Initial Site-Specific De-Inventory Report for Big Rock Point Report No.: RPT-3014537-002
TABLE 5-2: WEIGHTING OF TANGIBLE METRICS
Average Weight
Biased Weight Maximum
Rank Minimum
Metric
9.4%
1
8.9%
9.4%
10.2%
Cumulative Population Dose along Route
9.0%
2
7.5%
9.0%
10.2%
Cumulative Worker Exposure
8.7%
8.7%
11.0%
Security Vulnerability of Route
3
7.4%
7.4%
4
5.8%
7.4%
8.5%
Average Accident Frequency on Route
7.1%
7.1%
10.2%
Public Acceptability of Route
5
5.0%
Transit Duration per Conveyance and Consist
6.8%
6.8%
7.5%
6
6.0%
6.4%
6.4%
7.4%
Transport to Rail Costs
7
5.5%
6.0%
6.0%
6.9%
Infrastructure Improvement Costs
8
5.4%
5.9%
5.9%
7.1%
Immediacy of Ability to Perform Transfer
9
3.5%
5.7%
10
3.8%
5.7%
8.3%
Route Environment Characteristics
5.6%
5.6%
6.4%
Number of Permits
11
4.3%
Number of Sensitive Environmental Areas Nearby Route
5.5%
5.5%
6.3%
12
4.6%
5.4%
5.4%
5.9%
Impact of Weather/Tides to Route
13
4.0%
5.4%
5.4%
6.4%
Labor and Permitting Costs
14
4.3%
5.4%
5.4%
6.1%
Number of Water Areas Nearby Route
15
4.6%
5.3.3 Routes Assessments With the ranking/preference of the tangible metrics calculated, another pairwise comparison was performed to compare the tangible metrics for a route against those of each of the other routes (Step 7). Unlike the pairwise comparison performed for the tangible metrics, which were performed by multiple individuals, this pairwise comparison was performed by the collective team to ensure the responses from SMEs were properly weighted against responses from the other team members when a metric(s) (e.g., cost) was addressed in that SME’s discipline(s). In
Page 5-16
Initial Site-Specific De-Inventory Report for Big Rock Point May 10, 2017
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker