Section 43.61 - Specific Guidance for the Application of Particular Conditions(1)General. 310 CMR 43.61 provides guidance on the application of particular conditions as part of the preparation of the Candidate Site Information Report.(2)Modeling Capability- 310 CMR 43.10.(a) The depth to bedrock and the types of soils at the surface and in the subsurface should be determined according to accepted methods and principles. Hydrogeologic units should be delineated and the direction and rate of groundwater movement should be estimated on the basis of field data and quantitative models. Hydraulic conductivities should be estimated on the basis of lithologic classifications and direct measurement. Other characteristics, such as ground water discharge points, water table fluctuation, moisture potential, moisture content, hydraulic conductivity, porosity, geometry, boundary conditions and the physical and chemical properties of the water should be evaluated on the basis of field surveys or available data. The evaluation should also consider the results of hydrogeologic modeling. In evaluating this criterion the following factors should, at a minimum, be reviewed:1. The presence and extent of permeable and impermeable anomalies, variability and complexity in the stratigraphic relationships and lithology of the site, including, but not limited to, significantly fractured bedrock, faults, or sand/gravel lenses/layers or buried river channels, which would complicate monitoring.2. The extent to which the lateral flow of groundwater can be confidently predicted to flow to a defined discharge point rather than to multiple surface water bodies or down through bedrock;3. The ability of the site to be adequately described with a reasonable number of monitoring points;4. The presence or absence of upgradient, potentially leachable radioactive material.(b) The feasibility of monitoring for the release of radionuclides via groundwater pathways should be analyzed. In evaluating the feasibility of monitoring the Board should consider, at a minimum, the amenability of the site to modeling by available and applicable computer codes including, without limitation, the ability to reproduce natural and steady state conditions in response to precipitation and pumping stresses.(3)Existing Public Water Systems- 310 CMR 43.20(1)(b) and (2)(a). A conceptual Zone II of all existing public systems within 15,000 feet upgradient of the site, which do not have Department approved Zone IIs, should be calculated in accordance with Department approved procedures.(4)Potential Productive Aquifer- 310 CMR 43.20(1)(c). Except as otherwise provided in regulations or written policy adopted by the Department subsequent to the effective date of 310 CMR 43.00, the following evaluation should be conducted to determine if a site is a potential productive aquifer (PPA): (a) All of the following documents shall be reviewed:1. Department Aquifer Information Overlays2. USES Hydrologic Atlases-HA3. USES Surficial Geologic Maps-GQ4. USES Bedrock Geologic Maps-GQ6. The Bedrock Geologic Map of Massachusetts (Ean Zen)7. Hydrogeologic or geophysical reports addressing local subsurface conditions and or hydrogeology located within the Department's files.(b) In the event of discrepancies between the data in 310 CMR 43.61(4)(a)1. through 6. and 43.61(4)(a)7. the Department may review the data and make a determination on whether the site overlies a PPA.(c) Where the site overlies a PPA the Board may proceed to determine if the PPA is qualified for development. In conducting the land use sanitary survey portion of the qualified for development evaluation the site boundary shall be considered the potential wellhead in demonstrating whether existing or historical land uses preclude the use of the aquifer as a public water system. The survey should include the presence or absence of the uses set forth at 310 CMR 22.21(2)(a) and (b), sewer lines and underground or above ground storage tanks. Where the majority of a high or medium yield aquifer is located in a municipality with a population density equal to or greater than 4,400 person per square mile (based on the most recent U.S. Census) the Board may presume the aquifer is not qualified for development. The Board may also install a well and conduct a pump test to confirm that the aquifer is actually capable of a high or medium yield .(d) In the event that the source is qualified for development, the Board may proceed to determine if the site is located outside of the Zone II or Zone III, as applicable. Sites located within either the Zone II or Zone III of public water supplies that have either received Department approval as a new source or have submitted the appropriate documentation to the Department for a new source approval in accordance with Department guidelines shall be excluded. In the event that the Board desires to install a well to determine the Zone II or Zone III of a future water supply system it should do so in accordance with established Department procedures.(5)Existing and Potential Private Drinking Water Sources- 310 CMR 43.20(1)(d) and (e).(a) An inventory of existing and potential ground water users should be conducted within a minimum 11/2 miles of the waste management area. The inventory should be based on either existing documentation or field surveys or both and should provide information on all of the following: the location, type and amounts of use; the hydrogeologic unit used, typical well construction details and the identity of downgradient users within 1000 feet of the site.(b) The Zone of Contribution (ZOC) should be calculated for the existing private wells within a minimum of 500 feet from of the site which are hydraulically connected to hydrogeologic units under the site except where substantial evidence demonstrates that a smaller radius will adequately protect the users. Zone of Contributions are not required to be calculated for private wells beyond 1000 feet from the site except where substantial evidence exists to indicate that a well beyond that point would be adversely affected by a release from the site.(c) The Zone of Contribution should be calculated by determining the land area which is necessary to receive precipitation in sufficient quantity to meet the reasonsable gallon per day yield of the well.(6)Water Table Depth and Relation to Bedrock- 310 CMR 43.21(1)(g),(h) and 43.21(2)(b).(a) All significant hydrogeologic units underlying the proposed waste management area should be identified to a depth of 90 feet. The depth to the water table should be estimated by the installation of at least two monitoring wells at appropriate locations (on or off site) which shall be monitored through as many months of seasonal water table fluctuation as feasible consistent with the time limit established by M.G.L. c. 111H,§ 20(c) in order for the Board to issue the draft candidate site identification report. Data available from existing regional water table information may also be used.(b) The depth to bedrock should be determined according to accepted standards, protocols, and principles. Hydraulic conductivities shall be estimated on the basis of lithologic classifications, transmissivity correlations and direct measurement.(7)Horizontal Gradient- 310 CMR 43.20(1)(c). The number of wells to be installed to determine horizonal hydraulic gradient should be based on an evaluation of the complexity of the site, provided that a minimum of one upgradient and two downgradient wells should be used to determine the gradient.(8)Groundwater Travel Time- 310 CMR 43.20(3)(d). In assessing a site's capability to retard migration of contaminants, the travel time of groundwater should be compared to groundwater travel of less than 100 years along a 100-ft flow path from a point of potential release to the edge of the waste management area. The potential adverse effect relative to the projected travel time should be estimated consistent with the likely source term of the waste.(9)Surface Water Impact Evaluations. In assessing the surface water regime of a site the following parameters should, at a minimum, be preliminarily characterized on a site specific basis and within five miles of the site: the hydrologic system; past, present and projected surface water usage; flood studies; drought studies; precipitation and infiltration; runoff; discharge; channel characteristics; flow velocity; erosion; and sedimentation. In addition, if a sufficient number of site specific samples are obtained or adequate regional data are available, then chemical and physical properties of the waters should be evaluated.(10)100 and 500 Year Flood Plains- 310 CMR 43.21(1)(c) and (2)(a). When NFIP profile data is unavailable, the extent of this zone should be calculated by methods described in 310 CMR 10.57(2)(a)3. adjusting, as necessary, for the appropriately designed storm event.(11)Runoff Retention- 310 CMR 43.21(1)(f). In assessing the sites the following factors should, at a minimum, b e investigated:(a) The presence and extent of poor runoff characteristics such as depressions, swampy areas, ponded water, or evidence of frequent flooding; and(b) The extent to which engineered structures are required to protect from ponding or flooding.(12)Dams- 310 CMR 43.21(1)(h)- Sites downstream from dams which were not excluded in the previous report shall be evaluated for potential risk of inundation based upon the probable maximum flood as defined in 302 CMR 10.06. The area subject to inundation should be based on published analysis from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or the Dam Safety Division of the Department of Environmental Management. When such analyses are not available, they should be carried out by generally accepted engineering methods.(13)Surface Water Discharges- 310 CMR 43.21(1)(a). Sites with surface water features sustained by groundwater discharges such as perennial and ephemeral streams, springs, seeps, swamps, marshes, and bogs within the potential waste management area should be delineated and screened out.(14)Distances from Significant Surface Waters- 310 CMR 43.21(3)(b). Class A, Class SA and Outstanding Resource Waters as defined and delineated in 314 CMR 4.04 and vernal pool habitats certified by the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife on or near sites should be delineated. The decision on the location and extent of a tributary should be made by reference to the most recent edition of maps generated by the Massachusetts geographic information service based on the United States Geological Survey 1:25,000 scale quadrangle maps unless more accurate maps are adopted by the Department pursuant to notice and public hearing as provided in M.G.L. c. 30A.(15)Tectonic Processes- 310 CMR 43.22(1)(a) and (2). In assessing the geologic regime of a site the following parameters should be investigated on a site specific and regional basis: geomorphology, stratigraphy, lithology, structure, tectonics, seismology and geologic hazards. Geologic hazards include, without limitation, landslides, collapse, liquefaction, significant alteration by surficial processes in last 500-1000 years and other unstable elements in near-surface stratigraphic units and soils.(16)Slope- 310 CMR 43.23(1)(b). The slope should be estimated on the basis of USGS 7.5 minute quadrangles using a scale of 1:24,000 with a contour interval of either ten feet or 20 feet.(17)Surface Geologic Process- 310 CMR 43.23(1)(a). Areas mapped on the USGS maps of Landslides and Related features should be delineated and screened out. The estimation of past rates of occurrence of geologic processes and events may be carried out primarily on the basis of general regional understanding of the evolution of the geologic environment over the past thousand years, in combination with limited site or locality-specific field data for confirmation of important uncertainties. Issues that may require more extensive field investigation may be deferred to the site characterization phase.(18)Seismic Impact Zone- 310 CMR 43.23(3)(c). (a) Seismic impact zones should be delineated based on a review of the most recent and relevant seismic acceleration maps maintained by Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey and other reasonably available public or private seismic impact investigations that are considered reliable and relevant conducted on locations in Massachusetts or other areas in the Northeast region including, without limitation, sites analysis conducted in relation to the siting of nuclear power plants or radioactive waste storage or disposal facilities. Geotechnical stability may be determined by the use of computer models to approximate the dynamic vertical and horizontal forces caused by bedrock acceleration taking into account local soil conditions. In considering estimating seismic impacts beyond 250 years the Board should consider the source term of the disposed waste and the time period during which its potential release would likely result in dose exposures in excess of DPH performance objectives.(b) Where sufficient information is available to project the suitable technology which may be located at a site , a preliminary performance assessment of the facility's ability to meet the performance standard of this criterion should be conducted. The performance standard is met if, based on reasonable but conservative assumptions of the estimated useful life of the engineered structures, systems and components important to the safety of suitable facilities and foundation engineering, said engineered barriers are projected to be capable of complying with the standards for earthquake resistance set forth in the State Building Code at 780 CMR 1113.0,et seq. In projecting the potential seismic impact the preliminary assessment may consider the applicable NEHRP Recommended Provisions for the Development of Seismic Regulations for New Buildings.(19)Contaminant Migration- 310 CMR 43.23(2)(a). In evaluating the ability of a site to retard contaminant migration the extent of unconsolidated stratigraphic units that have a high clay or silt content should be determined through published sources, regional boring logs and site specific field investigations.(20)Liquefaction Resistance and Soil Stability- 310 CMR 43.23(3)(b)(1) and (2). In evaluating the ability of the site to resist liquefaction and provide suitable soil for engineered barriers, site soil samples may be correlated to standards provided in the State Building Code at 780 CMR 1113.0,et seq. Available testing may be conducted in accordance with the guidance documents on geotechnical investigation referred to at 310 CMR 43.42(1) if appropriate site specific data is available.(21)Erosion- 310 CMR 43.23(3)(j). General assessment of the erosional process should be accomplished by reviewing published soil maps, evaluating topography, assessing regional geomorphology, evaluating meteorological conditions and assessing local slope conditions.(22)Dissolution- 310 CMR 43.23(3). In evaluating sites, the existence and extent of significant past or present subsurface dissolution areas including, but not limited to, sinkholes, caverns, or underground streams should be investigated.(23)Demographic Effect on Site Performance- 310 CMR 43.24(a). In evaluating the potential for current or changing residential, commercial or industrial patterns in the area that affect a site's performance the following parameters should, at a minimum, be evaluated and considered: current land use, land use and subdivision plans, zoning restrictions, utility land uses, proximity to industrially developed areas and recreational areas that are reasonably likely to experience future growth, agricultural areas and the documented existence of mineral resources at the site. The survey should be conducted within a minimum five mile radius of the site. Estimates on future impacts should be based on time periods coinciding with the expected first year of operating life of the facility through the operation lifetime of the facility.(24)Proximity to Population Centers- 310 CMR 43.24(2)(b). Population size and boundary locations of population places should be defined in accordance with the U.S. Census Bureau published definitions .(25)Proximity to Residences and Sensitive Population Locations- 310 C MR 43.24(b) and (c). The survey should be conducted within a minimum of a one mile radius of the site.(26)Site Size and Facility Compatibility- 310 CMR 43.25. (a) The candidate sites should be drawn and labelled so as to delineate between the waste management area and that portion of the site to be designated as a buffer zone. There is considerable flexibility in how such a site may be subdivided into distinct zones and utilized, and this process can affect the suitability of the site. For the purpose of characterization the site should include the estimated waste management area and the buffer zone. The designations chosen during this phase of site identification should not be regarded as final or irrevocable, but should be intended to make best use of a site in terms of satisfying the siting requirements.(b) In assessing the compatibility of the site with suitable facilities the following parameters should, at a minimum, be based upon:1. SCS soil classification maps,2. surficial and bedrock geology maps and topographic maps3. presence of a well defined (granular) surface layer,4. the degree of the slope,5. allowable bearing pressure of foundation soils and clearly defined surface drainage; and, if available, from on-site wells,6. soil thickness, and water table depth.(27)Meteorology- 310 CMR 43.27. In evaluating the frequency, probability and potential consequences for severe weather conditions affecting the site's performance, existing historical records should be reviewed and an on-site environmental monitoring program may be established to obtain preliminary data. The parameters to be analyzed should, at a minimum, include temperature, severe weather incidents such as heavy snowfalls, hurricanes and tornadoes and the annual amount of precipitation. Additional parameters which may be required to establish the site's water budget, facility design loads and airborne release of contaminants may be deferred to the Detailed Site Characterization stage pursuant to 310 CMR 43.71.(28)Transportation- 310 CMR 43.28. (a) Existing and projected access routes from sites to the point of exit off existing interstate or limited access highways or rail lines should be identified, described and evaluated with respect to: 1. Total travel distance from the site to the point of exit from the highwayand/or commercial railway station/siding.2. The current volume to capacity [V/C] ratio of the access routes(s) and whether the additional projected traffic from the construction or operation of the facility would cause the V/C ratio to exceed 1.0.3. The current structural status of the access route(s) relative to applicable state and federal transportation laws and regulation governing the transportation of low-level radioactive waste;4. The need for and the level of effort required to bring the access route into compliance with said law or regulations;5. The average number of dwellings and public places per mile determined by dividing the total number of occupied permanent residential dwellings and public places on the primary access route by the total distance in route miles from the projected facility entrance to the access point of the interstate or limited access highway or commercial railway station/siding.6. The yearly average number of serious traffic accidents on the access route(s) in comparison to the statewide yearly average as determined by records maintained by state and local public safety/highway departments.7. The average number of intersections per mile maintained by local or state highway departments and railroad crossings per mile determined by dividing the total number of said intersection on the primary access route from the projected facility entrance to the access point of the interstate or limited access highway or commercial railway station/siding.(b) In addition to the field measurement described at 310 CMR 43.61(28)(a), the Board may assess the level of transportation risk on the basis of the relevant data contained in the NRC guidance document,The Final Environmental Statement on the Transportation of Radioactive Material by Air and Other Modes, NUREG-0170 or subsequent updated transportation risk analysis .(29)Inconsistent Land Uses- 310 CMR 43.29(1)(a) and (b).(a) In assessing the potential adverse effect of inconsistent land uses, the following land uses in existence or having received a permit to construct in effect within six miles of the site from the governing state or federal agency should, at a minimum, be evaluated: 1.Airports. Sites and/or waste management areas within one mile from an airport runway should be delineated and may be screened out considering the size of the aircraft accommodated, frequency of use and flight paths.2.Operations storing large quantities of flammable liquids. Sites within one half mile from any single aboveground storage tank regularly used for the storage of flammable liquids and having a capacity of at least 500,000 gallons, or from any aboveground storage tank or vessel for liquefied natural gas (LNG) or liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and having a capacity of at least 25,000 gallons should be delineated and may be screened out;(b) Measurements of gamma rays emitted by radionuclides in the surface and subsurface soil should be conducted in situ or in the laboratory by generally accepted techniques in assessing the potential of the site to interfere with monitoring.(30)Protected Lands and Environments- 310 CMR 43.31. (a) Protected resources, lands and species located within a one mile radius of the site should be described and evaluated to determine the nature, extent and likelihood of potential adverse effects from facility construction, operation and maintenance.(b) All applicable state and federal statutes and regulations that govern the protected resources, lands and species should be reviewed to determine the likelihood that the construction, operation and maintenance of a facility can proceed in light of restrictions or permit requirements contained in said laws or regulations, including, but not limited to, those statutes and regulations listed in Appendix A of 310 CMR 43.00. In evaluating potential adverse effect the following factors may be relevant: 1. The type and size of the facility as it relates to disruption and/or permanent or temporary alteration of the original conditions of the area that contains the protected resource, lands or species from construction and operation;2. The abundance and characteristics of potentially affected species, lands and resources;3. The importance of the protected species, land or resources relative to its commercial or recreational value, including but not limited to, its status as threatened or endangered;4. The importance of the protected resource, land or species to other protected resources, lands or species;5. The importance of the protected resource, land or species to the structure and functioning of the ecological system;6. The importance of the protected resource, land or species as a biological indicator of radiological and non-radiological constituents in the environment;7. Seasonal and migratory patterns of species within the area; and8. Existing natural and human induced effects such as farming, logging or recreational uses.