Review of New York State Low-Level Radioactive Waste Siting Process (1996)

SHEET OF

WINDSHIELD SURVEY CHECKLIST—PLANNING CRITERIA

PREPARED BY DATE APPROVED BY

CHECKED BY DATE APPROVED BY

CANDIDATE AREA

POTENTIAL SITE (s) T R SEC.

Are there any obvious unfavorable conditions found upon arrival at the site that would clearly prohibit development of the waste disposal facility? If no, proceed with remainder of checklist. If yes, state the prohibiting conditions below and proceed to the next site.______________________________________________________ .

CRITERIA NOT PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED

CRITERION 31

INCORPORATE NEARBY ACTIVITIES (ACTIVITIES) CHK. BY

Identify any nearby activities that could interfere with the ability of the facility to meet the performance objectives of 6 NYCRR Part 382, Subpart C. Such facilities could include areas of irrigated agriculture (groundwater withdrawal) mining and quarrying areas, industrial incinerators, transmission lines or pipelines.

Comment:

CRITERION 32

POPULATION DENSITY (EXCLUDE > 1,000)

CHK. BY

Delineate the boundaries of unincorporated areas and other concentrations of populations not already evaluated. Identify the number of residential units within. Multiply the number of units by 2.5 to arrive at approximate total population.

Comment:

CRITERION 35

NONRESIDENT POPULATION

Identify the locations, names, and types of facilities that are located in or near the site that would account for nonresidents inhabiting the area. This would include recreation facilities (parks, campgrounds, trails, picnic areas), manufacturing plants, office buildings, schools, and other institutional properties Attempt to estimate size/number of visitors by building size, approximate number of parking spaces, etc.

Comment:

CRITERION 38

STATE-PROTECTED LANDS (MUNICIPAL PARKS) CHK. BY

Identify the locations, names, and types of municipal parks located in or near the potential site. Note creation date if available.

Comment:

CRITERION 40

REAL PROPERTY NOTABLE TO BE ACQUIRED CHK. BY

Identify the locations, names, and types of any properties that do not appear to be acquirable for the facility. The exact nature of these facilities has not been identified, but should

include cemeteries or institution-owned lands (school district forests as an example found in some states). Ownership other than private should be noted.

Comment:

CRITERION 44

SOIL GROUPS 1-4 CHK. BY

This criterion has been evaluated in the PSIR, however, issues related to it remain. Data on farming activity and crop types will be important in settling these issues as well as input to the preliminary performance assessments. Where possible, delineate areas of active agriculture (remember pasture/grazing) and indicate crop type. The latter will be difficult; it may be possible to differentiate by general classifications (i.e., cropland and pasture; orchards, groves, nurseries, etc.; confined feeding operations; rangeland, and other.

Comment:

CRITERION 43

OTHER GOVERNMENT-OWNED LANDS CHK. BY

See Criterion 40. Note government-owned lands not already analyzed. Municipal solid waste landfills, transfer stations or sewage treatment facilities outside municipal boundaries are potential examples.

Comment:

CRITERION 45

POPULATION GROWTH CHK. BY

Note the locations, size and type of development that may be developed in the near future. Clearing and road building are good signs of future/present development. Sometimes a billboard or sign is placed along a roadway announcing future projects.

New county or town roads (or even in some cases improvements) may signal the direction, albeit not quantity, of growth.

Comment:

CRITERION 48

CONGESTION CHK. BY

This will be difficult to analyze on a site-specific basis. However, it may be noticeable through travels to candidate areas that contain segments of major highway systems are extremely busy. Note any such segments, as well as any site-specific access roads that appear to be overloaded.

Comment:

CRITERION 49

NEW CONSTRUCTION/IMPROVEMENTS CHK. BY

As most sites are located in very rural settings and are accessible only by town roads, note any segments that are narrow, in need or repair (surface breaking up), or any old or unmaintained or weight-restricted bridges crossed. Give the highway system in the immediate vicinity a straightforward rating of either good, fair, or poor.

Comment:

CRITERION 52

ACCIDENT RATES CHK. BY

This will most likely not be able to be evaluated, however, if any guard rails appear to be damaged from vehicular contact, please note. Give highway system in immediate area an observed rating of good, fair, or poor. Take into consideration speed restrictions, changes in slope, number and severity of curves, etc.

Comment:

CRITERION 54

LABOR FORCE CHK. BY

Note local employment opportunities such as types of manufacturing, does the site's perceived labor shed/community area include a relatively large city, is the local economy dominated by agriculture, etc.

Comment:

CRITERION 55

HOUSING STOCK CHK. BY

While passing through cities, villages, hamlets and unincorporated places proximate to the site, notice the availability of residential properties being marketed. Note what appear to be anomalies, e.g., many or no houses for sale. This will be a qualitative evaluation. (The number of employees at the facility during construction will be approximately 100 and 30 during operation.)

Comment:

CRITERION 56

INFRASTRUCTURE CHK. BY

If while reading local newspapers, etc., an article specifies a particular need for additions to the school or hospital, more emergency personnel and equipment, a new highway, water or sewer system, note it here. Don't anticipate the ability to visualize infrastructure insufficiencies.

Comment:

CRITERION 60

VIEWSHEDS CHK. BY

Evaluate the site with respect to its elevation, vegetative cover and the overall ability to permit the facility to be viewed by the public. Delineate viewsheds where possible.

Comment:

CRITERION 61

NOISE CHK. BY

Identify the locations of nearest residences or recreation facilities, etc., that may be within earshot of the facility. Consult with biologists with regard to animal species within or nearby the site. If able to approximate furthest distance noise could be heard, do so.

Comment:

CRITERIA COVERED IN PREVIOUS SCREENING STEPS

Comment on conditions you see relating to the following criteria that have been used in GIS screening.

CRITERION 6

REFORESTATION AREAS CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 30

INCOMPATIBLE NEARBY ACTIVITIES (SOURCES) CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 32

POPULATION DENSITY (EXCLUDE > 1,000) CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 33

POPULATION DENSITY (PREFER LOW DENSITY) CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 34

HIGHLY POPULATED PLACES CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 36/37

FEDERAL LANDS CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 38/39

NEW YORK STATE LANDS CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 41/42

INDIAN LANDS CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 44

SOIL GROUPS 1-4 CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 46

WEST VALLEY FACILITY CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 47

PROXIMITY TO MAJOR HIGHWAYS CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 50

MULTIMODAL ACCESS CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 51

PROXIMITY TO MAJOR WASTE GENERATORS CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 53

ROUTES THROUGH INCORPORATED PLACES CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 57

HISTORIC PLACES CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 58

ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES CHK. BY

Comment:

RFW432

SHEET OF

WINDSHIELD SURVEY CHECKLIST—GEOSCIENCE CRITERIA

PREPARED BY DATE APPROVED BY

CHECKED BY DATE APPROVED BY

CANDIDATE AREA

POTENTIAL SITE T R SEC.

Are there any obvious unfavorable conditions found upon arrival at the site that would clearly prohibit development of the waste disposal facility? If no, proceed with remainder of checklist. If yes, state the prohibiting conditions below and proceed to the next site.

CRITERIA NOT PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED

CRITERION 19

DRAINAGE CHARACTERISTICS CHK. BY

Provide written descriptions of observations relating to how well-drained the site is, and comment on the potential for ephemeral flooding of ponding due to streams or runoff. Evaluate road cuts for soil permeability. Evaluate surface for drainage network development. Check culverts, check dams, levees, etc., for potential flooding. Provide a good, fair, or poor rating to the site. Identify data needs that could better aid your decision.

Comment:

CRITERION 20

POTENTIAL OR EXISTING EROSIONAL CHARACTERISTICS CHK. BY

Provide written descriptions of observations relating to existing or potential erosional characteristics (i.e., slope failures, mass wasting, sheet erosion, etc.) and comment on the potential for adverse impacts on waste containment. Evaluate soil strength in road cuts. Use aerial photography or maps to assess post or potential landslides. Note springs or seeps if possible.

Provide a good, fair, or poor evaluation.

Comment:

CRITERION 21

UPSTREAM IMPOUNDMENTS CHK. BY

Provide written descriptions of observations relating to the potential for ephemeral flooding from failure of upstream man-made impoundments. Include potential impact to power lines, access roads, etc. Provide a good, fair, or poor rating for the site.

Comment:

OTHER FACTORS/ISSUES

SLOPE

Provide written description of topography in terms of percent-area by percent slope. Describe slope type (i.e., exposed rock, colluvium, glaciogenic deposits) and condition (i.e., vegetated, forested, dissected, etc.). Comment on slope for construct-ability issues. Note any slope protection measures currently in use, e.g., bolts, nets, walls, etc. Provide a good, fair, or poor rating to the site.

Comment:

CONSTRUCTABILITY

Provide written description of conditions that may result in issues impacting the constructability (time, money, politics) of an option at the site(s) (i.e., remoteness, access roads, power, existing developments/land use, etc.). Evaluate potential for intrusion. Provide a good, fair, or poor rating.

Comment:

FLAWS

Comment on any obvious or potential flaws that the site(s) exhibits that would restrict development or eliminate the site(s) from further consideration. Ask yourself if it was you task to build a facility here what would the potential drawbacks be.

Comment:

CRITERIA COVERED IN PREVIOUS SCREENING STEPS

Comment on the conditions you see relating to the following criteria that have been used in GIS screening.

CRITERION 1

STRATIGRAPHIC COMPLEXITY CHK. BY

Aboveground/Belowground Disposal Methods

Comment:

Mine Repository Disposal Method Only

Comment:

CRITERION 3

SUBSURFACE DISSOLUTION CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 5

THICKNESS AND AERIAL EXTENT OF GEOLOGIC UNIT CHK. BY

Aboveground/Belowground Disposal Methods

Comment:

Mine Repository Disposal Method Only

Comment:

CRITERION 7

NEARBY MINES CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 8

RESOURCE POTENTIAL CHK. BY

Do your observations confirm the favorability ranking in the draft report? ____yes ____no; if no, comment below with observation and suggested modification (attach sheets if necessary).

Comment:

CRITERION 10

OIL AND GAS FIELDS CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 12

AQUIFERS CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 13

GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE ZONES CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 14

RADIONUCLIDE RETARDATION (PERMEABILITY) CHK. BY

Comment:

CRITERION 16

FEMA 100-YR FLOODPLAINS CHK. BY

Comment:

RFW429

SHEET OF

WINDSHIELD SURVEY CHECKLIST—WETLANDS AND ECOLOGY CRITERIA

PREPARED BY DATE APPROVED BY

CHECKED BY DATE APPROVED BY

CANDIDATE ARE

POTENTIAL SITE(S) T R SEC.

FIRST IMPRESSIONS

Are there any obvious unfavorable conditions found upon arrival at the site that would clearly prohibit development of the waste disposal facility? If no, proceed with remainder of checklist. If yes, state the prohibiting conditions below and proceed to the next site._______________________________________

CRITERIA NOT PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED

Criteria relating to wetlands and ecology have been evaluated in previous screening steps. However, additional analyses pertaining to these criteria are to be conducted during the windshield surveys as stated below.

CRITERIA 17 and 18

WETLANDS

Provide written summaries on the occurrence of the following subcriteria for each site;

• °	Wetland habitats (refer to CAIR and DEC maps)

• °	Streams/floodplains

• °	Hydric soils

• °	0-1% slopes

- Application of above to immediate downgradient areas

Comment:

CRITERIA 28 AND 29

ECOLOGY

Provide written summaries on the occurrence of the following subcriteria for each site:

• °	Proximity to Threatened/Endangered species records in screening report

• °	Occurrence on site of habitats of T/E species based upon DEC list and species ranges

• °	General habitat descriptions: habitats of ''Important'' species based upon experience

- Application of above to immediate downgradient areas

Comment:

RFW454

RFW443