Appendix K Examples of Windshield Survey Forms



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 271
--> Appendix K Examples of Windshield Survey Forms

OCR for page 271
--> 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. 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 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:

OCR for page 271
--> 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

OCR for page 271
--> 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.

OCR for page 271
--> 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.

OCR for page 271
--> 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:

OCR for page 271
--> 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:

OCR for page 271
--> 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:

OCR for page 271
--> 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:

OCR for page 271
--> CRITERION 57 HISTORIC PLACES CHK. BY Comment: CRITERION 58 ARCHEOLOGICAL SITES CHK. BY Comment: RFW432

OCR for page 271
--> SHEET OF WINDSHIELD SURVEY CHECKLIST—GEOSCIENCE CRITERIA PREPARED BY DATE APPROVED BY CHECKED BY DATE APPROVED BY CANDIDATE AREA POTENTIAL SITE 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 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:

OCR for page 271
--> 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:

OCR for page 271
--> 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:

OCR for page 271
--> 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:

OCR for page 271
--> 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

OCR for page 271
--> 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

OCR for page 271
--> °   Natural habitat islands or peninsulas within agricultural fields - Application of above to immediate downgradient areas Comment:

OCR for page 271
--> 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

OCR for page 271
--> Reconnaissance summary Site Number PLANNING CRITERIA Overall Rating (New criteria only) 1 (Least Favorable) 3 (Favorable) 5 (Most Favorable) Criterion Number Rating 31 1 3 5 32 1 3 5 35 1 3 5 38 1 3 5 40 1 3 5 44 1 3 5 43 1 3 5 45 1 3 5 48 1 3 5 49 1 3 5 52 1 3 5 54 1 3 5 55 1 3 5 56 1 3 5 60 1 3 5 61 1 3 5 Comments:

OCR for page 271
--> Reconnaissance Summary Site Number GEOLOGY CRITERIA Overall Rating (New criteria only) 1 (Least Favorable) 3 (Favorable) 5 (Most Favorable Criterion Number Rating 19 1 3 5 20 1 3 5 21 1 3 5 Other Issues Rating Slope 1 3 5 Constructability 1 3 5 Flaws 1 3 5 Comments:

OCR for page 271
--> Reconnaissance Summary Site Number WETLANDS/ECOLOGY CRITERIA Overall Rating 1 (Least Favorable) 3 (Favorable) 5 (Most Favorable) Criterion Number Rating 17 1 3 5 18 1 3 5 28 1 3 5 29 1 3 5 Comments: RFW443