Document: NUREG-1555
Document ID: 71e35073-327e-4683-aa43-b361ce1d32b0
Document Type: esrp
Title: HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEMS
Source: NUREG-1555
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/staff/sr1555/initial/
Revision Date: 2007-10
Chapter: 9
Section ID: 9.4.1
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
ture and magnitude of the proposed system’s environmental impacts. An environmental review for the alternatives may be needed following the analysis and evaluation procedures of the appropriate ESRP Chapters 4.0 and 5.0. The following criteria apply to this evaluation: NUREG-1555 9.4.1-10 October 1999 - Environmental preference will be established when an alternative can be shown to have no unavoidable adverse impacts and will meet CWA requirements. - Environmental preference may be established when an alternative that meets CWA requirements can be shown to have unavoidable adverse impacts that are less severe in both nature and magnitude than those of the proposed system. Determination of environmental preference under these conditions should involve consultation with the EPM and the appropriate ESRP Chapter 4.0 and 5.0 reviewers. This consultation should result in a joint determination of the status of any such alternative. - Environmental equivalence will be established when an alternative that meets CWA requirements can be shown to have unavoidable adverse impacts of the same or equivalent nature and magnitude as those of the proposed system. - Environmental inferiority will be established when an alternative can be shown to have unavoidable adverse impacts that are more severe in both nature and magnitude than those of the proposed system, or that will not meet CWA requirements. When the reviewer determines that there are environmentally preferable alternatives to the proposed heat dissipation system, the reviewer should conduct those portions of the analysis instructions of this ESRP that deal with the economic costs of the alternative systems. ` When environmentally preferable alternative heat dissipation systems have been identified, the reviewer should ensure that economic cost data have been developed for the alternatives and that these data are adequate for a benefit-cost balancing and comparison with the proposed system. This portion of the evaluation