Management of Commercially Generated Radioactive Waste - U.S. ...

Response
306
COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT
The reference material was not well worded and modifications were made. Moreover it
is believed that the data base exists to generically assess the adequacy of geologic
disposal.
Draft pp. 4.1-45
Issue
Chapter 4.0 gives little guidance in judging the relative environmental and social
impacts of the possible courses of action. (208-NRC)
Response
The revised comparative assessment attempts to address the potentially significant
environmental and social impacts of the waste disposal alternatives to a depth appropriate
for this assessment and current level of knowledge.
The President, in his February 12, 1980, message, noted that past governmental efforts
to manage radioactive wastes have neither been technically adequate, nor have they suffi-
ciently involved states, local governments and the public in policy and program decisions.
This message established a program with mechanisms for full participation of these groups
and continuous public review. The Department of Energy is fully committed to this program.
Draft p. 4.2
Issue
There seems to be a contradiction between the statement on page 4.2, second paragraph,
which says: "Value judgments were required in at least two areas: 1) judgments relative
to selection of the decision criteria and 2) judgments relative to selection of appropriate
methods of measuring effects on criteria," and the statement in the footnote on p. 4.2 which
says: "Because these questions relate to the values of society and individuals they are
avoided here where possible." (208-NRC)
Response
It is stated that "...they be avoided here where possible." In this instance, value
judgments were necessary and their avoidance was not possible.