RiskAnalysis, zyxwvutsrqponm Vol. zyxwvutsrqp 10, No. 4, 1990 zyxwvutsrqp Public Attitudes Toward Siting a High-Level Nuclear Waste Repository in Nevada Howard Kunreuther,l 1. INTRODUCTION Douglas Easterling,' William Desvousges,z and Paul Slovicj Received December 7, 1989; revired June 14, 1990 zyxwvu This paper examines the sources of public opposition to a high-level nuclear waste repository among samples of 1001 residents of Nevada and a national sample of 1201 residents. Two models of choice are contrasted: A benefit-cost model and a risk-perception model of individual choice. The data suggest that the willingness of Nevada residents to accept a repository at Yucca Mountain depends upon subjective risk factors, especially the perceived seriousness of risk to future gener- ations. Perceived risk depends in part on level of trust placed in the Department of Energy to manage a repository safely. Opposition to a local repository did not decrease significantly if compensation in the form of annual rebates, either ($1000, $3000, or zyxw $5000 per year for 20 years) were offered to residents. The public needs to be convinced before compensation is considered, that the repository will possess minimal risks to themselves as well as to future generations, and that the site currently targeted is suitable. One way to do this is through adoption of mitigation and control procedures such as strict federal standards and local control over the operation of the repository. The federal government should also consider returning to the fair procedure for selection between candidate sites specified in the initial Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. KEY WORDS: Nuclear waste; perceived risk; compensation; mitigation. The decision as to where a high-level nuclear waste (HLNW) repository should be sited has generated a great deal of public concern regarding safety and equity. The repository, to be constructed 2000 feet below ground, will permanently store spent nuclear fuel rods shipped from commercial reactors throughout the United States. Although the repository is intended to reduce radiation risks relative to the temporary storage methods that cur- rently exist, it has proven difficult to find a site that is universally acceptable. The controversy on where to locate the repository came to a head in December 1987, when Congress Wharton Center for Risk and Decision Processes, University of Penn- sylvania, Philadelphia Pennsylvania 19104. Research Triangle Institute, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. Decision Research, Eugene, Oregon. zyxwvutsrq 469 amended the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA) to narrow the search to a single site - Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Political leaders in Nevada generally oppose the repository and have taken a number of steps to block its construction at Yucca Mountain. For example, the state legislature passed Assembly Bill 222 in June 1989 making it illegal to dispose of high-level nuclear waste within Nevada. This legislation has been interpreted to allow state agencies to deny permits that the Department of Energy (DOE) requires for its characterization of the Yucca Mountain site.(') In addition, the U.S. Congressional delegation from Nevada has become increasingly polarized against the repository; indeed, ex-governor Richard Bryan was able to defeat Senator Chic Hecht for the US. Senate in 1988 largely as a result of Hecht's equivocal stand on the repository. In taking this antirepository position, elected officials feel that storage and transportation of nuclear wastes within the state pose unacceptable risks to the z 0272-433u90/1200-0469506.00/1 Q 19W Society for Risk Analysis