5.3 Alternative 3 - Expanded Use
Alternative 3, Expanded Use of the NTS, is defined as the increased support of both defense and nondefense programs. This alternative includes support for the ongoing DOE/NV missions, as described under Alternative 1, with the addition of many new activities within each program. Alternative 3 includes programs at the NTS, portions of the NAFR Complex, the Tonopah Test Range, the Project Shoal Area, the Central Nevada Test Area, and three Solar Enterprise Zone locations: Eldorado Valley, Dry Lake Valley, and Coyote Spring Valley. The description of Alternative 1 activities is presented in Section 5.1 . Therefore, this section summarizes only the additional activities that would be included under Alternative 3. A detailed description of the activities is presented in Appendix A. Defense Program. Stockpile stewardship, stockpile management, nuclear emergency response, and storage and disposition of weapons-usable fissile material would be the four categories of activities included in the Defense Program under Alternative 3. Stockpile stewardship would consist of the same activities as under Alternative 1 with the addition of more complex hydrodynamic tests and dynamic experiments, advanced nuclear weapons simulators, the National Ignition Facility, and a new large,heavy industrial facility. Stockpile management would be made up of interim storage of nuclear weapons and construction of a stockpile management complex. Nuclear emergency response activities would be the same as those described under Alternative 1. The DOE would be responsible for the management, storage, and disposition of weapons-usable fissile materials from the nation’s nuclear weapons dismantlement and weapons production processes. Waste Management Program. As with Alternative 1, waste management activities at the NTS would continue to be conducted in four primary areas: Areas 3, 5, 6, and 11. The additional waste management activities that would be implemented under Alternative 3 for each area are described below. The Area 3 Radioactive Waste Management Site activities would be increased to levels consistent with the centralized alternative in the Waste Management Draft Programmatic EIS. Three additional low-level waste disposal craters, one support building, and a truck decontamination facility would be constructed. All new waste disposal facilities will be designed and constructed to meet all applicable regulations. Closure of the additional disposal units would occur when they become full. The radioactive and mixed waste disposal activities at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site would be increased to meet the need of additional DOE generators identified to ship waste to the NTS. Two additional low-level waste disposal pits would be opened (pending the approval of a modification to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Part B permit) and 20 mixed waste disposal cells would be prepared. Other construction would include a Class I sanitary landfill, a mixed waste storage unit, a low-level storage unit, a Waste Examination Facility, a real-time radiography building, a cotter concentrate treatment facility, and a new access building. Waste management operations in Area 6 under Alternative 3 would be the same as those described under Alternative 1. The Area 11 Explosive Ordnance Disposal Unit activities under Alternative 3 would be the same as those described under Alternative 1, except that treatment operations would be increased to a level near maximum capacity. Environmental Restoration Program. Environmental Restoration Program activities would continue as described under Alternative 1, but would be accelerated. Expanded uses may require cleanup level adjustment in accordance with the applicable environmental requirements. Nondefense Research and Development Program. Under Alternative 3, the changes in Nondefense Research and Development Program activities include the construction and operation of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility, increased activitiesat the Spill Test Facility, and increased technology development activities. Work for Others Program. Activities would be the same as those described under Alternative 1.
5.3.1 Nevada Test Site
The impacts that would occur at the NTS as a result of Alternative 3 are presented in this section.
5.3.1.1 Land Use
Alternative 3 would result in 5,809 acres of new ground disturbance resulting in a total of 64,500 acres compared to 58,729 acres of existing ground disturbance. Most of the new disturbance would be for new facility construction, especially a Solar Enterprise Zone facility (2,402 acres). The Defense Program would contribute 1,000 acres of new disturbance; the Waste Management Program, 209 acres; the Environmental Restoration Program, 51 acres; the Nondefense Research and Development Program, 4,582 acres; the Work for Others Program, 10 acres; and the site-support activities would contribute 30 acres. Defense Program. Under Alternative 3, the High-Explosive Test Zone acreage would increase from 176 km2 (68 mi2) to 422 km2 (163 mi2) of land area. All 130 km2 (50 mi²) of the former Critical Assembly Zone in Area 27 would become part of the Reserved Zone and would become available for diverse short-term testing and experimentation or short-duration exercises and training, such as those associated with Nuclear Emergency Search Team, Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center, and DoD land navigation. Alternative 3 also includes the creation of a 49-km2 (19-mi²) Defense Industrial Zone for stockpile management of weapons, including production; assembly; disassembly or modification; staging, repair, retrofit, and surveillance; and construction of a large, heavy industrial facility. Also included in this zone would be permanent facilities for stockpile stewardship operations involving equipment and activities such as radiography, lasers, special nuclear materials processing, and explosive-pulsed power. In North Las Vegas the principal impact of the proposed National Ignition Facility project on land use at the North Las Vegas Facility would be the conversion of limited vacant land, which would not be available for other uses. The proposed National Ignition Facility would require about 8 acres, which represents approximately 10 percent of the total land area at the North Las Vegas Facility and 56 percent of land available for development at the North Las Vegas Facility. The impact of this conversion would be reduced somewhat by the existence of other areas on the site that would remain open for future development. Potential onsite impacts to land use could also result from required waste and water system upgrades, but the presence of the National Ignition Facility should not preclude future land uses for development in the city of North Las Vegas or Clark County. Waste Management Program. Alternative 3 would not involve the expansion of the Radioactive Waste Management Zones in Areas 3 or 5. The land-use areas for solid waste landfills could be expanded to accommodate increased on-site municipal wastes and solid wastes from surrounding rural counties. Environmental Restoration Program. Characterization and cleanup activities would be commensurate with the designated land uses at the site. Environmental restoration is not considered a land-use designation, but it is an activity required for characterization and re-use of lands and facilities. Nondefense Research and Development Program. Under Alternative 3, the Nondefense Research and Development Program would designate approximately 62 km2 (24 mi²) of land area as a Solar Enterprise Zone. All other activities proposed for this program would be conducted in areas appropriately zoned for the activity. Work for Others Program. Under Alternative 3, the Research Test Experiment Zone would be designated for defense-related small-scale research and development projects, demonstrations, pilot projects, and outdoor tests and experiments for the development, quality assurance, or reliability of materials and equipment under controlledconditions. This zone area would increase from 36 km22 to 298 km2 (14 mi2 to 115 mi2).
5.3.1.1.1 Site-Support Activities
Under Alternative 3, the NTS site-support activities would be modernized and expanded to the extent necessary to provide support for existing activities, as well as new projects and activities not previously conducted at the NTS. FACILITIESIt is anticipated that the Control Point 1 and Mercury cafeterias would undergo minor renovation. In Area 23, Buildings 117 (offices) and 650 (the medical facilities and laboratory) would be expanded and renovated or modified. A new records management building would be constructed in Area 23, and the existing bulk fuel storage facility in Area 23 would be upgraded. Current maintenance levels of existing off-site government-owned facilities would continue. The DOE and contractor personnel currently in leased facilities would relocate to the North Las Vegas facility. The North Las Vegas and Remote Sensing Laboratory Facility would be expanded to accommodate additional employees. SERVICESLaw enforcement, security, fire protection, and health services would be expanded as required with this alternative. UTILITIESPower utilities at the NTS would be modified and expanded. The main electrical power substation on the line from Las Vegas would be replaced with a modern substation. A new switching center would be installed, and significant sections of the power grid would be upgraded. Water wells and supply lines would be installed, as necessary, depending on the location of future projects. Waste-handling systems would be built, as necessary, with environmental acceptability as a primary concern. The NTS substation for the main 138-kV supply line from Las Vegas would be replaced with a modern substation. Along with this modernization, a new switching center and a switching station would be built. The existing 34.5-kV loop that extends primary supply into the forward areas of theNTS would be upgraded at the Area 2 substation. This upgrade would provide a backup feed line to the Rainier substation. There would be no significant increase to the approximately 427 km (265 mi) of primary and secondary power supply lines used on the NTS. COMMUNICATIONSCommunications systems would be upgraded, mobile radio systems would be replaced with modern digital systems, and monitoring systems would be consolidated. Telephone communications would be enhanced with a modern microwave system and a paging terminal and controller. Fiber-optic links would be extended to facilities requiring extensive data communication capabilities. The approximately 60 radio systems and 3,500 mobile units would be replaced with a digitally trunked mobile radio system. Administrative issues associated with the change, such as procedures and training, would be modified accordingly. Central monitoring of NTS radio nets maintained at Station 900 would be consolidated and enlarged to provide greater access for equipment and maintenance. This station would function primarily as an emergency reporting point for both radio and telephone. The public safety network, which provides coverage to most of Nevada and portions of nearby states, would be upgraded. The central hub for telephone communications would be relocated to the Nevada Support Facility in North Las Vegas. The microwave portion of the system would be replaced with state-of-the-art microwave equipment, and the paging terminal and controller would be replaced to provide the highest level of flexibility. Additional Aspen voice mail systems would be added, as necessary, to the Octel maximum system that currently services the DOE/NV community. The NTS would continue to operate the two existing mail systems. Little or no expansion is anticipated for either of the mail systems as a result of this alternative.
5.3.1.1.2 Airspace
Under Alternative 3, there could be an increase in flying time betweencommercial airports within and outside Nevada. An increase in the number of operations is also projected. However, this alternative would most likely maintain the current level of air traffic control and navigational aid services, as well as the same airspace structure. Based on past trends and on improvements in communication, this alternative might cause modification and extended flight times for civilian aircraft. The only activities that would affect airspace would be defense related. Therefore, only Defense and Work for Others Programs will be discussed and evaluated. However, occasional helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft carrying supplies and personnel are anticipated for all programs. Defense Program. Under Alternative 3, there would be an increase in the support for ongoing defense-related activities located at the NTS, possibly resulting in the increase of air traffic operations. Assuming a 2-percent annual increase, operations would increase by approximately 20 percent over the 10-year study period. This would require additional coordination with other federal agencies to ensure all missions are accommodated. Work for Others Program. Under Alternative 3, the Work for Others Program activities would cause an increase in the use of the NTS airspace by the DoD for training and defense-related research and development. No commercial air passenger, general aviation, or air cargo activities would occur within the NTS airspace. (Occasional DOE-related aircraft operations carrying supplies and personnel or for emergency operations might take place.) The continuation of operations at the NTS under the Work for Others Program within this alternative would require additional coordination with other military operations and activities to ensure both missions are accommodated.
5.3.1.2 Transportation
. The following sections contain the discussion of the environmental impacts related to transportation activities as defined under Alternative 3. The analysis of transportation impacts is presented with respect to on-site traffic, off-site traffic, transportation of materials and waste, and other transportation.
5.3.1.2.1 On-Site Traffic
Traffic generated within the NTS as a result of land uses, projects,and activities associated with Alternative 3 is estimated to be 16,310 vehicle trips per day. Table 5.3-1 shows the average daily trip generation for each program. The daily trips were distributed on site based on existing travel patterns for commuters and the current NTS areas affected by each program. Table 5.3-2 summarizes the average daily traffic volume for the key roadways on the NTS for Alternative 3. The portion of the average daily traffic volume thatwould be attributable to each program is also provided. All key on-site roadways have capacities exceeding 2,000 vehicles per hour for both directions combined (Transportation Research Board, 1994). A comparison of capacity to the volumes assigned to each segment on Table5.3-2 shows that no roadway would experience significant traffic congestion under Alternative 3. Defense Program Traffic generated on the roads within the NTS as a result of projects and activities associated with the Defense Program is estimated to be 2,450 average daily trips under Alternative 3. There would be no adverse effects on traffic flow as a result of the Defense Program. Waste Management Program. Traffic generated on the roads within the NTS as a result of projects and activities associated with the Waste Management Program is estimated to be 1,215 average daily trips under Alternative 3. The Radioactive Waste Management Sites in Areas 3 and 5 would continue operations as described in Alternative 1, with an increase in the scope of service to the entire DOE complex (DOE, 1995b). Projections indicate that the number of inbound shipments from off-site generators would be approximately 4,000 shipments per year, during the next 10 years, for an average of 20 shipments per day. The number of on-site generated waste shipments would remain at six shipments per day, as described under Alternative 1. Road 5-01, the access to the Radioactive Waste Management Site in Area 5, is scheduled for improvement by the second quarter Fiscal Year 1997. The improvement project is described under Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.1.2.1 . No adverse effects on traffic flow would occur as a result of the Waste Management Program. Environmental Restoration Program. Traffic generated on the roads within the NTS as a result of projects and activities associated with the Environmental Restoration Program is estimated to be 1,400 average daily trips under Alternative 3. No adverse effects on traffic flow would occur as a result of the Environmental Restoration Program. Nondefense Research and Development Program. Traffic generated on the roads within the NTS as a result of projects and activities associated with the Nondefense Research and Development Program is estimated to be 6,080 average daily trips under Alternative 3. Traffic volumes on Jackass Flats Road, Cane Spring Road, and that portion of Mercury Highway that is south of Cane Spring Road would be approximately 3,000 vehicles per day for each segment, representing a substantial increase over Alternative 1. These volumes, however, represent on-site trips that were assumed to be uniformly distributed throughout the day. This, together with the fact that all on-site trips were also assumed to have an endpoint in Mercury, shows that no adverse effects on traffic flow would occur as a result of the Nondefense Research and Development Program. Work for Others Program. Traffic generated on the roads within the NTS as a result of projects and activities associated with the Work for Others Program is estimated to be 1,130 average daily tripsunder Alternative 3. No adverse effects on traffic flow would occur as a result of the Work for Others Program. Site-Support Activities. Traffic generated on the roads within the NTS as a result of site-support activities is estimated to be 4,035 average daily trips under Alternative 3. No adverse effects on traffic flow would occur as a result of site-support activities.
5.3.1.2.2 Off-Site Traffic
Under Alternative 3, on-site NTS employment would be increased relative to the future baseline (Alternative 1). Correspondingly, an increase in daily vehicle trips and traffic volume on key roadways is anticipated. This increase in vehicle trips was estimated for each roadway segment and added to the baseline to obtain the overall vehicle trips for the project. Traffic impacts were determined based on level of service changes for each of the key roads analyzed. The major traffic generators at the site resulting from various programs under Alternative 3 are the additional construction and operation employees (totaling 389 employees in 1996; 3,011 employees in 2000; and 2,051 employees in 2005) and their associated activities. Note that the employment figures represent the increment above the baseline figures (Alternative 1). Table 5.3-3 shows a summary of average daily vehicle trips increase by each program activity for the years 1996, 2000, and 2005. The year 2000 represents a peak in the increased number of trips. Under Alternative 3, the NTS access road (State Route 433) would experience the greatest increase in traffic during the peak hour (in one direction). This increase would be 40 vehicles in 1996, 300 in 2000, and 200 in 2005. Similarly, 30 vehicles would be added in 1996 to the Mercury interchange ramps serving Las Vegas, 250 vehicles in 2000, and 135 in 2005. Approximately 100 to 250 vehicles would be added to U.S. Highway 95 between Mercury and Las Vegas in 2000. Most other roadway segments would generally experience less than 100 additional vehicles during the peak hour. This figure would be less by 20 for segments in remote areas. The projected peak-hour traffic on key roads and the associated level of service that would result under Alternative 3 for 1996, 2000, and 2005 are shown in Table 5.3-4. Based on Association of American State Highway and Transportation Officials standards, level of service B is appropriate for freeways; arterials; and rural, level, or rolling terrain. Level of service C is appropriate for rural (mountainous), urban, and suburban highways. For local roads, level of service D is appropriate in all terrain (AASHTO, 1990). Under Alternative 3, the access highway to the site (State Route 433) would operate at level of service C in 1996 and level of service D in 2000 and 2005. According to Association of American State Highway and Transportation Officials standards and considering this access to be a local highway, level of service D is acceptable. Roadway ramps at the Mercury interchange would continue to operate at level of service B. U.S. Highway 95 east of Mercury would continue to have excess capacity and would operate at level of service A. However, U.S. Highway 95 north of the Mercury interchange would likely operate at level of service D by 2005. On the other hand, key roads within metropolitan Las Vegas (segments of Interstate 15, U.S. Highway 95, and U.S. Highway 93) alreadyoperate at levels of service ranging from A to F, and by 2000, they would all deteriorate to unacceptable level of service F. These conditions would prevail even without Alternative 3 because of cumulative traffic growth (recreational, regional, and commuter traffic). U.S. Highway 93 at Hoover Dam (rural and mountainous) already operates at unacceptable level of service F, and its level of service would continue to deteriorate further with or without this alternative, owing to its geometry (steep grades and narrow curves) and partially to its moderate traffic volume and truck traffic. All other key roadways would continue to operate at level of service C or better. These conditions would prevail with or without Alternative 3 and with or without any single program activity. The following sections address the contribution of each program activity to traffic impacts. The trips discussed for each program account for construction and operations activities generated by the site and occurring at the access road off U.S. Highway 95. Defense Program. With the Defense Program, 40 additional daily vehicle trips in 1996, 350 in 2000, and 350 in 2005 would be generated. Except for site support, the defense-related activities would have the highest number of daily vehicle trips, peak-hour vehicles, and the most traffic impacts. The defense activities would contribute 34 percent to total trips added under Alternative 3 in 2005. Waste Management Program. Under Alternative 3, the Waste Management Program would add 130 vehicle trips on a typical weekday in 2005. The number of daily vehicle trips added would amount to less than 13 percent of trips added by all programs. Environmental Restoration Program. Under Alternative 3, Environmental Restoration Program activities are expected to be accelerated relative to Alternative 1. The largest number of trips added is expected to be approximately 90, or 9 percent of the total in 2005. Nondefense Research and Development Program. Under Alternative 3, approximately 40 vehicle trips would be added with this program on a typical weekday. In 2005, the Nondefense activities would contribute less than 4 percent to the total number of daily vehicle trips. Work for Others Program. Under Alternative 3, employees of the Work for Others Program would add 10 vehicle trips per day. Site-Support Activities. Site-support activities are expected to add 900 additional vehicle trips in 2000 and 410 in 2005. These trips account for operations activities related to roads, utilities, communications, and other site support. Under Alternative 3, these activities would contribute to approximately 60 percent of the total number of increased daily trips in 2000.
5.3.1.2.3 Transportation of Materials and Waste
Alternative 3 represents a significant increase in the mission of the NTS. The majority of the activities under this alternative are associated with Defense and Waste Management Program activities. Activities identified for the Defense Program include added responsibilities for the stockpilestewardship mission. Besides the NTS’s primary mission of readiness to test nuclear weapons other activities include relocation of assembly/disassembly activities and management of special nuclear materials (plutonium pits) and other highly explosive materials. The transportation of nuclear explosive materials are required for the following reasons for this alternative:
- Weapons currently stored at classified DoD facilities are returned to the NTS for dismantlement.
- Weapons are returned to the identified assembly area for testing, modification upgrades, and certain component replacement.
- Weapons are returned to DoD facilities upon completion of modification or test of the unit.
5.3.1.3 Socioeconomics.
The potential socioeconomic effects under Alternative 3 are discussed in this section. The description of socioeconomic conditions includes indicators (population, civilian labor force, employment, unemployment rate, and income) that provide a basis for comparing regional socioeconomic conditions of the site with the three other alternatives. Public finance and public services (public education, police and fire protection, and health) are described. Alternative 1 was considered equivalent to future baseline conditions without new activities. Table 5.3-8 reflects the effects of economic indicators for this alternative, and Table 5.3-9 describes housing projections. American Indian socioeconomic impacts due to fluctuations in DOE employment opportunities for tribal members from the CGTO region of influence are discussed in Section 5.1.1.3 . ECONOMIC ACTIVITY, POPULATION, AND HOUSINGUnder Alternative 3, it was assumed that direct employment would increase by 867 jobs in 1996, with a maximum increase of 6,718 jobs in 2000, and 4,531 jobs in 2005. It is estimated that direct payroll and purchases of goods and services would generate 2,017 additional secondary jobs in 1996; 12,744 in 2000; and 8,977 in 2005. Of the total employment increase of 13,508 workers, a vast majority (over 97 percent) is expected to live in Clark and Nye counties. Hence, the discussion below concentrates on these two counties. Within Clark County, a total of 2,756 new jobs in 1996; 18,534 jobs in 2000; and 12,857 jobs in 2005 would be generated under Alternative 3. Within Nye County, this alternative would generate 101 new jobs in 1996; 758 in 2000; and 516 in 2005. An increase of 12,857 in Clark County in 2005 would result in a decrease in the County’s unemployment rate from 5.8 percent to 4.7 percent. Similarly, in Nye County, an increase of 516 jobs in 2005 would result in a decrease in the County’s unemployment rate from 5.2 percent to 4.7 percent. Because of an increase in employment opportunities, population in-migration is anticipated. It is estimated that 10,020 persons could relocate to Clark County in 2005 resulting in a population increase of 0.7 percent over the Alternative 1 level of 1,380,920 persons. As manyas 656 persons may in-migrate to Nye County in 2005. This would result in a population increase of 1.7 percent over the Alternative 1 level of 38,516 persons. In 2005, an estimated 3,914 households could relocate to Clark County and 246 households to Nye County under Alternative 3. This would result in a reduction of housing vacancy rates from 7.9 percent to 7.2 percent in Clark County and from 16.2 percent to 14.8 percent in Nye County. Direct earning levels are estimated at $41.2 million in 1996, $330.7 million in 2000, and $224.6 million in 2005. Secondary earnings are estimated at $53.9 million in 1996, $346.1 million in 2000, and $243.0 million in 2005 in the region of influence. Of these earnings, Clark County would gain a total of $90.9 million in 1996, $643.2 million in 2000, and $444.7 million in 2005. For Nye County, this economic activity would generate a total of $4.2 million in 1996, $33.6 million in 2000, and $22.9 million in 2005. Defense Program. In the region of influence, this program would create 532 new jobs, including 160 direct and 372 secondary positions, in 1996. In 2000, employment in the region of influence would increase by 4,584 jobs. By the end of 2005, total employment increase in the region of influence would remain at 4,584. In Clark County, this program would contribute to 4,359 jobs (1,383 direct and 2,976 secondary) in 2005. For Nye County, this program would contribute 178 jobs (109 direct and 69 secondary) in 2005. In 2005, an estimated 1,897 households that support the Defense Program would relocate to Clark County, and 92 households to Nye County,contributing to a decrease in housing vacancy rates. In North Las Vegas, construction of the proposed National Ignition Facility at the North Las Vegas Facility would require 280 workers during the peak year of construction (1998). Operation of the facility would require 330 direct workers in the peak year of 2003 and continue through the duration of National Ignition Facility operations. These activities would generate too few jobs to affect the socioeconomic region of influence. Waste Management Program. In the region of influence, this program would create 226 new jobs, including 68 direct and 158 secondary jobs, in 1996. In 2000, employment in the region of influence would increase by 1,634 jobs (563 direct and 1,071 secondary). By the end of 2005, total employment would remain at 1,634. In Clark County, the Waste Management Program would contribute 1,553 jobs (493 direct and 1,060 secondary) in 2005. In Nye County, the Waste Management Program would contribute 64 jobs (39 direct and 25 secondary) in 2005. With the workload increase in this program, 1,730 persons would relocate to Clark County, and 88 persons to Nye County. In 2005, an estimated 676 households that support this program would relocate to Clark County, and 33 households to Nye County contributing to a decrease in housing vacancy rates. Environmental Restoration Program. In the region of influence, this program would create 432 new jobs, including 130 direct and302 secondary positions, in 1996. In 2000, employment in the region of influence would increase by 1,152 jobs. By the end of 2005, total employment would remain at 1,152. In Clark County, this program would add 1,095 jobs (348 direct and 747 secondary) in 2005. For Nye County, this program would add 45 jobs (27 direct and 18 secondary) in 2005. Because of the workload increase in the Environmental Restoration Program, 1,220 persons would relocate to Clark County, and 62 persons to Nye County in 2005. An estimated 477 households that support this program would relocate to Clark County and 23 households to Nye County contributing to a decrease in housing vacancy rates. Nondefense Research and Development Program. In the region of influence, this program would create a total of 170 jobs, including 51 direct and 119 secondary positions, in 1996. In 2000, employment in the region of influence would increase by 467 jobs. By the end of 2005, total employment would remain at 467. Within Clark County, this program would add 444 jobs (140 direct and 304 secondary) in 2005. For Nye County, this program would add 18 jobs (11 direct and 7 secondary) in 2005. With workload increases in the Nondefense Research and Development Program, 495 persons would relocate to Clark County and 25 persons to Nye County. The demand for housing in the region of influence would increase as a result of the relocation of households associated with the NTS. In 2005, an estimated 193 households that support this program would relocate to Clark County and an estimated 9 households would relocate to Nye County, contributing to a decrease in housing vacancy rates. Work for Others Program. In the region of influence, this program would create 27 jobs, including 8 direct and 19 secondary positions, in 1996. In 2000, employment in the region of influence would increase by 23 jobs (8 direct and 15 secondary). By the end of 2005, total employment would remain at 23 jobs. In Clark County, this program would contribute 22 jobs (7 direct and 15 secondary) in 2005. In Nye County, the Work for Others Program would contribute at least one job in 2005. Because of the workload increase in this program, 25 persons are anticipated to relocate in Clark County and one person in Nye County. In 2005, an estimated 10 households that support the Work for Others Program would relocate to Clark County, and one household to Nye County, contributing to a decrease of housing vacancy rates. Site-Support Activities. Under Alternative 3, additional employment would be required to support increased construction requirements under other programs. In the region of influence, site-support activities would create 1,497 jobs, including 450 direct and 1,047 secondary positions, in 1996. In 2000, employment in the region of influence would increase by 11,632 jobs (4,009 direct and 7,623 secondary). By the end of 2005, total employment would reach 5,648 (1,822 direct and 3,826 secondary). In Clark County, this program would contribute 5,384 jobs (1,708 direct and 3,676 secondary) in 2005. For Nye County, this program would contribute 210 jobs (129 direct and 81 secondary) jobs in 2005. Because of workload increases in site-support activities, 1,695 persons would relocate to Clark County, and 234 persons to Nye County. In 2005, an estimated 661 households that support this program would relocate to Clark County, and 89 households to Nye County, contributing to a decrease in housing vacancy rates. PUBLIC FINANCEThe fiscal impact of all alternatives can be determined by subtracting their income statement totals from the Alternative 1 future baseline. The remaining fiscal impact is the specific impact associated with each alternative. Projected financial summaries are present in T able 5.3-10, and the text makes comparisons to Alternative 1. Clark County. The expansion and improvement of the county infrastructure would continue to be the primary focus of Clark County fiscal efforts. In addition, Clark County has undertaken the implementation of a county facilities development program as discussed under Public Finance, Section 4.1.3 . Under Alternative 3, revenues for Clark County would increase because of increases in population, personal income, and total employment in the county. Assuming continued small increases in revenues and slightly larger initial increases in expenditures (see discussion on capital projects under Public Finance, Section 4.1.3 ), Alternative 3 would result in revenues less expenditures of a negative $358,000 in Fiscal Year 2000. In Fiscal Year 2005, revenues less expenditures are expected to be $38,982,000. The fund balance (or reserves) as a percentage of current expense is expected to be 247 percent in 2000 and 381 percent in 2005. To compare with Alternative 1, Clark County revenues over expenditures would be $2,144,000 more in 2000 and $1,941,000 more in 2005. City of Las Vegas. Under Alternative 3, revenues over expenditures for the City of Las Vegas are expected to become positive in Fiscal Year 1995 because of increases in population, personalincome, and total employment in the city. Assuming continued increases in revenues and expenditures, this alternative would result in revenues less expenditures of $15,422,000 in Fiscal Year 2000. It is predicted that by Fiscal Year 2005, revenues over expenditures would be $17,308,000. The fund balance as a percentage of current expense is expected to be 180 percent in 2000 and 275 percent in 2005. To compare with Alternative 1, revenues over expenditures would be $1,042,000 more in 2000 and $873,000 more in 2005. City of North Las Vegas. Expenditures for North Las Vegas are forecast to continue to outpace revenues. Revenues over expenditures in Fiscal Year 2000 would be a negative $6,964,000 and a less negative $6,449,000 in Fiscal Year 2005. This is despite anticipated increases in population, personal income, and total employment in the city. Public safety and capital projects are anticipated to continue to be the largest expenditures. Taxes, which recently decreased (from $10,059,472 in Fiscal Year 1993 to $7,941,972 in Fiscal Year 1994), are expected to slowly grow to 1993 levels by Fiscal Year 2000. The fund balance as a percentage of current expense is expected to be 64 percent in Fiscal Year 2000 and 96 percent in Fiscal Year 2005. To compare with Alternative 1, revenues over expenditures would be $113,000 more in 2000 and $132,000 more in 2005. Clark County School District. Under Alternative 3, revenues for the Clark County School District would expand because of increases in population and corresponding school enrollment. Regular program and undistributed expenditures would likely continue to increase. The school district is not predicted to achieve a positive fiscal position by Fiscal Year 2005, even with Alternative 3. With more students and no corresponding increases in revenue by Fiscal Year 2000, revenues less expenditures would be a negative $14,457,000 and, in Fiscal Year 2005, a less negative $10,872,000. The fund balance as a percentage of current expense is expected to be 16 percent in Fiscal Year 2000 and a 0.23 percent in Fiscal Year 2005. To compare with Alternative 1, revenues over expenditures would be $610,000 less in 2000 and $296,000 less in 2005. Nye County. Under Alternative 3, revenues for Nye County would increase slightly because of increases in population, personal income, and total employment in the county. Assuming continued small increases in expenditures as well, a positive fiscal position is expected to be reached in Fiscal Year 1996. This alternative would result in revenues less expenditures of $2,043,000 in Fiscal Year 2000. In Fiscal Year 2005, revenues less expenditures would be $3,755,000. The fund balance as a percentage of current expense is expected to be 60 percent in Fiscal Year 2000 and 108 percent in Fiscal Year 2005. To compare withAlternative 1, revenues over expenditures would be $476,000 more in 2000 and $300,000 more in 2005. Town of Tonopah. Revenues and expenditures for the town of Tonopah would increase slightly because of increases in population, personal income, and total employment in the county. Assuming continued increases, Alternative 3 would result in revenues less expenditures of $85,000 in Fiscal Year 2000. In Fiscal Year 2005, revenues less expenditures would be $79,000. The fund balance as a percentage of current expense would be 129 percent in Fiscal Year 2000 and 192 percent in Fiscal Year 2005. To compare with Alternative 1, revenues over expenditures would be $6,000 more in 2000 and $4,000 more in 2005. Town of Pahrump. Under Alternative 3, revenues for the town of Pahrump would increase slightly because of increases in population, personal income, and total employment in the county. Assuming continued increases in revenues and slightly smaller initial increases in expenditures compared to Fiscal Year 1994, this alternative would result in revenues less expenditures of $240,000 in Fiscal Year 2000. In Fiscal Year 2005, revenues less expenditures would be $327,000. The fund balance (or reserves) as a percentage of current expense is anticipated to be 172 percent in Fiscal Year 2000 and 283 percent in the Fiscal Year 2005. To compare with Alternative 1, revenues over expenditures would be $16,000 more in 2000 and $12,000 more in 2005. Nye County School District. Under Alternative 3, revenues for the Nye County School District would increase slightly because of increases in population. Local sources would continue to generate the most revenue. Assuming small increases in revenues and expenditures, the school district would see a positive level of revenues over expenditures in Fiscal Year 2005. Revenues less expenditures are expected to be a negative $1,173,000 in Fiscal Year 2000 and $8,000 in Fiscal Year 2005. The fund balance as a percentage of current expense is expected to be 0.93 percent in Fiscal Year 2000 and 19 percent in Fiscal Year 2005. To compare with Alternative 1, revenues over expenditures would be $229,000 more in 2000 and $128,000 more in 2005. PUBLIC SERVICES Table 5.3-11 summarizes the level of service that would be required for Alternative 3, and the following text compares them to Alternative 1. In each case, the current level of service per 1,000 population is assumed to continue. Public Education. A total of 7,928 full-time equivalent licensed teachers were employed by the Clark County School District in the 1993 to 1994 school year, resulting in a student-to-teacher ratio of 18:33. To continue with this ratio, the Clark County School District would require 11,185 teachers by the school year 2004 to 2005, or 80 more than under Alternative 1. The student-to-teacher ratio for Nye County School District was 16:39 in the 1994 to 1995 school year. Assuming this ratio were to be projected in the school year 2004 to 2005, 390 teachers or 6 more than with Alternative 1 would be required. Police Protection. Assuming the same level of service in the future, requirements for sworn police and deputy protection in the year 2005 can be examined. The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department would require 1,717 sworn police officers or 12 more officers than under Alternative 1. The North Las Vegas Police Department would require 183 sworn officers or 1 more sworn police officer over Alternative 1. The Nye County Sheriff’s Office in Tonopah would require 16 sheriff deputies or 1 more deputy sheriff over Alternative 1. The town of Pahrump Sheriff’s Substation would require 52, the Beatty Sheriff’s Substation would require 5, and the Amargosa Valley Sheriff’s substation would require 3. This would lead to the requirement for one more deputy sheriff for the town of Pahrump and none for the Beatty and Amargosa Valley Sheriff’s substations. Fire Protection. It can be assumed that the present level of service based on current population can be projected into the future. The Clark County Fire Department, which handles fires in the urbanized unincorporated county, would be expected to require 568 firefighters in 2005, or 4 more than under Alternative 1. Some 409, or 3 more firefighters, would be required in the Las Vegas Fire Department in the year 2005. The North Las Vegas Fire Department would require 113 or 1 more firefighter. The Tonopah, Pahrump, Beatty and Amargosa Valley Volunteer Fire Departments would require 30, 56, 29 and 36 firefighters, respectively. There are changes of zero, one, one, and zero, respectively, in comparison with Alternative 1. Health Care. The 1995 level of service for medical doctors and registered nurses was used to determine future needs based on population growth. By 2005, a total of 1,911 (14 more than under Alternative 1) medical doctors and 6,738 (49 more) registered nurses would be required in Clark County. In Nye County, 13 medical doctors and 60 registered nurses would be required, which is the same number of medical doctors and one more registered nurse from Alternative 1.
5.3.1.4 Geology and Soils
. The following is a discussion of geologic and soils impacts. Defense Program. Under Alternative 3, adverse impacts to geology and soils media are the same as those discussed under Defense Program in Alternative 1 (Section 5.1.1.4) . Storage of weapons or components of weapons in the Device Assembly Facility and in the P-Tunnel has been proposed and, if implemented, could disturb geologic media. New stockpile management activities at the Device Assembly Facility would disturb approximately 29 acres of surface geologic media. Any additional excavation for this purpose would result in permanent loss of the excavated geologic media and could impact slope stability. The construction and operation of the proposed National Ignition Facility at the North Las Vegas Facility would have no adverse impact on geological resources. The National Ignition Facility would require about 8 of vacant land. The soils at the North Las Vegas Facility are considered acceptable for standard construction techniques. Soil impacts during construction would be short-term and minor with appropriate standard construction erosion and sediment control measures. The site has been disturbed in the past; therefore, construction impacts would be minor. Net soil disturbance during operation would be less than for construction because areas temporarily used for laydown would be restored. Seismic risks would be taken into consideration during design, construction, and operation activities. Waste Management Program. Adverse impacts to geologic media discussed for the Waste Management Program under Alternative 1 also apply under Alternative 3. Specific other facilities or actions that could adversely impact geologic media include those listed in Appendix A . Environmental Restoration Program. Under Alternative 3, the adverse impacts to geologic media discussed under the Environmental Restoration Program in Section 5.1.1.4 apply. Nondefense Research and Development Program. Under Alternative 3, the adverse impacts to geologic media discussed under the Nondefense Research and Development Program in Section 5.1.1.4 apply. Other facilities that could adversely impact geologic media are the Treatability Test Facility and the Area 6 decontamination pad. Work for Others Program. Under Alternative 3, the adverse impacts to geologic media discussed under the Work for Others Program in Section 5.1.1.4 apply. Other specific actions that could adversely impact geologic media are associated with the demilitarization of conventional weapons. Site-Support Activities. The impacts associated with site-support activities under Alternative 3 would be the same as those discussed under Alternative 1. Construction of new facilities could adversely impact the geologic media. Impact to geologic media is primarily from clearing of the site, construction of infrastructure, and excavation of aggregate.
5.3.1.5 Hydrology
. The environmental impacts to surface hydrology and groundwater are described in the sections that follow . Discussions of impacts to water quality and water quantity are also presented.
5.3.1.5.1 Surface Hydrology
The impacts to surface hydrology for the five programs and site-support activities are presented in this section. One potential impact from all the programs would be alteration of natural drainage paths, resulting in potential preferential erosion of natural or fill deposits, deposition of sediments, ponding of water, or inundation of infrastructure. Activities could have minor effects on drainage patterns and discharge rates because of surface disturbance and altered infiltration rates. No surface waters are used for water supplies. The ephemeral waters exist in normally dry washes for short periods of time and on the surface of usually dry lakes for periods of days to weeks. Water quality of the ephemeral waters is poor because of naturally high sediment loads and dissolved solids. Change to sediment loads and dissolved solids due to project activities would be minor compared to the natural baselines. No significant change in water quality or quantity is anticipated, and thus the impacts would be negligible. Defense Program. Under Alternative 3, the adverse impacts to the surface hydrologic environment discussed under the Defense Program in Alternative 1 apply. The additional facilities andactivities included under Alternative 3 could increase the adverse impacts to the surface hydrologic environment that are presented under Alternative 1. Information regarding these facilities is presented in Appendix A . The proposed National Ignition Facility location at the North Las Vegas Facility is outside the 500-year floodplain of the local drainage. Construction of the National Ignition Facility at the North Las Vegas Facility would be expected to have minor to negligible effects on water quality with the implementation of a stormwater pollution and prevention plan to minimize soil erosion, sedimentation, and contamination of stormwater. Measures would be taken to comply with stormwater discharge regulations associated with construction activities. Waste Management Program. Under Alternative 3, the adverse impacts to the surface hydrologic environment discussed under the Waste Management Program in Section 5.1.1.5 apply. The additional facilities and activities included under Alternative 3 could increase the adverse impacts to the surface hydrologic environment that are presented under Alternative 1. Environmental Restoration Program. Under Alternative 3, the adverse impacts to the surface hydrologic environment discussed under the Environmental Restoration Program in Section 5.1.1.5 apply. Nondefense Research and Development Program. Under Alternative 3, the adverse impacts to the surface hydrologic environment discussed under the Nondefense Research and Development Program in Section 5.1.1.5 apply. Specific other facilities that could adversely impact the surface hydrologic environment are the Treatability Test Facility and the Area 6 decontamination pad. The impacts would be the same as those described under Alternative 1. Work for Others Program. Under Alternative 3, the adverse impacts to the surface hydrologic environment discussed under the Work for Others Program in Section 5.1.1.5 apply. Site-Support Activities. Under Alternative 3, the impacts to the surface hydrologic environment discussed under site-support activities in Section 5.1.1.5 apply.
5.3.1.5.2 Groundwater
The demand for water resources under Alternative 3 would increase for all programs on the NTS. The major demands would be the Defense Program and a Solar Enterprise Zone facility under the Nondefense Research and Development Program. As a result of the increased demand for water, the impacts for Alternative 3 would be the same as Alternative 1, plus the added effects of the new actions that would be included under Alternative 3. Defense Program. The impacts of Alternative 3 on the water resources of the NTS include all of the impacts considered under Alternative 1, plus the added impacts of the additional activities. The additional activities would result in a slight increase in water demand relative to Alternative 1, which are reflective of the historical NTS water demand. The additional activities are not expected to affect groundwater quality. Groundwater would not be used for construction or operation of the proposed National Ignition Facility at the North Las Vegas Facility; all water would be purchased from public suppliers. Waste Management Program. Under Alternative 3, additional waste disposal capacity would be developed, and minor added water demands would result.It is estimated that 9.251 m3/yr (7.5 acre-feet per year) of groundwater will be needed for increased waste disposal. No significant adverse impacts are associated with this minor added demand for additional water. It is expected that the additional waste management activities would be similar to ongoing activities and that they would not have an additional impact on the groundwater. The craters that are and would continue to be used at the Area 3 Radioactive Waste Management Site represent the unavoidable adverse impacts that have resulted from past underground nuclear tests. Use of the craters for waste disposal and subsequent capping with engineered covers would prevent the downward migration of precipitation into the waste. The underground shot cavities beneath the subsidence craters and waste cells in the Area 3 Radioactive Waste Management Site are much deeper than active hydrologic surface processes (infiltration, redistribution, and evapotranspiration) operating beneath the waste unit from the ground surface to a depth of approximately 31 m (100 ft). Current scientific models suggest that the chimney beneath the low-level waste water unit does not enhance or promote vertical groundwater flow between the waste water unit (subsidence crater) and the deep shot cavity. This conceptual model was confirmed by hydrologic data obtained in 1996 from the exploratory borehole completed beneath U-3bl. Water potential data indicate that there is no groundwater movement from 40 m to 96 m (131 ft to 315 ft) depth within the subsurface chimney (Van Cleave, 1996). Given the proximity of Area 5 to Area 3 (22 km [14 mi]) and the very similar hydrologic conditions, the defensible hydrogeologic conceptual model for Area 5 is being tested and validated for the Area 3 Radioactive Waste Management Site. The Environmental Restoration Program will evaluate the potential for groundwater contamination from shot cavities located in the unsaturated zone (more than 100 m [330 ft] above the water table). After 30 years of waste disposal operation, groundwater monitoring at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site has not detected any contamination. In addition, field studies conducted to support the performance assessment, which include monitoring of soil moisture and chloride ion concentrations, indicate that water falling on the surface (precipitation) does not reach the groundwater. These studies and the absence of contamination support the conclusion that no groundwater pathway exists beneath the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site. Thus, no impact to groundwater from waste management operations would occur during the timeframe covered in this EIS and long into the future (see Appendix A , Section A.2; Chapter 2, Section 2.5.6 ; and Chapter 4, Section 4.1.5.2 for additional information). Environmental Restoration Program. For the Environmental Restoration Program, the impacts would be the same as for Alternative 1, but on anaccelerated schedule. Additional restoration actions would be taken, and characterization wells would be drilled at a faster rate. Acceleration of the Environmental Restoration Program schedule could result in a doubling of characterization water demands to about 246,696 m3/yr (200 acre-feet per year). The impacts of this increase would not be significant, as the increase represents only a small portion of the available water in all but Yucca Flat. Because no significant impacts on the water resources were identified and because of constraints on the length of time that would be required for remediation, no significant added impacts are anticipated as a result of accelerated remedial actions under Alternative 3. Small quantities of water would be needed for remedial actions unless active groundwater controls were implemented. In the unlikely event that such controls would be necessary, large-scale groundwater withdrawals (millions of cubic-meter per year [thousands of acre-feet per year]) could be required. Nondefense Research and Development Program. The water demand for the Nondefense Research and Development Program is likely to be large and would have a significant impact on the availability of the groundwater in the basin in which actions are taken. The peak demand for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility has been estimated at between4.0 x 106 m³ and 6.8 x 106 m³ (3,250 and 5,550 acre-ft/yr), depending on the final array of power-generating options that would be constructed. The alternate fuel vehicle and other demonstration projects would not have appreciable water demands unless large-volume aquifer testing were conducted. Any such occurrences would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, and National Environmental Policy Act requirements would be met, as needed. Use of water for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility would more than triple the annual water use at the NTS. The impacts of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility on the water resources of the NTS would depend on the location, aquifer, perennial yield, and other water uses in the area. The two candidate sites for the facility are in Area 25 in Fortymile Canyon and Area 22 in Mercury Valley. The perennial yield of FortymileCanyon is 9.4 x 106 m3 (7,600 acre-feet per year). The peak historic demand was only 419,384 m3 (340 acre-ft), leaving as much as 8.9 x 106 m3 (7,260 acre-ft) of water available. Mercury Valley has a perennial yield of 9.9 x 106 m³/yr (8,000 acre-ft/yr) and a peak historic demand of only 527,930 m3 (428 acre-ft), leaving as much as 9.3 x 106 m3 (7,570 acre-ft) of unappropriated water available. The perennial yields of the two areas are based on the limited recharge from precipitation and the appreciable underflow from upgradient basins. In Fortymile Canyon, the naturally occurring recharge has been estimated by Scott et al. (1971) to be about2.8 x 106 m3/yr (2,300 acre-feet per year), with underflow estimated at 7.2 x 106 m3/yr (5,800 acre-feet per year). The location of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility in Fortymile Canyon would increase total groundwater withdrawals from 1.2 x 106 to 3.7 x 106 m3 (1,000 to 3,100 acre-ft) above the recharge from precipitation and would thus capture some of the underflow out of the basin. There may not be a one-to-one correspondence between the quantity of water withdrawn in excess of the perennial yield and the reduction in underflow to downgradient basins. The results of preliminary modeling of the groundwater withdrawals indicates that the groundwater level impacts will be localized within the vicinity of the well and most impacts will be upgradient. It is likely that some groundwater will be removed from storage, a process referred to as groundwater mining and there will be a corresponding decrease in the impact on downgradient discharge rates. The results presented herein are preliminary and are adequate for the purposes of this sitewide EIS. More detailed evaluations will be performed as more detailed information on water use by the facility becomes available and will be presented in lower-tiered National Environmental Policy Act documents prior to the development of the water. The recharge from precipitation over Mercury Valley is slight, estimated at only 3.1 x 105 m³/yr (250 acre-ft/yr) by Scott et al. (1971). Existing historic demands for water have exceeded this amount; thus, the development of water supplies for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility in Mercury Valley would likely capture some portion of the underflowout of the basin into Amargosa Desert (an estimated 2.09 x 107 m³/yr [17,000 acre-ft/yr]). Sensitive environmental areas downgradient of the NTS include Ash Meadows, Devils Hole, and Death Valley. A recent evaluation of water-level declines in Devils Hole was performed by the Las Vegas Valley Water District (Avon and Durbin, 1994). A statistical analysis of precipitation, water withdrawals in Pahrump Valley, water withdrawals on the NTS, and water levels in Devils Hole was performed as part of this evaluation. The results indicated that there was no relationship between water withdrawals on the NTS to lowering of water levels at Devils Hole. It is considered very unlikely that the withdrawal of the groundwater from the NTS for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility would have any significant adverse impact on downgradient water levels or spring discharge rates. Site Support Activities. The additional water demand under Alternative 3 includes 3.8 x 104 m3/yr (31 acre-ft/yr) of potable water and 6.5 x 105 m3/yr (525 acre-ft/yr) of nonpotable water. In total, the increase of 6.9 x 105 m3/yr (556 acre-ft) is not a large quantity of water, and added impacts are not considered unless a large portion of that total is withdrawn from Yucca Flat. For Yucca Flat, any increases in groundwater withdrawals would add to the overdraft of groundwater (withdrawals in excess of the perennial yield) of that basin. In Yucca Flat, the total quantity of water needed would be quite small, a few thousands of cubic-meter (tens of acre-feet) at most.
5.3.1.6 Biological Resources
. Impacts are as discussed under Alternative 1, except that four major sources of impacts are added: expansion of the Device Assembly Facility for the Stockpile Management project; construction of the large, heavy industrial facilities near the Device Assembly Facility; construction of new facilities for Area 5 Waste Management projects; and implementation of the alternative energy project at one site on the NTS. A total of approximately 15,600 acres could be disturbed under Alternative 3. This represents an increase of 5,700 acres over Alternative 1. A portion of this area (3,000 acres) could be in tortoise habitat on the NTS. Alternative 3 projects could increase the risk of crushing tortoises atconstruction sites and along roads leading to construction sites. The alternative energy project is sufficiently large that it could negatively affect the viability of some small, local populations of some species if it were sited in an area where those species are found. Given these potential impacts of the alternative energy project, Alternative 3 might reduce biodiversity in the region. Defense Program. Six defense-related activities would be conducted under Alternative 3. The nuclear emergency response activity would have the same potential impacts described under Alternative 1. The stockpile stewardship activity under Alternative 3 would increase the number of tests to be conducted, which would slightly increase the impact that is described in the introductory paragraph in this section. The hydrodynamic tests and dynamic experiments would be conducted at several appropriate places on the NTS, including two existing facilities in Yucca Flat (the Lyner Complex and the Big Explosives Experimental Facility) and two proposed new facilities. The existing facilities in Yucca Flat are north of the range of the desert tortoise (Rautenstrauch et al., 1994), and operations there are not expected to significantly impact surrounding habitat, the viability of plant or animal populations, or springs. About 3 acres of habitat would be cleared for each proposed new facility, which would not be enough to influence population viability of plants and animals in these areas. A potential location for the next generator radiographic facility is north of the desert tortoise range. This facility should have no effect on springs. Transportation during construction might be a significant impact on desert tortoises because of the increased risk of crushing individuals along the road. The stockpile management project includes assembly, disassembly, maintenance, and storage of nuclear devices. Under Alternative 3, a large facility could be built near the Device Assembly Facility in Area 6 to perform all stockpile management functions, including modifying nuclear weapons, quality assurance, testing, and interim storage of pits and components. About 8 acres would be cleared for this facility. Some or all of this land is currently undisturbed habitat. Densitiesof desert tortoises are relatively high around this site compared to other sites on the NTS (Blomquist et al., 1995). These tortoises might be crushed during construction and transportation activities for the project (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992; DOE/NV, 1993). There are no other endangered, threatened, or candidate species at this site (Blomquist et al., 1995). The loss of habitat and associated mortality of individual plants and animals are not expected to significantly affect the viability of their population. The new large, heavy industrial facilities under Alternative 3 would involve the disturbance of approximately 600 acres on the NTS in Area 6. No rare plants are known to occur at the site. Construction of these facilities should not affect the viability of the more common plant or animal populations because the disturbances are very small relative to the range of those populations. Desert tortoises might be killed during ground-clearing activities if these facilities were located within the range of desert tortoises. Tortoises also might be killed along roads during transportation activities. All surface-disturbing activities may kill or displace other wildlife such as small mammals, reptiles, and soil-dwelling invertebrates. If ground clearing for construction occurs during the breeding season, the eggs of birds in nests on the ground within a project area may be destroyed. Most birds that breed on the NTS are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Because construction of the large, heavy industrial facilities is the only likely activity to occur during the timeframe covered in this EIS, water demands would be low. Because groundwater used for construction would not be taken from the perched aquifers that supply springs on the NTS (Section 4.1.5.2 ), this action should have little or no impact on those springs. Given the small quantities of groundwater required, there would be no likely impacts on springs off the NTS during the construction phase. However, pumping the large quantities of groundwater needed during the operation phase of this project could impact off-site springs. The storage and disposition of weapons-usable fissile materials project could occur within theDefense Industrial Zone in Areas 5 and 6 and in existing tunnels in Area 12. Biological resources could be affected by this activity during transportation of construction and waste material and during operation if there were an accidental release of radionuclides. Neither of these is likely to cause important impacts on biological resources because of the relatively small quantities of waste to be transported and because of the safety protocols in place (See Appendix I of this EIS). Accidents associated with transport of nuclear devices and components, tritium, and associated radioactive waste for the Defense Program would be unlikely. Impacts on biological resources are unlikely to occur for this reason and because of the small quantities that would be released and the small areas impacted should an accident occur. No original undisturbed native vegetation remains on the site of the North Las Vegas Facility. Few wildlife species exist at the North Las Vegas Facility because it is located in an urbanized area and contains little vegetation. The only species that exist are those adapted to urban habitats. No biological resource impacts are expected. The North Las Vegas Facility is located within urban Las Vegas on previously disturbed land within a fenced site. It is not expected that any threatened, endangered, or rare species exist. No impacts to threatened and endangered species are expected. Waste Management Program. At the Area 3 Radioactive Waste Management Site, low-level waste would be buried in existing subsidence craters; four filled disposal cells would be closed. In addition, three additional craters would be used for a total of seven craters. Building 3-302 would be expanded, and a truck decontamination station would be constructed. Impacts of these activities were described for Alternative 1. The amount of undisturbed habitat that would be removed is about the same under Alternatives 1 and 3 because most of the project area is already disturbed. Approximately 145 acres of previously undisturbed land would be disturbed at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site because of new construction projects. This would result in the loss of plant and wildlife habitat. Disturbances are not expected to impact viability of plant or animalpopulations. Threatened and endangered species are not likely to be impacted by construction given that no desert tortoises have been seen in the area (EG&G/EM, 1994). Several storage pits and disposal units would be closed. Because these disturbed sites would be revegetated, this activity would have a positive impact on habitat. There would be no effects on springs or their associated biota because there are no springs near this site. Area 6 Waste Management Program activities and impacts would include all that are described for Alternative 1. In addition, a 14 acres Liquid Waste Treatment System would be constructed in Area 6 in 1996 or 1997. Impacts resulting from the construction and operation of the Liquid Waste Treatment System are presented in the Liquid Waste Treatment System Environmental Assessment, issued in 1995. Bird and bat candidate species and economically and recreationally important species like doves and waterfowl (Greger, 1995) could be exposed to hazardous materials or drown in open evaporative tanks constructed for this facility. Off the site, these doves and waterfowl could be harvested, thereby exposing hunters to contaminants. This site is located outside desert tortoise habitat (EG&G/EM, 1991; Rautenstrauch et al., 1994). There would be no effects on springs or their associated biota. Transportation of wastes to Area 6 would be unlikely to have significant impacts on biological resources because of the low probability of an accidental release during transport, the small quantity likely to be released, and the small area impacted should an accident occur. Area 11 Waste Management Program activities would be similar to those under Alternative 1; thus, impacts would be the same. Environmental Restoration Program. Activities proposed under Alternative 3 are similar to those described under Alternative 1, with the exception that the rate at which these activities would be initiated and completed is likely to be accelerated. This is not likely to change the nature of the impacts; they should remain as described under Alternative 1. Nondefense Research and Development Program. Five projects within this program would be conducted under this alternative. For four of these projects (Spill Test Facility, Alternate FuelDemonstration Project, Environmental Management and Technology Development Project, and National Environmental Research Park), the impacts would not be substantially different from those described under Alternative 1. The fifth project within this program, alternative energy, would result in the destruction of large areas of undisturbed habitat and might use massive quantities of water. TheAlternative Energy Solar Power Generating Project would involve the development of one of four technologies or subprojects in Areas 22 or 25 capable of generating electricity from solar energy. For this analysis, it was assumed that one of the four technologies would be developed there and that about 2,400 acres of previously undisturbed habitat would be cleared. This loss of habitat and associated mortality of individuals, disruption of movement patterns and gene flow, and other effects should not have a negative impact on the viability of most species found in that area because those species are common throughout a large region. The DOE/NV will consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to evaluate the effects, if any, of the Alternative Energy Project on species listed as endangered, threatened, or candidates under the Endangered Species Act. Nests of birds, protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, may also be destroyed if ground clearing for construction of the project occurred during the breeding season. The abundance of desert tortoises is very low in the vicinity of proposed sites (EG&G/EM, 1991). If tortoises are within or near the chosen site, they might be killed, injured, or displaced during construction and operation of the facilities. Tortoises also are likely to be killed on roads during transportation activities for this project. Up to 6.8 x 106 m³ (5,500 acre-ft) of water might be pumped annually from the underground aquifer for this project. Because this groundwater would not be taken from the perched aquifers that supply springs on the NTS (Section 4.1.5.2 ), this action should have little or no impact on those springs. Although the groundwater under the NTS is connected to springs in Devils Hole National Monument and Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, water use at the NTS should affect neither water quality nor quantity in these springs (Section 5.3.1.5 ). Finally, construction of site-support facilities, such as a 97 km (60 mi) power line from Las Vegas, local water lines, and a 97 km (60 mi) natural gas pipe line, could adversely affect desert tortoises. Work for Others Program. The Work for Others Program consists of five projects. The treaty verification, nonproliferation, and counterproliferation research and redevelopment projects would consist of the same activities and would have the same impacts under Alternative 3 as are described under Alternative 1. The joint Demilitarization Technology Program involves demonstration projects designed to explore the feasibility of resource and recycling technologies and destruction technologies that could be used to dispose of conventional munitions and solid rocket motors. Some activities would occur in existing underground facilities. Given the location and methods proposed for minimizing and monitoring vented hazardous gases, there are no expected impacts on biological resources. Activities for the second project, defense-related research and development, are similar to those described under Alternative 1. Therefore, the impacts on biological resources would be the same as those described inSection 5.1.1.6 . Site-Support Activities. Under Alternative 3, the NTS site-support activities would be expanded to the extent necessary to provide support for existing activities, as well as new projects and activities not previously performed at the NTS. Scheduled site support activities could remove at least 62 acres of undisturbed habitat. Potential impacts to biological resources are larger under this alternative relative to the other three alternatives. Given the development of several new projects under Alternative 3, it is likely that development to service these new projects would be sizeable. An example would be the construction of a natural gas pipe line from Las Vegas to service some subprojects within the alternative energy project. Projects of this size could have significant impacts on habitat removal and might lead to the death of desert tortoises because of crushing during construction. Based on historic levels of less than or equal to one tortoise killed on NTS roads per year, this increase in traffic might result in the mortality of two to three tortoises per year. This loss should not affect the viability of the tortoise population on the NTS. Given the number of new projects proposed for the Control Point or Device Assembly Facility areas or for areas along the southern boundary of the NTS, it is also likely traffic would become disproportionately common in areas inhabited by tortoises.
5.3.1.7 Air Quality
. This section addresses the potential effects that the five programs and the site-support activities on the NTS might have on regional air quality. Emissions from stationary, mobile, and fugitive dust sources, shown in Tables 5.3-12 and 5.3-13 , occur within and outside of the NTS. These emissions would be dispersed over the 3,496-km2 (1,350-mi2) area of the test site. At the boundaries of the site, ambient pollutant concentrations would be well below the ambient air standards. Carbon monoxide emissions from mobile sources in the Las Vegas Valley nonattainment area would be approximately 90-tons per year (40 percent of 224 tons, see Table 5.3-12 and Section 5.1.1.7). This value is below the 100-ton carbon monoxide de minimus value shown in Table 5.1-14 . Therefore, a general conformity analysis would not be required for this alternative. Defense Program. The air quality of the NTS is subject to periodic disturbance brought about by routine operations and test detonations. About 521 acres of land would be disturbed during Defense Program construction activities under this alternative. The average annual fugitive dust (PM10) emission rate, including various drilling and construction activities, would be about 15.6 tons. These emissions represent 0.002 percent of the total Nye County fugitive emissions (864,600 tons). These calculations assume that fugitive dust would be reduced by 50 percent as a result of watering the sites. Because construction activities are expected to occur only on a short-term basis, long-term air quality impacts are not expected. Nevada Administrative Code 445, Sections 704 to 7165 regulates surface disturbance of 5 acres or more. The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Air Quality, issued Operating Permit 2743 to the DOE for variable disturbance of land at the NTS. The permit expires in March 1998. There could be gaseous releases associated with new large, heavy industrial facilities. Pollutant concentrations combined with Alternative 1 concentrations would be in compliance with national and state standards. The transfer of Pantex stockpile management operations to the NTS would increase pollutant emissions. The amount of criteria and hazardous air-pollutant-emission increases at the NTS are shown in Tables 5.3-14 and 5.3-15, respectively. Table 5.3-12 .Summary of NTS construction emissions and mobile source emissions (on-site and off-site) tons per year under Alternative 3 These emissions are based on the 1993 Pantex emission inventory (Pantex, 1995). The stationary-source criteria pollutant emissions would increase 20 to 30 percent above those shown in Table 5.3-13 . If the emissions from the large, heavy industrial facilities were included, emission increases could require a Prevention of Significant Deterioration permit application. The NTS would be considered a major source under Prevention of Significant Deterioration requirements (potential to emit 250 tons per year or more of any air pollutant subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act). Military aircraft conduct training exercises in the airspace over the NTS, and the pollutant emissions released from these aircraft are distributed over a large area. A study has shown that pollutant ambient air standards. Carbon monoxide emissions from mobile sources in the Las Vegas Valley nonattainment area would be approximately 90-tons per year (40 percent of 224 tons, see Table 5.3-12 and Section 5.1.1.7 ). This value is below the 100-ton carbon monoxide de minimus value shown in Table 5.1-14 . Therefore, a general conformity analysis would not be required for this alternative. Defense Program. The air quality of the NTS is subject to periodic disturbance brought about by routine operations and test detonations. About 521 acres of land would be disturbed during Defense Program construction activities under this alternative. The average annual fugitive dust (PM10) emission rate, including various drilling and construction activities, would be about emissions from operations contribute no more than 0.05 percent of the allowable ambient concentrations (SAIC/DRI, 1991). Thus, these military aircraft operations have a negligible impact on air quality over the NTS. Aircraft operations at Desert Rock Airport (Mercury) are relatively low (3,500 to 4,000 operations per year); therefore, the emissions resulting from related air and ground activities would be negligible (SAIC/DRI, 1991). Operation of the proposed National Ignition Facility in North Las Vegas would generate criteria and toxic/hazard pollutants resulting from the combustion of boiler fuel for heating, operation of diesel generators, and solvent cleaning processes. The emissions consist of particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, lead,and volatile organic compounds. Boiler fuel is assumed to be liquefied petroleum gas. Concentrations of pollutants resulting from operation of the proposed National Ignition Facility added to existing concentrations are expected to be within federal and state regulation levels. For additional information, consult the Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Stockpile Stewardship and Management (DOE,1996). Waste Management Program. The NTS Waste Management Program activities are conducted in four primary areas: Areas 3, 5, 6, and 11. About 75 acres of land would be disturbed over a 10-year period. The average annual fugitive dust emissions (PM10) would be about 2.3 tons. Most of the fugitive dust would be generated during the construction of a new waste storage site. < P>Calculations assume that fugitive dust would be reduced 50 percent as a result of watering the sites. Because construction activities are expected to occur only on a short-term basis, long-term air quality impacts are not expected. Environmental Restoration Program. The total fugitive dust emissions (PM10) generated from environmental restoration projects would be about 221 tons per year, compared with the total fugitive dust (PM10) emissions generated in Nye County, which would be about 866,400 tons per year. The total Environmental Restoration Program emissions represent about 0.03 percent of the county’s PM10 burden. Nondefense Research and Development Program. One Nondefense Research and Development Program at the NTS with Alternative 3 could impact air quality. The Solar Enterprise Zone facility would be the site of a 100-megawatt (MW) solar generation facility, which would be located in either Area 22 or Area 25. It was assumed that the maximum disturbed area for the facility would be 2,402 acres, and the construction period would be two years. Annual fugitive dust (PM10) emissions would be approximately 360 tons. Work for Others Program. Under Alternative 3, the use of NTS airspace and certain land by theDoD for training, research, and development would continue and possibly increase. The approximately 10 acres of land disturbance with this program would cause 3 tons of PM10 emissions. Site-Support Activities. Stationary sources at the NTS for emissions include the shaker plant, boilers, aggregate crushing and processing, a concrete batch plant, and fuel storage tanks. Portable compressor emissions are also included. The construction of a large, heavy industrial facility in Area 6, would contribute to the emissions. About 30 acres of land would be disturbed for new facility construction, generating 1.8 tons of PM10. RADIOACTIVE AIR QUALITYAir concentrations would have to be 14 times higher than the measured 1993 average concentrations to achieve the maximum CAP-88 air dose assessment modeled dose (see Section 4.1.7 ). Average concentrations from the five programs and site- support activities are estimated never to equal or exceed this amount. Impact to air quality by radioactive effluents under Alternative 3 would be minimal.
5.3.1.8 Noise
. Because of its large size (3,496 km2 [1,350 mi2]), noise generated on the NTS does not propagate off site at audible levels. The closest sensitive receptors to the site boundary are residences located 2 km (1.3 mi) to the south in the town of Amargosa Valley. Therefore, NTS noise impacts for this alternative are a result of noise generated during the operation of construction equipment and from the transportation of personnel and materials to and from the site. The NTS total construction and operations workforce under this alternative would increase from 1996 to 2005. Railroad and aircraft noise was considered. No railroads serve the NTS; therefore, railroad noise impact analyses were not required. Based on composite noise contours developed by the U.S. Air Force in 1994 for subsonic and supersonic flight operations over the NAFR Complex (U.S. Air Force, 1994), the day-night average sound level (Ldn) on the NTS portion of the complex resulting from aircraft operations would be less than 50 db. Flight operations at supersonic speeds are not authorized over the NTS (SAIC/DRI, 1991), and subsonic operations are not normally scheduledover the eastern portion of restricted area R-4808, which includes most of the NTS (U.S. Air Force, 1994). Only periodic helicopter and small fixed-wing aircraft operations are conducted from Desert Rock Airport. All noise impacts under Alternative 3 would be the same as those under Alternative 1, with additional impacts resulting from an increase in training exercises. At the North Las Vegas Facility, the noise background levels are those that would be expected in an urbanized industrial area. No anticipated impacts from additional noise are anticipated for operations activities. Construction activities would contribute a small portion of noise temporarily.
5.3.1.9 Visual Resources
. An analysis has been conducted to determine the effects of Alternative 3 activities on visual resources. Visual impacts were assessed on the potential of activities to alter or conflict with the existing landscape character. Defense Program. Under Alternative 3, a total of 1,000 acres of new ground disturbance is anticipated to occur for projects related to the Defense Program. The projects would be located in areas of scenic quality common to the area. Most of this ground disturbance would be associated with new construction at the Device Assembly Facility in Area 6, and the large, heavy-industrial facilities, which have not been sited. Area 6 is currently used for large, heavy industrial activities. It is not anticipated that these facilities would be seen from public viewpoints. Therefore, impactsto visual resources resulting from facility construction and operation on visual resources would be negligible. Under Alternative 3, a nuclear test would be conducted if directed by the President. Underground testing likely would be conducted in existing drill holes. The test would occur in the existing testing areas that do not have high scenic value and are not visible from public viewpoints. Therefore, impacts to visual resources caused by testing would be negligible. The North Las Vegas Facility occupies approximately 80 acres in the city of North Las Vegas, Nevada. The area can be described as an urbanized industrial area, and visual resourcesare typical for such an area. No additional impacts are expected to visual resources. Waste Management Program. The Waste Management Program would generate approximately 209 acres of new ground disturbance under Alternative 3. The new facilities would be located in areas of scenic quality common to the region, near similar facilities in areas that are already disturbed. None of the Waste Management Program projects would be visible from any public viewpoints. Therefore, impacts to visual resources from waste management operations would be negligible. Environmental Restoration Program. Under Alternative 3, the Environmental Restoration Program would generate approximately 50 acres of new ground disturbance. Environmental Restoration Program activities would be located in areas of scenic quality common to the region, and none would be visible from any public viewpoints. Depending on pertinent reclamation factors, disturbed areas would be revegetated after remediation is completed. Adverse impacts would be negligible. There would be some beneficial impacts to visual resources once vegetation is reestablished. Nondefense Research and Development Program. The Nondefense Research and Development Program would cause approximately 2,400 acres of new ground disturbance for the construction of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility. A Solar Enterprise Zone facility is proposed to be located on the southern NTS boundary (Area 22) and would be visible from U.S. Highway 95. However, the scenic quality is classified as Class C. The landscape character of the area is common to the region, and there is a minor amount of existing manmade modification in the highway viewshed. Because of the size of the area affected and the visibility from Highway 95 (a view corridor with a high sensitivity level) there would be adverse impacts to visual resources. Work for Others Program. Only 10 acres of new ground disturbance would occur for this program under Alternative 3. Although most Work for Others Program activities are proposed for existingfacilities, some new construction would occur. Most of the ground disturbance would be related to construction of the facilities. The new facilities would be constructed near existing facilities, which are located in areas with common scenic quality and are not visible from public viewpoints. Therefore, impacts would be negligible. Site-Support Activities. Approximately 30 acres of new ground disturbance would occur for site- support activities under Alternative 3. Most of the ground disturbance would be related to new road and utility corridor construction to support expanded programs. Ground disturbance would be scattered throughout the NTS. Impacts to visual resources would be negligible.
5.3.1.10 Cultural Resources
The amount of acreage disturbed as a result of activities described for Alternative 3 would increase substantially as compared to Alternative 1. All activities as proposed under Alternative 1 are proposed under Alternative 3 with the addition of construction of fifteen buildings, expansion of waste management and disposal areas, increased road construction, expansion of communications, water control systems and flood protection, increased cleanup activities, and an expansion of power lines and gas lines. A total of 15,600 acres are expected to be disturbed under Alternative 3. Continued visitation and vehicular traffic could lead to vandalism or artifact collecting that could directly affect recorded archaeological sites and archaeologically sensitive areas. Although archaeological surveys have not been conducted in these areas, it is estimated that more than 67 sites could be impacted by projects associated with this alternative based on surveys conducted in adjacent areas in 1994. The precise location and number of these resources are unknown until archaeological surveys are conducted. Surveys will be conducted prior to any ground-disturbing activities, and impacts would be mitigated through the measures described in Chapter 7. At least eight structures will be decommissioned under Alternative 3. If these buildings are determined to be historically significant, they would be mitigated using measures described in Chapter 7 . Defense Program. Additional impacts are expected from ground disturbances associated with the construction of facilities, upgrading utilities, and construction of a waste management complex. Increased visitation and vehicular traffic in archaeologically sensitive areas could have indirect impacts. All surveys will be performed prior to any ground-disturbing activities or expansion of existing facilities. At North Las Vegas, the construction and operation of the proposed National Ignition Facility would have no effect on archaeological sites or historic structures that are listed on or eligible to be listed on the National Register of Historical Places or Native American cultural resources. Waste Management Program. Under Alternative 3, waste management would expand and additional facilities would be constructed in Area 3 and Area 5 at the NTS. An increase in ground disturbance, and an increase in visitation could have an impact on cultural resources. Environmental Restoration Program. Impacts to cultural resources are the same as those contained in Alternative 1. Nondefense Research and Development Program. Additional impacts may occur through construction of the Natural Gas facility. Work for Others Program. Impacts are the same as contained in Alternative 1. AMERICAN INDIAN CULTURAL RESOURCES This section contains the description of the American Indian concerns associated with implementing Alternative 3, as summarized by the CGTO. Defense Program at the NTS Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources will be adversely impacted if new Defense Program operations are undertaken or if current underground nuclear tests are expanded into previously unused areas. Access to culturally significant places will be reduced because Indian peoples ’ perception of health and spiritual risk will increase if additional testing, storage, disassembly, or disposal of nuclear and conventional weapons occur. Waste Management Program at the NTS Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources will continue to be adversely impacted, in particular, if waste storage facilities are expanded because the waste has not been disposed of in a culturally appropriate manner. Access to culturally significant places on the NTS will be reduced because waste isolation facilities increase Indian people ’s perception of health and spiritual risks. Environmental Restoration Program at the NTS Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources will be adversely impacted by an expansion of the monitoring well program and access road activities, but will be positively impacted by actions that return disturbed land to its natural condition in a culturally appropriate manner and with the participation of Indian people. Nondefense Research and Development Program at the NTS Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources will be adversely impacted by increased visits by students and researchers who collect artifacts, visit sacred areas, and remove plants or animals. Cultural resources will be positively impacted if students and researchers receive proper guidance by Indian people regarding how to visit places and interact with the environment. Work for Others Program at the NTS Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources will be impacted if the NTS continues to be a place where weapons are stored, disassembled, and disposed. These actions have and will continue to pollute these lands. The presence of conventional and nuclear weapons defines the NTS as a place of destruction which promotes an image that is inappropriate for a place for peaceful relations between Indian ethnic groups. American Indian cultural resources will continue to be impacted by military training exercises and weapons tests. Defense Program at Area 13 Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources will be adversely impacted if nuclear safety tests continue or increase and if natural lands are scraped for construction. In this alternative, however, there are no plans for additional tests at the Area 13 site on the NAFR Complex . Waste Management Program at Area 13 Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources will not be adversely impacted because there is no Waste Management Program on the Area 13 site on the NAFR complex and none has been identified for this alternative. Environmental Restoration Program at Area 13 Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources of the Area 13 site on the NAFR Complex be adversely impacted if natural lands are scraped during environmental restoration. Access to culturally significant places will increase if environmental restoration is successful, thus reducing Indian peoples ’ perception of health and spiritual risks associated with this area. Indian people wish to be involved in identifying environmental restoration methods and in the evaluation of restoration success. Nondefense Research and Development Program at Area 13 Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources will be adversely impacted if natural lands are scraped during research and development. These actions have and will continue to pollute these lands. American Indian cultural resources will continue to be adversely impacted by military training exercises and weapons tests. Work for Others Program at Area 13 Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources will be impacted if weapon research and development programs continue or are expanded at the Area 13 site. These actions have and will continue to pollute these lands. American Indian cultural resources will continue to be adversely impacted by military training exercises and weapons tests.
5.3.1.11 Occupational and Public Health and Safety
. Alternative 3 includes all program activities described under Alternative 1, plus additional activities. For NTS workers, the increased activities are expected to result in a corresponding increase in human health and safety impacts compared with Alternative 1. Table 5.3-16 summarizes the occupational and public health and safety impacts to construction and operations and maintenance personnel for each NTS program area under Alternative 3. Increased impacts to public health and safety can also be anticipated under Alternative 3. For routine activities, these impacts are primarily related to routine air emissions and transportation activities. Potential impacts to the public from routine air emissions of radioactivity and priority pollutants are discussed in Section 5.3.1.7 , Air Quality. Transportation impacts are discussed in Section 5.3.1.2 . This section contains the discussion of potential impacts to public health and safety from subsurface contamination of groundwater and from accidental releases of radioactivity to the air. Unless otherwise noted, impacts presented in this section are the total impacts for the 10-year period evaluated in this EIS. Results are presented for each program area although some program areas do not involve hazards from radiation or hazardous chemicals. Defense Program. Based on occupational injury and fatality rates for construction and other industrial activities and on projected increases in the worker population under Alternative 3, Defense Program activities at the NTS are expected to result in 3.7 injuries to workers during routine program activities and in 61 injuries as a result of construction activities over the 10-year period evaluated in this EIS. During the same period, 0.0066 fatalities are expected because of routine activities, and 0.11 fatalities are expected from construction activities. Based on previous NTS occupational radiation records and on projected increases in the worker population under Alternative 3, occupational exposure to radiation is estimated to result in a collective dose to NTS Defense Program workers of about 115-person rem in 10 years. Based on the dose to health effects correlation factors recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (1991), this dose could result in about0.046 latent cancer fatalities and 0.018 other detrimental health effects in the worker population. Risk of accidental exposure to workers increases the latent cancer fatality risk by 0.005 and the risk of other detrimental health effects by 0.002. No Defense Program hazardous chemical accident resulting in measurable effects at the NTS has been identified. The health and safety impact to the public from potential Defense Program accidents could result in about 4.4 x 10-6 latent cancer fatalities and 2.0 x 10-6 other detrimental health effects in the population. Should the DOE be directed by the President to conduct underground nuclear-yield testing under Alternative 3, potential accidents associated with venting of radionuclides following a test could result in a risk of about 0.0054 latent cancer fatalities and 0.0025 other detrimental health effects in the population. The maximum reasonably foreseeable Defense Program radiological accident at the NTS would be the same as described in Section 5.1.1.11 for Alternative 1 (an explosion of high explosives associated with interim stored nuclear weapons at the Area 27 storage bunkers, which has a probability of occurrence of 1 x 10-7 (1 in 10,000,000) per year. No Defense Program accident resulting in measurable chemically hazardous effects at the NTS has been identified. Subsurface radioactivity from past underground nuclear weapons tests would continue to be a potential exposure pathway for the public under Alternative 3. Potential impacts to the public would be identical to those described under Alternative 1. The maximally exposed public individual is estimated to have a lifetime probability of contracting a fatal cancer between 8 x 10-13 (about one in one trillion) and 1 x 10-5 (about one in 100,000). The public exposure scenario assumes that the individual consumes contaminated well water for 70 years centered around the time of peak tritium concentration in well water. These impacts are not expected to occur within the 10-year timeframe of this EIS. For the North Las Vegas Facility, the occupational and public health and safety impacts described in this section are based on analyses documented in the Draft Programmatic EIS for Stockpile and Managmement (DOE, 1996). Potential radiation exposures to workers inside the proposed National Ignition Facility would be kept as low as reasonably achievable through facility design and administrative controls. The average worker inside the facility is estimated to receive about 30 millirem per year, and the worker population inside the facility is estimated to receive a collective dose of 10 person-rem per year. Over the 10-year period of activities considered by the NTS EIS, workers could receive a total dose of 100 person-rem which would result in a risk of 0.04 (about 1 in 25) of a single latent cancer fatality in the worker population. Other workers at the North Las Vegas Facility outside the National Ignition Facility are estimated to receive a collective dose of 0.07 person-rem per year, or a maximum of 0.7 person-rem over 10 years with a corresponding cancer fatality risk of 2.8 x 10-4 (about 1 in 4,000). Potential radiation exposures to the public within 80 kilometers (50 miles) of the proposed National Ignition Facility would be well within regulatory limits. The maximally exposed public individual is estimated to receive an annual dose of 0.6 millirem per year, which is much less than the limit of 100 millirem per year from all DOE sources. Over the 10-year period of activities considered by the NTS EIS, this individual could receive a total dose of 6 millirem resulting in a risk of 3 x 10-6 (about 1 in 300,000) of contracting a fatal cancer. The entire population within 80 kilometers is estimated to receive a collective dose of 0.6 person-rem per year, or 6 person-rem over 10 years with a corresponding risk of 0.003 (about 1 in 300) of a single latent cancer fatality in the exposed population. No routine impacts from hazardous chemicals would be expected to occur because only minute quantities of volatile organic compounds are expected to be emitted during routine operations. The maximum reasonably foreseeable radiological accident associated with the proposed National Ignition Facility involves a severe earthquake that occurs during a maximum-credible-yield fusionexperiment. The collapse of beamlines and building structures would potentially result in atmospheric releases of tritium in the tritium processing system, activitated gases in the air, and activated material in the target chamber. The joint frequency of a severe earthquake during a maximum-credible-yield fusion experiment would be less than 2 x 10-8 per year. If this accident occurred, workers at the North Las Vegas Facility could receive a collective dose of 47 person-rem resulting in a risk of 0.019 (about 1 in 50) of a single latent cancer fatality among the worker population. The maximally exposed public individual could receive a dose of 68 millirem resulting in a latent cancer fatality risk of 3.4 x 10-5 (about 1 in 30,000). The population within 80 kilometers could receive a collective dose of 4,900 person-rem per year, potentially resulting in two to three latent cancer fatalities among the exposed population. The maximum reasonably foreseeable chemical accident associated with the proposed National Ignition Facility involves an accidental release of mercury. People within 239 m (784 feet) of the release could experience adverse health effects from mercury inhalation if not protected (i.e., sheltering inside building, breathing protection). The nearest members of the public would be 210 m (689 ft) west of the facility. The personnel in nearby buildings would likely be protected because the release (typically lasting15 minutes) would pass by the buildings with little infiltration. Personnel in the NIF Laser and Target Area Building and those outside in the immediate vicinity might be affected. Waste Management Program. Based on occupational injury and fatality rates for construction and other industrial activities and on projected increases in the worker population under Alternative 3, the Waste Management Program at the NTS is expected to result in 440 injuries to workers during routine program activities and 27 injuries as a result of construction activities over the 10-year period evaluated in this EIS. During the same period, 8.7 fatalities are expected because of routine activities, and 0.048 fatalities are expected from construction activities. Based on previous NTS occupational radiation records and on projected increases in the worker population under Alternative 3, occupational exposure to radiation is estimated to result in a collective dose to NTS Waste Management Program workers of about 23-person rem in 10 years. Based on the dose to health effects correlation factors recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (1991), this dose could result in about 0.0092 latent cancer fatalities and 0.0037 other detrimental health effects in the worker population. The risk of accidental exposure increases the latent cancer fatality risk by 0.016 and detrimental health effect risk by 0.0064. The risk of a single cancer in the worker population as a result of accidental exposure to hazardous chemicals is estimated to be 5.2 x 10-7. The risk of life-threatening noncarcinogenic effects to a single worker from Waste Management Program hazardous chemical accidents has a hazard index of 0.48. A hazard index less than 1.0 indicates that no life-threatening noncarcinogenic health effects would be expected to occur. The health and safety impact to the public from potential Waste Management Program accidents could result in about 5.1 x 10-5 latent cancer fatalities and 2.3 x 10-5 other detrimental health effects in the population. Waste Management Program accidents involving hazardous chemicals could result in about 2.0 x 10-5 cancers in the population. No noncancer effects from chemical accidents would be expected to occur. The maximum reasonably foreseeable Waste Management Program radiological accident at the NTS would be the same as described in Section 5.1.1.11 for Alternative 1 (an airplane crash into the Area 5 transuranic waste storage unit, which has a probability of occurrence of 6 x 10-7 (1 in 1,700,000) per year. For Waste Management Programs hazardous chemical effects, the maximum reasonably foreseeable accident would also be the same as described in Section 5.1.1.11 for Alternative 1 (an airplane crash into the Area 5 hazardous waste storage unit, which has a probability of occurrence of 1 x 10-7 (1 in 10,000,000) per year. Environmental Restoration Program. Based on occupational injury and fatality rates for construction and other industrial activities and on projected increases in the worker population under Alternative 3, Environmental Restoration Program activities at the NTS are expected to result in 8.8 injuries to workers during routine program activities and 2.5 injuries as a result of construction activities over the 10-year period evaluated in this EIS. During the same period, 0.03 fatalities are expected from routine activities, and 0.0044 fatalities are expected from construction activities. Based on previous NTS occupational radiation records and on projected increases in the worker population under Alternative 3, occupational exposure to radiation is estimated to result in a collective dose to NTS Environmental Restoration Program workers of about 23-person rem in 10 years. Based on the dose to health effects correlation factors recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (1991), this dose could result in about 0.0093 latent cancer fatalities and 0.0037 other detrimental health effects in the worker population. The risk of accidental worker exposure to hazardous chemicals increases the risk of fatal or nonfatal cancer in the worker population by 2.8 x 10-7. The risk of life-threatening noncarcinogenic effects to workers from Environmental Restoration Program hazardous chemical accidents has a hazard index of 0.14. The health and safety impact to the public from potential Environmental Restoration Program radiological accidents could result in about 2.3 x 10-10 latent cancer fatalities and 1.1 x 10-10 other detrimental health effects in the population. Environmental Restoration Program accidents involving hazardous chemicals could result in about 1.6 x 10-5 cancers in the population. No noncancer effects to the public from chemical accidents would be expected to occur. The maximum reasonably foreseeable Environmental Restoration Program radiological accident at the NTS would be the same as described in Section 5.1.1.11 for Alternative 1 (an airplane crash into the Area 13 site, which has a probability of occurrence of 7 x 10-7 [1 in 1,400,000]) per year. For Environmental Restoration Program hazardous chemical effects, the maximum reasonably foreseeable accident would also be the same as described in Section 5.1.1.11 for Alternative 1 (an airplane crash into a hypothetical environmental restoration site consisting of a composite of hazardous sites across the NTS, which has a probability of occurrence of 7 x 10-7 (1 in 1,400,000) per year. Nondefense Research and Development Program. Based on occupational injury and fatality rates for construction activities and on projected increases in the worker population under Alternative 3, Nondefense Research and Development Program activities at the NTS are expected to result in 8.6 injuries and 0.015 fatalities to workers during construction activities over the 10-year period evaluated in this EIS. During the same period, no injuries or fatalities are expected because of routine activities. Based on previous NTS occupational radiation records and on projected increases in the worker population under Alternative 3, occupational exposure to radiation is estimated to result in a collective dose to NTS Nondefense Research and Development Program workers of about 11-person rem in 10 years. Based on the dose to health effects correlation factors recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (1991), this dose could result in about 0.0042 latent cancer fatalities and 0.0017 other detrimental health effects in the worker population. No Nondefense Research and Development Program accident resulting in measurable radiological effects at the NTS has been identified. The risk of accidental worker exposure to hazardous chemicals increases the risk of a single cancer in the worker population by 3.2 x 10-6. The risk of life-threatening noncarcinogenic effects to workers from Nondefense Research and Development hazardous chemical accidents has a hazard index of 0.58. The health and safety impact to the public from potential Nondefense Research and Development Program accidents could result in about 1.9 x 10-4 cancers in the population. No hazardous chemicalnoncancer effects to the public from chemical accidents would be expected to occur. For Nondefense Research and Development Program hazardous chemical effects, the maximum reasonably foreseeable accident would be the same as described in Section 5.1.1.11 for Alternative 1 (an airplane crash into the tank farm at the Fuel Spill Test Facility, which has a probability of occurrence of 1 x 10-7 (1 in 10,000,000) per year. Work for Others Program. Based on occupational injury and fatality rates for construction activities and on projected increases in the worker population under Alternative 3, Work for Others Program activities at the NTS are expected to result in 11 injuries and 0.019 fatalities to workers during construction activities over the 10-year period evaluated in this EIS. During the same period, no injuries or fatalities are expected because of routine activities. Based on previous NTS occupational radiation records and on projected increases in the worker population under Alternative 3, occupational exposure to radiation is estimated to result in a collective dose to NTS Work for Others Program workers of about 14-person rem in 10 years. Based on the dose to health effects correlation factors recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (1991), this dose could result in about 0.0055 latent cancer fatalities and 0.0022 other detrimental health effects in the worker population. The risk of accidental exposure increases the latent cancer fatality risk by 0.002 and detrimental health effect risk by 0.001. The risk of accidental worker exposure to hazardous chemicals increases the risk of a single cancer in the worker population by 8.9 x 10-8. The risk of life-threatening noncarcinogenic effects to workers from Work for Others Program hazardous chemical accidents has a hazard index of 2.4. The health and safety impact to the public from potential Work for Others Program radiological accidents could result in about 2.0 x 10-7 latent cancer fatalities and 9.2 x 10-8 other detrimental health effects in the population. Work for Others Program accidents involving hazardous chemicals could result in about 4.2 x 10-7 cancers in thepopulation. No noncancer effects to the public from chemical accidents would be expected to occur. The maximum reasonably foreseeable Work for Others Program radiological accident at the NTS would be an inadvertent detonation of a test assembly at the Big Explosives Experimental Facility and release of 1,000 ci of tritium, which has a probability of occurrence of 3 x 10-5 (1 in 33,000) per year. The following consequences are estimated if this accident occurs:
- Involved worker: fatally injured in the explosion
- ·Maximally exposed non-involved worker: 0.35 rem, 1.4 x 10-4 chance of latent cancer fatality, 5.6 x 10-5 chance of other detrimental effects
- ·Non-involved worker population at the nearest major facility area: 0.006 person-rem, 2.4 x 10-6 chance of a single latent cancer fatality, 9.6 x 10-7 chance of any other detrimental effects
- Maximally exposed off-site individual at the nearest point of public access: 4.7 x 10-5 rem, 2.4 x 10-8 chance of latent cancer fatality, 1.1 x 10-8 chance of other detrimental effects
- Population within 80 km (50 mi), 0.02 to 0.35 person-rem, 1.0 x 10-5 to 1.8 x 10-4 chance of latent cancer fatality, 4.6 x 10-6 to 8.1 x 10-5 chance of other detrimental effects.
- Involved worker: fatally injured in the explosion
- Maximally exposed non-involved worker: 8.0 x 10-4 chance of fatal or nonfatal cancer,240 noncancer hazard index for potentially life-threatening one-hour concentration
- Non-involved worker population at the nearest major facility area: 2.8 x 10-6 chance of a single cancer, 0.023 noncancer hazard index for potentially life-threatening one-hour concentration
- Maximally exposed off-site individual at the nearest point of public access: 6.3 x 10-9 chance of cancer, 6.4 x 10-5 noncancer hazard index for potentially life-threatening one-hour concentration
- Population within
5.3.1.12 Environmental Justice
. Environmental Justice analysisis conducted in two steps. One is the determination of significant and adverse impacts as a result of the alternative. The other is an evaluation of whether a minority or low-income population is disproportionately affected by these significant and adverse impacts. If there are no significant and adverse impacts, there would be no significant, disproportionately high and adverse impacts experienced by minority and low-income populations. The location of minority or low-income populations is shown on the figures in Section 4.1.12 . The CGTO has identified impacts to American Indian groups as a result of Alternative 3. While not physically located in Clark, Nye, or Lincoln Counties, these groups have traditional ties to the NTS and surrounding areas. Impacts would include continued reduced access to culturally significant areas, the potential for unauthorized artifact collection, and the potential for culturally inappropriate environmental restoration techniques. Because of the expansion of activities under Alternative 3, potential impacts would be greater than those listed under Alternative 1. These impacts would be perceived only by American Indian groups and would, therefore, be a disproportionately high impact on these groups. No other significant adverse impacts as a result of this alternative were ascertained; therefore, there would be no disproportionately high and adverse impacts to other minority and low-income populations. American Indian concerns include: (1) Holy Land violations, (2) perceived risks from radiation, and (3) cultural survival especially access violations. These impacts are discussed in Section 5.2.1.10, Cultural Resources, and 5.2.1.11 , Occupational and Public Health and Safety. There has not been a systematic study of these issues for the NTS. The CGTO maintains that past, present and future activities on the NTS have, are, or will disproportionately impact these American Indian people. Under the Expanded Use Alternative 3, there is a high potential of adverse impacts to these issues. As more activities occur, both risks from radiation and reduced access from land disturbance is expected to occur. The CGTO should be funded to design, conduct, and produce a systematic American Indian Environmental Justice study, before new activities are approved. Action-by-action responses are accessed in Section 5.1.1.12 and are not repeated here.
5.3.2 Tonopah Test Range
Under Alternative 3, the Defense, Environmental Restoration, and Work for Others Programs at the Tonopah Test Range would continue. In addition, a variety of proposed tests would be conducted at the Tonopah Test Range. The activities associated with Alternative 3 are summarized below. A detailed description of the activities is presented in Appendix A. Defense Program. Under Alternative 3, Tonopah Test Range activities would include the same activities as under Alternative 1, with the addition of a variety of proposed tests. The proposed tests would include robotics, smart transportation, a variety of burn tests, smoke obscuration operations, thermal test operation facility, climatic test operation facility, armor/antiarmor tests, and infrared tests. Environmental Restoration Program. Environmental Restoration Program activities would continue at current or accelerated rates. Work for Others Program. Current Work for Others Program activities would continue at the Tonopah Test Range. Activities would be the same as those described for Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.2 . Site-Support Activities. Site-support activities under Alternative 3 would be increased as a result of increased activities at the Tonopah Test Site.
5.3.2.1 Land Use
. Under Alternative 3, the actions taken at the Tonopah Test Range would be the same as for Alternative 1, including the addition of Nondefense Research and Development and Work for Others Programs. The Environmental Restoration Program would accelerate its schedule. Defense Program. Alternative 3 would include all activities identified under Alternative 1 and any increase of defense-related missions not evaluated in the baseline, resulting in more demands on the airspace by the DOE. This would require additional coordination with the U.S. Air Force to ensure both missions are accommodated. Environmental Restoration Program. Two Environmental Restoration Program projects at the Tonopah Test Range could result in land disturbance under Alternative 3. One project would consist of the restoration of approximately 200 acres for the Soils Media Corrective Action Unit. The second project would consist of 43 Environmental Restoration Program sites identified at the Tonopah Test Range. Impacts to land-use resources from Environmental Restoration Program activities would be mostly beneficial, making contaminated lands usable subject to restrictions and tenant uses. Adverse impacts would be negligible. The 1,025 acres identified for Environmental Restoration Program projects would represent less than 0.3 percent of the Tonopah Test Range land area. Work for Others Program. Under Alternative 3, the activities conducted would be similar to those activities identified under Alternative 1 and otherDefense Program activities. Therefore, the impact would be similar.
5.3.2.1.1 Site-Support Activities
Site-support activities under Alternative 3 would include those identified under Alternative 1, as well as any expansions needed. This could require additional facilities, services, utilities, and communications, depending on growth in certain testing activities. Maintenance support of all facilities would continue at present levels. New facilities could be built as required for expansion of activities. Law enforcement, security, fire protection, and health services would expand to match increased activities. Off-site administrative support would be primarily located in Las Vegas, Nevada, and Albuquerque, New Mexico, and their number would increase as needed to serve the Tonopah Test Range. All utilities would be maintained to ensure they are free of defects. Utilities that are currently not in use might be required to be powered up. Additional support lines could be established. It is anticipated that the present water system would provide sufficient support for an increase in activities, and the present wastewater system would be sufficient to support all growth within Areas 3 and 9. No additional expansion of solid waste units or support construction would be required to support an increase in solid waste. The communication systems described in Section 4.2.1.3 would have the capability of being expanded as needed to support all increased activities at the Tonopah Test Range.
5.3.2.1.2 Airspace
Airspace actions associated with Alternative 3 would most likely be similar to those discussed under Alternative 1. Current levels of air traffic control and navigational air service, as well as airspace structure, would be maintained. Under this alternative, the only activities that would affect airspace would be defense-related. Therefore, only the Defense and Work for Others Programs are discussed. Defense Program. Alternative 3 includes all activities identified in Alternative 1 and any increase of defense-related missions not evaluated in the baseline, resulting in more demands on theairspace by the DOE. This would require additional coordination with the U.S. Air Force to ensure both missions are accommodated. Work for Others Program. With the Work for Others Program, the continuation of the use of the Tonopah Test Range airspace for various military training exercises and for defense-related activities is anticipated. No commercial air passenger or general aviation activities are anticipated. Occasional air cargo, fixed-wing, and helicopter transit are expected. Airspace requirements under Alternative 3 would be the same as those currently in effect with Nellis Air Force Base Air Traffic Control Facility, assuming coordination of air traffic control at the Tonopah Test Range and its surrounding areas. The continuation of operations at the Tonopah Test Range under the Work for Others Program under Alternative 3 would require additional coordination with the U.S. Air Force to ensure both missions are accommodated.
5.3.2.2 Transportation
. The following sections contain the discussion of the environmental impacts related to transportation activities, as defined under Alternative 3. The analysis of transportation impacts is presented with respect to on-site and off-site traffic, transportation of materials and waste, and other transportation.
5.3.2.2.1 On-Site Traffic
Traffic volumes on the Tonopah Test Range are below 1,000 vehicles per day on any roadway. Activities associated with the Tonopah Test Range would add minimal traffic to the already underused roadways. Federal agencies that use the Tonopah Test Range would continue to maintain some of the transportation infrastructure.
5.3.2.2.2 Off-Site Traffic
Under Alternative 3, activities at the Tonopah Test Range as a result of the Defense, Environmental Restoration, and Work for Others Programs would generate only an occasional and minor amount of vehicular traffic on the local access roads and on the immediate regional highway (U.S. Highway 6 near Tonopah). There would be no traffic impacts on off-site roadways under Alternative 3 .
5.3.2.2.3 Transportation of Materials and Waste
The impacts resulting from the transportation of materials and waste under Alternative 3 would be the same as those described under Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.2.2.3 .
5.3.2.2.4 Other Transportation
Under Alternative 3, the impacts related to other transportation would be the same as those described under Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.2.2.4 . In addition, the increase in personnel under Alternative 3 might require multiple airplane trips.
5.3.2.3 Socioeconomics
The socioeconomic analysis has been prepared for the region of influence, regardless of where employees work. Therefore, the place of employment would not change the effects in any of the socioeconomic indicators. The analysis for this site is included in Section 5.3.1.3 .
5.3.2.4 Geology and Soils
The impacts to geology and soils resulting from three programs and site-support activities are presented in this section. Defense Program. Under Alternative 3 for the Tonopah Test Range, the adverse impacts to geologic media discussed under the Defense Program in Section 5.1.2.4 apply. An additional 2.8 acres are anticipated to be impacted by excavation of the surface for installation of infrastructure or test facilities. Weapons tests are anticipated to impact an additional 9 m2 (100 ft2) of surface geologic media. Environmental Restoration Program. Under Alternative 3, the adverse impacts to geologic media discussed under the Environmental Restoration Program in Section 5.1.2.4 apply. Work for Others Program. Under Alternative 3, the adverse impacts to geology and soils are similar to the impacts discussed for the Defense Program under this alternative. Site-Support Activities. Impacts are not expected as a result of site-support activities.
5.3.2.5 Hydrology
. The environmental impacts to surface hydrology and groundwater are described. Discussions of impacts to water quality and water quantity are also presented.
5.3.2.5.1 Surface Hydrology
The impacts to surface hydrology for the programs and site- support activities are presented in this section. One potential impact from all programs would be the alteration of natural drainage paths, resulting in potential preferential erosion of natural or fill deposits, deposition of sediments, ponding of water, or inundation of infrastructure. Some negligible increase in surface water flows may occur if appreciable areas were paved or the natural runoff characteristics were otherwise altered. The impact would not be considered significant. Defense Program. Adverse impacts to the surface hydrologic environment discussed under the Defense Program in Section 5.1.2.5 apply under Alternative 3 of the Tonopah Test Range. An additional 2.8 acres are anticipated to be impacted by excavation of the surface for installation of infrastructure or test facilities. Weapons tests are anticipated to impact an additional 9 m2 (100 ft2) of surface geologic media. Environmental Restoration Program. Under Alternative 3, the adverse impacts to the surface hydrologic environment discussed under the Environmental Restoration Program in Section 5.1.2.5 apply under Alternative 3. Work for Others Program. Under Alternative 3, Work for Others Program activities are similar to Defense Program activities; therefore, the potential impacts to surface hydrology would be similar. Site-Support Activities. Site-support activities at the Tonopah Test Range are not expected to significantly impact surface waters.
5.3.2.5.2 Groundwater
For the Tonopah Test Range, the impacts are the same as discussed under Alternative 1. The increase of defense-relatedactivities or acceleration of Environmental Restoration Program activities is not expected to have significant impacts on water demand under Alternative 3.
5.3.2.6 Biological Resources
Only three programs, Defense, Environmental Restoration, and Work for Others, would occur on the Tonopah Test Range under Alternative 3. The discussion for these three programs follows. Defense Program. The projects under Alternative 3 are similar to those proposed under Alternative 1, except that more tests would be performed in previously disturbed areas. As was concluded for Alternative 1, there would be no impacts on biological resources. Environmental Restoration Program. The activities under Alternative 3 for this program are similar to those described under Alternative 1 with the exception of the acceleration of scheduled activities associated with this program. This is not likely to change the nature of the impacts as described under Alternative 1. Work for Others. The activities associated with this program are similar to activities associated with Defense Program activities. Therefore, there would be no impacts to biological resources. Site-Support Activities. The impacts to biological resources would be the same as those described under Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.2.6 .
5.3.2.7 Air Quality
. Under Alternative 3, impacts to air quality would be the same as those described under Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.2.7. Increased defense-related programs and the acceleration of the environmental restoration activities would not significantly impact the air quality of the area.
5.3.2.8 Noise
. Under Alternative 3, noise impacts would be the same as those described under Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.2.8 .
5.3.2.9 Visual Resources
. The impacts to visual resources under Alternative 3 would be similar to those described under Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.2.9.
5.3.2.10 Cultural Resources.
The impacts to cultural resources on the Tonopah Test Range as a result of activities included under Alternative 3 are presented in this section. Defense Program. Additional impacts are expected from increased testing, which may result in ground disturbances or a modification of existing structures. Archaeological sites have been recorded in the area, and indirect impacts to these sites could occur as a result of increased visitation to the site. Environmental Restoration Program. Impacts to cultural resources are the same as those contained in Alternative 1. Waste Management Program. Under Alternative 3, waste management would expand and additional facilities would be constructed at Areas 3 and 5 at the NTS. An increase in ground disturbances and an increase in visitation could have an impact on cultural resources. AMERICAN INDIAN CULTURAL RESOURCES This section describes the American Indian concerns associated with implementing Alternative 3, as summarized by the CGTO. Defense Program Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources would be adversely impacted if additional underground nuclear tests occur or if new areas are used for expanded testing programs. Waste Management Program Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources would not be adversely impacted. There is no Waste Management Program on the Tonopah Test Range, and none has been identified for this alternative. Environmental Restoration Program Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources would be adversely impacted if natural lands are scraped during environmental restoration. Access to culturally significant places would be increased if environmental restoration were successful, thus reducing Indian peoples ' perception of health and spiritual risks associated with this area. Indian people wish to be involved in identifying environmental restoration methods and in the evaluation of restoration success. Nondefense Research and Development Program. Additional impacts may occur through construction of the Natural Gas Facility. Work for Others Program. Impacts are the same ascontained in Alternative 1. Site-Support Activities. Impacts are the same as contained in Alternative 1. Nondefense Research and Development Program Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources would be adversely impacted if natural lands are scraped during any nondefense research and development actions. Work for Others Program Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources would be impacted if Tonopah Test Range weapons research and development programs were expanded. These actions have and will continue to pollute these lands. American Indian cultural resources will continue to be adversely impacted by military training exercises and weapons tests.5.3.2.11 Occupational and Public Health and Safety.
Alternative 3 includes all program activities described under Alternative 1 plus additional activities. For Tonopah Test Range workers, the increased activities are expected to result in a corresponding increase in human health and safety impacts compared to Alternative 1. Table 5.3-17 summarizes the occupational and public health and safety impacts for the applicable Tonopah Test Range programs under Alternative 3. As under Alternative 1, none of the routine activities conducted at the Tonopah Test Range under Alternative 3 involves hazards that would impact public health and safety. Section 5.3.2.7 , Air Quality, identifies no active sources for airborne release of radioactivity or criteria pollutants. Section 5.1.2.2.3 addresses the impacts of transportation of radioactive materials and waste. Accidents associated with activities at the Tonopah Test Range could impact public health and safety, and are discussed in this section. Defense Program. Based on occupational injury and fatality rates for construction activities, the Defense Program at the Tonopah Test Range is expected to result in 2.6 injuries and 0.0046 fatalities to workers during construction activities over the 10-year period evaluated in this EIS. During the same time period, no injuries or fatalities are projected as a result of routine program activities. Based on previous occupational radiation records, occupational exposure to radiation is not expected to exceed a collective dose to Defense Program workers of about 7-person rem in 10 years. Based on the dose to health effects correlation factors recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (1991), this dose could result in about 0.0028 latent cancer fatalities and 0.0011 other detrimental health effects in the worker population. The risk of accidental exposure to radioactive or hazardous chemical releases contributes nearly zero increase to the risk of latent cancer fatality or detrimental health effect. The health and safety impact to the public from potential Defense Program accidents at Tonopah Test Range could result in about 9.0 x 10-9 latent cancer fatalities and 4.1 x 10-9 other detrimental health effects in the population. Additional risk due to accidental exposure to hazardous chemicals would be even less. The maximum reasonably foreseeable Defense Program radiological accident at the Tonopah Test Range would be the same as described in Section 5.1.2.11 for Alternative 1 (a failure of an artillery fired test assembly, which has a probability of occurrence of 1 x 10-7 [1 in 10,000,000] per year). For Defense Programs hazardous chemical effects at the Tonopah Test Range, the maximum reasonably foreseeable accident would also be the same as described inSection 5.1.2.11 for Alternative 1 (an explosion of a rocket test assembly containing depleted uranium and beryllium, which has a probability of occurrence of 6 x 10-6 [1 in 170,000] per year). Environmental Restoration Program. Based on occupational injury and fatality rates for industrial activities, the Environmental Restoration Program is expected to result in 0.0054 injuries and0.0011 fatalities to workers during routine program activities over the 10-year period evaluated in this EIS. During the same period, no injuries or fatalities are expected to result from construction activities. Based on previous occupational radiation records, occupational exposure to radiation is estimated to result in a collective dose to Tonopah Test Range Environmental Restoration Program workers of about 0.7-person rem in 10 years. Based on the dose to health effects correlation factors recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (1991), this dose could result in about 2.6 x 10-4 latent cancer fatalities and 1.2 x 10-4 other detrimental health effects in the worker population. The risk of accidental exposure to radioactive releases contributes nearly zero increase to the risk of latent cancer fatality or detrimental health effect. No Environmental Restoration Program hazardous chemical accident resulting in measurable effects at the Tonopah Test Range has been identified. The health and safety impact to the public from potential Environmental Restoration Program accidents at Tonopah Test Range could result in about 1.2 x 10-9 latent cancer fatalities and 5.7 x 10-10 other detrimental health effects in the population. The maximum reasonably foreseeable Environmental Restoration Program radiological accident at the Tonopah Test Range would be the same as described in Section 5.1.2.11 for Alternative 1 (an airplane crash into the Project Roller Coaster site, which has a probability of occurrence of 1 x 10-6 [1 in 1,000,000] per year).5.3.2.12 Environmental Justice.
Impacts for Environmental Justice for this site are discussed for the region of influence in Section 5.3.1.12 . American Indian concerns include: (1) Holy Land violations, (2) perceived risks from radiation, and (3) cultural survival especially access violations. These impacts are discussed in Section 5.3.2.10 , Cultural Resources, and 5.3.1.11 , Occupational and Public Health and Safety. There has not been a systematic study of these issues for the Tonopah Test Range. The CGTO maintains that past, present, and future activities on the Tonopah Test Range have, are or will disproportionately impact the American Indian people. Under the Expanded Use Alternative 3, there is a high potential of adverse impacts. As more activities occur, both risks from radiation and reduced access from land disturbance is expected to occur. The CGTO should be funded to design, conduct, and produce a systematic American Indian Environmental Justice study, before new activities are approved. Program-by-program responses are assessed in Section 5.1.1.12 and are not repeated here .
5.3.3 Project Shoal Area
The Environmental Restoration Program is the only program scheduled for the Project Shoal Area under this alternative; therefore, it is the only program discussed. Characterization and remediation activities would continue as in Alternative 1 with the possibility of accelerated schedules.
5.3.3.1 Land Use
. The completion of the actions on an accelerated schedule would not appreciably decrease the time required for any given activity. Site characterization or feasibility studies action would be initiated sooner under this alternative. No impacts to land use are expected. Because of the remoteness of this site and the compatible surrounding land uses, no impacts are anticipated to surrounding land uses.
5.3.3.1.1 Site-Support Activities
No significant impacts on site-support activities would occur as a result of Alternative 3 actions. Requirements for water, power, and other facilities would not be increased from Alternative 1 levels.
5.3.3.1.2 Airspace
Under Alternative 3, the Environmental Restoration Program activities anticipated at the Project Shoal Area would not use air transportation. Therefore, there would be minimal effects on airspace at the Project Shoal Area as a result of this alternative.
5.3.3.2 Transportation
. The following sections address the environmental impacts related to transportation activities as defined under Alternative 3. The analysis of transportation impacts ispresented with respect to on-site and off-site traffic, transportation of materials and waste, and other transportation.
5.3.3.2.1 On-Site Traffic
Environmental Restoration Program activities at the Project Shoal Area would be short-term and would require relatively few personnel (less than 10 people at any given time). Therefore, no traffic impacts are expected.
5.3.3.2.2 Off-Site Traffic
Under Alternative 3, Environmental Restoration Program activities would generate only an occasional and minor amount of vehicular traffic (less than 100 vehicle trips per day) on the local access roads and on the immediate regional highway (U.S. Highway 50). Therefore, under Alternative 3, there would be no traffic impacts on off-site roadways.
5.3.3.2.3 Transportation of Materials and Waste
The transport of materials and wastes from the Project Shoal Area would not have a significant impact on the overall risk estimates; chances for getting cancer or having radiation detriment from these shipments would be highly unlikely.
5.3.3.2.4 Other Transportation
Because Alternative 3 activities would not include direct use of local railroads or other modes of air transportation to the Project Shoal Area, direct effects on rail and other modes of transportation are expected to be minimal. Furthermore, the anticipated activities at the site do not call for a measurable transportation demand.
5.3.3.3 Socioeconomics
The socioeconomic analysis has been prepared for the region of influence, regardless of where employees work. Therefore, the place of employment would not change the effects in any of the socioeconomic indicators. The analysis for this site is included in Section 5.3.1.3
5.3.3.4 Geology and Soils
Under Alternative 3, the impacts to geology and soils would be the same as those described under Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.3.4 Acceleration of the restoration schedule would not significantly impact geology and soils.
5.3.3.5 Hydrology
Actual water demand on an accelerated schedule would not vary appreciably from Alternative 1, in which only minimal quantities of water would be required.
5.3.3.6 Biological Resources
The activities at this site would be similar to those described under Alternative 1, so the impacts would be the same as those described under Alternative 1.
5.3.3.7 Air Quality
Emissions from the operation of U.S. Navy aircraft over the Project Shoal Area would have little impact on surface ambient pollutant concentrations. Studies have shown that resulting concentrations would be about 0.05 percent of allowable concentrations (SAIC/DRI, 1991). About 10 acres of land would be disturbed during the Environmental Restoration Program. The average annual fugitive dust emission (PM10) from Alternative 3 drilling activity would be about 3 tons. Fugitive dust calculations assume a 50-percent reduction as a result of watering the sites. Because activities are only expected to occur on a short-term basis, long-term air quality impacts are not expected.
5.3.3.8 Noise
Under Alternative 3, noise impacts would be the same as those described under Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.3.8 .
5.3.3.9 Visual Resources
Impacts to visual resources under Alternative 3 would be similar to those described under Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.3.9 .
5.3.3.10 Cultural Resources
Indirect impacts to cultural resources might result from increased visitation
and vehicular traffic in archaeologically
sensitive areas. The indirect impacts would be monitored through site visits by
archaeologists.
AMERICAN INDIAN CULTURAL RESOURCES This section
describes the American Indian concerns associated with implementing
Alternative 3, as summarized by the CGTO.
This study is not within the traditional lands of the Indian people
represented by the CGTO. It is recommended by the CGTO that the DOE EIS team
directly contact Indian tribes and organizations having traditional lands in
the Project Shoal test site area. The following tribes were suggested: Fallon
Paiute, Walker River Paiute, Pyramid Lake, and Lovelock Paiute Tribes.
Note: The Fallon Paiute, Walker River Paiute,
and Lovelock Paiute Tribes were contacted by the DOE in letters dated May 12,
1995.
5.3.3.11 Occupational and Public Health and Safety
The Environmental Restoration Program is the only active program expected to result in health and safety impacts to workers at the Project Shoal Area under Alternative 3. No contamination has been detected in surficial soils at this site, and no surface soil remedial actions are proposed. Activities at this site would consist of characterization and hydrologic monitoring. Alternative 3 accelerates the program activities described under Alternative 1. For Project Shoal Area workers, the increased activities are expected to result in a corresponding increase in human health and safety impacts compared to Alternative 1. Table5.3-18 summarizes the occupational and public health and safety impacts for Environmental Restoration Program activities under Alternative 3. As in Alternative 1, no impacts to public health and safety are reasonably foreseeable from either routine activities or accidents under Alternative 3. Potential impacts to public health and safety from subsurface contamination of groundwater are the same as those discussed under Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.3.11 . Environmental Restoration Program. Based on occupational injury and fatality rates for industrial activities, Environmental Restoration Program activities at the Project Shoal Area are expected to result in 1.7 x 10-4 injuries and 3.4 x 10-5 fatalities to workers during routine program activities over the 10-year period evaluated in this EIS. During the same period, no injuries or fatalities are expected from construction activities. Based on previous occupational radiation records, occupational exposure to radiation is estimated to result in a collective dose to Project Shoal Area Environmental Restoration Program workers of about 0.05-person rem in 10 years. Based on the dose to health effects correlation factors recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (1991), this dose could result in about 1.9 x 10-5 latent cancer fatalitiesand 7.6 x 10-6 other detrimental health effects in the worker population. No Environmental Restoration Program accidents resulting in measurable radiological or chemically hazardous effects at the Project Shoal Area have been identified.
5.3.3.12 Environmental Justice
Impacts for Environmental Justice at this site are discussed for the region of influence in Section 5.3.1.12. American Indian concerns include: (1) Holy Land violations, (2) perceived risks from radiation, and (3)cultural survival especially access violations. The impacts are discussed in Section 5.3.8.10 , Cultural Resources, and 5.3.1.11 , Occupational and Public Health and Safety. There has been no systematic study of these issues for the Project Shoal Area. The study area is not within the traditional lands of the American Indian people represented by the CGTO. It is recommended by the CGTO that the DOE EIS team directly contact American Indian tribes and organizations having traditional lands in the Project Shoal Area. The following tribes were suggested: Fallon Paiute, Walker River Paiute, Pyramid Lake, and Lovelock Paiute Tribes
5.3.4 Central Nevada Test Area
The Environmental Restoration Program is the only program planned for the Central Nevada Test Area under this alternative; therefore, it is the only program discussed. Characterization and remediation activities would continue, but might be accelerated relative to Alternative 1.
5.3.4.1 Land Use
Under Alternative 3, the actions taken at the Central Nevada Test Area are the same as under Alternative 1, but on an accelerated schedule. An accelerated schedule would not appreciably decrease the time required for any given activity; e.g., site characterization or feasibility studies. The actions simply would be initiated sooner under this alternative. No land-use impacts are expected because of the remoteness of the Central Nevada Test Area and similar land use surrounding it. Fallon Naval Air Station intends to create military operating areas in three of Nye County's rural regions; they would be designated Smoky, Duckwater, and Diamond. The Central Nevada Test Area falls under the Duckwater military operating area. This airspace expansion has not yet been filed and would not affect Environmental Restoration Program activities at the Central Nevada Test Area. Therefore, there would be minimal effects on airspace at the Central Nevada Test Area as a result of Alternative 3. No other programs are scheduled at the Central Nevada Test Area.
5.3.4.2 Transportation
The following sections address the discussion of the environmental impacts related to transportation activities as defined under Alternative 3. The analysis of transportation impacts is presented with respect to on-site and off-site traffic, transportation of materials and waste, and other transportation.
5.3.4.2.1 On-Site Traffic
Environmental Restoration Program activities at the Central Nevada Test Area would be short-term and would require relatively few personnel (less than 10 at any given time). There are no public roads currently on site, and the low level of personnel anticipated would generate a minor amount of traffic.
5.3.4.2.2 Off-Site Traffic
Under Alternative 3, Environmental Restoration Program activities would generate only an occasional and minor amount of vehicular traffic (less than 100 vehicle trips per day). Therefore, under Alternative 3, there would be minor vehicular traffic generated and no traffic impacts on off-site roadways.
5.3.4.2.3 Transportation of Materials and Waste
The transport of radioactive waste from the Central Nevada Test Area would not have a significant impact on the overall risk estimates; that is, the chances of getting cancer or having radiation detriment from these shipments is highly unlikely.
5.3.4.2.4 Other Transportation
Because Alternative 3 activities do not include direct use of local railroads, air transportation, or other modes of transportation to this site, direct effects on rail, air, and other modes of transportation are expected to be minimal.
5.3.4.3 Socioeconomics.
The socioeconomic analysis has been prepared for the region ofinfluence, regardless of where employees work. Therefore, the place of employment would not change the effects in any of the socioeconomic indicators. The analysis for this site is included in Section5.3.1.3 .
5.3.4.4 Geology and Soils.
Potential impacts to the geology of the Central Nevada Test Area are the same as described for Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.4.4 .
5.3.4.5 Hydrology.
Under Alternative 3, the Environmental Restoration Program actions would be accelerated. Water demand on an accelerated schedule would not vary appreciably from Alternative 1, in which only minimal quantities of water would be required.
5.3.4.6 Biological Resources
The activities at this site under Alternative 3 are similar to those described under Alternative 1. Therefore, the impacts are the same as those described under Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.4.6 .
5.3.4.7 Air Quality
Under Alternative 3, air quality impacts at the Central Nevada Test Area would be the same as those described for Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.4.7 .
5.3.4.8 Noise
Noise impacts as a result of Alternative 3 would be the same as those described for Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.4.8 .
5.3.4.9 Visual Resources
Under Alternative 3, the impacts to visual resources would be similar to those described for Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.4.9.
5.3.4.10 Cultural Resources
Under Alternative 3, impacts to cultural resources on the Central Nevada Test Area would be identical to those defined for Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.4.10. AMERICAN INDIAN CULTURAL RESOURCES This section describes the American Indian concerns associated with implementing Alternative 3, as summarized by the CGTO. Defense Program Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources will be adversely impacted if nuclear tests continue or increase and if natural lands are scraped for construction. In this alternative, however, there are no plans for additional tests or construction at the Central Nevada Test Area. Waste Management Program Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources will not be adversely impacted because there is no Waste Management Program on the Central Nevada Test Area and none has been identified for this alternative. Environmental Restoration Program Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources on the Central Nevada Test Area will be adversely impacted if natural lands are scraped during environmental restoration. Access to culturally significant places will be increased if environmental restoration is successful, thus reducing Indian people 's perception of health and spiritual risks associated with this area. Indian people wish to be involved in identifying environmental restoration methods and in the evaluation of restoration success. Nondefense Research and Development Program Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources will be adversely impacted if natural lands are scraped during weapons research and development. No such actions are planned for this alternative, so cultural resources will not be adversely impacted. Work for Others Program Under Alternative 3, it is expected that American Indian cultural resources will be impacted if weapon research and development programs are implemented in the Central Nevada Test Area. No such actions are planned for this alternative, so American Indian cultural resources will not be adversely impacted.
5.3.4.11 Occupational and Public Health and Safety
The Environmental Restoration Program is the only active program expected to result in health and safety impacts to workers at the Central Nevada Test Area under Alternative 3. Activities at this site would consist of site characterization and remediation with removal of contaminated mud and sludge. Alternative 3 accelerates the program activities described under Alternative 1. For Central Nevada Test Area workers, the increased activities are expected to result in a correspondingincrease in human health and safety impacts compared to Alternative 1. Table 5.3-19 summarizes the occupational and public health and safety impacts for Environmental Restoration Program activities under Alternative 3. As under Alternative 1, no impacts to public health and safety are reasonably foreseeable from either routine activities or accidents under Alternative 3. Potential impacts to public health and safety from subsurface contamination of groundwater are the same as those discussed for Alternative 1 in Section 5.1.4.11 . Environmental Restoration Program. Based on occupational injury and fatality rates for industrial activities, Environmental Restoration Program activities at the Central Nevada Test Area are expected to result in 1.7 x 10-4 injuries and 3.4 x 10-5 fatalities to workers during routine program activities over the 10-year period evaluated in this EIS. During the same period, no injuries or fatalities are expected because of construction activities. Based on previous occupational radiation records, occupational exposure to radiation is estimated to result in a collective dose to Central Nevada Test Area Environmental Restoration Program workers of about 0.05-person rem in 10 years. Based on the dose to health effects correlation factors recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (1991), this dose could result in about 1.9 x 10-5 latent cancer fatalities and7.6 x 10-6 other detrimental health effects in the worker population. No Environmental Restoration Program accidents resulting in measurable radiological or chemically hazardous effects at the Central Nevada Test Area have been identified.
5.3.4.12 Environmental Justice
Impacts for Environmental Justice for this site are discussed for the region of influence under Alternative 1 in Section 5.3.1.12 American Indian Environmental Justice concerns include: (1) Holy Land violations, (2) perceived risks from radiation, and (3) cultural survival especially access violations. These impacts are discussed in Section 5.3.4.10 , Cultural Resources, and Section 5.3.1.11 , Occupational and Public Health and Safety. There has not been a systematic study of these issues for the Central Nevada Test Area. The CGTO maintains that past, present, and future activities on the Central Nevada Test Area have, are, or will impact these American Indian Environmental Justice issues. Under the Expanded Use Alternative 3, there is a high potential of adverse impacts to these issues, As more activities occur, both risks from radiation and reduced access from land disturbance is expected to occur. Even though the CGTO has not been permitted to visit the area, the area is especially important due to the concentration of cultural resources. Therefore, this area provides a special opportunity for the DOE to undue past Environmental Justice impacts. The CGTO should be funded to design, conduct, and produce a systematic American Indian Environmental Justice study, before new activities are approved. Program-by-program responses are assessed in Section 5.1.1.12
5.3.5 Eldorado Valley
A Solar Enterprise Zone facility would be developed as part of the Nondefense Research and Development Program under Alternative 3. The only activity being considered for Eldorado Valley is the Solar Enterprise Zone facility. Therefore, it is the only program discussed for this site. A sitewide environmental impact statement, supplemental environmental impact statement, and/or other environmental analysis would be performed to describe all impacts should this site be chosen for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility. Project plans, site preparation, technical studies, and worker transition training development and implementation would also be accomplished. According to the Nevada Solar Enterprise Zone Task Force Work Group (DOE/NV, 1994c), a reinforcement of the natural gas supply system could be required. Water supplies would also have to be secured for the site, and conveyance systems would have to be installed. Construction of a 19-km (12-mi) water line from Boulder City and a 10-km (6-mi) natural gas line are necessary to support the alternative energy project at this site.
5.3.5.1 Land Use.
The location of the Solar Enterprise Zone facility at the Eldorado Valley would not result in significant impacts on land use. Designation of the site for renewable energy development would be consistent with surrounding land uses, such as a tortoise preserve. This site falls within the Las Vegas terminal control area. A Solar Enterprise Zone facility at this site would not be expected to affect aircraft operations in the vicinity of McCarran International Airport. However, the construction of the Dish/Stirling solar trough and other facilities (energy corridors) would need to be coordinated with airport management and the Federal Aviation Administration to ensure obstacle clearance criteria and safety; e.g., the elimination of possible glare from dishes.
5.3.5.2 Transportation
The analysis of transportation impacts is presented with respect to on-site and off-site traffic.
5.3.5.2.1 On-Site Traffic
Assuming that employees commute daily to work by private passenger cars (not buses), there would be 1,060 daily vehicle trips generated, based on the rate 3.02 daily vehicle trip ends per employee (ITE, 1991) and 0.44 vehicle trip ends per employee during peak hours. During peak hours, the project would generate 150 vehicle trips in both directions or 120 trips in the peak direction. This would not affect on-site traffic appreciably.
5.3.5.2.2 Off-Site Traffic
U.S. Highway 95 would be the major regional access to the site; U.S. Highway 95 is a two-lane, two-way rural highway south of Boulder City with 6,600 average daily traffic in 1993. The projected peak-hour traffic and associated level of service for 1996, 2000, and 2005 are shown in T able 5.3-4. With the Solar Enterprise Project, U.S. Highway 95 near the site would continue to operate at level of service C.
5.3.5.3 Socioeconomics
The socioeconomic analysis has been prepared for the region of influence regardless of where employees work. Therefore, the place of employment would not change the effects in any of the socioeconomic indicators. The analysis for this site is included in Section 5.3.1.3 .
5.3.5.4 Geology and Soils
There would be some impacts on the geologic resources and soils of Eldorado Valley as a result of the development of aSolar Enterprise Zone facility. An extensive area of soils would be disturbed and, if blasting is required, some minor ground motion might be induced. Aggregate would be required for roads and concrete; however, the aggregate resources of the region are very large, and the use of aggregate for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility would not result in a significant loss of resources.
5.3.5.5 Hydrology
The impact of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility on the hydrology and water resources of Eldorado Valley would depend on the source of the water. It is anticipated that the water requirements would be met through the purchase of water directly from Boulder City and the city of Henderson. The purchase and use of this water would increase the total use of Colorado River water in southern Nevada, but by a very small percentage. The application of this water to a Solar Enterprise Zone facility would represent an opportunity for gain or loss depending on other potential uses for the water. The perennial yield of Eldorado Valley is only 6.2 x 105 m³/yr (500 acre-feet per year), and the basin is already overdrafted. Groundwater withdrawals for support of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility would result in additional overdrafting and would result in a continual lowering of water levels in the vicinity of water supply wells. If groundwater withdrawals from the basin are permitted and used, then the effects on water levels in the basin would be significant. Assuming a 40-year project peak, water demand and aquifer transmissivity of 189,265 L/day (50,000 gal/day) per foot and the conservative assumptions behind this non-equilibrium equation (Driscoll, 1986), the drawdown in water levels for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility can be predicted. The estimated drawdown for this scenario is appreciable, 31 m (100 ft) in the immediate vicinity of the pumping well field and as much as 9 m (30 ft) at a distance of 6 km (4 mi) from the well field.
5.3.5.6 Biological Resources
A Solar Enterprise Zone facility would involve the development of up to four technologies or subprojects capable of generating electricity from solar energy. For this analysis, it was assumed that one of the fourtechnologies would be developed, and about 2,400 acres of previously undisturbed habitat would be cleared for the site, and 420 acres for utility corridors. Loss of habitat and associated mortality of individuals, disruption of movement patterns and gene flow, and other effects should not have a negative impact on the viability of most species found in this area. The species are common throughout a large, relatively undisturbed region. No threatened, endangered, or candidate plants or animals are known to occur in the proposed area; however, this area has not been thoroughly surveyed. If populations of rare species are found, this project might impact their viability. Nests of birds, protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, may be destroyed if ground clearing for construction of the project occurred during the breeding season. The abundance of desert tortoises is low in the vicinity of the proposed site (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1994), and the site is not critical habitat for this species. Tortoises living within the site could be killed, injured, or displaced during construction of the facility. Tortoises are also likely to be killed on roads during transportation activities for this project. Construction of water and natural gas lines could significantly impact populations of rare species or the threatened desert tortoises. However, the locations of these support facilities have not been finalized, and the impacts, therefore, cannot be accurately evaluated.
5.3.5.7 Air Quality
Construction of a 100-MW solar-generated electric power station at Eldorado Valley would generate fugitive dust (PM10) emissions during ground-disturbing activities. In addition, mobile source emissions would be generated by construction employee vehicles. About 2,400 acres of land would be disturbed during a two-year period. The average annual fugitive dust (PM10) emission from this activity would be about 360 tons. Fugitive dust generated from construction of the solar-powered electric power plant would be minor. Mobile-source emissions would consist of exhaust emissions from vehicles used by construction employees to commute to and from the site. Assuming about 350 vehicles per day would travel to the site, pollutant emissions would be as follows:
- Volatile Organic Compounds: 10.57 tons/yr·1890
- Carbon Monoxide: 71.66 tons/yr·1890
- Nitrogen Oxides: 15.74 tons/yr·1890
5.3.5.8 Noise
Noise generation related to the construction of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility technology equipment would occur under Alternative 3. Temporary impacts resulting from construction-related noise would occur within the immediate vicinity of the construction sites. Noise impacts would be negligible. The site is located within a remote area, and no sensitive receptors are close to the construction area. Potential construction-related noise levels of 80 to 85 dBA at 15 m (50 ft) from construction equipment (e.g., large trucks and front-end loaders) would be reduced as distance increases. Because activities are only expected to occur on a short-term basis, long-term noise impacts are not expected.
5.3.5.9 Visual Resources
A Solar Enterprise Zone facility proposed for the Eldorado Valley site would disturb approximately 2,400 acres, representing about 40 percent of the site. The landscape of Eldorado Valley is common to the region. However, the site has a high visual sensitivity level because it is crossed by U.S. Highway 95. There are also three U.S. Bureau Land Management wilderness study areas within the site's viewshed. Because of the size of the area affected and the visibility from U.S. Highway 95, there would be adverse visual impacts.
5.3.5.10 Cultural Resources
The construction of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility and the expansion of existing facilities is likely to impact both previously recorded and undiscovered cultural resources in Eldorado Valley. Indirect impactsmight result from increased visitation and vehicular traffic in archaeologically sensitive areas. AMERICAN INDIAN CULTURAL RESOURCES This section describes the American Indian concerns associated with the potential development of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility in the Eldorado Valley. It is expected that American Indian cultural resources will be adversely impacted if a solar production facility is constructed and operated . Work for Others Program It is unlikely that Work for Others Program activities will be implemented in Eldorado Valley; therefore, no adverse impacts on American Indian resources are expected under Alternative 3.
5.3.5.11 Occupational and Public Health and Safety
Health and safety issues at a Solar Enterprise Zone facility site would be related to construction activities and are not expected to be out of the ordinary; therefore, impacts would be minimal.
5.3.5.12 Environmental Justice
Impacts for Environmental Justice for this site are discussed for the region of influence in Section 5.3.1.12 . American Indian concerns include: (1) Holy Land violations, (2) perceived risks from radiation, and ( 3 ) cultural survival especially access violations . These impacts are discussed in Section 5.3.5.10 , Cultural Resources, and Section 5.3.1.11 , Occupational and Public Health and Safety . There has not been a systematic study of these issues for the Eldorado Valley. The CGTO maintains that past activities in the Eldorado Valley have impacted these American Indian issues, especially Holy Land violations . This constitutes a disproportionate impact on American Indian People . The CGTO should be funded to design, conduct, and produce a systematic American Indian Environmental Justice study before new activities are approved .
5.3.6 Dry Lake Valley
A Solar Enterprise Zone facility would be developed as part of the Nondefense Research and Development Program under Alternative 3. Theonly activity being considered for Dry Lake Valley is the location of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility. Therefore, Nondefense Research and Development is the only program discussed. A sitewide environmental impact statement, supplemental environmental impact statement, and/or other environmental studies could be performed to describe all impacts should this site be chosen for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility. Project plans, site preparation, technical studies, and worker-transition training development and implementation could also be accomplished. Three important support activities must be completed before a Solar Enterprise Zone facility could be constructed at this site. A 2-km (1-mi) natural gas pipe line would need to be constructed to allow connection to the Kern River pipe line. A 48-km (30-mi) power line would need to be constructed for a solar energy generating facility. Water would have to be pumped to this site, perhaps from Moapa Valley.
5.3.6.1 Land Use
The location of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility at the Dry Lake Valley would not result in significant impacts on land uses. The designation of the site for renewable energy development is consistent with surrounding land uses, which include an industrial park, the municipal landfill, a co-generation facility, and, to the northeast of California Wash, The Reid Gardner Power Station, a coal-fired power plant. This site falls within the NAFR Complex and the Las Vegas terminal control area. A Solar Enterprise Zone facility at this site would not be expected to affect aircraft operations. The construction of the Dish/Stirling solar trough and other facilities (energy corridors) would need to be coordinated with the Federal Aviation Administration and airport management to ensure obstacle clearance criteria and safety; e.g. avoidance of conflicting glare from dishes.
5.3.6.2 Transportation
The analysis of transportation impacts is presented with respect to on-site and off-site traffic.
5.3.6.2.1 On-Site Traffic
Assuming that employees commute daily to work by private passenger cars (not buses), there would be 1,060daily vehicle trips generated, based on the rate of 3.02 daily vehicle trip end per employee (ITE, 1991) and 0.44 vehicle trip end per employee during peak hours. During peak hours, the project would generate 150 vehicle trips in both directions or 120 trips in the peak direction. This on-site traffic would have very little impact on the site.
5.3.6.2.2 Off-Site Traffic
Interstate 15 would be the major regional access to the site; Interstate 15 is a four-lane divided freeway with 12,906 average daily traffic in 1993 south of the Lamb Boulevard intersection. The projected peak-hour traffic and associated level of service for 1996, 2000, and 2005 are shown in T able 5.3-4. With a Solar Enterprise Zone facility, U.S. Highway 93 near the site would continue to operate at level of service B or better.
5.3.6.3 Socioeconomics
The socioeconomic analysis has been prepared for the region of influence, regardless of where employees work. Therefore, the place of employment would not change the effects in any of the socioeconomic indicators. The analysis for this site is included under Section 5.3.1.3 .
5.3.6.4 Geology and Soils
There would be some impacts on the geologic resources and soils of Dry Lake Valley as a result of the development of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility. An extensive area of soils would be disturbed and, if blasting is required, some minor ground motion might be induced. Aggregate would be required for roads and concrete. However, the aggregate resources of the region are very large, and the use of aggregate for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility would not result in a significant loss of resources.
5.3.6.5 Hydrology
The lack of a water supply for the construction and operation of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility is a serious limitation in Dry Lake Valley. The perennial yield of the basin is only 4.9 x 105 m³/yr (400 acre-feet per year). There are 1.1 x 106 m³/yr (930 acre-feet per year) of existing water rights, and more applications for water rights have been made totaling more than 2.6 x 107 m³/yr (21,000 acre-feet per year). It is unlikely that water rights could be secured within the basin unless the use of water for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility is designated as a preferred use. In this event, the impacts of pumping would be similar to thosedescribed for the Eldorado Valley location (i.e., water level declines as much as 31 m [100 ft] in the vicinity of the operating well field and as much as 9 m [30 ft] at a distance of6 km [4 mi] from the well field). Most likely, outflow to the California Wash would be slightly reduced, but, because of the low volume of such a reduction and the poor quality of that discharge, the impact to downgradient basins would be minimal. If the proposed facility is not designated as a preferred use, then it is not likely that the large-scale water withdrawals needed for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility would be permitted. In this case, a source of water for the construction and operation of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility would have to be located beyond the basin boundaries. Alternate locations for the development of a water supply are limited. The groundwater basins in the vicinity of Dry Lake Valley are either already designated as critical groundwater basins, do not have adequate groundwater resources to support such a project, or have numerous outstanding water right applications. Pending the identification of a source of water for the proposed location in Dry Lake Valley, no analyses can be performed to predict the effects on the basin from which the water is obtained.
5.3.6.6 Biological Resources
It is assumed that about 2,400 acres of previously undisturbed habitat would be clearedfor the site, and 560 acres for utility corridors. This loss of habitat and associated mortality of individuals, disruption of movement patterns and gene flow, and other effects would not have a negative impact on the viability of most species found in this area. The species are common throughout a large, relatively undisturbed region. A survey of the site to be disturbed has not been conducted; therefore, it is not possible to determine if any rare species would be affected. Nests of birds, protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, may be destroyed if ground clearing for construction of the project occurred during the breeding season. However, two State-protected plant species are found in this valley. If the facility causes the destruction of a population of one of these or any other rare species, the viability of that species might be significantly affected. Desert tortoises are foundthroughout this valley, but their densities are generally low (Clark County, 1990). This site is not critical habitat for desert tortoises. Tortoises living within the site might be killed, injured, or displaced during construction of the facility. Some tortoises could be killed on roads during transportation activities for this project. Construction of site-support facilities, such as a water line and a natural gas pipe line, might significantly impact populations of rare species or the threatened desert tortoises. Water sources for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility are not currently known. Given the limited water availability in this and surrounding valleys (see Section 5.3.6.5 ), water use may have negative impacts on springs and their associated biota, including some threatened or endangered species.
5.3.6.7 Air Quality
Construction of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility at Dry Lake Valley would generate fugitive dust (PM10) emissions during ground-disturbing activities. In addition, mobile-source emissions would be generated by construction employee vehicles. About 2,400 acres of land would be disturbed during a two-year period. The average annual fugitive dust (PM10) emission from this activity would be about 360 tons. Fugitive dust generated from construction of a solar-electric power plant would be minor. Mobile-source emissions would consist of exhaust emissions from vehicles used by construction employees to commute to and from the site. Assuming about 350 vehicles per day would travel to the site, pollutant emissions would be as follows:
- Volatile Organic Compounds: 6.61 tons/yr·1890
- Carbon Monoxide: 44.79 tons/yr·1890
- Nitrogen oxides: 9.84 tons/yr·1890
5.3.6.8 Noise
Noise impacts in Dry Lake Valley as a result of siting a Solar Enterprise Zone facility would be the same as those described for Eldorado Valley in Section 5.3.5.8 .
5.3.6.9 Visual Resources
The landscape of Dry Lake Valley is common to the region and is near an industrial development. The Nevada Power Company is planning to develop four additional power plants at this site, which already contains electrical power equipment. The site has a high visual sensitivity level because it is near Interstate 15. Construction of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility at this site would result in adverse impacts; however, the degree of contrast would be moderate because of the extensive man-made modifications already existing in the areas.
5.3.6.10 Cultural Resources
The construction of aSolar Enterprise Zone facility and the expansion of existing facilities would likely impact both previously recorded and undiscovered cultural resources in Dry Lake Valley. In particular, those sites associated with shoreline adaptations and the historically important Spanish Trail/Mormon Road might be affected. The precise nature of these impacts is unknown. However, any project that involves ground disturbance or modification to existing structures or features is likely to impact resources. Indirect impacts might result from increased visitation and vehicular traffic in archaeologically sensitive areas. AMERICAN INDIAN CULTURAL RESOURCES This section describes the American Indian concerns associated with the development of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility , as summarized by the CGTO. It is expected that American Indian cultural resources will be adversely impacted if a Solar Enterprise Zone facility is constructed and operated .
5.3.6.11 Occupational and Public Health and Safety
Occupational and public health and safety issues at this site would be related to constructionactivities. Therefore, impacts are expected to be minimal.
5.3.6.12 Environmental Justice
Impacts for Environmental Justice for this site are discussed for the region of influence in Section 5.3.1.12 . American Indian Environmental Justice include: (1) Holy Land violations, (2) perceived risks from radiation, and ( 3 ) cultural survival especially access violations . These impacts are discussed in Section 5.3.6.10, Cultural Resources, and 5.3.1.11 , Occupational and Public Health and Safety. There has not been a systematic study of these issues for the Dry Lake Valley, The CGTO maintains that past activities in the Dry Lake Valley have disproportionately impacted American Indian people, especially, Holy Land violations. Any activities occurring near Indian reservations further precludes future opportunities for expansion and access to these lands for any purpose. The CGTO should be funded to design conduct, and produce a systematic American Indian Environmental Justice study before new activities are approved. Program-by-program responses are assessed in 5.1.1.12 and are not repeated here.
5.3.7 Coyote Spring Valley
A Solar Enterprise Zone facility would be developed as part of the Nondefense Research and Development Program under Alternative 3. Because this is the only alternative being considered for Coyote Spring Valley, Nondefense Research and Development is the only program discussed for this site. A sitewide EIS, supplemental environmental EIS, and/or other environmental studies would be performed to describe all impacts should this site be chosen for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility. Project plans, site preparation, technical studies, and worker transition training development and implementation would also be accomplished. To maintain continuous power production, an 85 km (53-mi) natural gas pipe line would have to be constructed to tie into the Kern River pipe line. Development of any but the smallest subprojects would require upgrading of the power line system to this site. Water availability remains an unsettledissue, thus the size and location of water pipe line corridors are currently unknown.
5.3.7.1 Land Use
Alternative 3 actions would not significantly impact land uses. Surrounding land uses include wildlife management, mining, and recreation. The Coyote Spring Valley falls within the NAFR Complex and the Las Vegas terminal control area. A Solar Enterprise Zone facility at this site would not be expected to affect aircraft operations. However, the construction of the Dish/Stirling solar trough and other facilities (energy corridors) would need to be coordinated with the Federal Aviation Administration and airport management to ensure obstacle clearance criteria and safety; e.g., elimination of possible glare from dishes. American Indian concerns include: (1) Holy Land violations, (2 ) perceived risks from radiation, and (3) cultural survival especially access violations . These impacts are discussed in Section 5.3.7.10 , Cultural Resources, and Section 5.3.1.11 , Occupational and Public Health and Safety . There has not been a systematic study of the issues for the Coyote Spring Valley . The CGTO maintains that past activities in the Coyote Spring Valley have disproportionately impacted the American Indian people, especially regarding Holy Land violations. This area was traditional lands for Southern Paiutes especially the Moapa Paiute Tribe. Any activities occurring near Indian reservations further precludes future opportunities for expansion and access to these lands for any purpose. The CGTO should be funded to design, conduct, and produce a systematic American Indian Environmental Justice study before new activities are approved. Program-by-program responses are assessed in 5.1.1.12 and are not repeated here.
5.3.7.2 Transportation
The analysis of transportation impacts is presented with respect to on-site and off-site traffic.
5.3.7.2.1 On-Site Traffic
Assuming that employees commute daily to work by private passenger cars (not buses), there would be 1,060 daily vehicle trips generated, based on the rate of3.02 daily vehicle trip ends per employee (ITE, 1991) and 0.44 vehicle trip ends per employee during peak hours. During the peak hours, the project would generate 150 vehicle trips in both directions or 120 trips in the peak direction. These trips would not significantly impact the site.
5.3.7.2.2 Off-Site Traffic
U.S. Highway 93 would be the major regional access to the site; U.S. Highway 93 is a two-lane, two-way rural highway with 1,210 average daily traffic in 1993 south of State Route 375 Junction. The projected peak-hour traffic and associated level of service for 1996, 2000, and 2005 are shown in Table 5.3-4 . With a Solar Enterprise Zone Project, U.S. Highway 93 near the site would continue to operate at level of service C or better.
5.3.7.3 Socioeconomics
One of the objectives of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility in Coyote Spring Valley is to provide local employment and economic benefits to offset the impact of defense conversion on the NTS. A Solar Enterprise Zone facility would stimulate the economy of Coyote Spring Valley and Lincoln County, while simultaneously serving national energy and environmental objectives. Building individual solar projects would provide construction jobs for a short period of time, while a fairly small, stable workforce would be required for sustained operation and maintenance of the facilities. Solar energy couldhelp meet the increased demand for electricity without damaging the environment. The development of a new science and manufacturing base mission is important. At the same time, environmental concerns create a growing demand for alternative generating technologies. The socioeconomic impacts of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility will be presented when more information with respect to economic activity, population, housing, public finance, and public services is available. A sitewide EIS, supplemental EIS, and/or other environmental studies will be performed to describe all socioeconomic impacts. In addition, project plans, site preparation, technical studies, and worker transition training development and implementation would be accomplished.
5.3.7.4 Geology and Soils
There would be some impacts on the geologic resources and soils of Coyote Spring Valley as a result of the development of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility . An extensive area of soils would be disturbed, and, if blasting is required, some minor ground motion might be induced. Aggregate would be required for roads and concrete. However, the aggregate resources of the region are very large, and the use of aggregate for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility would not result in a significant loss of resources. If the Coyote Spring Valley site is selected for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility , a site-specific environmental document would be prepared that covers the impacts of construction and operation of the facility.
5.3.7.5 Hydrology
Although the water resources of Coyote Spring Valley are appreciable, they have been the focus of some of the largest water right filings ever made in the state of Nevada. The perennial yield of the basin is large (2.2 x 107 m3/yr [18,000 acre-feet per year]); however, almost all of this quantity is based on the assumption that half the underflow that discharges out of the basin could be captured and placed to a beneficial use within Coyote Spring Valley. Even though the current groundwater use in Coyote Spring Valley is minimal, there have been many applications to appropriate groundwater within the basin. Applications that have been filed total 5.2 m³/yr (185 ft3/sec) or 1.7 x 108 m³/yr (133,940 acre-feet per year). Obviously, only a small portion, if any, of these water right applications will ever be granted. Unless the use of water for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility is designated as a preferred use, there would be little chance that groundwater might be appropriated in Coyote Spring Valley for its construction and operation. The impacts of the water withdrawals from the carbonate aquifer in Coyote Spring Valley may be estimated on the basis of prior tests conducted by the U.S. Air Force. The U.S. Air Force conducted numerous well and aquifer tests, including a 30-day test at 12,870 L/min (3,400 gal/min), the same peak amount that might be required for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility . During testing, water levels were measured in adjacent monitoring wells in the downgradient basin and spring discharge rates at theMuddy Springs area. No declines in water levels or spring discharge rates could be detected that were attributed to the testing of the carbonate well. Thus, significant impacts from the pumping of this well at equal or lower rates forthe Solar Enterprise Zone facility would not be likely. A localized lowering of water levels would occur in the vicinity of the pumping well, but, based on testing results, would be less than 6 m (20 ft) at the well and less than 1.5 m (5 ft) at a distance of 100 m (330 ft) after 20 years of continuous pumping. These impacts are not considered significant.
5.3.7.6 Biological Resources
It is assumed that about 2,400 acres of previously undisturbed habitat would be cleared for the site, and 960 acres for utility corridors. This loss of habitat and associated mortality of individuals, disruption of movement patterns and gene flow, and other effects should not have a negative impact on the viability of most species found in this area. The species are common throughout a large region. However, because a survey of the proposed site has not been conducted, it is not possible to determine if rare species will be affected. Nests of birds, protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, may be destroyed if ground clearing for construction of the project occurred during the breeding season. This valley generally has a low-to-moderate density of desert tortoises, but some areas in this valley have moderately high-to-high densities (Garcia et al., 1982). Tortoises living within the project site may be killed, injured, or displaced during construction of the facility. Tortoises also are likely to be killed on roads during transportation activities for this project. Because the abundance of desert tortoises is higher in Coyote Spring Valley than in the other sites considered for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility , and because this site is within critical habitat for desert tortoises, development of the project at this site would likely have a greater negative impact on desert tortoises than development elsewhere. Because of the presence of critical habitat, final siting discussions should be strongly influenced by potential impacts on biological resources. It is proposed that 6.8 x 106 m³ (5,500 acre/ft) of groundwater be pumped from Coyote SpringValley. This groundwater withdrawal is not expected to influence water quality or quantity in nearby springs (see Section 5.3.7.5 ) and thus should have no biological impacts. Construction of these infrastructure support facilities could significantly impact populations of rare species or the threatened desert tortoises.
5.3.7.7 Air Quality
Construction of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility in Coyote Spring Valley would generate fugitive dust (PM10) emissions during ground-disturbing emissions. In addition, mobile-source emissions would be generated by construction employee vehicles. About 2,400 acres of land would be disturbed during a two-year period. The average annual fugitive dust (PM10) emission from this activity would be about 360 tons. Mobile-source emissions would consist of exhaust emissions from vehicles used by construction employees to commute to and from the site. Assuming about 350 vehicles per day would travel to the site, pollutant emissions would be as follows:
- Volatile Organic Compounds: 13.21 ton/yr·1890
- Carbon Monoxide:89.58 ton/yr·1890
- Nitrogen Oxides: 19.67 ton/yr·1890
5.3.7.8 Noise
Noise impacts at Coyote Spring Valley would be the same as those described for Eldorado Valley in Section 5.3.5.8 .
5.3.7.9 Visual Resources
The visual quality of Coyote Spring Valleyhas been designated as Class B because of the extensive panoramic views of the surrounding mountain ranges. In addition, the Solar Enterprise Zone facility site has high visual sensitivity because it is visible from the west on U.S. Highway 93. There are also three U.S. Bureau of Land Management Wilderness Study Areas within the site's viewshed. Construction of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility would greatly change the landscape character of Coyote Spring Valley, adversely impacting visual resources.
5.3.7.10 Cultural Resources.
The construction of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility is likely to impact both previously recorded and undiscovered cultural resources in Coyote Spring Valley. Indirect impacts might result from increased visitation and vehicular traffic in archaeologically sensitive areas. AMERICAN INDIAN CULTURAL RESOURCES This section describes the American Indian concerns associated with the development of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility in Coyote Spring Valley , as summarized by the CGTO. It is expected that American Indian cultural resources at Coyote Spring Valley will be adversely impacted if a Solar Enterprise Zone facility is constructed and operated .
5.3.7.11 Occupational and Public Health and Safety
Health and safety impacts at this site are expected to be minor. The health and safety issues are related to construction activities that are expected to be typical.
5.3.7.12 Environmental Justice
Impacts for Environmental Justice for this site are discussed for the influence in Section 5.3.1.12 . American Indian concerns include: (1) Holy Land violations, (2) perceived risks from radiation, and (3) cultural survival especially access violations. These impacts are discussed in Section 5.3.7.11 , Occupational and Public Health and Safety. There has not been a systematic study of these issues for the Coyote Spring Valley. The CGTO maintains that past activities in the Coyote Spring Valley have disproportionately impacted the American Indian people, especially regarding Holy Land violations. This area was traditional lands for Southern Paiutes especially the Moapa Paiute Tribe. Any activities occurring near Indian reservations further precludes future opportunities for expansion and access to these land for any purpose. The CGTOshould be funded to design, conduct, and produce a systematic American Indian Environmental Justice study before new activities are approved.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
