Initial Site-Specific De-Inventory Report for Big Rock Point Report No.: RPT-3014537-002
As shown in Figure 5-3 and Table 5-2, the tangible metrics with the highest preferences (based on average weighting method) are Cumulative Population Dose Along Route, Cumulative Worker Exposure, and Security Vulnerability of Route which rated at about 9.4%, 9.0%, and 8.7% of the total weight. The tangible metrics with the least preferences (based on average weighting method) are Impact of Weather/Tides to Route, Labor and Permitting Costs, and Number of Water Areas Nearby Route which all rated at about 5.4% (i.e., a little bit more than half of the highest preferences). The preferences/ranking and weights of all the tangible metrics in descending order (based on average weighting method) are shown in Table 5-2. These results also show negligible differences between the average weighting method and the biased weighting method, which indicates a fairly uniform assessment by the eight individuals. However, at the extremities of the individual assessments (i.e., the minimum and maximum values), there are some significant findings including: The Security/Vulnerability of Route metric, which ranked 3 rd overall, had the largest maximum ranking by an individual (as clearly seen in Figure 5-3) indicating a wide range of importance levels for this metric between the individual evaluators The Public Acceptability of Route metric, which ranked as the 5 th highest metric, had the 2 nd highest favorable ranking by an individual at 10.2% (along with the Cumulative Population Dose along Route and Cumulative Worker Exposure), but also was ranked fairly low by another individual at 5.0% (having the highest range between the minimum and maximum). The Immediacy of Ability to Perform Transfer metric, which ranked as the 9 th overall, had the lowest favorable ranking by an individual at 3.5%. Overall, the safety and security metrics ranked near the top in preference for each individual’s assessment. The cost metrics finished consistently within each individual’s assessment at or near the bottom of the list of preferences, with three exceptions who placed the Number of Permits at the bottom of their lists. The metric with the largest difference between minimum and maximum values was the Public Acceptability of Route, which ranked near the top on three evaluations and toward the bottom of the remaining evaluations. The metric with the least difference between minimum and maximum values was the Cumulative Population Dose, which ranked at the top of importance of all the metrics and hence, showing a fairly robust rating. Finally, the minimum and maximum values listed in Table 5-2 provide ranges of values to be utilized in the sensitivity analyses performed in Section 5.4.
Page 5-14
Initial Site-Specific De-Inventory Report for Big Rock Point May 10, 2017
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker