Re: Transportation Impacts

[RuthWeiner@AOL.COM]

LET ME SAY AT THE OUTSET THAT I DO NOT SPEAK FOR DOE -- ONLY FROM MY OWN KNOWLEDGE.


The EIS exhaustively covers the question of accident health impacts, not necessarily economic impacts (Maybe I was speaking of my own "exhaustion").  


I don't quite understand what the fuss is about.  As far as cleanup costs are concerned, any estimates (of anything) that are given in the EIS had to be documented.  If 1996 estimates were the most recently available in existing credible documentation, that's what was used.  I haven't taken the time to look it up -- it was not part of the EIS I worked on -- but a range of cleanup cost estimates is given.  I might add that for traffic accident rates, 1999 estimates were used.  Population densities were escalated from the 1990 census.  All this is clearly stated in the EIS, as are the sources of economic data.  there were also several years between the issuance of the DEIS and the FEIS, and comments on the economic analysis were all responded to (there is a Comment/Response Document). 


"Truncated" according to my dictionary, means "cut short."  In my opinion, that was not done.  And please let's not get into a "yes it was, no it wasn't" dialogue.

    

Ruth Weiner, Ph. D.

ruthweiner@aol.com