Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Nevada Test Site and Off-Site Locations

Chapter 6

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS

This chapter is comprised of five sections: (1) definition of cumulative impacts, methods of analysis, analytical baseline, and information sources; (2) inventory and characterization of past, present, and reasonably foreseeable actions (including federal and non-federal actions); (3) summary of impacts attributable to implementation of the Nevada Test Site (NTS) alternatives; (4) cumulative impact analysis by resource area; and (5) a summary of cumulative impacts.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is currently planning or conducting a variety of Programmatic Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) that have the potential for impacting activities at the NTS. These activities are discussed in Chapter 2, Purpose and Need . The impact of actions proposed by the DOE in these Programmatic EISs is accounted for in the assessment presented in Chapter 5, Environmental Consequences . Impacts experienced at the NTS attributable to activities contained in Programmatic EISs prepared by agencies other than the DOE are not individually identified and specifically addressed in Chapter 5.

6.1 Definition of Cumulative Impacts Methods of Analysis, Analytical Baseline and Information Sources

The following subsections provide the definition of cumulative impacts, and description of methods used in the analysis. Also included is the analytical baselines and a summary of the information sources used.

6.1.1 Definition

In accordance with the Council on Environmental Quality regulations, a cumulative impact analysis within an EIS includes the anticipated impacts to the environment resulting from "the incremental impacts of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (federal or non-federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impactscan result from individually minor, but collectively significant, actions taking place over a period of time." (40 CFR Part 1508.7).

6.1.2 Methods of Analysis

A cumulative impact analysis is based on a number of assumptions. Cumulative impacts are examined by combining the impacts of the proposed program alternatives with the impacts of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable activities in a region of influence. The extent ofthe region of influence can vary widely from one resource to another. For example, the region of influence for land use generally includes all impacts on land use in a broad region surrounding the area affected by the program alternatives. The region of influence for groundwater would generally be much smaller, encompassing only those groundwater-flow systems that are affected by the program alternatives, and by all past, present, and future actions that have or could affect these groundwater-flow systems. The region of influence for transportation could include an entire state, whereas the region of influence for socioeconomics could include all the cities and towns affected by the major economic activities in the region.

Public documents prepared by agencies of federal, state, and local government are the primary sources of information. It is assumed that actions undertaken by private persons and entities are captured in the information provided by such agencies.

The cumulative impacts methodology employs an approach that references resource management plans and economic and demographic projections as the sources of non-DOE-related baseline conditions. These plans provide an assessment of impacts to the environment associated with the implementation of these plans and scenarios. This approach is used rather than one that employs a compilation of specific future projects anticipated to occur in the respective regions of influence. In most cases the geographical areas in question are extensive and canalso contain large populations, making it infeasible to achieve a project-by-project aggregation.

Because of the wide geographic scope of a cumulative assessment and the variety of activities assessed, cumulative impacts are commonly examined at a less detailed level than are direct and indirect impacts.

The resource management plans and economic and demographic projections developed by public agencies present a consolidated picture of activities that are projected to occur in their respective geographical areas. In general terms, the resource management plans apply to large areas of relatively undeveloped land (virtually all of which is in federal ownership), and the economic and demographic projections apply to Clark and Nye counties, respectively.

6.1.3 Analytical Baseline

Except for the Las Vegas metropolitan area, southern Nevada is sparsely populated with large tracts of uninhabited desert and forested mountains controlled by a few federal agencies. Other land owners control relatively little land area.

FEDERAL LANDThe U.S. Bureau of Land Management controls the largest amount of land in the region. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management’s lands are open to the public and are used chiefly for grazing and dispersed recreation; mineral exploration and mining have affected small areas. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management manages the Red Rock Canyon National Recreation Area 10 miles west of Las Vegas. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management also manages a few dozen areas surrounding the NTS and Nellis Air Force Range (NAFR) Complex as Wilderness Study Areas. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management has recommended to the Secretary of the Interior that some of these areas be included in the National Wilderness Preservation System.

The NAFR Complex, controlled by the U.S. Air Force, is the next largest block of land in the region. It surrounds the NTS on the north and east sides, and most of the west side (public lands border the NTS on its southern and southwestern sides). The NAFR Complex is used for military training and isclosed to public access. The NTS is the next largest block of land in the region and is closed to public access. Combined, the NAFR Complex and the NTS form a single northwest-trending block of land that contains approximately 4,000,000 acres.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service manages a large block of land north of Las Vegas as the Desert National Wildlife Range, and a smaller block of land 24 kilometers (km) (15 miles [mi]) south of the NTS as Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge. These lands are managed for wildlife conservation, with an emphasis on bighorn sheep in the Desert National Wildlife Range and pupfish in the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge.

The National Park Service manages a large block of land bordering Lake Mead and the Colorado River as part of the Lake Mead National Recreation Area, and another block of land west of Beatty, Nevada, as part of Death Valley National Park. Lands controlled by the National Park Service are managed for conservation and recreation.

The U.S. Forest Service manages a single segment of land west of Las Vegas as part of the Toiyabe National Forest. Other U.S. Forest Service lands are located just north of Tonopah. U.S. Forest Service lands are used chiefly for recreation.

AMERICAN INDIAN LANDThe Moapa River Indian Reservation is 48 km (30 mi) northeast of Las Vegas and is the largest reservation in the region. Other reservations include the Las Vegas Indian Reservation, which is located about 24 kilometers (15 miles) northwest of Las Vegas, and the Fort Mojave Indian Reservation at the southern tip of Clark County. Within this region, there also are several Indian reservation schools, tribal enterprises, tribally controlled schools, tribal police departments, and tribal emergency response units. The following reservations are located within the region: Duckwater Shoshone Tribe, Las Vegas Paiute Tribe, Moapa Paiute Tribe, and the Yomba Shoshone Tribe. In addition, there are tribes which are located geographically outside of the region, but are potentially impacted by NTS activities. (One of these tribes is the Timbisha Shoshone Tribe, based in Death Valley, California and is located closer to the Nevada Test Site than many towns in northern Nye County). As a consequence of this proximity,people from the Timbisha Shoshone Tribe, are a part of the social and economic region of influence of the NTS. For example, students from the Timbisha Shoshone Tribe attend public school in Beatty, Nevada, whereas many Shoshone students from Tacopa, California attend school in Pahrump, Nevada. Timbisha tribal members both work and shop in Clark and Nye counties.

The Pahrump Paiute Tribe, located in Pahrump Valley, is composed of Indian people who have been historically recognized by state and federal agencies as qualified to receive services as Indian people, and who as a group are currently seeking federal acknowledgment.

STATE LANDThe state of Nevada manages the Valley of Fire State Park. This park is used for recreational purposes and is located about 64 km (40 mi) northeast of Las Vegas. Other small parcels of undeveloped state lands are scattered throughout the region.

PRIVATE LANDSThe Las Vegas Valley and nearby Boulder City contain the single largest block of private land in the region. Pahrump Valley, located about 32 km (20 mi) south of the NTS, also contains large amounts of private land, but relatively little of this land has been developed. Large blocks of private land occur also in the Overton area at the north end of Lake Mead, in Coyote Spring Valley immediately east of the Desert National Wildlife Range, and in the Amargosa Desert, 16 km (10 mi) northwest of Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge. These lands are used chiefly for agriculture, with smaller amounts dedicated to residential and business development. Other small blocks of private agricultural lands are scattered around many of the small communities in the region.

6.1.4 Information Sources

Resource management plans, and EISs associated with their implementation, have been prepared by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management for the NAFR Complex (BLM, 1990) and the Stateline and Tonopah resource areas (BLM, 1994a; 1994b) near the NTS. A framework for a resource management plan has been prepared for the NTS and is included as Volume 2 of the NTS EIS. Such plans aredesigned to guide and control future management actions, including the development of limited and more detailed plans for specific resources and land uses. Resource management plans identify objectives for each resource area, management direction designed to attain these objectives, and restricted land-use designations associated with the management direction (where appropriate).

The resource categories commonly considered in resource management plans, include air, soils, water, vegetation, riparian, visual, fish and wildlife habitat, forestry, livestock grazing, wild horses and burros, cultural and paleontological, lands, natural areas, recreation, wild and scenic rivers, rights-of-way, minerals, fire management, and socioeconomic values.

The resource management plans and economic and demographic projections for the following geographic areas are:

U.S. Bureau of Land Management Tonopah Resource Area·510
U.S. Bureau of Land Management Stateline Resource Area
Nellis Air Force Range
Clark County Region Economic and Demographic Projections
Nye County Economic and Demographic Projections.

6.2 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions

In the following subsections, the past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future action of federal agencies, non-federal (public and private) entities, and American Indian Tribes, which contribute to the cumulative impacts, are presented.

6.2.1 Past and Present Actions

Past and present actions associated with activities of the DOE and other public and private entities are included in the baseline conditions described in Chapter 4, Affected Environments .

6.2.2 Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions

Reasonably foreseeable future projects are presented below under the following three categories: federal, non-federal (public and private), and American Indian. Following the description of plans and programs, the relationships between their implementation and potential environmental impacts (by resource area) are presented.

FEDERAL ACTIONSActions of agencies of the federal government included in this section are those of the DOE, U.S. Air Force, Department of the Interior (U.S. Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), and U.S. Navy.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYSite characterization studies at Yucca Mountain in Nye County, Nevada, are ongoing and designed to determine whether the site is suitable for the storage and isolation of high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel. Activities being carried out include surface-based studies, underground studies, laboratory tests, modeling, and various associated analyses. The purpose of these studies and tests is to determine whether (1) a geologic repository can be constructed and operated at the site in such a way that the health and safety of the public and workers are protected and (2) nuclear waste emplaced in a repository will remain isolated from the accessible environment.

The DOE anticipates making a recommendation to the President on the suitability of Yucca Mountain for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste in 2001. If found suitable, a license application for construction of the repository would be submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2002. Construction of the repository would only begin after the Nuclear Regulatory Commission grants a construction license. It is anticipated that construction would be complete and the repository would start operations in 2010.

In support of the process that led to the recommendation of the Yucca Mountainsite as the location where site characterization activities would be carried out, the DOE prepared a site-specific Environmental Assessment (DOE, 1986). This document concluded that no significant adverseenvironmental impacts were expected from site characterization activities carried out at the Yucca Mountain site. Environmental impacts associated with site characterization activities are monitored and outlined in detail in an annual Site Environmental Report. Such reports have been prepared for calendar years 1991, 1992, 1993, and 1994 (DOE, 1992a; 1993; 1994a; 1995f). Until 1994, with the positioning of the tunnel-boring machine in the starter tunnel, the main focus of site characterization was on surface activities. During the entire period covering site characterization activities, the DOE has complied with all environmental requirements and permit conditions. In addition, numerous monitoring activities have been carried out, especially in the areas of radiological field studies, air quality, meteorology, cultural resources (archaeological and American Indian), water resources, and terrestrial ecosystems.

No significant adverse impacts are anticipated as a result of site characterization activities. According to the 1986 Yucca Mountain Environmental Assessment, limited impacts are expected to occur in the following resource areas: approximately 704 acres of surface soils will be disturbed, wildlife habitat will be disturbed, air quality will be affected through the generation of particulate and gaseous emissions, noise effects will temporarily impact sensitive receptors (wildlife), impacts to aesthetics will result from the construction of access roads; and additional trips on U.S. Highway 95 will occur but are not expected to affect the current level of service.

Estimates of these impacts are described in the Environmental Assessment. Annual monitoring, as described in the Site Environmental Reports, is conducted to ensure that impacts associated with site characterization activities remain well within the levels projected in the Environmental Assessment. Certain mitigation actions, including reclamation of disturbed lands, studies of the desert tortoise and its habitat, and archaeological monitoring, have been implemented as part of the site characterization program. (Areas scheduled for ground disturbance are also surveyed in advance to determine the presence of cultural and biological resources and appropriate mitigation measures, such as avoidance or collection of resources). Mitigation activities required as part of applicable site permits,such as dust suppression in conformance with air quality permits, are also implemented.

The cumulative impacts from site characterization activities at Yucca Mountain, added to the impacts anticipated from implementation of program alternatives analyzed in this EIS, are expected to be minimal. Because most of these anticipated impacts will occur on the NTS, the cumulative contribution to off-site, regional conditions is expected to be negligible. In addition, given the recent reductions in weapons testing activity at the NTS, cumulative impacts would be expected to have declined during the period of site characterization activities. Further discussion regarding potential cumulative impacts to specific resource areas and the general population can be found in Section 6.4, and are summarized in Table 6-1.

U.S. AIR FORCEThe major land area associated with activities conducted at the Nellis Air Force Base is that of the NAFR Complex. The NAFR Complex comprises 3,035,326 acres (of which 826,000 acres are administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as the Desert National Wildlife Range) located in south-central Nevada. Included in the NAFR Complex are about 123 acres of private land (patented mining claims).

Environmental concerns that could contribute to cumulative impacts in a resource region of influence are addressed in the Nellis Air Force Range Proposed Resource Plan and Final Environmental I mpact Statement (BLM, 1990). Two alternatives were identified in the Resource Management Plan and selected for detailed analysis. They were (1) No Action Alternative, or a continuation of current management direction within the framework of present laws and regulations, and (2) Preferred Alternative which is designed to improve rangeland vegetation conditions and wildlife habitat by achieving and maintaining the appropriate management level of the wild horse population in the planning area. Four major issues were identified for consideration: (1) vegetation, (2) wildlife habitat, (3) wild horse and burro management, and (4) cultural resources.

In addition to operational activities associated with the NAFR Complex, other potential actions include return of approximately 7,200 to 7,500 acres of NAFR Complex lands to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (Donegan, 1995). It is anticipated that property currently managed by the Nellis Air Force Base will be returned to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. The property is comprised of approximately 4,800 acres within the old small arms range located west of the Nellis Air Force Base near Interstate 15 and less than 3,000 acres located west of the Indian Springs Auxiliary Airfield.

U.S. BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Resource management plans, and EISs associated with their implementation, have been prepared by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management for the Stateline and Tonopah resource areas.

The Stateline resource area comprises 3.7 million acres of public land in Clark and Nye counties. The resource area is bordered by the Caliente resource area, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Desert National Wildlife Range, the NAFR Complex, and the NTS.

Table 6-1. Population projections

Table 6-1. Population projections
County	Year 2000	Year 2005
Clark County
NTS EIS	1,223,541	1,380,920
Clark County Regional Transportation Plan	1,130,000	1,289,000
Clark County Desert Conservation Plan	1,088,197	1,205,070
Nye County	33,966	38,516

The Resource Management Plan (BLM, 1992) provides a detailed characterization of five resource management plans (Alternatives A through D and the No Action Alternative). Alternative D is the Bureau of Land Management’s Preferred Alternative. Following public and agency review of the draft version of the NTS EIS, an additional alternative was developed (Alternative E) and a Supplemental EIS was issued in 1994 (BLM, 1994a). The alternatives are as follows:

No Action AlternativeThis represents a continuation of current management direction within the framework of present laws and regulations, including existing Memoranda of Understanding and Cooperative Agreements. The No Action Alternative also provides a baseline against which the environmental effects of implementing other alternatives are compared.
Alternative AThis Alternative is designed to provide for a full spectrum of public land uses in the traditional sense of multiple-use and sustained yield. Consumptive and non consumptive uses would be balanced.
Alternative BThis alternative attempts to provide maximum opportunities for land-based growth and development needs of the state of Nevada while continuing to provide for multiple-use and sustained yield of the public lands.
Alternative CThis alternative provides for the management of the public lands on an ecosystemic basis, with an emphasis on biodiversity, nonconsumptive uses, and the protection and recovery of the desert tortoise.
Alternative DThis alternative is the U.S. Bureau of Land Management’s Preferred Alternative and would continue to allow for the multiple-use of the public lands, permit maximum flexibility in the disposal of public lands, and provide for the protection and recovery of the desert tortoise.
Alternative EThis alternative proposes management direction to provide for public land uses on the basis of multiple-use andsustained yield, while emphasizing biodiversity and the protection and recovery of the threatened desert tortoise.

The Resource Management Plan/EIS focuses on 10 management issues, each of which is incorporated in the alternative plans under assessment. The identified issues are as follows:

Land Tenure
Desert Tortoise
Mineral Development
Off-Highway Vehicle Use
Special Management Areas and Areas of Critical Environmental Concern
Utility Corridors
Rangeland Classification
Utility Corridor Locations and Widths
Minerals Management and Post Congressional Non-designation of Wilderness Study Areas
Desert Tortoise Habitat Management in Conformance with the Recovery Plan for the Desert Tortoise (Mojave Population).

The potential environmental consequences in each of the resource areas are assessed from a number of perspectives. For example, effects on air resources are assessed from the perspective of land management, recreation management, and minerals management. The effects on soils are addressed from the perspectives of livestock grazing management, recreation management, rights-of-way management, and minerals management. The effects (quantified in terms of disturbed land area) attributable to reasonably foreseeable future actions are identified in the Supplement to the Stateline Draft Resource Management Plan and EIS (BLM, 1994a).

The total area potentially disturbed over the 10-year period could reach approximately 197,000 acres.

The Tonopah resource area encompasses 6.1 million acres of land in Nye and Esmeralda counties of central Nevada. Significant resources and program emphases include locatable minerals, livestock grazing, wild horses and burros, real estate, cultural resources, and wildlife.

Four detailed alternative management scenarios were analyzed in the NTS EIS (BLM, 1994b) which aim at resolving six major issues:

Alternative 1 (No Action Alternative) This alternative represents a continuation of management under existing planning guidance and also provides a baseline against which the potential environmental impacts associated with implementation of the other alternatives are compared.
Alternative 2This alternative provides management with an emphasis on private economic development and economic diversity through the use of a wide range of resources. Lands will be made available for expansion and development while protecting sensitive resources.
Alternative 3This alternative provides for private economic development and economic diversity which are constrained by environmental safeguards designed for the preservation and enhancement of environmental systems, and for species diversity.
Alternative 4This alternative is the preferred alternative and it provides for the development of renewable and nonrenewable resources while ensuring that the preservation and enhancement of fragile and unique resources will occur.

The issues addressed in the Tonopah Resource Management Plan and accompanying EIS are outlined below:

Wild horses and burros (determine what intensity of management should be implemented to ensure a thriving natural ecological balance)
Special management areas (determine if lands should be given special management to protect high resource values)
Off-highway vehicle use (determine if lands should be limited or closed)
Management of released wilderness study areas (determine what objectives should be established for areas now designated by Congress as nonwilderness)
Utility corridors (determine lands for preferred routes for utility corridors and to minimize conflicts)
Locatable and fluid minerals (determine lands for closure to leasing or location of minerals, and lands for special considerations).

The total area potentially disturbed over the 10-year period could reach approximately 26,800 acres.

U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Approximately 28 bighorn sheep were recently introduced into the Spotted Range of the Desert National Wildlife Range. Their introduction involved the construction of two water developments (wildlife guzzlers), and a third is planned for the future. These water developments comprise two or three water tanks (11.356 to 15.141 liters [3,000 to 4,000 gallons] each), a surface water collection apron, and a drinking device. Potential impacts to biological resources would be minor.

U.S. NAVYThe U.S. Navy proposes to withdraw 189,000 acres of U.S. Bureau of Land Management land in Churchill County around existing training ranges to accommodate increased levels of flight training activity at Naval Air Station Fallon. The action is referred to as the Master Land Withdrawal. The objectives of the proposed action are fourfold: (1) meet training requirements for national defense, (2) fulfill established operation and Range Air Installation Compatibility Use Zone safety guidelines, (3) facilitate protection of the public from off-range ordnance, and (4) provide for continued public access to and safety on public lands adjacent to the military withdrawals. The withdrawn land would be managed for militarypurposes for a proposed term of 20 years. A Resource Management Plan will be developed for the withdrawn lands to provide for public safety by defining public uses compatible with military training operations (McMillan, 1995).

A number of sensitive issues were identified prior to scoping. They include land use (including public recreational uses), public health and safety, cultural resources, and unexploded ordnance on withdrawn lands. The principal concern is the proposed withdrawal of land. This potential issue is of a statewide nature and is not directly related to NTS programs.

NON-FEDERAL ACTIONSThis section includes information from the following public entities: state of Nevada, Clark County, and Nye County. Activities that would likely take place within the incorporated places of both Clark and Nye countiesare assumed under the economic and demographic growth projections presented for each of the counties.

STATE OF NEVADAVirtually all state involvement in development activities in the region involve regional transportation. This area of concern, and others related to it, are addressed under county governmental entities.

CLARK COUNTYThe Regional Transportation Plan for Clark County (Regional Transportation Commission, 1994) documents an average annual rate of population growth over the period 1980 to 1990 of 5.2 percent, and 5.7 percent for employment. The respective growth rates over the period 1990 to 2000 are projected to be 3.9 percent for population and 4.6 percent for employment. Over the period 2000 to 2015, these growth rates fall to 2.5 percent for both population and employment.

A number of factors will influence the rate of future development in the Las Vegas Valley. They include, but are not limited to, the availability of water, air quality, the strength of the tourism industry (the gaming sector in particular), the cost of housing, and the disposal of public lands making areas available for urban development.

Population projections for Clark County anticipate a population of between 1.1 x 10⁶ and 1.2 x 10⁶ persons by the year 2000. Population is expected to rise to between 1.2 x 10⁶ and 1.4 x 10⁶ persons by the year 2005 (see Table 6-1). It is further projected that approximately 58,000 acres of undeveloped land, in the Las Vegas Valley, will be converted to urban uses between 1996 and the year 2005. (See Table 6-2 ).

CLARK COUNTY DESERT CONSERVATION PLANThe Clark County Desert Conservation Plan (Regional Environmental Consultants, 1995) was prepared for two reasons: (1) support an application for a Section 10(a) incidental take permit under the Endangered Species Act applicable to the desert tortoise, and (2) outline a strategy that will allow Clark County (as well as state and federal resource managers) to address the conservation and protection of habitat necessary to preserve other plant and wildlife resources to avoid the need for listing those species.

The incidental take ofdesert tortoises applies to an area of approximately 525,000 acres which comprises all non-federal land in Clark County and on approximately 2,900 acres of desert tortoise habitat associated with the Nevada Department of Transportation activities (rights-of-way and material sites) in Clark, Esmeralda, Lincoln, and Nye counties.

Over the permit period (30 years), it is estimated that about 114,000 acres of land (111,000 acres in Clark County and 2,900 acres in Nevada Department of Transportation rights-of-way and material sites) will be developed, most of which is desert tortoise habitat. In order to offset this destruction of desert tortoise habitat, the Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan proposed six distinct population segments or recovery units within the range of the Mojave population of the desert tortoise. Each recovery unit includes one or more Desert Wildlife Management Areas. The Desert Wildlife Management Areas that fall primarily in Clark County are Paiute-Eldorado, Coyote Spring, Gold Butte, and Mormon Mesa. The recovery units are located in areas of prime desert tortoise habitat and are subject to a number of land-use constraints designed to optimize the survival and recovery of the desert tortoise in these areas. Funding for the program is derived mainly from the imposition of a $500-per-acre mitigation fee on development projects in the permit area.

Table 6-2. Land area disturbed (acres)

Table 6-2. Land area disturbed (acres)
Locality	Disturbed Area
Stateline Resource Area	197,000
Tonopah Resource Area	26,800
Las Vegas Valley	58,000
Nye County	2,100
Total	283,900

NYE COUNTYSeveral key economic and demographic forces influence future activities and the character of Nye County and the communities contained in it. They include the NTS, Tonopah Test Range, mining activity, tourist activity, commuting, migration patterns, local service sector activity, and demographic factors.

Baseline population projections prepared for the county (Nye County Board of Commissioners, 1993) indicate an average annual compound growth rate of 4.6 percent for the entire county over the period 1990 to 2010. However, this population increase is highly localized and concentrated in the Pahrump area. It is projected that this area will experience a growth rate of 7.6 percent annually over the time period. The share of total county population located in Pahrump is projected to increase from 42 percent in 1990 to 74 percent in 2010. This urbanization trend will entail the conversion of land currently in an undeveloped state. It is anticipated that over 2,000 acres of land will be converted to urban uses by the year 2005 (see Table 6-2). The rapid urban development occurring in Pahrump is fueled by the low cost of land, proximity to the Las Vegas metropolitan region, and relocation of retirees. This residential activity, in turn, creates development and construction of service activities and infra-structural improvements.

AMERICAN INDIAN ACTIONSThe following American Indian tribal organizations and representatives have been contacted: Pahrump Paiute Tribe, Pahrump, Nevada; Las Vegas Paiute Tribe, Las Vegas, Nevada; Moapa Paiute Tribe, Moapa, Nevada; Kaibab Paiute Tribe, Glendale, Arizona; Las Vegas Indian Center, Las Vegas, Nevada; Owens Valley Paiute Tribe, Lone Pine, California; Yomba Shoshone Tribe, Austin, Nevada; and Duckwater Shoshone Tribe, Duckwater, Nevada.

Information regarding reasonably foreseeable future actions was received from the Las Vegas Paiute Tribe. Plans have been developed for the construction of a destination resort to be located on the east side of the reservation fronting U.S. Highway 95. The core of the resort area will encompass 150 acres and will include a 450-room hotel/casino and four championship golf courses. A 300-acre theme park will be built next to the resort area. On the west side of the reservation, a planned development includes 200 single-family homes for tribal members, a laundry plant, a 20-mw solar park, and a solar research center. The Bureau of Indian Affairs has prepared an Environmental Assessment for the construction of the four golf courses.

6.3 Nevada Test Site Program Alternatives

A summary of the anticipated impacts associated with implementing each of the program alternatives, on a resource-specific basis, is presented in Table 3-5. An inspection of this table reveals minimal impact from new programs or projects at the NTS over the 10-year period. In general, the level of intensity of impacts declines from those projected under Alternative 1 (No Action) for those under Alternative 2 (Discontinue Operations) and Alternative 4 (Alternative Use of Withdrawn Lands). The intensity of potential impacts associated with implementation of Alternative 3 (Expanded Use) is expected to be higher than under Alternative 1 (No Action). Potential impacts to the three areas associated with the Solar Enterprise Zone facility (Eldorado Valley, Dry Lake Valley, and Coyote Spring Valley) represent new rather than incremental potential impacts as is the case of the NTS, the fourth Solar Enterprise Zone facility area.

6.4 Cumulative Impact Analysis

Most of theland near the NTS is held in public ownership by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (contained in the Stateline and Tonopah resource areas, respectively), the U.S. Air Force (NAFR Complex), and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Desert National Wildlife Range), while much of the land in the Las Vegas Valleyis privately owned and undergoing widespread and rapid conversion to urban uses. The following assessment of cumulative impacts associated with reasonably foreseeable future actions is based on information presented in EISs prepared by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management for the Stateline and Tonopah resource areas, an EIS prepared for the Resource Plan at the NAFR Complex, a general development scenario applicable to private lands in the Las Vegas Valley section of Clark County, and economic and demographic projections prepared by both Clark and Nye counties.

It is likely that large areas of land will be disturbed throughout the entire region because of changes in use. These changes include urban development, development of mineral resources, the opening of areas for recreational use, and development of utility easements. The vast majority of the projected urban development will occur in areas adjacent to the Las Vegas urban area; additional rapid development will be localized in southern Nye County.

It is projected that approximately 284,000 acres of land could be disturbed within the region during the 10-year period. Of this total, about 58,000 acres would be located in the Las Vegas Valley. The general location of this disturbance is presented in Table 6-2. Much of the land disturbance in theLas Vegas Valley and southern Nye County is attributable to the conversion of land from non-urban to urban uses in the Las Vegas metropolitan area of Clark County and around Pahrump in Nye County. A series of population projections exist for Clark County as seen in Table 6-1. For purposes of this analysis, the higher projections are used.

6.4.1 Land Use

It is anticipated that the major land-use designations and land users within the region will remain unchanged through the foreseeable future. Under Alternative 4, some NTS land could be returned to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. This action, along with the possible return of small tracts of U.S. Air Force land to the public, would increase the amount of public land in this area. However, the NTS (and the NAFR Complex) would continue to form a large, continuous block of land closed to the public.

It is likely that, over the next decade, Congress will designate some U.S. Bureau of Land Management lands in southern Nevada for inclusion in the National Wilderness Preservation System. Management and use of these wilderness areas would be similar to their current management and use as wilderness study areas. Wilderness study areas not included in the National Wilderness Preservation System will be released for general use, thereby increasing the types of activities that can be conducted by the public on thousands of acres of U.S. Bureau of Land Management land.

Rapid urbanization in Las Vegas and its vicinity, and the potential sale of U.S. Bureau of Land Management land to accommodate this growth, would reduce the acreage of public-owned lands in this area.

Under Alternative 3, defense-related aircraft operations within the DOE and NAFR Complex airspace would increase gradually over a 10-year period. This increase and the expected increases in civilian aviation activities would not have an adverse cumulative impact on airspace use in southern Nevada. The majority of DOE and the Department of Defense (DoD) aircraft transiting to and from the DOE and NAFR Complex airspace use corridors that do not conflict with those routesflown by commercial aircraft between Las Vegas and other key cities.

6.4.2 Transportation

An increase of 1,030 one-way vehicle trips generated by an additional 4,400 workers employed at the NTS in 2005 under Alternative 3 (Expanded Use Alternative) would contribute negligible amounts to approximately 4.0 x 10⁶ daily vehicle trips projected for the year 2005 by the Regional Transportation Plan (Regional Transportation Commission, 1994). The Regional Transportation Commission of Clark County has been actively engaged in highway improvement programs to relieve traffic congestion and reduce traffic accidents in Clark County.

TRANSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALSThe cumulative impacts of the transportation of radioactive material consist of impacts from (1) historical shipments of radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel to the NTS, (2) other historical shipments, (3) contributions made by the alternatives evaluated in the NTS EIS, (4) reasonably foreseeable actions that include transportation of radioactive material, and (5) transportation of general radioactive materials that are not related to a particular action.

The Yucca Mountain Repository EIS will consider other relevant transportation information and analyses, including the NTS EIS and other EISs prepared by the DOE to address other proposed actions. The Yucca Mountain Repository EIS will incorporate information from the NTS EIS, as appropriate, in its description of the existing environment as well as in its analysis of cumulative impacts. In this way, the DOE will ensure that the cumulative effects from all activities taking place or contemplated at the NTS are considered in its decisionmaking process, along with the public’s comments on these activities.

The assessment of cumulative transportation impacts concentrates on the cumulative impacts of off-site transportation, because off-site transportation yields potential radiation doses to a greater portion of the general population than does on-site transportation. The collective dose to the general population and workers is the measure used to quantify cumulative transportation impacts. Thismeasure of impact was chosen because it may be directly related to latent cancer fatalities using a cancer risk coefficient and because of the difficulty in identifying a maximally exposed individual for shipments throughout the United States spanning the period 1951 (the year corresponding to the start of operations at the NTS) through 2005, a 55-year period.

1. Historical Shipments to NTS

Collective doses from historical shipments of spent nuclear fuel to the NTS were summarized in Jones and Maheras (1994). Data for these shipments were available for 1971 through 1993 and were linearly extrapolated back to 1951 because data prior to 1971 were not available. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 6-3 .

Other collective doses from historical shipments of low-level waste, low-level mixed waste, and transuranic waste to the NTS were also estimated. From 1974 through 1994, there were about 8,400 of these shipments. The results of this analysis are also summarized in Table 6-3. 2. Other Historical Shipments

Collective doses from other historical shipments of radioactive material were evaluated in DOE (1995a). These include historical shipments associated with the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, the Savannah River Site, the Hanford Site, the Oak Ridge Reservation, and Naval spent nuclear fuel and test specimens. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 6-3. 3. Shipments for NTS Alternatives

The collective doses for radioactive waste shipments associated with the alternatives evaluated in this EIS are summarized in Volume 1, Appendix I of the NTS EIS. The number of waste shipments from off-site generators ranges from none in Alternative 2, Discontinue Operations, to about 40,000 shipments in Alternative 3, Expanded Use. The range of collective doses estimated to result from these shipments is summarized in Table 6-3. 4. Reasonably Foreseeable Actions

Transportation impacts may also result from reasonably foreseeable projects taking place within the timeframe of the NTS EIS (1996 to 2005), such as the transportation impacts contained in other DOE National Environmental Policy Act analyses.

Shipments associated with the DOE Tritium Supply and Recycling Program
The shipment of radioactive and hazardous wastes associated with the DOE Waste Management Program
Shipments associated with the disposition of surplus highly enriched uranium
Shipments associated with the storage and disposition of weapons-usable fissile materials
The shipment of Defense Program materials associated with the DOE Stockpile Stewardship and Management Program
Shipments of spent nuclear fuel associated with a proposed container system for Naval spent nuclear fuel
Shipments of Defense Program materials associated with continuous operation of the Pantex Plant
Shipments of radioactive waste associated with the West Valley Demonstration Project.

The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 6-3. For many of these analyses, a preferred alternative was not identified nor has a Record of Decision been issued. In those cases, the alternative that was estimated to result in the largest transportation impact was included in Table 6-3. It should be noted that although the DOE is presently determining the suitability of Yucca Mountain, Nevada, as a site for a geologic repository for spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste, these shipments were not included in this analysis because they are scheduled to start in 2010, which is outside the timeframe evaluated in this EIS.

There are also reasonably foreseeable projects that involve limited transportation of radioactive material: (1) shipment of submarine reactor compartments from the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard to the Hanford Site for burial, (2) return of cesium-137 isotope capsules to the Hanford Site, (3) shipment of uranium billets from the Hanford Site to the United Kingdom, and (4) shipment of low specific activity nitric acid from the Hanford Site to the United Kingdom. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 6-3. While this is not an exhaustive list of projects that may involve limited transportation of radioactive material, it does illustrate that the transportation impacts associated with these types of projects are extremely low when compared to major projects or general transportation. 5. General Transportation

General transportation activities also take place that are unrelated to the alternatives evaluated in the NTS EIS or to reasonably foreseeable actions. Examples of these activities are shipments of radiopharmaceuticals to nuclear medicine laboratories and shipments of commercial low-level waste to commercial disposal facilities. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission evaluated these types of shipments based on a survey of radioactive materials transportation published in 1975 (NRC, 1977). Categories of radioactive material evaluated in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission document (1977) included limited quantity shipments, medical, industrial, fuel cycle, and waste shipments.

Because comprehensive transportation doses were not available, collective dose estimates derived from transportation dose assessments in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission document (1977) were used to estimate transportation collective doses for 1951 through 1982 (32 years). These dose estimates included spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste shipments made by truck and rail. The cumulative transportation collective doses for 1951 through 1982 are summarized in Table 6-3 . The cumulative transportation doses for 1983 through 2005 are also summarized in Table 6-3.

Table 6-3. Cumulative transportation-related radiological collective doses and latent cancer fatalities (1951 to 2005)

Table 6-3. Cumulative transportation-related radiological collective doses and latent cancer fatalities (1951 to 2005)
Category	Collective occupational dose (person-rem)	Collective general population dose (person-rem)
1. Historical shipments to the NTS
Spent nuclear fuel (Jones and Maheras, 1994)	1.4	0.70
Radioactive waste	82	100
2. Other historical shipments (DOE, 1995a)	250	130
3. Shipments for alternatives evaluated in the NTS EIS	d	0.0 to 154.0^d
4. Reasonably foreseeable actions
Spent nuclear fuel management (DOE, 1995a; 1996a)	360	810
Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (DOE, 1994b)	2,900	8,400
Molybdenum-99 production (DOE, 1996b)	240	520
Tritium supply and recycling (DOE, 1995b)	--	--
Waste Management Programmatic EIS (DOE, 1995c)^a	16,000	20,000
Surplus highly enriched uranium disposition (DOE, 1995d)	1,100	1,200
Storage and Disposition of Fissile Materials (DOE, 1996c)	--	2,400.0 ^b
Stockpile Stewardship (DOE, 1996d)	--	170.0 ^b
Container system for Naval spent nuclear fuel (USN, 1996)	18	24
Pantex (DOE, 1996e)	250.0^c	490.0^c
West Valley (DOE, 1996f)	1,400	12,000
Submarine reactor compartment disposal (USN, 1984)	--	0.053
Return of Cs-137 capsules (DOE, 1994c)	0.42	5.7
Uranium billets (DOE, 1992b)	0.50	0.014
Nitric acid (DOE, 1995e)	0.43	3.1
5. General transportation
1951 to 1982	180,000	130,000
1983 to 2005	39,000	42,000
Summary
Historical	330	230
Shipments for alternatives evaluated in the NTS EIS	d	154
Reasonably foreseeable actions	22,000	46,000
General transportation (1951 to 2005)	220,000	170,000
Total collective dose	240,000	220,000
Total latent cancer fatalities	96	110
^a Includes low-level mixed waste and low-level waste; transuranic waste included in DOE (1995c) ^b Includes public and occupational collective doses ^c Includes all highly enriched uranium shipped to Y-12 ^d Collective occupational dose included in the total for collective general population dose.

The total worker and general population collective doses are summarized in Table 6-3. Total collective worker doses from all types of shipments (historical, the alternatives, reasonably foreseeable actions, and general transportation) were estimated to be 240,000 person-rem (96 latent cancer fatalities) for the period 1951 through 2005 (55 years). Total general population collective doses were estimated to be 220,000 person-rem (110 atent cancer fatalities). The majority of the collective dose for workers and the general population was because of general transportation of radioactive material. The total number of latent cancer fatalities over the period 1951 through 2005 was estimated to be 210. Over this same period (55 years), approximately 27,000,000 people would die from cancer, based on 510,000 latent cancer fatalities per year (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1993). The estimated number of transportation-related latent cancerfatalities attributable to NTS alternatives would be indistinguishable from other latent cancer fatalities, and the transportation-related latent cancer fatalities attributable to NTS alternatives would be 0.0008 percent of the total number of latent cancer fatalities.

VEHICULAR ACCIDENT IMPACTS Fatalities involving the shipment of radioactive materials were surveyed for 1971 through 1993 using the Radioactive Material Incident Report database. For 1971 through 1993, 21 vehicular accidents involving 36 fatalities occurred. These fatalities resulted from vehicular accidents and were not associated with the radioactive nature of the cargo. No radiological fatalities because of transportation accidents have ever occurred in the United States. During the same period, over 1,000,000 persons were killed in vehicular accidents in the United States.

For the alternatives evaluated in the NTS EIS, zero to eight vehicular accident fatalities are estimated to occur. During the 10-year period from 1996 through 2005, approximately 400,000 people would be killed in vehicular accidents in the United States. The vehicular accident fatalities associated with NTS radioactive waste shipment would be 0.002 percent of the total vehicular number accident fatalities. Activities related to the NTS would not measurably increase regional vehicular fatalities.

6.4.3 Socioeconomics

Cumulative socioeconomic impacts are defined as impacts generated by NTS activities under Alternative 3 (Expanded Use), which represents maximum impacts, added to the impacts generated by all economic activities projected for Clark and Nye counties in the year 2005. Employment and population projections embracing all economic activities including the continuation of current NTS-related activities as described under Alternative 1 were based on Economic Outlook (Schwer, 1995) and Draft Baseline Economic and Demographic Projections: 1990-2010 (Nye County Board of Commissioners, 1993). Impacts on selected socioeconomic indicators are presented in Table 6-4 . Employment associated with activities at the NTS under Alternative 3 would contribute 2 percent of the projected employment level in Clark County in the year 2005 and reduce the projected unemployment rate by just over one percentage point. Although the total number of jobs held by residents of Nye County are significantly less than those held by Clark County residents, they correspond to 3.3 percent of the projected abor force in the year 2005. This NTS-related employment will reduce the unemployment rate by one half of one percentage point.

Table 6-4. Cumulative socioeconomic impacts

Table 6-4. Cumulative socioeconomic impacts
Socioeconomic Indicators	NTS Activities (Alternative 3) 2005	All Other Economic Activities 2005	Cumulative Impacts 2005	Percent Change (attributable to NTS activities)
Clark County
Total Jobs	12,857.00	650,413.00	663,270.00	2.00
Personal Income ($million)	633.00	32,281.00	32,914.00	2.00
Population	10,020.00	1,380,920.00	1,390,940.00	0.70
Unemployment Rate (percent)	(1.10)	5.80	4.70	Not Applicable
Nye County
Total Jobs	516.00	15,445.00	15,961.00	3.30
Personal Income ($million)	31.00	781.00	812.00	4.00
Population	656.00	38,516.00	39,172.00	1.70
Unemployment Rate (percent)	(0.50)	5.20	4.70	Not Applicable

Under Alternative 2 there would be a reduction in employment at the NTS. There would be a reduction of almost 750 jobs held by Nye County residents which represents 5.5 percent of the projected labor force in 1997, the year when minimal site employment levels are reached.

Given the considerable growth of the economies of both Clark and Nye counties, it is estimated that increases or decreases of the magnitude referenced above will not severely impact the ability of county government to provide adequate public services to their residents. No fiscal impacts to cities and counties are anticipated.

6.4.4 Geology and Soils

Actions related to underground testing would add incrementally to the levels of subsurface contamination in underground nuclear zones. For tests conducted more than 100 m (328 ft) above the water tables, there would be an incremental increase in the deposition of radioactive materials in thesubsurface and the activation of naturally occurring elements bound in the rock in the near test environments. Underground subcritical dynamic experiments would result in incremental increases in the deposition of radioactive material in the mined cavities of the Lyner Complex. The land surface would be unaffected by these experiments.

Excavation of contaminated soils during remediation will result in a substantial, but temporary, increase in disturbed areas. These areas will be regraded and revegetated, however, rendering the impacts temporary.

The continued restriction of the NTS to mining activities will result in the continued loss of some mineral resources and potential geothermal resources. The use of aggregate resources for construction will result in a cumulative impact to regional aggregate mining. However, aggregate resources are more than adequate to fill projected regional needs and the impact will not be significant.

Discontinuation of activities at the site would result in an increase in the areas of geological media and soils that are irretrievably lost as a resource.

6.4.5 Hydrology

Testing-related actions would add incrementally to the levels of subsurface contamination inunderground testing areas if any tests are conducted under or within 100 m (328 ft) of the water table.

Groundwater withdrawals on the NTS in excess of historic pumping levels, in conjunction with existing water withdrawals, will decrease the water available for future appropriation in the Death Valley flow system. The only action that would cause water withdrawals to exceed past levels would be the construction and operation of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility. The impacts of water withdrawals for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility are expected to be limited to a lowering of water levels at the NTS. No incremental impacts to downgradient water levels or water quality are anticipated. The withdrawal of water for a Solar Enterprise Zone facility in Clark County would add incrementally to the overall demand for water and would decrease the water available for future appropration in the Colorado River flow system.

If a Solar Enterprise Zone facility is located in Eldorado Valley, water supplies would come largely from existing allocations and there would be minimal or no cumulative impact on groundwater availability. The Las Vegas Valley Water District once planned to import water from rural areas; however, if this plan proceeds, actual development will not occur within the 10-year planning period covered by the NTS EIS. An incremental demand for water in the Las Vegas basin may occur in response to population increases attributable to the proposed actions. However, such increases are not expected to be large.

6.4.6 Biological Resources

Cumulative impacts to desert tortoises would occur throughout the region, although the intensity of the impact would vary from location to location depending on the habitat. Impacts in the Las Vegas Valley could be substantial. The Clark County Desert Conservation Plan is authorized to take all tortoises on 110,000 acres of non-federal land in the county, and on 2,900 acres disturbed by Nevada Department of Transportation activities in Clark County and adjacent counties. Because the Las Vegas Valley does not have large "islands" of habitat capable of sustaining viable populations, the loss of habitat is not expected to jeopardize thecontinued existence of the Mojave population of the desert tortoise.

The Biological Opinion for the Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project authorizes the incidental killing or injury of 15 tortoises, but only 4 have been killed along roads in the 6 years since the opinion was issued. The number killed is expected to decline further because surface disturbing activities have been largely completed.

The Draft Biological Opinion for the NTS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1996) authorizes incidental take of: three desert tortoises injured or killed per year as a result of project activities; ten tortoises taken through capture and displacement from project sites; an unknown number taken through predation by ravens; an unknown number of tortoise eggs destroyed during construction activities; an unknown number taken indirectly in the form of harm or harassment through increased noise associated with operation of heavy equipment; and a total of 3,015 acres of desert tortoise habitat disturbed. No tortoises were killed due to project activities and only four have been killed along roads in the four years since an earlier opinion for the NTS was issued (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992). Because similar rates of mortality are predicted for the future, the most important consideration would be that given to desert tortoise habitat. Under the Expanded Use Alternative approximately 15,600 acres of habitat would be disturbed. The areal extent of these disturbances within desert tortoise habitat won’t be known until project sites are selected. Even if all of the disturbances were in tortoise habitat, which is unlikely, the loss would represent a small amount of available habitat, and negative effects on the tortoise population would be unlikely.

Because the NTS is surrounded by federal lands that are managed in part for wildlife, it is also unlikely that the small amount of habitat disturbed would negatively affect other biological resources.

Since historic groundwater withdrawals, including those from Yucca Flat at rates beyond the perennial yield, have not resulted in any detectable impacts on water table levels, no cumulative impacts on flora and fauna associated with Devils Hole or Ash Meadows are anticipated.

6.4.7 Air Quality

For the NTS, it is projected that construction activities under Alternative 3 would generate about 600 tons of fugitive dust (PM₁₀) per year. This level of construction-related grading activity will extend over a period of three years. This quantity of fugitive dust (PM₁₀) would comprise just over 3 percent of the total of 177,660 tons associated with land disturbance activities throughout the region represented by the Stateline and Tonopah resource areas and the Las Vegas Valley.

Of the air sheds within which NTS-related activities are located, only the Las Vegas Valley metropolitan area is classed as a non-attainment area for carbon monoxide. Quantities of other criteria pollutants associated with activities proposed under Alternative 3 would not generate a measurable increase in the Las Vegas metropolitan area. It is projected that quantities of carbon monoxide generated by mobile sources associated with NTS activities in Clark County would contribute 90 tons per year to the projected 47,532 tons per year identified in the Regional Transportation Plan of Clark County (Regional Transportation Commission, 1994). Such an increment represents less than 0.2 percent of the Clark County pollutant burden. This contribution would not produce any additional violations of the carbon monoxide ambient air quality standard. The Regional Transportation Commission of Clark County, Nevada, has determined that the Regional Transportation Plan conforms with the applicable State Implementation Plan for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Project-related mobile source emissions distributed throughout Nye County would not increase ambient pollutant concentrations above ambient standards.

6.4.8 Noise

At the regional level, it is expected that ambient noise levels will increase, especially in areas undergoing urban development and those that are adjacent to industrial and mineral extraction activities. Noise impacts associated with activities at the NTS will be restricted to the geographical area contained therein and would not affect persons resident in adjacent areas or add measurably to regional noise levels.

6.4.9 Visual Resources

The visual character of the region will change in selected areas especially in those undergoing urban development and near mineral extraction activities. In such areas, natural landscapes will be modified by human activities. In those areas undergoing development, it is anticipated that activities associated with the implementation of program alternatives will have only a minor effect on visual resources. In the case of a Solar Enterprise Zone facility, implementation would have more noticeable effects.

6.4.10 Cultural Resources

As a result of DOE activities, 40,492 acres on the NTS have been surveyed for cultural resources. The area surveyed represents approximately 4.7 percent of the land surface of the site. A site density of 0.043 sites per acre is estimated for the NTS. This estimate is based on the recording of 1,764 sites for DOE projects. This site density represents an average based on all of the sites recorded on the NTS. However, it must be recognized that site density can vary significantly with location.

General site densities for surrounding areas have been estimated by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. Based on data for the Tonopah resource area, site density is estimated to be approximately 0.024 sites per acre. Also, according to the State Historic Preservation Officer’s (SHPO) records, approximately 12 percent of all sites identified in Nevada are found to be eligible.

For non-NTS programs and projects,it is estimated that approximately 284,000 acres of land are likely to be disturbed over the next decade. About 80 percent of this disturbed acreage is located on federal lands and is associated with federal or state actions, with the remaining 20 percent attributable to development on privately held land. Using a site density value derived from the NTS, over 12,000 sites may be located within the disturbed area of the region. Approximately 1,460 of these sites may be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places.

Impacts to cultural resources will occur through ground-disturbing activities, unauthorized artifact collecting, and vandalism. This may result in a loss of over 12,000 sites, 1,460 of which may be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Cultural resources associated with federal and state projects will be subject to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. For these cultural resources, identification, evaluation, and data recovery are likely to occur resulting in increases of cultural resources information to the regional database. Cultural resources on about 20 percent of the acreage disturbed (located on privately held land) may be destroyed without data recovery, resulting in a serious loss of the information value inherent in these nonrenewable resources.

For the combination of NTS and non-NTS programs and projects, it is estimated that between 284,000 and 300,000 acres are likely to be disturbed in the next 10 years. NTS programs and projects account for between 3.5 to 5.5 percent of the overall disturbed acreage. Using a site density value derived from the NTS, ground-disturbing activities at the NTS could result in the potential loss of an additional 670 sites under Alternative 3. Of these, about 80 may be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. The addition of these NTS-related impacts to those attributable to all other activities could raise the number of potentially lost sites to between 12,200 and 12,900. Of these sites, between 1,460 and 1,550 could be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places.

6.4.11 Occupational and Public Health and Safety

Based on occupational injury and fatality rates for construction and other industrial activities, NTS actions would result in up to 775 injuries and 9 fatalities over the 10-year period evaluated in the NTS EIS. The NTS actions should not elevate regional rates, which should remain unchanged. Occupational radiation exposure to the worker population could be about 380 person-rem over the 10-year period, resulting in 0.128 latent cancerfatalities and about 1 in 17 of any other detrimental health effects in the worker population. Over the same period, the worker population would receive about 9,000 person-rem from naturally occurring cosmic radiation and radon, airplane travel, and personal medical procedures (X-rays, radiodiagnostics).

The remote location of the NTS insulates the general public from NTS activities. Potential impacts to the public from routine airborne emissions of radioactivity and priority pollutants would be minimal. Over the same period, the population in the Las Vegas Metropolitan planning area would receive a radiation dose of about 3.0 x 10⁶ person-rem from naturally occurring cosmic radiation and radon, airplane travel, and personal medical procedures (X-rays, radiodiagnostics). No impacts to the public from exposure to groundwater containing radioactivity from past activities would be expected during the 10-year period evaluated in the NTS EIS.

6.4.12 Environmental Justice

American Indian Environmental Justice concerns, as identified by the Consolidated Group of Tribes and Organizations, include holy land violations, perceived risks from radiation, and cultural survival. Increased land disturbance associated with all forms of development in the region of influence could result in a decrease in access to these areas for American Indians. Limiting access could reduce the traditional use of the area and affect its sacred nature. Increased development throughout the region of influence has the potential for greater disturbance and vandalism of American Indian cultural resources. Such impacts would be perceived, in the main, by American Indian groups who would comprise the population group experiencing disproportionate impacts as a result of project implementation.

6.5 Summary of Cumulative Impacts

A summary of cumulative impacts described on a resource-specific basis is presented in Table 6-5 .

6.6 References

REGULATION, ORDER, LAW

40 CFR Part 1508.7	Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), "Protection of the Environment: Cumulative Impact," Code of Federal Regulations, Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1993.
GENERAL
DOE, 1986	U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Yucca Mountain Site, Nevada Research and Development Area, Nevada, Vol. I, DOE/RW-0073, Washington, DC, 1986.
DOE, 1992a	DOE, Site Environmental Report for Calendar Year 1991, Yucca Mountain Site, Nye County, Nevada, Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Office, Las Vegas, NV, 1992.
DOE, 1992b	DOE, Environmental Assessment for the Shipment of Low Enriched Uranium Billets to the United Kingdom from the Hanford Site, Richland, Washington, DOE/EA-0787, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC, 1992.
DOE, 1993	DOE, Site Environmental Report for Calendar Year 1992, Yucca Mountain Site, Nye County, Nevada, Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Office, Las Vegas, NV, 1993.
DOE, 1994a	DOE, Site Environmental Report for Calendar Year 1993, Yucca Mountain Site, Nye County, Nevada, Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Office, Las Vegas, NV, 1994.
DOE, 1994b	DOE, Comparative Study of Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIMP) Transportation Alternatives, DOE/WIMP 93-058, U.S. Department of Energy, Carlsbad, NM, 1994.
DOE, 1994c	DOE, Environmental Assessment for Return of Isotope Capsules to the Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility, DOE/EA-0942, Washington, DC, 1994.
DOE, 1995a	DOE, Department of Energy Programmatic Spent Nuclear Fuel Management and Idaho National Engineering Laboratory Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Programs Final Environmental Impact Statement, DOE/EIS-0203-F, Washington, DC, 1995.
DOE, 1995b	DOE, Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Tritium Supply and Recycling, DOE/EIS-0161, Washington, DC, 1995.
DOE, 1995c	DOE, Draft Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Managing Treatment, Storage, and Disposal of Radioactive and Hazardous Waste, DOE/EIS-0200-D, Washington, DC, 1995.
DOE, 1995d	DOE, Disposition of Surplus Highly Enriched Uranium Draft Environmental Impact Statement, DOE/EIS-0240-D, Washington, DC, 1995.
DOE, 1995e	DOE, Environmental Assessment: Disposition and Transportation of Surplus Radioactive Low Specific Activity Nitric Acid, Hanford Site, Richland, Washington, DOE/EA-1005, Washington, DC, 1995.
DOE, 1995f	DOE, Site Environmental Report for Calendar Year 1994, Yucca Mountain Site, Nye County, Nevada, Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Office, Las Vegas, NV, 1995.
DOE, 1996a	DOE, Final Environmental Impact Statement on a Proposed Nuclear Weapons Nonproliferation Policy Concerning Foreign Research Spent Nuclear Fuel, DOE/EIS-0218F, Washington, DC, 1996.
DOE, 1996b	DOE, Medical Isotopes Production Project: Molybdenum-99 and Related Isotopes, Environmental Impact Statement, DOE/EIS-0249F, U.S. Department of Energy, Washington, DC, 1996.
DOE, 1996c	DOE, Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, DOE/EIS-0229-D. Washington, DC, 1996.
DOE, 1996d	DOE, Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Stockpile Stewardship and Management, DOE/EIS-0236, Washington, DC, 1996.
DOE, 1996e	DOE, Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Continued Operation of the Pantex Plant and Associated Storage of Nuclear Weapon Components, DOE/EIS-0225D, Washington, DC, 1996.
DOE, 1996f	DOE, Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Completion of the West Valley Demonstration Project and Closure or Long-Term Management of Facilities at the Western New York Nuclear Service Center, DOE/EIS-0226-D, Washington, DC, 1996.
BLM, 1990	U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Nellis Air Force Range Proposed Resource Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement, U.S. Department of the Interior, Reno, NV, 1990.
BLM, 1992	BLM, Stateline Resource Management Plan and Draft Environmental Impact Statement, U.S. Department of the Interior, Las Vegas, NV, 1992.
BLM, 1994a	BLM, Stateline Resource Management Plan and Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, U.S. Department of the Interior, Las Vegas, NV, 1994.
BLM, 1994b	BLM, Tonopah Resource Management Plan and Final Environmental Impact Statement, U.S. Department of the Interior, Tonopah, NV, 1994.
Donegan, 1995	Donegan, W., personal communication dated May 2, 1995, from W. Donegan, USAF Weapons and Tactics Center, Environmental Management Directorate, Nellis AFB, NV, to R.W. Smith, Science Applications International Corporation, Las Vegas, NV, regarding relevant potential actions associated with operations at Nellis AFB, NV, 1995.
Jones and Maheras, 1994	Jones, S. and S. J. Maheras, Summary of Doses and Health Effects From Historical Offsite Spent Nuclear Fuel Shipments to the Nevada Test Site, Engineering Design File (EDF) EIS-TRANS-31, 1994.
McMillan, 1995	McMillan, A., personal communication dated June 13, 1995, from A. McMillan, Office of Public Affairs, Naval Air Station (NAS), Fallon, NV, to Christopher Clayton, Science Applications International Corporation, Las Vegas, NV, regarding Master Land Withdrawal in Churchill County, NV, 1995.
NRC, 1977	U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Final Environmental Impact Statement on the Transportation of Radioactive Materials By Air and Other Modes, NUREG-170, Washington, DC, 1977.
Nye County Board of Commissioners, 1993	Nye County Board of Commissioners, Baseline Economic and Demographic Projections: 1990-2010 Nye County and Nye County Communities, prepared for the Nye County Board of Commissioners by Planning Information Corporation, Denver, CO, 1993.
Regional Transportation Commission, 1994	Regional Transportation Commission of Clark County, Regional Transportation Plan, 1995-2015, Las Vegas, NV, 1994.
Regional Environmental Consultants, 1995	Regional Environmental Consultants, Clark County Desert Conservation Plan, prepared for Clark County, NV, San Diego, CA, 1995
Schwer, 1995	Schwer, R.K., U.S. Economic Outlook: 1995, the Center for Business and Economic Research, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV, 1995.
U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1993	U.S. Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United States: 1993 (113th Edition), U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC, 1993.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1992	U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Opinion on Nevada Test Site Activities, U.S. Department of the Interior, Reno, NV, 1992.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1996	U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Draft Programmatic Biological Opinion for Nevada Test Site Activities, U.S. Department of the Interior, Reno, NV, 1996
USN, 1984	U.S. Department of the Navy (USN), Final Environmental Impact Statement on the Disposal of Decommissioned, Defueled Naval Submarine Reactor Plants, PB90-193855, 1984.
USN, 1996	USN, Department of the Navy Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a Container System for the Management of Naval Spent Nuclear Fuel, 1996.

NEWSLETTER

Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list

Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

CUMULATIVE IMPACTS