Of the 21 reactor sites identified in NRC filings, 15 are in the South. Four are in Texas, three in South Carolina, two each in North Carolina and Florida, and one each in Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana and Mississippi.

Unlike much of the United States, utilities in the South operate under traditional rate regulation which encourages investment in power plants and limits competition from third-party electric suppliers.

Utilities are attracted to the South for new reactors by prospects for future electric growth and by billions of dollars in federal financial incentives that are up for grabs. Because nuclear plants emit no carbon dioxide, the technology is viewed as a potential solution to rising public concern over climate change.

Nuclear-revival critics said Southeastern residents are still saddled by soaring nuclear costs from the 1980s while a glut of little-used power plants could meet future demand.

A RUSH OF NEW FILINGS

Frank Spencer, a former Mississippi assistant attorney general, has not forgotten the years-long legal battle over Entergy Corp's Grand Gulf station that pitted elected officials in Arkansas, Louisiana and Mississippi against the utility and state and federal regulators. The fight over who would pay went to the US Supreme Court.

Spencer battled unsuccessfully to keep Mississippi residents from paying more than their share of Grand Gulf's price tag which ballooned to more than $3.4 billion from $900 million.

"It was a huge burden, with the increase in rates," said Spencer, now a minister who runs a soup kitchen and shelter in Jackson. "It was the most costly plant at the time and Mississippi had to pay for one-third of it."

Today, a typical Entergy Mississippi customer still pays $12 a month for overruns at the 23-year-old nuclear plant, according to state regulatory filings.

The NRC expects a rush of new reactor filings this year from utilities seeking to qualify for nuclear production tax credits, financial risk insurance and federal loan guarantees created by the 2005 Energy Policy Act.

Georgia, Mississippi, Louisiana and Florida are among states considering more incentives to attract new reactors.

Outside of Texas, the Southeast has more than enough existing gas-fired generation to meet power needs for another decade, according to long-term forecasts from two power agencies. Utilities view these plants as unattractive because of the high and volatile cost of natural gas.

Yet few regulators have asked companies to compare the risk of future gas volatility to the uncertain expense to build the next nuclear unit even as costs soar for steel, concrete and skilled labor.

An index of power-plant construction costs showed that since 2000, the price of a new reactor has risen almost 200 percent, said Cambridge Energy Research Associates.

FPL Group's Florida utility told regulators its two-reactor expansion plan could cost from $12 billion to $16 billion, nearly double other company estimates from last year.

RATEPAYERS STUCK FOOTING THE BILL

Regulators should think carefully about burdening ratepayers with the uncertain costs of new reactors given the industry's history, said Peter Bradford, a former state utility regulator and former NRC commissioner.

"Regulators today should be looking a lot harder at a mechanism that a few states wound up using during the runaway cost era of the '80s and that's putting a cap on the amount that is recoverable from customers," Bradford said.

The Southeast is home to some of the most politically powerful utilities in the country, including Atlanta-based Southern Co, Charlotte, North Carolina-based Duke Energy, Juno Beach, Florida-based FPL Group and New Orleans-based Entergy, all of which operate nuclear plants and have indicated they may expand that capacity.

While no utility has committed to build a new reactor yet, their attraction to the South is obvious, said Sara Barczak of the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy, a nuclear opponent.

"What we have in the South is ratepayers that get stuck footing the bill, again," said Barczak.

Electric rates across the South are set by state regulators except in Texas where suppliers compete. If utilities can convince regulators that new reactors are needed, captive customers will pay to build and operate the plants and utilities will earn a return on every dollar invested, she said.

The region has a favorable view of nuclear power, said Bradford. Companies "have a pretty good chance of avoiding or minimizing the political turmoil that might accompany a project in California or Massachusetts," he said.

Meanwhile, dozens of gas-fired power plants sit idle most of the year. The units were built by Duke, Calpine, Teco Energy and others to serve a competitive wholesale market that never matured.

Even with future electric demand forecast to grow at 2 percent a year, the region will have a surplus of 27,000 megawatts in 2016, according to reports from the Southeastern Electric Reliability Council, in excess of what nuclear developers hope to build.

One company is taking a second look. Citing rising costs for all types of power plants, SCANA Corp's South Carolina utility said last month it would delay a plan to pursue a new reactor license, for now.

The utility is studying options such as more gas-fired generation or purchased power to meet future demand. "We have to think about our customers," spokesman Robert Yanity said.