AUGUSTA — Most of the 29 areas to be studied as potential sites for a disposal facility for low-level radioactive waste are in northern Maine, according to a map released Tuesday by the Maine Low-Level Radioactive Waste Authority.

Eleven are in Aroostook County — either west of Presque Isle or near Ashland, and five are near the top of Somerset County.

Penobscot County has four potential sites — in Medway, Winn, Edinburg and Summit, and Waldo County has two areas in Frankfort. The other potential sites are Starks, Fairfield, Dixfield, Paris, Pittston and two locations in Carthage.

No study areas were named in Piscataquis, Hancock, Washington, Cumberland, York, Androscoggin, Sagadahoc, Knox or Lincoln counties.

There also are three “volunteer sites” still on the list for consideration: Unity Township in Kennebec County, Township 2 Range 9 in Penobscot County, and Maine Yankee in Wiscasset. Volunteer sites are areas proposed for consideration for a disposal facility by the property owners.

Geologist Jim Burnell explained how the 29 “technical sites” had been chosen from 12 regions. The process began with topographical base maps, to which were added “exclusion and avoidance factors” to narrow the list of possible sites.

Consideration was given to whether there were “protected natural areas” such as deer wintering grounds, and to the hydrology of surface water and ground water. One of the problems, Burnell said, was looking for soil that was “well-drained,” yet had “low permeability.” Sites also could not be above 2,700 feet in elevation, nor be uphill from houses with their own wells or aquifers.

The authority has sent questionnaires to the communities involved, asking them for further information on the sites, said John Williams, executive director of the LLRWA. With authority approval, each site may have up to $500 in expenses reimbursed for gathering the information.

All available information will be compiled for a workshop in March, at which time the authority will narrow the 29 potential sites to about a dozen “candidate sites.”

At that workshop, authority member Thomas Eastler hopes “we can look at the 29 sites blindly — list them 1 through 29, with no name.”

Another authority member, James McBreairty, disagreed. “I do not intend to vote blindly,” he said. He wanted to know which sites would be “near some people.”

That would be taken into account under each site’s criteria, Eastler responded. “Proximity is one of the factors.” He did not think it was necessary to put the site far from civilization. “If we’re going to watch it for the next 500 years, it ought to be near us,” he offered.

Despite a few protests about being restricted for time, the authority’s Citizens Advisory Group held its meeting the same day — and both meetings drew about 50 people.

Authority members said they thought it helpful to have the CAG meeting earlier the same day, so that they could consider citizen comment when making decisions.

Phil Merletti of Lee, spokesman of Maine Citizens Against Nuclear Dumps, objected strenuously to the change, saying that moving the meeting from Bangor to Augusta deprived people from northern Maine the opportunity to attend the CAG meetings. He also saw it as an effort to reduce the CAG’s influence.

Both the CAG and authority members discussed at length the problems of financial arrangments with the eventual selected site. The community would be entitled to receive money for “incentive,” a way of bringing something positive to the community; “compensation,” to make up for costs incurred; and possibly liability.

The current law will have to be changed, Williams said, because it allocated only $10 million to build the facility, and $1 million a year to run it and cover all other areas of concern. Both figures are inadequate, he said.

Several CAG members questioned whether the authority could even begin talking to the potential site communities until the Legislature had clarified the matter.

With these “unanswered questions,” it would be very “difficult to win over any town,” said Jeff Barnum, CAG member and selectman from New Vineyard, dropped earlier as a volunteer site. Barnum asked that a consensus be taken of CAG members to see whether they would recommend that the authority stop the site process until the matter could be settled.

A majority of the CAG members thought the process should continue, but that the authority should go to the Legislature right away so that it could proceed with accurate figures.

The next meetings of the CAG and the authority are scheduled for Wednesday, Jan. 15.