Executive Summary

Return to the Main Document

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. Introduction

The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 (NWPA or "the Act") established the process for development of geologic repositories for the disposal of high-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel, and established a program of research, development and demonstration regarding the disposal of such material. In the 1987 amendment to the Act, the Secretary of Energy was directed to evaluate the suitability of a single site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, as the initial nuclear waste repository in the United States. If the Secretary considers recommending the site, the Act requires the Secretary to conduct hearings in the vicinity of the Yucca Mountain site to inform the residents of the area of such consideration and to receive their comments regarding its possible recommendation. The Secretary announced his consideration of the site on May 7, 2001, and initiated a public comment period that continued through the closure date of October 19, 2001 (although comments continued to be accepted by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) through October 31, 2001). Comments or summaries of comments received during this period and the DOE responses are contained in this document, the "Site Recommendation Comment Summary Document" (CSD).

The Secretary of Energy subsequently established a 30-day supplemental comment period beginning on November 14, 2001, and extending through December 14, 2001. Responses to all comments received after October 31, 2001, and through the end of the supplemental comment period will be provided separately in "Supplemental Site Recommendation Comment Summary Document" (SCSD).

The CSD includes the following information:

Views and comments from governors and state legislatures and the Secretary's responses to those views and comments, as required by the NWPA;
Comments from elected federal, state, and local officials and representatives of Native American tribes and the DOE's responses to those comments;
Summary comments for all comments received from the general public and DOE's summary responses to those comments; and
Indices indicating where responses to all comments received can be found within the CSD.

2. NUCLEAR WASTE POLICY ACT OF 1982

In the NWPA, Congress established the process to be followed by the Secretary of Energy in considering a recommendation to the President regarding the development of a site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, as a geologic repository for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. As indicated above, the NWPA (as amended in 1987) directed the DOE to limit its consideration to a single site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada and directed the Secretary of Energy to make a determination regarding the possible recommendation of that site to become the initial geologic repository in the United States for such material.

Prior to any decision by the Secretary whether to recommend Yucca Mountain for development as a repository, Section 114(a)(1) of the NWPA, as amended (codified as 42 U.S.C. Section 10134(a)(1)), requires the following:

The Secretary shall hold public hearings in the vicinity of the Yucca Mountain site, for the purposes of informing the residents of the area of such consideration and receiving their comments regarding the possible recommendation of such site...

In addition, if the Secretary recommends the site to the President, the recommendation must be accompanied by a comprehensive statement of the basis of such recommendation, including the following:

(F) the views and comments of the Governor and legislature of any State, or the governing body of any affected Indian tribe, as determined by the Secretary, together with the response of the Secretary to such views...

The DOE indicated its intent in a number of Federal Register notices to make technical documents available to the public and to establish a variety of mechanisms to solicit the views and comments of both individuals and organizations during the public comment period.

3. Background

In a Federal Register notice dated May 7, 2001 (66 FR 23013), the DOE announced "a public comment period on the possible recommendation of the Yucca Mountain Site in Nevada by the Secretary of Energy to the President for development as a spent nuclear fuel and high-level nuclear waste geologic repository." Concurrent with the Federal Register notice, the DOE released the "Yucca Mountain Science and Engineering Report" to facilitate the public review and comment process. The "Yucca Mountain Science and Engineering Report" provided the public with "a summary of the information and data collected to date by the Department in its multi-year study and characterization of the Yucca Mountain site as a potential spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste repository." The Federal Register notice also indicated that "The Department intends for the ["Yucca Mountain Science and Engineering Report"] and its supporting documents, to be used by the public as an aid in providing comments on the technical information and data underlying the Department's consideration of a possible recommendation of the site." It further stated, "This summer, [2001] after the release of additional information, the DOE will announce the dates, locations, and times for public hearings on the possible recommendation and the date for the end of the public comment period." Paragraph I.B of the same Federal Register notice indicated that "Comments received during the public comment period will be considered by the Secretary before a decision is made whether to recommend the site to the President."

On August 21, 2001, the DOE issued a Federal Register notice (66 FR 43850) that announced the release of the "Yucca Mountain Preliminary Site Suitability Evaluation" for public review and established the closure date for the site recommendation consideration comment period as September 20, 2001. Included in that notice was the announcement of public hearings to be held in Las Vegas, Amargosa Valley and Pahrump, Nevada on September 5, September 12, and September 13, 2001, respectively. In an August 30, 2001, Federal Register notice (66 FR 45845), the DOE announced that "[I]n order to encourage and facilitate public participation in the [comment] process," it had forwarded a letter requesting comments on the overall site recommendation process and the Secretary's decision to "a list of governmental officials and members of the public whose interest in commenting [on such matters] the Department has anticipated." This letter solicited comments and was sent to over 6,000 individual, corporate, and group recipients.

The Las Vegas hearing was held as scheduled and included teleconferencing connections to three other cities within the state of Nevada: Carson City, Elko, and Reno, and connections to the Congressional studio for comments from the Nevada Congressional delegation. However, the events of September 11, 2001, warranted the postponement of the Amargosa Valley and Pahrump hearings. These hearings were rescheduled for and held on October 10 and October 12, 2001, respectively. In response to requests from the Nevada Congressional delegation and others, the DOE extended the comment period by 15 days to October 5, 2001, and announced the extension in a Federal Register notice (66 FR 47644) dated September 13, 2001. On October 2, 2001, the DOE announced in the Federal Register (66 FR 50176) that the DOE's Yucca Mountain Science Centers in Las Vegas, Pahrump, and Beatty, Nevada would be staffed with the DOE representatives and public stenographers to receive comments through October 15, 2001.

On October 3, 2001, the DOE announced "...additional opportunities, in various localities in Nevada and California, for the public to provide comments on the possible recommendation of the Yucca Mountain site in Nevada for development...." These opportunities consisted of 29 hearing sessions that were held in each of Nevada's 17 counties and California's Inyo County during the period extending from October 3 through October 12, 2001. Subsequently, in another Federal Register notice (66 FR 51027) dated October 5, 2001, the DOE extended the comment period through midnight Friday, October 19, 2001.

To ensure that all comment documents had adequate time to reach the DOE, the DOE continued to accept comments received through the close of business on October 31, 2001. All such comments are addressed in the CSD. Comments received after October 31, 2001, and through the end of the supplemental comment period are addressed in a separate SCSD.

Subsequent to the closure of the initial comment period, additional documents entitled "Total System Performance Assessment—Analyses For Disposal of Commercial and the DOE Waste Inventories at Yucca Mountain—Input to the Final Environmental Impact Statement and Site Suitability Evaluation," "Total System Performance Assessment Sensitivity Analyses For Final Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulations," and "Technical Update Impact Letter Report" were posted to the Internet on November 14, 2001, and a Federal Register notice regarding their availability was published (66 FR 57049). The purpose of these documents was to provide the latest technical information and supplemental analyses regarding the expected performance of a repository system at Yucca Mountain consistent with the provisions contained in the final standards promulgated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at 40 CFR Part 197 and the final licensing regulations of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), 10 CFR Part 63. The notice also indicated that a supplemental comment period was being opened to collect and address comments on project-related information that was not available at the time of the closure of the initial comment period, October 19, 2001. This information included the DOE's final site suitability guidelines at 10 CFR Part 963. The supplemental comment period was noticed to extend for 30 days, with closure on December 14, 2001.

In a Federal Register notice dated November 21, 2001 (66 FR 58460), the DOE announced its intent to hold nine additional public hearings during the first two weeks of December 2001 at multiple sites in the State of Nevada to provide additional opportunities for members of the public to express their opinions regarding the newly released information. Comments received after the closure of the initial comment period, including those received at the nine additional public hearings, are addressed in the SCSD.

4. Methodology

The Federal Register notices associated with the initial site recommendation consideration comment period indicated that comments could be submitted through a variety of mechanisms: U.S. mail, e-mail, fax, hearing appearances, and appearances before a public stenographer provided by the DOE for the purpose of receiving comments. A system was established to capture comment documents submitted to the addresses provided in the Federal Register notices, as well as comment documents submitted to other addresses, including those sent to the Secretary, the Acting Director, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management, and to the President. As correspondence containing comments was received, each individual document 1 was assigned a unique identification number and entered into the electronic CSD project database. An acknowledgement was sent to each member of the public submitting a letter, e-mail or faxed comment document. Each comment document was reviewed to identify specific issues or comments. Individual comments within the document were assigned an identification number and entered into the database. This electronic database was established to ensure that all comments and responses could be tracked effectively, to facilitate identification of identical or similar comments, and to produce a foundational document for the CSD.

The views and comments received from governors and state legislatures of any state² are included in Section 2 of the CSD. A response addressing the views and comments of the governors and state legislatures was developed for each comment received. In addition, comments received from elected public representatives (i.e., U.S. Senators, U.S. Representatives, elected State of Nevada and local officials (including those from Inyo County, California), and individuals representing Native American tribes) also received individual responses addressing their specific concerns. These comments and responses can be found in Section 3 of the CSD.

Comments received from other members of the public (individuals or organizations) were grouped in categories by topic to facilitate the response development process. Since many comments were identical or similar, summary comments were developed to address the general topics of interest. Summary responses were then developed to respond to the summary comments. Both the summary comments and summary responses are found in Section 4 of the CSD. In many instances, the responses also indicate where further information on the subject of interest can be found within project documentation.

Section 5 of the CSD contains indices wherein all individuals and organizations submitting comments can determine where within the CSD their subject of interest has been addressed.

5. Results

During the course of the 165-day comment period from May 7 to October 19, 2001, and including comments received through October 31, 2001, approximately 4,600 comment documents were received and documented in the CSD database. These documents resulted in approximately 14,800 comments. Approximately 35 percent of the comments received were from individuals making appearances at the various public hearings while the remainder was received primarily via U.S. mail and e-mail.

5.1 Summary of Key Points Supporting a Yucca Mountain Recommendation

Those supporting a recommendation by the Secretary raised a number of points to support their position. The points mentioned most often included:

The position that Yucca Mountain has been studied extensively for more than 20 years and that sufficient information presently exists to move ahead with a recommendation
Increased national security by centralizing control and oversight of such material and placing it in a repository where it is basically inaccessible
Support for moving the radioactive material from multiple sites, many of which are close to heavily populated areas and vital waterways, to a centrally located site
The statutory obligation of the DOE to accept spent nuclear fuel from utilities with nuclear power plants by 1998.

5.2 Summary of Key Points Supporting Opposition to a Yucca Mountain Recommendation

Those opposing a recommendation by the Secretary to proceed also raised a number of issues to support their position. Their major issues included:

Transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste across the country, resulting in an increased potential for radioactive releases due to traffic accidents, sabotage, or both
The manner in which the public hearings were scheduled and conducted
Inadequate length of the comment period
Appropriateness of a Secretarial decision at this time
The potential for seismic and volcanic activity in the vicinity of Yucca Mountain
Lack of final design and scientific details on which to base a decision
The potential for groundwater contamination and subsequent impact on the surrounding populace
Issues regarding EPA standards and NRC radiation protection requirements for licensing
Ownership of the land and failure to honor the Ruby Valley Treaty of 1863
Failure to adequately address transportation-related issues and notify the general public of such considerations
Failure to consider alternatives to a geologic repository at Yucca Mountain.

These issues and the DOE response to these issues are addressed in greater detail below.

Transportation of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste Across the Country Resulting in an Increased Potential for Radioactive Releases Due to Traffic Accidents and/or Sabotage

Safety—Radioactive materials, including spent nuclear fuel, have been and continue to be transported safely throughout the country on a regular basis. The DOE would comply with all applicable NRC and U.S. Department of Transportation regulations, and DOE guidelines to ensure that the transport of radioactive materials to Yucca Mountain would be handled in a manner that protects the public health and safety.
Sabotage—Physical security measures and the exceptional strength and durability of the transportation casks would help protect shipments of radioactive materials from acts of terrorism and sabotage. The same design features that make transportation casks capable of surviving severe accidents also limit their vulnerability to such acts. Also, programs and processes to guard against potential sabotage would be developed by the DOE and submitted to the NRC for review and approval before any spent nuclear fuel or high-level radioactive waste is transported to Yucca Mountain.
Emergency preparedness—As required by Section 180(c) of the NWPA, the DOE would provide technical and financial assistance to States to train public safety officials of appropriate units of local government and Native American tribes on procedures for the safe and routine transportation of radioactive materials and on procedures for dealing with emergency response situations.
Material remaining at current locations—The NWPA provides for the investigation and development of geologic repositories for the safe and permanent disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste, not permanent disposal at the current locations.

The Manner in Which the Public Hearings Were Scheduled and Conducted

Time for review—The initial project document associated with the recommendation process, the "Yucca Mountain Science and Engineering Report" was available for public review for 165 days prior to the end of the public comment period and the second document, the "Yucca Mountain Preliminary Site Suitability Evaluation," was available for 60 days prior to the end of the comment period;
Announcements of upcoming public hearings—The DOE issued notices in the Federal Register announcing all public hearings in a timely manner and made use of available local mechanisms to disseminate information regarding the hearings;
Hearing locations and facilities—The DOE attempted to avail itself of the best available facilities for the conduct of all hearings. Criteria included the size of the anticipated audience, accessibility, security, parking and a number of other factors. In several instances, the "best" locations were not available or were withdrawn at the last moment by the proprietors due to concerns about crowds and potential impacts on normal commercial activities. To the extent possible, the DOE contracted for locations that were of sufficient size and had the appropriate access and facilities for the anticipated audiences;
Hearing process—Individuals at public hearings were provided a specified period of time (5 minutes) to make their public statements. Establishment of such limits was necessary to ensure that all attendees had the opportunity to speak. An independent facilitator was hired to conduct the proceedings in a fair and unbiased manner. In many situations the time limits were not strictly enforced or, when time was available, individuals were afforded more than one opportunity to present their concerns. Alternative mechanisms, such as the availability of additional public stenographers at the hearing locations and, subsequently, at the Science Centers, were made available for individuals to express their opinions and concerns. All comments, no matter how presented, were accorded equal treatment and consideration.

Inadequate Length of the Public Comment Process

Appropriateness of a Site Recommendation Decision at This Time

Final Environmental Impact Statement—The Secretary issued the "Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada" in August 1999. "Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a Geological Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada" was issued in May 2001. Public comments were received on both documents. These public comments were considered in the preparation of the "Final Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada." Section 114(f)(1) of the NWPA states that "[A] final environmental impact statement prepared by the Secretary under such Act shall accompany any recommendation to the President to approve a site for a repository."

NRC Licensing Regulations and DOE Guidelines—At the time of the initial public hearings and public comment period, project documents available for public review were based on proposed NRC licensing regulations and proposed DOE site suitability guidelines. The NRC licensing regulation, 10 CFR Part 63, was published as final on November 2, 2001 (66 FR 55732) and the DOE guidelines, 10 CFR Part 963, were finalized on November 14, 2001 (66 FR 57298). The DOE conducted a supplemental analysis, to the extent necessary, to evaluate the projected repository performance using provisions contained in final NRC licensing regulations, and the DOE documented the analysis in the document, "Total System Performance Assessment Sensitivity Analyses for Final Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulations." This and two other documents with updated technical information were made available to the public.

The Potential for Seismic and Volcanic Activity in the Vicinity of Yucca Mountain

Seismic Stability—Geologic faults that show evidence of movement in the last two million years exist at or near the Yucca Mountain site. These faults have been characterized and their potential for earthquakes has been evaluated as part of a comprehensive seismic hazards analysis for the Yucca Mountain site. The results of this analysis have been used in conjunction with preliminary preclosure safety assessment and would be used in designing the structures, systems, and components important to radiological safety to ensure that they continue to perform their safety functions in the event of an earthquake;
Engineering Capability—The magnitude of the potential activity that could result from any postulated seismic event can be accommodated by present-day seismic design methods; and
Volcanic Activity—Geologically recent volcanic cinder cones exist in the vicinity of the Yucca Mountain site. The DOE has conducted extensive investigations of the potential for volcanic activity near and below Yucca Mountain and has determined that the probability of a volcanic disruption of the site is extremely small (about 1.6 chances in 100 million per year). However, as this annual probability is greater than the screening probability of one chance in 100 million per year for disruptive events, the DOE has completed total system performance assessment (TSPA) analyses for volcanic activity consistent with the disruptive events methodology in 10 CFR Part 963. The probability-weighted dose consequences (i.e., risk) of volcanic activity are below the applicable radiation protection standards for licensing.

The Lack of Final Design and Scientific Details On Which To Base a Decision

Preliminary Data and Design—The design process for any major project is an evolving and iterative process. Initial investigations lead to a conceptual design and preliminary design criteria that define the project in broad terms and establish the envelopes within which the necessary structures, systems, and components important to radiological safety must operate. Similarly, the necessary data gathering to characterize the project and its site begins with the gathering of general information and then focuses in on those aspects that are considered to be of greatest importance to performance. The design information that is available at this time is considered to be consistent with typical design practices and sufficient to support a site recommendation. Under Section 114(a) of the NWPA, as amended, the DOE must provide a description of the proposed repository, including preliminary engineering specifications, as part of the basis for any site recommendation. Design details would be developed during the course of the normal design evolution process. The detailed design criteria and design details would be reviewed by and any concerns resolved to the satisfaction of the NRC staff during the normal licensing review and approval process.
Sufficiency of Scientific and Technical Data—Based on more than 20 years of scientific investigations, the DOE has completed and released the "Yucca Mountain Science and Engineering Report," the "FY01 Supplemental Science and Performance Analyses" (two volumes), and the "Yucca Mountain Preliminary Site Suitability Evaluation," and has performed supplemental performance assessment analyses addressing, as necessary, changes from the proposed to the final standards of the EPA and licensing regulations of NRC. The TSPA analyses are consistent with the methodology that would be required by the NRC for licensing. Additionally, the adequacy and completeness of data and models in the TSPA analyses have been considered in the "Yucca Mountain Site Suitability Evaluation," consistent with 10 CFR Part 963. The TSPA analyses explicitly identify and account for uncertainties and variabilities in the parameters and models that the DOE used to estimate doses.

The Potential for Groundwater Contamination and Subsequent Adverse Impact on the Surrounding Populace

Groundwater Contamination—The preliminary design of the repository includes a number of natural and engineered barriers that would significantly mitigate the potential for release of radioactive materials from the repository. The natural barrier capabilities of the mountain serve to keep moisture away from the repository and the waste packages, as well as delay and reduce the release to the environment of any radionuclides that might escape the repository. The engineered barriers include the drip shield and waste package.
Radiological Dose—Calculations performed by the DOE have shown that the radiological dose that would be received by the reasonably maximally exposed individual (RMEI) in Amargosa Valley would likely be below the allowable limits established by applicable NRC licensing regulations. The allowable annual radiological dose is a small fraction of the annual background radiation.

Concerns Regarding EPA Standards and NRC Radiological Requirements for Licensing

Ownership of the Land and Failure to Honor The Ruby Valley Treaty of 1863

Ownership of the Land—A United States Supreme Court decision (United States v. Dann, 470 U.S. 39 (1985)) held that the Western Shoshone claim to land associated with the Ruby Valley Treaty of 1863 had been extinguished and that fair compensation had been made. In this decision, the Supreme Court ruled that even though the money has not been accepted by the Western Shoshone people, the United States had met its treaty obligations and the land in contention, including Yucca Mountain, is the property of the federal government.
Honor Treaties—The DOE recognizes that the Native American people indigenous to the area have a special relationship with the land and with the federal government, and the DOE will honor and abide by all applicable treaties and agreements.

Failure to Adequately Address Transportation-Related Issues and to Notify the General Public of Such Considerations

Transportation Planning—Specific transportation modes and routes associated with the potential transport of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste to a repository at Yucca Mountain have not been determined and would only be determined if a decision is made to proceed with the project. Decisions on specific transportation modes and routes are premature at this time and would be made approximately five years before shipments are to begin and would be based on the latest information regarding possible routes and the transportation infrastructure available at that time. Although the DOE has not chosen specific transportation routes or modes, the DOE conducted extensive evaluations of the risks associated with the transportation of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. These evaluations are included in the "Final Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada" and are part of the information considered by the Secretary. In addition, in support of the public review process, the DOE made the transportation routes analyzed in the "Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada" available for public review shortly after issuance of that document. Maps that depict these routes are included in the "Final Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada."
Notify the Public of Considerations—"Final Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada" provides environmental impact information necessary to make certain broad transportation-related decisions, namely, the choice of a national mode of transportation outside Nevada (mostly rail or mostly legal-weight truck), the choice among alternative transportation modes in Nevada (mostly rail, mostly legal-weight truck, or heavy-haul truck with use of an associated intermodal transfer station), and the choice among alternative rail corridors or heavy-haul truck routes with use of an associated intermodal transfer station in Nevada. The DOE has identified mostly rail as its preferred mode of transportation, both nationally and in Nevada. At this time, however, the DOE has not identified a preference among the five candidate rail corridors in Nevada.

Consideration of Alternatives to a Geologic Repository at Yucca Mountain

6. Summary

The DOE conducted public hearings in the vicinity of Yucca Mountain, Nevada, and invited and received comments from the public regarding the possible recommendation by the Secretary of Energy of the site as a geologic repository for the disposal of spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste. In addition, numerous hearings were held at other locations throughout the 17 counties of the State of Nevada and Inyo County, California. Also, multiple alternative mechanisms were established by the DOE for the receipt of additional comments. Two documents, the "Yucca Mountain Science and Engineering Report" and the "Yucca Mountain Preliminary Site Suitability Evaluation," were published and widely distributed to assist the public in making informed comments.

The site recommendation comment period extended from May 7, 2001, through October 19, 2001, a period of 165 days, with comments accepted through October 31, 2001. During this period, approximately 4,600 comment documents were received from elected officials, representatives of academia, environmental, business and professional organizations and individual members of the public. These comment documents contained approximately 14,800 individual comments. These comments were documented by the DOE, and responses were prepared by the DOE to address the issues raised by these comments.

A few comments were received that were specific to the "Yucca Mountain Science and Engineering Report" or the "Yucca Mountain Preliminary Site Suitability Evaluation." The DOE reviewed these comments in the preparation of Revision 1 of the "Yucca Mountain Science and Engineering Report" and the "Yucca Mountain Site Suitability Evaluation," which would be issued along with the CSD. Similarly, the DOE considered comments received on the "Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada" and the "Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for a Geological Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada" in the preparation of the "Final Environmental Impact Statement for a Geologic Repository for the Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste at Yucca Mountain, Nye County, Nevada."

The CSD was developed by the DOE to consolidate the comments received during the site recommendation comment period and to facilitate consideration of the received comments by the Secretary. The DOE developed individual responses to specific comments received from U.S. Senators and Representatives, elected State of Nevada and local officials, including those from Inyo County, California, and representatives of Native American tribes, and these responses are contained in the CSD. In addition, summary comments describing issues raised by the general public were developed and summary responses to those comments are contained in the CSD. The CSD includes indices to enable individuals and organizations to determine where the responses to their specific comment can be found.

In the event the Secretary recommends the Yucca Mountain site to the President, the CSD, along with other project documents, will be submitted to the President and be made available to the public.

Previous Section | Next Section