Premium
Choosing remediation and waste management options at hazardous and radioactive waste sites
Author(s) -
Greenberg Michael,
Burger Joanna,
Powers Charles,
Leschine Thomas,
Lowrie Karen,
Friedlander Barry,
Faustman Elaine,
Griffith William,
Kosson David
Publication year - 2002
Publication title -
remediation journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.762
H-Index - 27
eISSN - 1520-6831
pISSN - 1051-5658
DOI - 10.1002/rem.10053
Subject(s) - checklist , hazardous waste , radioactive waste , environmental remediation , process (computing) , environmental planning , business , waste management , scale (ratio) , environmental resource management , engineering , environmental science , computer science , contamination , psychology , geography , ecology , cartography , cognitive psychology , biology , operating system
This article discusses a process for finding insights that will allow federal agencies and environmentalprofessionals to more effectively manage contaminated sites. The process is built around what Etzioni(1968) called mixed‐scanning, that is, perpetually doing both comprehensive and detailedanalyses and periodically re‐scanning for new circumstances that change the decision‐makingenvironment. The article offers a checklist of 127 items, which is one part of the multiple‐stagescanning process. The checklist includes questions about technology; public, worker, and ecologicalhealth; economic cost and benefits; social impacts; and legal issues. While developed for a DOEhigh‐level radioactive waste application, the decision‐making framework and specific questions canbe used for other large‐scale remediation and management projects. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals,Inc.