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and storage, transportation, environmental restoration, and research and development; or (D) implement alternate use of withdrawn lands for new programs including unprecedented public access to remote areas for education and recreation.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.

No description available.

Thesis (M. En.)--Miami University, Institute of Environmental Sciences, 2004. / Title from first page of PDF document. Includes bibliographical references (p. 31).

This presentation is a project overview and discussion of Native American participation in preparing documents for the Greater Than Class C Environmental Impact Statement. Tribal representatives were involved in the assessments at the Hanford Site, Nevada Test Site, and Los Alamos National Lab.