5.6 SOCIOECONOMICS
The following is a summary of the potential impacts to the socioeconomic environment associated with each of the alternatives. To support a comparison of the relative impacts of each alternative, the impact analysis focused on key indicators of the potentially impacted area including Hanford Site employment and the effects of Site employment levels on employment, population, taxable retail sales, and housing prices in the surrounding area. These impacts are addressed in more detail in Volume Five, Appendix H. Based on the results of the socioeconomic modeling of the key indicators of socioeconomic impacts, analyses of potential impacts to public services and facilities (schools, police and fire protection, medical services, sanitary and solid waste disposal, and electricity, natural gas, and fuel oil) were completed. The socioeconomic analysis did not address the possible economic impacts of TWRS accidents. Impacts resulting from accidents are presented in Section 5.12 and Volume Four, Appendix E. Impacts to the transportation system are addressed separate from this section (Section 5.10).
All of the tank waste alternatives, except No Action, would create new jobs at the Hanford Site and in the surrounding community. Peak year new employment typically would occur during the construction phase for each alternative with peak construction ranging from 150 jobs under the In Situ Fill and Cap alternative to approximately 6,700 jobs under the Ex Situ Intermediate Separations and Phased Implementation alternatives. For capsule alternatives, peak year employment would range from none under the No Action alternative to 47 under the Overpack and Ship and Vitrify with Tank Waste alternatives. New jobs created under each alternative would have impacts on the Tri-Cities economy based on the number of jobs created. These impacts would include increased total population, retail sales, housing prices, and increased demands for housing and public facilities and services. The level of impacts would be directly related to the level of new jobs created, and in each case, the impacts would be greatest in the years closest to the year of peak employment. A large number of jobs would be created over a short period of time under some of the alternatives, resulting in the Tri-Cities economy experiencing a boom-bust cycle that could adversely impact the local economy.
This socioeconomic analysis was limited to the Richland-Kennewick- Pasco Metropolitan Statistical Area, also known as the Tri-Cities area, which encompasses all of Benton and Franklin counties. The analysis did not address impacts on other areas in the region because there are too few Hanford Site employees in surrounding counties for changes in Hanford Site employment to cause any measurable economic impacts. Historically, Hanford Site employees that live outside Benton and Franklin counties constitute approximately 7 percent of the total Hanford Site labor force (Cushing 1995). Most of these employees live in Yakima County, which has a total nonfarm employment of over 65,000 (WSDES 1993b). Hanford Site employees represent approximately 1 percent of the total Yakima County nonfarm employment. Thus, outside of Benton and Franklin counties, the economic impacts of EIS alternatives would be too small to warrant detailed analysis (Serot 1995a).
The socioeconomic modeling summarized in this section focused on total numbers of jobs and did not address the possible economic effects of differences in wage and salary levels (and thus total Tri-Cities gross income) of new jobs created compared to wages and salaries of jobs lost as Hanford Site employment declines over time. Historically, Hanford Site-related jobs have been higher paying than non-Site jobs in the area, and new jobs created in the Tri-Cities might not match the total income generated by jobs that previously existed at the Hanford Site. The projections of nonfarm employment and population were used to assess the impacts of each alternative on public services and facilities (e.g., schools, police and fire services, and public utilities). Development of the calculational baseline projection and use of the economic forecasting model are described in more detail in Volume Five, Appendix H.
Economic forecasts that attempt to calculate conditions many years into the future are inherently limited in their accuracy. Because of the uncertainties in calculating Federal funding, and thus future employment levels, the economic forecasting model may provide optimistic calculations of several economic indicators. This socioeconomic impact analysis is not a definitive description of the future of the Tri-Cities area. Rather, the information is presented to identify the differences in socioeconomic impacts among the various EIS alternatives. To use the analysis for any other purpose assumes a validity and usefulness not intended.
Currently, the Tri-Cities area is in a transitional period as the Hanford Site, historically the dominant local employer, downsizes. There is as yet limited evidence of how the area's economy will adapt to this change. For example, it is not yet known how successful the ongoing attempts will be to diversify the economy by using the Site's technology and skilled employee base. The Tri-Cities economy of the mid-1990's is considerably larger and more diversified than it was during Site downturns in past decades. This would tend to lessen the overall effect on the Tri-Cities of changes in employment and spending at the Site.
Emerging data indicate that the negative effect to the Tri-Cities economy of the recent declines in Hanford Site employment have been less severe than commonly assumed. For example, average Hanford Site employment in 1995 declined from 18,388 in 1994 to 15,767, a reduction of over 2,600 jobs. Over the same time frame, total nonfarm employment in the Tri-Cities area declined from 73,800 to 72,200, a reduction of 1,600 jobs (Table 4.6.1). Analyses of the Tri-Cities economy based on historical data indicate that each additional job created at the Hanford Site would in turn lead to the creation of more than one additional job locally (i.e., a multiplier effect of more than 2). If this same multiplier worked in reverse, each job lost at the Site should lead to a reduction in total nonfarm employment of two jobs or more. However, the data indicate that this has not occurred, or at least has not yet occurred.
It is too early to determine why Site job losses have not led to greater immediate declines in total Tri-Cities employment, and it would be inappropriate to suggest that the data mean that total Tri-Cities employment is unaffected by Hanford Site job reductions. Future data on total nonfarm employment may show a sharper decline, which could indicate that there is a time lag between Site job reductions and the time when these reductions would be reflected in the data about the Tri-Cities area's economy as a whole. However, it also is possible that because of the increasing diversification of the area's economy, the effects of changes in Site employment on the area's economy may not be as great as in the past, particularly when Site employment declines (i.e., as in 1995), compared to when it increases (i.e., as it did in the early 1990's) (Serot 1996).
If future data indicate that changes in Hanford Site employment have a smaller impact on total nonfarm employment and other socioeconomic aspects of the Tri-Cities area than would result from the 2.4 employment multiplier for Site employment used in this EIS, then the impacts of the TWRS alternatives on total Tri-Cities nonfarm employment, population, taxable retail sales, housing prices, and public services and facilities would be less than estimated in this EIS.
5.6.1 Economy and Employment
The socioeconomic impacts of each TWRS alternative were measured in terms of changes from a baseline projection of economic activity, population, and housing in the Tri-Cities area. The projection assumed the successful completion of the scheduled milestones for Hanford Site cleanup and environmental restoration under the Tri-Party Agreement (Ecology et al. 1994). This baseline projection was developed for impact analysis purposes only and should be considered a calculational baseline. Developing this calculational baseline began with the most current available projection of long-term overall Hanford Site employment including DOE employees, contractors, and major subcontractors (Daly 1995). The overall Hanford Site employment projection included the proposed TWRS activities as defined in the Tri-Party Agreement (Ecology et al. 1994).
The calculational baseline for the EIS socioeconomic impact analysis removed the proposed TWRS component from the overall Hanford Site employment projection. This provided a consistent base from which to add the estimated labor requirements for each TWRS alternative (WHC 1995a, c, e, f, g, h, j, n and Jacobs 1996). Figure 5.6.1 shows the projection of Hanford Site employment including the TWRS program as defined in the Tri-Party Agreement and the calculational baseline used for this socioeconomic analysis. An economic forecasting model then was used to project the effects of the calculational baseline of Hanford Site employment under each alternative on the Tri-Cities area nonfarm employment, taxable retail sales, population, and housing prices.
The current projection of long-term, overall Hanford Site employment showed a decline from a peak of about 19,000 in 1994 to 15,000 in 1996 (Daly 1995). From 1996 to 2001, the current projection showed staffing at 15,000. From 2001 to 2030, the projection showed a steady decline in employment, reaching a level of 8,000 by 2030. For this analysis, the same rate of decline was continued through 2040, which was the end of the forecast period for the EIS socioeconomic impact analysis. Figure 5.6.2 shows the current Hanford Site employment projection and a projection of Tri-Cities area nonfarm employment based on that forecast of Hanford Site employment.
Recent data show that the Site employment in mid-1996 was 14,100, which was lower than the 15,000 that was used in the EIS baseline forecast for this year. However, because the same future baseline forecast was used to assess the impacts of all TWRS alternatives on Tri-Cites total nonfarm employment, population, taxable retail sales, and housing prices, the comparison of impacts among the TWRS alternatives would yield the same relative results. This means that the alternatives with the largest impacts on Site employment, total nonfarm employment, and population would still have the largest impacts even if a new baseline Site employment forecast were used. Likewise, the alternatives with the smallest impacts on local socioeconomic conditions under the previous baseline forecast would have the smallest impacts under a new baseline forecast.
Revisions in the descriptions and schedules of the TWRS alternatives have occurred since the Draft EIS was published. However, for all alternatives except Phase 2 of Phased Implementation, the changes would have less than a 5 percent effect on the alternative's employment levels. The modeling analysis of the Phased Implementation (Total alternative) has been revised to reflect the revised employment estimates. No additional modeling has been performed for the other alternatives for the Final EIS.
The Final EIS also includes the Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 2 alternative, which was not analyzed in detail in the Draft EIS. Although estimates of peak employment were developed for this alternative, detailed year-by-year employment data were not available, and thus no socioeconomic impact modeling was performed. The discussions in Section 5.6 of the Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 2 alternative's impacts on Tri-Cities total nonfarm employment, population, taxable retail sales, housing prices, and public services and facilities were scaled from the impact analyses of other TWRS alternatives with similar employment levels.
The projection of Tri-Cities nonfarm employment showed a decline from 1994 to 1996, then an increasing trend. The increase in regional employment at the same time as Hanford Site employment declines reflects the experience in the Tri-Cities following the shut-down of Hanford Site plutonium production operations in 1988 (Section 4.6). The projection showed an approximately 33 percent increase in nonfarm employment between its lowest point in 1996 and the year 2040. Agriculture and food processing would remain important factors in the local economy, as would the role of the Tri-Cities as a regional retail center and transportation hub.
Figure 5.6.1 Current Hanford Site Employment Projection and Calculation Baseline, 1994 to 2040
The current projection of long-term, overall Hanford Site employment showed a decline from a peak of about 19,000 in 1994 to 15,000 in 1996 (Daly 1995). From 1996 to 2001, the current projection showed staffing at 15,000. From 2001 to 2030, the projection showed a steady decline in employment, reaching a level of 8,000 by 2030. For this analysis, the same rate of decline was continued through 2040, which was the end of the forecast period for the EIS socioeconomic impact analysis. Figure 5.6.2 shows the current Hanford Site employment projection and a projection of Tri-Cities area nonfarm employment based on that forecast of Hanford Site employment.
As described previously, the calculational baseline used to analyze and compare the socioeconomic impacts of the TWRS EIS alternatives reflects these same underlying trends except that the baseline excludes TWRS remediation. As a result, the economy showed slower growth for the period 1997 to 2030, which would be the primary period of TWRS activities. After 2030, however, the calculational baseline projection for the Tri-Cities area employment merged into the current projection.
The four capsule alternatives, No Action, Onsite Disposal, Overpack and Ship, and Vitrify with Tank Waste, are not described in detail because their potential socioeconomic impacts would be small. The capsules No Action alternative showed a peak labor requirement of 10 full-time equivalent employees per year. The Onsite Disposal alternative showed a peak labor requirement of 28 full-time equivalent employees per year. The Overpack and Ship and Vitrify with Tank Waste alternatives both showed a peak labor requirement of 47 full-time equivalent employees per year (WHC 1995n). These staffing levels were too small to have any measurable effect on economic conditions in the Tri-Cities and are not described further in this section.
5.6.1.1 Hanford Site Employment
Figures 5.6.3, 5.6.4, and 5.6.5 and Tables 5.6.1, 5.6.2, and 5.6.3 present total Hanford Site employment for the calculational baseline projection and each of the tank waste alternatives. All of the tank waste alternatives, except No Action and Long-Term Management, included employment estimates associated with the closure scenario. In all cases, closure-related employment would represent a small fraction of the total Hanford Site employment (less than 2 percent). Typically, closure activities would begin during the final phases of remediation activities. For all alternatives involving closure, peak employment impacts would occur during the construction and remediation phases of the alternative, and therefore closure employment would not appreciably affect the impacts described in the remainder of this section. The following text summarizes the impacts of each tank waste alternative on Hanford Site employment.
No Action Alternative (Tank Waste)
Under the No Action alternative, routine operations would be maintained at approximately their current level with approximately 1,000 employees during the 100-year institutional control period. Hanford Site employment under this alternative would begin to diverge from and exceed the baseline in 2006 because routine tank farm operations would begin to decline at that time in the calculational baseline. By 2030, when routine operations were fully phased out in the baseline, the No Action alternative would have about 1,000 employees more than the baseline.
Long-Term Management Alternative
In terms of Site employment, the Long-Term Management alternative would be the same as the No Action alternative, except that replacement DSTs would be constructed between the years 2031 and 2037. Constructing the new tanks would add approximately 350 additional employees to the level of employment shown for the No Action alternative. This would be about 1,350 more employees than in the baseline during the 2030's.
In Situ Fill and Cap Alternative
Employment under this alternative would peak at 150 workers in 2001 during remediation activities and continue at nearly that level until 2012 when the remediation phase would end. For closure activities under the In Situ Fill and Cap alternative, employment would never exceed 150 jobs in any single year and would have a maximum impact on Hanford Site employment of less than 2 percent.
In Situ Vitrification Alternative
Under the In Situ Vitrification alternative, the greatest onsite employment impact would occur during remediation in 2004, when there would be 2,600 more workers employed at the Hanford Site or about 19 percent more workers above the baseline level. When the remediation phase ended in 2016, employment under this alternative would be below 1,000 workers. Closure activities would begin in 2016 and end in 2020. The year 2020 shows a reduction in Hanford Site employment that would be below the baseline level. This would be caused by the faster phase-out of routine tank farm operations compared to the baseline because routine operations would cease when all waste in a given tank farm was vitrified. The in situ vitrification activities, including closure, would be completed by 2033 except for monitoring and maintenance.
Ex Situ Intermediate Separations Alternative
The Ex Situ Intermediate Separations alternative would have its greatest impact on Hanford Site employment during the remediation phase of the alternative in 2002, when total Site employment was estimated to be about 4,000 above the calculational baseline; a 29 percent increase. These initial increases would result from construction employment. There would be a second increase in employment in 2009 when full waste processing would begin.
The greatest percentage change would occur in 2015, where the percentage change would be 47 percent and when the alternative's total employment would be about 3,800. The greater percentage change in 2015 would be caused by the decline in overall Hanford Site employment in the calculational baseline scenario, which would make the smaller number of TWRS employees a larger percentage of the baseline. This same paradox of large percentage would impact in later years, because TWRS employment would impact a smaller base of total Hanford Site employment, which would apply to the Ex Situ No Separations and Ex Situ Extensive Separations alternatives as well.
Overall employment under the alternative would decline substantially from 2015 to 2024 as remedial construction and waste processing began to phase out. Remediation would end in 2028. Closure activities would begin in 2010 and end in 2034. During the early phase of closure, less than 5 percent of the workers would result from closure activities, and the highest level of employment would reach 90 workers in 2031.
Ex Situ No Separations Alternative
Analysis of the Ex Situ No Separations alternative showed a substantial increase in Hanford Site employment compared to the calculational baseline between 1996 and about 2018. There would be an employment spike (a short-term increase that dropped off rapidly after the peak year) between 1996 and 2003 because of construction employment. The largest impact under this alternative would occur during construction in 2000, when there would be over 4,400 more Hanford Site employees than in the baseline, a difference of approximately 30 percent. Remediation would end in 2017. Closure activities would have a peak employment of 510 in 2018.
Ex Situ Extensive Separations Alternative
The Ex Situ Extensive Separations alternative shows an initial spike in Hanford Site employment in 1998, then a second, larger spike that would peak in 2003. Both of these spikes would be attributable to construction employment. The largest percentage impact of the alternative would occur in 2003 during construction, when Hanford Site employment would be almost 50 percent above the calculational baseline, a difference of approximately 6,700 jobs. The 1998 and 2003 spikes in the projections of Hanford Site employment under this alternative would result in a boom-bust pattern that could have adverse impacts on the local economy and public services. Remedial activities would end in 2024, with closure activities beginning in 2010, and would end in 2030. Peak closure-related employment would be 370 jobs in 2023.
Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 1 Alternative
Under this alternative, Hanford Site employment would peak at about 16,800 employees in 2001, which would be 17.0 percent higher than the calculational baseline. Employment would remain at about 17 percent (more than 2,200 employees) above the baseline through 2004. Activities under this alternative would contribute approximately 2,000 employees to the total Hanford Site workforce until 2018. Remediation activities would end in 2023 with closure beginning in 2010 and ending in 2034. Peak employment during closure would reach 390 employees in 2024.
Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 2 Alternative
Employment under this alternative would peak in 2001 with total Hanford Site employment of approximately 16,600, which would be 15.3 percent higher than the calculational baseline. From the years 2009 to 2018, during the alternative's peak operations phase, the Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 2 alternative would add approximately 750 workers to the Site's workforce.
Phased Implementation Alternative
Phase 1
The Phased Implementation alternative was analyzed in two parts. Part one analyzed Phase 1 of the Phased Implementation alternative and part two analyzed the total Phased Implementation alternative.
The Phased Implementation alternative would cause a large increase in Hanford Site employment compared to the calculational baseline between 1997 and 2001. This increase would result from constructing the waste treatment facilities associated with the alternative. During the alternative's operation phase, Site employment would exceed the baseline by approximately 4 to 5 percent or about 550 workers. There would be no impacts after 2013 because all activities, including decommissioning and decontamination, would have been completed.
Total Alternative
Hanford Site employment for the Phased Implementation alternative would include the employment discussed for Phase 1 of the alternative through 2003 and Phase 2, which would start in 2004. Construction of the Phase 2 treatment facilities would begin in 2005. The additional Hanford Site employment in the Phased Implementation total alternative would peak in 2010, with about 6,700 additional workers, which would be an approximate 65 percent increase over the calculational baseline. Site employment would remain over 40 percent above the baseline during the period of full-scale operations. Operations would begin to decline in 2024 , followed by a period of decommissioning and decontamination activities ending about 2030. Closure and management and maintenance activities would continue through 2040, accounting for a small continued increase in employment above the baseline. Employment associated with closure would peak in 2023 at about 1,600 jobs.
5.6.1.2 Tri-Cities Area Employment
Changes in Hanford Site employment would be the primary source of socioeconomic impacts on the Tri-Cities for all the tank waste alternatives. These impacts would be driven by the changes in the area's nonfarm employment caused by changes in Site employment. Nonfarm employment included all employment in the Tri-Cities except for permanent and migratory farm workers. Nonfarm employment included food processing, which is classified in government statistics as a type of manufacturing. Farm workers were excluded from the impact analysis because farm employment would not be affected by Hanford Site employment.
Tables 5.6.4, 5.6.5, and 5.6.6 show Tri-Cities nonfarm employment for each tank waste alternative for the years 1994 through 2040. The following text summarizes the potential impacts of each tank waste alternative on Tri-Cities nonfarm employment.
No Action Alternative (Tank Waste)
Under the No Action alternative, Tri-Cities area nonfarm employment would track the baseline through 2005, then increase through the end of the forecast period in 2040. This reflects the continuation of routine operations at the tank farms under the No Action alternative. By 2040, Hanford Site employment would be about 1,000 employees above the baseline, which would translate to a 2 percent increase (1,600 jobs) in nonfarm employment in the local economy.
Long-Term Management Alternative
Under this alternative, Hanford Site employment would be the same as the No Action alternative until 2031, when replacement DSTs tanks would be constructed. The new tank construction would increase Site employment, which would result in an increase of about 2.5 percent (2,200 jobs) in local employment during the tank construction period. By the year 2040, however, when the retanking was completed, Tri-Cities nonfarm employment would fall back to the same level as in the No Action alternative.
In Situ Fill and Cap Alternative
Under the In Situ Fill and Cap alternative, nonfarm employment impacts would peak in the year 2000 at approximately 320 jobs over the baseline, a difference of 0.5 percent. Nonfarm employment would stay slightly over the baseline until 2020.
Ex Situ No Separations Alternative
The impacts of the No Separations alternative on area nonfarm employment would peak in 1999 and 2000, when employment would be 10 to over 11 percent higher (over 7,400 jobs) than the calculational baseline. The higher employment would fall off by 2003, then peak again in 2005 at 8 percent (5,700 jobs) above the baseline. By 2020, nonfarm employment impacts of the alternative would correspond to the baseline.
In Situ Vitrification Alternative
For the In Situ Vitrification alternative, a large increase in area nonfarm employment would occur from 2000 to 2007. Employment then would decline relative to the calculational baseline. By 2017, nonfarm employment with this alternative would fall below the baseline and remain below the baseline through 2029. This would reflect lower Hanford Site employment under the In Situ Vitrification alternative caused by the faster phase-out of routine tank farm operations compared to the baseline. In the peak impact year (2000), there would be over 4,300 more nonfarm jobs compared to the calculational baseline, an increase of approximately 6.2 percent.
Ex Situ Intermediate Separations Alternative
The Ex Situ Intermediate Separations alternative would result in nonfarm employment above the calculational baseline from 1996 through 2030. Implementing this alternative would result in two large increases in employment compared to the baseline. The first, with a peak in 2000, would occur when the alternative's employment peaked during the construction of the waste retrieval and treatment facilities. At this peak, there would be about 6,700 more jobs, an increase of 9.6 percent over the baseline. The second increase, beginning about 2009, would occur during the peak of the alternative's operation phase when employment would be about 6,300, or 8.8 percent over the baseline.
Ex Situ Extensive Separations Alternative
Analysis of the Ex Situ Extensive Separations alternative showed a spike in nonfarm employment compared to the calculational baseline in 1997 and 1998. In 1998, there would be 8.6 percent (5,900 jobs) more nonfarm jobs in the area than would exist for the baseline conditions. By 2000, the level of increase in nonfarm jobs would fall to 2.9 percent over the baseline. Nonfarm employment then would spike again compared to the baseline, peaking at 17.2 (12,200 jobs) percent above the baseline in 2003. Employment then would begin to fall back to the baseline, and by 2020 would be only 2.2 percent higher than the baseline.
Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 1 Alternative
This alternative would have its greatest impacts on Tri-Cities nonfarm employment in 2000 and 2001, when nonfarm employment would be 5.8 percent (4,100 jobs) above the calculational baseline.
Tri-Cities nonfarm employment under this alternative would remain above the baseline through 2030.
Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 2 Alternative
This alternative would be expected to have its peak impacts on total nonfarm employment in approximately 2001. In that year, nonfarm employment would be about 5.1 percent (3,600 jobs) higher than the calculational baseline. Tri-Cities nonfarm employment would remain above the baseline until about 2030.
Phased Implementation Alternative
Phase 1
The peak impact on Tri-Cities employment under this alternative would occur in 1999, when area employment would be 8.4 percent (5,900 jobs) above the calculational baseline. There would be a dip in employment in 2002 after the completion of the construction phase, caused by the loss of several thousand construction jobs.
Total Alternative
The employment impacts on the Tri-Cities showed two peaks for the total Phased Implementation alternative. Employment under the total alternative tracked the impacts of Phase 1 through 2003, with a peak of more than 8 percent in 1999. Beginning in 2004, the increased Hanford Site employment under the Phased Implementation total alternative would result in a second increase in area employment. The maximum impact would occur in 2010, with a 15.4 percent increase in employment over the calculational baseline, or about 11,000 additional jobs. Employment would remain well above the baseline through 2025 , then converge to the calculational baseline over the next 5 years as the Phased Implementation alternative was completed and decommissioning and decontamination and closure activities was finished.
5.6.1.3 Taxable Retail Sales
Taxable retail sales are an important indicator of economic impacts. The data on taxable retail sales used in this analysis, as reported by Washington State, included services, building contracting, manufacturing, wholesaling, and other industries in addition to sales by retail stores. These data are representative of aggregate economic activity in the Tri-Cities area.
Table 5.6.7 shows the taxable retail sales impacts of the various alternatives. For all tank waste alternatives except No Action, Long-Term Management, and In Situ Fill and Cap, there would be a large increase in taxable retail sales from current levels between 1999 and 2040. This result would be consistent with the experience in the Tri-Cities during the economic downturn of 1988 and 1989, when retail sales continued to increase despite employment reductions at the Hanford Site (Section 4.5). The projected retail sales growth would be equivalent to an approximate 3.5 percent average annual rate of growth from current levels. However, the data used to estimate the forecasting equation for retail sales were not corrected for inflation so that much of the apparent growth in retail sales could be accounted for by inflation.
One important implication of the increase in taxable retail sales would be that cities and counties would receive increased revenues from their share of sales taxes. Increases in sales tax revenues from higher employment would help finance the increased services needed for the increased population that would follow increased employment. Population impacts are described in Section 5.6.1.2.
The maximum impact under the tank waste No Action alternative would occur between 2025 and 2035 when taxable sales would be approximately 0.6 percent above the baseline. The largest impact under the Long-Term Management alternative would occur in 2035, when sales would be approximately 0.8 percent above the calculational baseline. The taxable retail sales impacts of the In Situ Fill and Cap alternative would be small, peaking at approximately $3 million in 2022. The maximum impact under the In Situ Vitrification alternative would occur in 2002, with retail sales 4.5 percent higher than the baseline.
Table 5.6.7 Taxable Retail Sales in the Tri-Cities - Changes from the Baseline for Selected Years
In 2002, retail sales in the Ex Situ Intermediate Separations alternative would be 7.3 percent above the baseline. The Ex Situ No Separations alternative would have its peak impact on retail sales in 2000, when sales would be 8.7 percent above the baseline. The Ex Situ Extensive Separations alternative's retail sales impacts would peak in 2004, when sales would be 10.8 percent above the baseline. The Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 1 alternative's impacts would peak in 2001 at 4.4 percent above the baseline , while the Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 2 alternative's impacts would peak in the same year at about the same level . Under the Phased Implementation alternative, the maximum impact would be 6.6 percent in 2000 during Phase 1, with another peak in 2011 of 7.6 percent.
For all tank waste alternatives, the pattern of the impacts closely followed the impacts on nonfarm employment, especially with respect to the timing of the divergence from the baseline. Taxable retail sales would exceed those of the baseline when nonfarm employment under the alternative exceeded baseline employment. The main difference is that the impacts of the alternative on taxable retail sales would be smaller (in terms of percent changes) than their impacts on nonfarm employment.
5.6.1.4 Employment Impacts by Ethnic Group
The analysis of employment impacts by ethnic group focused on Hanford Site employment. The breakdown of Hanford Site Management and Operations contractor employment by occupational category and minority group as of November 1994 showed that African Americans, Asians, and Native Americans account for the same or higher percentage of the Management and Operations contractor workforce than the group's proportion to the total labor force in the Tri-Cities area (Pitcher 1994). Hispanics, however, accounted for about 4 percent of the Site work force, compared to 11.4 percent of the total labor force in the Tri-Cities. Therefore, the analysis of employment impacts of the EIS alternatives by ethnic group focused on Hispanic employment. Assuming that the proportions of Hispanic workers in the different occupational categories at the Site Management and Operations contractor remained constant, it would be possible to estimate the employment impact of different EIS alternatives on the Hanford Site's Hispanic labor force.
Hispanics currently are underrepresented in the Tri-Cities construction labor force. Data show that Hispanics account for about 2.5 percent of the construction workers in Benton and Franklin Counties, while the Hispanic origin category in the 1990 census represents about 13 percent of the two counties' population. The estimates of the Hispanic construction workers under the EIS alternatives assumed that Hispanics' participation in the local construction trades remained at current levels. Table 5.6.8 shows estimated Hispanic employment under the various EIS alternatives during both construction and operation phases.
5.6.2 Population and Housing
Changes in employment and economic activity would cause changes in population, which in turn would have impacts on housing and the demand for public facilities and services. This section describes population and housing. Public facilities and services impacts are described in Section 5.6.3.
5.6.2.1 Population
Table 5.6.9 provides population projections for the Tri-Cities for the calculational baseline and population projections based on implementing the tank waste alternatives. While the time paths of the population projections closely track the time paths of the corresponding nonfarm employment projections, there are two differences. First, the population projections lag behind employment projections by one year. For example, employment impacts would peak under the Ex Situ Intermediate Separations alternative in the year 2000, while the population impacts would peak in 2001. Based on the historical experience of the Tri-Cities (Section 4.6), population changes lag behind changes in employment. This tendency was reflected in the forecasting model used for this analysis. Second, the impacts of each EIS alternative in terms of percentage changes from the calculational baseline would be smaller for population changes than for employment changes. The following text summarizes the potential impacts on the Tri-Cities population under each tank waste alternative.
Table 5.6.9 Population Changes in the Tri-Cities from the Baseline for Selected Years
No Action Alternative (Tank Waste)
Under the No Action alternative, population would exceed the baseline by about 2,400 persons or 1.2 percent by 2035.
Long-Term Management Alternative
Under the Long-Term Management alternative, population change would peak at 1.6 percent in 2035. The population difference between this alternative and the calculational baseline projection in 2035 would be approximately 3,200.
In Situ Fill and Cap Alternative
Under this alternative, peak impacts on Tri-Cities population would occur in 2001 at approximately 460 people (0.3 percent) over the calculational baseline.
In Situ Vitrification Alternative
The In Situ Vitrification alternative would have its peak population impact in 2001, with approximately 6,300 more people than in the baseline projection. This would represent a 3.8 percent change from the baseline.
Ex Situ Intermediate Separations Alternative
For the Ex Situ Intermediate Separations alternative, the maximum change in population would occur in 2001, when population would be 9,900 above the calculational baseline, a difference of 5.9 percent. By 2020, the population changes compared to the baseline would be 2,900 (1.6 percent).
Ex Situ No Separations Alternative
The Ex Situ No Separations alternative would result in a population increase over the calculational baseline beginning in 1997. The maximum impact under this alternative would occur in 2000, when population would be 11,700 over the baseline, an increase of 7 percent. By 2020, the population impact would be approximately 380 (0.2 percent).
Ex Situ Extensive Separations Alternative
The Extensive Separations alternative would result in a spike in population peaking in 1999 and a second spike peaking in 2004. Each spike in population would be followed by a large drop in population, especially the spike in 2004. The peak impact in 2004 would result in a population 17,800 (10.5 percent) above the baseline. However, by 2005 the increase would be down to 11,300 or 6.6 percent. Population impacts would continue until 2025 when they would be approximately 1,700 people ( 0.9 percent) over the baseline. The population spikes with the Ex Situ Extensive Separations alternative could result in potential adverse socioeconomic impacts on the Tri-Cities because of the short-term demands on housing and public facilities caused by large numbers of construction workers moving into the area for a limited time.
Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 1 Alternative
Under this alternative, peak impacts on Tri-Cities population would occur in 2001, when population would be 6,000 people (3.6 percent) above the calculational baseline. Population would remain between 3 and 3.5 percent above the baseline until 2015.
Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 2 Alternative
Under this alternative, peak impacts on Tri-Cities population would occur in 2001 or 2002 when population would be about 5,300 (3.2 percent) above the baseline. From approximately 2010 to 2019, population levels in the Tri-Cities would be about 2,000 (slightly over 1 percent) above the baseline.
Phased Implementation Alternative
Phase 1
The peak impact under Phase 1 of the Phased Implementation alternative on population would occur in 2000, with an increase of 8,600 people (5.1 percent) above the calculational baseline. After construction was completed in 2001, employment would decline and population growth would begin to decline in 2003. After Phase 1 was completed in 2013, employment and population would decline.
Total Alternative
Population under the Phased Implementation alternative would follow the changes resulting from Phase 1 through 2003, with a peak of 5.1 percent above the calculational baseline in 2000, followed by a decline through 2003. However, from 2004 the higher levels of employment resulting from Phase 2 implementation would cause higher population levels. The peak impact would occur in 2011, with 16,100 additional persons, or about 9.3 percent more than the calculational baseline. This would result in a boom-bust pattern, which could have impacts on housing and public facilities.
5.6.2.2 Housing Prices
Table 5.6.10 shows projected average home prices for the calculational baseline and prices that would result from the various alternatives. These projections closely matched the projections of nonfarm employment in timing and direction. However, while population projections for the tank waste alternatives showed smaller impacts than in the projections of nonfarm employment, the projections for average home prices showed larger impacts.
The baseline projection showed housing prices in the Tri-Cities rising steadily from 1997 through 2040. All tank waste alternatives would result in consistent increases in housing prices, although there would be fluctuations in prices with all tank waste alternatives except for No Action and Long-Term Management. These housing price fluctuations reflected the fluctuations in Tri-Cities area nonfarm employment that would be caused by implementing these alternatives.
In some years under the In Situ Vitrification alternative and the various ex situ alternatives, average housing prices would decline at the same time as total Hanford Site employment and total Tri-Cities nonfarm employment declines. However, these declines would be from projected average prices the proceeding year. In all cases, housing prices would be higher than they would be in that year under the baseline scenario. The following text summarizes the potential impacts on housing prices in the Tri-Cities under each tank waste alternative.
No Action Alternative (Tank Waste)
The No Action alternative would have no impact on housing prices until approximately 2010. The impacts would peak in 2025 and for the following decade when average housing prices would be $4,000 over the calculational baseline, a difference of over 2 percent.
Long-Term Management Alternative
Housing prices under this alternative would be the same as under the No Action alternative, except for slightly higher prices in the 2030's, when replacement tanks would be constructed. In those years, housing prices would be approximately $5,000 over the baseline, a difference of almost 3 percent.
In Situ Fill and Cap Alternative
The In Situ Fill and Cap alternative would have minor impacts on housing prices because of its small impact on employment and population.
In Situ Vitrification Alternative
Under the In Situ Vitrification alternative, housing prices would increase above the baseline levels from 1999 until nearly 2010. Impacts would peak in 2001 when average prices would be $11,000 (9.3 percent) over the calculational baseline. There then would be several years of modest declines in housing prices from the preceding year, although prices still would exceed the baseline.
Ex Situ Intermediate Separations Alternative
The Ex Situ Intermediate Separations alternative would lead to increases in the average housing prices from 1997 through 2020. The peak impact year would be 2001, when average prices would be $16,000 (14.5 percent) above the calculational baseline. There would be housing price declines from the proceeding year between 2005 and 2008 and again in 2020, reflecting declines in Hanford Site and Tri-Cities total employment.
Ex Situ No Separations Alternative
The Ex Situ No Separations alternative would have impacts on housing prices between approximately 1998 and 2020. The maximum impact would be in the year 2000, with average home prices exceeding the baseline by $19,000 (17.5 percent). There would be a decline in housing prices (compared to the previous year, not compared to the baseline) in 2004, followed by a resumption in housing price growth in 2005.
Ex Situ Extensive Separations Alternative
The Ex Situ Extensive Separations alternative would show a peak in housing prices in 1999 with average housing prices exceeding the baseline by $14,000 (13.3 percent), then dropping and peaking again to reach an even higher peak in 2004, with prices $30,000 (25.1 percent) above the baseline.
Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 1 Alternative
Under this alternative, housing prices would exceed the calculational baseline from 1996 until 2030. In the 2001 peak year, housing prices would be $10,000 (8.8 percent) above the baseline.
Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 2 Alternative
Under this alternative, housing prices would show a peak increase over baseline levels in 2001 or 2002. In the peak year, housing prices would be approximately 8 percent higher than the baseline.
Phased Implementation Alternative
Phase 1
Housing prices would reflect changes in employment under Phase 1 of the Phased Implementation alternative. The peak impact would occur in 2000, when the average home price would be $14,000 above the calculational baseline, a difference of 12.9 percent.
Total Alternative
Housing prices reflected the pattern in employment under the Phased Implementation alternative, with prices tracking prices in Phase 1 and peaking in 2000 at 13 percent above the calculational baseline, then falling through 2003. Prices would start rising again in 2004 with the implementation of Phase 2, with a second higher peak in 201 0 , when the average price would be $22,000 ( 19.9 percent) above the baseline.
5.6.2.3 Impacts of Higher Housing Prices
Higher housing prices that would be related to the various ex situ alternatives, the Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 1 and 2 alternatives, and the In Situ Vitrification alternative could have a negative impact on home buyers in the Tri-Cities area. Young families, low-income families, and first-time home buyers could be adversely affected by the higher prices and might find it difficult to buy a house. This could also affect families moving into the Tri-Cities area to work. Higher housing prices could make it harder for employers to attract new workers to the region.
The Ex Situ Extensive Separations alternative and, to a lesser extent, the Ex Situ No Separations alternative would have impacts that reflect the boom-bust pattern in Hanford Site and total Tri-Cities nonfarm employment that could cause adverse impacts on the housing market. The potential problems would be caused not so much by the size of the price increases, but by the fact that the price increases would result from the large number of construction workers involved in relatively short-term but labor-intensive projects. The Ex Situ Intermediate Separations alternative also would lead to considerable housing price increases, but would not have the same level of boom-bust impacts as the other two ex situ alternatives.
The sharp increases in housing prices in some years under the Ex Situ Extensive Separations and Ex Situ No Separations alternatives would make it more difficult for lower-income residents to purchase homes, while the sharp declines in housing prices might adversely affect existing home owners. Permanent residents moving into the area at the peak of one of these spikes may have to pay higher prices for housing, and then see the prices of their homes drop after the peak. This could be a serious loss for many families for whom their home is their major asset. Over time, average home prices would rise, as in the baseline, but stable housing prices would make it easier for families to plan their future and reduce the potential for loss if the family needed to sell its home on short notice.
At the same time, the higher housing prices would be caused by higher levels of employment associated with the tank waste alternatives. Therefore, while higher prices could adversely affect young families and low-income families, the greater employment opportunities would benefit these same families. In addition, higher housing prices would benefit current homeowners, especially if they were selling their homes.
5.6.2.4 Rental Housing Prices (All Alternatives)
Rental housing would show price increases consistent with single-family home prices. Higher employment levels would increase the demand for rental units, thus raising rates. Unless new rental construction was sufficient to keep prices down, rents would increase. Because many renters are young or lower-income families or individuals, they would be adversely affected. Although in many cases, these adverse impacts could be offset by increased employment opportunities. While this is a common situation in any growing economy, the impacts could be more severe in an area like the Tri-Cities where the total supply of rental housing is smaller than in a large, metropolitan area.
5.6.2.5 Housing Starts
The projected increases in housing prices for the various alternatives might stimulate new housing construction in the Tri-Cities. The level and timing of any additional housing construction would depend in part on the size, timing, and expected duration of the employment and population growth associated with individual alternatives. The Ex Situ Extensive Separations, Ex Situ No Separations, Ex Situ Intermediate Separations, and the Phased Implementation alternatives could have the largest impact on housing starts because of their associated levels of employment and population growth.
5.6.3 Public Facilities and Services
This section describes the impacts of the various EIS alternatives on public facilities and services in the Tri-Cities area. The most important driving forces for impacts on public facilities and services were 1) changes in population, which create changed levels of demand on the agencies and facilities providing these services; and 2) changes in the local economy, which cause population changes and generate the local tax revenues that fund public services.
Sharp upturns or downturns in a local economy, coupled with fluctuations in the population base, can strain the ability of agencies to meet service requirements in a timely manner. The Tri-Cities area has faced such problems in the past, in large part because of cycles of growth and decline at the Hanford Site. The rapid growth at the Hanford Site from the late 1980's to 1994 led to population growth that strained public services, particularly local school districts. The ongoing and expected reductions in budgets and employment at the Hanford Site likely will ease some of the problems related to continuing rapid growth in the area. However, losses to the local economic base from Hanford Site cutbacks also will impact the vitality of the local economy and public service systems. In addition, not all workers who may be drawn to the Tri-Cities to work on the relatively short-term TWRS construction activities would bring their families to the area, thus reducing the demand on public services and facilities. Table 5.6.11 summarizes the EIS alternatives' impacts on local public facilities and services.
Current baseline population forecasts for the Tri-Cities area (without implementing any of the EIS alternatives) showed relatively slow growth through 2040 (Section 5.6.2). This projected population growth rate was well below recent levels of increase and reflected the expected long-term decline in Hanford Site employment.
5.6.3.1 Public Safety
Increases in population that would result from the alternatives would place additional demands on public safety services provided by local jurisdictions.
Table 5.6.11 Impacts on Public Facilities and Services in the Tri-Cities Area
Long-Term Management Alternative
Impacts under the Long-Term Management alternative would be the same as under the No Action alternative. Local police departments each would require one additional officer in Pasco, Richland, Kennewick, and Benton County. Local fire departments would not require additional staff.
No Action Alternative
Under the No Action alternative, to maintain existing service levels (based on officers per population of 1,000), the police departments of Pasco, Richland, and Kennewick, and the Benton County Sheriff's Department each would require one additional officer during the 2025 to 2040 period compared to baseline levels (Table 5.6.11). Local fire departments would not require any additional staffing under this alternative. The alternative would not result in the need for new public safety facilities (e.g., police or fire stations).
In Situ Fill and Cap Alternative
The In Situ Fill and Cap alternative would involve little population growth, and thus no additional police or fire department personnel or facilities would be required.
In Situ Vitrification Alternative
Under the In Situ Vitrification alternative, for local agencies to maintain existing service levels (officers per population of 1,000), an additional two to three officers each over baseline levels would be required by the Richland, Kennewick, and Pasco police departments and the Benton County Sheriff's Department in the peak year (2001). Local fire departments also could require one to two additional personnel each. No new public safety facility requirements would be expected.
Ex Situ Intermediate Separations Alternative
Under the Ex Situ Intermediate Separations alternative, to maintain existing service levels,
the Richland, Kennewick, and Pasco police departments and the Benton County Sheriff's Department would require an additional three to four officers each over baseline levels during the 1999 to 2019 time frame. Local fire departments in Richland, Kennewick, Pasco and the Benton County Fire Department also could require two to three additional personnel each. It is unlikely that new public safety facilities (e.g., police or fire stations) would be needed, assuming that TWRS population growth was centered within established residential areas or in newly developed areas in close proximity to established areas.
Ex Situ No Separations Alternative
The Ex Situ No Separations alternative would require an additional three to four officers over baseline levels by each of the Richland, Kennewick, and Pasco police departments and the Benton County Sheriff's Department to maintain existing service levels from 1999 to 2003. Local fire departments in Richland, Kennewick, Pasco, and the Benton County Fire Department also might require two to three additional personnel each. No new public safety facilities would be required.
Ex Situ Extensive Separations Alternative
To maintain existing ratios of officers per population of 1,000, the Ex Situ Extensive Separations alternative would require as many as four to five additional police officers by each of the Richland, Kennewick, and Pasco police departments and the Benton County Sheriff's Department in the single peak year of 2004, and three to four additional officers between 2003 and 2008. Fire departments in Richland, Kennewick, Pasco and the Benton County Fire Department would need two to three additional personnel each in the 2003 to 2008 time period. No new public safety facilities would be required.
Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 1 Alternative
Under this alternative, the Richland, Kennewick, and Pasco police departments and the Benton County Sheriff's Department would each need an additional two to three officers over baseline levels to maintain current service levels in the year 2001. Local fire departments could each require one to two additional personnel. No new public safety facilities would be required.
Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 2 Alternative
Under this alternative, the Richland, Kennewick, and Pasco police departments and the Benton County Sheriff's Department would be expected to need two or three additional officers each to maintain current service levels in the peak year, which would be 2001 or 2002. Local fire departments could each require an additional one to two personnel. No new public safety facilities would be required.
Phased Implementation Alternative
Phase 1
This alternative would have impacts similar to the Ex Situ Intermediate Separations alternative in terms of additional public safety services needs. To maintain current services levels, the Richland, Kennewick, and Pasco police departments and the Benton County Sheriff's Department would require an additional three to four officers each over baseline levels. The peak requirement would occur from 1999 to 2001, with a smaller requirement of perhaps one additional officer in each jurisdiction from 2002 to 2013. Local fire departments also could require two to three additional personnel each.
Total Alternative
The Phased Implementation alternative, when fully implemented, would involve the impacts detailed for Phase 1 as well as impacts associated with the second phase of the alternative. Peak requirements for police and fire services under Phase 2 would occur in 2011 when Richland, Kennewick, and Pasco police departments and the Benton County Sheriff's Department would require four to five officers over baseline levels. The local fire departments would also require four to five additional personnel.
Capsule Alternatives
None of the cesium and strontium capsule alternatives would require new public safety personnel or facilities. This is because employment and resulting population growth for the capsule alternatives would be small.
5.6.3.2 Medical Services
The projected population increase associated with the various EIS alternatives (as much as 10.5 percent over baseline levels in the peak year) would create additional demands on the facilities and services provided by the area's three major hospitals. However, these hospitals currently are operating at between 35 and 50 percent capacity (Cushing 1995). Although some additional staffing might be required to handle the potential increase in admissions, the existing facilities should be able to accommodate the impacts associated with all alternatives -- given current use rates and the moderate expected baseline growth. The supply of medical personnel (e.g., physicians) currently is adequate, and no major problems would be expected in accommodating growth as a result of implementing any of the EIS alternatives.
5.6.3.3 Schools
Local schools in the Kennewick, Richland, Pasco, and Kiona-Benton school districts all are operating at or near their capacities in 1995 (Section 4.6). Although the pace of enrollment growth over the next few years could slow somewhat as Hanford Site employment declines and associated population growth rates decline (particularly in the Richland school district), current capacity problems need to be addressed. School district enrollment grew by an average of 1.2 percent in the 1995 to 1996 school year even though Hanford Site employment declined in 1995. In all cases, the severity of impacts related to increased school enrollment would be partially dependent on the various school districts resolving existing capacity issues. Table 5.6.11 provides data on estimated school enrollment impacts of the EIS alternatives.
No Action Alternative
Under the No Action alternative, population increases compared to baseline levels would be relatively minor up to the year 2025. In 2025, increases in enrollments would be approximately 1.2 percent over projected baseline enrollments. Because of the long planning horizon and the relatively minor enrollment increases (670 students), these additional students should be accommodated fairly easily.
Long-Term Management Alternative
Under the Long-Term Management alternative, impacts on school enrollment would be similar to the No Action alternative. By the year 2035, enrollment would be approximately 1.6 percent over projected baseline enrollments. Because of the relatively minor increases (900 students), the impacts should be accommodated fairly easily.
In Situ Vitrification Alternative
The In Situ Vitrification alternative would have its most substantial school enrollment increase compared to baseline levels between 2000 and 2008, with the peak year occurring in 2001. In 2001, assuming that the school growth was distributed proportionally among the school districts, area school enrollment would increase over calculational baseline levels by the following amounts: Kennewick 760; Richland 500; Pasco 450; and Kiona-Benton 90. These would represent enrollment increases of 3.8 percent over calculational baseline levels.
In Situ Fill and Cap Alternative
The In Situ Fill and Cap alternative would involve additional school enrollments of less than one-half of 1 percent (140 students) over baseline levels. This increase should be accommodated fairly easily.
Ex Situ Intermediate Separations Alternative
With the Ex Situ Intermediate Separations alternative, substantial school enrollment increases would occur between 1999 and 2019, with the peak year occurring in 2002. In the peak year, area school enrollment would increase over calculational baseline levels by the following amounts: Kennewick 1,200; Richland 780; Pasco 700; and Kiona-Benton 140. This would represent an increase of 5.9 percent over baseline levels.
Ex Situ No Separations Alternative
The Ex Situ No Separations alternative would involve substantial school enrollment increases in the 1999 to 2003 time frame, peaking in 2000. In 2000, area school enrollment would increase over calculational baseline levels by the following amounts: Kennewick 1,400; Richland 920; Pasco 830; and Kiona-Benton 160. This would represent increases of 7 percent over calculational baseline levels. Annual growth would continue at more moderate rates (3 to 4 percent per year higher than the baseline) until 2015.
Ex Situ Extensive Separations Alternative
The Ex Situ Extensive Separations alternative would result in an increase over the baseline of 10.5 percent and would lead to the largest school enrollment increases of all the EIS alternatives.
Enrollment would increase considerably between 2003 and 2008, peaking in 2004. In that year, area school enrollment would increase over calculational baseline levels by the following amounts:
Kennewick 2,100; Richland 1,400; Pasco 1,300; and Kiona-Benton 250. The severity of these impacts would depend in part on the district's ability to solve current capacity problems. Annual growth would remain at over 4 percent per year higher than the calculational baseline until 2015.
Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 1 Alternative
This alternative would have a peak impact on school enrollments in 2001. In that year, assuming that the school growth is distributed proportionally among the school districts, area school enrollment would increase over calculational baseline levels by the following amounts: Kennewick 720; Richland 470; Pasco 430; and Kiona-Benton 80. This growth would represent a 3.6 percent increase over calculational baseline levels.
Ex Situ/In Situ Combination 2 Alternative
Peak impacts on school population under this alternative would occur in 2001 or 2002 when there would be approximately 1,500 more students than under baseline conditions. Assuming that the growth was distributed proportionately among the area school districts, school enrollments would be over calculational baseline levels by approximately the following amounts: Kennewick 640, Richland 410, Pasco 380, and Kiona-Benton 70.
Phased Implementation Alternative
Phase 1
Phase 1 impacts on school enrollment would peak in 1999. In that year, area school enrollment would increase over calculational baseline levels by the following amounts: Kennewick 1,000; Richland 680; Pasco 610; and Kiona-Benton 120. This would represent a 5.1 percent increase over calculational baseline levels.
Total Alternative
The Phased Implementation alternative, when fully implemented, would involve the impacts detailed for Phase 1 as well as impacts associated with the second phase of the alternative. Peak impact on school enrollments would occur in 2011 when 4,600 new students would be enrolled in the four school districts. This growth would represent a 9.3 percent increase over baseline levels distributed as follows: Kennewick 1,900 ; Richland 1,300 ; Pasco 1,200 ; and Kiona-Benton 230 .
5.6.3.4 Electricity, Natural Gas, and Fuel Oil
For all TWRS alternatives, construction, operation, and project-related population growth would result in an increased demand for electricity. Domestic electrical demand would be expected to directly reflect the population growth associated with each alternative, which could peak at over 10 percent above baseline levels in 2001 to 2002 under the Ex Situ Extensive Separations alternative. For all alternatives that involved waste vitrification, operation phase electrical demands would be more substantial than the population growth incremental demand, but would peak later than the population demand. This is because waste vitrification is an electrical power-intensive operation.
The incremental electrical demand of all the vitrification alternatives (up to over 320 megawatts [MW]) would be a substantial increase over the 1994 estimated Hanford Site electrical requirement of approximately 57 MW. However, this demand still would be less than Site electrical usage in the late 1980's, when average Site requirements were approximately 550 MW (Cushing 1994). The Site has the electrical power infrastructure required by the TWRS alternatives' without major modifications other than new powerlines (mostly for the In Situ Vitrification alternative) and an additional electrical substation in the 200 Areas.
The incremental demand under all EIS alternatives would be no more than 1.5 percent of the Pacific Northwest electrical generation system's guaranteed energy supply capacity. Additional hydroelectric generating capacity, which is the primary electrical power source in the region, is being constructed in the region, and there are proposals being considered by various utilities in the region to construct natural gas-fired power plants. Currently, the Pacific Northwest has a surplus of electrical generating capacity.
Natural gas is a minor energy source in the Tri-Cities area, and incremental consumption related to population growth under any alternative would have negligible impacts. The operation phase of the EIS alternatives also would require up to 38,000 L/day (10,000 gal/day) of fuel oil. No substantial impacts on local supply or distribution systems would be expected from this level of demand.
5.6.3.5 Sanitary Waste Disposal
Under all EIS alternatives, project-induced population growth would increase demands on local municipal wastewater systems. The treatment systems of Richland, Kennewick, and Pasco would be expected to be able to accommodate these increased demands because they all are currently operating at 50 to 60 percent capacity (Cushing 1994). The current sanitary waste disposal system in the 200 Areas, however, would not be able to accommodate the additional personnel and tank waste treatment activities required under any of the EIS alternatives except the No Action, Long-Term Management, and In Situ Fill and Cap alternatives (Harvey 1995).
5.6.3.6 Solid Waste
The Hanford Site's solid waste landfill is expected to reach capacity by 1996. In October 1995, an agreement was announced between DOE and the city of Richland under which nonregulated, nonhazardous solid waste generated at the Hanford Site would be accepted by the city of Richland's sanitary landfill (DOE 1995k). The first shipments of Site solid waste to the Richland landfill occurred in November 1995.
The solid waste landfills that serve the Tri-Cities area (including the city of Richland-owned landfill and landfills in Arlington, Oregon and Roosevelt, Washington, which are operated by firms that contract with Kennewick, Pasco, and West Richland) all have current capacity life expectancies of 40 to 50 years. Thus, no TWRS alternatives would be expected to cause any difficulties in terms of municipal solid waste disposal.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
