As there is one here I always disclose and doubly to out of towner's.

Anne Lok I think this should be disclosed - it is not in the best interest of the buyer and future value may be affected by this.

It absolutely should be mandatory and if it is not then the legislature has dropped the ball.

Rule of thumb - if you have to ask - it's best to disclose...

if we have a disaster like that....im just gonna put my head between my legs and kiis my butt good bye... yes.. the govt should warn people, scare them and give pills out.. make mine Valium please

if it would change a consumer's mind about buying the property, it had better be disclosed.....

Disclose, disclose, disclose.  

Some people won't care at all, others will freak out and everything in between.  Present the information in a neutral way and let your clients decide if and how their home search will be affected. 

Scarey thought I think it should be disclosed. The San Onofre plant is 15 miles from where I live -they had a leak in 2012 and were secretive about how much :(

I am neutral on this subject. Personally, I believe that most people already know this information in a specific area, as it's hard to hide. I could actually argue the case both ways. I would disclose, but I don't know that we have to make another mandatory disclosure.

I am going to agree with Tammy Lankford , it is public knowledge, some of this cya crap gets excessive.

When in doubt, disclose, disclose, disclose!

Anne,

In California, we are disclosure maniacs.  I always think would an attorney find this a reason to sue? I would definitely disclose.  A

It seems safer to disclose.  But, I will say that that the buyer's agent should know this stuff too.  I would guess homes in this area are much lower priced.

I'm in the camp that if the question must be asked -- it should be disclosed.

Of course, I'm in California -- the land of disclosure.

ANYTHING that could materially and adversely affect the consideration paid! Disclose the heck out of that!

Whether required disclosure or not. I'm guessing a realtor worth their weight would drive their clients past the nuke plant when looking for a home and casually mention, "oh there's where we get our electricity from"... now let's go find you a home. If the clients freak out, then you probably should be helping them look somewhere else.

I think it would be prudent to disclose any issue affecting the property regardless if speculative if it will ever come to pass.

if you know...you got to spill the beans. People have told me that it is not necessary for somethings but I don't differentiate. I disclose by habit now

Of Course!      You always..... disclose it, if you know it!

Then yes, absolutely it should be disclosed.

Anne,
As you have seen from all the other answers our attorney’s and E&O vendors have made sure we know to disclose anything and everything if it might have the slightest relevance to a buyer.

of course not, the location of the plant is public information and easily seen.

Of course!

If you know about it, disclose! :-)

You want to disclose anything that is potentially important to a new buyer.  I suspect most looking would be aware of a nuclear plant nearbye but disclosure is always best for everyone concerned.  Mark

I think this falls under the category of "material", which warrants disclosure.

Anne Lok When in doubt disclose.

Whether its mandatory or not I think any potential Buyers should be made aware of the fact that they are looking to purchase a home thats within a potential nuclear emergency disaster zone.

Definitely Anne Lok .....Can't wait to read the answers you get from this one ....

We do not have that issue in our market.

 Good Saturday morning Anne. I think that this would be a good broker or real estate attorney question.

Ann, a nearby nuclear power plant is a pretty hard thing to miss!  I think that disclosures are more important for issues that the sellers know about but that might be hidden.