Review of New York State Low-Level Radioactive Waste Siting Process (1996) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Executive Summary
Executive Summary
Pages 1-9
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
REVIEW OF Alto SITING PROCESS The Siting Commission adopted a two-phase siting process, described in its Plan for Selecting Sites for Disposal of LLRW, hereafter referred to as the "Siting Plan." The first phase was designed to identify a small number of candidate sites by using existing data and limited reconnaissance studies. The second phase was designed to use on-site investigations to identify one or more sites for certification and licensing.
|
From page 2... ...
The committee also was directed to address eight specific questions regarding the technical and scientific adequacy of the siting criteria and site selection process. These questions are discussed in Chapter ~ of this report.
|
From page 3... ...
Subsets of these criteria were used to score and rank areas numerically during various screening steps. The scoring procedure was intended to guide the selection process toward areas and sites with desirable characteristics for an LLRW disposal facility.
|
From page 4... ...
The committee identified problems with the design or application of some of the exclusionary and preference criteria used in CAl screening, as noted in Chapter 5. These criteria address seismic hazards, existing mines, protection of ground water resources, buffers from water resources, best usage of surface waters, and air quality nonattainment.
|
From page 5... ...
During PSt screening, the Siting Commission also considered five parcels of land that had been offered by landowners as possible sites for an LLRW disposal facility, and included one of the parcels on the list of five potential sites. The committee identified problems with either the design or the application of a few of the exclusionary and preference criteria used in the PSI screening step (Chapter 6~.
|
From page 6... ...
DISCUSSION The failure of the New York siting effort can be attributed to both external and internal causes. The primary external cause was the unrealistic schedules imposed on the Siting Commission by the federal and state LLRW management acts.
|
From page 7... ...
The committee also believes that the technical deficiencies in the screening process contributed significantly to the failure of the siting process and that the sensitivity analyses performed by the Siting Commission were inadequate for identifying these problems. In addition, the committee also notes that the Siting Commission did not provide adequate documentation of some of its important screening decisions.
|
From page 8... ...
In the committee's judgment, top-down screening should not be pushed beyond the capabilities of the data and selection criteria to support comprehensive and technically credible decisions. In the New York siting effort, top-down screening probably should not have been pushed much beyond SES, the only step for which statewide data of reasonably good quality were available and in which exclusionary criteria were based on laws and regulations viewed as reasonable by most parties.
|
From page 9... ...
To be successful, waste disposal siting efforts must be structured to address these effects through a high level of public involvement in facility siting, design, operation, and monitoring. This process must be a cooperative effort and requires the constructive participation of the potentially affected communities.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.