Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Notices 36097 

conducted January through June 2012, 

and student data collection will take 

place January through September 2012. 

This submission requests approval for 

contacting institutions and students, list 

sampling, obtaining student enrollment 

lists and institution record data for the 

full-scale NPSAS:12. A separate request 

for review pertaining to student record 

data collection, the student interview, 

and post-data collection administrative 

record matching will be submitted in 

September 2011. 

Copies of the information collection 

submission for OMB review may be 

accessed from the RegInfo.gov Web site 

at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/ 

PRAMain or from the Department’s Web 

site at http://edicsweb.ed.gov, by 

selecting the ‘‘Browse Pending 

Collections’’ link and by clicking on 

link number 4636. When you access the 

information collection, click on 

‘‘Download Attachments’’ to view. 

Written requests for information should 

be addressed to U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., 

LBJ, Washington, D.C. 20202–4537. 

Requests may also be electronically 

mailed to the Internet address 

ICDocketMgr@ed.gov or faxed to 202– 

401–0920. Please specify the complete 

title of the information collection and 

OMB Control Number when making 

your request. 

Individuals who use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD) may call the Federal Information 

Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– 

8339. 

[FR Doc. 2011–15418 Filed 6–20–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Notice of Intent To Prepare a 

Programmatic Environmental Impact 

Statement for the U.S. Department of 

Energy Uranium Leasing Program 

AGENCY: Department of Energy (DOE). 

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a 

programmatic environmental impact 

statement for the DOE Uranium Leasing 

Program. 

SUMMARY: DOE announces its intent to 

prepare a Programmatic Environmental 

Impact Statement (PEIS), pursuant to 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.), 

the Council on Environmental Quality’s 

(CEQ) NEPA regulations (40 CFR Parts 

1500–1508), and DOE’s NEPA 

implementing procedures (10 CFR part 

1021), to analyze the reasonably 

foreseeable environmental impacts, 

including the site-specific impacts, of 

alternatives for the management of 

DOE’s Uranium Leasing Program (ULP), 

under which DOE administers tracts of 

land for the exploration, development, 

and extraction of uranium and 

vanadium ores. DOE’s ULP includes 

tracts of land located in Mesa, Montrose, 

and San Miguel counties in western 

Colorado that cover a cumulative 

acreage of approximately 25,000 acres. 

In July 2007, DOE issued a 

Programmatic Environmental 

Assessment (PEA) for the ULP (DOE/ 

EA–1535) (available at http:// 

www.lm.doe.gov/land/sites/ 

uranium_leasing/uranium_leasing.htm), 

in which it examined three alternatives 

for the management of the ULP for the 

next ten years. In that same month, DOE 

issued a Finding of No Significant 

Impact (FONSI) (available at http:// 

nepa.energy.gov/documents/EA1535FONSI.pdf), in which DOE 

announced its decision to proceed with 

the preferred ‘‘Expanded Program 

Alternative’’ that was examined in its 

July 2007 PEA, and also determined that 

the preparation of an Environmental 

Impact Statement (EIS) was not 

required. 

DOE has determined that, in light of 

the site-specific information that DOE 

has gathered as a result of the sitespecific agency actions proposed and 

approved pursuant to the July 2007 

PEA/FONSI, it is now appropriate for 

DOE to prepare a PEIS in order to 

analyze the reasonably foreseeable 

environmental impacts, including the 

site-specific impacts, of a range of 

alternatives for the management of the 

ULP for the remainder of the ten-year 

period that was covered by the July 

2007 PEA. 

DOE is issuing this Notice of Intent 

(NOI) to inform interested parties of this 

PEIS and to invite public comments on 

its proposed scope, including the 

preliminary range of alternatives and 

environmental issues to be considered. 

DOE plans to invite Federal, state, and 

local governmental agencies with 

jurisdiction by law or special expertise 

to participate as cooperating agencies in 

preparing the PEIS. 

DATES: DOE invites comments on the 

proposed scope of the PEIS. To ensure 

consideration, comments must be 

submitted by August 22, 2011. DOE will 

consider comments e-mailed or 

postmarked after that date to the extent 

practicable. In addition to receiving 

written comments (see ADDRESSES

below), DOE will conduct public 

scoping meetings during which 

interested government agencies, Native 

American tribes, private-sector 

organizations, and the general public are 

invited to present oral and written 

comments. DOE will announce the 

dates, times, and locations of the public 

scoping meetings in a separate Federal 

Register notice and in local news media 

at least 15 days before the meetings. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments on the 

scope of the PEIS and requests to be 

included in future communications 

should be addressed to the ULP Program 

Manager, Ms. Laura Kilpatrick, Esq., 

Realty Officer, Asset Management Team, 

Office of Legacy Management, U.S. 

Department of Energy, 11025 Dover 

Street, Suite 1000, Westminster, CO 

80021, 720–880–4338, 

laura.kilpatrick@lm.doe.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

further information about this PEIS, 

please contact the ULP Program 

Manager, Ms. Laura Kilpatrick, at the 

addresses listed above. 

For general information on the DOE 

NEPA process, please contact Ms. Carol 

M. Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA 

Policy and Compliance (GC–54), U.S. 

Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue, SW., 

Washington, DC 20585; telephone (202– 

586–4600); fax (202–586–7031); or leave 

a toll-free message (1–800–472–2756). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Congress directed DOE’s predecessor 

agency, the U.S. Atomic Energy 

Commission (AEC), to develop a supply 

of domestic uranium that would 

adequately meet the Nation’s defense 

needs (42 U.S.C. 2096–2097). Congress 

gave to AEC the authority to withdraw 

Federal lands for the exploration and 

development of a viable domestic 

uranium source under a variety of 

programs that were carried forward in 

the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. Around 

the same time, the U.S. Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM) issued Public Land 

Order (PLO) 459 that stated, ‘‘Subject to 

valid existing rights and existing 

withdrawals, the public lands and the 

minerals reserved to the United States 

in the patented lands in the following 

areas in Colorado are hereby withdrawn 

from all forms of appropriation under 

the public-land laws, including the 

mining laws but not the mineral-leasing 

laws, and reserved for the use of the 

United States Atomic Energy 

Commission.’’ The areas under 

consideration are located in western 

Colorado in Mesa, Montrose, and San 

Miguel counties. Subsequently, other 

PLOs increased or decreased the total 

acreage in withdrawn status. 

In addition, the Federal Government, 

through the Union Mines Development 

Corporation, acquired a substantial 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
36098 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Notices 

number of patented and unpatented 

mining claims, milling, tunnel sites, and 

agricultural patents, until the aggregated 

acreage managed by AEC totaled 

approximately 25,000 acres. 

The Mineral Leasing Program, which 

was in operation from approximately 

1949 to 1962, produced more than 1.2 

million pounds of uranium and 6.8 

million pounds of vanadium, and 

generated $5.9 million in royalties to the 

Federal Government. When the program 

ended in 1962, AEC directed the lessees 

to close the mines, but little was done 

to reclaim the mine sites. 

AEC initiated a second leasing 

program in 1974 under the Domestic 

Uranium Program regulations (10 CFR 

760.1) that was called the Uranium 

Lease Management Program (ULMP). 

This program was designed to address 

the lack of production capacity of 

uranium—and vanadium—bearing ores 

for the U.S. Government defense needs, 

and emphasized the need for uranium 

in the expanding commercial nuclear 

energy market. The two main goals of 

the ULMP were to recover the resources 

that had been developed initially by 

AEC and to improve the prospects for 

continued mill operations, thereby 

encouraging further exploration and 

development on privately-held land. In 

preparation for the ULMP in 1972, AEC 

evaluated potential environmental and 

economic impacts related to the ULMP 

in the Environmental Statement: 

Leasing of AEC Controlled Uranium 

Bearing Lands. AEC and its successor 

agencies, the U.S. Energy Research and 

Development Administration and DOE, 

administered the ULMP. In 1984, DOE 

renewed the lease agreements for a 

second ten-year term. 

During the ULMP, DOE and BLM 

acknowledged that each agency had 

defined jurisdictional authority over the 

various activities that could be 

conducted on the lease tracts. DOE 

maintained jurisdiction and authority 

over all activities on withdrawn lands 

associated with uranium and vanadium 

mining, including exploration, 

development, extraction (mining), and 

transportation. BLM maintained 

jurisdiction and authority over all other 

surface uses. This acknowledgment of 

the agencies’ jurisdiction continues 

today. 

In July 1995, DOE prepared a 

programmatic environmental 

assessment (PEA) to inform DOE’s 

determination whether the leasing 

program should continue. DOE then 

issued a FONSI in August 1995, in 

which it determined to continue the 

ULP. DOE subsequently entered into 

negotiations with the previous lessees. 

Seven of the lessees informed DOE that 

they did not wish to continue with the 

program and began reclamation of their 

lease tracts. DOE then entered into 13 

new lease agreements with the 

remaining lessees. 

In 2005, DOE initiated a review of its 

1995 PEA, and began to prepare a new 

PEA to evaluate the continuation of the 

ULP. In the July 2007 PEA, DOE 

examined three alternatives for the 

management of the ULP for the next ten 

years, including DOE’s preferred 

‘‘Expanded Program Alternative,’’ under 

which DOE would continue and expand 

the existing ULP. Under that alternative, 

DOE would extend the 13 existing 

leases for a ten-year period, and then 

expand the ULP to include the 

competitive offering of up to 25 

additional lease tracts to the domestic 

uranium industry. In the July 2007 

FONSI, DOE announced its decision to 

proceed with the Expanded Program 

Alternative. DOE determined that the 

Expanded Program Alternative would 

not constitute a major Federal action 

significantly affecting the quality of the 

human environment, within the 

meaning of NEPA; and, therefore, that 

preparation of an EIS was not required. 

After the issuance of the July 2007 

PEA and FONSI, DOE took a series of 

site-specific agency actions to 

implement the ULP. These actions 

included: Entering into new lease 

agreements for 31 lease tracts after 

reconfiguring the expanded number of 

tracts from 38 to 31 (currently, 29 tracts 

are actively held under lease, and the 

remaining two tracts are not leased), 

approval of exploration plans on some 

leases, and approval of reclamation-inlieu-of-royalties (RILOR) plans on some 

leases (under which a lessee agreed to 

perform necessary reclamation services 

on its lease, and in return DOE agreed 

to reduce the amount of royalties that 

the lessee must pay to the U.S. 

Government). DOE reviewed each of the 

exploration plans and RILOR plans in 

accordance with DOE’s NEPA 

regulations, and determined that each of 

the plans was categorically excluded 

from further environmental evaluation 

under categorical exclusions set forth in 

DOE’s NEPA regulations. DOE has not 

received any mining plans from any of 

its ULP lessees; and no mining activities 

are currently being performed on any of 

the ULP leases. 

DOE believes that in light of the sitespecific information that it has gathered 

as a result of the site-specific agency 

actions proposed and approved 

pursuant to the July 2007 PEA and 

FONSI, it is now appropriate to prepare 

a PEIS in order to analyze the 

reasonably foreseeable environmental 

impacts, including the site-specific 

impacts, of a range of alternatives for the 

management of the ULP for the 

remainder of the ten-year period that 

was covered by the July 2007 PEA. 

DOE’s preparation of this PEIS is in 

accordance with DOE’s NEPA regulation 

at 10 CFR 1021.300(b), which provides 

that DOE may prepare a NEPA 

document for any DOE action at any 

time in order to further the purposes of 

NEPA, and may do so ‘‘to analyze the 

consequences of ongoing activities, 

support DOE planning, assess the need 

for mitigation, fully disclose the 

potential environmental consequences 

of DOE actions, or for any other reason.’’ 

DOE is separately preparing to enter 

into consultation with the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, in compliance with 

Section 7 of the Endangered Species 

Act, concerning DOE’s management of 

the ULP. 

The ULP lease tracts are located in the 

western portions of Mesa, Montrose, 

and San Miguel Counties, in western 

Colorado. Elevations of the mesas and 

valleys throughout this semiarid area 

vary from 5,500 feet above sea level in 

the valleys to approximately 8,000 feet 

above sea level on top of the higher 

mesas. Except for the cities of Montrose 

and Grand Junction, which are each 

more than 50 miles from the nearest 

lease tract, the region is sparsely 

populated and has few towns. 

The lease tracts are located in four 

geographical areas referred to as the 

Gateway, Uravan, Paradox Valley, and 

Slick Rock lease tracts. The Gateway 

lease tracts are remotely located on the 

tops and side slopes of Outlaw and 

Calamity Mesas; surface runoff from 

these areas travels through Maverick 

and Calamity Creeks, which are 

tributaries of the Dolores River. The 

Uravan lease tracts in Montrose County 

are located on the tops and side slopes 

of Spring Creek, Atkinson, and Club 

Mesas, near the historical community of 

Uravan, which has only two remaining 

buildings. The Dolores River and its 

main tributary, the San Miguel River, 

flow in the valley bottoms below the 

lease tracts. The Paradox Valley lease 

tracts are in Montrose and San Miguel 

Counties in a broad valley flanked by 

the high plateaus of Monogram Mesa 

and Long Park. The Slick Rock lease 

tracts are located near the historical 

community of Slick Rock in San Miguel 

County. In this area the land surface is 

deeply incised by the Dolores River and 

its tributaries; the Dolores River Canyon 

in this area is approximately 500 feet 

wide at the bottom and is characterized 

by steep slopes and sheer cliffs. 

Land use on and around the ULP 

lease tracts include mining, oil and gas 

exploration and production, timber 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Notices 36099 

harvesting, recreation, agriculture, and 

grazing. DOE and BLM administer the 

lands within the lease tract boundaries. 

Considerable mineral exploration and 

development has occurred historically 

in the lease tract areas. Mined minerals 

have included coal, oil and gas, sand 

and gravel, radium, uranium, and 

vanadium; uranium and vanadium 

mining, and oil and gas exploration, are 

the predominant mineral activities. 

Sections of the more active lease tracts, 

such as in Paradox Valley, have been 

substantially mined and are restricted 

from public access; other tracts remain 

open for other surface and subsurface 

uses. The public uses many of the 

unimproved roads around and near 

some of the lease tracts for recreational 

purposes, grazing, and general ranching. 

Purpose and Need for Agency Action 

In light of the site-specific 

information that DOE has gathered as a 

result of the site-specific agency actions 

proposed and approved pursuant to the 

July 2007 ULP PEA/FONSI, it is now 

appropriate for DOE to prepare a PEIS 

in order to analyze the reasonably 

foreseeable environmental impacts, 

including the site-specific impacts, of 

the range of reasonable alternatives for 

the management of the ULP for the 

remainder of the ten-year period that 

was covered by the July 2007 PEA. 

The underlying purpose and need for 

agency action is that, in support of the 

Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Pub. L. 109– 

58), which emphasized the 

reestablishment of nuclear power 

(Sections 601 through 657), DOE needs 

to determine the future course of the 

ULP, including whether to continue 

leasing some or all of DOE’s withdrawn 

lands and government-owned patented 

claims (referred to as ‘‘DOE-managed 

lands’’) for the exploration and 

production of uranium and vanadium 

ores for the remainder of the ten-year 

period that was covered by the July 

2007 PEA. The Domestic Uranium 

Program regulation (10 CFR 760.1) gives 

DOE the flexibility to continue leasing 

these DOE-managed lands via a 

competitive bidding process to achieve 

the highest returns for the government. 

A key element in this determination is 

the analysis of environmental impacts 

attributable to lease tract operations and 

associated activities. Therefore, DOE 

will prepare this PEIS to provide such 

information to decision-makers, as well 

as to the public. 

Proposed Action 

DOE’s proposed action is to decide 

whether to continue the ULP for the 

remainder of the ten-year period 

covered by the July 2007 PEA; and, if it 

decides to continue the ULP, to 

determine which alternative to adopt in 

order to manage the ULP during that 

period. 

Alternatives 

As required by the CEQ and DOE 

NEPA implementing procedures, at 40 

CFR parts 1500–1508 and 10 CFR part 

1021, respectively, DOE will analyze the 

range of reasonable alternatives for 

continuation of the ULP. In accordance 

with CEQ’s NEPA implementing 

procedures at 40 CFR 1508.25(b), DOE 

will also analyze the ‘‘no action’’ 

alternative. DOE proposes that the 

alternatives to be analyzed in the PEIS 

include the following: 

(1) DOE would terminate the leases 

for the ULP; lessees would be required 

to reclaim their operations on their 

respective leases; and, once final 

reclamation activities were completed, 

DOE would continue its management of 

the withdrawn lands, without leasing, 

in accordance with applicable 

requirements. 

(2) DOE would terminate the leases 

for the ULP; lessees would be required 

to reclaim their operations on their 

respective leases; and, once final 

reclamation activities were completed, 

all lands would be restored to the public 

domain with the approval of BLM and 

under BLM’s administrative control, 

and DOE’s leasing program would end. 

(3) DOE would continue the ULP as 

it existed before the issuance of the July 

2007 PEA/FONSI; the 13 then-active 

leases would be continued for the tenyear period covered by the July 2007 

PEA/FONSI, or for another reasonable 

period; and DOE would terminate the 

leases for the remaining leases tracts. 

Regarding the leases that would be 

terminated, DOE would follow the 

procedures proposed either in 

alternative (1) above, or in alternative 

(2) above. Regarding the 13 leases that 

would be continued, the lessees would 

be allowed to file plans to explore for 

and mine uranium and vanadium ore 

reserves on their respective tracts, and 

to engage in reclamation activities on 

those tracts. For those 13 leases, DOE 

would analyze, among other things, the 

reasonably foreseeable environmental 

impacts, including the site-specific 

impacts, of leasing, exploration, mining 

activities (including any resumption of 

mining activities that were previously 

approved), transportation, and 

reclamation, as well as cumulative 

impacts resulting from the incremental 

impacts of those actions when added to 

other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable future actions. DOE would 

explore reasonable mitigation measures 

to avoid or minimize potential 

environmental impacts. 

(4) DOE would continue the ULP for 

the expanded number of leases in the 

July 2007 PEA/FONSI; the expanded 

number of leases would be continued 

for the ten-year period covered by the 

July 2007 PEA/FONSI, or for another 

reasonable period. For all of those ULP 

leases, the lessees would be allowed to 

file plans to explore for and mine 

uranium and vanadium ore reserves on 

their respective tracts, and to engage in 

reclamation activities on those tracts. 

DOE would analyze, among other 

things, the reasonably foreseeable 

environmental impacts, including the 

site-specific impacts, of leasing, 

exploration, mining activities (including 

any resumption of mining activities that 

were previously approved), 

transportation, and reclamation, as well 

as cumulative impacts resulting from 

the incremental impacts of those actions 

when added to other past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable future actions. 

DOE would explore reasonable 

mitigation measures to avoid or 

minimize potential environmental 

impacts. 

(5) DOE would continue the ULP 

exactly as it was approved in the July 

2007 PEA/FONSI, and would continue 

to approve plans by lessees as it has 

done since the issuance of the July 2007 

PEA/FONSI. 

Alternative (5) would be the ‘‘no action’’ 

alternative in the PEIS. 

Preliminary Identification of 

Environmental Issues 

DOE proposes to address the 

environmental issues listed below. This 

list is neither intended to be allinclusive, nor a predetermined set of 

potential impacts. DOE invites 

comments on whether this is an 

appropriate list of issues that should be 

considered in the PEIS. The preliminary 

list of potentially affected resources or 

activities and their related 

environmental issues includes: 

Biological resources: including 

potential impacts to vegetation, wildlife, 

threatened or endangered species, 

migratory birds, and ecologically 

sensitive habitats; 

Water resources: potential impacts on 

surface water and ground water; 

Cultural and historic resources; 

Floodplains and wetlands: DOE will 

assess potential impacts of actions that 

may occur in a floodplain or wetland in 

accordance with DOE floodplain and 

wetland environmental review 

requirements (10 CFR part 1022). 

(Portions of three lease tracts are located 

within the 100-year floodplain of the 

Dolores River.); 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1
36100 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 119 / Tuesday, June 21, 2011 / Notices 

Socioeconomics: potential impacts to 

schools, housing, public services, and 

local revenues, including the creation of 

jobs; 

Transportation: including potential 

impacts on transportation corridors; 

Accidents and intentional destructive 

acts; 

Air quality: including potential 

impacts on regional air quality and 

climate change; 

Land use: potential impacts on 

mining, recreation, timber harvesting, 

agriculture, grazing, and soils; 

Environmental justice: potential for 

disproportionately high and adverse 

impacts on minority and low-income 

populations; 

Noise and light: potential disturbance 

impacts from construction, 

transportation of materials, and 

operations; 

Wilderness areas; Wild and scenic 

rivers: DOE will assess potential impacts 

on the Dolores River Canyon Wilderness 

Study Area from increased activity and 

mining on portions of three lease tracts, 

and potential impacts on the Dolores 

River and San Miguel River; 

Visual resources; 

Human health and safety: including 

potential impacts from public exposure 

to radioactive or hazardous materials, 

traffic accidents, land subsidence, and 

other potential hazards; 

Cumulative impacts: for each 

alternative DOE will assess potential 

effects that could result from the 

incremental impacts of the action when 

added to other past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable future actions. 

Public Scoping Process 

This NOI initiates the scoping process 

under NEPA, which will guide the 

development of the Draft PEIS. To 

ensure that all issues related to DOE’s 

proposed action are addressed, DOE 

invites public comments on the scope of 

the PEIS. Interested government 

agencies, Native American tribes, 

private-sector organizations, and the 

general public are encouraged to submit 

comments or suggestions on the scope 

of the PEIS, including potential issues 

and environmental impacts that should 

be addressed and the alternatives that 

should be considered. The scoping 

period will end August 22, 2011. 

Comments should be submitted by that 

date to ensure consideration (see 

ADDRESSES above). DOE will consider 

comments e-mailed or postmarked after 

that date to the extent practicable. 

DOE will conduct public scoping 

meetings in the vicinity of the ULP lease 

tracts at dates, times, and locations to be 

announced in a separate Federal 

Register notice and in local news media 

at least 15 days before the meetings. 

Oral comments will be heard during the 

formal portion of the scoping meetings. 

The public is also invited to learn more 

about the project at an informal session 

at each location. DOE requests that 

anyone who wishes to speak at the 

public scoping meetings should contact 

Ms. Laura Kilpatrick, by e-mail or postal 

mail (see ADDRESSES above). 

Those who do not arrange in advance 

to speak may register at the meeting 

(preferably at the beginning of the 

meeting) and would be given an 

opportunity to speak after previously 

scheduled speakers. Speakers will be 

given approximately five minutes to 

present their comments. Those speakers 

who want more than five minutes 

should indicate the length of time 

desired in their request. Depending on 

the number of speakers, DOE may need 

to limit all speakers to five minutes 

initially and provide additional 

opportunity as time permits. Individuals 

may also provide written materials in 

lieu of, or supplemental to, their 

presentations. DOE will give equal 

consideration to oral and written 

comments. 

DOE will consider public scoping 

comments in preparing the Draft PEIS. 

DOE will issue the Draft PEIS for public 

review and conduct public hearings. 

DOE will consider public comments on 

the Draft PEIS and respond as 

appropriate in the Final PEIS. No sooner 

than 30 days following completion of 

the Final PEIS, DOE will issue a Record 

of Decision regarding the proposed 

action. 

Issued in Washington, DC, this 15th day of 

June 2011. 

David W. Geiser, 

Director, Office of Legacy Management. 

[FR Doc. 2011–15408 Filed 6–20–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Environmental Management SiteSpecific Advisory Board, Portsmouth 

AGENCY: Department of Energy. DOE. 

ACTION: Notice of open meeting. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces a 

meeting of the Environmental 

Management Site-Specific Advisory 

Board (EM SSAB), Portsmouth. The 

Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. 

L. 92–463, 86 Stat. 770) requires that 

public notice of this meeting be 

announced in the Federal Register. 

DATES: Thursday, July 7, 2011; 6 p.m. 

ADDRESSES: Ohio State University, 

Endeavor Center, 1862 Shyville Road, 

Piketon, Ohio 45661. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joel 

Bradburne, Deputy Designated Federal 

Officer, Department of Energy, 

Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office, Post 

Office Box 700, Piketon, Ohio 45661, 

(740) 897–3822, 

Joel.Bradburne@lex.doe.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Purpose of the Board: The purpose of 

the Board is to make recommendations 

to DOE–EM and site management in the 

areas of environmental restoration, 

waste management and related 

activities. 

Tentative Agenda 

• Call to Order, Introductions, Review 

of Agenda. 

• Approval of May Minutes. 

• Deputy Designated Federal Officer’s 

Comments. 

• Federal Coordinator’s Comments. 

• Liaisons’ Comments. 

• Visioning Team Update, Ohio 

University. 

• FLUOR B&W Community 

Commitment Plan Update, Jerry 

Schneider. 

• Administrative Issues: 

Æ Subcommittee Updates. 

• Motions: 

Æ First Reading of the amendment to 

the Operating Procedures: Section VI. 

Board Structure C 3a. 

Æ Recommendation 11.02— 

Construction of a multi-purpose facility 

for DOE and community needs. 

Æ Recommendation 11.05—Defined 

Future Use at the Portsmouth Site. 

• Public Comments. 

• Final Comments. 

• Adjourn. 

Public Participation: The meeting is 

open to the public. The EM SSAB, 

Portsmouth, welcomes the attendance of 

the public at its advisory committee 

meetings and will make every effort to 

accommodate persons with physical 

disabilities or special needs. If you 

require special accommodations due to 

a disability, please contact Joel 

Bradburne at least seven days in 

advance of the meeting at the phone 

number listed above. Written statements 

may be filed with the Board either 

before or after the meeting. Individuals 

who wish to make oral statements 

pertaining to agenda items should 

contact Joel Bradburne at the address or 

telephone number listed above. 

Requests must be received five days 

prior to the meeting and reasonable 

provision will be made to include the 

presentation in the agenda. The Deputy 

Designated Federal Officer is 

empowered to conduct the meeting in a 

fashion that will facilitate the orderly 

conduct of business. Individuals 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with NOTICES_PART 1