With none of these three units avail-able, the regional reserve margin would be only 8.7%, which the FPC considers extremely low.
If Point Beach Unit 2 were available, but the Quad-Cities Units were not, the regional reserve margin would be 11.4 percent. The FPC has further stated that without the Guad-Cities Units and Point Beach Unit 2, the adequacy of power in the summer of 1972 will depend critically on unscheduled outages and 1
the availability of power from neighboring areas, especially the East Central area.
1 i
l i
1 I
k