Review of New York State Low-Level Radioactive Waste Siting Process (1996) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Overview of the Siting Process
3 Overview of the Siting Process
Pages 35-48
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 35... ...
The Siting Plan describes the goal of the siting process as follows (Siting Plan, p. 2-41: The process will identify sites that are expected to be potentially suitable for low-level radioactive waste disposal.
|
From page 36... ...
Sites that meet the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) regulations for disposal of radioactive waste are referred to in this report as certifiable sites although actual certification would be granted only after a review of an application by the DEC.
|
From page 37... ...
(Chapter 6) Data Collection Candidate Reconnaissance Site Selection ~ Evaluations _ _ _ PHASE 2: Screening Based on Site Studies Site Characterization Public Participation Site Comparison 1 , 1 Certification FIGURE 3.
|
From page 38... ...
These cletailed characterizations were to occur ciuring phase 2 of the screening process.2 The Siting Plan noted that the DEC had the responsibility for developing the regulations and siting criteria governing the selection of a permanent disposal facility.3 The Siting Plan indicated that the Siting Commission would carry out site selection in compliance with DEC's 2As noted previously, the siting process was halted by the governor of New York during the first phase of the screening process, after five potential sites had been identified. 3The regulations are laid out in Title 6, Part 382, New York Code of Rules and Regulations ~YCRR)
|
From page 39... ...
In response to this committee's questions regarding its role in the early stages of the commission's site selection plan (Appendix F) , the DEC responded as follows: Because DEC would eventually review the Siting Plan and its implementation under that regulatory review, it was not appropriate for DEC to take a more active role in the Scads iSiting Commission's]
|
From page 40... ...
40 REVIEW OFNYS SITING PROCESS TABLE 3.1 Preference and Exclusionary Criteria Siting Factors Number of Exclusionary Criteria Number of Preference Criteria Total Weight of Preference Criteriaa Geology 1 4 135 Natural resources 1 3 60 Ground water hydrology 1 3 135 Surface water hydrology 3 5 150 Meteorology and climatology 0 3 55 Air quality 1 1 30 Ecology 1 1 55 Incompatible nearby activities 0 2 40 Demographic patterns 1 3 1 15 Land use 6 5 70 Cultural resources and aesthetics 2 Transportation O Socioeconomics/ 3 7 45 75 community services 0 335 Total 17 431,000 Weights are discussed later in this chapter.
|
From page 41... ...
Because the exclusionary and preference criteria played a central role in the site selection process, much of this report focuses on the design and application thereof. Disposal Methodology Although not required by the 1986 State Act, the Siting Plan indicated that the selection of a disposal method would occur concurrently with the selection of candidate sites.
|
From page 42... ...
states that this criterion was applied only to aboveground or belowground disposal methods during CAI and PSI. The Siting Plan, Candidate Area Identification Report (CAIR)
|
From page 43... ...
If the closest mine was between I/2 mile and 1 mile, a scaling factor of 3 was assigned, whereas a scaling factor of 1 was assigned if the closest mine was less than or equal to 1/2 mile away. Weighting factors are integer values that provide a relative ranking of the numerical importance among the preference criteria in terms of site suitability for example, the importance of distance to schools versus distance to highways.
|
From page 44... ...
Quantitative expressionist of these value judgments are called weighting factors. In the CAl and PSI steps of the screening process, the Siting Commission used the following process to "score" each area under consideration quantitatively to assess its suitability for an LLRW disposal facility: 1.
|
From page 45... ...
and the DEC required a quality assurance program as part of site characterization and licensing efforts. The USNRC regulations applications for a low-level waste disposal site require regarding license a description of the quality control program for the determination of natural disposal site characteristics and for quality control during the design, construction, operation, and closure of the land disposal facility and the receipt, handling, and emplacement of waste.
|
From page 46... ...
The following objectives were iclentif~ed: · Provide a base of public information on the LLRW disposal facility site and method selection process. ~ Create convenient, meaningful opportunities for members of the public across the state to participate in those processes.
|
From page 47... ...
Local information offices were to be opened in the candidate site communities to provide a channel of communication with the Siting Commission. These offices would provide public information on radioactive waste disposal, Siting Commission plans, and the site selection process.
|
From page 48... ...
Second, through the implementation of the exclusionary and preference criteria, the Siting Commission divided the site selection process into an exclusionary phase, during which the commission was removing land from consideration, and a selection phase, during which the commission actively sought to identify certifiable sites from eversmaller areas of the state. The differences between these two activities had important implications for the commission's work.
|
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.