Ward Valley An Examination of Seven Issues in Earth Sciences and Ecology (1995) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
1 INTRODUCTION
1 INTRODUCTION
Pages 15-26
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 15... ...
The geologists, Howard Wilshire, Keith Howard, and David Miller, expressed concern that, in their professional judgment, the site evaluation studies for the Ward Valley, California, proposed low-level radioactive waste (LLRW) facility in the eastern Moiave Desert were inadequate to determine the suitability of the site to isolate the waste and left several critical issues unresolved (Wilshire et al, 1993a)
|
From page 16... ...
The need for LLRW legislation arose when the last three LLRW disposal facilities operating for co~runercial wastes decided in the late 1970's that they would no longer continue to accept radioactive waste from the entire country. Hanford, Washington and Barnwell, South Carolina experienced difficulties with corrosion and leaks of waste packages before the 1980 federal act and subsequent regulations governed such activity.
|
From page 17... ...
, is a definition of LLRW (see Box A) and a description of the types of wastes that are allowable for a LLRW site and classification of radioactive wastes based on the concentrations, half lives of the isotopes, and the types and intensities of activity (See Appendix B)
|
From page 18... ...
. Siting Considerations Given the concern about ground water, it has long been recognized that the safest places to store hazardous wastes, especially radioactive waste, would be in the unsaturated zone in desert climates (Winograd, 1974; National Research Council, 1976~.
|
From page 19... ...
However, the concentrations of a large number of radionuclides, especially shorter-lived species, would be much reduced in their groundwater path beyond the site boundaries because the slow travel time would allow time for radionuclides to decay to stable elements, or to adsorb to minerals in the aquifer through which the ground water flows and thus remove some contaminants. THE WARD VALLEY CONTROVERSY The preceding general remarks provide the context within which the debate arose conceiving the Ward Valley site in California.
|
From page 20... ...
4. No plans are revealed for monitoring ground water or the unsaturated zone downgradient Dom the site.
|
From page 21... ...
Based on the agreement reached with DOT, the Committee to Review Specific Scientific and Technical Safety Issues Related to the Ward Valley, California, Low-Leve! Radioactive Waste Site, the official name of the NAS/NRC committee, reviewed the literature and other relevant material related to the seven issues to (~)
|
From page 22... ...
The Open Meetings The committee met twice for three days in open session in the city of Needles, California, the closest population center to the Ward Valley site. The Wilshire group and the license applicant and licenser, USE and DHS, were given the time they requested to present arguments and evidence in support of their positions.
|
From page 23... ...
For example, the Beatty facility includes both a toxic chemical waste site and a low-level radioactive waste site adjacent to each other. There are also serious questions or uncertainties regarding the types, compositions, and physical forms of wastes that were accepted at the Beatty site, such as how much toxic chemical and/or radioactive waste were disposed of in liquid form.
|
From page 24... ...
First is a statement of the issue, followed by a summary of the Wilshire group's position, the USE and DHS response or position, and the committee's discussion, analysis, observations, conclusions, recommendations and references cited. Chapter 2, then, is the site overview; Chapter 3 addresses the potential for water and contaminants to be transferred through the unsaturated zone to the ground water; Chapter 4 deals with lateral subsurface flow in the unsaturated zone; Chapter 5 analyzes the five postulated pathways that ground water could take to flow Dom the site to the Colorado River; Chapter 6 discusses the mo~toring plans for the unsaturated zone and the ground water; Chapter 7 evaluates the flood control devices and other engineered structures to prevent flooding and erosion at the site; Chapter ~ considers the Desert Tortoise and its habitat; and Chapter 9 evaluates the revegetation plan to reestablish the native vegetation at the site after construction.
|
From page 25... ...
The committee depended upon the information provided by the opposing groups, DlIS/USE and the Wilshire group, any relevant information provided by outside interests, the scientific literature, and their own professional judgment. None of the conclusions should be read as either an endorsement of, nor condemnation of, the Ward Valley site.
|
From page 26... ...
1994. Ward Valley proposed low-level radioactive waste site.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.