Document: NUREG-1555
Document ID: 5071ad4a-5acf-4db6-95f2-6add6fdf98d4
Document Type: esrp
Title: ALTERNATIVES NOT REQUIRING NEW GENERATING CAPACITY
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: 9.2.1
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
ould review the estimate of the environmental and operating costs associated with the use of these plants. Factors to be considered in preparing these cost estimates should include the ` capital costs needed to reactivate retired plants and to upgrade existing plants, when necessary, to comply with current standards ` operating costs, including costs associated with meeting current environmental standards (these costs should be adjusted to account for reduced availability factors where applicable) ` environmental costs, including the environmental impacts associated with alternative-energy sources. Conservation (Energy Efficiency) The reviewer’s analysis of conservation (increased energy efficiency) as an alternative to construction of the proposed plant should be based on the analysis and evaluation of conservation and substitution received from the reviewer for ESRP 8.2.2.2. Except for unusual circumstances, no additional review should be required to complete this portion of this ESRP, since the reviewers for ESRP 8.2.2.2 and 8.4, in the process of analyzing and evaluating the need for the plant, should make a determination that conservation is or is not a practical alternative to the proposed plant. The reviewer should consult with and assist the reviewer for ESRP 8.2.2.2 in analyzing the effects of conservation on the need for the plant and to prepare data for inclusion in this section of the EIS. The reviewer should review the relevant regional (e.g., power pool, power marketing area, major utility service area) summation of the total amount of alternative electrical generating capacity available through a combination of purchased power and the reactivation and extended service life of plants within the regional system. If this combined capacity is insufficient to meet the capacity needs through the 6th year of commercial operation of the proposed project, the reviewer may conclude that this alternative is not feasible. Where sufficient capacity is available,