Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 138
References ACNW (Advisory Committee on Nuclear Waste). 2002. Letter report from George Hornberger, ACNW chairman, to R.A.Meserve, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission chairman. Subject: Total System Performance Assessment and Conservatism. January 17. Washington, D.C. AkEnd (Arbeitskreis Auswahlverfahren für Endlagerstandorte). 2002. DRAFT-Recommendations of the AkEnd. Committee on a Selection Procedure for Repository Sites. Safety Criteria and Site Selection Procedure for deep disposal of radioactive wastes. G.Arens. June. Federal Office for Radiation Protection. Available at: http://www.akend.de/englisch/berichte/index_1024.htm. Aryris, C. 1982. Reasoning, Learning and Action: Individual and Organizational. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey Bass. Bastide S., J.P.Moatti, J.P.Pages, and F.Fagnani.1989. Risk perception and the social acceptability of technologies: The French case. Risk Analysis 9:215–223. Bechtel SAIC Company, LLC. 2002. Modular Construction System Evaluation. Pre-Decisional Study. TDR-CRW-SE-000023. Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, under contract number DE-AC28–01RW12101. August 2002. Las Vegas, Nev.: Bechtel SAIC. Berman, P. 1980. Thinking about programmed and adaptive implementation: Matching strategies to situations. Pp. 205–227in Ingram, H., and D.Mann, eds. Why Policies Succeed or Fail. London: Sage Publications. Cha, Y. 2000. Risk perceptions in Korea: A comparison with Japan and the United States. Journal of Risk Research 3(4):321–332. Curtis, C., C.Johnson, S.Rogers, D.Jackson, K.Rackham, G.Butler, T.Abbott, and S.Mitchell. 2001. The Role of Environmental Policy and Regulation: A Case for Modernisation. Cumbria, UK: Westlakes Research Institute, University of Manchester. Cyert, R.M. and J.G.March. 1963. The Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Prentice-Hall. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.Prentice-Hall. Depeche Meusienne. 2002. Bertrand Pancher Donne la Parole aux Meusiens. October 26. Page 5. Bar le Duc: Meuse Diffusion. Dess, G.G. and D.W.Beard. 1984. Dimensions of organizational task environments. Administrative Science Quarterly 29:52–73. DOE-OCRWM (Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management). 2001a. Analysis of the Total System Life Cycle Cost of the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program. DOE/RW-0533. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy. Available at: http://www.rw.doe.gov/tslccr1.pdf. DOE-OCRWM. 2001b. Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System Total System Description Revision 02 (TDR-CRW-SE-000002). DOE/RW-0500. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy. Available at: http://www.rw.doe.gov/tsdkrb/tsdkrb.htm.
OCR for page 139
DOE-OCRWM. 2002a. Final Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada. DOE/EIS-0250. February 2002. Available at: http://www.ymp.gov/documents/feis_a/index.htm. DOE-OCRWM. 2002b. Modular Construction System Evaluation. Pre-Decisional Study. TDR-CRW-SE-000023 REV 00. August 2002. Prepared by Bechtel SAIC. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy. DOE-SEAB (Department of Energy, Secretary of Energy Advisory Board). 1993. Earning Public Trust and Confidence: Requisites for Managing Radioactive Waste. Final Report of the Secretary of Energy Advisory Board Task Force on Radioactive Waste Management. November. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy. Available at: http://www.seab.energy.gov/publications/trust.pdf. Dunlap, R.E., M.E.Kraft, and E.A.Rosa, eds. 1993. Public Reactions to Nuclear Waste: Citizens’ Views of Repository Siting. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press. EDRAM (International Association for the Environmentally Safe Disposal of Radioactive Materials). 2002. The Management of Radioactive Waste; A Description of Ten Countries. By Lidskog, R., and A.Andersson. Orebro University. Orebro, Sweden: Research Center Man-Technology-Environment. EKRA (Expert Group on Disposal Concepts for Radioactive Waste). 2000. Disposal Concepts for Radioactive Waste. Final Report. Report on behalf of the Federal Department for the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communication. January 31. Bern, Switzerland: Federal Office of Energy. EKRA. 2002. Monitored Long-Term Disposal: A New Approach to the Disposal of Radioactive Waste in Switzerland. Report on behalf of the Federal Department for the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communication. Presentation at the NEC 2002 Scientific Seminar. October 7–9. Lille, France. Emery, F.E. and E.L.Trist. 1965. The causal texture of organizational environments. Human Relations 18:21–32. Englander, T., K.Farago, P.Slovic, and B.Fischhoff. 1986. A comparative analysis of risk perception in Hungary and the United States. Social Behaviour: An International Journal of Applied Social Psychology 1:55–66. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1999. Code of Federal Regulation, Title 40, Part 197. Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Yucca Mountain, Nevada. August 27. 64 Federal Register 46976. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. EPRI (Electric Power Research Institute). 2001. Performance Confirmation for the Candidate Yucca Mountain High-Level Nuclear Waste Repository, Final Report-December 2001. Palo Alto, Calif.: EPRI. Etzioni, A. 1967. Mixed scanning: A third approach to decision making. Public Administration Review (December): 385–392. Flynn, J., P.Slovic, and C.K.Mertz. 1993. Decidedly different: Expert and public views of risks from a radioactive waste repository. Risk Analysis 13(6):643–648. Forsberg, C.W. 1995. DUSCOBS: A Depleted-Uranium Silicate Backfill for Transport, Storage, and Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel. ORNL/TM 13045. Oak Ridge, Tenn.: Oak Ridge National Laboratory.
OCR for page 140
Forsberg, C.W. 2000. Effect of depleted-uranium dioxide particulate fill on spent nuclear fuel waste packages. Nuclear Technologies 131:337–353. Foundations of Success. 2002. Adaptive Management: A Tool for Conservation Practitioners. Available at: http://www.fosonline.org/whatwedo/adaptive_management.htm. Galbraith, J. 1977. Organizational Design. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley. Holling, C.S. 1978. Adaptive Environmental Assessment and Management. New York: John Wiley & Sons. HSK/KSA (Swiss Federal Nuclear Safety Inspectorate). 1993. Protection Objectives for the Disposal of Radioactive Waste. Regulatory Guidelines R-21 of the Swiss Federal Nuclear Safety Inspectorate. November. Bern, Switzerland: Swiss Federal Nuclear Safety Inspectorate. IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency). 1994. Siting of Geological Disposal Facilities, Safety Series No. 111-G-4.1. Vienna, Austria: IAEA. IAEA. 1997. Regulatory Decision Making in the Presence of Uncertainty in the Context of the Disposal of Long Lived Radioactive Wastes. Third Report of the Working Group on Principles and Criteria for Radioactive Waste Disposal. IAEA-TECDOC-975. Vienna, Austria: IAEA. IAEA. 2001a. Monitoring of Geological Repositories for High-Level Radioactive Waste. Tecdoc-1208. Vienna, Austria. IAEA. 2001 b. Measures to Strengthen International Co-operation in Nuclear, Radiation, Transport, and Waste Safety: Waste Safety. GOV/2001/31-GC(45/14). July 19. Vienna, Austria: IAEA. INRA (European Co-ordination Office). 2001. Europeans and Radioactive Waste. Eurobarometer 56.2. April 19. Brussels, Belgium: European Commission. Isaacs, T. 2002. Building Public Confidence in Nuclear Activities. Presented at the 2002 American Nuclear Society/International Congress on Advanced Nuclear Power Plants. June 13–14. Hollywood, Fla. Available at: http://www3.inspi.ufl.edu/icapp/program/abstracts/1121.pdf. ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 1996a. International Standard ISO 14001. Environmental Management Systems. Specification with guidance for use. First edition 1996–09–01. Reference number ISO 14001:1996(E). Licensed to the National Academies. ISO. 1996b. International Standard ISO 14004. Environmental Management Systems. General Guidelines on Principles, Systems, and Supporting Techniques. First edition 1996–09–01. Reference number ISO 14004:1996(E). Licensed to the National Academies. Itkin, I. 2000. Letter to Bruce Alberts, Chair, National Research Council, The National Academies asking for a committee to advise the Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management on the Design and Operational Strategies for Repository Staging. October 19. Washington, D.C. Jensen, K.A., C.S.Palenik, and R.C.Ewing. 2002. U6+ phases in the weathering zone of the Bangombé U-deposit; observed and predicted mineralogy. Radiochimica Acta 90:761–769. Klinke, A., and O.Renn. 2002. A new approach to risk evaluation and management: Risk-based, precaution-based, and discourse-based strategies. Risk Analysis 22:1071–1094.
OCR for page 141
Konkel, R.M. 1990. Space Science in the Budget: An Analysis of Budgets and Resource Allocation in NASA, FY1961–1989. Center for Space and Geosciences Policy. May 1990. Boulder, Colo.: University of Colorado. Kowalski, E. 2002. Negative Outcome of the Wallenberg Vote. Wallenberg Repository Cooperative (GNW) n-20922-prm-e2.doc. September 22. Wolfenschiessen, Switzerland. La Porte, T.R. 1994. Large technical systems, institutional surprise and challenges to political legitimacy. Technology in Society 16(Dec.):269–288. La Porte, T.R. and A.Keller. 1996. Assuring institutional constancy: Requisite for managing long-lived hazards. Public Administration Review 56(6):535– 544. La Porte, T., and D.Metlay. 1996. Facing a deficit of trust: Hazards and institutional trustworthiness. Public Administration Review 56(4):341–346. La Porte, T.R. 2000. Institutional elements for long term stewardship in a nuclear age. Pp. 1–32 in Stewardship and the Design of ‘Future Friendly’ Technologies: Avoiding Operational Strain in Nuclear Materials Management at Scale. Final Report. LANL/UCB Stewardship Studies, 1998–2000. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California. Available at: http://socrates.berkeley.edu:4050/regexp/part2.pdf. Lee, K.N. 1993. Compass and Gyroscope. Integrating Science and Politics for the Environment. Washington, D.C.: Island Press. Lee, K.N. 1999. Appraising adaptive management. Conservation Ecology 3(2):3. Available at: http://www.consecol.org/vol3/iss2/art3. Lindblom, C.E. 1959. The Science of Muddling Through. Public Administration Review (Spring):79–88. Lindblom, C.E. 1965. The Intelligence of Democracy. New York: Basic Books. Lipset, S.M., and W.Schneider. 1987. The Confidence Gap: Business, Labor and Government in the Public Mind. Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press. Lundqvist, B. 2001. The Swedish Program for Spent Fuel Management. In Witherspoon, P.A. and G.S.Bodvarsson, eds. 2001. Geological Challenges in Radioactive Waste Isolation: Third Worldwide Review. LBNL-49767. Berkeley, Calif.: Berkeley Lab Press. Makhijani, A. and Saleska S. 1999. The Nuclear Power Deception. U.S. Nuclear Mythology from Electricity “Too Cheap to Meter” to “Inherently Safe” Reactors. A report of the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. New York: The Apex Press. McCutcheon, C. 2002. Nuclear Reactions: The Politics of Operating a Radioactive Waste Disposal Site. Albuquerque, N.M.: University of New Mexico Press. McKinley, I., P.Zuidema, S.Vomvoris, and P.Marshall. 2001. Swiss geological studies to support implementation of repository projects: Status 2001 and outlook. In Witherspoon, P.A. and G.S.Bodvarsson, eds. Geological Challenges in Radioactive Waste Isolation: Third Worldwide Review. LBNL-49767. Berkeley, Calif.: Berkeley Lab Press. Mohanty, S. and B.Sagar. 2002. Importance of transparency and traceability in building a safety case for high-level nuclear waste repositories. Risk Analysis 22(1):7–15.
OCR for page 142
Murphy W.M. and R.B.Cadell. 1999 Alternative source term models for Yucca Mountain performance assessment based on natural analog data and secondary mineral solubility. Mat. Res. Soc. Conf. Proc. 556:551–558. NEA (Nuclear Energy Agency). 1991. Disposal of Radioactive Waste: Can Long-Term Safety Be Evaluated? A Collective Opinion of the Radioactive Waste Management Committee of the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency and the International Radioactive Waste Management Advisory Committee of the International Atomic Energy Agency, endorsed by the Experts for the Community Plan of Action in the Field of Radioactive Waste Management of the Commission of the European Communities. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. NEA. 1999a. Confidence in the Long-Term Safety of Deep Geological Repositories. Its Development and Communication. NEA 01809. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Available at: http://www.nea.fr/html/rwm/reports/1999/confidence.pdf. NEA. 1999b. Geologic Disposal of Radioactive Waste: Review of Developments in the Last Decades. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. NEA. 1999c. The Role of the Nuclear Regulator in Promoting and Evaluating Safety Culture. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. NEA. 2001a. Joint NEA-IAEA International Peer Review of the Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project’s Total System Performance Assessment Supporting the Site Recommendation Process, Final Report. Available at: http://www.ymp.gov/documents/ymipr_a/toc.htm. NEA. 2001b Reversibility and Retrievability in Geologic Disposal of Radioactive Waste. Reflections at the International Level. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. NEA. 2002. Establishing and Communicating Confidence in the Safety of Deep Geologic Disposal. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. NRC (National Research Council). 1957. The Disposal of Radioactive Waste on Land. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. NRC. 1990. Rethinking High-Level Radioactive Waste Disposal: A Position Statement of the Board on Radioactive Waste Management. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. NRC. 1996. Understanding Risk: Informing Decisions in a Democratic Society. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. NRC. 1999. Environmental Management Systems and ISO 14001. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. NRC. 2001. Disposition of High-Level Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel. The Continuing Societal and Technical Challenges. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. NRC. 2002a. Principles and Operational Strategies for Staged Repository Systems Progress Report. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. NRC. 2002b. Making the Nation Safer: The Role of Science and Technology in Countering Terrorism. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press. NWPA (Nuclear Waste Policy Act). 1982. Available at: http://www.rw.doe.gov/progdocs/nwpa/nwpa.htm.
OCR for page 143
Nuclear Waste News. 2002. New OCRWM program will explore broad science, technology issues. Nuclear Waste News 22(50):491–492. NWTRB (Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board). 2002. Letter report to Congress and the Department of Energy. January 24. Washington, D.C. Nye County. 2002. Resolution stating the intent of Nye County to actively and constructively engage with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the Administration, and Congress as the Yucca Mountain Project proceeds to final design, licensing, and implementation. Resolution No. 2002–22. April 16. Nye County Board of Commissioners. Nye County, Nev. Pharr, S.J., and R.D.Putnam, eds. 2000. Disaffected Democracies. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Renn, O. In Press. The Challenge of Integrating Deliberation and Expertise: Participation and Discourse in Risk Management. In McDaniels, T. and M. Small, eds. Risk Analysis and Society: Interdisciplinary Perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press. Renn, O., T. Webler, and P.Wiedemann, eds. 1995. Fairness and Competence in Citizen Participation: Evaluating Models for Environmental Discourse. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Rosa, E.A., and D.L.Clark, Jr. 1999. Historical routes to technological gridlock: Nuclear technology as a prototypical vehicle. Research in Social Problems and Public Policy 7:21–57. Rosa, E.A., and R.E.Dunlap. 1994. Nuclear power: Three decades of public opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly 58:295–324. Rosa, E.A. 2001. Public acceptance of nuclear power: Déjà Vu all over again? Forum on Physics and Society. The American Physical Society. Spring 2001. Available at: http://www.aps.org/units/fps/apr01/ap5.html. Rosa, E.A. and G.Machlis. 2002. It’s a bad thing to make one thing into two: Disciplinary distinctions as trained incapacities. Society and Natural Resources 15:251–262. Sabatier, P.A. 1986. Top-down and bottom-up approaches to implementation research: A critical analysis and suggested synthesis. Journal of Public Policy 6(1):21–48. Scott, W.R. 2003. Organizations: Rational, Natural and Open Systems, 5th ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.Prentice Hall. Slovic, P. 1987. Perception of risk. Science 236:280–285. Slovic, P. 1993. Risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Analysis 13:675–682. Steinbrunner, J. 1974. Cybernetic Theory of Decision, Part I.Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Teigen, K.H., Brun, W., and Slovic, P. 1988. Societal risks as seen by the Norwegian public. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 1:111–130. Thompson, J.D. 1967. Organizations in Actions. New York: McGraw-Hill. UKCEED (The UK Centre for Economic and Environmental Development). 2000. Workshop on the Monitoring and Retrievability of Radioactive Waste. A Report for Nirex prepared in association with the Centre for the Study of Environmental Change (CSEC) at Lancaster University. December 2. Manchester, United Kingdom. USNRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 2000. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Strategic Plan. NUREG-1614, FY2000–2005 Strategic Plan, September. Washington, D.C.: USNRC.
OCR for page 144
USNRC. 2002. Yucca Mountain Review Plan. NUREG-1804. Rev. March 2. USNRC. Van Luik, A. 2001. Developing a Safety Case for Yucca Mountain. Presentation before the committee. December 19. Las Vegas, Nev. Vira, J. 2001a. Taking it step by step: Finland’s decision-in-principle on final disposal of spent nuclear fuel. Radwaste Solutions (September/October):30–35. Vira, J. 2001 b. Step-wise Decision-making in Trial: The Case of Finland. Paper presented at the 9th International High-level Radioactive Waste Management Conference. 29 April–3 May, 2001. Las Vegas, Nev. Walters, C., R.D. Goruk, and D.Radford. 1993. Rivers inlet sockeye salmon: An experiment in adaptive management . North American Journal of Fisheries Management 13:253–62. Weart, S.1988. Nuclear Fear: A History of Images. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Webler, T., H., Kastenholz, and O.Renn. 1995. Public participation in impact assessments: A social learning perspective. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 15:443–463. Wene, C.O., and R.Espejo. 1999. A Meaning for Transparency in Decision Processes. Pp. 404–421 in Proceedings of the VALDOR Symposium in the RISCOM Programme Addressing Transparency in Risk Assessment and Decision Making. June 13–17. Stockholm, Sweden: Karinta Konsult. Williams, J. 2002. DOE’s Vision of Staging. Presentation before the committee. June 10. Washington, D.C. Witherspoon, P.A. and G.S.Bodvarsson, eds. 2001. Geological Challenges in Radioactive Waste Isolation: Third Worldwide Review. LBNL-49767. Berkeley, Calif.: Berkeley Lab Press. Ziegler, J.P. 2002. Department of Energy Views on Safety Case and Safety Strategy for Repository Licensing. Presentation before the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board. May 7. Washington, D.C.
Representative terms from entire chapter: