Yes, there's Yucca Mountain. Of course, the big problem with Yucca is that it's pretty much already full, if all the waste we have now goes into it. The easiest alternative, of course, would be fuel reprocessing. Jimmy Cater banned fuel reprocessing back in the 70s so that it wouldn't encourage nuclear proliferation. Meanwhile, many other countries went ahead with reprocessing. Most notably France, they have a very well developed system.
The main constituent of nuclear waste are spent nuclear fuel rods. Once they're through a reactor cycle, they usually consist of unburned u-238, some small amounts of plutonium and higher actinides, and fission products, the broken halves of atoms created by the splitting of uranium and plutonium. On average, the fission products make up 5% of the spent fuel. The plutonium can be used as fuel for reactors, it can be used in what's known as mixed oxide (MOX) fuel. This kind of fuel has been used for years, when Russia agreed to lower it's nuclear stockpile, part of that involved selling plutonium taken from those weapons and using it to make MOX fuel, and it's been getting used in our reactors for a while now. So by reprocessing our fuel, we can pull out the plutonium and use it for fuel. Taking that out leaves the fission products, some higher actinides, and the u-238, otherwise known as depleted uranium. In terms of fuel storage, the plutonium and higher actinides are the worrisome products, being more toxic and having relatively long half lives. Now ideally, those higher actinides could be broken down in fast breeder reactors, but they could also be destroyed in accelerator driven subcritical reactors, and possibly in pressurized heavy water thorium reactors. Breeders would be useful, because they could also use the u-238 as fuel, which is currently a low level waste product. The u-238 is also known as depleted uranium, it's not very radioactive, it has a half life of 4.468 billion years, so it decays very slowly. As an aside, it would probably be better to use it as fuel, for a while the military was using it in anti-tank shells, which tends to vaporize the u 238, and having radioactive elements go airborne is probably the most dangerous form to have them in.
But anyway, if you pull out the plutonium and higher actinides, as well as the depleted uranium, what you're left with are the fission products. They usually have much shorter half lives, so they're dangerous for a much shorter time. The isotopes with the shortest half lives decay in a fairly short time, so they're mostly gone after a 30-50 year storage term on site at the reactors. What's left after that would generally be considered low level waste, and for that we already have 3 existing sites:
So what I'm getting at here is, there are alternatives to Yucca Mountain. Now Bush did make reprocessing legal again during his term, so a couple of companies have been looking into it. The big problem getting it going is more economic than anything else, recycling nuclear weapons is cheaper than reprocessing fuel, but that won't last forever. Of course, having more demand from new plants would help. At the moment, storing spent fuel at reactor sites is pretty safe.
On the other hand, if you want to talk about toxic waste that's all over the place right now, I just saw this:
or, for the scary map:
Yikes! If you take that, and add in all the groundwater that's getting contaminated with a crazy mix of chemicals due to natural gas fracking (have you seen gasland? Watch it!: http://gaslandthemovie.com/
) you can see that the real enemy here is fossil fuels, by far. If nuclear power can help us get beyond this mess, I'm all for it. You may disagree, of course.