Document: NUREG-1555
Document ID: 3cb66d4f-d9e6-4d2c-848a-a0a6595ac915
Document Type: esrp
Title: THE SITE AND VICINITY
Source: NUREG-1555
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1555/initial/
Revision Date: 2007-10
Chapter: 5
Section ID: 5.1.1
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
tivity of resident species to salts expected from effluents from cooling towers and spray ponds (from the environmental report [ER]) ` location of roads and bridges within the site vicinity (from ESRP 2.2.1). II. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA Acceptance criteria for the review of land-use impacts at the site of the nuclear-power station and in its vicinity are based on the relevant requirements of the following: ` 10 CFR 51.71(d) with respect to analysis requirements to be included in draft environmental impact statements (EISs) prepared by NRC ` 10 CFR 51, Appendix A(7), with respect to discussion in EISs prepared by NRC of possible conflicts between alternatives and the objectives of applicable land-use plans. Regulatory positions and specific criteria necessary to meet the regulations identified above are as follows: ` There are no conflicts between the applicant’s proposed facility and the objectives of Federal, State, regional, and local (and in the case of proposed location on a reservation, Native American tribal) land-use plans and the Federal sources shown in Table 4.1.1-1 (plus comparable State sources). or ` If there are or are likely to be conflicts, the extent of the conflicts, the possibilities of resolving the conflicts, and the seriousness of the impact of the applicant’s proposal on land-use plans and policies and the effectiveness of land-use control mechanisms for the area can be adequately evaluated and discussed in the EIS or other environmental document. Technical Rationale The technical rationale for evaluation of the applicant’s description of impacts to the site and vicinity is discussed in the following paragraphs: NRC’s regulations implementing NEPA provide that NRC EISs are to include a section discussing the environmental consequences of alternatives (10 CFR 51, Appendix A[7]). The section is to NUREG-1555 5.1.1-4 October 1999 include a discussion of “possible conflicts between the alternatives and the objectives of Federal, State,