[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 198 (Friday, October 13, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60484-60490]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 06-8675]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY


Amended Notice of Intent To Expand the Scope of the Environmental 
Impact Statement for the Alignment, Construction, and Operation of a 
Rail Line to a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, NV

AGENCY: Department of Energy.

ACTION: Amended notice of intent.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) is providing 
this Amended Notice of Intent to expand the scope of the ongoing 
Environmental Impact Statement for the Alignment, Construction and 
Operation of a Rail Line to a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain, 
Nye County, Nevada (DOE/EIS-0369, Rail Alignment EIS, Notice of Intent, 
April 8, 2004, 69 FR 18565). In the ongoing Rail Alignment EIS, DOE has 
undertaken an analysis of alternative rail alignments in which to 
construct and operate a rail line within what is referred to as the 
Caliente corridor. Based on new information, DOE now plans to expand 
the Rail Alignment EIS to incorporate analysis of a new rail corridor 
alternative. This additional analysis will supplement the corridor 
analyses in the ``Final Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic 
Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level 
Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada'' (DOE/EIS-
0250F, Yucca Mountain Final EIS, February 2002). The expanded analysis 
will consider the potential environmental impacts of a newly proposed 
Mina rail corridor at the same level of corridor analysis as is 
contained in the Yucca Mountain Final EIS, and will review the rail 
corridor analyses of that Final EIS, and update, as appropriate. The 
expanded scope will then proceed to include a detailed analysis of 
alternative alignments within the Mina corridor at the same level of 
analysis of the ongoing alignment analysis for the Caliente corridor. 
The result will be to provide the public with information concerning 
both the potential corridor and alignment impacts of the Mina corridor 
at the same time DOE presents the potential impacts for the 
construction and operation of a rail line within the Caliente corridor. 
The expanded EIS will be entitled the Supplemental Yucca Mountain Rail 
Corridor and Rail Alignment EIS (DOE/EIS-0250F-S2 and DOE/EIS-0369).
    On April 8, 2004 (69 FR 18557), the Department issued a Record of 
Decision announcing its selection, both nationally and in the State of 
Nevada, of the mostly rail scenario analyzed in the Yucca Mountain 
Final EIS. This decision will ultimately require the construction of a 
rail line to connect the repository site at Yucca Mountain to an 
existing rail line in the State of Nevada for the shipment of spent 
nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. To that end, the 
Department also selected the Caliente rail corridor in which to examine 
possible alignments for construction of that rail line. On April 8, 
2004 (69 FR 18565), DOE issued a Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS 
under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for the alignment, 
construction, and operation of a rail line for shipments of spent 
nuclear fuel, high-level radioactive waste, and other materials from a 
site near Caliente, Nevada, to a geologic repository at Yucca Mountain, 
Nevada (the Rail Alignment EIS).
    During subsequent public scoping, DOE received comments that 
offered preferences for various rail corridors analyzed in detail in 
the Yucca Mountain Final EIS, and identified other rail corridors for 
consideration. In particular, commenters recommended that DOE consider 
the Mina route, which would include use of an existing rail line from 
Hazen, Nevada, to the Thorne siding in Hawthorne, Nevada, and the 
construction of new rail line that would follow an abandoned rail line 
nearly to Yucca Mountain.
    In the Yucca Mountain Final EIS, DOE considered, but eliminated 
from detailed study, several potential rail routes. One of those 
potential rail routes, the Mina route, could only connect to an 
existing rail line by crossing the Walker River Paiute Tribe 
Reservation northwest of Hawthorne, Nevada, and the Tribe had informed 
DOE that it would refuse to allow nuclear waste to be transported 
across its reservation (letter dated December 6, 1991). For this 
reason, the Department considered the Mina route to pose an unavoidable 
land use conflict and thus to be unavailable for further consideration.
    Following review of the scoping comments for the Rail Alignment 
EIS, DOE held discussions with the Walker River Paiute Tribe regarding 
the availability of the Mina route. Subsequently, in May 2006, the 
Walker River Paiute Tribe informed DOE that the Tribal Council had 
withdrawn its objection to the completion of an EIS studying the 
transportation of nuclear waste across its reservation. The Tribe 
stated that its Tribal Council had not decided to allow such shipments, 
but indicated that inclusion of the Mina route in an EIS would allow 
the Tribe

[[Page 60485]]

to make a more informed, final decision about the matter.
    In view of the Tribal Council's decision, DOE initiated a study to 
determine the feasibility of the Mina route, and to identify a specific 
corridor (Mina corridor) and associated preliminary alternative 
alignments (described below under Mina Alternative Alignments). Based 
on DOE's preliminary analysis, in comparison with other rail corridors, 
the Mina corridor appears to offer potential advantages to the extent 
it would cross fewer mountain ranges, utilize existing rail bed, and 
also be a shorter distance. These potential advantages would simplify 
design and construction of a rail line, and therefore would be less 
costly to construct. The Mina corridor also would appear to have fewer 
land use conflicts, and would involve less land disturbance, which 
tends to result in lower adverse environmental impacts overall.
    For these reasons, DOE has concluded that the Mina corridor 
warrants further detailed study. Accordingly, DOE is announcing its 
intent to expand the scope of the Rail Alignment EIS to supplement the 
rail corridor analyses of the Yucca Mountain Final EIS, and analyze the 
Mina corridor. This Supplemental Yucca Mountain Rail Corridor and Rail 
Alignment EIS \1\ also will consider, in detail, alignments for the 
construction and operation of a rail line within the Caliente and Mina 
rail corridors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Coincident with this Amended Notice of Intent, DOE is 
publishing a Notice of Intent to prepare a Supplemental Yucca 
Mountain EIS (DOE/EIS-0250F-S1). That Supplement will consider the 
current repository design and plans for its construction and 
operation, and the transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-
level radioactive waste from sites around the United States to the 
repository at Yucca Mountain.

DATES: The Department invites comments on the scope of the Supplemental 
Yucca Mountain Rail Corridor and Rail Alignment EIS to ensure that all 
relevant environmental issues and reasonable alternatives are 
addressed. Public scoping meetings are discussed below in the 
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section. DOE will consider all comments 
received during the 45-day public scoping period, which starts with 
publication of this Amended Notice of Intent and ends November 27, 
2006. Comments received after this date will be considered to the 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
extent practicable.

ADDRESSES: Requests for additional information on the Supplemental 
Yucca Mountain Rail Corridor and Rail Alignment EIS or transportation 
planning in general should be directed to: Mr. M. Lee Bishop, EIS 
Document Manager, Office of Logistics Management, Office of Civilian 
Radioactive Waste Management, U.S. Department of Energy, 1551 Hillshire 
Drive, M/S 011, Las Vegas, NV 89134, Telephone 1-800-967-3477. Written 
comments on the scope of the Supplemental Yucca Mountain Rail Corridor 
and Rail Alignment EIS may be submitted to Mr. M. Lee Bishop at this 
address, by facsimile to 1-800-967-0739, or via the Internet at http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov under the caption, What's New.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For general information regarding the 
DOE NEPA process contact: Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of 
NEPA Policy and Compliance, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 
Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20585, Telephone 202-586-4600, 
or leave a message at 1-800-472-2756.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On July 23, 2002, the President signed into law (Pub. L. 107-200) a 
joint resolution of the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. 
Senate designating the Yucca Mountain site in Nye County, Nevada, for 
development as a geologic repository for the disposal of spent nuclear 
fuel and high-level radioactive waste. Subsequently, the Department 
issued a Record of Decision (April 8, 2004) to announce its selection, 
both nationally and in the State of Nevada, of the mostly rail scenario 
analyzed in the Yucca Mountain Final EIS as the mode of transportation 
for spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste to the 
repository. Under the mostly rail scenario, the Department would rely 
on a combination of rail, truck and possibly barge to transport to the 
repository site at Yucca Mountain up to 70,000 metric tons of heavy 
metal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. Most of 
the spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste, however, would 
be transported by rail.
    The Department's decision to select the mostly rail scenario in 
Nevada ultimately will require the construction of a rail line \2\ to 
connect the repository site at Yucca Mountain to an existing rail line 
in the State of Nevada for the shipment of spent nuclear fuel and high-
level radioactive waste in the event the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 
authorizes construction of the repository, and receipt and possession 
of these materials at Yucca Mountain. To that end, in the same Record 
of Decision, the Department also decided to select the Caliente rail 
corridor \3\ to study possible alignments for this proposed rail line. 
The Caliente rail corridor originates at an existing siding to the 
Union Pacific railroad near Caliente, Nevada, and extends in a westerly 
direction to the northwest corner of the Nevada Test and Training 
Range, before turning south-southeast to the repository at Yucca 
Mountain. The Caliente corridor ranges between 512 kilometers (318 
miles) and 553 kilometers (344 miles) in length, depending on the 
alternative alignments considered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ Rail line means the railroad track and underlying 
earthworks.
    \3\ A corridor is a strip of land 400 meters (0.25 mile) wide 
through which DOE would identify an alignment for the construction 
of a rail line.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On April 8, 2004, DOE issued a Notice of Intent to prepare an EIS 
under NEPA for the alignment, construction, and operation of a rail 
line for shipments of spent nuclear fuel, high-level radioactive waste, 
and other materials \4\ from a site near Caliente, Nevada to a geologic 
repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. During subsequent public scoping, 
DOE received comments that offered preferences for various rail 
corridors analyzed in detail in the Yucca Mountain Final EIS, and 
identified other rail corridors for consideration. In particular, 
commenters recommended that DOE consider ``the Mina route,'' which 
would include use of an existing rail line from Hazen, Nevada, to the 
Thorne siding at Hawthorne, Nevada, and the construction of new rail 
line that would follow an abandoned rail line nearly to Yucca Mountain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ Other materials are those related to the construction and 
operation of the repository.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    In the Yucca Mountain Final EIS, DOE considered, but eliminated 
from detailed study, the Mina route and several other potential rail 
routes (see Section 2.3.3.1). These other potential rail routes were 
identified in a series of three transportation studies--``Preliminary 
Rail Access Study'' (January, 1990), the ``Nevada Potential Repository 
Preliminary Transportation Strategy, Study 1'' (February, 1995), and 
the ``Nevada Potential Repository Preliminary Transportation Strategy, 
Study 2'' (February, 1996). Based on the latter (1996) study and public 
scoping, five potential rail corridors were considered in detail in the 
Yucca Mountain Final EIS.
    In the 1996 study, the Mina route was not recommended for further 
study, because a rail line within the Mina route could only connect to 
an existing rail line by crossing the Walker River Paiute

[[Page 60486]]

Tribe Reservation, and the Tribe had informed DOE that it would refuse 
to allow nuclear waste to be transported across its reservation (letter 
dated December 6, 1991). For this reason, the Department considered the 
Mina route to pose an unavoidable land use conflict and thus to be 
unavailable for further consideration (see Section 2.3.3.1 in the Yucca 
Mountain Final EIS).
    Following review of the scoping comments for the Rail Alignment 
EIS, DOE held discussions with the Walker River Paiute Tribe regarding 
the availability of the Mina route. Subsequently, in May 2006, the 
Walker River Paiute Tribe informed DOE that the Tribal Council had 
withdrawn its objection to the completion of an EIS studying the 
transportation of nuclear waste across its reservation. The Tribe 
stated that its Tribal Council had not decided to allow such shipments, 
but indicated that inclusion of the Mina route in an EIS would allow 
the Tribe to make a more informed, final decision about the matter.
    In view of the Tribal Council's decision, DOE initiated a study to 
determine the feasibility of the Mina route, and to identify a specific 
corridor (the Mina corridor) and associated preliminary alternative 
alignments. Based on DOE's preliminary analysis, in comparison with 
other rail corridors, the Mina corridor appears to offer potential 
advantages to the extent it would cross fewer mountain ranges, utilize 
existing rail bed, and also be a shorter distance. These potential 
advantages would simplify design and construction of the rail line, and 
therefore would be less costly to construct. The Mina corridor also 
would appear to have fewer land use conflicts, and would involve less 
land disturbance, which tends to result in lower adverse environmental 
impacts overall.
    For these reasons, DOE has concluded that the Mina corridor 
warrants further detailed study. Accordingly, DOE is announcing its 
intent to expand the scope of the Rail Alignment EIS to prepare a 
Supplemental EIS that will supplement the rail corridor analyses of the 
Yucca Mountain Final EIS. In the Yucca Mountain Final EIS, DOE 
evaluated the construction and operation of a rail line within five 
corridors--Caliente, Caliente-Chalk Mountain, Carlin, Jean and Valley 
Modified. In the Supplemental Yucca Mountain Rail Corridor and Rail 
Alignment EIS, DOE will review the environmental information and 
analyses for these corridors, and update, as appropriate \5\; DOE also 
plans to consider the Mina corridor at a level of detail commensurate 
with that of the Yucca Mountain Final EIS. In addition, the 
Supplemental Yucca Mountain Rail Corridor and Rail Alignment EIS will 
consider, in detail, alignments for the construction and operation of a 
rail line within the Caliente and Mina corridors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ In a letter to the U.S. Air Force (dated December 1, 2004), 
DOE eliminated from detailed study alignments that would intersect 
the Nevada Test and Training Range because of concerns regarding 
military readiness testing and training activities. This letter was 
in response to a May 28, 2004 letter from the U.S. Air Force. For 
the same reasons cited in these letters, DOE does not intend to 
consider further the Caliente-Chalk Mountain rail corridor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Mina corridor originates at an existing rail line near Wabuska, 
Nevada, where it proceeds southeasterly through Hawthorne to Blair 
Junction, and then on to Lida Junction. At that point, it becomes 
coincident with the Caliente corridor trending southeasterly through 
Oasis Valley before turning north-northeast to Yucca Mountain. The Mina 
corridor is about 450 kilometers (280 miles) in length; however, 
construction of new rail line would range between about 386 kilometers 
(240 miles) and 409 kilometers (254 miles) because the corridor 
includes the existing Department of Defense rail line from Wabuska to 
the Hawthorne Army Depot in Hawthorne.

Previous Public Scoping Comments

    The Department received more than 4,100 comments during the public 
scoping period for the Rail Alignment EIS that ended June 1, 2004. In 
general, many of these comments offered preferences for various rail 
corridors or requested DOE to evaluate rail corridors other than 
Caliente, and suggested new alternative alignments or criteria (e.g., 
avoid wilderness study areas) that could be used to modify the 
preliminary alignments proposed by DOE or to create new alternative 
alignments. These comments helped inform DOE's decision to expand the 
scope of the Rail Alignment EIS as discussed under Background above, 
and to identify the range of reasonable alternative alignments as 
discussed under Caliente Alternative Alignments below.
    Commenters also requested that DOE allow other commodities to be 
shipped on the rail line by private entities (referred to herein as 
shared use). As described under Proposed Action below, the Supplemental 
Yucca Mountain Rail Corridor and Rail Alignment EIS will evaluate 
shipments of commercial commodities, in addition to shipments of DOE 
materials.
    DOE also received comments regarding analytical methods for various 
environmental resources such as cultural resources and water use, 
treatment of cumulative impacts and Native American concerns, the 
nature of the evaluation of potential accidents and sabotage, and the 
identification of mitigation measures. These comments and associated 
issues will be addressed in the Supplemental Yucca Mountain Rail 
Corridor and Rail Alignment EIS.

Proposed Action

    Under the Supplemental Yucca Mountain Rail Corridor and Rail 
Alignment EIS, the Proposed Action is to determine a rail alignment \6\ 
(within a rail corridor) in which to construct and operate a rail line 
for shipments of spent nuclear fuel, high-level radioactive waste, and 
other materials from an existing railroad in Nevada to a geologic 
repository at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada. DOE now plans to 
review the environmental information and analyses for four rail 
corridors, and update, as appropriate (Caliente, Carlin, Jean and 
Valley Modified), include and analyze the Mina corridor, and evaluate 
in detail two alternatives that would implement the Proposed Action--
the Mina Alternative and the Caliente Alternative. Under each 
implementing alternative, DOE will evaluate the potential environmental 
impacts from the construction and operation of a rail line along 
various alternative alignments \7\ and common segments.\8\ As part of 
rail line operations, DOE also will evaluate, as an option to the Mina 
and Caliente implementing alternatives, the shipment of commercial 
commodities by private entities (shared use).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ A strip of land less than 400 meters (0.25 mile) wide 
through which the location of a rail line would be identified.
    \7\ A geographic region of the rail alignment for which multiple 
routes for the rail line have been identified.
    \8\ A geographic region of the rail alignment for which a single 
route for the rail line has been identified.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Preliminary Alternatives

    As required by the Council on Environmental Quality and 
Departmental regulations that implement NEPA, the Supplemental Yucca 
Mountain Rail Corridor and Rail Alignment EIS will analyze and present 
the environmental impacts associated with the range of reasonable 
alternatives to meet DOE's purpose and need for a rail line, and a no-
action alternative. The preliminary alternative alignments for the 
Caliente and Mina rail alignments comprise a series of common segments 
and alternatives (maps may be obtained as described above in

[[Page 60487]]

ADDRESSES). The Department is interested in identifying and 
subsequently evaluating any additional reasonable alternative 
alignments within the Caliente or Mina corridors that would reduce or 
avoid known or potential adverse environmental impacts, features having 
aesthetic values, and land-use conflicts, or alternatives that should 
be eliminated from detailed consideration. This could include 
identifying alternative alignments that could avoid environmentally 
sensitive areas or other land use conflicts.

Caliente Alternative Alignments

    DOE's Notice of Intent (April 8, 2004) identified preliminary 
alternative alignments and common segments to be evaluated in the Rail 
Alignment EIS. The Notice of Intent also indicated that DOE would 
consider other potential alternatives if they would minimize, avoid or 
otherwise mitigate adverse environmental impacts.
    Following scoping, DOE evaluated all public comments, as well as 
information from other sources, that could affect the preliminary 
alternative alignments and common segments identified in the Notice of 
Intent. Based on this information, DOE identified additional 
alternative alignments, and modified the preliminary alignments and 
common segments identified in the Notice of Intent to create a suite of 
potential alternatives. This suite was then evaluated using 
environmental features and engineering and design factors to determine, 
preliminarily, the range of reasonable alternative alignments. As an 
example, commenters identified alternative alignments that would avoid 
Garden Valley by identifying routes through Coal Valley that cross the 
Golden Gate Range. However, DOE found these alignments are not 
reasonable alternatives because they would either exceed engineering 
and design factors or would be far more costly to construct than other 
alignments that pass through Garden Valley.
    On this basis, DOE has identified, preliminarily, alternative 
alignments at the interface with the Union Pacific Railroad near 
Caliente, in Garden Valley, near the Reveille Range and the Town of 
Goldfield, north of Scottys Junction (referred to as Bonnie Claire), 
and in Oasis Valley. These alternative alignments, which are described 
below, will be considered in detail in the Supplemental Yucca Mountain 
Rail Corridor and Rail Alignment EIS.

Interface With Union Pacific Railroad

    DOE has identified two alternative alignments, Caliente and Eccles, 
either of which alternative alignment would connect the proposed rail 
line to the existing Union Pacific Railroad in or near the City of 
Caliente. The Caliente alternative alignment would begin in Caliente, 
enter Meadow Valley Wash at Indian Cove, and extend generally north 
through Meadow Valley Wash and along U.S. 93. This alternative 
alignment would then cross U.S. 93 about 5 kilometers (3 miles) 
southwest of Panaca and connect to Common Segment 1 about 1 kilometer 
(0.6 mile) northwest of U.S. 93 and 18 kilometers (11 miles) south of 
Pioche. The Caliente alternative alignment would be approximately 18 
kilometers (11 miles) long.
    The Eccles alternative alignment would begin along Clover Creek 
about 8 kilometers (5 miles) east of Caliente and trend generally north 
to enter Meadow Valley Wash from the southeast. This alternative 
alignment would then cross U.S. 93 about 5 kilometers (3 miles) 
southwest of Panaca and connect to Common Segment 1 about 1 kilometer 
(0.6 mile) northwest of U.S. 93 and 18 kilometers (11 miles) south of 
Pioche. The Eccles alternative alignment would be about 18 kilometers 
(11 miles) long.

Garden Valley

    DOE is considering four alternative alignments in the Garden Valley 
area, referred to as Garden Valley 1, 2, 3, and 8. Garden Valley 1 
would run due west through the Golden Gate Range for about 7 kilometers 
(4 miles), trend in a southwesterly direction through Garden Valley, 
cross the Lincoln and Nye County line, and connect to Common Segment 2 
about 5 kilometers (3 miles) north of the Worthington Mountains 
Wilderness Area, and 3 kilometers (2 miles) east of the Humboldt 
Toiyabe National Forest. The Garden Valley 1 alternative alignment 
would be approximately 35 kilometers (22 miles) long.
    Garden Valley 2 would run to the south of Garden Valley 1 and 
Garden Valley 3, crossing the Lincoln and Nye County line. Garden 
Valley 2 would continue southwesterly through the Golden Gate Range at 
Water Gap, turn westward through Garden Valley, and continue 
southwesterly to connect to Common Segment 2 about 5 kilometers (3 
miles) north of the Worthington Mountains Wilderness Area and 3 
kilometers (2 miles) east of the Humboldt Toiyabe National Forest. The 
Garden Valley 2 alternative alignment would be about 37 kilometers (23 
miles) long.
    Garden Valley 3 would run due west through the Golden Gate Range 
and then in a northwesterly direction until turning southwest to run 
along the southeast base of the Quinn Canyon Range. Continuing in a 
southwesterly direction, it would run through Garden Valley, cross the 
Lincoln and Nye County line, and connect to Common Segment 2 about 5 
kilometers (3 miles) north of the Worthington Mountains Wilderness Area 
and 3 kilometers (2 miles) east of the Humboldt Toiyabe National 
Forest. The Garden Valley 3 alternative alignment would be 
approximately 36 kilometers (22 miles) long.
    Garden Valley 8 would run to the south of Garden Valley 1 and 
Garden Valley 3, crossing the Lincoln and Nye County line. It would 
continue southwesterly through the Golden Gate Range at Water Gap, 
would turn westward through Garden Valley, and run in a southwesterly 
direction before turning sharply westward. Garden Valley 8 would 
proceed westward and connect to Common Segment 2 about 5 kilometers (3 
miles) north of the Worthington Mountains Wilderness Area and 3 
kilometers (2 miles) east of the Humboldt Toiyabe National Forest. The 
Garden Valley 8 alternative alignment would be about 38 kilometers (23 
miles) long, 8 kilometers (5 miles) of which parallels Garden Valley 
Road.

South Reveille

    South Reveille 2 and South Reveille 3 alternative alignments would 
begin 5 kilometers (3 miles) south of the South Reveille Wilderness 
Study Area. South Reveille 2 would trend to the northwest along the 
border of the South Reveille Wilderness Study Area. South Reveille 3 
would trend northwest a few kilometers to the west and roughly parallel 
to South Reveille 2. South Reveille 2 or South Reveille 3 would connect 
to Common Segment 3 in Reveille Valley about 14 kilometers (9 miles) 
west of State Route 375. South Reveille 2 would be approximately 19 
kilometers (12 miles) long and South Reveille 3 would be approximately 
20 kilometers (12 miles) long.

Goldfield

    DOE is considering three alternative alignments in the Goldfield 
area, referred to as Goldfield 1, 3, and 4. Goldfield 1 would extend 
south into the Goldfield Hills area, passing east of Black Butte. It 
would turn east near Espina Hill and head south to the east of Blackcap 
Mountain. It would wind around a series of hills and valleys to

[[Page 60488]]

maintain an acceptable grade. Goldfield 1 would run for approximately 
11 kilometers (7 miles) along an abandoned rail line before joining 
Common Segment 4 about 1 kilometer (0.6 mile) northeast of Ralston. In 
total, the Goldfield 1 alternative alignment would be 47 kilometers (29 
miles) long.
    Goldfield 3 would extend south and farther to the east than the 
other Goldfield alternative alignments. Like Goldfield 1, Goldfield 3 
would wind around a series of hills and valleys to maintain an 
acceptable grade. Also like Goldfield 1, Goldfield 3 would run for 
approximately 11 kilometers (7 miles) along an abandoned rail line 
before joining common Segment 4 about 1 kilometer (0.6 mile) northeast 
of Ralston. In total, the Goldfield 3 alternative alignment would be 
about 50 kilometers (31 miles) long.
    The western Goldfield alternative alignment, Goldfield 4, would 
depart from Common Segment 3 to the north of Black Butte and trend 
southwest. It would then cross U.S. 95 and turn south toward Goldfield. 
After passing through the southwestern edge of Goldfield and crossing 
U.S. 95 again, Goldfield 4 would turn south to connect with Common 
Segment 4. Goldfield 4 would be about 53 kilometers (33 miles) long.

Bonnie Claire

    DOE is considering two alternative alignments, Bonnie Claire 2 and 
3. Bonnie Claire 2 would depart Common Segment 4 about 8 kilometers (5 
miles) north of Stonewall Pass and would trend east toward the Nevada 
Test and Training Range for about 5 kilometers (3 miles) before turning 
south for an additional 17 kilometers (11 miles). Bonnie Claire 2 
generally would follow the Nevada Test and Training Range boundary and 
would join Common Segment 5 in Sarcobatus Flats to the north of Scottys 
Junction near the intersection of State Route 267 and U.S. 95. Bonnie 
Claire 2 would be approximately 20 kilometers long.
    Bonnie Claire 3 would depart Common Segment 4 about 8 kilometers (5 
miles) north of Stonewall Pass. Bonnie Claire 3 would trend generally 
south, paralleling U.S. 95 to the east. After approximately 10 
kilometers (6 miles), Bonnie Claire 3 would turn southeast and continue 
for an additional 10 kilometers (6 miles) through Sarcobatus Flats. It 
would then join Common Segment 5 approximately 4 kilometers (2 miles) 
north of Scottys Junction near the intersection of State Route 267 and 
U.S. 95. Bonnie Claire 3 would be approximately 20 kilometers (12 
miles) long.

Oasis Valley

    DOE is considering two alternative alignments, referred to as Oasis 
Valley 1 and Oasis Valley 3. Oasis Valley 1 would depart Common Segment 
5 about 3 kilometers (2 miles) north of Oasis Mountain and would run 
southeast and connect to Common Segment 6. Oasis Valley 1 would be 
approximately 10 kilometers (6 miles) long.
    Oasis Valley 3 would also depart Common Segment 5 about 3 
kilometers (2 miles) north of Oasis Mountain and would run generally 
east and then south before crossing Oasis Valley farther to the east 
than Oasis Valley 1, and then connecting to Common Segment 6. Oasis 
Valley 3 would be 14 kilometers (9 miles) long.

Mina Alternative Alignments

    Following receipt of the letter regarding the Walker River Paiute 
Tribal Council decision (May, 2006), the Department initiated a study 
to consider the feasibility of the Mina route, and to identify a 
specific corridor (Mina corridor) and associated preliminary 
alternative alignments. The process used to identify the preliminary 
alternative alignments within the Mina corridor is consistent with that 
described under Caliente Alternative Alignments. Alternative alignments 
were identified near the Town of Schurz, around the Montezuma Range, 
north of Scottys Junction (referred to as Bonnie Claire), and in Oasis 
Valley. These are described below.

Town of Schurz

    DOE has identified three alternative alignments that would bypass 
the Town of Schurz, Nevada. Schurz Bypass 1 would depart from the 
existing rail line about 30 kilometers (18 miles) northwest of the Town 
of Schurz passing along the eastern side of the valley (Sunshine Flat). 
From there, the alignment passes east of Weber Reservoir and crosses 
U.S. 95 about 8 kilometers (5 miles) north of the intersection of U.S. 
95 and Alternate U.S. 95. Schurz Bypass 1 then trends southeast 
remaining on the far side of the valley to where it rejoins the 
existing rail line about 13 kilometers (8 miles) south of Schurz. 
Schurz Bypass 1 would be 51 kilometers (32 miles) long.
    Schurz Bypass 2 also would depart the existing line at the same 
point of departure as Schurz Bypass 1 and would pass along the eastern 
side of Sunshine Flat. From there, the alignment passes east of Weber 
Reservoir and crosses U.S. 95 about 7 kilometers (4 miles) north of the 
intersection of U.S. 95 and Alternate U.S. 95. From there, the 
alignment trends to the southeast but staying to the east of Schurz and 
west of Schurz Bypass 1 until it rejoins the existing rail line about 
13 kilometers (8 miles) south of Schurz. Schurz Bypass 2 would be 50 
kilometers (31 miles) long.
    Schurz Bypass 3 would depart the existing rail line about 9 
kilometers (6 miles) northwest of the Town of Schurz where it would 
cross the Walker River. The alignment then crosses U.S. 95 about 8 
kilometers (5 miles) north of the intersection of U.S. 95 and Alternate 
U.S. 95 at which point it continues southeasterly to a point where it 
rejoins the existing rail line about 13 kilometers (8 miles) south of 
Schurz, on the east side of the valley.

Montezuma Range

    DOE identified two alternative alignments that depart near Blair 
Junction at the intersection of U.S. 95 and U.S. 6 to avoid the 
Montezuma Range; they rejoin at a point just east of Lida Junction. The 
first alignment, Montezuma Range 1, would depart Blair Junction 
paralleling State Route 265 to the Town of Silver Peak where it would 
proceed north to follow the western side of Clayton Ridge. The 
alignment would then turn south approximately 16 kilometers (10 miles) 
before Railroad Pass at which point it would turn east between the 
southern end of the Goldfield Hills and the Cuprite Hills. The 
alignment would then cross U.S. 95 about 7 kilometers (5 miles) north 
of Lida Junction and, paralleling U.S. 95, then head south to a point 
just east of Lida Junction. Montezuma Range 1 would be about 134 
kilometers (83 miles) long.
    Montezuma Range 2, after departing from the intersection of U.S. 95 
and U.S. 6, would follow the abandoned Tonopah and Goldfield rail 
roadbed east to the north of Lone Mountain, at which point the 
alignment would head south following the abandoned roadbed. The 
alignment would traverse Montezuma Valley south to Klondike and would 
then parallel U.S. 95 as it approaches the Town of Goldfield. Montezuma 
Range 2 would stay west of Goldfield and then trend southeasterly to a 
point just east of Lida Junction where it would reconnect with 
Montezuma Range 1. Montezuma Range 2 would be about 135 kilometers (84 
miles) long.

Bonnie Claire and Oasis Valley

    The Bonnie Claire and Oasis Valley alternative alignments are as 
described above under Caliente Alternative Alignments.

[[Page 60489]]

No Action Alternative

    The Council on Environmental Quality and Departmental regulations 
that implement NEPA require consideration of the alternative of no 
action. Under the No Action Alternative, DOE would not select a rail 
alignment within the Caliente or Mina rail corridors for the 
construction and operation of a rail line. As such, the No Action 
Alternative provides a basis for comparison to the Proposed Action.
    In the event that DOE were not to select a rail alignment in the 
Caliente or Mina corridors, the future course that it would pursue is 
uncertain. DOE recognizes that other possibilities could be pursued, 
including identifying and evaluating alignments in other corridors 
considered in the Yucca Mountain Final EIS.

Potential Environmental Issues and Resources To be Examined

    The Council on Environmental Quality regulations direct Federal 
agencies preparing an EIS to focus on significant environmental issues 
(40 CFR 1502.1) and discuss impacts in proportion to their significance 
(40 CFR 1502.2). Accordingly, the Supplemental Yucca Mountain Rail 
Corridor and Rail Alignment EIS will analyze issues and impacts with 
the amount of detail commensurate with their importance.
    To facilitate the scoping process, DOE has identified a preliminary 
list of issues and environmental resources that it may consider in the 
Supplemental Yucca Mountain Rail Corridor and Rail Alignment EIS. The 
list is not intended to be all-inclusive or to predetermine the scope 
or alternatives of the Supplemental Yucca Mountain Rail Corridor and 
Rail Alignment EIS, but should be used as a starting point from which 
the public can help DOE define the scope of the EIS.
    <bullet> Potential impacts to the concept of multiple use as it 
applies to public land use planning and management specified by the 
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976.
    <bullet> Potential impacts to land use and ownership.
    <bullet> Potential impacts to plants, animals and their habitats, 
including impacts to wetlands, and threatened and endangered and other 
sensitive species.
    <bullet> Potential impacts to cultural resources.
    <bullet> Potential impacts to American Indian resources.
    <bullet> Potential impacts to paleontological resources.
    <bullet> Potential impacts to the public from noise and vibration.
    <bullet> Potential impacts to the general public and workers from 
radiological exposures during incident-free operations of the railroad.
    <bullet> Potential impacts to the general public and workers from 
radiological exposures from potential accidents during operations of 
the railroad.
    <bullet> Potential impacts to water resources and floodplains.
    <bullet> Potential impacts to aesthetic values.
    <bullet> Potential disproportionately high and adverse impacts to 
low-income and minority populations (environmental justice).
    <bullet> Irretrievable and irreversible commitment of resources.
    <bullet> Compliance with applicable Federal, state and local 
requirements.
    The Department specifically invites comments on the following 
relative to the Mina corridor and its alternative alignments:
    1. Should additional alternative alignments be considered that 
might minimize, avoid or mitigate adverse environmental impacts (for 
example, looking beyond the 0.25 mile wide Mina corridor, avoiding 
environmentally sensitive areas)?
    2. Should any of the preliminary alternatives be eliminated from 
detailed consideration?
    3. Should additional environmental resources be considered?
     4.What mitigation measures should be considered?
    In addition, the Department is interested in identifying any 
significant changes to, or new information relevant to, the rail 
corridors analyzed in the Yucca Mountain Final EIS.

Schedule

    The DOE intends to issue the Draft Supplemental Yucca Mountain Rail 
Corridor and Rail Alignment EIS in 2007 at which time its availability 
will be announced in the Federal Register and local media. A public 
comment period will start upon publication of the Environmental 
Protection Agency's Notice of Availability in the Federal Register. The 
Department will consider and respond to comments received on the Draft 
in preparing the Final Supplemental Yucca Mountain Rail Corridor and 
Rail Alignment EIS.

Other Agency Involvement

    Currently, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Air Force and 
the U.S. Surface Transportation Board are cooperating agencies in the 
preparation of the Supplemental Yucca Mountain Rail Corridor and Rail 
Alignment EIS. The Department also expects to invite the following to 
be cooperating agencies: Walker River Paiute Tribe, U.S. Bureau of 
Indian Affairs, and the U.S. Army. The Tribe and these agencies have 
management and regulatory authority over lands traversed by alternative 
rail alignments within the Mina and Caliente rail corridors, or special 
expertise germane to the construction and operation of a rail line. DOE 
will consult with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Native American 
Tribal organizations, the State of Nevada, and Nye, Lincoln, Esmeralda, 
Mineral, Churchill and Lyon Counties regarding the environmental and 
regulatory issues germane to the Proposed Action. DOE invites comments 
on its identification of cooperating and consulting agencies and 
organizations.

Public Scoping Meetings

    DOE will hold public scoping meetings on the Supplemental Yucca 
Mountain Rail Corridor and Rail Alignment EIS. The meetings will be 
held at the following locations and times:
    <bullet> Amargosa Valley, Nevada. Longstreet Hotel Casino, Nevada 
State Highway 373, November 1, 2006 from 4-7 p.m.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ DOE will hold a joint public scoping meeting on the 
Supplemental Yucca Mountain EIS (DOE/EIS-0250F-S1) and Supplemental 
Yucca Mountain Rail Corridor and Rail Alignment EIS (DOE/EIS-0250F-
S2 and DOE/EIS-0369) in Amargosa Valley, Longstreet Hotel Casino, 
Nevada State Highway 373, November 1 from 4-7 pm. Additional public 
scoping meetings on the Supplemental Yucca Mountain EIS will be held 
in Washington, DC, L'Enfant Plaza Hotel, 480 L'Enfant Plaza, SW, 
October 30 from 4-7 pm; and Las Vegas, Cashman Center, 850 North Las 
Vegas Blvd., November 2 from 4-7 pm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    <bullet> Caliente, Nevada. Caliente Youth Center, U.S. 93 North, 
November 8, 2006 from 6-8 p.m.
    <bullet> Goldfield, Nevada. Goldfield School Gymnasium, Hall and 
Euclid, November 13, 2006 from 4-7 p.m.
    <bullet> Hawthorne, Nevada. Hawthorne Convention Center, 932 E. 
Street, November 14, 2006 from 4-7 p.m.
    <bullet> Fallon, Nevada. Fallon Convention Center, 100 Campus Way, 
November 15, 2006 from 4-7 p.m.
    The public scoping meetings will be an open meeting format without 
a formal presentation by DOE. Members of the public are invited to 
attend the meetings at their convenience any time during meeting hours 
and submit their comments in writing at the meeting, or in person to a 
court reporter who will be available throughout the meeting. This open 
meeting format increases the opportunity for public comment and 
provides for one-on-one discussions with DOE representatives involved 
with

[[Page 60490]]

the Supplemental Yucca Mountain Rail Corridor and Rail Alignment EIS, 
and transportation planning in general.
    The public scoping meetings will be held during the public scoping 
comment period. The comment period begins with publication of this 
Amended Notice of Intent in the Federal Register and closes November 
27, 2006. Comments received after this date will be considered to the 
extent practicable. Written comments may be provided in writing, 
facsimile, or by the Internet to Mr. Lee Bishop, EIS Document Manager 
(see ADDRESSES above).

Public Reading Rooms

    Documents referenced in this Amended Notice of Intent and related 
information are available at the following locations: Beatty Yucca 
Mountain Information Center, 100 North E. Avenue, Beatty, NV 89003, 
(775) 553-2130; Esmeralda County Yucca Mountain Oversight Office, 274 
E. Crook Avenue, Goldfield, NV 89013, (775) 485-3419; Las Vegas Yucca 
Mountain Information Center, 4101-B Meadows Lane, Las Vegas, NV 89107, 
(702) 295-1312; Lincoln County Nuclear Waste Project Office, 100 Depot 
Avenue, Caliente, NV 89008, (775) 726-3511; Nye County Department of 
Natural Resources and Federal Facilities, 1210 E. Basin Road, Suite 
<greek-i>6, Pahrump, NV 89060 (775) 727-7727; Pahrump Yucca Mountain 
Information Center, 2341 Postal Drive, Pahrump, NV 89048, (775) 571-
5817; University of Nevada, Reno, The University of Nevada Libraries, 
Business and Government Information Center, M/S 322, 1664 N. Virginia 
Street, Reno, NV 89557, (775) 784-6500, Ext. 309; and the U.S. 
Department of Energy Headquarters Office Public Reading Room, 1000 
Independence Avenue SW., Room 1E-190 (ME-74) FORS, Washington, DC 
20585, 202-586-3142.

    Issued in Washington, DC, October 10, 2006.
David R. Hill,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 06-8675 Filed 10-10-06; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P