After storing low-level radioactive and hazardous waste on campus since 1992, the UA could run out of space for it within the next two years.

Unless more space can be found, research programs may have to be modified or even shut down to reduce the amount of waste they generate.

Michael Cusanovich, vice president for research and graduate studies, predicted the University of Arizona would run out of space in about two years, shutting down UA research and medical procedures at University Medical Center that use radioactive isotopes.

But the university is not yet at that point, he said.

The UA generates about 4,500 cubic feet of waste per year, said Melvin Young, the UA's deputy radiation safety officer. The waste is stored on campus anywhere from two months to three years. The length of storage time, he said, depends on whether the waste's radioactivity is short- or long-lived. The types of radioactive waste generated by the UA usually have a half-life of about 120 days, he said.

A half-life of a radioactive isotope is the time required for half of the atoms in the radioactive substance to become disintegrated.

Other hazardous waste, such as animal carcasses, needles and surgical gloves, are shipped off-campus to incinerators and burned, Young said.

One solution would be to construct a new building on campus to store the hazardous waste. Young said the UA has been working on that proposal for the last two years.

"If construction goes ahead we won't run out of space," he said.

Mary Booth, health physicist for the Radiation Control Office, said the UA has entered into the bidding stage for the new building and its cost could run as high as $500,000.

Booth said the building's purpose is to keep the impact to researchers at a minimum. She said if the university does run out of space then her office will have to ask UA researchers who use radioactive isotopes to do less research to cut back on waste generated.

In the long run, she said, "It would be far more detrimental to (UA) research if this building is not built."

Cusanovich said the UA has renovation funds that could be used to construct the building, but also said next year's priority has not yet been set.

Cusanovich said if the university decides to go ahead with construction, it could find itself in a bind. For one, he said, he did not know what would happen to the building if the UA later starts shipping to a dump in California.

The UA used to ship its waste to Washington and Nevada, until a federal mandate in the mid-1980s directed states to enter into mutual agreements to store waste at dumps within their regions.

Young said Arizona belongs to the Southwest regional compact, which includes California, Arizona and Nevada.

The UA can no longer deliver waste to the Nevada dump, because that site has been permanently closed down due to leakage.

A hazardous and radioactive waste dump is scheduled to be established in California, although a site has not yet been decided.

Cusanovich said it is unclear when a site in California would become available.

A proposed nuclear waste dump site, Ward Valley, near Needles, Calif., has been contested because of its location, 18 miles from the Colorado River. Opponents say seepage could contaminate the river, which provides water for Southwestern communities. If the site is approved, land could be taken away from the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe's reservation and given to the state to build the dump.

If Ward Valley is opened, that is where the UA will be shipping waste, Young said.

Steve Lopez, a former councilmember of the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe, said he has been working with his and other Colorado River tribes for almost 10 years to stop the proposal.

Lopez said representatives from the Colorado River Native American tribes met with White House and Interior representatives last month in Washington, D.C.

"We let them know what was going on with the forced land transfer that Congress is trying to pass, which allows (it) to turn the land over to the state of California," Lopez said. "What we've been saying is that we're trying to protect our own land. We're not trying to propose any alternate sites."