Interesting article I noticed in the BBC got me thinking about nuclear power plants and evacuation plans in cases of emergencies. Mudslides in Brazil have damaged evacuation routes that would be used during a nuclear accident and so the local mayor is floating the idea that the nuclear reactors should be shut down as a precaution.
Nothing is operationally wrong with the nuclear reactors, but I suspect that as part of the licensing process the nuclear operators must provide proof to the Brazilian regulator that in the event of an accidental release of radiation, exposure of the public is limited to below key thresholds. If radiation escapes the facility, this means that members of the public must be evacuated to a safe distance within a given time frame. If they can't be evacuated within the expected amount of time then the impact on the public might be greater than is tolerated by the regulator.
A similar discussion surrounds the nuclear reactors sited in Pickering. When the reactors were first constructed the area around the nuclear reactor was far less developed than it is today, which means that the evacuation estimates may no longer be sufficient. Some anti-nuclear groups and persons have used this as fodder for their attacks, but in this case, they may actually have a point.
In all likelihood, the Brazilian regulator will make a judgment call regarding how long the road is slated to be closed and if the nuclear reactors should be shut down as a result. The utilities and local governments on the other hand, would be well advised to review their estimates on the how long an evacuation will require and to take actions (ie building new roads, 'safeguarding' old roads, etc...) to make sure that this sort of thing doesn't reoccur.