ML18030A114

Responds to NRC Requests for Comments Re Draft Suppl to Draft Eis.Review Indicates Use of Cowanesque Project Currently Under Const Would Provide Better Water Storage than Building New Reservoir

ML18030A114
Person / Time
Site:	Susquehanna
Issue date:	06/10/1980
From:	Lindsay W FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION
To:	Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
OEPR-DRB, NUDOCS 8006130308
Download: ML18030A114 (3)

Text

REGULATORINFORMATION DISTRIBUTION TEH (RIBS)E gU//ACCESSION NOR:8006130308 OOC~DATE: 80/06/10 NOTARI FACIL;50~87.-Susquehanna Steam Electric Stat ion<Uni t SOM88 Susquehanna Steam Electric Stationi Unit AI,AFAR~AUTHOR AFFILIATION LINDSAYFlAr

~*~Federal Energy Regul ator y Commi ssion RECIP~NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION EISEI<HUTFD.G Division of I icensing S UBJECT: Responds to NRC requests for comments re dra draft EISA Review indicates use of Cowanesque currently under const would provide better w than building new reservoir, DISTRIBUTION CODE: C002S COPIES RECEIVED:LTR ENCL TITLE: Environ~Comments, NOTES.K'&MlO X, g~W C'fN~+R ZEO;NO DOCKET iF Pennsylva 05000387 2F Pennsylva 05000388 ft suppl to project ater storage SIZE: REC IP IEN T COPIES ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL ACTION: 05 PH~~~~1 18 I A~~~~~1 INTERNAL: 01 M.~ISLE 07 I II E 10 CST BNFT ANL 13 HYDRO METEOR 15 EFLT TRT SYS 19 DIR DSE AD SITE ANAL Y EXTERNAL: 03 LPOR 20 NATL LABPh~i 5 RECIPIENT IO CODE/NAME 17 BC L.~n-N AD~ha)~v~02 NRC PDR 09 ENVN SPEC BR 12 GEOSC IEN BR 14 ACDENT ANALY 16 RAO ASMT BR AO ENVIRON TECH OEI 0 04 NSIC ACRS COPIES LTTR ENCL 1 1 1.1 1 1'~'6~SeO d TOTAL NURSER OF COPIES REQUIRED: LTTR~ENCL FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C.20426 In Reply Refer To: OEPR-DRB Cooperative Studies Draft Supplement to DEIS Susquehanna Steam-Electric Station Units 1 and 2 Darrel G.Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.Z0555

Dear Mr.Eisenhut:

This is in response to your recent request for comments'on the draft supplement to the draft environmental impact statement for the Susquehanna Steam-Electric Station (SSES)Units 1 and 2, Pennsylvania.

The draft supplement addresses the subject of low flow augmentation required to supply water to the Susquehanna River to replace water consumptively used by the SSES during periods of very low streamflow.

The aver age consumptive use at the SSES would be about 1.4 cubic meters per second or approximately 6 percent of the seven consecutive day, 10-year frequency low flow of 2Z.7 cubic meters per second at the Wilkes-Barre gage.When the discharge at the gage is below this'evel, Pennsylvania law prohibits water withdrawals from the river.This would result in SSES being shutdown for the duration of the streamflow deficiency.

The applicants, Pennsylvania Power and Light Company and the Allegheny Electric Cooperative, Inc., have studied two alternatives for providing low flow augmentation

-one, a new single-purpose reservoir and another, which would utilize storage from an existing reservoir.

Another opt'ion would be to"river follow" or accept and accommodate the occasional shutdowns necessary during low streamflow.

The applicants have recommended construction of the Pond Hill low flow augmentation reservoir.

The proposed single-purpose reservoir w'ould be located on a headwater tributary to the Susquehanna River, with i nsufficient natural streamflow for its intended purpose.Consequently, pumping energy amounting to about 2,417 megawatt-hours per year would be required to maintain its required inflow.This is equivalent to the amount of electricity that could be generated from using about 4,000 barrels of oil.The report recognizes that the most economic alternative to augment low flows would be the modified operation of an existing upstream reservoir.

However, we believe that the draft supplement did not adequately explore that opportunity, which appears to us to be the most practical alternative.

The primary project cob>5 Darrel G.Eisenhut, Director~2 w considered is the U.S.Army Corps of Engineers'owanesque project, presently under construction and scheduled for completion in June 1981.The report states that the Corps of Engineers pointed out uncertainties regarding the availability of storage due to the need for Congressional approval for reallo-cation of storage capacity, and according to the Susquehanna River Basin Com-mission, the Cowanesque project cannot be considered as a timely alternative.

The report implies that the Pond Hill project could be designed, constructed, and placed in operation in less time than the Congress could effect changes in the Cowanesque project operations.

We question this implication.

According to the Corps of Engineers, the pre-construction planning of the Cowanesque project included approximately 31,000 acre-feet of storage for water supply but it was not included as a project purpose due to lack of local support at the time.However, we have been informed by the Corps that a detailed$600,000 plus study is currently underway to determine the availability of storage in the Cowanesque project for supply make-up water for the Susquehanna Steam-Electric Station.This extensive study, initiated in March 1979, is scheduled for completion in early 1982.Based on our review of the draft supplement report and consultation with the Corps of Engineers, it appears that the use of the Cowanesque project, now under construction, instead of the proposed Pond Hill project would: save an equivalent of 4,000 barrels of oil annually, avoid the environmental effects normally associated with dam construction, eliminate possible objections from local residents or property owners, increase benefits to recreation and fish and wildlife resources during low flow conditions, and perhaps provide the low flow regulation sooner than Pond Hill.Therefore, it appears to be in both the ratepayers'nd taxpayers'nterests to include storage in the Corps of Engineers'roject (under construction) rather than build a new reservoir.

Sincerely,+MLCa William W.Lindsay, Direc r Office of Electric Power egulation