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:
o 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, the reviewer should consider whether there are any factors unique to the relevant regional system that could prevent the reactivation or extended service life of existing units or the purchase of power from other systems. The reviewer should ensure that cost data associated with this alternative, including purchases of power, transmission line costs, capital/operating costs and environmental costs of reactivated and extended service life plants, are available and accurate and can be compared with the costs of the proposed project. These cost data should be used by the reviewer for ESRP 9.2.3. Where sufficient electrical generating capacity is available to meet the need established by the reviewers for ESRP Chapter 8.0, and the costs of the alternative are reasonable when compared to costs of the proposed project, the reviewer of ESRP 9.2.1 should provide this assessment to the reviewer of ESRP 9.2.3. However, when costs of this October 1999 9.2.1-7 NUREG-1555 alternative are significantly greater than costs of the proposed project, the reviewer, after consulting with the reviewers for ESRP 10.4, may conclude that the alternative is not practical. The reviewer should ensure that the reviewer for ESRP 8.4 has considered the effects of conservation in determining (1) system peakload responsibility plus reserve requirement, (2) the need for additional baseload capacity, and (3) costs of equipment or education to implement the conservation measures. When this determination has been made, the reviewer should adopt the conclusions of the reviewer for ESRP 8.4 as they relate to conservation as an alternative to the proposed plant. When the reviewer has determined that the alternatives of conservation, power plant reactivation and life extension, and power import have been