mitigative measures chosen. This is a particularly important consideration with respect to license renewal, because of the requirement to consider “Severe Accident Mitigation Alternatives” if they have not previously been considered in an EIS for that facility. See 51 C.F.R. 51.53(c)(3)(ii)(L). As demonstrated in BREDL / NIRS Contention 2, reasonable alternatives exist that could substantially decrease the potential for serious accidents caused by terrorist attacks or sabotage.
As reported in the article “Structural Changes At Nuclear Plants May Be Necessary, Says Ridge” (Platts February 11, 2002, Vol. 24, No. 3, Page 1), “Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge said Feb. 7th that it may be necessary for nuclear power plant operators to make structural changes to their facilities to fortify them against the kind of kamikaze attacks of September 11.” Referring to NRC licensees, Department of Defense and Department of Energy installations, Ridge speaking before the National Press Club acknowledged, “there may ultimately be some actual bricks and mortar adjustments that are made to some of these facilities.”
Accordingly, there can be no question that NIRS’s contention raises “new information” regarding “changed circumstances” that could have a significant effect on the environmental impacts of license renewal for the McGuire and Catawba nuclear plants. Because NIRS has described the new information and its relationship to the plants with basis and specificity, the contention should be admitted.
2.The standard for determining whether new information is
sufficient to warrant supplementation of an EIS is
reasonableness, not whether it meets the standard in
10 C.F.R. § 2.758.