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

6.189
design might well be limited to a few hundred acres of low productivity habitat. Release
of toxic materials presents a potentially more severe problem. While it is predicted that
release of chemicals from waste packaging facilities can be controlled to acceptable levels,
control of spoils may prove difficult because of the open air storage required.
Very deep hole repositories would produce ecosystem effects similar to the mined
repository option. Spoils, however, would be less bulky and presumably easier to control.
Island geologic, though technically similar to the mined repository concept, has a
greater potential for ecosystem disruption because of the sensitive and unique characteris-
tics of many island ecosystems. Assuming careful design and management of such a facility,
however, the facility exclusion area might well protect or restore the integrity of the
natural ecosystem as has happened to some extent at the sites such as the DOE site near Han-
ford, Washington. Leach of the spoil pile could significantly effect the quality of a small
island ecosystem.
The potential ecological effects of the subseabed option are not known at this time.
On-shore facilities are likely to be constructed near populated (and presumably ecologically
disturbed) areas because of current efforts to protect what remains of natural coastline.
A large area of seabed would be subject to penetrometer emplacement; however, the population
and productivity of the affected region is likely to be low and relatively minor disturbance
would be experienced.
Ecological effects of space disposal are likely to be modest (with the exception of
those normally associated with space flight launches) in comparison to the other options.
Assuming space disposal of all high-level waste, ancillary geological repository require-
ments would be very small compared to disposing of all waste in terrestrial repositories.
All concepts under consideration here offer the potential for satisfactory performance
on the basis of non-radiological environmental effects; however, important differences in
the absolute magnitude of these effects may exist. Some discrimination is possible on the
basis of non-radiological health effects to the general public; however, the generic nature
of the study and the early stage of development of most of the concepts provide tenuous dis-
crimination among concepts on the basis of occupational (non-radiological) health effects
and socioeconomic, aesthetic, and ecological effects. The order of decreasing preference
based on available evidence regarding non-radiological environmental effects is: mined
repository/very deep hole, subseabed/island, space.
6.2.4.3 Status of Development
Availability of Technology for Construction of System
There are considerable differences among the concepts with respect to the engineering
development needed for implementation. Construction for the mined repository and island
repository options would use well-tested existing technology, although for novel applica-
tions. The waste treatment technology required to support the mined repository concept is
also well advanced, having been the focus of substantial development. Less is understood