60484 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 198 / Friday, October 13, 2006 / Notices 

burden of the information collections, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; (c) 

ways to enhance the quality, utility, and 

clarity of the information to be 

collected; and (d) ways to minimize the 

burden of the information collections on 

respondents, including through the use 

of automated collection techniques or 

other forms of information technology. 

DATES: Comments regarding this 

collection must be received on or before 

November 13, 2006. If you anticipate 

that you will be submitting comments, 

but find it difficult to do so within the 

period of time allowed by this notice, 

please advise the OMB Desk Officer of 

your intention to make a submission as 

soon as possible. The Desk Officer may 

be telephoned at 202–395–4650. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments should 

be sent to: DOE Desk Officer, Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, 

Office of Management and Budget, New 

Executive Office Building, Room 10102, 

735 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20503. 

Comments should also be addressed 

to: Jeffrey Martus, IM–11/Germantown 

Building, U.S. Department of Energy, 

1000 Independence Ave., SW., 

Washington, DC 20585–1290; or by fax 

at 301–903–9061 or by e-mail at 

Jeffrey.martus@hq.doe.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Requests for additional information or 

copies of the information collection 

instrument and instructions should be 

directed to Jeffrey Martus at the address 

listed above in ADDRESSES. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

information collection package listed in 

this notice for public comment includes 

the following: 

1. (1) OMB No.: 1910–5103. (2) 

Package Title: Reporting and 

Recordkeeping Requirements for Safety 

Management System. (3) Type of 

Review: Renewal. (4) Purpose: This 

collection is required by the Department 

to ensure that the management and 

operating contractors are performing 

work safety at DOE facilities. (5) 

Respondents: 7. (6) Estimated Number 

of Burden Hours: 2,450. 

Statutory Authority: Department of Energy 

Organization Act, Public Law 95–91. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on October 6, 

2006. 

Sharon A. Evelin, 

Director, Records Management Division, 

Office of the Chief Information Officer. 

[FR Doc. E6–17000 Filed 10–12–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

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, highlevel 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 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 198 / Friday, October 13, 2006 / Notices 60485 

1Coincident 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. 

2Rail line means the railroad track and 

underlying earthworks. 

3A 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. 

4Other materials are those related to the 

construction and operation of the repository. 

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. 

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. 

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. 

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 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES2
60486 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 198 / Friday, October 13, 2006 / Notices 

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. 

6A strip of land less than 400 meters (0.25 mile) 

wide through which the location of a rail line 

would be identified. 

7A geographic region of the rail alignment for 

which multiple routes for the rail line have been 

identified. 

8A geographic region of the rail alignment for 

which a single route for the rail line has been 

identified. 

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. 

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 northnortheast 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). 

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 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 198 / Friday, October 13, 2006 / Notices 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 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES2
60488 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 198 / Friday, October 13, 2006 / Notices 

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. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES2
Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 198 / Friday, October 13, 2006 / Notices 60489 

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. 

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. 

• 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. 

• Potential impacts to land use and 

ownership. 

• Potential impacts to plants, animals 

and their habitats, including impacts to 

wetlands, and threatened and 

endangered and other sensitive species. 

• Potential impacts to cultural 

resources. 

• Potential impacts to American 

Indian resources. 

• Potential impacts to paleontological 

resources. 

• Potential impacts to the public from 

noise and vibration. 

• Potential impacts to the general 

public and workers from radiological 

exposures during incident-free 

operations of the railroad. 

• Potential impacts to the general 

public and workers from radiological 

exposures from potential accidents 

during operations of the railroad. 

• Potential impacts to water resources 

and floodplains. 

• Potential impacts to aesthetic 

values. 

• Potential disproportionately high 

and adverse impacts to low-income and 

minority populations (environmental 

justice). 

• Irretrievable and irreversible 

commitment of resources. 

• 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: 

• Amargosa Valley, Nevada. 

Longstreet Hotel Casino, Nevada State 

Highway 373, November 1, 2006 from 

4–7 p.m.9

• Caliente, Nevada. Caliente Youth 

Center, U.S. 93 North, November 8, 

2006 from 6–8 p.m. 

• Goldfield, Nevada. Goldfield School 

Gymnasium, Hall and Euclid, November 

13, 2006 from 4–7 p.m. 

• Hawthorne, Nevada. Hawthorne 

Convention Center, 932 E. Street, 

November 14, 2006 from 4–7 p.m. 

• 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 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES2
60490 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 198 / Friday, October 13, 2006 / Notices 

1Coincident with this Notice of Intent, DOE is 

publishing an Amended Notice of Intent to prepare 

a Supplemental Yucca Mountain Rail Corridor and 

Rail Alignment EIS (DOE/EIS–0250F–S2 and DOE/ 

EIS–0369). That EIS will review the rail corridor 

analyses of the Yucca Mountain Final EIS, and 

update, as appropriate, and will analyze the 

proposed Mina corridor; it also will include 

detailed analyses of alternative alignments for the 

construction and operation of a rail line within the 

Mina corridor, as well as the Caliente corridor. 

2Section 114(f)(4) of the NWPA provides that any 

environmental impact statement ‘‘prepared in 

connection with a repository * * * shall, to the 

extent practicable, be adopted by the Commission 

[NRC] in connection with the issuance by the 

Commission of a construction authorization and 

license for such repository. To the extent such 

statement is adopted by the Commission, such 

adoption shall be deemed to also satisfy the 

responsibilities of the Commission under the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 * * *.’’

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 #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 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Supplement to 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, NV 

AGENCY: U.S. Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of intent. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE or the Department) is 

announcing its intent to prepare a 

Supplement to 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, 

February 2002) (Yucca Mountain Final 

EIS). The Proposed Action addressed in 

the Yucca Mountain Final EIS is to 

construct, operate and monitor, and 

eventually close a geologic repository at 

Yucca Mountain in southern Nevada for 

the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and 

high-level radioactive waste. 

The Yucca Mountain Final EIS 

considered the potential environmental 

impacts of a repository design for 

surface and subsurface facilities, a range 

of canister packaging scenarios and 

repository thermal operating modes, and 

plans for the construction, operation 

and monitoring, and eventual closure of 

the repository. The Yucca Mountain 

Final EIS also considered the 

environmental impacts of the 

transportation of spent nuclear fuel and 

high-level radioactive waste from 

commercial and DOE sites to the 

repository by two principal modes—

mostly truck and mostly rail. In the 

Yucca Mountain Final EIS DOE 

recognized that these repository design 

concepts and operational plans would 

continue to develop during the design 

and engineering process. 

Since publication of the Yucca 

Mountain Final EIS, DOE has continued 

to develop the repository design and 

associated plans. As now planned, the 

proposed surface and subsurface 

facilities would allow DOE to operate 

the repository following a primarily 

canistered approach in which most 

commercial spent nuclear fuel would be 

packaged at the commercial sites in 

multipurpose transport, aging and 

disposal canisters (TADs), and all DOE 

materials would be packaged in 

disposable canisters at the DOE sites. 

Waste packages would be arrayed in the 

repository underground to achieve what 

is referred to as a higher-thermal 

operating mode, and most spent nuclear 

fuel and high-level radioactive waste 

would arrive at the repository by rail. 

To evaluate the potential 

environmental impacts of the current 

repository design and operational plans, 

DOE has decided to prepare a 

Supplement to the Yucca Mountain 

Final EIS 1, consistent with the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and 

the Nuclear Waste Policy Act, as 

amended (Pub. L. 97–425) (NWPA). 

This Supplemental Yucca Mountain EIS 

(DOE/EIS–0250–S1) is being prepared to 

assist the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission (NRC) in satisfying its 

NEPA responsibilities pursuant to the 

NWPA (Section 114(f)(4)) 2. 

DATES: The Department invites 

comments on the scope of the 

Supplemental Yucca Mountain EIS to 

ensure that all relevant environmental 

issues 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 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 EIS or on the repository 

program in general, should be directed 

to: Dr. Jane Summerson, EIS Document 

Manager, Regulatory Authority Office, 

Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste 

Management, U.S. Department of 

Energy, 1551 Hillshire Drive, M/S 010, 

Las Vegas, NV 89134, Telephone 1–800–

967–3477. Written comments on the 

scope of the Supplemental Yucca 

Mountain EIS may be submitted to Dr. 

Jane Summerson at this address, or 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: 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with NOTICES2