REFERENCES - Home - Springer978-94-011-0629...Repository on Local Communities: A Survey of Texas...

REFERENCES

Abrams, Nancy E. and Joel R. Primack (1980), "Helping the Public Decide," Environment 22 (April): 14-20, 39-40.

Adams, Steve (1989), "Nuclear Plant Operator Hits DOE on Dump," Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 16, pp. IB, 6B.

Ahearne, John (1990), "Nuclear Waste Disposal: Can There be a Resolution? Past Problems and Future Solutions," Paper presented at the MIT International Conference on the Next Generation of Nuclear Power Technology, Cambridge, MA, October 5.

Angell, Philip (1993), Personal communication regarding Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc.'s 'program for siting landftlls, April (Houston, TX: BFI).

Baram, Michael S., Patricia S. Dillon, and Betsy Ruffle (1990), Managing Chemical Risks: Corporate Response to SARA Title /II (Medford, MA: Tufts University Center for Environmental Management).

Barke, Richard, Jennifer Espey, and Hank Jenkins-Smith (1991), "The Evolution of Policy Contexts: Analyzing the Bases for Change in Mass Perceptions of Nuclear Politics," Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC, August 29.

Barnard, Jeff (1994), "Tribe Considers Storing Nuclear Waste," Reno GazetteJournal, June 16, p. 4B.

Bassett, Gilbert, Hank Jenkins-Smith, and Carol Silva (1994), "Attitudes and Perceptions Regarding On-Site Storage of High Level Nuclear Waste," Paper presented at the 16th Annual Research Conference of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, Chicago, IL, October 27.

Batt, Tony (1993a), "DOE Seeks to Alter Nuke Waste Cap," Las Vegas ReviewJournal, July 1, p. lB.

Batt, Tony (1993b), "Official Insists on Date," Las Vegas Review-Journal, December 21, p. 3B.

Batt, Tony (1994a), "Temporary Nuke Dump Considered," Las Vegas ReviewJournal, March 2, pp. lA, 2A.

Batt, Tony (1994b), "Agency Hopes to Know Fate of Dump by '98," Las Vegas Review-Journal, June 7, pp. lB, 5B.

Been, Vicki (1994), "Locally Undesirable Land Uses in Minority Neighborhoods: Disproportionate Siting or Market Dynamics," The Yale Law Journal 103, 1383-1422.

Benson, Allen, Robert Lesko, and Eric W. Moore (1991), "Payments-Equal-toTaxes (PETT): An Interpretation of Sections 116(c)(3) and 118(b)(4) ofNWPA of 1982 as Amended," High-LevelRadioactive Waste Management: Proceedings of the Second Annual International Conference (La Grange Park, IL: American Nuclear Society and American Society of Civil Engineers), 1555-1560.

Black Elk, Wallace and William L. Lyon (1990), Black Elk: The Sacred Ways of a Lakota (San Francisco: Harper and Row).

242 THE DILEMMA OF SITING A REPOSITORY

Blakeslee, Sandra (1992), "Earthquake Raises Concern About Nuclear Waste Dump," New York Times, July 4, p. 6.

Border, Heather and Clyde Weiss (1994), "Tribe Signs Pact for Temporary Nuclear Waste Dump," Las Vegas Review-Journal, February 5, p. 6B.

Broad, William J. (1990), "A Mountain of Trouble," New York Times Magazine, November 18, pp. 36-39, 80-82.

Broad, William J. (1991), "Experts Clash on Risk at Nuclear Waste Site," New York Times, December 3, p. C2.

Broad, William J. (1992), "Experts Dismiss Flood Threat at Proposed Nuke Dump," New York Times, April 14, p. C4.

Brody, Julie' and Judy Fleishman (1987), Effects of a High-Level Nuclear Waste Repository on Local Communities: A Survey of Texas Panhandle Residents (Austin, TX: Texas Department of Agriculture).

Browne, Malcolm M. (1991), "Modem Alchemists Transmute Nuclear Waste," New York Times, October 29, pp. Cl, Cll.

Bryan, Richard H. (1987), "The Politics and Promises of Nuclear Waste Disposal: The View from Nevada," Environment 29(8): 14-17, 32-38.

Bullard, Robert D. (1983), "Solid Waste Sites and the Houston Black Community," Sociological Inquiry 53, 273-288.

Calabresi, G. and P. Bobbitt (1978), Tragic choices (New York: Norton). Caldwell, Lynton (1989), "A Constitutional Law for the Environment: 20 Years

with NEPA Indicates the Need," Environment, 31(10): 6-11, 25-28. Carle, Remy (1981), "Why France Went Nuclear," Public Power 39(4): 58--60, 82,

85. Cames, S.A., E.D. Copenhaver, J.H. Sorensen, EJ. Soderstrom, J.H. Reed, DJ.

Bjornstad, and E. Peelle (1983), "Incentives and Nuclear Waste Siting: Prospects and Constraints," Energy Systems and Policy 7(4): 324--351.

Carrier, Jim (1993), "Tribe Mulls Nuclear Dump," The Denver Post, April 14, pp. lA, 13 A.

Carter, Luther J. (1987), Nuclear Imperatives and Public Trust: Dealing With Radioactive Waste (Washington, DC: Resources for the Future).

Carter, Luther J. (1988), "Site Specifics" (letter to the editor), Sierra 73 (September/October): 11.

Carter, Luther J. (1989), "Nuclear Waste Policy and Politics," Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy 4 (Fall): 5-18.

Carter, Luther J. (1993), "Ending the Gridlock on Nuclear Waste Storage," Issues in Science and Technology 2 (Fall): 73-79.

Chess, Caron, Billie Jo Hance, and Peter M. Sandman (1988), Improving Dialogue with Communities: A Short Guide for Government Risk Communication (Trenton, NJ: New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection).

REFERENCES 243

Christofferson, J. (1985), History: Federal Nuclear Waste Disposal Program in Paradox Basin, Utah, Contract Report #85-0111 (Salt Lake City, UT: Utah High-Level Nuclear Waste Office).

Church, Foster (1987), "Congress Picked on the Little Guy in Nuke-Dump Selection," Reno Gazette Journal, December 27.

Cohen, Bernard L. (1983), Before It's Too Late: A Scientist's Case for Nuclear Power (New York: Plenum).

Colglazier, E. William (ed.) (1982), The Politics of Nuclear Waste (Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press).

Colglazier, E. William (1989), "The Relation of Equity Issues to Risk Perceptions and Socioeconomic Impacts of a High Level Waste Repository," Paper presented at Waste Management '89, Tucson, AZ, February 27.

Colglazier, E. William, David L. Dungan, and Sheldon J. Reaven (1987), "Value Issues and Stakeholders' Views in Radioactive Waste Management," Paper presented at Waste Management '87, Tucson, AZ, March 3.

Colglazier, E. William and R.B. Langum (1988), "Policy Conflicts in the Process for Siting Nuclear Waste Repositories," Annual Review of Energy 11, 317-357.

Consensus (1991), "The Facility Siting 'Credo': Guidelines for Public Officials," Consensus, January, p. 5.

Cook, Brian J. (1988), "A Note on Procedural Equity," Working paper, Department of Government, Clark University, Worcester, MA.

Cook, Brian J., Jacque L. Emil, and Roger E. Kasperson (1990), "Organizing and Managing Radioactive Waste Disposal as an Experiment," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 9, 339-366.

Cook, Brian J., Jacque L. Emil, and Roger E. Kasperson (1992), Clashing Judgments, Common Fears, Unpublished monograph, Clark University, Worcester, MA.

Coombs, Clyde H. (1964), A Theory of Data (New York: Wiley). Council on Environment.1l Quality (1980), Public Opinion on Environmental

Issues: Results of a National Public Opinion Survey (Washington, D.C.: CEQ). Covello, Vincent T., Peter M. Sandman, and Paul Slovic (1988), Risk

Communication, Risk Statistics, and Risk Comparisons: A Model for Plant Managers (Washington, DC: Chemical Manufacturers Association).

Craig, Paul (1990), Siting a Liquid Hazardous Waste Incinerator: Experience with California's Tanner Act, Case study report, Toxic Substances Research and Training Program, University of California-Davis.

Cropper, Maureen L., Serna K. Aydede, and Paul R. Portney (1991), "Discounting Human Lives," Discussion Paper, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC.

Cummings, Ronald G. (1988), New Mexico's Waste Isolation Pilot Project (WIPP): An Historical Overview, Report submitted to Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office, Carson City, NY.


Cushman, John R. (1993), "U.S. Drops Test Plan at Bomb Waste Site," New York Times, October 22.

Davenport, James R. (1986), "The Law of High-level Nuclear Waste," Tennessee Law Review 53, 481-526.

Davenport, James (1993), "The Federal Structure: Can Congress Commandeer Nevada to Participate in its Federal High-Level Waste Disposal Program?" Virginia Environmental Law Journal 12, 539-571.

Davis, Joseph A. (1988), "The Wasting of Nevada," Sierra 73 (July/August): 30-35.

Department of Energy (DOE) (1978), Report of the Task Force for Review of Nuclear Waste Management (The Deutch Report), (Washington, DC: DOE).

Department of Energy (DOE) (1980), Management of Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste (Washington, DC: DOE).

Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (1984a), "General Guidelines for the Recommendation of Sites for the Nuclear Waste Repositories," Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 960.

Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (1984b), Draft Environmental Assessment. Yucca Mountain. Nevada Research and Development Area (Washington, DC: DOE/RW-OOI2). [Similar reports were published for the other candidate sites.]

Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (1985), Region-to-Area Screening Methodology for the Crystalline Repository Project (Argonne, IL: DOE/CR-l).

Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (1986a), A Multiattribute Utility Analysis of Sites Nominated for Characterization for the First Radioactive-Waste Repository - A DecisionAiding Methodology (Washington, DC: DOE/RW-0074).

Department of Energy (DOE) (1986b), Recommendation by the Secretary of Energy of Candidate Sites for Site Characterization for the First Radioactive Waste Repository (Washington, DC: DOE/S-0048).

Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (1987), OCRWM Mission Plan Amendment (Washington, DC: DOE/RW-I028).

Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (1989), Report to Congress on Reassessment of the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program (Washington, DC: OOE/RW-0247).

Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (1992), DOE's Yucca Mountain Studies (Washington, DC: DOE/RW-0345P).

Department of Energy (DOE) (1993), Draft Policy on Public Involvement (Washington, DC: DOE).

Dixon, Wilfred J. and Frank J. Massey (1957), Introduction to Statistical Analysis, Second Edition (New York: McGraw-Hill).

REFERENCES 245

Dolin, Eric Jay (1990), "The Plasticola Plastics Recycling Plant Case Study," Prepared for the National Workshop on Facility Siting (Phase II), Philadelphia, PA, February 23.

Douglas, Mary and Aaron Wildavsky (1982), Risk and Culture (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).

Downey, Gary L (1985), "Federalism and Nuclear Waste Disposal: The Struggle over Shared Decision Making," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 5, 73-99.

Dreyfus, Daniel A. (1994), "Status of the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program," Presentation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, June 6.

Dudley, W.W. (1990), Unpublished letter from U.S. Geological Survey scientists to the Editor of the New York Times regarding William J. Broad's November 18, 1990 article on Yucca Mountain (U.S.G.S. Open-File Report 91-58, Denver), November 28.

Dunlap, Riley E. (1991), "Public Opinion in the 1980s: Clear Consensus, Ambiguous Commitment," Environment 33(8): 10-15,32-37.

Dunlap, Riley E., Michael E. Kraft, and Eugene A. Rosa (eds.) (1993), Public Reactions to Nuclear Waste: Citizens' Views of Repository Siting (Durham, NC: Duke University Press).

Dunlap, Riley E., Eugene A. Rosa, Rodney K. Baxter, and Robert Cameron Mitchell (1993), "Local Attitudes Toward Siting a High-level Nuclear Waste Repository at Hanford, Washington," in Riley E. Dunlap, Michael E. Kraft, and Eugene A. Rosa (eds.), Public Reactions to Nuclear Waste: Citizens' Views of Repository Siting (Durham, NC: Duke University Press).

Easterling, Douglas (1992), "Fair Rules for Siting a Nuclear-Waste Repository," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 11,442-475.

Easterling, Douglas V. (1993), Siting Strategies to Instill Legitimacy: The Case of High-Level Nuclear Waste, Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, P A.

Easterling, Douglas V. and Howard Kunreuther (1993), "The Vulnerability of the Convention Industry to a High-level Nuclear Waste Repository," in Riley E. Dunlap, Michael E. Kraft, and Eugene A. Rosa (eds.), Public Reactions to Nuclear Waste: Citizens' Views of Repository Siting (Durham, NC: Duke University Press).

Easterling, Douglas V., Vield Morwitz, and Howard Kunreuther, "Forecasting Behavioral Response to a Repository from Stated Intent Data," High-Level Radioactive Waste Management: Proceedings of the Second Annual International Conference (La Grange Park, IL: American Nuclear Society and American Society of Civil Engineers), 1540-1547.

Edelstein, Michael R. (1988), Contaminated Communities: The Social and Psychological Impacts of Residential Toxic Exposure (Boulder, CO: Westview Press).


Elkins, Charles L. (1987), "Risk Communication: Getting Ready for 'Right-toKnow' ," EPA Journal 13(9): 23-26.

Emil, Jacque, Brian Cook, Roger Kasperson, Ortwin Renn, and G. Thompson (1990), Nuclear Waste Management: A Comparative Analysis of Six Countries

(Carson City, NV: Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office, NWPO-SE-034-90). English, Mary (1992), Siting Low-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Facilities:

The Public Policy Dilemma (New York: Quorum Books). Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (1982), Using Compensation and

Incentives When Siting Hazardous Waste Management Facilities (Washington, DC: EPNSW-942).

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (1985), Environmental Standard for the Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel. High Level and Transuranic Wastes (40 CFR 191) (Washington, DC: EPA).

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Science Advisory Board, High-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal Subcommittee (1984), Report on the Review of Proposed Environmental Standard for the Management and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High Level and Transuranic Wastes (40 CFR 191) (Washington, DC: EPNSAB).

Eplan, Leon (1991), Personal communication regarding the construction of the Presidential Highway in Atlanta, December (Atlanta, GA: Commissioner of City Planning).

Erikson, Erik H. (1950), Childhood and Society (New York: Norton). Erikson, Kai (1990), "Toxic Reckoning: Business Faces a New Kind of Fear,"

Harvard Business Review 90(1): 118-126. Erikson, Kai (1994), "Out of Sight, Out of Our Minds," New York Times

Magazine, March 6, pp. 34-41, 50, 63. Erikson, Kai, E. William Colglazier, and Gilbert F. White (1994), "Nuclear

Waste's Human Dimension," Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy 9(3): 91-97.

Esser, James and Joanne Lindoerfer (1989), "Groupthink and the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident: Toward a Quantitative Case Analysis," Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 2, 167-177.

Ewing, T.P. (1990), "Guarantees Near a LandfIll," New York Times, July 8. Fischhoff, Baruch (1985), "Cognitive and Institutional Barriers to Informed

Consent," in M. Gibson (ed.),Risk, Consent, and Air (Totawa, NJ: Rowman and Allenheld).

Fischhoff, Baruch, Paul Slovic, Sarah Lichtenstein, S. Read, and Barbara Combs (1978), "How Safe is Safe Enough? A Psychometric Study of Attitudes Toward Technological Risks and Benefits," Policy Sciences 8, 127-152.

Flynn, James H., William Burns, C.K. Mertz, and Paul Slovic (1992), "Trust as a Determinant of Opposition to a High-Level Radioactive Waste Repository: Analysis of a Structural Model," Risk Analysis 12,417-430.

REFERENCES 247

Flynn, James, James Chalmers, Doug Eu"terling, Roger Kasperson, Howard Kunreuther, c.K. Mertz, Alvin Mushkatel, K. David Pijawka, and Paul Slovic (1995), One Hundred Centuries of Solitude: The Failure of America's HighLevel Radioactive Waste Polfcy and Recommendations for a New Direction (Boulder, CO: Westview Press).

Flynn, James H., Roger Kasperson, Howard Kunreuther, and Paul Slovic (1992), "Time to Rethink Nuclear Waste Storage," Issues in Science and Technology 1 (Summer): 42-48.

Flynn, James H., C.K. Mertz, and Paul Slovic (1991a), The 1991 Nevada State Telephone Survey: Key Findings (Carson City, NY: Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office, NWPO-SE-036-91).

Flynn, James H., C.K. Mertz, and Paul Slovic (1991b), The August 1991 Nevada State Telephone Survey: Key Findings (Carson City, NV: Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office).

Flynn, James H., C.K. Mertz, and Paul Slovic (1993), The Spring 1993 Nevada State Telephone Survey: Key Findings (Carson City, NV: Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office).

Flynn, James H., Paul Slovic, and C.K. Mertz (1993a), "The Nevada Initiative: A Risk Communications Fiasco," Risk Analysis l3, 497-502.

Flynn, James H., Paul Slovic, and C.K. Mertz (1993b), "Decidedly Different: Expert and Public Views of a Radioactive Waste Repository," Risk Analysis 13, 643-648.

Flynn, James H., Paul Slovic, c.K. Mertz, and James Toma (1990), Evaluations of Yucca Mountain: Survey Findings about Attitudes. Opinions and Evaluations of Nuclear Waste Disposal and Yucca Mountain, Nevada (Carson City, NV: Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office).

Fowler, Catherine S., Marybeth Hamby, Elmer Rusco, and Mary Rusco (1990), Native Americans and Yucca Mountain: A Summary Report (Carson City, NY: Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office).

Fradkin, Philip L. (1989), Fallout: An American Nuclear Tragedy (Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press).

Freudenburg, William R. (1990), "Risk and Recreancy: Weber, the Division of Labor, and the Rationality of Risk Perceptions," Paper presented at 12th Annual Department of Energy Conference on Low-Level Radioactive Waste, Chicago, IL, August.

Furby, Lita, Robin Gregory, Paul Slovic, and Baruch Fischhoff (1988), "Electrical Power Transmission Lines, Property Values, and Compensation," Journal of Environmental Management 27,69-83.

Galinsky, Victor (1985), VIA Common-sense Approach to Nuclear Waste," Technology Review 88 (January): 14-15.


Galpin, Floyd L. and Raymond L. Clark (1991), "EPA's Development of Environmental Standards for High-Level and Transuranic Waste," High-Level Radioactive Waste Management: Proceedings of the Second Annual International Conference (La Grange Park, IL: American Nuclear Society and American Society of Civil Engineers), 1-6.

General Accounting Office (GAO) (1991), Nuclear Waste: DOE Expenditures on the Yucca Mountain Project (Washington, DC: GAOrr-RCED-91-37).

General Accounting Office (GAO) (1993), Nuclear Waste: Yucca Mountain Project Behind Schedule and Facing Major Scientific Uncertainties (Washington, DC: GAO/f-RCED-93-124).

German, Jeff (1991), "Pro-Nuke Bullies Batter State Commissioners," Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 20.

German, Jeff (1993), "Senate Nukes Yucca Resolution," Las Vegas Sun, July 2, p. 3A.

Gole, Barbara S. (1990), "Achieving Public Confidence in the Siting of Environmentally Sensitive Facilities," Paper presented at the Fourth National Conference on Environmental Issues: Solid Waste Management," January 16.

Gomez, Leo S., Hank: Jenkins-Smith, and Kenneth W. Miller (1992), "Changes in Risk Perception Over Time," Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Chicago, IL, February 6.

Graham, Robert (1992), Testimony to the full Senate on the Energy Policy Act, Congressional Record: Senate, October 8, pp. S17,569-S17,590.

Greber, M.A. (1992), "Public Perceptions of Nuclear Waste Management in Canada," Hazardous Materials/Wastes: Social Aspects of Facility Planning and Management (Conference Proceedings), (Winnipeg, Manitoba: The Institute for Social Impact Assessment), 277-283.

Gregory, Robin, Ralph Keeney, and Detlof von Winterfeldt (1992), "Adapting the Environmental Impact Statement Process to Inform Decision Makers," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 11, 58-75.

Gregory, Robin, Howard Kunreuther, Douglas Easterling, and Ken Richards (1991), "Incentives Policies to Site Hazardous Facilities," Risk Analysis 11, 667-675.

Hall, Joel T. (1992), Letter to James D. Watkins regarding biases in DOE's siteevaluation of Yucca Mountain, April 22.

Headley, Ron, Ray Vaughan, Kathy Roach, and Jim Weiss (1990), 'Low-Level' Radioactive Waste: The Siting Process in New York State, Second Edition (Norwich, NY: Partners' Press).

Heiman, Michael (1990), "Using Public Authorities to Site Hazardous Waste Management Facilities: Problems and Prospects," Policy Studies Journal 18, 974-985.

REFERENCES 249

Hendrickson, Tom A. (1992), Letter to Joel T. Hall responding to allegations of misconduct in DOE's site-evaluation of Yucca Mountain, May 28.

HLW Focus, The (1994), "DOE's Answer to Spent Fuel Storage: On Site with Multi-Purpose Canisters," The HLW Focus, May 6, pp. 12-15.

Hoaglun, Brad (1994), Invited review of an earlier draft of The Dilemma of Siting a Nuclear Waste Repository, February 18 (Washington, DC: Office of the Nuclear Waste Negotiator).

Hughes, Lance (1992), Letter to the editor regarding a recommendation for voluntary siting, Issues in Science and Technology 7 (Fall): 19-20.

ICMA (1992), "Siting Solid Waste Facilities: Seven Case Studies," Report prepared by ICMA MIS for the Environmental Protection Agency.

Impact Assessment, Inc. (lAI) (1993), Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waste Repository Program: Stage one Telephone Survey Results, Report prepared for the Clark County Department of Comprehensive Planning (Las Vegas, NY: Impact Assessment, Inc.).

Inter-Agency Review Group (IRG) on Nuclear Management (1979), Report to the President (Washington, DC: DOEffID-2944Z).

Isaacs, Thomas (1990), "The Institutional Dimensions of Siting Nuclear Waste Disposal Facilities," Paper presented at Hazardous MaterialsIWastes: Social Aspects of Facility Planning and Management, Toronto, October 1.

Jacob, Gerald (1990), Site Unseen: The Politics of SUing a Nuclear Waste Repository (Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press).

Jenkins-Smith, Hank C., Jennifer L. Espey, Amelia A. Rouse, and Douglas H. Molund (1991), Perceptions of Risk in the Management of Nuclear Wastes: Mapping Elite and Mass Beliefs and Attitudes (Albuquerque, NM: Sandia National Laboratories, SAND90-7002).

Jernegan, Natasha (1991), "Adventures in Siting: In Your Face, Bill Ruckelshaus," Everyone's Backyard (Newsletter of Center for Environmental Justice and Citizen's Clearinghouse for Hazardous Wastes), June, pp. 19-20.

Kasperson, Roger (1986), "Six Propositions on Public Participation and Their Relevance for Risk Communication," Risk Analysis 6, 275-281.

Kasperson, Roger (1990), "Social Realities in High-Level Radioactive Waste Management and Their Policy Implications," Paper presented at First Annual International High Level Radioactive Waste Management Conference, Las Vegas, NY, April 9.

Kasperson, Roger, Dominic Golding, and Seth Tuler (1992), "Social Distrust as a Factor in Siting Hazardous Facilities and Communicating Risks," Journal of Social Issues 48(4): 161-167.

Kasperson, Roger E. and Jeanne X. Kasperson (eds.) (1987), Nuclear Risk Analysis in Comparative Perspective: The Impacts of Large-Scare Risk Analysis in Five Countries, Risks and Hazards series, 4 (Boston: Allen and Unwin).


Kasperson, Roger E. and Barry L. Rubin (1983), "Siting a Radioactive Waste Repository: What Role for Equity," in Roger E. Kasperson (ed.), Equity Issues in Radioactive Waste Management (Cambridge, MA: Oegleschlager, GUlln, and Rain).

Keeney, Ralph L. (1987), "An Analysis of the Portfolio of Sites to Characterize

for Selecting a Nuclear Repository," Risk Analysis 7, 195-218. Keeney, Ralph L. and Detlof von Winterfeldt (1994), "Managing Nuclear Waste

from Power Plants," Risk Analysis 14, 107-130. Kerr, John (1990), "Repository's Effects on Vegas's Economy, Image Raise

Concerns," Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 26. Kirk, Lisa A. (1991), "Nuke Panel Strips State's Power," Las Vegas Review

Journal, June 13, p. lA. Kleindorfer, Paul R., Marc Knez, Howard Kunreuther, and Douglas MacLean

(1988), Valuation and Assessment of Equity in the Siting of a Nuclear Waste Repository (Carson City, NY: Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office).

Kneese, Allen V., Shaul Ben-David, David Brookshire, William Schulze, and David Boldt (1983), "Economic Issues in the Legacy Problem," in Roger E. Kasperson (ed), Equity Issues in Radioactive Waste Management (Cambridge, MA: Oegleschlager, Gunn, and Rain).

Knox, Margaret L. (1993), "Their Mother's Keepers," Sierra 78 (March/April): 50-57, 81-84.

Knudson, John (1991), Personal communication regarding the siting of an incinerator in Minneapolis, October (Minneapolis, MN: Hennepin County Public Affairs Department).

Koenig, David (1988), "House Approves Bill to Reduce Nevada's Nuclear Waste Funds," Las Vegas Review-Journal, July 1.

Koenig, David (1989), "Secretary-Designate Discusses Nuke Issue," Las Vegas Review-Journal, February 23, p. IA.

Kraft, Michael E. (1988), "Evaluating Technology Through Public Participation: The Nuclear Waste Disposal Controversy," in Michael E. Kraft and Norman J. Vig (eds.), Technology and Politics (Durham, NC: Duke University Press).

Kraft, Michael E. (1992), "Technology, Analysis, and Policy Leadership: Congress and Radioactive Waste," in Gary C. Bryner (ed.), Science, Technology, and Politics: Policy Analysis in Congress (Boulder, CO: Westview Press).

Kraft, Michael E. and Bruce B. Clary (1993), "Public Testimony in Nuclear Waste Repository Hearings: A Content Analysis," in Riley E. Dunlap, Michael E. Kraft, and Eugene A. Rosa (eds.), Public Reactions to Nuclear Waste: Citizens' Views of Repository Siting (Durham, NC: Duke University Press).

Krannich, Richard S. and Ron L. Little (1989), "Rural Community Residents' Views Toward Nuclear Waste Repository Siting in Nevada," Paper presented at the annual meetings of the American Association for Advancement of Science, San Francisco, CA, January 14-19.

REFERENCES 251

Krannich, Richard S., Ron L. Little, Alvin Mushkatel, and K. David Pijawka (1991), Southern Nevada Residents' Views About the Yucca Mountain HighLevel Nuclear Waste Repository and Related Issues: A Comparative Analysis of Urban and Rural Survey Data (Carson City, NY: Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office, NWPO-SE-038-91).

Kraus, Nancy, Torbjom Malmfors, and Paul Slovic (1992), "Intuitive Toxicology: Expert and Lay Judgments of Chemical Risks," Risk Analysis 12,215-232.

Krauss, Clifford (1992a), "House Approves Energy Legislation," New York Times, October 6, p. Cl.

Krauss, Clifford (1992b), "Energy Bill is Limited, But Offers a Beginning," New York Times, October 9, p. All.

Kunreuther, Howard and Douglas Easterling (1990), "Are Risk-benefit Trade-offs Possible in Siting Hazardous Facilities?" American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings 80 (May): 252-256.

Kunreuther, Howard and Douglas Easterling (1992), "Gaining Acceptance for Noxious Facilities with Economic Incentives," in Daniel Bromley and Kathleen Segerson (eds.), The Social Response to Environmental Risk (Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers).

Kunreuther, Howard, Douglas V. Easterling, William Desvousges, and Paul Slovic (1990), "Public Attitudes Toward Siting a High Level Nuclear Waste Repository in Nevada," Risk Analysis 10, 469-484.

Kunreuther, Howard, Kevin Fitzgerald, and Thomas D. Aarts (1993), "Siting Noxious Facilities: A Test of the Facility Siting Credo," Risk Analysis 13, 301-318.

Kunreuther, Howard, Paul Kleindorfer. Peter J. Knez, and Rudy Yaksick (1987), "A Compensation Mechanism for Siting Noxious Facilities: Theory and Experimental Design," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 14, 371-383.

Kunreuther, Howard, John Lathrop, and Joanne Linnerooth (1982), "A Descriptive Model of Choice for Siting Facilities," Behavioral Science 27, 281-297.

Kunreuther, Howard and Paul Portney (1991), "Wheel of Fortune: A Lottery Auction Mechanism for the Siting of Noxious Facilities," Journal of Environmental Engineering 3 (December): 125-132.

Kunreuther, Howard, Paul Slovic, Joanne Nigg, and William Desvousges (1987), Yucca Mountain Socioeconomic Project Final Report: Risk Perception Telephone Survey (Carson City, NY: Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office).

Kwitny, Jonathan (1985), "Geologist Opposes One Potential Site for Nuclear Dump," Wall Street Journal, February 14, p. 22.

Laird, Frank N. (1989), "The Decline of Deference: The Political Context of Risk Communication," Risk Analysis 9, 543-550.

Lake, Robert W. (ed.) (1987), Resolving Locational Conflict (New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research).


Lake Michigan Federation (1993), "High-Level Nuclear Waste Storage on Lake Michigan," Lake Michigan Federation Update, J u1y 30.

Langer, Gary (1989), "Nuclear Accident Likely, 50% Say," The Arizona Republic, February 28, pp. AI-A2.

Las Vegas Review-Journal (1988), "Red Herring Issue in Nuke Dump Fight" (Editorial), Las Vegas Review-Journal, July 15.

Las Vegas Review-Journal (1990), "Anti-Dump Feelings Run Deep in Nevada" (Editorial), Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 30.

Las Vegas Review-Journal (1991), "States' Rights at Issue in Nuclear Dump Fight" (Editorial), Las Vegas Review-Journal, June 16.

Las Vegas Review-Journal (1994), "Minnesota OKs PIan for Nuclear Wastes," Las Vegas Review-Journal, May 9.

Las Vegas Sun (1991), "Media Onslaught to Start in Nuclear Opinion Battle," Las Vegas Sun, September 13.

Latir Energy Consultants (1994a), Summary Report on National Program Developments. April 1994 (Santa Fe, NM: Latir Energy Consu1tants).

Latir Energy Consultants (1994b), Report to the Technical Review Committee on Nuclear Waste Program Developments. June 1994 (Santa Fe, NM: Latir Energy Consultants).

Laws, David and Lawrence Susskind (1991), "Changing Perspectives on the Facility Siting Process," Maine Policy Review, December, pp. 29-41.

Leavitt, Michael (1993), Policy Statement by Governor Leavitt on Monitored Retrievable Storage (Salt Lake City, UT: Office of Governor). Lee, Gary (1994), "Callers Flood Radiation-Test Hot Lines," Washington Post, January 10, pp. AI-A6.

Lemons, John, Charles Malone, and Bruce Piasecki (1989), "America's HighLevel Nuclear Waste Repository: A Case Study of Environmental Science and Public Policy," International Journal of Environmental Studies 34, 25-42.

Lenssen, Nicholas (1992), "Confronting Nuclear Waste," in Lester R. Brown et al. (eds.), State of the World. 1992 (New York: Norton).

Leroy, David H. (1991a), "Moving Beyond the Headlines: Negotiated Nuclear Facility Siting in the 1990's," Speech to the Second Annual International High Level Radioactive Waste Management Conference, Las Vegas, NY, April 30.

Leroy, David H. (1991b), "Federalism on Your Terms: An Invitation for Dialogue, Government to Government, II Speech to the National Congress of American Indians, San Francisco, CA, December 4.

Leroy, David H. (1992a), "The Challenge of Beginning: Questions and Answers About Negotiated Nuclear Facility Siting in the 1990's," Speech to the Third Annual International High Level Radioactive Waste Management Conference, Las Vegas, NY, April 13.

Leroy, David H. (1992b), Letter to Dan Silver of Clinton Transition Temn updating the Nuclear Waste Negotiator program, December 16.

REFERENCES 253

Leroy, David H. (1992c), Letter to Senator Bennett Johnston refuting Secretary Watkins' assessment of the success of the Nuclear Waste Negotiator program, Dec.ember 24.

Lindell, Marc K. and Timothy C. Earle (1983), "How Close is Close Enough: Public Perceptions of the Risk of Industrial Facilities," Risk Analysis 3, 245-253.

Liu, Jin Tan and V. Kerry Smith (1991), "Risk Communication and Attitude Change: Taiwan's Experience," Resources 102, 14-17.

Lober, Douglas J. (1993), "Beyond Self-interest: A Model of Public Attitudes toward Waste Facility Siting," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 36, 345-363.

Lansberry, Bob (1989a), "A Wild 'Night of Rage'," Rochester Times-Union, October 27, pp. lA, 12A.

Lansberry, Bob (1989b), "Risk of Disorder at Waste Hearing Unnerves Hornell," Rochester Times-Union, November 2, pp. lA, 12A.

Lonsberry, Bob (1989c), "Protesters, Police Winners in Allegheny Confrontation," Rochester Times-Union, December 14, pp. lA, lOA.

Lonsberry, Bob (1990a), "New Kodak Home Incentives," Rochester Times-Union, April 12, p. IA.

Lansberry, Bob (1990b), "New State Rules Leave Siting Group Uncertain," Rochester Times-Union, July 20, p. lB.

Loux, Robert R. (1989a), "A View on Siting Issue From Nevada," Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy 4 (Fall): 29-31.

Loux, Robert R. (1989b), "Deadlock Over Yucca Mountain Repository can be Resolved," Las Vegas Review-Journal, November 3, p. IA.

Loux, Robert R. (1994), Statement before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power, August 3.

Lyons, Oren (1980), "An Iroquois Perspective," in C. Vecsey and R. Venables (eds.), American Indian Environments: Ecological Issues in Native American History (Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press).

M:'lcCrimmon, Kenneth R., William T. Stanbury, and Donald A. Wehrung (1980), "Real Money Lotteries: A Study of Ideal Risk, Context Effects, and Simple Processes," in T.S. Wallsten (ed.), Cognitive Processes in Choice and Decision Behavior (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum).

M:'lcLean, Douglas. (1983), "Radioactive Wastes: A problem of Morality Between Generations," in R. Kasperson (ed.), Equity Issues in Radioactive Waste Management (Cambridge, MA: OegJeschlager, Gunn, and Hain).

Magat, Wesley and W. Kip Viscusi (1992), Informational Approaches to Regulation (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press).

M:'llone, Charles R. (1991), "High-Level Nuclear Waste Disposal: A Perspective on Technocracy and Democracy," Growth and Change 22(2): 69-74.


Manning. Mary (1989), "Nevada Officials Rip DOE's Proposed Lawsuit," Las Vegas Sun, November 30. pp. lB,2B.

Manning, Mary (1991), "Nevadans Angered by Threat to States' Rights," Las Vegas Sun, May 24.

Marshall, Eliot (1991), "The Geopolitics of Nuclear Waste," Science 251, 864-867. Maslow, Abraham A. (1954), Motivation and Personality (New York: Harper). Matthiessen, Peter (1992), In the Spirit of Crazy Horse (New York: Penguin

Books). May, John (1989), The Greenpeace Book of the Nuclear Age (New York:

Pantheon Books). Maynard, Joyce (1986), "The Story of a Town," New York Times Magazine, May

11. McCabe, Amy and Michael Fitzgerald (1992), "Prospects for Monitored

Retrievable Storage of High-Level Nuclear Waste," Policy Studies Review 10(4): 167-179.

McClelland, Gary H. and William D. Schulze (1991), "The Disparity Between Willingness-to-pay and Willingness-to-accept as a Framing Effect," In D.R. Brown and J.E.K. Smith (eds.), Frontiers in Mathematical Psychology (New York: Springer-Verlag).

McClelland, Gary H., William D. Schulze, and Brian Hurd (1990), "The Effect of Risk Beliefs on Property Values: A Case Study of a Hazardous Waste Site," Risk Analysis 10, 485-497.

McDaniels, Timothy L., Mark S. Kamlet, and Gregory W. Fisher (1992), "Risk Perception and the Value of Safety," Risk Analysis 12,495-503.

McGlennon, J.(1983), "The Alberta Experience .. , Hazardous Wastes? Maybe in My Backyard," The Environmental Forum 2, 23-25.

McKay, Brian and Harry Swainston (1989), Letter from Nevada Attorney General's office to the Governor concerning the implications of Nevada's notice of disapproval, November 1.

McKinnon, Shawn (1990), "Poll Shows Majority Oppose Further Underground Testing," Las Vegas RevieW-Journal, October 21.

McQuaid-Cook, J. (1991), "Case Study: Siting a Fully Integmted Hazardous Waste Management Facility with Incinerator and LandfIll," Innovative Approaches to Siting Waste Management Facilities (Montebello, Quebec: Auberge Montevilla).

Merkhofer, Miley W. and Ralph L. Keeney (1987), "A Multiattribute Utility Analysis of Alternative Sites for the Disposal of Nuclear Waste," Risk Analysis 7, 173-194.

Metlay, Dan (1978), "History and Interpretation of Radioactive Waste Management in the United States," in W. Bishop et al. (eds.), Essays on Issues Relevant to the Regulation of Radioactive Waste Management (Washington, DC: Nuclear Regulatory Commission).

REFERENCES 255

Metz, William C. (1994), "Potential Negative Impacts of Nuclear Activities on Local Economies," Risk Analysis 14, 763-770.

Metz, W.C., M. Morey, and J. Lowry (1990). "Hedonic Price Theory: Concept and Applications," High-Level Radioactive Waste Management: Proceedings of the First Annual International Conference (La Grange Park, IL: American Nuclear Society and American Society of Civil Engineers).

Montgomery, Lori (1994a), "Dangerous Radioactive Wastes Ignite States' Complaints," Las Vegas Review-Journal, March 20, p. 20A.

Montgomery, Lori (1994b). "States Sue U.S. Over Removal of Nuke Wastes," Las Vegas Review-Journal, June 21, pp. 1A,2A.

Moore Kimberly C. (1994), "Cloud Looms Over Nevada's Nuclear Future," Las Vegas Review-Journal/Sun, February 6, pp. lD, 7D, 8D.

Morrell, David and Christopher Magorian (1982), Siting Hazardous Waste Facilities: Local Opposition and the Myth of Preemption (Cambridge, MA: Ballinger).

Morrison, Jane Ann (1991), "Gamers Weren't Approached to Fund Anti-Nuke Dump Ads," Las Vegas Review-Journal, September 25.

Mountain West (1989), An Interim Report on the State of Nevada Socioeconomic Studies (Las Vegas, NY: Mountain West).

Mufson, M. (1982), "Three Mile Island: Psychological Effects of a Nuclear Accident and Mass Media Coverage," in American Psychiatric Association, Psychosocial Aspects of Nuclear Developments (Washington, DC: APA).

Murray, R.L. (1982), Understanding Radioactive Waste (Richland, WA: Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratory).

Nathwani, I.S. (1993), "The Unintended Social Risks of Nuclear Waste Disposal," Risk Abstracts, December.

National Academy of Sciences (NAS) (1957), The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land, Report of the Committee on Waste Disposal of the Division of Earth Sciences (Washington, DC: NAS-NRC Pub. 519).

National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), Nuclear Waste Program Office (1994), Report and Recommendations of the NARUC Dialogue on Spent Fuel Management (Washington, DC: NARUC).

National Research Council, Board on Radioactive Waste Management (1985), Letter Report to Mr. Ben Rusche, April 26.

National Research Council, Board on Radioactive Waste Management (1986), Letter Report to Mr. Ben Rusche, AprilW.

National Research Council, Board on Radioactive Waste Management (1990), Rethinking High-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal (Washington, DC: National Academy Press).

Nealey, S. and I. Herbert (1983), "Public Attitudes Toward Radioactive Wastes," in C. Walker, L. Gould, and Eo Woodhouse (eds.), Too Hot to Handle?: Social and Policy Issues in the Management of Radioactive Wastes (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press).


Nevada State Engineer (1992), Ruling in the Matter of Application 52338 Filed to Appropriate the Wasters from an Underground Source within the Forty Mile Canyon-Jackass Flats Groundwater Basin (Carson City, NY: Office of the State Engineer).

New York State Legislative Commission on Toxic Substances and Hazardous Wastes

(1987), Hazardous Waste Facility Siting: A National Survey (Albany, NY: NYSLCTSHW).

New York Times (1987), "Energy Official to Yield on Waste Storage Plan," New York Times, February 12, p. 15.

Norris, Mike (1988), "Nuke Dump Study Funding Bid Fails: Scientists Say State Won't be Able to Check Federal Data," Reno Gazette Journal, June 15, pp. IC, 2C.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1983), Draft Decision on the Confidence RuleMaking on the Storage and Disposal of Nuclear Waste (Washington, DC: NRC).

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) (1990a), First Report to the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Secretary of Energy, March 1990 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office).

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) (1990b), Second Report to the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Secretary of Energy, November 1990 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office).

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NW1RB) (1991a), Third Report to the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Secretary of Energy, May 1991 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office).

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) (1991b), Fourth Report to the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Secretary of Energy, December 1991 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office).

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) (1992a), Fifth Report to the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Secretary of Energy, June 1992 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office).

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) (l992b), Sixth Report to the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Secretary of Energy, December 1992 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office).

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) (1993a), Special Report to Congress and the Secretary of Energy, March 1993 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office).

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) (1993b), Underground Exploration and Testing at Yucca Mountain: Report to Congress and the Secretary of Energy, October 1993 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office).

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB) (1994), Letter Report to Congress and the Secretary of Energy, February 1994 (Arlington, V A: NW1RB).

REFERENCES 257

Nussbaum, Paul (1987), "Recall Campaign Rolling Against Arizona Governor," Philadelphia Inquirer, October 21, pp. lA, 8A.

Nussbaum, Paul (1988), "A Mountain as Nuclear Waste Site," Philadelphia Inquirer, July 11, pp. IA,4A.

Office of Nuclear Waste Negotiator (1992),1991 Annual Report to Congress, Office of the United States Nuclear Waste Negotiator, Boise ID, March 1992.

Office of Nuclear Waste Negotiator (1993),1992 Annual Report to Congress, Office of the United States Nuclear Waste Negotiator, Boise ID, January 1993.

Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) (1991), Complex Clean-up: The Environmental Legacy of Nuclear Weapons Production (Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office).

O'Hare, Michael, Lawrence Bacow, and Debra Sanderson (1983), Facility Siting and Public Opposition (New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold).

O'Hare, Michael and Debra Sanderson (1993), "Facility Siting and Compensation: Lessons from the Massachusetts Experience," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 12, 364-376.

Oklahoman (1992), "Poncas Given Nuclear Waste Study Grant," Saturday Oklahoman and Times, September 19, p. 7.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Nuclear Energy Agency (OECD) (1994), Background document for the Workshop on the Environmental and Ethical Aspects of Long-Lived Radioactive Waste Disposal, May 17, NEA/R WM/DOC(94) 1.

Otway, Harry (1987), "Experts, Risk Communication, and Democracy," Risk Analysis 7, 125-129.

Papinchak, Steve and Laum Wingard (1990), "Poll Shows Strong Opposition to Dump," Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 21, pp. lA, lOA-12A.

Peelle, Elizabeth (1987), "The MRS Task Force: Economic and Noneconomic Incentives for Local Public Acceptance of a Proposed Nuclear Waste Packaging and Storage Facility," in R.C. Post (ed.), Waste Management 87 (Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona).

Peelle, Elizabeth and R. Ellis (1987), "Hazardous Waste Management Outlook: Are There Ways Out of the 'Not-in-My-Backyard' Impasse?" Forumfor Applied Research and Public Policy 2 (Fall): 68-88.

Petterson, John S. (1992), "Remedying Fundamental Flaws in the Nation's Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program," Paper presented to the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board Task Force on Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, Las Vegas, NY, May 1992.

Pijawka, David and Alvin H. Mushkatel (1991/1992), "Public Opposition to the Siting of the High Level Nuclear Waste Repository: The Importance of Trust," Policy Studies Review 10(4): 180-194.

Piller, Charles (1991), The Fail-Safe Society (New York: Basic Books).


Popper, Frank (1983), "LP/HC and LULUs: The Political Uses of Risk Analysis in Land-Use Planning," Risk Analysis 3, 255-263.

Rabe, Barry G. (1994), Beyond NIMBY: Hazardous Waste Siting in Canada and the United States (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution).

Rad Waste Update (1985), "Council Provides Technical Expertise to Review Board,"

Rad Waste Update (Publication of Wisconsin Radioactive Review Board, Madison), 1 (Spring): 1.

Radelat, Ana (1992), "Trading Away Their Future: Will the Mescalero Apaches Share Their Land with Radioactive Waste?" Public Citizen 13(1): 16-21.

Radioactive Exchange, The (1992a), "House Passes Energy Legislation as Senate Agrees to Cloture Vote," The Radioactive Exchange, October 8, pp. 1-3.

Radioactive Exchange, The (1992b), "House Approves WIPP Land Bill, with Senate Set for Last-Day Vote," The Radioactive Exchange, October 8, pp. 1, 15.

Ralston, Jon (1988), "Ad Ridicules Hecht on Nuke Dump," Las Vegas ReviewJournal, October 15, p. 3B.

Ratick, Samuel and A. White (1988), "A Risk Sharing Model for Locating Noxious Facilities," Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 15, 166-179.

Raufer, Roger K. (1988), "Environmental Risk Management: Lessons from Philadelphia," Paper presented at PARSS Seminar, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, November 9.

Rawls, John (1971), A Theory of Justice (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press). Rayner, Steve and Robin Cantor (1987), "How Fair is Safe Enough? The Cultural

Approach to Societal Technology Choice," Risk Analysis 7, 3-13. Rennick, Paul H. and R.L. GreyeU (1990), Opting for Cooperation: A Voluntary

Approach to Siting a Low-level Radioactive Waste Facility (Ottawa, Ontario: Siting Task Force on Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management/Energy, Mines and Resources Canada).

Rhodes Jr., Joseph (1990), "Nuclear Power: Waste Disposal, New Reactor Technology, Pyramids Underground," Paper presented at the 102nd Annual Meeting of National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, Orlando Florida, November 13.

Ristoratore, M. (1985), "Siting Toxic Waste Disposal Facilities in Canada and the United States," Policy Studies Journal 14, 140-149.

Roberts, Barbara (1994), Letter to Secretary of Energy O'Leary opposing the siting of an MRS in Oregon, March 15.

Robinson, Marshall (1993), "The Ford Foundation: Sowing the Seeds of a Revolution," Environment 35(3): 10-15, 38-41.

Rogers, Keith (1991a), "Governor Rips DOE, Scientists Over Nuke Dump Site Issues," Las Vegas Review-Journal, April 30, pp. 1B, 6B.

Rogers, Keith (1991b), "Miller Predicts Problems if Officials Pursue Nuke Bid," Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 17, pp. lA, 9A.

REFERENCES 259

Rogers, Keith (1992), "Geologist: Quake Prohibits Nuke Dump," Las Vegas ReviewJournal, July 3, pp. lA, 4A, 5A.

Rogers, Keith (1993), "GAO Probe Set on Nuke Dump Plans," Las Vegas ReviewJournal, January 12, pp. lA, 2A.

Rogers, R. R. (1980), "On Emotional Responses to Nuclear Issues and Terrorism," The Psychiatric Journal of the University of Ottawa 3 (September): 147-152.

Rosa, Eugene A. and William R. Freudenburg (1993), "The Historical Development of Public Reactions to Nuclear Power: Implications for Nuclear Waste Policy," in Riley E. Dunlap, Michael E. Kraft, and Eugene A. Rosa (eds.), Public Reactions to Nuclear Waste: Citizens' Views of Repository Siting (Durham, NC: Duke University Press).

Rothman, S. and S. Lichter (1985), "Elites in Conflict: Nuclear Energy, Ideology, and the Perception of Risk," Journal of Contemporary Studies 8(3): 23-44.

Rusche, Ben C. (1987), Remarks before the National Research Council Committee on Risk Perception and Communication, Washington, DC, July 23.

Russell, Dick (1989), "Environmental Racism," The Amicus Journal 11 (Spring): 22-32.

Rydell, Nils (1992), "Swedish Experience in Spent Fuel Research: A Reviewer's Perspective," Nuclear Waste Management Review Work: Part of the Decision Making Process. Proceedings from a Symposium in Connection with the 10-Year Anniversary of the Swedish National Board for Spent Nuclear Fuel. Stockholm, Sweden. September 25-26,1991 (Stockholm: Statens Kmnsbransle Naman), 17-22.

Salpukas, Agis (1993), "U.S. Seeks Help in Finding Site for Nuclear Waste," New York Times, April 13, p. A9.

Sandman, Peter M. (1986), "Getting to Maybe: Some Communications Aspects of Siting Hazardous Waste Facilities," Seton Hall Legislative Journal 9, 437-465.

Scharf, Ron (1991), "NYC Strives for 'Fairness' in Siting," Consensus, January, pp. 1,8.

Schmeidler, Emilie and Peter M. Sandman (1988), Getting to Maybe: Negotiation in Hazardous Waste Facility Siting, Environmental Communication Research Program, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ.

Schneider, Keith (1988a), "Operators Got Millions in Bonuses Despite Hazards at Atom Plants," New York Times, October 26, pp. AI, B9.

Schneider, Keith (1988b), "Defects in Nuclear Arms Industry Minimized in Early Reagan Years," New York Times, November 6, pp. AI, B12.

Schneider, Keith (1992), "Decision is Expected to Ease the Pressure on St.'ltes," New York Times, June 20, p. 10.

Schumacher, Elouise and Jack Broom (1986), "Enthusiasm Far From Unanimous in Tri-Cities Poll," Seattle Times, July 31, p. A3.


Secretary of Energy Advisory Board Task Force on Radioactive Waste Management (1993), Earning Public Trust and Confidence: Requisites for Managing Radioactive Waste, June 1993 (Washington, DC: Secretary of Energy Advisory Board Task Force).

Shapiro, Fred C. (1988), itA Reporter at Large: Yucca Mountain," New Yorker, May 23, pp 61-67.

Shrader-Frechette, K.S. (1993), Burying Uncertainty: Risk and the Case Against Geologic Disposal of Nuclear Waste (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press).

Sigmon, E. Brent (1987), "Achieving a Negotiated Compensation Agreement in Siting: The MRS Case," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 6, 170-179.

Simon, Herbert A. (1955), "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," Quarterly Journal of Economics 69 (February): 99-118.

Simon, R. (1990), "Yes, in My Backyard," Forbes 146, 72. Slovic, Paul (1987), "Perception of Risk," Science 236, 280-285. Slovic, Paul, Baruch Fischhoff, and Sarah Lichtenstein (1982), "Why Study Risk

Perception?" Risk Analysis 2, 83-93. Slovic, Paul, James Flynn, and Robin Gregory (1994), "Stigma Happens: Social

Problems in the Siting of Nuclear Waste Facilities," Risk Analysis 14,773-777. Slovic, Paul, Mark Layman, and James H. Flynn (1990), What Comes to Mind When

You Hear the Words 'Nuclear Waste Repository'?: A Study of 10,000 Images (Carson City, NY: Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office).

Slovic, Paul, Mark Layman, and James H. Flynn (1991), "Risk Perception, Trust, and Nuclear Waste: Lessons from Yucca Mountain," Environment 33(3): 6-11, 28-30.

Slovic, Paul, Mark Layman, Nancy Kraus, James Flynn, James Chalmers, and Gail Gesell (1991), "Perceived Risk, Stigma, and Potential Economic Impacts of a High-Level Nuclear Waste Repository in Nevada," Risk Analysis 11,683-696.

Smothers, Ronald (1991), "North Carolina Faces Loss of U.S. Aid for Cleanup," New York Times, March 12, p. A20.

Stallings, Richard (1994), "Strategies for Siting an MRS Facility in the United States," Presentation to Workshop on Siting Radioactive-Waste Facilities, Center for Risk Management and Decision Processes, Wharton School, Philadelphia, PA, January 6.

Starbuck, William and Frances Milliken (1988), "Challenger: Fine-Tuning the Odds Until Something Breaks," Journal of Management Studies 25, 319-340.

Stillinger, Constance A., Michael Epelbaum, Dacher Keltner, and Lee Ross (1989), "The 'Reactive Devaluation' Barrier to Conflict Resolution," Journal of Personf:llity and Social Psychology.

Sugai, Wayne H. (1987), Nuclear Power and Ratepayer Protest: The Washington Public Power Supply System Crisis (Boulder, CO: Westview Press).

REFERENCES 261

Sullivan, Mike (1992), Letter to Fremont County Commissioners refusing to allow them to proceed with the siting of an MRS, August 21.

Susskind, Lawrence and Jeffrey Cruikshank (1987), Breaking the Impasse: Consensual Approaches to Resolving Public Disputes (New York: Basic Books).

Svenson, O. and G. Karlsson (1989), "Decision-Making, Time Horizons, and Risk in the Very Long-Term Perspective," Risk Analysis 9, 385-400.

Swainston, Harry W. (1991), "The Characterization of Yucca Mountain: The Status of the Controversy," Federal Facilities Environmental Journal, Summer, 151-160.

Terrell, Robert, Robert Philpott, Stephen L. Smith, and Jeffrey Gibson (1991), "Building Consensus in Developing Radioactive Waste Management Systems," High-Level Radioactive Waste Management: Proceedings of the Second Annual International Conference (La Grange Park, IL: American Nuclear Society and American Society of Civil Engineers), 1042-1048.

Tetreault, Steve (1994a), "Yucca Plan May Be Put on Hold," Las Vegas ReviewJournal, March 15, pp. lA, 3A.

Tetreault, Steve (1994b), "O'Leary Unyielding on Yucca," Las Vegas Review-Journal, March 25, pp. lB, 2B.

Thomas, K., E. Swanton, M. Fishbein, and H.I. Otway (1980), "Nuclear Energy: The Accuracy of Policy Makers' Perceptions of Public Beliefs," Behavioral Science 25, 332-344.

Thurlow, Rich (1994), "PETT Decision Expected Soon," Pahrump Valley Times, April 15.

Titus, Dina (1988), Phase lllA Yucca Mountain Socioeconomic Report: NTS Study (Carson City, NY: Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office).

Titus, Dina (1990), "Bullfrog County: A Nevada Response to Federal NuclearWaste Disposal Policy," Publius: The Journal of Federalism 20 (Winter): 123-135.

Tomb, Diana L. (1989), "Ginna is Short on Space for Radioactive Wastes," Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, December 31, pp. lB,2B.

United Church of Christ Commission for Racial Justice (1987), Toxic Wastes and Race in the United States: A National Report on the Racial and Socio-Economic Characteristics of Communities with Hazardous Waste Sites (New York: United Church of Christ).

van Konynenburg, R.A. (1991), "Gaseous Release ofCarbon-14: Why the High-Level Waste Regulations Should be Changed," High-Level Radioactive Waste Management: Proceedings of the Second Annual International Conference (La Grange Park, IL: American Nuclear Society and American Society of Civil Engineers),313-319.

Vari, Anna, Patricia Reagan-Cirincione, and Jeryl L. Mumpower (1994), LLRW Disposal Facility Siting: Successes and Failures in Six Countries (Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers).


Vig, Nonnan J. (1988), "Technology, Philosophy, and the State: An Overview," in Michael E. Kraft and Nonnan J. Vig (eds.), Technology and Politics (Durham, NC: Duke University Press).

von Winterfeldt, Detlof and Ward Edwards (1984), "Patterns of Conflict About Risky Technologies," Risk Analysis 4, 55-68.

Wald, Matthew L. (1989), "Energy Chief Says Top Aides Lack Skills to Run U.S. Bomb Complex," New York Times, June 28, pp. AI, A16.

Wald, Matthew L. (1990), "Hanford's Atom Waste Tanks Could Explode, Panel Warns," New York Times, July 31, pp. AI, A16.

Wald, Matthew L. (1991), "New Setbacks for Nuclear Anns Complex," New York Times, September 20, p. AI7.

Wald, Matthew L. (1992a), "Nuclear Agency's Chief Praises Watchdog Group," New York Times, June 23, p. AI3.

Wald, Matthew L. (1992b), "Nuclear Plants Held Hostage to Old Fuel," New York Times, October 3, p. 6.

Wald, Matthew L. (1992c), "Rules Rewritten on Nuclear Waste," New York Times, October 11, p. 13.

Wald, Matthew L. (1992d), "Battling Nuclear Waste in Michigan," New York Times, December 8, pp. Cl, C8.

Wald, Matthew L. (1993), "Nuclear Storage Divides Apaches and Neighbors," New York Times, November 11, p. A18,

Warren, J. (1990), "Needles' Welcome Cools for Nuclear Waste Dump," Los Angeles Times, September 20, pp. AI, A3.

Watkins, James D. (1989), Statement before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources in support of confmnation for Secretary of Energy.

Watkins, James D. (1992), Letter to Sen. Bennett Johnston on a new strategy for interim storage of spent fuel, December 17.

Weart, Spencer R. (1988), Nuclear Fear: A History of Images (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).

Weinberg, Alvin (1972), "Social Institutions and Nuclear Energy," Science 177, 34. Western Energy Update (1993), "Mescalero Apache Tribe," Western Energy Update,

Western Interstate Energy Board, Denver, CO, October 22, p. 18. White, Gilbert F. (1986), "The Meaning of the Environmental Crisis," in Robert W.

Kates and Ian Burton (eds.), Geography, Resources, and Environment, Volume I: Selected Writings of Gilbert F. White (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).

White, G.P', M.S. Bronzini, E.W. Colglazier, B. Dohrenwend, K. Erikson, R. Hansen, A.V. Kneese, R. Moore, E.B. Page, and R.A. Rappaport (1994), "Socioeconomic Studies of High-Level Nuclear Waste Disposal," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 91.

Whitehead, Bradley (1991), "Who Gave You the Right?" Mimeo, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

REFERENCES 263

Wildavsky, Aaron and Karl Dake (1990), "Theories of Risk Perception: Who Fears What and Why?" Daedalus 119(4): 41-60.

Wilkinson, James R. (1990), "DOE Review Board is Made Up of Apologists," Reno Gazette-Journal, November 6.

Wiltshire, Susan (1986), "Public Participation in Department of Energy High-level Waste Management Programs," Tennessee Law Review 53, 540-557.

Wingard, Laura (1990), "Battle Against Nuke Repository Waged on Many Fronts," Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 28, p. lA.

Yucca Mountain Socioeconomic Study Team (1993), State of Nevada Socioeconomic Studies of Yucca Mountain (Carson City, NV: Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office).

Zeiss, Chris and J. Atwater (1989), "Waste Facility Impacts on Residential Property Values," ASCE Journal of Urban Planning and Development 115, 63-80.

Ziemer, Paul L. (1992), Letter to William Rosenberg describing DOE's objections to EPA's proposed standard for disposal of high-level nuclear waste (40 CPR 191), August 12.

APPENDIX

Classification of 10,000 Images Elicited in Response to "Underground Nuclear Waste Repository"

I. DANGEROUS I HARM TO ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH 4,000

A. DANGER AND HAZARDS (General Images) 1,722 - Danger, Hazard, Unsafe, Scary, Poison, Toxic, Problems

B. POLLUTION, CONTAMINATION, HARM (General Images) 497 - Pollution, Contamination, Harmful, Damage

C. DESTRUCTION AND DISASTER 312 - Destructon, Devastation, Disaster, Tragedy, End of world

D. HARM TO THE ENVIRONMENT - Harmful to environment; Contaminates water, soil, food

E. HARM TO HUMANS - Death, Cancer, Sickness, Health hazard, Mutations,

Birth defects

F. LONG-TERM HARM - Long-term effects, Fear for new generations

232

841

22

G. EVENTS LEADING TO A RELEASE OF RADIATION 330 - Leakage, Accidents, Earthquakes, Corrosion

H. DEFECTIVE - Defective, Inadequate, Ineffective

1. UNCONTROLLED - Uncontrolled, No way to control it

J. MISCELLANEOUS RISK RELATED IMAGERY - Love Canal, Ticking time bomb

16

16

12

II. SAFE TO HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT 116

A. SAFE (General Images) 80 - Safe, Not worried, Not bothered


B. SAFEGUARDED - Safeguarded, Controlled, Well built

C. ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY - Clean, Less pollution

21

9

m. ISSUE OF RISK AND SAFETY RAISED (Ambiguously) 499

A. SAFETY 215 - Safety, Caution, Needs to be safe, Is it safe?, Security

B. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 145 - Water, Environment, Air, Soil, Wildlife, How it affects planet

C. HEALTH EFFECTS - Health, Children, Lives at stake, Exposure

D. DURATION OF HAZARD - Future, Future generations, Long-lasting, Permanent

E. MANAGEMENT OF REPOSITORY PROGRAM - Management, Responsibility

IV. NEGATIVE ATTRIBUTES (Other than Risk)

A. NEGATIVE (General Images) - Bad, Not good, Negative, Bad idea, Problem

B.TERRIBLE,HORRIBLE - Terrible, Horrible, Horror, Terror

C. WRONG - Wrong, Unethical, Evil, Against nature, Don't bury it

D. STUPID - Stupid, Dumb, Folly

E. UNNECESSARY - Unnecessary

56

68

15

930

306

109

19

85

63

APPENDIX

F. INFEASmLE - Futile, Impossible, Useless

G. WASTEFUL - Wasteful, Waste of money, Waste of land, Inefficient

H. DIRTY AND DISGUSTING - Disgusting, Gross, Dirty, Messy, Ugly, Smelly, Spooky

I. GOVERNMENT IRRESPONSmILITY - Government can't be trusted, Cover-ups, Lies, Mismanagement

J. CRIME AND CORRUPTION - Corruption, Crime

K. ECONOMIC LOSSES - People moving away, Hurt image

v. PERSONAL OPPOSITION OR DISTASTE

A. OPPOSED - Against it, Don't like it, Dislike, Find alternatives

B.UPSET - Anger, Depressing, Sad, Bad feeling, Frustration

C.NOTHERE - Not near me, Not in my backyard, Far away, Somewhere else

D. MOVE AWAY - Moving away, Move

E. DON'T WANT TO THINK ABOUT IT - Don't want to think about it

F. OPPOSED TO NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY - Opposed to nuclear power, weapons

267

26

37

157

44

20

4

263

51

242

15

9

12


VI. POSITIVE ATTRIBUTES (Other than Safe)

A. POSITIVE (General Images) 40 - Good. Favor, Support, Happy

B. APPROPRIA1E 40 - Best alternative, Good idea, Should be underground

C. NECESSARY 156 - Necessary, Necessity, Need it

D.FEASffiLE 4 - Feasible, Scientifically valid

E. EFFICIENT 6 -Efficiency, Economical

F. POSITIVE ECONOMIC EFFECTS 71 - Employment, Income for state, Tourist attraction

VII. LOCATIONS 899

A. GEOGRAPillC SI1ES PROPOSED FOR REPOSITORIES 290 - Nevada, Yucca Mountain. New Mexico, Hanford, Texas

B. OTHER LOCATIONS IN WES1ERN U.S: - Arizona, Colorado, Utah, California, Mojave

C. OTHER CITIES AND STATES IN U.S:

D. FOREIGN COUNTRIES' - Russia, Canada

93

39

15

E. PUT REPOSITORY AT SPECIFIC GEOGRAPillC SITE 17 - Put it in Nevada, Send it to California, Ship to Russia

F. BARREN PLACES - Desert, Barren, Wasteland, Isolated. Deserted. Remote

G. PUT REPOSITORY IN AN ISOLATED PLACE - Should be away from people, In the desert

316

43

APPENDIX

H. OUTER SPACE -Outer space, Moon, Send it to outer space

I. FEATURES OF LANDSCAPE - Mountains, Ocean, Beach, Lakes, River

J . DISTANCE REFERENCE - Distance, X miles, Far, Proxmity, Close

K. CONCERN ABOUT LOCATING A REPOSITORY - Location, Where to put it

10

11

21

44

VIll. PHYSICAL FEATURES OF REPOSITORY SYSTEM 804

A. DISPOSAL FACILITY - Neutral Terms 54 - Storage, Cont'linment, Waste site, Facility, Disposal unit

B. DISPOSAL FACILITY - Disparaging Terms - Dump, Garbage dump, Sewer

C. COMPONENTS OF PHYSICAL STRUCTURE - Concrete, Dirt, Rock, Building, Big

D.TVNNELS - Tunnels, Cave, Mines, Basement

E. UNDERGROUND - Underground, Underground storage, Deep, Dark, Black

F.BVRIED - Buried waste, Burial, Drums underground

G. NUCLEAR WASTE - Waste, Nuclear waste, Plutonium, Fuel, Rods

H.TRASH - Gargage, Trash, Sewage, Junk

45

76

109

83

25

131

41

269

I. BARRELS 34 - Barrels, Containers, Cans


J. SHIPMENTS - Shipments, Transportation

K. SECRET - Secret, Guarded, Barbed wire

L. PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF WAS1E - Heat, Fire, Hot, Volatile, Unstable, Fumes, Vapors

M. CHEMICALS - Chemicals

N. NASTY STUFF - Decay, Slime, Sludge, Crud, Shit

IX. RADIATION AND NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY

A. RADIATION - Radiation, Radioactive, Nuclear, Atomic, Half-life

B. NUCLEAR POWER - Power, Energy, Reactors, Palo Verde, Seabrook

C. NUCLEAR REACTOR ACCIDENTS - TMI, Chemobyl

D. SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY - Science, Scientists, Technology

E. MISCELLANEOUS - Glowing, Rad suits, Badges

X. NUCLEAR WEAPONS AND NUCLEAR WAR

A. NUCLEAR WEAPONS - Bombs, Atomic bomb, The bomb, Weapons, Missiles,

Warheads

B. NUCLEAR EXPLOSIONS - Explosion, Mushroom cloud, Bombing, Hiroshima,

Nuclear attack

36

45

53

41

31

464

296

91

26

32

19

51

95

APPENDIX 271

C. NUCLEAR WAR 67 - War, Nuclear war, Holocaust, World War TIl

D. NUCLEAR TESTING 22 - Nuclear testing, Nevada Test Site, Fallout

E. NUCLEAR WEAPONS FACILITIES 15 - White Sands, Rocky Flats, Los Alamos

F . :MILITARY 37 - Military, Defense, Army, Guns, Violence

XI. MISCELLANEOUS

A.COST 76 - Expensive, Cost, Lots of money

B.CONTROVERSY 75 - Controversy, Protests, Socially unpopular, Publicity

C. GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS 146 - Government, Politics, Political, Politicians, Reagan, Bush

D. BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY 11 - Big business, Business, Industry

E. UNINFORMED 58 - Uninformed, What is it?, People don't know enough

F. UNCERTAINTY 82 - Uncertainty, Doubt, Questions, Unknown, Do we need it?

G. NEUTRAL 23 - Neutral, Indifferent, Nothing

H. IMPORTANT 8 - Important, Serious, Interesting

1. INEVITABLE 10 - Inevitable, Going to Happen

272

J. PEOPLE - Population, People

K. WORKS OF FICTION - Movies, Novels

XII. ALL OTHERS

THE DILEMMA OF SITING A REPOSITORY

19

11

573

Note: Data are from surveys conducted by Slovic. Layman. and Flynn (1990). Responses have been recoded according to a slightly different categorization scheme .

• Locations of nuclear weapons facilities and reactors are classified in Section IX.

INDEX

Above-ground storage, 54, 207, 218 preference for, 140

Acceptability, 16, 111, 142 discrepancy in, 146 increase in, 162, 167, 172

Acceptance, 90--93, 123, 230, 231-233 beliefs and, 115 (table) compensation and, 178, 179 (table), 180,

181, 190n8, 13 differences in, 101, 120n8, 157 (table) economic impact and, 116 expected consequences and, 101-104,

104 (table), 105 (table), 106 gaining, 83, 91, 95, 167-168, 171, 184,

193, 197,213, 219 legal requirements for, 83-84 legitimacy and, 109 local, 83-84, 91, 178, 180 models of, 100--104, 106-111, 113-114,

116-117, 119, 168 predictors for, 114, 116, 118 (table), 183 risk and, 114, 190n11

Accidents, 107, 124, 129, 134 perceived risk of, 102, 104, 127, 128

(table) ABC, see Atomic Energy Commission Aheame, John: high-level waste problem

and, 43 Alpena site, 30, 34, 95 Amendments Act, see Nuclear Waste

Policy Amendments Act American Association for Advancement of

Science, 129 American Nuclear Energy Council, 206 American Nuclear Society, 130 Anti-repository bills, 14, 64n48, 96-97

in Nevada, 43-44, 64n47 Appropriateness, 116, 139-142, 239 Assembly Bill 222 (Nevada), 43-44, 96 Assembly Joint Resolution 4 (Nevada), 43 Assembly Joint Resolution 6 (Nevada),

43, 129, 151n11

Atomic Energy Act (P.L. 79-585) (1946), 17n3

Atomic Energy Act (P.L. 83-703) (1954), 6, 65n51

moratorium and, 58n7 nuclear safety concerns of, 85

Atomic Energy Commission (ABC), 59n16, 95, 151n13, 191n15, 212

credibility of, 17-18n3, 133-134 DAD and, 211, 227 monitoring of, 59n18 nuclear waste and, 13,33, 97, 198 siting and, 27, 30, 31, 32, 34, 43, 55, 57,

227 storage and, 194-195

Baltimore Gas & Electric Co. v. Natural Resources Defense Council [13 ELR 20544 (1983)]. 150n7

Beliefs, see Perceptions Benefit-cost decision model, 103, 107,

121n16 moving beyond, 108-111, 113

Benefit-sharing approach, 175, 210 Benefits, 186

assessment of, 237 availability of, 215 economic, 103, 107, 121nI5, 158, 159,

176-177, 181 perceived, 111, 183

Benefits agreements, 176-177, 209, 217 negotiations on, 188

Bennett, Robert, 77 Bentsen, Lloyd, 63n45 Best-site approach, 56, 224n26

abandonment of, 213-214 fairness of, 213

Best solution, 193, 197-200 BFI, see Browning Ferris Industries Bilbray, James, 145 Bingaman, Jeff, 74 Birth defects, radiation-induced, 132


Board on Radioactive Waste Management ~AS),37,45, 61n30,228

DOE and, 63-64n44 recommendations of, 52

Bribery, 176, 182, 215 Browning Ferris Industries (BPI), 94n3,

185 voluntary approach and, 12

Bryan, Richard, 41, 100, 224n26 Amendments Act and, 96 Bullfrog County and, 210 on repositories, 92, 137 on siting policy, 85-86

Bullfrog County, creation of, 210 Bureau of Indian Affairs, 217 Bush, George, 47, 63n45, 72,96

National Energy Strategy of, 89 NWPA and, 145

California Energy Resources Conservation and Development Commission, 22

"Call for Participation Dialogue" (Leroy), 72

Carlsbad site, 30, 31-32, 33 Carson, Rachel, 3 Carter, Jimmy: nuclear waste and, 21, 25 Carter, Luther, 89

MRS and, 76-77, 89 influence of book by, 42 on siting efforts, 56, 130, 239

Catastrophic events, 206 Chambers Development, Inc.: tipping fee

by, 178 Champion International Corporation:

property value protection by, 176, 177

Chernobyl, 3 Chino, Wendell: MRS and, 80n18 Clinch River site, 70-71, 78n4 Clinton, Bill, 53, 73 Coalition on West Valley Nuclear Wastes,

18n4 Committee on Waste Disposal ~AS),

62n30 Communities

compensation and, 178, 211, 215

consent from, 184, 212, 215-216 de facto authority of, 84-90 investigation by, 203-204, 216-217 opposition from, 88, 184 perceived benefits and, 183 poor, 92-93, 94n8 proximal, 156 siting and, 83-84, 85, 86

Community organizations, opposition from, 4,8

Community Partnership program (BFI), 94n3,185

Compensation, 167, 172,185, 187, 210-211, 223n18

acceptance and, 178, 179 (table), 180, 181, 182, 190n8, 13

bribery and, 182 host communities and, 211, 215 moral objections and, 182 perceived importance of, 173 (table) perceived risk and, 180 preconditions for, 181 provisions for, 178, 208-211 response to, 209-211 site characterization and, 208 strategies for, 175-178, 180-182 support/opposition and, 179 (table) symbolic function of, 177

Congress cooperation from, 52 DOE and, 53 HLNW and, 56, 85, 167, 194, 221n1,

233 interim-storage policies and, 76 mistrust of, 229 MRS and, 219 public health and, 203 siting and, 55, 57, 212, 214, 221

Consensus building, 187, 198-199,200,201,

218, 224n26, 236-237 extended process of, 237 forms of, 234

Consent, 184, 217, 219, 224n21 explicit, 182

INDEX

Contingent agreements, 174-175, 176, 177,205

Cooling ponds, 13,20, 21, 195, 222n4 Cumulative release, 45, 65n55 Cuomo, Mario, 8

DAD strategy, see Decide-Announce-Defend strategy

Davenport, James: opposition and, 89 Davis Canyon site, evaluation of, 37 Deaf Smith site, 41, 85, 189n8

analysis of, 37, 39 suitability of, 62n32 support/opposition in, 161, 161 (table)

Decide-Announce-Defend (DAD) strategy, 11, 19, 43, 68n76, 211, 227

Decision making inclusivity of, 236 open-ended, 238-239 timetables for, 221

Department of Energy (DOE), 151n13, 200--201

burden of proof and, 45, 145 consultation and cooperation by, 87, 212 criticism of, 49--50, 63--64n44, 133--134 deadlines and, 54-55 economic benefits and, 209 licensing and, 203 management by, 137 mistrust of, 131, 134, 135, 136,

205--206, 229 MPCs and, 55, 58nlO, 69 MRS and, 71, 76, 77, 78n5, 137,210,

219,239 Nevada and, 47, 97 opposition and, 40, 44, 151n15, 158 public participation and, 201, 220 repositories and, 54, 63n38, 66n61, 134,

148,233 site characterizations and, 41, 56, 60n22,

88, 159, 162, 163n4, 228 siting and, 27, 30, 34, 35, 36, 37, 39-40,

42, 57, 62n31, 87, 89, 94n6, 200, 221

storage and, 76, 77, 194-195

275

studies by, 33-34, 37, 52, 62n29, 64n46, 73, 198, 204

support for, 53 WIPP and, 32, 59n19

Department of Environmental Conservation (New York), 7

Deutch, John, 25 Developers, problems for, 4-5, 10 Disagreements

nature of, 146--150 resolving, 187

Disqualifying conditions, 53, 87--88, 203 Distributional equity, 11, 143--144, 184,

230 fairness and, 192n23 working for, 149, 186, 224n22

DOE, see Department of Energy Doughnut effect, 153, 158-162 Dreyfus, Daniel, 51, 53

on cost overruns, 50 on DOE, 55 on MRS, 77 presentation by, 52

Dry-cask storage, 17,54, 78n1, 140, 195, 222n3, 234, 238

building, 14, 57n4, 197, 235 future generations and, 141 as interim solution, 20--21

Dukakis, Michael, 96

Earthquakes, perceived risks of, 127 EAs, see Environmental assessments Economic benefits, 121n15, 176--77, 181

doughnut effect and, 158 expectation of, 103 future consequences and, 107 risk and, 159

Economic issues, 39, 123, 137--138, 230 acceptance and, 116 concern for, 184 negative/positive, 114

Educational programs, 167, 171,206,207, 233

EIS, see Environmental Impact Statement Eisenhower, Dwight: "Atoms for Peace"

program and, 151n13


Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (1986), 5, 17n1

"Ending the Gridlock on Nuclear Waste Storage" (Carter), 76-77

Energy Policy Act (P.L. 102-486) (1992),

34, 47-50, 56, 66n59, 78n6, 145, 228

provisions of, 47-48 regulatory review process and, 202-203 siting process and, 145

Energy Reorganization Act (P.L. 93-438), 31

Energy Research and Development Agency (ERDA), 151n13, 212

Alpena and, 68n76, 95 replacement of, 33 siting and, 27, 30, 31, 34, 57, 227 WIPP and, 32

Environmental assessments (EAs), 60n22, 61029

Environmental Evaluation Group, 32 Environmental groups, 25-26, 32, 184

opposition from, 5, 8, 90 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS),

15Dn7,201 on geologic repositories, 25

Environmental issues, 114, 119n4, 137-138, 229

concern for, 5, 132, 194, 202 identifying/publicizing, 3

Environmental Policy Act (P.L. 91-190) (1970), 5, 222n8

Environmental Policy Center, 36 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),

18n6,65n54 hazardous waste and, 4 radiation-release standards by, 45-46,

48, 49, 51, 52, 66n56, 66n57, 87, 202, 228

regulatory approach by, 45, 46 trust in, 136

Equity, 142-146, 227 concerns for, 16, 238, 239 intergenerational, 182 regional, 224n22

see also Distributional equity; Procedural equity

ERDA, see Energy Research and Development Agency

Erikson, Erik: generativity and, 108

Erikson, Kai, 67n67 Ethical issues, 91, 229, 230, 231

concern for, 194,239 disagreements about, 148-149

Expected consequences acceptance and, 101-104, 104 (table),

105 (table), 106 opposition and, 119 see also Perceptions

Experts, 148, 194 comparison oflaypersons with, 129-131 siting efforts and, 130

Exploratory Studies Facility, 49, 50, 66n60

Facility Siting Guidelines, 168, 182, 188, 193, 206, 208, 214

geographic fairness and, 211 procedural equity and, 212 table of, 169 timeliness and, 221

Fairness, 36, 41, 123, 146, 167-168, 182-186, 211-220, 224n22, 229, 231

acceptance and, 122n25 concern for, 16,35,110,114,116,117,

145 distributional equity and, 192n23 geographic, 184-185. 186,211-212.214 level of, 162 principles of, 143

Federal Court of Appeals EPA standards and, 45 moratorium laws and, 22

Foley, Tom, 63n45 Fort McDermitt Paiute-Shoshone, MRS

and, 75 Friends of the Earth, 36, 142, 194 Future generations

compensation and. 180, 182

INDEX

concern for, 108, 149, 176, 181, 198, 202,229

risks for, 106, 107-108, 141, 190n13

General Accounting Office (GAO), 89, 134

on DOE, 50 Generativity, 108 Geographic fairness, 184-185, 186,

211-212, 214 Geographic variation, 156-157

perceived risk and, 158 Geohydrologic modeling, 46 Geologic disposal, 13, 17, 23-24, 46,

58n13, 198, 228 acceptability of, 140, 200, 234 as best solution, 193 Canadians and, 140 doubts about, 54, 57, 132-133, 199,200,

207, 232 engineered/natural barriers for, 23 future generations and, 141 legitimacy of, 140, 149 safety in, 124 support for, 25-26,53, 199, 232, 233

Geologic repositories, see Repositories Gertz, Carl, 138, 147 Ghost Dance Fault, 53 Gorton, Slade, 36 Graham, Bob: Yucca Mountain and, 48 Gramm, Phil, 63n45 Groundwater contamination, 101, 103,

130,207

Hall, Joel: letter from, 134 Hambleton, William, 30 Hanford site, 33, 41, 75, 137, 182, 189n8,

191n17 analysis of, 37, 39, 62n32 opposition to, 159, 160 (table) plutonium production at, 22 site characterization for, 163n4 support for, 113, 159, 163n5 temporary storage at, 134 wastes at, 23, 31, 32

Hazardous waste facilities

benefits of, 9-10 blocking, 4

Health

277

concerns for, 23-24, 123, 129, 132, 202 risks to, 114, 119n4, 137-138

Hecht, Chic, 96 Herrington, Secretary, 62nn32, 35, 145

siting and, 39, 40 High-level nuclear waste (HLNW)

funding for, 51, 67nn62, 65 managing, 131, 136, 140, 197, 199,229,

233 mining by future generations, 46 public education on, 206 risks of, 19, 221n2, 237 storing, 12-14,16,17,69,169,195,197,

222n5,238 High-level nuclear waste issue, 199, 220,

230 best solution for, 123, 198 consensus on, 236-237 management of, 238 perceptions about, 196 (table) preemption of, 84-85 solving, 17, 22, 23, 26, 139, 142, 201,

227,229,231,232-39 High-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal

Subcommittee (EPA), 45 HLNW, see High-level nuclear waste Hoaglun, Brad: on tribal councils, 217 Host communities, see Communities

Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (INEL), 23, 32, 75

Imagery data, 124, 127, 132, 139, 265-272

Impact assistance, 208 caps on, 209

Impacts controlling, 167, 169 disagreements regarding, 146-148 negative, 130, 177 perceived, 167 socio-economic, 114, 116

Incentives, 172, 177,215 Indian Reorganization Act (1934), 217


Individual-dose approach, 66nn56, 57 INEL, see Idaho National Engineering

Laboratory Inequity, 152n18, 191n21

intemporai, 144 See also Procedural inequity

Infonned consent, 90, 91-92, 168 In-kind provisions, 176, 178 Interagency Review Group on Nuclear

Waste Management (IRG), 25, 59n14, 198

Interim storage, 55, 78nl, 216, 219, 222n6, 225n28, 232

at-reactor, 235 challenges of, 233, 235, 237 problems with, 221-222n3 relying on, 14, 16, 234-235, 238 strategies for, 54, 76 see also Temporary storage

Inter-jurisdictional disputes, 217 IRG, see Interagency Review Group on

Nuclear Waste Management Irretrievability, 140-141, 207 Isolation periods, recommended, 20

Johnson, Carl, 147 Johnston, Bennett, 36, 52, 65n56, 73, 145,

210 MRS and, 77 retrievability and, 199-200 siting process and, 48 Yucca Mountain and, 42, 63nn40, 41

Joint Committee on Atomic Energy: ABC and, 59n18

King, Bruce: AEC and, 31 Kodak, property value protection by, 176 Kraft, Steven, 89

Las Vegas growth of, 12On7 opposition in, 153, 156, 158 support in, 156 survey in, 136

Las Vegas Review Journal on fairness, 146

on tourism, 138 Laws, Rufina Marie, 80n18 Leavitt, Michael, 219 Legitimacy, 121n17, 140, 149, 185,231

assessment of, 109, 113, 167-168 instilling, 181 perceived, 114 public acceptance and, 109

Leroy, David, 72 criticism of, 218 siting model by, 214-220, 237 study grants and, 73

Liability, limits on, 209 Licensing, 46, 61n23, 145, 202-203

questions about, 133 threshold for, 202

Licensing process, 35-36, 48, 62n29, 66n59, 202-203, 230

shift in, 51-52 unattainable, 44--45

Little Skull Mountain: earthquake at, 67n66, 147

LLRW, see Low-level radioactive waste Local communities, see Communities Locally Unwanted Land Uses (LULUs),

167 Long-tenn welfare, 8-9, 107, 108

concerns for, 127, 170 Los Medanos site, 31-32 Loux, Robert, 67n67

on Little Skull Mountain earthquake, 147

on NWPA, 231 on safety, 203

Love Canal, 3 Low-level radioactive waste (LLRW),

storing, 6-8, 162 Low-Level Radioactive Waste

Management Act (1986) (New York),6

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act (P.L. 96-573) (1980), 6, 18n6

Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act (P.L. 99-240) (1985), 8

LULUs, see Locally Unwanted Land Uses

INDEX

Lyons site, 33, 34,43,56, 59n16, 17,95, 211

considering, 30-31, 55 DAD and, 227 opposition to, 156

McClure, James, 36 Management, 231

alternative approaches to, 53-54, 238--239

distrust of, 133-134, 175 Markey, Ed: siting process and, 62n37 Massachusetts Hazardous Waste Siting

Act (1980), 83, 91 MAU, see Multiattribute utility Maxey Flats, 197 Maynard, Joyce: article by, 40 Mescalero Apaches, 79n17, 217

grant to, 74 Northern States Power and, 76 voluntary siting and, 75

Miller, Robert, 44, 96, 100, 210 siting effort and, 89

Milliken, William, 33 Mitigation, 167, 170-171, 172, 174, 186,

189n3, 206-207 adoption of, 91 limitations on, 208 perceived importance of, 173 (table)

Monetary provisions, 175, 178 Monitored retrievable storage (MRS)

facilities, 14, 17, 19,43, 51, 55, 200, 209, 222n6, 225n30, 234, 237

Congressional interest in, 71-72 development of, 69, 71, 76, 239 DOE and, 137 hosting, 73, 74, 77, 216 opposition to, 160 siting, 70-71, 75, 92, 211, 214--220, 235 storage at, 58nlO, 67n69, 222n7

Monitored Retrievable Storage Commission, 71

Moral issues, 139, 212-213, 230, 231 compensation and, 182 disagreements about, 148-149

279

Moratorium laws, 22, 32, 34, 37, 58n7, 222n5

Moratorium on second repository, 42 MPCs, see Multi-purpose canisters MRS facilities, see Monitored retrievable

storage facilities Multi-purpose canisters (MPCs), 58nl0,

234 at-reactor use of, 235 development of, 55, 69, 76

Multiattribute utility (MAU), 37, 63n44 Myers, John: on cost overruns, 50

NARUC, see National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners

National Academy of Sciences (NAS), 49 Energy Policy Act and, 47 report by, 25, 48, 59n16, 198 repository concept and, 24, 30, 33, 36,

62n30, 65n58, 134, 203, 204 upwelling theory and, 133

National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC): MRS and, 77

National Congress of American Indians, 72

National Energy Strategy, 47, 89, 145 National Research Council, 37, 45, 61n30 National Workshop on Facility Siting, 168 Natural Resources Defense Council, 45,

90 Nellis Air Force Base, 85 Nevada

anti-repository legislation by, 129 DOE and, 47 map of, 15 opJXlsition in, 43-44, 53 site selection and, 214

Nevada Nuclear Waste Project Office (NWPO), 203-204, 205

research agenda for, 209 Nevada Resort Association: on tourism

losses, 138 Nevada Test Site (NTS), 14, 33, 39, 85,

97, 116, 137, 138, 150n6, 163n5, 181, 214, 239


dangers from, 119n2 employment at, 96 MRS proposed for, 76, 77 testing at, 133, 158

Nevada v. Herrington [86-7307 (9th Cir.)]. 39,119n3

Nevada v. Herrington [777 F.2d 529 (9th Cir. 1985)], 119n3, 203, 223n14

Nevada v. Watkins [914 F.2d 1545 (9th Cir. 1990)], 44, 85, 88, 94n7

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, 189n4

New York LLRW repository, case of, 6-8 New York State Legislative Commission

on Toxic Substances and Hazardous Wastes, 4

New York State Low-Level Radioactive Waste Siting Commission, 6

New York Times Magazine: Maynard article in, 40

New Yorkv. United States [112S.Ct. 2408 (1992)], 8, 18n6

"Night of Rage" rally (1989), 7 NIMBY, see Not-in-my-backyard problem Northern States Power, Co., 235

MRS and, 75-76, 79n17 Not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) problem,

17,231 Notice of disapproval, 36, 44, 212

submitting, 86-87 Noxious facilities: opposition to, 100

(table) NRC, see Nuclear Regulatory Commission NTS, see Nevada Test Site Nuclear fuel rods, see Spent fuel Nuclear Imperatives and the Public Trust

(Carter), 42 Nuclear power

opposition to, 138, 139, 142, 152n16, 222n5, 231-232

promotion of, 18n3, 206, 232 status quo and, 193-194

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), 31, 85, 89, 201, 222n9, 228

consultation and cooperation and, 44, 52, 88

DOE and, 51, 53 high-level waste management and, 37,

43 licensing and, 61n23, 130, 202 MRS and, 76. 239

radiation-release standards and, 49 siting and, 36, 88 trust for, 136

Nuclear Waste Fund, 55, 67n62, 67n70, 74,203,235

repository program and, 212 study grants and, 73

Nuclear-waste management, 25, 236 acceptability of, 198

Nuclear Waste Negotiator, 78n8, 84,91, 218, 219, 236

see also Office of Nuclear Waste Negotiator

Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) (P.L. 97-425) (1982), 6, 13, 29, 34-37, 39-41, 42, 44, 50, 65n51, 66n61, 67n70, 78n8, 92, 142, 193, 194, 203,233

abandonment of, 43 complying with, 41, 96 consultation and cooperation and, 35, 87 deadlines and, 54-55 DOE and, 6On21, 60-61n23, 61n28 fairness issue and, 36, 146, 211 federal preemption and, 84-85 federal-state balance of power in, 145 geologic disposal and, 26, 198,200,201 health issues and, 202 local communities and, 85 MRS and, 69, 70-71 on safety, 202 site selection and, 14,41,56, 60n21, 88,

144,145,211,227,229 support for, 230-232

Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments Act (P.L. 100-203, Title V) (1987), 14, 17, 42, 44, 48, 56, 57, 64n48, 67n69, 68n72, 96, 144-145, 210, 219,221

best-site approach and, 213-214 federal preemption and, 84--85

INDEX

health issues and, 202 impact-assistance packages and, 209 MRS and, 70, 71-74 NWTRB and, 204-205 siting and, 211

Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (NWTRB), 43, 134,201,204-205

on DOE, 50 site characterization timetable and, 221

Nuclear weapons accidents/mismanagement and, 134 NLNW repositories and, 139 qualms with, 138

NWPA, see Nuclear Waste Policy Act NWPO, see Nevada Nuclear Waste

Project Office NWTRB, see Nuclear Waste Technical

Review Board

Oak Ridge, 70, 75, 78n5, 137 compensation and, 209 MRS at, 71, 160

O'Connor, Sandra Day: decision by, 18n6 OCRWM, see Office of Civilian

Radioactive Waste Management OECD, see Organisation for Economic

Co-Operation and Development Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste

Management (OCRWM), 134,220 authority of, 34 mission statement of, 205

Office of Nuclear Waste Negotiator, 17, 227

creation of, 43, 71, 72, 214 study grants and, 73 siting and, 75

O'Leary, Hazel, 32, 220 MRS and, 77 on site characterization, 50 trust issue and, 205

Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (1987),42

Ontario Siting Task Force, 93nl Opposition, 5, 6, 142, 151-152n15, 213,

219-220 beliefs/perceptions about, 101

compensation and, 179 (table) effectiveness of, 4, 8-9, 16, 40 geographic patterns of, 153, 156 levels of, 95-100, 101 local, 7, 8--9, 89, 90, 233 managing, 41-42

281

motivation for, 123, 162, 220 overcoming, 90, 95-96, 124, 168-172 pattern of, 153 political, 95-96, 100 risk dimensions and, 149 support for, 119

Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD)

geologic disposal and, 228 Nuclear Energy Agency of, 54, 199

Outcome-related factors: voting behavior and, 104, 106

Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. State Energy Resources & Development Commission [461 U.S. 190 (1983)], 1803, 58n7, 64n48, 85

Pantex assembly plant, 39, 163n5 Perceived risks, 101, 102, 106, 109, 111,

114, 124-127, 126 (figure), 129-138, 15On4, 174, 189n2

acceptance and, 190n 11 compensation and, 180 determining, 136, 169 geographic differences and, 158 predictors of, 136, 158 reducing, 170, 171,201-202,206-207 regional differences in, 157 (table) trust and, 135 (table), 135-37 See also Risks

Perceptions acceptance and, 115 (table) correcting, 171 estimates of effect size for, 117 (table) factors underlying, 131-137 impact of, 131 improvement in, 101 opposition and, 119 See also Expected consequences; Risk

perceptions


Permanent storage, 16, 219, 222n3, 225n28, 232, 237, 238

demand for, 21-22 perceptions about, 109 risks associated with, 132

Poor communities equity of siting in, 92-93 income effect and, 94n8

"Potentially acceptable" sites, 39 evaluation of, 60n22 identifying, 61n28 map of, 38

Predictors, 106 analyzing, 117 key, 103-104

Preemption strategy, 5-6, 8 Presidential Highway, siting, 187 Price-Anderson Act (1957), 224n20 Procedural equity, 212

achieving, 149 violations of, 146

Procedural inequity concerns about, 144-145 distributional inequity versus, 11 salience of, 145-146

Property value, protecting, 176, 177 Proxmire, William, 36 Public education, 167, 171, 206, 233 Public participation, 186

expanding, 220-221 Public relations, 205-206 Public sentiment, 237

elected officials and, 100 threats to, 139

Public surveys, analyzing, 95

QUality of life, impacts on, 138-139

Radiation contamination, 131, 132 concerns about, 144 preventing, 26

Radiation release, 133 perceived risk of, 101, 102, 126-127,

127 (table), 128 (table), 224n26

standards for, 45-46, 48, 49, 51, 52, 65nn51, 55, 66n56, 66n57, 87, 202, 203,228

Radioactive waste, 4 concerns about, 119n4, 129, 197 disposing of, 9, 24-25 perceptions about, 196 (table) storing, 6-8, 162

Radioactive Waste Review Board (Wisconsin), 40

Radioactivity dangers of, 20, 22 intensity of, 237 preventing, 23 releasing, 52, 57n2

Raleigh, C. Barry, 133 Recycling facilities

blocking, 4 siting, 174

Redundancies, eliminating, 103-104, 106 Regulatory review process, 172, 202-203,

230 Reid, Harry, 145 Religious concerns, 139, 149 Repositories, 55, 172, 222n6, 225n28

acceptance of, 201 appropriateness of, 139-142 benefits of, 212 building, 16, 17, 66n60, 77 economic dislocations and, 137-138 effectiveness of, 178, 180 environmental impact statement on, 25 establishing need for, 168-170, 193-195,

197-201 free-association responses to, 125 (table),

265-272 long-term welfare and, 127 moratorium on, 234 Nevada and, 98-100, 146, 153 opening, 50-52 opposition to, 19, 98, 106, 113, 139,

195, 204, 213 rationale for, 12-13, 19-26,97,232-233 regional, 227 regulating, 137 risk perceptions and, 125-126, 130, 131

INDEX

safety standards for, 172, 224n26 sealing, 23 siting, 14, 16-17, 26-27, 29-30, 78n8,

84,211-212,214, 230-232 storage at, 24 (figure) support for, 24, 90, 95, 109, 110 (table),

156, 169 testing, 52, 59n14 See also Geologic disposal

Reprocessing, 194, 199 alternatives to, 25 failure of, 21-22, 25

Retrievability, 58n12, 78n2, 240n6 preference for, 140 preserving, 199-200

Richton Dome site, evaluation of, 37, 39 Riley, Dick: on fairness, 35 Risk assessment, 148, 152n22, 183,

224n26, 237 comprehensibility of, 189n4 differences in, 147

Risk perceptions, 120n8, 196 (table) opposition and, 149 reducing, 170-172, 174,201-208 studies of, 108-109 indicators of, 11, 102

Risk reduction, 152n22 provisions for, 208 traditional approach to, 170-171

Risks, 147 acceptance of, Ill, 114 concerns for, 113 (table), 195 disagreements over, 148 economic benefits and, 159, 191n18 extent of, 123 irreducibility of, 207 minimizing, 111, 184-185, 194, 195 reducing, 171 siting and, 149 temporal dimensions of, 106-108 See also Perceived risks

Roberts, Barbara: on Nuclear Waste Negotiator, 92

Rocky Flats, military waste at, 23, 32 Rusche, Ben, 62n35, 197

Safe Drinking Water Act, 45 Safety, 187, 231, 237

283

concerns for, 109, 113, 124, 129, 133, 137, 149, 172, 207, 223n14, 224n26, 238, 239

maintaining, 35-36, 183, 202-203 meeting, 174 perceptions about, 110-111, 113

Salt barriers, 30, 31, 59n16 Savannah River site: wastes at, 23 Science Advisory Board (EPA), 45 "Screw Nevada" legislation, see Nuclear

Waste Policy Amendments Act Second-round search, 39-41, 61n28

doughnut effect and, 162 Secretary of Energy Advisory Task Force:

report by, 220 Selin, Ivan, 22, 52 Senate Appropriations Committee: DOE

budget request and, 52 Shut-down of nuclear power plants, 195 Sierra Club, 36, 90, 195

concerns of, 25, 194 Silent Spring (Carson), 3 Site characterization, 35, 49, 51, 60n22,

62n29, 64n46, 66n61, 119n3, 159, 209,21O,240nl

compensation and, 208 cost of, 212, 229 delay in, 7, 88-89, 228 hearings on, 220 mismanagement of, 134 scientific data from, 203 time requirement for, 50

Site selection, 19, 30, 33, 55-56, 60-61n23, 61n24, 152n17,205,227

blocking, 8 costs and benefits of, 10-11 fairness in, 116, 167-168, 182-186,

211-220 fast-track approach to, 237 federal government and, 149 legitimacy of, 168 opposition to, 182, 233 politics of, 36, 61n23 predicting, 188


problems with, 40, 90 progressive approach to, 11-12 risk and, 149 stageslrounds of, 27 (figure), 28-29

(table), 29, 30-33, 33-37, 39-52 successful, 230--232, 239

See also Siting; Siting process; Voluntary Siting

Siting analyzing, 83 experts and, 130 host communities and, 83 model for, 214-217 overview of, 26-27, 29-30 protesting, 7-8 See also Site selection; Voluntary siting

Siting agreements alternatives to, 170 doughnut effect and, 159 influence on, 239 specific guidelines for, 170, 174--175,

185-186 veto power over, 36

Siting commissions, 7, 18n4, 94n3 authority of, 6

Siting dilemma, 3-4, 8 changes in, 4--5 different sides in, 147 economic inefficiencies of, 9 exploring, 16 perspectives on, 9-12 solving, 17

Siting policy designing, 19 ethics and, 229 federal government and, 49-50, 55 formulation of, 233

Siting process, 7, 11, 12, 90, 91, 185, 186 analyzing, 188 beliefs about:, 101 challenges to, 5 controlling, 84, 183, 212, 215 equity in, 149, 162, 227 fairness of, 85, 110, 114, 123, 145,

224n24, 229, 239 host communities and, 86

judicial review of, 6 legislation on, 144 legitimacy in, 168-169 timely, 187-188, 221 vigilance over, 96

Skubitz, Joe, 31

Skull Valley Goshutes, 74, 75 Socioeconomic impacts: indicators of,

114,116 Spent fuel, 19-20, 57nl, 227

cooling, 14, 20 interim storage of, 55, 76, 222nn4, 5,

234 managing, 27, 32, 124, 139, 149, 193,

199, 222n4, 229, 238 permanent storage of, 12, 13, 14, 17, 19,

21-22, 142, 197, 200, 222n5, 235, 237,238

reprocessing, 21, 25 retrieving, 52 transporting, 14,20, 78n2, 194,235

Stallings, Richard, 73-74 siting approach and, 74--75, 200

Status quo un acceptability of, 170 viability of, 193-194, 195

Storage above-ground, 54, 140, 207, 218 at-reactor, 78nl, 140, 193-194, 195,

197, 222n6, 235 future generations and, 108 legitimacy of, 218 perceived risk of, 130 (table) underground, 22, 140 See also Dry-cask storage; Interim

storage; Permanent storage; Temporary storage

Storage pools, 194, 197, 221n3 Study grants, 79nn9, 10, 14, 223n15

elimination of, 74, 75, 217 local communities and, 83 phases of, 72-73, 216

Suitability, 94n6, 202, 203 beliefs about, 111 determining, 51-52, 87

Sullivan, Mike, 219

INDEX

study grants and, 216, 218 Sundance Fault, 53 Superfund Amendments and

Reauthorization Act (P.L. 99-499) (1986), 17n1

Swainston, Harry, 89 Szymanski, Jerry: theory by, 132-133,

140, 146

Tanner Process, 5, 17n2 Technical Advisory Council (Wisconsin),

40 Technology, 23-24, 169, 170, 216

concerns about, 138, 199,207 consensus on, 235-237 controlling, 148 interim -storage, 237 legitimacy of, 140-141 perceptions about, 109, 111 suitability of, 109, 136,236

Temporary storage, 14, 20-21, 92, 216 problems with, 134 risks associated with, 132 solutions to, 148-149 See also Interim storage

Tennessee MRS and, 71, 210 opposition patterns in, 160-161

Tennessee Valley Authority, 78n4 Texas: doughnut effect in, 161 Three Mile Island, 3, 108 Times Beach, 3 Timetables: setting, 187-188, 207, 221 Tipping fees, 178 Tonkawa: MRS and, 75 Tort Claims Act, 223n18 Tourism, 151n12

losses in, 137, 13 8 Transportation

concerns about, 143-44, 175, 195, 206, 232

risk of, 152n20, 156, 162nl, 192n22, 207

Transcientific questions, 147, 207 Transuranic waste, 58n9

storing, 30, 32, 59n19

285

Treaty of Ruby Valley (1863), 191n15 Treichel, Judy, 210 Tribal councils: consent from, 217 Trust

assessing, 136 building, 167, 175, 205 perceived risk and, 135 (table), 135-137

Trust fund: establishment of, 211

Udall, Morris, 36, 78-79n8 fairness and, 41 nuclear waste policy and, 40 repositories and, 59n20 site selection and, 61 n23

Underground retrievable storage (URS) facilities, 77, 239, 240n5

Upwelling theory, see Szymanski, Jerry: theory by

URS, see Underground retrievable storage facilities

US Ecology, 9 scholarship program by, 181

Voluntary siting, 12,74-75, 83-84, 91, 94n3, 182-185, 186, 211, 214-220, 225n28

problems with, 92-93, 94n2, 220 process of, 75, 236 reliance on, 17 veto power and, 184

Voting behavior, predicting, 102-103, 104, 106

Warren, Charles, 57n5 Warren-Alquist Act, 22, 57n6 Washington Public Power Supply System

(WPPSS), overconfidence/ overcommitment of, 59n17

Washington State, opposition patterns in, 159-160, 160 (table)

Waste canisters, 23, 58nlO see also Multipurpose canisters

Waste disposal facilities environmental concern about, 3 public opposition to, 3-4


Waste Isolation Pilot Project (WIPP), 65n51, 65n57,74

DOE and, 32, 59n19 ERDA and, 32 licensing for, 66n59 transuranic wastes and, 58n9

Waste Management Inc. (WMI), 175 Waste streams, reduction of, 10 Watkins, James, 55, 57, 73

letter to, 134 NWPA and, 145 trust issue and, 205

Wellstone, Paul: nuclear waste policy and, 53

Wes-Con, 174 Western Shoshone, 141

compensation for. 181 West Valley reprocessing plant, 21, 197 White, Donald, 37 WIPP, see Waste Isolation Pilot Project WMI, see Waste Management Inc. Worst-case scenarios: considering,

206-207 WPPSS, see Washington Public Power

Supply System Wright, Jim, 63n45

Yucca Mountain, 17, 34, 41, 181, 211, 227-228,231

acceptance of, 114, 116, 118 (table) compensation and, 209 doubts about, 89, 102, 134, 199 economic effects of, 138 faults in, 53 groundwater at, 132-133 issues related to, 53 licensability of, 46, 49, 53,221 long-term considerations about, 228-229 map showing, 15 opposition to, 88, 89, 96-97, 153, 154

(map), 155 (map), 221 referendum votes on, 98 (table) repository at, 14, 57, 72, 123, 129,

143-144, 189n8, 223n17, 234, 24On4

safety of, 111, 133

short-term solution at, 57 site characterization and, 44, 47, 53,

64n47, 119n3, 221, 228 suitability of, 16,37,39,42-43,44,51.

52, 56-57, 62n32, 63nn40, 42, 44, 64n46, 65n50, 85, 110, 203, 240n1, 24On5

support for, 89, 154 (map), 155 (map), 156, 159, 213

testing at, 49, 133 Yucca Mountain Project Office, 134, 147

public trust and, 205-206

Ziemer, Paul: on DOE standards, 46-47

REFERENCES - Home - Springer978-94-011-0629...Repository on Local Communities: A Survey of Texas...

Documents

Transcript of REFERENCES - Home - Springer978-94-011-0629...Repository on Local Communities: A Survey of Texas...