Power to the People or Regulatory Ratcheting? Explaining the Success (or Failure) of Attempts to Site Commercial U.S. Nuclear Power Plants: 1954-1996

Living With the Invisible Risks in the U.S. Urban Areas: Potential Nuclear Power-Induced Disasters, Urban Emergency Management Challenges, and Environmental Justice Issues

“…Fifth, procedural equity has two aspects: participation in sitting procedure and participating in environmental decision making. In the beginning of commercialization of nuclear power, the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) encouraged to site nuclear power facilities in rural areas, but many owners have managed to site their units closer to metropolitan areas (Berndt & Aldrich, ). According to AEC's guidelines, the three key criteria—exclusion area, low‐population zone, and population center distance for site selection are based on Part 100 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) (Greenberg & Krueckeberg, ).…”

“…According to AEC's guidelines, the three key criteria—exclusion area, low‐population zone, and population center distance for site selection are based on Part 100 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) (Greenberg & Krueckeberg, ). For example, there were a few project owners initially that the utilities facilities were planned to place in the city of Boston and New York, but there were many successfully cited projects in relatively high population densities including Indian Point, being located in areas where an estimated population of 21,700 (1975 estimate) living within two miles which is only 24 miles from the New York City (Berndt & Aldrich, ). In the early period of commercial nuclear power, the AEC was the responsible agency to oversee the NPP siting process.…”