EIS-0113_Section_11 - Hanford Site

TR
23
234
(P
3.2.6.4
3.2.6.6
3.5.5.42
projections of economic parameters are offered (i.e., personal and per capita
income, employment by Standard Industrial Classification, unemployment, labor
force participation rates, etc.). These should be described In the EIS.
4. A distinction should be made between eorstruc ton employees and Permanent
aW rations workers In each alternative.
5. Demographic date should also include composition of the regional workfare. and
population in terms of age profiles, ethic composition, wage and salary rates by
major employer estegory (SIC lode or similar), and canard ... I basis.
3.2.5.1 8. Culture], aesthetic, rccreotlonsl, and other attributes should be described as part of
e comprehensive socioeconomic assessment.
s. Additional parameters should summaries, of county and community fiscal
3.2.6.4
data, traffic volumes along critical street and highway segmen., traffic accident
frequency, and related infrastructure descriptions.
a. The geographic scope of the socioeconomic analysis in the draft EIS is confined to
Benton and Pranklrn counties In the State of Washligton. No evidence is presented
in the D12S to simport the exclusion of areas lanyard the two,aunty study men.
3.2.6.4 Par example, profile; of the residential locations end contracting patterns of
current Hanford employees may or may not support the present geographic extent
of the present study area With improved regional highway facilities becoming
3.2.6
available recently and expected to be fmNer refined over the next few years,
commuting times end Ir ffie congestion In the Tri-ciees roes may be retluced.
Consequently, project employees may be attracted to realdenees well beyond the
two-c ... I, area. This issue should be addressed in the M.
S. N estimating population changes and secondary employment, differential effects of
construction versus operations should be considered The DM states that a
. 6
multiplier of 1.2 is used to calculate secondary employment, but it is unclear
L V
whether this factor is used for both construction and operations wrckforees.
6
11. Likewise, ealculati.. card for total induced population check. should reflect
possibly different ratios for construction-related activities and operational
activities, if applicable. Historically, in many other major industrial and energyrelated
projects developed near non-metropolitan arses, population changes related 3.2.6.5
to cousfruetioe activities have ga mall, been different than Nose induced by
permanent operational workforc o. It may be quite helpful to examine longer-term
historical employment, population, and other demographic date for the Hanford
complex and surrounding communities in order to discern important relationships
between changes in workforees and population .barges net have occurred over the
43 year history of the Hanford Works.
12. Another important body of historical data that Is absent in the DEIS concerns
epidemiological baseEnes. No Information Is provided on the states of population 3.5.5.42
health in the study er gs. It is recommended that available data on mortality and
morbidity rates, age profiles of residents, incidence of cancer, and other healthrelated
indicators he described in the EIS, along with appropriate nompsrlsouv with
regional, Steve, end national health statistics.
13. The final EIS should incorporate relevant historical date (prior to 1984) concerning
radiological releases sad emissions end any a ... rletions between such releases and
calculated public exposures to Ionizing radiation In the study area. The body of
3.5.5.42
historical data recently released by DOE/Richland Operations Office (approximately
19,000 pages covering the years 1943-1984), together with other available
information, should be utilized to establish me appropriate epidemiological baseline.
14. Another significant deficieneg in the draft End k the very limited treatment of
cum ulative socioeconomic effects resulting from several major DOE and nonfederal
activities which may be developed simelteneously with the proposed defense 3.2.6.5
waste disposal projects.* Although several other major projects (such m the
possible resumption of construction of the WPPSS nuclear power units end the
potential development of the Basalt Waste LsoleLon Project) ere mentioned in the
draft 09, very little statistical &to is provided.
3.2.6.6
10. if d istinctions are shown in the final EIS between comlumation and operations
workforces, as recommended above, appropriate "secondary, (or toml) employment
multipliers" should be identified for each type of workforce data.
15
• .Note: The leek of "cumulative Impacts" information applies to a environmental
parameters, not just socioeconomic factors.
16