DOCSLIB.ORG

Appendix I Needs Assessment Case Studies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Appendix I Needs Assessment Case Studies Appendix I Needs Assessment Case Studies www.camsys.com ALAMEDA COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT PLAN Case Studies Technical Memorandum prepared for Alameda County Transportation Commission prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. with Fehr & Peers January 23, 2015 technical memorandum ALAMEDA COUNTY GOODS MOVEMENT PLAN CASE STUDIES prepared for Alameda County Transportation Commission prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 555 12th Street, Suite 1600 Oakland, CA 94607 with Fehr & Peers Date December 2015 Alameda County Goods Movement Plan Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1-1 2.0 West Oakland and Port Development .................................................................. 2-1 2.1.1 Background ................................................................................................. 2-2 2.1.2 Role of Goods Movement in the Case Study Area ........................................ 2-5 2.1.3 Relevance to other areas .............................................................................. 2-8 2.2 Specific Issues ........................................................................................................ 2-8 2.2.1 Air Quality and Public Health Challenges ..................................................... 2-9 2.2.2 Operational Inefficiencies and Related Issues ............................................ 2-11 2.2.3 Lack of Effectiveness of Port related Overnight Parking Facilities Issue ..... 2-13 2.2.4 Local Roadways Conflicts of Freight Planning with Planning for Other Modes Issue ............................................................................................... 2-14 2.2.5 Local Roadways Pavement Condition and Markings Issues ........................ 2-14 2.2.6 Local Signage, Traffic Signal and Enforcement Issues ................................ 2-17 2.2.7 Local Safety Issues ..................................................................................... 2-20 2.3 Summary of Issues and Suggested Potential Solutions ........................................ 2-24 th 3.0 International Boulevard/E 14 Street ................................................................. 3-25 3.1 General Background and Issues ........................................................................... 3-25 3.1.1 Background ............................................................................................... 3-26 3.1.2 Role of Goods Movement in the Corridor ................................................... 3-30 3.1.3 Relevance to other areas ............................................................................ 3-31 3.2 Specific Issues ...................................................................................................... 3-31 3.3 Potential Solutions and Strategies ....................................................................... 3-32 3.3.1 Street Cross-Section .................................................................................. 3-33 Potential Issues for Goods Movement ........................................................ 3-33 Mitigation .................................................................................................. 3-36 3.3.2 Loading zones and parking ........................................................................ 3-37 Potential Issues for Goods Movement ........................................................ 3-37 Mitigation .................................................................................................. 3-37 3.3.3 Access to major truck generators—Gatorade site example ........................ 3-40 Potential Issues for Goods Movement ........................................................ 3-40 Mitigation .................................................................................................. 3-41 Cambridge Systematics, Inc. i 008924.004 Alameda County Goods Movement Plan 3.3.4 Role of International Boulevard as a Truck Route ......................................... 3-1 Potential Issues for Goods Movement .......................................................... 3-1 Mitigation .................................................................................................... 3-1 3.4 Summary of Issues and Suggested Potential Solutions .......................................... 3-5 4.0 I-80 Corridor Rail Impacts .................................................................................... 4-6 4.1 General Background and Issues ............................................................................. 4-6 4.1.1 Background ................................................................................................. 4-7 4.1.2 Role of Goods Movement in the Corridor ................................................... 4-10 4.1.3 Relationship to other areas ........................................................................ 4-11 4.2 Specific Issues ...................................................................................................... 4-11 4.2.1 Noise Impacts ............................................................................................ 4-12 4.2.2 Disruption of Access and Traffic Flow ........................................................ 4-14 Crossing Congestion .................................................................................. 4-14 Physical Barrier .......................................................................................... 4-15 4.2.3 Safety and Environment ............................................................................ 4-15 4.3 Potential Solutions and Strategies ....................................................................... 4-18 4.4 Summary of Issues and Suggested Potential Solutions ........................................ 4-19 5.0 Central County Industrial Access ........................................................................ 5-20 5.1 General Background and Issues ........................................................................... 5-20 5.1.1 Background ............................................................................................... 5-21 5.1.2 Role of Goods Movement in the Corridor ................................................... 5-22 5.1.3 Relevance to other areas ............................................................................ 5-22 5.2 Specific Issues ...................................................................................................... 5-23 5.2.1 Truck Route Continuity .............................................................................. 5-23 5.2.2 Truck Parking ............................................................................................. 5-25 5.2.3 Truck Diversion from Freeways .................................................................. 5-26 5.3 Potential Solutions and Strategies ....................................................................... 5-28 5.3.1 Truck Route Continuity ............................................................................. 5-28 5.3.2 Truck Parking ............................................................................................. 5-30 5.3.3 Truck Diversion from Freeways .................................................................. 5-31 5.4 Summary of Issues and Suggested Potential Solutions ........................................ 5-32 6.0 Tesla Road Case Study ........................................................................................ 6-1 ii Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Alameda County Goods Movement Plan 6.1 General Background and Issues ............................................................................. 6-1 6.1.1 Background ................................................................................................. 6-1 6.1.2 Role of Goods Movement in the Corridor ..................................................... 6-4 6.1.3 Relevance to other areas .............................................................................. 6-4 6.2 Specific Issues ........................................................................................................ 6-4 6.3 Potential Solutions and strategies ......................................................................... 6-5 6.4 Summary of Issues and Suggested Potential Solutions .......................................... 6-6 Cambridge Systematics, Inc. iii 008924.004 Alameda County Goods Movement Plan List of Tables Table 1.1 Summary of Case Studies ...................................................................................... 1-3 Table 2.1 Summary of Issues and Solutions ............................................................................. 2-24 Table 3.1 Preliminary Parking Replacement Inventory ........................................................ 3-40 Table 3.2 Summary of Issues and Solutions ............................................................................... 3-5 Table 4.1 Summary of Issues and Solutions ............................................................................. 4-19 Table 5.1 Opportunities for Truck Reliever Routes .............................................................. 5-28 Table 5.2 Summary of Issues and Solutions ............................................................................. 5-32 Table 0.1 Summary of Issues and Solutions .............................................................................. 6-7 Cambridge Systematics, Inc. v Alameda County Goods Movement Plan List of Figures Figure
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Redevelopment Agency of the City of Oakland Broadway/Macarthur/San Pablo Project Tax Allocation Bonds, Series
    NEW ISSUE-BOOK-ENTRY ONLY RATINGS: Moody’s: Aaa (Baa2 underlying) S&P: AAA (BBB+ underlying) (See “Ratings” herein) In the opinion of Jones Hall, A Professional Law Corporation, San Francisco, Bond Counsel, subject, however to certain qualifications, under existing law, the interest on the Series 2006C-TE Bonds is excluded from gross income for federal income tax purposes and such interest is not an item of tax preference for purposes of the federal alternative minimum tax imposed on individuals and corporations, although for the purpose of computing the alternative minimum tax imposed on certain corporations, such interest is taken into account in determining certain income and earnings. In the further opinion of Bond Counsel, interest on the Series 2006C-TE Bonds and the Series 2006C-T Bonds is exempt from California personal income taxes. Interest on the Series 2006C-T Bonds is subject to all applicable federal income taxation. See “TAX MATTERS” herein. $4,945,000 $12,325,000 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF OAKLAND CITY OF OAKLAND BROADWAY/MACARTHUR/ SAN PABLO BROADWAY/MACARTHUR/ SAN PABLO REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT TAX ALLOCATION BONDS TAX ALLOCATION BONDS SERIES 2006C-TE SERIES 2006C-T (FEDERALLY TAXABLE) Dated: Date of Delivery Due: September 1, as shown on inside cover page This cover page contains certain information for quick reference only. It is not a summary of this issue. Investors are advised to read the entire Official Statement to obtain information essential to the making
    [Show full text]
  • Directions from Meadowood to Sacramento Airport Daly City
    Directions to Meadowood Directions to Meadowood Directions to Meadowood Middletown Directions to Meadowood Directions to Meadowood from San Francisco International from San Francisco International from San Francisco International from Sacramento Airport from Oakland Airport Geyserville Airport via the Golden Gate Bridge Airport via the Golden Gate Bridge Airport via the Bay Bridge Take Interstate 5 south approximately 5 miles. Take From Oakland Airport, follow all signs to Interstate 880 and Santa Rosa Calistoga the Interstate 80 exit toward San Francisco, west. north. Continue on Interstate 880 north for 8 miles Take Highway 101 north staying to the left at fork. Travel 1 Take Highway 101 north, (staying to the right) toward St. Helena Winters Continue on Interstate 80 through Fairfield. Take the to Interstate 80 east. Take Interstate 80 east toward mile taking Interstate 380 west toward Interstate 280 (San San Francisco. Travel 6 miles. Highway 101 then merges Highway 12 exit toward Napa. Continue on Highway 12 Berkeley/Vallejo/Sacramento for approximately 25 miles, Take Highway 101 north staying left at the fork. Travel 1 mile Santa Rosa Bruno). Travel 1 mile then take I-280 north toward San into Interstate 80. Follow signs to Bay Bridge/Oakland. Rutherford To approximately 6 miles to Highway 29. Turn right following all signs to Vallejo. You will cross the Carquinez Francisco. Take Highway 1 toward 19th Ave./Golden Gate taking Interstate 380 west toward Interstate 280 (San Bruno). Cross Bay Bridge and stay in left lanes following signs to Sacramento (north), and continue 25 miles through the towns of Bridge, where you will need to pay a $5 toll.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 65, No. 233/Monday, December 4, 2000
    Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 233 / Monday, December 4, 2000 / Notices 75771 2 departures. No more than one slot DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION In notice document 00±29918 exemption time may be selected in any appearing in the issue of Wednesday, hour. In this round each carrier may Federal Aviation Administration November 22, 2000, under select one slot exemption time in each SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION, in the first RTCA Future Flight Data Collection hour without regard to whether a slot is column, in the fifteenth line, the date Committee available in that hour. the FAA will approve or disapprove the application, in whole or part, no later d. In the second and third rounds, Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the than should read ``March 15, 2001''. only carriers providing service to small Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. hub and nonhub airports may L. 92±463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: participate. Each carrier may select up is hereby given for the Future Flight Patrick Vaught, Program Manager, FAA/ to 2 slot exemption times, one arrival Data Collection Committee meeting to Airports District Office, 100 West Cross and one departure in each round. No be held January 11, 2000, starting at 9 Street, Suite B, Jackson, MS 39208± carrier may select more than 4 a.m. This meeting will be held at RTCA, 2307, 601±664±9885. exemption slot times in rounds 2 and 3. 1140 Connecticut Avenue, NW., Suite Issued in Jackson, Mississippi on 1020, Washington, DC, 20036. November 24, 2000. e. Beginning with the fourth round, The agenda will include: (1) Welcome all eligible carriers may participate.
    [Show full text]
  • General Travel Information
    GENERAL TRAVEL INFORMATION: Yolo County Visitors Bureau The Yolo County Visitors Bureau provides information on other hotels as well as activities in the area. Air Travel The closest major airport to Davis is the Sacramento International Airport (SMF). Many major airlines fly in and out of this airport. For more information: http://www.sacramento.aero/smf/. Most of the major rental car agencies are available at SMF: http://www.sacramento.aero/smf/to_and_from/rental_car/. Driving directions from SMF to UC Davis: Take Interstate 5 South towards Sacramento to Interstate 80 West towards San Francisco. Exit UC Davis (Exit #71). Turn right onto Old Davis Road. Continue straight, go through the traffic circle and keep to the right, past the Robert Mondavi Institute of Food and Wine Science on your right. Turn right on Hilgard Lane to get to the parking structure or Parking Lots 1 or 2. Look for restriction signs and park in an appropriate space and display a purchased parking permit on the driver’s of your dashboard . It is about a five-minute walk from parking to the Conference Center (east side of the grassy area and waterfall). Attendees can also fly in to: San Francisco International (SFO) http://www.flysfo.com/web/page/index.jsp) OR Oakland International Airport (OAK) http://www.flyoakland.com/) …and then rent a car and drive to Davis: SFO – Davis: 85 miles via US 101-North to Interstate 80-East (cross two toll bridges). OAK – Davis: 78 miles via Interstate 880-North to Interstate 980-East to Interstate 580-West to Interstate 80-East (cross one toll bridge).
    [Show full text]
  • A Downtown for Everyone Robert A
    REPORT SEPTEMBER 2015 A DOWNTOWN Shaping the future of FOR downtown Oakland EVERYONE Contents Acknowledgements 4 Executive Summary SPUR staff Egon Terplan, Project lead 6 Introduction Mohit Shewaramani, Oakland Fellow 9 How We Got Here Sarah Jo Szambelan, Research Manager Robert Ogilvie, Oakland Director 12 Today’s Opportunities and Challenges SPUR Oakland City Board 20 Our Vision: A Downtown for Everyone Robert A. Wilkins (project co-chair) Bill Stotler (project co-chair) 24 BIG IDEA 1 Tomiquia Moss (board chair) Grow 50,000 more jobs in downtown and create pathways to get Fred Blackwell people into them. Deborah Boyer 33 BIG IDEA 2 Anagha Dandekar Clifford Jose Corona Bring 25,000 more residents to downtown at a range of incomes, and Charmaine Curtis enable existing residents to remain. Paul Figueroa 37 BIG IDEA 3 Mike Ghielmetti Set clear and consistent rules for growth to make downtown a better Spencer Gillette place for everyone. Chris Iglesias Robert Joseph 44 BIG IDEA 4 Ken Lowney Create inviting public spaces and streets as part of an active public Christopher Lytle realm. Olis Simmons Joshua Simon 54 BIG IDEA 5 Resources and reviewers Make it easy to get to and around downtown through an expanded Anyka Barber, Alex Boyd, Anthony Bruzzone, Clarissa transportation network. Cabansagan, Dave Campbell, Jim Cunradi, John Dolby, 63 Big Ideas for the Future Margo Dunlap, Karen Engel, Sarah Filley, Rachel Flynn, Erin Ferguson, Sarah Fine, Aliza Gallo, Jennie Gerard, June 66 Plan of Action Grant, Savlan Hauser, Linda Hausrath, Zakiya Harris,
    [Show full text]
  • Transportation and Traffic
    City of Walnut Creek Shadelands Gateway Specific Plan and The Orchards at Walnut Creek Project Draft EIR Appendix J: Transportation and Traffic FirstCarbon Solutions H:\Client (PN‐JN)\3611\36110005\EIR\4 ‐ EIR2\36110005 Sec99‐99 Appendix Dividers.doc Whitlock & Weinberger Transportation, Inc. 490 Mendocino Avenue Suite 201 Santa Rosa, CA 95401 voice (707) 542-9500 fax (707) 542-9590 475 14th Street Suite 290 Oakland, CA 94612 voice (510) 444-2600 website www.w-trans.com Traffic Impact Study for Shadelands Gateway Specific Plan in the City of Walnut Creek Updated Draft Report December 13, 2013 Table of Contents Page 1. Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................. 1 2. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................... 3 3. Transportation Setting ............................................................................................................................................ 5 4. Analysis Methodology ............................................................................................................................................ 11 5. Existing Conditions ................................................................................................................................................ 15 6. Specific Plan Scenario ............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Draft NHMRR Federal Register Notice
    State: California State Agency: CA Highway Patrol FMCSA: CA FMCSA Field Office POC: Tian-Ting Shih FMCSA POC: CA Motor Carrier Division Administrator Address: Commercial Vehicle Section Address: 1325 J Street, Suite 1540 P.O. Box 942898 Sacramento, CA 95814 Sacramento, CA 94298-0001 Phone: (916) 843-3400 Phone: (916) 930-2760 Fax: (916) 322-3154 Fax: (916) 930-2778 Web Address: www.chp.ca.gov California – Restricted HM routes Desig- Route Restriction(s) nation Route Description City County Order (0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,i) Date 10/28/92 A No person shall drive or permit the driving of 1 any vehicle transporting commodities listed in Section 13 CCR 1150 upon any highway not designated by this article. For pickup and delivery not over designated routes, the route selected must be the shortest-distance route from the pickup location to the nearest designated route entry location, and the shortest-distance route to the delivery location from the nearest designated route exit location. 01/01/95 B State 75 [Coronado Toll Bridge] from Mile Post San Diego San Diego 1,2,3,4 20.28 to Mile Post R22.26 Junction 5 [San Diego County] No flammables/corrosives or explosives on Coronado Bay Bridge (otherwise route is terminal access) 06/29/00 C Sepulveda Blvd. [tunnel] from Interstate Los Angeles Los Angeles 1,2,3,4,5,6,8 105/Imperial Highway to W. Century Blvd. [Restriction for Tank Vehicles] 10/28/92 D State 118 from State 232 [Oxnard] to Los 1 Angeles [western county line] 01/01/95 E State 154 from State 246 [MP 8.11- Santa Ynez] Santa Barbara 0 to US 101 [near Los Olivos] No hazardous materials or waste except pickup and delivery (otherwise, from R8.11 to R9.97 is Terminal Access and from R9.97 to 32.29 is California Legal) 1968 F Monterey Traffic Underpass from Washington Monterey Monterey 0 St.
    [Show full text]
  • Initial Study: Caldecott Improvement Project
    Initial Study: Caldecott Improvement Project On Route ALA/CC 24 From: ALA 24 KP 6.4 (PM 4.0) To: CC 24 KP 3.7 (PM 2.3) Caltrans Contract No. 04a1394 Lead Agency: California Department of Transportation 111 Grand Avenue Oakland, CA 94612-3006 Contact: Leo Scott (510) 286-5546 John Webb Date Leo Scott Date Division Chief Acting Division Chief North Region Environmental Planning Project Management - East Region California Department of Transportation California Department of Transportation, District 4 November 2002 California Department of Transportation. 2002. Initial study: Caldecott Improvement Project. November. (J&S 02-301) Oakland, CA. Prepared for Parsons Brinckerhoff by Jones & Stokes, Sacramento, CA. Contents Chapter 1. Introduction and Project Description ...............................................1-1 Introduction .......................................................................................1-1 Background.................................................................................1-1 Existing Conditions .....................................................................1-2 Project Location ................................................................................1-3 Project Description............................................................................1-3 Project Alternatives.....................................................................1-3 Purpose and Need............................................................................1-4 Chapter 2. Environmental Checklist....................................................................2-1
    [Show full text]
  • EIR Project Description DRAFT
    July 20, 2016 Alameda Marina EIR Project Description DRAFT PROJECT LOCATION The project site, Alameda Marina, is located at 1815 Clement Avenue, in the City of Alameda, California. The City of Alameda is located approximately 15 miles east of San Francisco in Alameda County (figure 1.1). Regional access to the City is provided by Interstate 880 (I‐880) connected via Interstate 80 (I‐80), Interstate 980 (I‐980) and Interstate 238 (I‐238). The project site lies in between Alameda Marina Drive and Willow Street. To the west of the site is Alameda Municipal Power, to the east is the Navy Operational Support Center (NOSC) and to the south is a mixture of light industrial, retail and residential uses. North of the site across the estuary is Coast Guard Island and Union Point Park located in Oakland along Embarcadero. The Park Street Business District is approximately 0.7 miles away and the Webster Street business core is approximately1.5 miles away. Public transportation connections such as the Fruitvale Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Station and AC Transit lines are within 2 miles of the site (figure 1.2). PROJECT OBJECTIVES Maintain Alameda Marina as a working waterfront and retain Alameda Marina’s maritime uses by creating a Maritime Core that utilizes the maritime footprint more efficiently. Encourage the retention and development of waterfront and maritime‐related job and business opportunities that relate to the area’s unique waterfront location. Upgrade and rehabilitate facilities, unique buildings, as feasible, and provide land for existing maritime businesses, boat berthing and maintenance, boat storage, and waterfront commercial recreation businesses.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 63, No. 110/Tuesday, June 9, 1998/Notices
    Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 110 / Tuesday, June 9, 1998 / Notices 31549 Information on Services for Individuals designations that: (1) specify highway on the Internet at: With Disabilities routes over which hazardous materials http://www.fhwa.dot.gov. For information on facilities or (HM) may, or may not, be transported Section 5112(c) of title 49, United services for individuals with disabilities within their jurisdictions; and/or (2) States Code, requires the Secretary of or to request special assistance at the impose limitations or requirements with Transportation, in coordination with the meeting, contact Mr. Payne as soon as respect to highway routing of HM. States, to update and publish possible. States and Indian Tribes are also periodically a list of current effective required to furnish updated HM route hazardous materials highway routing Dated: June 4, 1998. information to the FHWA. designations. In addition, 49 CFR Joseph J. Angelo, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 397.73(b) requires each State or Indian Director of Standards, Marine Safety and Tribe to furnish information on any new Mr. Kenneth Rodgers, Safety and Environmental Protection. or changed HM routing designations to Hazardous Materials Division (HSA±10), [FR Doc. 98±15425 Filed 6±8±98; 8:45 am] the FHWA within 60 days after Office of Motor Carrier Safety, (202) BILLING CODE 4910±15±M establishment. The FHWA maintains a 366±4016; or Mr. Raymond W. Cuprill, listing of all current State routing Office of the Chief Counsel, Motor designations and restrictions. In Carrier Law Division (HCC±20), (202) DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION addition, the FHWA has designated a 366±0834, Federal Highway point of contact in each FHWA Division Administration, 400 Seventh Street, Federal Highway Administration Office to provide local coordination SW., Washington, DC, 20590±0001.
    [Show full text]
  • Hazardous Materials Route Registry
    LEGEND Restrictions (Columns A to K) Designations (Columns L to P) 0 = All Hazmats A = All NRHM Hazmats 1 = Class 1 Explosives B = Class 1 Explosives 2 = Class 2 - Gas P = Class 7 HRCQ Radioactive 3 = Class 3 - Flammable I = Toxic Inhalation Hazard (TIH) 4 = Class 4 - Flammable Solid/Combustible M = Medical Waste 5 = Class 5 - Organic 6 = Class 6 - Poison 7 = Class 7 - Radioactive ID 8 = Class 8 - Corrosives REST = Restricted Route 9 = Class 9 - Dangerous (Other) PREF = Preferred Route i = Toxic Inhalation Hazard (TIH) PRES = Prescribed Route RECOM - Recommended Route YEAR DATE ID A B C D E F G HIJ K BLANK L NO P M STATE_ TEXT STATE CITY COUNTY ABBR ALABAMA YEAR DATE ID A B C D E F G HIJ K BLANK L NO P M STATE_ TEXT STATE CITY COUNTY ABBR 1996 08/26/96 PREF - ---------- ---P- ALBattleship Parkway [Mobile] froma By Bridge Rd. Alabama Mobile [Mobile] to Interstate 10 [exit 27] 1996 08/26/96 PREF - ---------- ---P- ALBay Bridge Rd. [Mobile] from Interstate 165 to Alabama Mobile Battleship Parkway [over Africa Town Cochran Bridge] [Westbound Traffic: Head south on I165; To by-pass the downtown area, head north on I165.] 1996 08/26/96 PREF - ---------- ---P- ALInterstate 10 from Mobile City Limits to Exit 26B Alabama Mobile [Water St] [Eastbound Traffic: To avoid the downtown area, exit on I-65 North] 1996 08/26/96 PREF - ---------- ---P- ALInterstate 10 from Mobile City Limits to Exit 27 Alabama Mobile 1996 08/26/96 PREF - ---------- ---P- ALInterstate 65 from Interstate 10 ton Iterstate 165 Alabama Mobile [A route for trucks wishing to by-pass the downtown area.] 1996 08/26/96 PREF - ---------- ---P- ALInterstate 65 from Mobile City Limits to Interstate Alabama Mobile 165 1996 08/26/96 PREF - ---------- ---P- ALInterstate 165 from Water St.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Environmental Impact Stabement
    Final Environmental Impact Stabement for the Nevada Test Site and Off-Site Locations in the State of Nevada Volume 1 Appendix I U.S. Department of Energy Nevada Operations Office Las Vegas, Nevada NEVADA TESTSITE Flh'AL ENV1ROh'ME.NTAL IMPACTSTATEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS ....................................................................... iv SUMMARY ....................................................................... S- l 1 .O INTRODUCTION ....... ............................. 1. I Purpose and Scope ....... ............................. 1.2 Background Information . ............................. 1.3 Summary of Results . .......................................... 1-6 1.3.1 Defense Pro ................. .................. 1-6 1.3.2 Waste Man ................. ............. 1-6 1.4 Conclusions .................................. .................. 1-1 2.0 PUBLIC ISSUES .... ............................................. 2-1 2. I Public Involvement ......................................... 2-1 2.2 Stakeholder Issues ........................... ........2-7 2.2. I Transportation Management Operations ............. ......... 2-7 2.2.2 Local Segments of Concern ................. .......... 2-8 2.2.3 Routing . ....................... ........... .2-11 2.2.4 Rail Option , , . ................ .2-11 2.2.5 Health Risks .................. 2.2.6 Transportation Protocol Working Gr 2.3 American Indian Issues ................ ...................... 2-16 2.4 Conclusions ......................... ...................... 2-16 3.0 TRANSPORTATION
    [Show full text]