List of Contributors. Preface. Acknowledgements. 1. Introduction.
I: Unifying Risk Management and Risk Analysis for Decision Makers. 2. Complementary Risk Management: A Unified View for Decision Makers.
II: Legacies. 3. Radiation Legacy of the Soviet Nuclear Complex. 4. Status and Challenges of Managing Risks in the U.S. Department of Energy Environmental Management Program. 5. Perception of Risk, Health, and Equality. 6. Risk-Based Banking Experiences for Cold War Legacy Facilities. 7. Cleanup of Radioactive Floating Refuse at Vromos Bay. 8. Integrated Accident Risk Analysis and Applications for the Disposal of Chemical Agents and Munitions. 9. Environmental Radiation Dose Reconstruction for U.S. and Russian Weapons Production Facilities: Hanford and Mayak. 10. Quantitative Risk Assessment Methods of Accounting for Probabilistic and Deterministic Data Applied to Complex Systems.
III: Analyses and Programs Applicable to Legacies. 11. Environmental Risk Assessment of Installations and Sites Inherited from the Cold War Period in Bulgaria. 12. Radiation Factors Risk Assessment within the Chornobyl Nuclear Power Plant Exclusion Zone. 13. Psychological Aspects of Risk Assessment and Management. 14. Utilizing a Multimedia Approach for Risk Analysis of Environmental Systems. 15. Using Integrated Quantitative Risk Assessment to Optimise Safety in Chemical Installations. 16. Site-Specific Modification of Ground-Water Generic Criteria as Applied to a Contaminated Site.
IV: Future Directions. 17. East Meets West: Teaming on Risk Management. 18. Where are We Going?
Appendix A: Programme for NATO Advanced Study Institute, Risk Assessment Activities for the Cold War Facilities and Environmental Legacies.
Appendix B: Acronyms and Abbreviations Used in Text.
Appendix C: Cross Cultural Guide to the Book.
Index.

The Cold War Era left the major participants, the United States and the former Soviet Union (FSU), with large legacies in terms of both contamination and potential accidents. Facility contamination and environmental degradation, as well as the accident­ vulnerable facilities and equipment, are a result of weapons development, testing, and production. Although the countries face similar issues from similar activities, important differences in waste management practices make the potential environmental and health risks of more immediate concern in the FSU and Eastern Europe. In the West, most nuclear and chemical waste is stored in known contained locations, while in the East, much of the equivalent material is unconfined, contaminating the environment. In the past decade, the U.S. started to address and remediate these Cold War legacies. Costs have been very high, and the projected cost estimates for total cleanup are still increasing. Currently in Russia, the resources for starting such major activities continue to be unavailable.