ML20205H643

Draft Reg Guide,Task Wm 408-4, Guidance for Selecting Sites Near-Surface Disposal of Low-Level Radwaste

ML20205H643
Person / Time
Issue date:	03/31/1987
From:	NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH (RES)
To:
Shared Package
ML20205H648	List: ML20205H643 ML20205H662
References
RTR-REGGD-4.019, TASK-RE, TASK-WM-408-4 REGGD-04.XXX, REGGD-4.XXX, NUDOCS 8704010122
Download: ML20205H643 (14)

Text

1. %

f March 1987

[ 'J.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COP 9tISSION 3 Tas i 0FFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH D ....e DRAFT REGULATORY GUIDE AND VALUE/ IMPACT STATEMENT

Contact:

John C. Stewart (301) 443-7980 GUIDANCE FOR SELECflHG SITES FOR NEAR-SURFACE DISPOSAL OF LOW-LEVEL RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE A. INTRODUCTION The purpose of this regulatory guide is to provide guidance on screening areas to identify a site or sites for near-surface disposal of low-level radio-active waste (LLW). Section 61.50, " Disposal Site Suitability Requirements for Land Disposal," of 10 CFR Part 61, " Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste," lists technical requirements for the site; Subpart C of Part 61 lists performance objectives that must be met by the disposal facility.

The purposes of screening are to identify a site or sites that have a high potential for meeting the site suitability requirements of paragraph 61.50(a) and to help ensure that the performance objectives of Subpart C will be met.

This regulatory guide will provide guidance for conducting a site screening investigation. It is anticipated that much of the data required for site screening can be obtained fron, published and open file information and aerial photographic interpretation. Only limited onsite studies are anticipated at the screening stage. l This regulatory guide does not provide guidance on site characterization requirements that must be addressed in a license application. Information on i site characterization requirements for a license application is provided in NUREG-0902, " Site Suitability, Selection and Characterization";1 Regulatory Guide 4.18, " Standard Format and Content of Environmental Reports for 1 Copies may be purchased from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. Box 37082, Washington, DC 20013-7082.

This regulatory guide and the associated value/ impact statement are being issued in draft form to involve the public in the early stages of the development of a regulatory position in this area. They have not received complete staff review and do not represent an official MRC staff position.

1 Public comments are being solicited on both drafts, the guide (including any implementation schedule) and the value/ impact l statement. Comments on the value/ impact statement should be accompanied by supporting data. Written comments may be sub-mitted to the Rules and Procedures Branch. ORR ADM, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington DC 20555. Comments may also be delivered to Room 4000, Maryland National Bank Building 7735 Old Georgetown Road, Bethesda, Maryland from 8:15 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Copies of coements received may be examined at the NRC Public Document Room 1717 H Street NW.,

Washington, DC. Comments will be most helpful if received by Me 29,1987.

Requests for single copies of draft guides (which may be reproduced) or for placement on an automatic distribution list for single copies of future draft guides in specific divisions should be made in writing to the U.$. Nuclear Regulatory Casuission, Washington, DC 20555. Attention: Director. Division of Technical Information and Document Control.

8704010122 870331 PDR REGGD 04.XXX R PDR

Near-Surface Disposal of Radioactive Waste";1 and NUREG-1199, " Standard Format and Content of a License Application for a Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility."1 j Applicants are encouraged to meet informally with the NRC technical staff )

at any time during the prelicense stage to discuss license application require-ments, performance objectives, or technical requirements of 10 CFR Part 61.

These informal discussions will streamline the review process and reduce overall costs to the applicant.

Any information collection activities mentioned in this draft regulatory guide are contained as requirements in 10 CFR Part 61, which provides the regu-latory basis for this guide. The information collection requirements in 10 CFR Part 61 have been cleared under 0MB Clearance No. 3150-0135.

B. DISCUSSION The technical site suitability requirements for near-surface LLW disposal are presented in paragraph 61.50(a) of 10 CFR Part 61 (See Appendix A). These requirements address specific conditions that could affect long-term site stability and waste isolation. The site suitability requirements may eliminate from consideration land that has certain unfavorable hydrologic, geologic, land-use, and demographic conditions that could adversely affect the site and its environs.

In evaluating sites for LLW disposal, it is important that a reasonable effort be made to select candidate sites with natural conditions that will maintain radionuclide releases to the general environment as low as is reason-ably achievable. The NRC staff considers the long-term contribution of the natural conditions of the site essential in protecting the general population against releases of radioactive material. The effectiveness of other measures such as design features, waste form, waste packaging, and institutional controls is assumed to decrease with time after site closure.

The NRC staff expects that the natural conditions of any proposed near-surface LLW disposal facility will contribute favorably to the isolation of LLW and to the stability of the disposal site after closure. Although it is unreal-istic to expect total isolation or site stability in the long term, it is expected that careful selection of a site will limit the potential for radio-nuclide leaching, provide long pathways to minimize potential radionuclide releases, prevent erosion and inundation of the disposal site to minimize active 2

maintenance, and avoid areas in which detrimental human activities are occurring.

D It is expected that the concepts in the technical requirements in S 61.50 will help the applicant meet the performance objectives for effluents (S 61.41) and long-term stability (S 61.44). Such careful site selection, along with equally careful consideration of the facility design, operation, and closure require-ments of 10 CFR Part 61, will ensure that the overall performance objectives of 10 CFR Part 61 will be met and that the health and safety of the public will be protected.

C. REGULATORY POSITION The performance objectives of Subpart C of 10 CFR Part 61 (see Appendix A) were established to define a level of safety for near-surface disposal of LLW.

The technical requirements of Subpart D were established to help ensure that the performance objective's are met. Demonstrating compliance (site characterization) with the site suitability requirements of paragraph 61.50(a) will specifically contribute to achieving the performance cbjectives SS 61.41 and 61.44.

1. CONSIDERATION FOR SITE SUITABILITY The following should be considered when screening a region of interest to identify a site for characterization. NUREG-0902 contains information that will assist in demonstrating compliance with the site suitability requirements (site characterization).

1.1 Capable of Being Characterized (Paragraph 61.50(a)(2))

The ability of the site to provide long-term isolation of waste should be demonstrated by using models and other analyses based on the characteristics of the site. A site that is being considered for LLW disposal must be capable of being analyzed, characterized, and modeled. This suggests identifying the indi-vidual components of the site, identifying the physical characteristics that make each individual component unique, and preparing a general representation of each site component to enable predictions of site performance. Although site characterization is not necessary for screening, there are some general S

3

concepts that should be considered to provide reasonable assurance that site characterization can be fulfilled.

Sites that are geologically and hydrologically simple and contain processes that occur at consistent and definable rates are preferred over complex sites.

For modeling, input assumptions must be valid (representative) for all site conditions. If a complex site condition is not included in a model, it must be demonstrated that the condition either has no effect on site performance or can be accounted for by using a conservative value parameter.

1.2 Population Distribution and Land Use (Paragraph 61.50(a)(3))

The candidate site should be located in an area of low population density where the potential for future population growth is estimated to be quite limited.

The candidate site should be at least 2 kilometers from the residential property limits of the nearest existing urban community (NUREG-0902, p. 6).

Applicable State and local land-use plans and regulations (including zoning ordinances) should be fully evaluated to be sure that there are no conflicting regulations or conflicting plans for development in the vicinity of the site.

Residentially zoned or planned land uses are considered to be conflicting uses l and should not exist or be planned within a 2-kilometer radius of the candidate site. In addition, local and State authorities should be consulted for informa-tion on planned highway construction in the vicinity of the site to be sure that no highways are planned that would interfere with the operation of the site.

It is also important to determine whether or not there will be adequate access to the site in terms of future highways and land use.

1.3 Natural Resources (Paragraph 61.50(a)(4))

Published or open file information on natural resources such as mineral deposits, coal or hydrocarbon deposits, and geothermal energy sources should be evaluated to determine the potential impact on the site if the resources were to be exploited. Generally, areas should be avoided if they contain natural resources in quantities or of such quality that future exploitation could affect waste isolation.

9 4

1.4 Site Must Be Well Orained (Paragraphs 61.50(a)(5) and 61.50(a)(6))

A 100 year floodplain, coastal high-hazard area, wetland, or areas where flood velocities could cause damage to the disposal facility are not suitable for waste disposal. In general, significant flood inundation and high water velocities can be expected in poorly drained areas, the floodplains of major rivers, and areas situated near hydraulically steep streams or arroyos with large drainage areas. Such areas should be avoided in the siting of LLW facilities.

Additionally, projected land uses (such as urbanization or other factors that increase runoff potential) should be evaluated to determine the effect of such changes on flood levels, flood-water velocities, and the overall impacts of flooding on site stability.

A waste disposal site should not be located in an area where the natural ground slope is steep. Runoff from intense local precipitation may cause damage to the waste disposal unit or to diversion channels constructed to divert over-land flow around the site. Intense rainfall could be a determining factor in the stability of the site. Even though the upstream drainage areas may be mini-I mized, steep slopes could produce high water velocities that could be difficult to mitigate.

1. 5 Depth to Water Table (Paragraph 61.50(a)(7))

Areas with a known or suspected high water table should be avoided. A disposal site should be sufficiently above the water table so that ground-water intrusion, perennial or otherwise, into the waste will not occur. In no case will waste disposal be permitted in the zone of fluctuation of the water table.

Hydrologic analyses should be based on existing open file reports and maps. To determine the depth to the water table, indirect measurements through geophysical techniques may be helpful.

1.6 Ground-Water Discharge (Paragraph 61.50(a)(8))

i Areas are not suitable for LLW disposal if ground-water discharge features such as springs, seeps, swamps, or bogs are present. The NRC staff prefers long flow paths from the disposal site to the point of ground-water discharge in 5

order to increase the amount of time for decay of the radionuclides, increase l

the hydrodynamic dispersion within the aquifer, and increase the likelihood of retardation of reactive radionuclides in the aquifer.

Hydrogeologic analyses can be conducted by reviewing open file reports, maps, and low-level aerial photographs. In addition, site visits during wet seasons may be helpful in identifying ground-water discharges.

1. 7 Tectonic and Geomorphic Processes (Paragraphs 61.50(a)(9) and 61.50(a)(10))

A candidate site should not be located in an area of known significant tectonic activity. Analysis of known or suspected tectonic activity during the Quaternary period should be conducted to evaluate the likelihood that the site suitability requirements will be met. In addition, a candidate site should not have the potential for significant mass wasting, erosion, slumping, or landsliding.

Tectonic and geomorphic information can be obtained from open file reports and U.S. Geological Survey and State geologic maps and topographic maps. Combin-ing topographic map information with available regional meteorological data l

should help in the evaluation for mass wasting.

1. 8 Adverse Impacts from Nearby Facilities (Paragraph 61.50(a)(11))

A candidate site should not be located near any facilities or activities that could adversely affect the ability of the site to meet the performance objectives of 10 CFR Part 61. In addition, a candidate site should not be located near facilities that could mask the site monitoring program.

State and local land-use plans should be evaluated to determine the potential for future facilities and activities to adversely impact on the proposed disposal facility.

2. SITE SELECTION PROCESS The generic site selection process outlined below provides guidance on evaluating a region to identify a site that can meet the licensing requirements for near-surface LLW disposal. The site selection process may vary from State 6

to State or compact to compact 2 depending on a variety of factors, such as the distribution of waste generators, population distribution, or geologic conditions.

However, the minimum technical requirements of S 61.50 of 10 CFR Part 61 and the environmental requirements of 10 CFR Part 51 apply irrespective of the site selection process employed.

The four-step site selection process presented in this regulatory guide is summarized in Table 1. Tha site suitability discussion (Section C.1) is fundamental to this site selection process.

2.1 Step 1 For the first step, the applicant should define the region of interest, such as the compact or State in which th LLW site will t,e located. The purpose of this first step is to eliminate unfavorable areas and identify candidate areas for further consideration. The applicant should conduct a search of all published and open file documents on generalized land use, transportation, and geophysical information on a regional or State-wide level. Recent high to mid-level aerial photographs should be evaluated for recent land-use changes.

Some examples of areas not suitable for LLW disposal include areas that contain steep terrain, surface waters, wetlands, faults or fracture zones, and karst areas. In addition, there should be no major recharge areas at the site.

Examples of significant land-use factors that should eliminate areas from further consideration include proximity to population centers or large parcels of committed lands such as active military land, Indian reservations, or National parks and monuments.

An example of a candidate area suitable for further study would be a sparsely populated area that has no apparent geologic limitations, has easy access to an interstate or limited access highway, and is approximately in the center of major LLV generators. Transportation issues that should be evaluated at this preliminary stage include access, distance from waste generators, and impacts to residential developments along potential transportation routes.

2The Low-level Waste Policy Act of 1980 provides the opportunity for States to form compacts by which a group of States may exclude other States from disposing of LLW within the compact.

7

Table 1 Site Selection Process MOST GENERAL MOST DETAILED Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4*

Category Region of Interest Candidate Areas Candidate Sites Proposed Sites-l Study Compact, State, or A homogeneous area. Sites thac are potentially The site for which Area geographic region. Sites within an area licensable. the applicant is will contain same seeking a license.

general environmental characteristics.

Criteria General exclusionary General compact or General review of compact Evaluate compact or To Be data pertaining to State criteria, or State criteria, S 61.50, State criteria, Reviewed health and safety, areas general screening and information in S 61.50, Regulatory protected by law. requirements from Regulatory Guide 4.18. Guide 4.18.

S 61.50, and Regulatory Guide 4.18.

Data To Be USGS and State geologic USGS and State USGS and State geologic Data collected to Reviewed maps, Federal and State geologic maps, maps, topographic maps, this point and regulations, aerial topographic maps, university research, local collect original photographs. univers'ty research, government ordinances and data, local government surveys, and local utility ordinances and maps. Actual field surveys, aerial observation.

photographs.

Level of Reconnaissance-level Reconnaissance review Reconnaissance information Demonstrate fulfill- 1 Analysis map reviews, literature of local maps, high- and site visits (surface- ment of site charac- l and regulation reviews. level aerial photo- water samples, low-level terization require- .

I graphs, literature, aerial photos, onsite ments. Prepare and regulations. photos, air analysis, environmental report windshield surveys, etc.). as necessary.

~

\

Purpose Identify candidate Identify candidate Ident'fy proposed site for Meet site licensing areas. sites. charau.o rization. requirements.

• Step 4 involves site characterization.

O

2.2 Step 2 The purpose of Step 2 is to evaluate the candidate areas to identify candidate sites. Much of the local geophysical and land-use data can be obtained through Federal, State, and local agencies. Land-use plans, zoning ordinances, U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and State geological survey reports, and open file data are examples of information sources that may prove useful in developing a list of candidate sites. For example, local land-use documents should indicate whether or not development is planned or permitted in candidate areas. USGS and State geologic survey maps and reports often contain detailed information on faults, flood plains, seismic events, and bedrock and soil compo-sition. Also, the reviewer may wish to examine mid- to low-level aerial photo-l graphs for recent land-use changes. (See NUREG/CR-2861, " Image Analysis for l Facility Siting: A Comparison of Low- and High-Altitude Image Interpretability for Land Use/ Land Cover Mapping";1 NUREG/CR-3247, " Site Characterization Information Using LANDSAT Satellite and Other Remote Sansing Data: Integration of Remote Sensing Data with Geographic Information Systems";l and NUREG/CR-3583,

" Evaluation of Loiv-Altitude Remote Sensing Techniques for Obtaining Site Characteristic Information,"1 for more information concerning remote sensing applications for site selection.)

2.3 Step 3 The purpose of this step is to evaluate the candidate sitas in order to identify the proposed site. Since the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) requires an analysis of alternatives to the proposed action (site),

an environmental report that contains an evaluation of the candidate sites must be developed at the site characterization stage. Although a complete environ-mental report is not required until a license application is submitted (S 61.10),

the NRC staff suggests that the applicant consider each category in Chapter 3 of Regulatory Guide 4.18 during the site screening process. An early awareness of the environmental requirements should provide reasonable assurance that a complete environmental report can be submitted with a license application.

Data collection during this phase of site selection will require recon-naissance revievs and site visits. Soil and surface-water sampling may be conducted. Land-use, transportation, and geophysical data described in the 9

previous steps should be reevaluated. Recent low-level aerial photographs may be useful for further evaluation. These photographs may show land-use and transportation changes and geophysical features (faults, mass wasting, wet-lands) that may not be identified on existing maps. The physical inspection l 1

may include a low-level aerial or ground survey (windshield survey) of the site  !

and the surrounding areas. A suggested technique for conducting a site selec- l tion analysis after the data are collected is provided in Appendix B.

A substantial amount of information can be obtained through meetings with local utility officials to determine the location of community water distribu-tion systems and other utilities. This information may be important in candidate areas where the presence of potable wells may require the installation of a new water distribution system or an extension from an existing system to ensure the availability of adequate potable water. In addition, information on the loca-tion of existing and planned electrical distribution systems is also important in planning for adequate cost-effective power at the candidate disposal facility.

At this stage of screening, a title search of the candidate sites should be conducted. Land ownership information is important so that proper authorities and land owners may be contacted concerning planned onsite visits and surveys.

Knowledge of site parcel ownership is important because publicly held land may l

be easier to acquire for public use. Some states lack the power of eminent domain; therefore privately owned lands may not be available unless ,the owner is willing to sell. However, dedicated park land should not be used unless it can be demonstrated that there would be no significant environmental or community impacts.

2.4 Step 4 The purpose of this step is to evaluate the proposed site to determine whether it is licensable. A licensable site would fulfill the technical requirements of S 61.50, help ensure that the performance objectives of Subpart C of 10 CFR Part 61 will be met, and satisfy the requirements of NEPA.

A successful screening program will identify a site that can be licensed for near-surface disposal of LLW.

Guidance on implementing Step 4 (site characterization) can be obtained from NUREG-0902, Regulatory Guide 4.18, and NUREG-1199, " Standard Format and Content of a License Application for a Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility."

10

APPENDIX A From 10 CFR Part 61, " LICENSING REQUIREMENTS .

FOR LAND DISPOSAL OF RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE" I 81.44 Stability of the disposal site aner (6) Upstream drainage areas must be Subpart C-Ferformance Objectives closure. minimized to decrease the amount of 8 61.40 General requirement. The disposal facility must be sited, jfd sal uni

• designed, used, operated, and closed to Land disposal facilities must be achieve long-term stability of the dis- (7) The disposal site must provide sited, designed, operated, closed, and posal site and to eliminate to the sufficient depth to the water table controlled af ter closure so that reason- extent practicable the need for ongo- that ground water intrusion, perennial rble assurance exists that exposures to ing active maintenance of the disposal or otherwise, into the waste will not humans are within the limita estab* site following closure so that only sur- occur. The Con mission will consider lished in the performance objectives in veillance, monitoring, or minor custo- an exception to this requirement to il G1.41 through 61.44. dial care are required. allow disposal below the water table if it can be conclusively shown that dis-5 61.41 Protection of the general popula- posal site characteristics will result in tion from releases of radioactivity. Subpart D-Technical Requirements molecular diffusion being the pre-Concentrations of radioactive mate, f*' Land Disposal Facilities dominant means of radionuclide move-rie.1 which may be released to the gen. ment and the rate of movement will err.1 environment in ground water, sur- 8 61.50 msposal sik suitability require- result in the performance objectives of face water, air, soil, plants, or animals ments fw land disposal. Subpart C of this part being met. In must not result in an annual dose ex. (a) Disposal site suitability for near. no case will waste disposal be permit-ceeding an equivalent of 25 millirems surface disposal. ted in the zone of fluctuation of the m to thc whole body,75 millirems to the (1) The purpose of this section is to water table.

} thyroid, and 25 millirems to any other specify the minimum characteristics a (8) The hydrogeologic unit used for E/ crgan of any member of the public. disposal site must have to be accepta. disposal shall not discharge ground d Riasonable effort should be made to ble for use as a near-surface disposal water to the surface within the dispos-mr.intain releases of radioactivity in facility. The primary emphasis in dis. al site.

effluents to the general environment posal site suitability is given to isola. (9) Areas must be avoided where tec-as low as is reasonably achievable. tion of wastes, a matter having long- tonic processes such as faulting, fold-term impacts, and to disposal alte fea- ing, seismic activity, or vulcanism may ,

8 61.42 Protection of individuals from in- tures that ensure that the long term occur with such frequency and extent f advertent intrusion. performance objectives of Subpart C to significantly affect the ability of ,

Design, operation, and closure of the of this part are met, as opposed to the disposal site to meet the perform- i land disposal facility must ensure pro- short-term convenience or benefits. ance objectives of Subpart C of this j tection of any individual inadvertently (2) The disposal site shall be capable part, or may preclude defensible mod-Intruding into the disposal site and oc- of being characterized, modeled, ana. eling and prediction of long. term im- .

pacts.

cupying the site or contrting the lyzed and monitored.

J waste at any time after act e institu. (3) Within the region or state where (10) Areas must be avoided where j tional controls over the disposal site the facility is to be located, a disposal surface geologic processes such - I are removed. site should be selected so that project. mass wasting, erosion, rJumping, lanu ed population growth and fu6ure de. liding, or weathering occur with such i 1 61.43 Protection of Individuals during velopments are not likely to affect the frequency and extent to significantly  ;

ope-stion9 ability of the disposal facility to meet affect the ability of the disposal site to  ;

Operations at the land d!sposal f acil.

the performance objectives of Subpart meet the performance objectives of 1 C of this part. Subpart C of this part, or may pre- I

" " (4) Areas must be avoided having clude defensible modeling ' .id predic- l th t tan a r rad o known natural resources which, if ex. Lion of long term imr cts tection set out in Part 20 of this chap- j ter, except for releases of radioactivity plotted, would result in failure to meet (11) The disposd he must not be lo-  ;

in effluents from the land disposal fa- the performance objectives of Subpart cated where neath Lellities or activi- 1 C of this part. ties could adversely impact the ability cility, which shall be governed by of the site to meet the performance I 61.41 of this part. Every reasonable (5) The disposal site must be gener.

(ifort shall be made to maintain radt- ally well d-ained and free of areas of objectives of Subpart C of this part or ttion exposures as low as is reasonably flooding or frequent ponding. Waste significantly mask the envircnmental monitoring program.

disposal shall not take place in a 100 )

achievable, year flood plain, coastal high hazard area or wetland, as defined in Execu.

tive Order 11988, ' Floodplain Manage.

}y} ment Ochtelines."

/

v 11

APPENDIX B Geographic Information Computer Mapping In order to expedite the site selection process, it may be desirable to conduct a geographic information system (GIS) analysis of relevant geophysical and land-use data. An effective GIS technique is computer mapping where geo-physical, land-use, and de.lographic factors are encoded to form a data base for analysis. Each factor should be plotted on separate maps that were generated from the same base map. Each map should then be encoded. It is important that i the base map (such as USGS 7.5 minute quadrangle maps) have a coordinate grid system (latitude-longitude or UTM grid) so that the encoded data may be refer-enced and placed into the data base format for computer mapping analysis.

Once the relevant data is encoded and geophysically referenced according to a set of coordinates, site optimization analysis may begin. The primary feature of a computer mapping program is its capability to composite several factor maps to produce a single derivative map. The compositing is done on a cell-by-cell basis summing the factors within each cell. The user assigns a numeric value or " weight" to each of the mapped factors, and each cell accumu-lates a " score." The score is the result of the sum of the weights in each I cell. A user-supplied symbol is applied to each score level, and the composite map is produced on a line printer.

A simplified example of the compositing analysis process is shown in Figure 1. In this example, the system user wants to locate a LLW disposal site in an area free of three factors: shallow bedrock, surface water, and nature trees (1-A).

The relative importance of each factor is represented by a weight that is assigned by the user. In this case, trees have been assigned the greatest importance and shallow bedrock the least (1-C). The seven unique combinations of these factors produce scores from one through seven; each score represents only one combination (1-0). For example, a score cf three can only result from the combination of shallow bedrock and streams. The user could assign the greatest importance to bedrock to determine how areas of relative site suit-ability would change based on altering the importance of each factor.

O 12

l 1

SHALLOW BEDROCK STREAMS TREES N 1 $$ 4 N SOURCE MAPS [d / @ A ,

%$ / 1

% h5%M DIGITIZED MAPS $ f@ B MM

] O $ 0 0 . :2.- 0 @@$j WEIGHTS O Ffj 0 0 . 2. : 0 0 0 $ C 0 $$ 2~ 0 0 0 0 0 4 7 4 SCORES O 3 4 D 2 1 1 COMPUTER)

COMPOSITE s E MAP A . l, Figure 1 EXAMPLE OF COMPOSITING ANALYSIS 13

The result of the analysis is a computer-generated composite map that indicates areas most suited for siting LLW disposal facilities based on given weighted factors (1-E). In this case, the user has represented least desirable areas by dark symbols and most desirable areas as white or unpatterned (1-E).

l 1

8 6

\

14