Document: NRC Regulatory Guide
Document ID: f0baf50b-5bb7-4783-b2f9-9586e09c97e1
Document Type: regulatory_guide
Title: Preparation of Environmental Reports for Nuclear Power Stations + HISTORY - HISTORY 02/2017 – DG-4026 , Proposed Revision 3 09/2014 – Periodic Review of Revision 2 – Revise (Rev. 3)
Source: NRC Regulatory Guide Division 4
Source URL: https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1611/ML16116A068.pdf
Revision Date: 2023-06
Chapter: 
Section ID: RG-4.2
CFR Part: 
CFR Title: 

Content:
a fusion reactor is no closer to reality than it was 30 years ago. So fusion power is not a reasonable alternative. While these are extreme examples, they illustrate the point that to be considered an alternative, there must be a reasonable expectation that it could actually be implemented. Except as described in Appendix A, the ER should include information on four categories of alternatives: the no-action alternative, energy alternatives, site alternatives, and system alternatives. Specific information to include in the ER is covered in the following subsections. 9.1 No-Action Alternative The discussion of alternatives in the ER should include the no-action alternative under which the requested license or permit is not granted by the NRC. The ER should describe under the no-action alternative the impacts of not implementing the proposed action. Guidance from the CEQ states, “Where a choice of “no action” by the agency would result in predictable actions by others, this consequence of 17 Identification and evaluation of reasonable alternatives to a proposed action is the intent of NEPA: Reasonable alternatives include those that are practical or feasible from the technical and economic standpoint and using common sense, rather than simply desirable from the standpoint of the applicant (From the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) (46 FR 18026)). DG-4026, Page 134 the “no-action” alternative should be included in the analysis” (46 FR 18026). For example, if the proposed nuclear plant would be used to meet a demonstrated need for power, then not building the plant would lead to a failure to meet that need for power. Regulatory authorities (typically a State public service commission, or equivalent, in conjunction with any regional transmission operator and electrical reliability council) would take action to meet the need for power before the grid became unreliable. Because of this, the ER should discuss what other steps might be taken to address the