Decontamination and Environmental Restoration Of Nuclear Versus Non-Nuclear Sites: A Perspective From Both Sides Of The Fence
J. Sykes III, L. A. Miles, S. W. Porter, Jr.
The decontamination and environmental restoration of nuclear or, more properly, radioactively contaminated sites is very different from non-nuclear sites . . . or is it? The similarities and differences in the regulatory aspects, government involvement, public perception and public acceptance of remedial strategies for nuclear and non-nuclear clean-up sites are compared and contrasted. The sites studied include Technologically Enhanced - Naturally Occurring Radioactive Material (TE-NORM) contaminated sites and sites contaminated with hazardous metals and organic chemicals, including dioxin. The sites studied are located in the states of Pennsylvania and Florida and include Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund sites, State-funded sites and industry-funded clean-up sites. Remedial strategies include containment, removal/disposal and treatment of the contaminated material on- or off-site. Important factors in the acceptance of remedial strategies are the cooperation and consensus of Federal, State and local regulatory agencies and elected officials; public awareness and public participation in the decision making process; and the availability and sources of funding for the clean-up. The conclusion is that there are far more similarities than differences between the remediation of nuclear sites and non-nuclear sites.
This abstract was presented at the 35th Annual Midyear Meeting, "Decommissioning and Environmental Restoration", Controlling Dose I Session, 2/17/2002 - 2/20/2002, held in Orlando, FL.