Public Participation in Energy Facility Siting I: Case Study Results

The objective of this paper is to determine to what extent public participation has been effective in influencing recent energy‐facility siting (EFS) decisions for nuclear and coal‐fired power plants in the Ohio River Basin. Licensing requirements, review procedures, and criteria were studied for six basin states, along with utility‐siting criteria and siting methodologies. Six case‐study power plants (four coal‐fired and two nuclear) were investigated in detail. It is concluded that the current regulatory/adjudicatory EFS process is not conducive to meaningful public participation for a wide range of reasons, which include the following: (1) Lack of public involvement during the crucial early site screening stage; (2) lack of public information during the long draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) stage; (3) the negative effect on public trust caused by site purchase and limited site work before issuance of the DEIS; and (4) siting methodologies that heavily emphasize technological criteria. Nor are utilities well served; since the review process heightens uncertainty about the outcome in the following ways: (1) Changing regulatory criteria; (2) time‐conditioned permits; (3) lack of generic EISs or policy statements on such issues as fuel alternatives, agricultural production, land use, and energy conservation; and (4) threat of legal action by interveners.