Implications of a nuclear facility in South County, Rhode Island

[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]

Y-Y

jc@
Af

Rhode Island Coastal Zone Management Program
Rhode Island
TK1078 .I47 1980 V.1

IMPLICATIONS OF A NUCLEAR FACILITY IN SOUTH COUNTY

RHODE ISLAND

Volume 1

REPORT SUMMARY: KEY ISSUES

prepared by

REGIONAL COASTAL ENERGY IMPACT PROGRAM

WAKEFIELD, RHODE ISLAND

The preparation of this report was financed in
part by funds from the Office of Coastal Zone
Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce,
administered by the ENERGY OFFICE, EXECUTIVE
DEPARTMENT, GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, STATE OF RHODE
ISLAND.

June, 1980

US Department of Commerce
NOAA Coastal Center Library
2234 South Avenue
Charleston, SC 29405-2413

Preface

The Regional Coastal Impact Program (RCEIP) Region encompasses
seven towns: Charlestown, Hopkinton, Jamestown, Narragansett, Richmond,
South Kingstown and Westerly. These towns make up what is commonly known
to Rhode Islanders as."South County", a coastal area valued for its scenic
and natural attributes.

Plans to construct a nuclear facility in Charlestown,Rhode Island,
provided the-impetus for the organization of RCEIP in 1978. During a
one and one-half year grant period,_RCEIP staff have prepared a four-
volume report with the sponsorship and assistance of the participating
towns. Director Jonathan Feinstein; Acting Directori Cynthia Collins;
Environmental Consultant, Kathy Jones and Research typist, Coralie Gough
have been the permanent RCEIP staff. Consultants Francis X. Cameron and
Malcolm Grant of Interface Consulting and Dr. Eliahu R 'omanoff of Regional
Science Research Center assisted the Program and are responsible for
Volumes 3 and 4 of the report, respectively.

Special thanks are due to Anna Prager, South Kingstown Town Planner,
whose foresight brought RCEIP planning to South County, ar@d Town Manager,
Stephen Alfred for his constant support and the provision of office space
and facilities in the South Kingstown Town Hall.

Finally, the Pro gram has benefitted from the guidance of Roger Buck,
Director of the Governor's Energy Office, whose supervision throughout
the Program has been appreciated.

The study appreciates the cooperation of the many state and local
agencies who provided their time-arid made.information readily available
to members of this study team.

RCEIP GRANT PARTICIPANTS

RCEIP Research Staff

Jonathan Feinstein
Cynthia Collins
Kathy Jones
Coralie Gough

Grant Administrator

Anna Prager

RCEIP Interns - University of Rhode Island

Louis Sousa, University Year for Action
Randall Moor, University Year for Action
Peter Parker, University Year for Action
Angela Purcell, Planning Intern
Kathy Henrie, University Year for Action
Louis Coakley, University Year'for Action
Nancy VonHone, Urban Affairs Intern

Consultant Assistance

Interface
Regional Science Research Center
Peter Potthoff

Citizen/Governme-at Committee

Charlestown : Patricia Clarke, Mathew Puchalski
Hopkinton : Peter Burns, Ellen Dodge
Jamestown : Richard Zimmerman, Walter Cooper
Narragansett : George Allaire, John Hickey
Richmond : Edward Barske
South
Kingstown : Anna Prager, Barbara Drew
Westerly Clem Griscom

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page

Preface
RCEIP Grant Participants
Table of Contents
List @of Figures iv

1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i

2. VOLUME 2 - REGIONAL INVENTORY AND GROWTH PROSPECTS . . . . . . 4

3. VOLUME 3 - CASE STUDIES AND MITIGATION OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES

4. VOLUME 4 - ECONOMIC IMPACT DYNAMICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

5. CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page
I RCEIP Study Area 2
2 Natural Systems 9
Regional and Towns Employment Chronologies 20

T-

Volume 1 Report Summary

1. Introduction.

The report of the Regional Coastal Energy Impact Program (RCEIP) is

contained in four volumes: Volume 1, Report Summary: Key issues; Volume 2,

Regional Inventorv and Growth Prospects; Volume 3, Case Studies and Mitigation

of Nuclear FAcilities; and Volume 4, Economic Impact Dynamics. Volume I

summarizes and highlights the key issues of the entire report. Each of the

three main report volumes represents a different perspective on the issues

raised by the proposed siting of a nuclear facility in Charlestown, Rhode

Island and focuses on a different time frame. Volume 2, the Regional

Inventory addresses current issues and issues in the 1980's. Volume 3

focuses primarily on the 1970's in its case studies. Volume 4 examines the

19Ws in the economic impac t analysis.

The central objective of the RCEIP grant was to identify the social

and economic impacts of a nuclear power plant siting on a seven-town Region
in southern ihode Island including Charlestown, Hopkinton, Jamestown,

Narragansett, Richmond, South Kingstown and Westerly (See Figure 1). The

Town of South Kingstown, representing the seven-town Region, applied for a

Coastal Energy Impact Program grant at a time when nuclear power was a

volatile state and local issue. Construction permit hearings by the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission were underway. Six of the seven participating towns

were intervening parties. Before the end of the grant period, the power

company withdrew its application and cancelled its immediate plans for a

0 5

Miles

-4 11 Study Area

tucket
N
P r o@ i dL*c

PROVIDENCE

Cronsto@-,

WarwiCk

165 102 1

Hopkin on 2 Jamestown
1,38
Richmond

95
t South
Kingstown

Narragansett

Charlestown
I Westerl

RCEIP STUDY AREA

FIGURE 1

nuclear facility because it could not obtain the Charlestown site. @-Tith

the possibility of a nuclear facility in southern Rhode Island remote and

uncertain, the RCEIP grant fell short of an implementation stage. Thus

the RCEIP report does not emphasize integration of impact identification

and analysis of regional characteristics. Rather, the separate volumes stand

on their own merit and can be utilized separately.

Volume 2 of the RCEIP report consists of an inventory of the Region's

social, economic and environmental characteristics as well as a perspective

on future growth prospects. Extensive information on the Region was collected

both as a basis for impact analysis and in preparation for local management

of power plant impacts. Volume 2 identifies the Region's distinct population

and economic trends and inventories its extensive natural resources. It sets

the sta-e for future planning of critical regional concerns in the South

County area.

The original goal of the study was to arrive at an understanding of

how siting impacts would occur and to determine what could be done to mitigate

adverse impacts and capita lize on beneficial impacts. Two approaches were

made to impact analysis. A comparable area methodology was undertaken to

evaluate the siting effects of nuclear facilities on 'two other areas; Water-

ford, Connecticut, and Seabrook, New Hampshire. These case studies along

with a perspective an mitigating strategies are presented in Volume 3 of the

report.

Volume 4 of the report contains a dynamic impact analysis of the pro-

posed Charlestown facility and its implications for South County. Previous

energy impact studies have failed to quantify and identify the dynamics

associated with power pla ntconstruction and operation. The reliance on

static simulation models has resulted in vague estimates'of actual impacts.

RCEIP took advantage of the Sequential Interindustry Matrix (SIM) which

provides a nonstatic, dynamic approach for impact analysis. The SIM focused

on two key issues of regional interest, employment and the seasonality of

the coastal environment. Extensive data sources were collected and analyzed

for use in the modeling approach to ensure its reliability.and current

application.

The key findings of the three RCEIP reports are summarized in the

following sections. In addition, RCEIP published three discussion papers

in the,process of organizing its research material. South County Population

Growth, December 1979; Coastal Zone Seasonality in Employment, February 1980;

South County's Coastal Land: The Choices Before Us, May 1980.
jr
2. Volume 2 - Regional Inven tory and Growth Prospects.

Volume 2 of the RCEIP report describes the Region's characteristics

and resources. It'delineates the potentials for and the limitations on future

development. Several key points of particular significance to the Region's

towns are summarized below.

Population and the Economy

The population of the Re-ion has experiencEd and is continuing to

experience significant growth in comparison to the state. During the 1970's

the Region grew by an estimated 27 percent while the state population

declined by an estimated one-half percent. The population is expected to

continue to grow by 15 percent in the 1980's. The population as a whole is

growing older leading to a likely increase in demand for accommodations for

the elderly.

Although much of the population is employed outside the Region in

Providence and other commerical centers, employment in the Region has been

growing faster than that of the state. Because of the importance of the

tourist industry, the economy follows a distinct winter/summer cycle with

economic activity peaking as one might expect in the summer months. The
tourist industry draws significant summer populations to the area, i@creas-

ing the population of the Region for example by an estimated 77 percent in

the summer of 1980.

Future growth in the economy is uncertain because of the recession

and rising fuel costs. Major development projects such as the potential

of Outer Continental Shelf Development may spur economic development which

is otherwise likely to decliiie in the 1980's.

Housing

Demand for housing has reflected the Region's robust population growth.

Since 1960, the number of housing units in the Region has increased by 59

percent. Ninety percent of new construction of single family homes from

1970 to 1978 occurred in the Region's ocean-fronting towns. An examination

of U.S.G.S. Quadrangle maps revealed that the housing was further concentrated

along the narrow coastal zone of these towns placing special Dressures on the

Region's limited coastal resources.

Demand for single family housing which dropped in the mid-seventies

along with the business cycle is likely to decline in the current recession.

A shift in housing activity towards increased conversion of summer homes and

new construction of multi-family homes is likely to occur.. This shift has

important implications for town services and energy efficiency planning.

Services

T Water and Sewer. There is a significant range of town-supplied

services in the Region. Only the more urbanized areas of the larger towns

have water and sewer services. Private wells and individual septic systems

serve the majority of the Region.

The State 208 Water Quality Management Program has identified several

areas of high need for sewers in the Region. Generally, towns with sewers

have plans for extension and upgrading of their systems. Water supply is

typically adequate in the Region with future plans focused on improved

distribution systems.

Water and sewer services are important factors in determining the

location and type of development in the Region. Construction of new service

facilities is a costly undertaking to be avoided when possible. However,

planning is made difficult in the region by lack of information at the town

level as well as a lack of continuity in record -keeping and rate setting

The cumulative impacts of private sewer systems, pollution problems in

private wells and -long-term protection of important water supplies are

important planning considerations as yet unaddressed.,

Landfills. There is a growing demand for landfills in the Region

because of population growth and the increase in throw-away items. Some

towns are faced with immediate service oroblems while the more rural towns

generally have room for expansion or ready availability of new sites.

Several regional waste disposal options are possible including

construction of trash burning solid waste disposal facilities and exploration

of the economic benefits of recycling activites.

Fire and Police. Public protection in the region is provided by a

range of professional police departments and almost entirely by volunteer

fire departments. There is a good deal of cooperation among the services

in the several towns, and some assistance from the state where service is

otherwise inadequate.

With the exception of Narragansett, which has a town fire department,

T_ the Region's fire protection is provided by 16 fire districts with 16

different service areas, facilities and rate regulations. More coordinated

record keeping on fire service would serve the homeowner who not only depends

on the service but also is subject to fire insurance rates linked to the type

of available fire service. Coordinated planning would also be desirable for

combating major fires and forest protection.

Schools. In most of-the Region school populations are declining while

costs continue to rise. An examination of the Region's schools revealed a

F few current and future capacity problems. Where there are problems, they are
t often of a temporary nature which may not require facility construction with

the proper planning.

Health Services. A good network of primary and secondary care is

provided in the Region by two hospitals and three regional health centers.

A need for more reduced fee services and better transportation was expressed

by health service providers. Hospitals,-in particular emergency room care,

experience a doubling of demand in the summer 'months placing critical

pressures on these services.

Increasing.state regulation and planning of health facilities is

striving to limit and budget new facilities, as well as regionalize health

planning. In South County which is growing rapidly and in which the western

part of the Region has been designated as medically underserviced,-there is

particular need for strong regional planning for new facilities.

Municipal Finances

The Region's population is costing more per capita as it grows and

over time in almost the entire Region. Costs associated with summer tourists

and student populations are not reflected in the tax base of the towns. From

a fiscal point of view, the Region's towns have an interest in studying

development as it relates to town fiscal management and in forming coherent

growth management policy.

Natural Resource Inventory

The RCEIP Region is unique in its diversity of natural features which

span a continuum from marine to terrestrial ecosystems. The Region's vital

biological diversity is seen in its rocky coastline, freshwaterwetlands,

coastal ponds, dense upland forests, and in its multitude of plant and animal

species, both abundant and rare. Efficient use of land and other resources

is paramount to the social economic and environmental well-being of South

County. To gain an insight into the potentials and limitations that the

Region's natural resources offer, an inventory of some of the natural systems

was undertaken. Figure 2 shows the Region's four major natural system zones.

The RCEIP environmental inventory provides a standardized data base

of pertinent natural resource and land use information for the seven towns

in the study area. Inventory analysis has focused on a "systems approach"

in dealing with growth, including ide@Ltification of areas that offer unusual

opportunities and constraints to development. Resource systems for RCEIP

Zone

'o
wetim , re(
onSoAt

Ilk
0 IV RICHMOND

HOPKINTON

UTH
GSTOWN

JL
10
'10

IlLY

NATURAL SYSTEMS
F16URE 2
50u(ce- R

study purposes are defined as geographical areas delineated by natural

boundaries, such as watershed divides and characterized by an interaction

among ecosystem components.

The natural system components mapped in the initial inventory include

surface conditions such as topography, slopes, surficial geology, bedrock

con straints and soils, as well.as hydrologic, flora and fauna characteristics

of the Region.- A number of@cultural components reflecting man's use of the

land have been included in the inventory. These "human systems" variables

focus on land use, zoning, recreation and transportation in the Region.

Several composite overlay maps were generated during the analysis to identify

the most significant resource areas in the Region. The inventory information

provides a basis for a discussion of future land use trends in the Region,

and a foundation for sound land use decisions regarding resource conservation,

land-use and the provision and timing of public facilities and housing.

Transportation and the Tourist Industry

The growing population and the tourist industry are placing increasing

demands on the Region's transportation systems. Commuter services to major

coiTmercial centers has improved, but transportation in outlying areas and

within the Region is often inadequate. Revitalization of the Narragansett

Pier railroad would serve the Region well.

The tourist industry in combination with the campus traffic from the

University of Rhode Island result in critical traffic problems in some areas.

,Tourist traffic may actually increase during the recession as the tourist

population is drawn from closer to home and stays for shorter periods. It is

important for the towns to keep track of seasonal variations in traffic demand

since these predominate and will continue to predominate transportation

problems.

3. Volume 3 - Case Studies and Mitigation of Nuclear Facilities.

Introduction

The two case studies contained in Volume 3 identify the social,

economic and governmental impacts of a nuclear power plant siting in Water-

ford, Connecticut and Seabrook, New Hampshire. The studies examine,what,

if anything, has been done to mitigate adverse effects or capitalize on

beneficial effects. A broader Derspective.on mitigation strategies as these

apply to Rhode Island is also presented in Volume 3.

Mitigation Perspective

The mitigation of adverse impacts associated with power plant construc-

tion is dependent in part on the socio-economic characteristics which are

present in the host community and on the municipal infrastructure which is

in operation. Successful mitigation of impacts relies on the coordination

and identification of information from the five following functional areas:

- information requirements;

- state/local participation in decision-making;

- planning and management;

- coordination of assistance programs; and

- financing.

The advancement of a close-working relationship between affected

communities, as well as workine agreement with federal, state and power

company officials are important mitigation considerations.

Case Studies - Methods

In preparation for the case studies, an initial literature search of

material relating to impacts of nuclear powir plant sitings was undertaken.

Based on the literature search, a candidate list of potential siting impacts

and the vario@s interactions which appeared to be involved in their occurrence

was prepared. A series of 17 questionnaires for some 17 categories of

municipal officials were prepared and employed in gathering information for

the case studies.

The Effects of Time and Place

It was the author's suspicion upon completion of the Waterford study

that a unique combination of time and place influenced the predominantly

benign impacts that construction of the Millstone nuclear station had on the

Town of Waterford, Connecticut. Construction in 196a after all,was begun

well before birth of the anti-nuclear power movement, the plant was sited in

an area with a long-term tradition of employment in the nuclear industry, and

for these and other reasons town-utility relations had always been cordial.

It was our belief that these conditions would not be duplicated in

Seabrook, New Hampshire with a plant that has been plagued with anti-nuclear

demonstrations and poor utility@town relations since construction began and

that therefore the experiences of the two communities would be radically

different. This has not proved to be the case, however. The experiences of

these two very different communities in very different times and places have

in most important respects been remarkably consistent. One must then look

to other factors to explain why this has apparently been the case.

Shared Exverience

Conceptually, the non-health and safety impacts of nuclear power plant

siting and construction in Waterford and Seabrook flow from two broad sources.

On the one hand are impacts related to the construction of the facility,

N. principally generated directly and indirectly by the construction work force.

On the other are those stemming from the massive infusion of tax wealth into

the coffers of the host community. In both cases, with very few exceptions,

the Towns of Seabrook and Waterford experienced comparable impacts and non-

impacts for the reasons noted below.

Construction and Work Force Impacts:

Inmigration: Neither Waterford nor Seabrook experienced significant

levels of worker inmigration during plant construction.

The Seabrook experience was somewhat different from the Milstone

situation, however, in the relatively large number of transient workers drawn

to the plant site. Transient workers include those moving into rental lodg-

ings in the general vicinity of the plant on a weekly basis and commuting

to their homes on days off. These workers apparently created tensions in

their new environment through differences in race and life style.

Population Levels: The construction of nuclear generating units in

Seabrook and Waterford has had few impacts on pre-existing growth patterns,

although the reasons, why this has been the case differ considerably. Water-

ford curbed growth primarily through effective and rigorously enforced land

use controls, while Seabrook relied in large part on the limited capacity of

its water system and on practical obstacles to private well drilling.

Population Characteristics: Seabrook and Waterford are again alike

in that inmigrant workers had few appreciable impacts on the characteristics

of the pre-existing population either through racial, income or educational
X
differences. However, both towns experienced changes to or stresses on their

resident populations attributable at least in part to plant construction. In

the case of Millstone, plant related tax advantages further inflated housing

costs already inflated by a highly restrictive zoning ordinance and thereby

contributed to displacement of young adults and low income families. Seabrook's

transient work force, through their general rowdiness and flagrant-abuse of

drugs and alcohol, assaulted established community values and created consid-

erable resentment.

Employment Opportunities: While a facility employing.several thousand

workers even for a relatively short time has substantial impacts on local job

opportunities, it is all too easy to overstate its impact on the economy of

the heavily populated labor sheds affected by the Millstone and Seabrook

plants. With regional work forces numbering in both instances in excess of

100,000 and strong and diversified industrial bases, it has proved difficult

to trace any significant impact on regional employme nt or unemployment levels

to the Millstone and Seabrook plants.

Local Government and Service Impacts:

Revenue Windfall: For the Towns of Waterford and Seabrook, the con-

struction of a nuclear plant within their borders represented a revenue wind-

fall of unparalleled proportions.

The impact of such revenues on towns hard-pressed to meet operating

expenses hardly requires elaboration, although it is interesting to note the

differing attitudes this windfall has engendered in Waterford and Seabrook

town fathers. Despite recent nuclear p lant incidents, Waterford officals

remain confident of their plant and are hard-pressed to suppress their glee

at the taxes it pays. By contrast, Seabrook's Chairman of Selectmen

recently stated that "Plant taxes aren't worth all the grief that have and,

will go with it (the plant)". An aura of foreboding hovers over Seabrook

which does not exist in Waterford at this time.

'The Taxpayer: The individual taxpayer in both Seabrook and Waterford

has been the principal direct beneficiary of the plant tax windfall even

though municipal spending has also increased.

Overall Non-Education Spending: While spending levels in.both

communities have increased since plant construction-began, Waterford has

experienced greater increases over a longer time frame with spending up

eight-fold overall. Seabrook spending, however, has doubled in only three

years. While spending has been subsidized in both communities, it is inter-

esting to note that the availability of such a large revenue source has not

significantly changed the "character" of municipal government or the extent

of services provided. Waterford was already expanding its administrative

apparatus prior to plant construction while Seabrook retains a small-town

government atmosphere with many public officials serving in part-time

capacity.

1. James Falconer, Chairman of Selectment, Town of Seabrook; telephone
interview of March 21, 1980.

SERVICES CTR LIBRARY

6
'668 14110519 9