These photographs offer illustrations of the people, places, and resources along the two prominent pilgrimage trails in the Timber Mountain Caldera region. These photographs were taken during the 2006 Timber Mountain Caldera Landscape Study, the 2001 Shoshone Mountain Wind Farm Environmental Assessment, and 1999 NTS Rock Art study.

Low wind speed conditions should be studied because these conditions can present risk, particularly for areas immediately surrounding the release point, where high concentrations can occur and not dissipate. The following research attempts to clarify the processes governing both the general and low wind speed cases by determining the accuracy and uncertainty of standard prediction methods for contaminant plume transport in low wind speed plume modeling. Multiple techniques were utilized to incorporate field measured data, previously gathered for a different purpose, to generate parameter distributions and ground-truth data that could be used in stochastic models for chemical plume prediction. These data were taken during a multi-day experiment performed on Frenchman Flats, a flat, dry lakebed, at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) in February of 2007 and include weather data and chemical concentrations throughout the chemical release time. I organized these data into continuous time series for each sampling location, which were represented as vectors for the statistical and mathematical analysis. I then animated these vectors with respect to time and performed a stochastic analysis which I compared to these observed vectors. Predicted vectors of chemical concentrations, based on the statistical parameter distributions generated from the observed vectors were developed and a statistical analysis was performed on the results of the stochastic process to determine how well the model predicted the plume. It was found that stochastically modeling, with SCIPuff, of contaminant plume releases in low wind speed conditions is not accurate. This was expected because below 2 m/s, plumes no longer have a Gaussian distribution and are difficult to predict because of fluctuating winds. In fact, the model only accurately predicts the period before the plume arrives at the sensor when no plume is present. It is possible, and even probable, that stochastic modeling of contaminant plumes will provide a means to compute the bounds of a release, when coupled with a model that is accurate for low wind speed conditions and includes all the complexities of the wind field. An unexpected finding is the fact that the vertical dimension of wind movement cannot be ignored in low wind speed conditions. When planning future experiments, special attention should be paid to obtaining a good representation of the 3-D wind profile.

This study is about the impacts of the transportation of low level radioactive waste (LLRW) on American Indians. The terms American Indians, Native Americans, and Indians are used interchangeably throughout this report to refer to people who are members of tribes in the United States. The information contained in this report is valuable to non -Indian individuals, communities, and governments as well as to the tribes and the U.S. Department of Energy/Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV) for which it was prepared. Many of the individuals who agreed to participate in this study asked if their non -Indian neighbors were also being given the opportunity to share their views and perspectives on the transportation of LLRW near and through their neighborhoods. Although this study was designed to include only Native Americans, it can serve as a model for additional studies in non –Indian communities. American Indian tribes have a unique status as sovereign nations within the U.S., and this study was designed to address that relationship.This study includes an assessment of social and cultural impacts. One type of impact assessment concerns the estimation and communication of risks associated with potentially dangerous technologies or substances. Such an assessment, a technological "risk assessment," is generally conducted by natural or physical scientists and focuses on the probability and magnitude of various scenarios through time (Wolfe 1988). The specialists who conduct the assessment believe their estimates reflect the "real risks" of a technology or project because the estimates were made using scientific calculations. This study is not a risk assessment. Instead, this study pays attention to the public perceptions of impacts and risks. Like other social scientists, the researchers and American Indian partners who designed and conducted this study focus on public perceptions and frame the discussions in terms of locally defined values and concerns.This study involves 29 tribes and subgroups and is therefore very complex. Every effort has been made to present information systematically to help the reader make sense of what is being presented. Information about the tribes is presented in the same order throughout the report.

This book examines the long -term consultation partnership involving a federal agency, a group of American Indian tribes, and a team of anthropologists. This book highlights the history, evolution, dynamics, and results of the consultation relationship between the U.S. Department of Energy Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV) and 20 tribes and organizations composed of ethnic Numic-speaking Western Shoshone, Southern Paiute, and Owens Valley Paiute -Shoshone people. A team of applied anthropologists currently affiliated with the Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology at the University of Arizona in Tucson (UofA), and a team of archaeologists from the Desert Research Institute (DRI), a unit of the University and Community College System of Nevada in Reno and Las Vegas, Nevada, respectively, have provided technical assistance and contract consulting services to the Indian tribes and the DOE/NV, first on the Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Office (YMSCO) and, in the past decade, on the Nevada Test Site (NTS). During the early stages of the consultation relationship, the culturally affiliated Indian and pan-Indian entities unified themselves into a single indigenous organization, the Consolidated Group of Tribes and Organizations, or CGTO, for the purpose of defending their collective interests in the lands and resources comprising the NTS in south –central Nevada. Since 1994, this new Indian organization has consulted with the DOE/NV on an increasingly wider range of issues that affect Indian cultural, religious, and resource values on and around the NTS. The book also examines these cultural and religious values regarding traditional lands and resources, and the cultural significance of resources, objects, places, and landscapes within the boundaries of this facility that have been affected by DOE/NV mission activities. The consultation relationship was initiated, and continues into the present, as a result of the implementation of a series of federal environmental laws and regulations that require consultation with American Indian tribal governments when activities conducted with federal funds, in federal facilities, or both, have the potential to adversely impact traditional American Indian resources and cultural practices. Most notable among these is the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA), which was passed by the United States Congress in 1978. Prior to that time, cultural resources were managed mainly in accordance with the provisions set forth in Sections 106 and 110 of the National Historic Preservation Act.

On August 10, 1994, the Department of Energy/Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV) published a Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the entire Nevada Test Site (NTS) and seven off -site locations in the State of Nevada. In the EIS, DOE was to consider the following site management alternatives: (A) continue current operations and interagency project activities and programs. (B) discontinue operations, except those related to monitoring, security, and human health and safety, and decommission, (C) expand the use of the NTS to support national defense and nondefense programs, including waste management and storage, transportation, environmental restoration, and research and development; or (D) implement alternate use of withdrawn lands for new programs including unprecedented public access to remote areas for education and recreation. The structure, organization, and content of the EIS document were to be developed in accordance with the law, and included an assessment of long -term consequences of pro-posed alternatives, evaluation of mitigation strategies, and development of a resource management plan. Thus, in 1995 DOE/NV released a Draft Implementation Plan that documented the agency's approach for preparing the EIS, an important aspect of which is the incorporation of public opinion. In the same year, DOE/NV began consultations with the CGTO as required by NEPA, by the President's Council on Environmental Quality (Federal Register 43: 230, 44978 -56007), and the American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Government Policy, as amended in 2000. The CGTO appointed seven of its representatives (the American Indian Writers Subgroup or AIWS) to research the potential adverse effects of each action alternative on American Indian resources, to propose mitigation alternatives, and to outline future involvement of the member tribes and organizations in NTS programs and activities. The result of this endeavor was unprecedented, in that DOE agreed to include excerpts of text prepared by the AIWS in the main body of the EIS document and to publish the American Indian Assessment: Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Nevada Test Site and Off-site Locations in the State of Nevada: A Native American Resource Document in its entirety, as Appendix G of the Final NTS EIS (DOE /NV 1996).

On August 10, 1994, the Department of Energy/Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV) published a Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the entire Nevada Test Site (NTS) and seven off -site locations in the State of Nevada. In the EIS, DOE was to consider the following site management alternatives: (A) continue current operations and interagency project activities and programs. (B) discontinue operations, except those related to monitoring, security, and human health and safety, and decommission, (C) expand the use of the NTS to support national defense and nondefense programs, including waste management and storage, transportation, environmental restoration, and research and development; or (D) implement alternate use of withdrawn lands for new programs including unprecedented public access to remote areas for education and recreation. The structure, organization, and content of the EIS document were to be developed in accordance with the law, and included an assessment of long -term consequences of pro-posed alternatives, evaluation of mitigation strategies, and development of a resource management plan. Thus, in 1995 DOE/NV released a Draft Implementation Plan that documented the agency's approach for preparing the EIS, an important aspect of which is the incorporation of public opinion. In the same year, DOE/NV began consultations with the CGTO as required by NEPA, by the President's Council on Environmental Quality (Federal Register 43: 230, 44978 -56007), and the American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Government Policy, as amended in 2000. The CGTO appointed seven of its representatives (the American Indian Writers Subgroup or AIWS) to research the potential adverse effects of each action alternative on American Indian resources, to propose mitigation alternatives, and to outline future involvement of the member tribes and organizations in NTS programs and activities. The result of this endeavor was unprecedented, in that DOE agreed to include excerpts of text prepared by the AIWS in the main body of the EIS document and to publish the American Indian Assessment: Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Nevada Test Site and Off-site Locations in the State of Nevada: A Native American Resource Document in its entirety, as Appendix G of the Final NTS EIS (DOE /NV 1996). In 2002 and 2008, reports were prepared that addressed American Indian responses to issues raised by the federally mandated five and ten year supplement analyses. This process involved looking at the 1996 Environmental Impact Assessment conducted to consider whether the issues Indian people assessed are still being addressed by the EIS and whether new issues have arisen that would require agency action such as a new Environmental Impact Statement assessment. Included in this collection is the original Appendix G of the Final NTS EIS (DOE /NV 1996), the 2002 Supplement Analysis and the 2008 Supplement Analysis. These efforts triggered a new Environmental Impact Statement which was completed in early 2013.

On August 10, 1994, the Department of Energy/Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV) published a Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the entire Nevada Test Site (NTS) and seven off -site locations in the State of Nevada. In the EIS, DOE was to consider the following site management alternatives: (A) continue current operations and interagency project activities and programs. (B) discontinue operations, except those related to monitoring, security, and human health and safety, and decommission, (C) expand the use of the NTS to support national defense and nondefense programs, including waste management and storage, transportation, environmental restoration, and research and development; or (D) implement alternate use of withdrawn lands for new programs including unprecedented public access to remote areas for education and recreation. The structure, organization, and content of the EIS document were to be developed in accordance with the law, and included an assessment of long -term consequences of pro-posed alternatives, evaluation of mitigation strategies, and development of a resource management plan. Thus, in 1995 DOE/NV released a Draft Implementation Plan that documented the agency's approach for preparing the EIS, an important aspect of which is the incorporation of public opinion. In the same year, DOE/NV began consultations with the CGTO as required by NEPA, by the President's Council on Environmental Quality (Federal Register 43: 230, 44978 -56007), and the American Indian and Alaska Native Tribal Government Policy, as amended in 2000. The CGTO appointed seven of its representatives (the American Indian Writers Subgroup or AIWS) to research the potential adverse effects of each action alternative on American Indian resources, to propose mitigation alternatives, and to outline future involvement of the member tribes and organizations in NTS programs and activities. The result of this endeavor was unprecedented, in that DOE agreed to include excerpts of text prepared by the AIWS in the main body of the EIS document and to publish the American Indian Assessment: Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Nevada Test Site and Off-site Locations in the State of Nevada: A Native American Resource Document in its entirety, as Appendix G of the Final NTS EIS (DOE /NV 1996). In 2002 and 2008, reports were prepared that addressed American Indian responses to issues raised by the federally mandated five and ten year supplement analyses. This process involved looking at the 1996 Environmental Impact Assessment conducted to consider whether the issues Indian people assessed are still being addressed by the EIS and whether new issues have arisen that would require agency action such as a new Environmental Impact Statement assessment. Included in this collection is the original Appendix G of the Final NTS EIS (DOE /NV 1996), the 2002 Supplement Analysis and the 2007 Supplement Analysis. These efforts triggered a new Environmental Impact Statement which was completed in early 2013.

The Greater than Class C (GTCC) Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) evaluated the potential impacts from the construction and operation of a new facility or facilities, or use of an existing facility, employing various disposal methods (geologic repository, intermediate depth borehole, enhanced near surface trench, and above grade vault) at six federal sites and generic commercial locations. For three of the locations being considered as possible locations, consulting tribes were brought in to comment on their perceptions on how GTCC low level radioactive waste would affect Native American resources (land, water, air, plants, animals, archaeology, etc.) short and long term. The consulting tribes produced essays that were incorporated into the EIS and these essays are in turn included in this collection. This essay was produced by the Consolidated Group of Tribes and Organizations (CGTO) for the Nevada Test Site. The CGTO is a pan-Indian organization representing 17 tribes from California, Nevada, Utah and Arizona.

These photographs offer illustrations of the people, places, and resources of Water Bottle Canyon. These photographs were taken during the 2004 Traditional Cultural Property Study.

This paper was given at the Great Basin Anthropological Conference in Las Vegas, Nevada in 2006. This talk presents findings from the 2004 Water Bottle Canyon Traditional Cultural Property Study.