In this article I present a somewhat detailed discussion of four examples of nuclear waste policy issues, in the hope that this may better convey an idea of the complexity of the entire topic. The first will show how drastically our perception of the waste‐disposal issue has changed in recent years, and should thus teach us some caution with regard to our present understanding. The second is geotechnical: It concerns site for high‐level nuclear waste and demonstrates some of its problems. The third concerns uranium mill tailings and will show the environmental risks posed by the very large volumes of low‐level radioactive wastes. The last example will address the least predictable aspect of long‐term management of nuclear wastes: future human activities, and how they affect the proper planning of nuclear waste disposal.

1.
A. Wolman, A. E. Gorman, Waste Materials in the United States Atomic Energy Program. WASH‐8, US, AEC, 1950.
2.
US AEC Authorizing Legislation, Fiscal Year 1972, Hearing before the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, part 3, March 16–17, 1971.
3.
D. S. Metlay, in Essays on Issues Relevant to the Regulation of Radioactive Waste Management, W. P. Bishop, ed., NUREG 0412, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1978).
4.
J. E. Mendel and I. M. Warner, in Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories Quarterly Progress Report BNW‐1761, A. M. Platt, ed., June 1973, page 4.
5.
US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Technical Criteria for Regulating Geologic Disposal of High‐Level Radioactive Waste, Federal Register 45, no. 94 (13 May 1980) page 32400.
6.
M. Knapic, Nucl. Fuel, 8 December 1980, page 12;
Nucl. Fuel, 13 April 1981, page 13.
7.
P. R. Dawson and J. R. Tillerson, in Proc. Int. Conf. on Evaluation and Prediction of Subsidence, Pensacola, Fla., 15–20 January, 1977 (report no. CONF 7801361).
8.
W. D. Weart, in Radioactive Waste in Geologic Storage, S. Fried, ed., ACS Symposium Series 100, American Chemical Society, Washington (1978), pages 14, 32.
9.
J. D. Bredehoeft et al., Geologic Disposal of High‐Level Radioactive Wastes—Earth‐Science Perspectives, Geological Survey Circular 779, US Geologic Survey (1978).
10.
E. Landa, Isolation of Uranium Mill Tailings and Their Component Radionuclides from the Biosphere—Some Earth Science Perspectives, Geological Survey Circular no. 814, US Geologic Survey (1980).
11.
J. A. Adams, V. C. Rogers, A Classification System for Radioactive Waste Disposal—What Goes Where? NUREG‐0456, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1978) page 140.
12.
Engineering Assessment of Inactive Mill Tailings, Mexican Hat Site, Utah, Ford Bacon and Davis Utah, Inc., Phase II, Title I. (1977).
13.
Progress Report on the Grand Junction Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Program, DOE/EV‐0033, US Department of Energy (1979).
14.
US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, “Uranium Mill Licensing Requirements,” Final Rules, Federal Register 45, no. 194 (3 October, 1980), page 65521.
15.
Cited in Final Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Uranium Milling, NUREG‐0706, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1980).
16.
Reference Site Intital Assessment for a Salt Dome Repository, Report PNL‐2955, Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratory (1979).
17.
The Effects on Population of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, report of the Advisory Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation, National Academy of Sciences, Washington (1972).
18.
K. S. Johnson, S. Gonzales, Salt Deposits in the United States and Regional Geologic Characteristics Important for Storage of Radioactive Waste, Y/OWI/SUB‐7414/1, Office of Waste Isolation (1978), page 174.
19.
Geological Criteria for Repositories for High‐Level Radioactive Wastes, National Academy of Sciences Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, Washington (1978).
20.
Z. A. Medvedev, Nuclear Disaster in the Urals, Norton, New York (1979);
J. R.
Trabalka
,
L. D.
Eyman
,
S. I.
Auerbach
,
Science
209
,
345
(
1980
).
This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.