research
Use by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission of the Obviously Superior Criterion for Alternative Sites
- Publication date
- Publisher
Abstract
In its consideration of alternative sites for new nuclear power plants, the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) uses a standard that the applicant’s proposed site will not be
rejected in favor of an alternative site unless the NRC staff determines that the alternative site is
“obviously superior” to the proposed site1. In this paper I will summarize the historical
development of this standard and how this standard has fared in the courts. I will then examine
the extent to which this standard complies with the requirements of National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended2 and the associated regulations published by the
Council on Environmental Quality3. I will also examine how the standard compares to the
approaches used by other agencies, such as the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (which uses a
standard of the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative). In conclusion, I will
discuss whether the NRC should consider modifying the standard either because of challenges to
its past implementation, or foreseeable changes in future implementation