Tribal Policy Statement, 2402-2417 [2017-00091]
Download as PDF
2402
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2017 / Notices
Other Questions
1. Should physical security
requirements for Category 1 and 2
quantities of radioactive material be
expanded to include Category 3
quantities?
2. Some Category 3 sources are
covered under a general license (10 CFR
31.5). Should the NRC consider
establishing maximum quantities in
general licensed devices, thereby
reserving authorization to possess
Category 1, 2, and 3 quantities of
radioactive material to specific
licensees?
IV. Public Comments Process
The NRC is committed to keeping the
public informed and values public
involvement in its assessment effort.
Responses to this solicitation will be
considered by NRC in preparing a report
to the Committees on Appropriations of
the House of Representatives and the
Senate, pursuant to Public Law 113–
235, Section 403 and will inform staff
consideration of the regulatory impacts
for any recommendations related to
Category 3 source security and
accountability, which will be
documented in a paper to be provided
to the Commission in August 2017. The
NRC, however, does not intend to
provide specific responses to comments
or other information submitted in
response to this request.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
V. Public Meetings
The NRC plans to hold three public
meetings and two webinars during the
public comment period for this action.
The first public meeting is scheduled for
January 31, 2017, at NRC Headquarters.
The two other public meetings will be
held outside of the Washington DC area.
The webinars are scheduled for
February 21, 2017 and March 2, 2017.
The public meetings and webinars will
provide forums for the NRC staff to
discuss the issues and questions with
members of the public. The information
received will be used by NRC to develop
a report to the Commission. The NRC
does not intend to provide any
responses to comments submitted
during the public meetings and
webinars. Each public meeting and
webinar will be noticed on the NRC’s
public meeting Web site at least 10
calendar days before the meeting.
Members of the public should monitor
the NRC’s public meeting Web site for
additional information about the public
meetings at https://www.nrc.gov/publicinvolve/public-meetings/index.cfm. The
NRC will post the notices for the public
meetings and webinars and may post
additional material related to this action
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:14 Jan 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
to the Federal Rulemaking Web site at
www.regulations.gov under Docket ID
NRC–2016–0276. The Federal
Rulemaking Web site allows you to
receive alerts when changes or additions
occur in a docket folder. To subscribe:
(1) Navigate to the docket folder (NRC–
2016–0276); (2) click the ‘‘Sign up for
Email Alerts’’ link; and (3) enter your
email address and select how frequently
you would like to receive emails (daily,
weekly, or monthly).
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 30th day
of December 2016.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Pamela J. Henderson,
Deputy Director, Division of Material Safety,
State, Tribal and Rulemaking Programs,
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and
Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2017–00169 Filed 1–6–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2012–0235]
Tribal Policy Statement
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
ACTION: Policy statement; issuance.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) is issuing this
Statement of Policy to set forth
principles to be followed by the NRC
staff to promote effective government-togovernment interactions with American
Indian and Alaska Native Tribes, and to
encourage and facilitate Tribal
involvement in the areas over which the
Commission has jurisdiction. It provides
agencywide guidelines that achieve
consistency, but also encourage customtailored approaches to consultation and
coordination that reflect the
circumstances of each situation and the
preference of each Tribal government. It
is the NRC’s expectation that all
program and regional office consultation
and coordination practices will be
consistent with or adhere to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement.
DATES: This policy statement is effective
on January 9, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID
NRC–2012–0235 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of
information regarding this document.
You may obtain publicly-available
information related to this document
using any of the following methods:
• Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and search
for Docket ID NRC–2012–0235. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00094
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Gallagher; telephone: 301–415–3463;
email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For
technical questions, contact the
individual listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section of this
document.
• NRC’s Agencywide Documents
Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publiclyavailable documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at
https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
adams.html. To begin the search, select
‘‘ADAMS Public Documents’’ and then
select ‘‘Begin Web-based ADAMS
Search.’’ For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC’s Public
Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1–800–397–4209, 301–415–4737, or by
email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
ADAMS accession number for each
document referenced in this document
(if that document is available in
ADAMS) is provided the first time that
a document is referenced. The Tribal
Policy Statement, in its entirety, is in
the attachment to this document.
• NRC’s PDR: You may examine and
purchase copies of public documents at
the NRC’s PDR, Room O1–F21, One
White Flint North, 11555 Rockville
Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Kevin O’Sullivan, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555–0001; telephone:
301–415–8112, email: Tribal_
Outreach.Resource@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. Discussion
III. Opportunity for Public Participation
IV. Procedural Requirements
I. Background
The purpose of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement is to establish policy
principles to be followed by the NRC to
promote effective government-togovernment interactions with Indian
Tribes, and to encourage and facilitate
Tribal involvement in the areas over
which the Commission has jurisdiction.
The NRC licenses and regulates the
Nation’s civilian use of radioactive
materials to protect public health and
safety, common defense and security,
and the environment under the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA)
(42 U.S.C. 2011). Other statutory
provisions such as the National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA) (54 U.S.C.
300101) can require Tribal consultation
as part of the NRC’s evaluation of
agency activities during licensing
actions, rulemaking, or policy
development. The NRC complies with
statutory provisions and NRC regulatory
E:\FR\FM\09JAN1.SGM
09JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2017 / Notices
provisions that require Tribal
consultation and interacts with Tribal
governments accordingly.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
A. NRC Previous Interactions with
Indian Tribes
Historically, the NRC has had limited,
but significant, interactions with Indian
Tribes. The Commission has upheld
statutory obligations to consult with
Tribes under Federal law and acted in
a manner consistent with the spirit of
certain Presidential initiatives
pertaining to Tribal consultation and
coordination. However, the NRC has not
previously formalized an agencywide
policy statement.
Many Federally recognized Tribes
have an interest in public health and
safety and environmental protection
associated with NRC regulatory
activities that include uranium
recovery, commercial nuclear power,
and nuclear waste transportation,
disposal, and storage activities. The
NRC has exercised its Trust
Responsibility in the context of its
authorizing statutes, including the AEA.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement
formally reflects the NRC’s recognition
of the Federal Trust Responsibility and
the NRC’s commitment to a governmentto-government relationship, which is
distinct from interactions with members
of the public, with Federally recognized
Tribes. The NRC will make efforts to
consult in good faith with Indian Tribes
on agency actions that have substantial
direct effects on one or more Indian
Tribes as well as those regulatory
actions for which Tribal consultation is
required under Federal Statute. Under
the NRC’s policy, the NRC or Tribal
governments can request consultation
on regulatory activities that have Tribal
implications. The NRC’s policy is to
consult on a government-to-government
basis with Tribal governments as soon
as practicable on NRC regulatory actions
with Tribal implications.
On November 6, 2000, President
Clinton issued Executive Order (EO)
13175, ‘‘Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments’’ (65 FR
67249). Executive Order 13175 states,
‘‘‘Policies that have Tribal implications’
refers to regulations, legislative
comments or proposed legislation, and
other policy statements or actions that
have substantial direct effects on one or
more Indian Tribes, on the relationship
between the Federal government and
Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
Federal government and Indian Tribes.’’
Executive Order 13175, established the
following principles to guide agencies
when forming and implementing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:14 Jan 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
policies with potential Tribal
implications:
• The United States has a unique
legal relationship with Indian Tribal
governments as set forth in the
Constitution of the United States,
treaties, statutes, EOs, and court
decisions. The Federal government
recognizes Indian Tribes as domestic
dependent nations under its protection
and has enacted statutes and
promulgated regulations that establish
and define a trust relationship with
Indian Tribes.
• The Federal government has
recognized the right of Indian Tribes to
self-government with inherent sovereign
powers over their members and
territory. The United States continues to
work with Indian Tribes on a
government-to-government basis to
address issues concerning Tribal selfgovernment, Tribal trust resources, and
Indian Tribal treaty and other rights.
• The United States recognizes the
right of Indian Tribes to self-government
and supports Tribal sovereignty and
self-determination.
As an independent regulatory agency,
the NRC is exempt from the
requirements of certain EOs, including
EO 13175. However, on January 26,
2001, the Commission sent
correspondence to the Office of
Management and Budget stating that
‘‘. . . in exercising its regulatory
authority this agency [NRC] acts in a
manner consistent with the fundamental
precepts expressed in the Order [EO
13175]’’ (ADAMS Accession No.
ML010260297). To that end, the
Commission has developed agency
practices for Tribal consultation
consistent with the principles
articulated in EO 13175.
The NRC’s past practice for
government-to-government interaction
with Federally recognized Tribes has
reflected the spirit of the relevant EOs,
without establishing a formal policy.
The NRC has interacted with Tribal
governments on a case-by-case basis,
allowing the NRC and the Tribes to
initiate communication and
consultation. The NRC staff has also
maintained working relationships with
Tribal governments and Tribal
organizations that have an interest in
NRC regulated activities.
B. Development of the Draft Tribal
Policy Statement
In SECY–96–187, ‘‘Policy Issues
Raised in Meeting with Prairie Island
Dakota Indian Representatives’’
(ADAMS Accession No. ML16293A128),
the NRC staff provided to the
Commission an analysis of Tribal issues.
The paper centered on issues raised by
PO 00000
Frm 00095
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2403
representatives from the Prairie Island
Dakota Indian Community including: (1)
Entering into a Memorandum of
Understanding with the NRC; 2)
allowing Tribal representatives to
observe inspections at the Prairie Island
Nuclear Generating Plant; and 3)
developing a formal policy on
cooperation with Federally recognized
Tribes. In the Staff Requirements
Memorandum (SRM) dated November
13, 1996, the Commission approved the
staff’s recommendation not to develop a
formal policy on cooperation with
Federally recognized Tribal
governments at that time, but to
continue addressing Native American
issues on a case-by-case basis and
operating with Tribal governments on a
government-to-government basis
(ADAMS Accession No. ML16293A154).
On January 8, 2009, the Commission
issued SRM–M081211, from the
December 11, 2008, ‘‘Briefing on
Uranium Recovery,’’ directing the NRC
staff to develop and implement an
internal protocol for interaction with
Native American Tribal Governments
that would allow for custom tailored
approaches to address both the NRC and
Tribal interests on a case-by-case basis
(ADAMS Accession No. ML090080206).
The Commission also directed the NRC
staff to assess what policies other
Federal agencies have for interactions
with Native American Tribal
Governments and to report those
findings, which could determine the
efficacy of an NRC Tribal Policy
Statement, to the Commission. The NRC
staff responded to this Commission
direction in SECY–09–0180, ‘‘U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Interaction with Native American
Tribes’’ (ADAMS Accession No.
ML092920384). The staff communicated
the determination that the NRC’s caseby-case approach to interaction was
effective and met the needs of the
Commission and the Tribes. The staff
concluded that Tribal interactions
would not benefit from a formal Tribal
policy at that time. The NRC staff also
developed NUREG–2173, ‘‘NRC Tribal
Protocol Manual: Guidance for NRC
Employees,’’ as an internal protocol for
interacting with Tribal governments
(ADAMS Accession No. ML092990559).
On May 22, 2012, the Commission
issued the SRM for COMWDM–12–
0001, ‘‘Tribal Consultation Policy
Statement and Protocol’’ (ADAMS
Accession No. ML121430233), directing
the NRC staff to provide a proposed
Policy Statement and protocol on
consultation with Tribal governments.
The Commission also directed the NRC
staff to do the following when
developing the proposed policy
E:\FR\FM\09JAN1.SGM
09JAN1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
2404
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2017 / Notices
statement: (1) Use the existing ‘‘Tribal
Protocol Manual: Guidance for NRC
Employees,’’ and the NRC staff’s
ongoing efforts outlined in SECY–09–
0180 as a starting point and the basis for
developing the proposed policy
statement and protocol; (2) seek input
from the Tribes and the public on how
to improve the existing manual; (3)
clearly articulate in the policy statement
and protocol that the NRC’s actions
must be in accordance with its
governing statutes and regulations; (4)
respect and reflect in the policy
statement and protocol sensitivity to the
distinction made in executive orders
and statutes between Indian Tribes who
are Federally recognized and those who
are not; (5) indicate in the policy
statement and protocol that the NRC
will conduct outreach to Staterecognized Tribes on a case-by-case
basis; (6) explore additional
opportunities within our current
regulatory processes for information
sharing and outreach to Staterecognized Tribes; and (7) make the
protocol prominently publicly available
on the NRC’s public Web site. The
Commission also specified that the
proposed policy statement should serve
as a high-level foundation for the
protocol and should echo the language
and spirit of the relevant Presidential
Memoranda and EOs.
The NRC staff formed an agency
working group to develop a proposed
NRC Tribal Policy Statement and to
revise the NRC Tribal Protocol Manual.
On October 12, 2012 (77 FR 62269), the
NRC requested public comment on the
NRC Tribal Protocol Manual and
requested suggestions for the
development of a proposed NRC Tribal
Policy Statement to establish policy
principles to be followed by the NRC to
promote effective government-togovernment interactions with Indian
Tribes, and to encourage and facilitate
involvement by Indian Tribes in the
areas over which the Commission has
jurisdiction. The public comment
period was open for 180 days, and the
NRC received a total of six comment
letters from two Tribal governments,
two mining associations, one interTribal organization, and a Tribal college.
Informed by internal working group
representatives, external outreach, and
review of similar policies at other
Federal agencies, the NRC developed
the proposed NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC engaged with
Tribal governments and other interested
parties by: (1) Collaborating with the
National Congress of American Indians
to conduct mass mailings to Federally
recognized Tribes; and (2) participating
in Tribal meetings hosted by Tribal
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:14 Jan 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
organizations and other Federal
agencies (these meetings included
attendees from Federally recognized and
State-recognized Tribes). Additionally,
the NRC staff reviewed Tribal policy
statements of executive departments,
their related agencies, and other
independent agencies and provided
their findings to the Commission.
The proposed NRC Tribal Policy
Statement was consistent with the
language of EO 13175 and was intended
to cover a broad range of Tribal
consultations, outreach, and
interactions conducted by NRC staff.
The proposed NRC Tribal Policy
Statement applied to Federally
recognized Indian Tribes as defined by
the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe
List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 479a). It also
encouraged participation by Staterecognized Tribes in the NRC’s
regulatory process. On December 1,
2014, the NRC published the proposed
NRC Tribal Policy Statement in the
Federal Register for public comment (79
FR 71136). (See Section III,
‘‘Opportunity for Public Participation,’’
of this document for additional
information.)
C. Development of the Final NRC Tribal
Policy Statement
After the December 2014 publication
of the proposed NRC Tribal Policy
Statement in the Federal Register, the
NRC staff engaged in internal and
external collaboration and outreach to
inform the final NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC staff also sought
comments on the final NRC Tribal
Policy Statement through participation
in external conferences and
presentations, periodic telephone calls,
teleconferences, and webinars. The NRC
staff continued to participate in
standing Tribal meetings hosted by
Federal partners and Tribal
organizations and initiated additional
outreach to Tribal leadership through
various regional or affiliated Tribal
leadership councils. A list of all
outreach efforts can be found in NRC
Tribal Liaison Annual Report Fiscal
Year 2015 (ADAMS Accession No.
ML15247A011).
The final NRC Tribal Policy Statement
reflects responses to both internal and
external comments. The final NRC
Tribal Policy Statement applies to all
NRC staff and activities within the
NRC’s regulatory jurisdiction. The NRC
Tribal Policy Statement is written at a
high level to cover a wide variety of
interactions, consultation, and outreach
to Indian Tribes, including Federally
recognized American Indian and Alaska
Native Tribes.
PO 00000
Frm 00096
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
II. Discussion
Within the context of this discussion,
the following definitions will apply
unless otherwise indicated:
Consultation means efforts to conduct
meaningful and timely discussions
between the NRC and Tribal
governments on the NRC’s regulatory
actions that have substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian Tribes and
those regulatory actions for which
Tribal consultation is required under
Federal statute. The NRC’s Tribal
consultation allows Indian Tribes the
opportunity to provide input on
regulatory actions with Tribal
implications and those where Tribal
consultation is required, and is different
from the outreach and public comment
periods. The consultation process may
include, but is not limited to, providing
for mutually-agreed protocols, timely
communication, coordination,
cooperation, and collaboration. The
consultation process provides
opportunities for appropriate Tribal
officials or representatives to meet with
NRC management or staff to achieve a
mutual understanding between the NRC
and the Tribes of their respective
interests and perspectives.
Indian Tribe means any American
Indian or Alaska Native Tribe, Band,
Nation, Pueblo, or other organized
group or community that the Secretary
of the Interior acknowledges to exist as
an Indian Tribe pursuant to the
Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List
Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 479a).
Interaction means reciprocal actions
involving the NRC and Indian Tribes,
and may include, but is not limited to,
outreach, consultation, coordination,
training, and information exchanges.
Interactions may be oral or written and
can take place remotely (through
electronic media) or in face-to-face
meetings.
Outreach means NRC staff efforts to
inform Indian Tribes about the agency’s
actions and plans. Outreach includes
sharing information and encouraging
Tribal governments to communicate
their concerns and interests to NRC
staff.
Regulatory Actions with Tribal
Implications refers to regulations,
legislative comments or proposed
legislation, and other policy statements
or actions that have substantial direct
effect on one or more Indian Tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes.
Tribal Official means an elected,
appointed, or designated official or
E:\FR\FM\09JAN1.SGM
09JAN1
2405
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2017 / Notices
employee of an Indian Tribe or
authorized intertribal organization.
Trust Responsibility means a fiduciary
duty, on the part of the United States,
to protect Tribal treaty rights, lands,
assets, and resources, as well as a duty
to carry out the mandates of Federal law
with respect to Indian Tribes. The NRC
exercises its Trust Responsibility in the
context of its authorizing statutes,
which include the AEA, the Energy
Reorganization Act of 1974, the Nuclear
Waste Policy Act of 1982, the Low-Level
Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1985,
and the Uranium Mill Tailings
Radiation Control Act of 1978, as
amended. As an independent regulatory
agency that does not hold in trust Tribal
lands or assets, or provide services to
Federally recognized Tribes, the NRC
fulfills its Trust Responsibility through
implementation of the principles of the
Tribal Policy Statement, by providing
protections under its implementing
regulations, and through recognition of
additional obligations consistent with
other applicable treaties and statutory
authorities.
III. Opportunity for Public Comment
On December 1, 2014 (79 FR 71136),
the NRC published a Federal Register
notice requesting public comments on
the proposed NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The original 120-day
comment period was extended to 180
days (ending on May 31, 2015) through
an additional Federal Register notice
that was published on February 5, 2015
(80 FR 6553).
A. Overview of Public Comments
The NRC received nine comment
submissions, including comments from
two representatives from Federally
recognized Tribes, two representatives
from inter-Tribal organizations, a
Federal agency, an electric utility
company, and three individuals who
did not provide an organizational
affiliation.
Comments and responses related to
the proposed NRC Tribal Policy
Statement are listed in this section, and
comments are quoted directly from
comment submissions. The NRC Tribal
Protocol Manual was published
concurrently with the proposed Policy
Statement in the Federal Register for
public comment; comments and related
responses will be published separately,
with the exception of overlapping
comments that cover both the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement and the NRC
Tribal Protocol Manual.
The following table lists the
commenter’s name and affiliation,
ADAMS accession number for the
comment submission, and the document
related to each comment.
Commenter Name
Affiliation
Comment Submission
ADAMS Accession No.
Document
Charlene Dwin Vaughn ..................
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP).
Indiana Michigan Power ...............
ML15154A842 ..............................
Proposed Tribal Policy Statement
ML15155A564 ..............................
Proposed Tribal Policy Statement
and Tribal Protocol Manual
Proposed Tribal Policy Statement
R. Budd Haemer ............................
Richard Arnold ...............................
Bill Thompson ................................
Philip R. Mahowald ........................
National Transportation Stakeholders Forum Tribal Caucus.
National Tribal Air Association .....
Prairie Island Indian Community ..
ML15124A013 ..............................
ML15159A181 ..............................
Heather Westra ..............................
Cassandra Bloedel ........................
Doreen Dupont ..............................
Savannah Halleaux ........................
Prairie Island Indian Community ..
Private Citizen ..............................
Private Citizen ..............................
Private Citizen ..............................
ML15065A219
ML15159A179
ML15159A180
ML14345A750
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
B. Public Comment Analysis
The NRC has reviewed every
comment submission and has identified
42 unique comments requiring NRC
consideration and response. Comments
and the NRC responses are presented in
this section. The comments generally
fell within the following categories:
NRC’s Trust Responsibility as a Federal
agency; suggested changes to the
language of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement; NRC’s Tribal outreach and
consultation; and NRC’s government-togovernment relationship with Tribes.
Commenters provided additional
comments that did not fall within those
categories as well as comments that
were out of scope of the NRC Tribal
Policy Statement; these comments have
been included at the end of this section,
along with NRC responses.
1. NRC’s Trust Responsibility as a
Federal Agency
Multiple commenters provided input
related to the NRC’s Trust
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:14 Jan 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
ML15175A161 ..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
Responsibility to Federally recognized
Tribes as a Federal agency.
Comment 1.1. ‘‘Politics should not
come into play in the Trust
Relationship. The Trust Relationship
requires more in terms of interactions
access, and voice.’’
Response 1.1. The NRC agrees with
this comment. The NRC upholds its
Trust Relationship with Federally
recognized Tribes without consideration
of politics. In achieving its mission, the
NRC adheres to the principles of good
regulation—independence, openness,
efficiency, clarity, and reliability. The
NRC seeks to use the highest possible
standards of ethical performance and
professionalism with regard to
regulatory activities. Tribal governments
and others are encouraged to participate
in the regulatory process to provide
relevant facts and opinions pertaining to
an action. The NRC considers many,
and possibly conflicting public
interests, when making decisions that
are based on objective, unbiased
assessments of all information, and
PO 00000
Frm 00097
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Proposed Tribal Policy Statement
Proposed Tribal Policy Statement
and Tribal Protocol Manual
Proposed Tribal Policy Statement
Proposed Tribal Policy Statement
Proposed Tribal Policy Statement
Proposed Tribal Policy Statement
must be documented with reasons
explicitly stated.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 1.2. ‘‘It is inconsistent to
say that the Trust Responsibility is met
simply by meeting standards for the
general public. Need to recognize the
uniqueness of Tribes and the Trust
Relationship. Trust relationship requires
more than simply meeting what is
required.’’
Response 1.2. The NRC agrees with
this comment. Under the Federal Trust
Doctrine, the United States—and the
individual agencies of the Federal
government—owe a fiduciary duty to
Indian Tribes. The nature of that duty
depends on the underlying substantive
laws (i.e., treaties, statutes, agreements)
creating the duty. The NRC exercises its
Trust Responsibility under its
authorizing statutes including the AEA,
the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974,
the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982,
the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy
E:\FR\FM\09JAN1.SGM
09JAN1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
2406
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2017 / Notices
Act of 1985, and the Uranium Mill
Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978,
as amended. As an independent
regulatory agency that does not hold in
trust Tribal lands or assets or provide
services to Federally recognized Tribes,
the NRC fulfills its Trust Responsibility
through implementation of the
principles of the Tribal Policy
Statement, by providing protections
under its implementing regulations, and
through recognition of additional
obligations consistent with other
applicable treaties and statutory
authorities. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement formally reflects the NRC’s
recognition of the Federal Trust
Responsibility and the NRC’s
commitment to a government-togovernment relationship with Federally
recognized Tribes that is distinct from
interactions with members of the public.
The NRC will consult in good faith with
Indian Tribes on agency actions that
have substantial direct effects on one or
more Indian Tribes as well as those
agency actions for which Tribal
consultation is required under Federal
Statute.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has
been revised to reflect the comment, in
part.
Comment 1.3. ‘‘NRC has not
historically met its Trust
Responsibilities. Tribal Advance
Notification Rule and the requirement
for tribes to ‘opt-in’ is inconsistent with
the Tribal Policy Statement. States do
not have to opt-in, while Tribes have to.
Tribes should be given the opportunity
to ‘opt-out.’’’
Response 1.3. The NRC disagrees with
the comment that the NRC has not
historically met its Trust Responsibility.
Under the Federal Trust Doctrine, the
United States—and the individual
agencies of the Federal Government—
owe a fiduciary duty to Indian Tribes.
The nature of that duty depends on the
underlying substantive laws (i.e.,
treaties, statutes, agreements) creating
the duty. The NRC exercises its Trust
Responsibility under its authorizing
statutes including the AEA, the Energy
Reorganization Act of 1974, the Nuclear
Waste Policy Act of 1982, the Low-Level
Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1985,
and the Uranium Mill Tailings
Radiation Control Act of 1978, as
amended. As an independent regulatory
agency that does not hold in trust Tribal
lands or assets or provide services to
Federally recognized Tribes, the NRC
fulfills its Trust Responsibility through
implementation of the principles of the
Tribal Policy Statement, by providing
protections under its implementing
regulations, and through recognition of
additional obligations consistent with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:14 Jan 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
other applicable treaties and statutory
authorities. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement formally reflects the NRC’s
recognition of the Federal Trust
Responsibility and the NRC’s
commitment to a government-togovernment relationship with Federally
recognized Tribes that is distinct from
interactions with members of the public.
In addition to affording Tribal members
protections under its implementing
regulations, the NRC will consult in
good faith with Indian Tribes on agency
actions that have substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian Tribes as
well as those agency actions for which
Tribal consultation is required under
Federal statute.
While the comment related to the
Tribal Advance Notification Rule is out
of scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement, the NRC believes the Tribal
Advance Notification Rule is consistent
with the NRC Tribal Policy Statement
because it requires Tribal governments
to opt-in to participate in the advanced
notification program. The Advance
Notification to Native American Tribes
of Transportation of Certain Types of
Nuclear Waste (Tribal Advance
Notification Rule) amends NRC rules to
require licensees to provide advance
notification to participating Federally
recognized Tribal governments
regarding shipments of irradiated
reactor fuel and certain types of nuclear
waste for any shipment that passes
within or across their reservations (77
FR 34194). After reviewing public
comments received during the
development of the Tribal Advance
Notification Rule, the NRC staff
concluded that Tribes should have the
option of whether to opt into the
program because the program requires
training, certain equipment, and has
civil and criminal penalties for noncompliance.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has
been revised to reflect the comment, in
part.
Comment 1.4. ‘‘The ACHP [Advisory
Council on Historic Preservation]
recommends expanding the discussion
on trust responsibility [related to policy
principle 2 on Trust Responsibility] and
including an acknowledgement of trust
responsibility. For more information
about trust responsibility, please
reference the Bureau of Indian Affairs
[BIA] definition of trust responsibility
(https://www.bia.gov/FAQs/).’’
Response 1.4. The NRC agrees with
this comment. In comparison with the
BIA, the NRC is an independent
regulatory agency and does not hold in
trust Tribal lands or assets or provide
services to Federally recognized Tribes.
Under the Federal Trust Doctrine, the
PO 00000
Frm 00098
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
United States—and the individual
agencies of the Federal Government—
owe a fiduciary duty to Indian Tribes.
The nature of that duty depends on the
underlying substantive laws (i.e.,
treaties, statutes, agreements) creating
the duty. The NRC exercises its Trust
Responsibility in the context of its
authorizing statutes including the AEA,
the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974,
the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982,
the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy
Act of 1985, and the Uranium Mill
Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978,
as amended. As an independent
regulatory agency that does not hold in
trust Tribal lands or assets or provide
services to Federally recognized Tribes,
the NRC fulfills its Trust Responsibility
through implementation of the
principles of the Tribal Policy
Statement, by providing protections
under its implementing regulations, and
through recognition of additional
obligations consistent with other
applicable treaties and statutory
authorities. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement formally recognizes the
unique relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes and
describes NRC’s continuing
commitment to a government-togovernment relationship with Tribal
governments that is distinct from the
interactions that the agency has with
members of the public. The discussion
section of Policy Principle 1 has been
revised to provide further clarification
and acknowledgment of the NRC’s Trust
Responsibility.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has
been revised to reflect the comment.
Comment 1.5. ‘‘To Indian tribes,
upholding a Trust relationship with
Indian tribes means more to Indian
tribes than just ensuring the tribal
members receive the same protections
that are available to other persons (i.e.,
the general public). In our view, the
NRC is required to do more, not less.
‘‘The ‘trust responsibility’ that the
federal government owes to Indian
tribes imposes both substantive and
procedural duties on the federal
government.’’
Response 1.5. The NRC agrees with
the comment. Under the Federal Trust
Doctrine, the United States—and the
individual agencies of the Federal
Government—owe a fiduciary duty to
Indian Tribes. The nature of that duty
depends on the underlying substantive
laws (i.e., treaties, statutes, agreements)
creating the duty. The NRC exercises its
Trust Responsibility under its
authorizing statutes including the AEA,
the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974,
the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982,
the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy
E:\FR\FM\09JAN1.SGM
09JAN1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2017 / Notices
Act of 1985, and the Uranium Mill
Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978,
as amended. As an independent
regulatory agency that does not hold in
trust Tribal lands or assets or provide
services to Federally recognized Tribes,
the NRC fulfills its Trust Responsibility
through implementation of the
principles of the Tribal Policy
Statement, by providing protections
under its implementing regulations, and
through recognition of additional
obligations consistent with other
applicable treaties and statutory
authorities. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement formally reflects the NRC’s
recognition of the Federal Trust
Responsibility and the NRC’s
commitment to a government-togovernment relationship with Federally
recognized Tribes that is distinct from
interactions with members of the public.
Other procedural components for
carrying out interactions with Tribal
governments are articulated in the
Tribal Protocol Manual and specific
agency regulations and guidance
documents.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has
been revised to reflect the comment.
Comment 1.6. ‘‘PIIC [Prairie Island
Indian Community] believes that the
trust responsibility must mean more
than solely complying with existing
statutes and regulations. Compliance of
this type is no different than what is
owed to the general public. In order for
the trust responsibility to have any
vitality, Federal agencies must exercise
a higher responsibility when taking
action that may affect a tribe. This is
especially true when the issues concern
lands held in trust by the United States
for a tribe and the tribal cultural and
historic resources and a tribe’s ancestral
homeland.’’
Response 1.6. The NRC agrees with
this comment. Under the Federal Trust
Doctrine, the United States—and the
individual agencies of the Federal
Government—owe a fiduciary duty to
Indian Tribes. The nature of that duty
depends on the underlying substantive
laws (i.e., treaties, statutes, agreements)
creating the duty. The NRC exercises its
Trust Responsibility under its
authorizing statutes including the AEA,
the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974,
the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982,
the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy
Act of 1985, and the Uranium Mill
Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978,
as amended. As an independent
regulatory agency that does not hold in
trust Tribal lands or assets or provide
services to Federally recognized Tribes,
the NRC fulfills its Trust Responsibility
through implementation of the
principles of the Tribal Policy
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:14 Jan 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
Statement, by providing protections
under its implementing regulations, and
through recognition of additional
obligations consistent with other
applicable treaties and statutory
authorities. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement formally reflects the NRC’s
recognition of the NRC’s commitment to
a government-to-government
relationship with Federally recognized
Tribes with respect to agency actions
that have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian Tribes that is
distinct from interactions with members
of the public. The NRC also upholds the
statutory obligation to consult with
Federally recognized Tribes under
Section 106 of the NHPA, which is
intended to protect historic properties
that may be affected by a Federal
undertaking. The NHPA requirement to
engage in Tribal consultation applies
regardless of the location of the historic
property and can include Tribal
ancestral lands that are not part of the
Tribe’s current reservation or trust
lands.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has
been revised to reflect the comment.
2. Suggested changes to the language of
the NRC Tribal Policy Statement
Multiple commenters proposed
changes to the language of the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement or to the
discussion section that defines terms
utilized throughout the NRC Tribal
Policy Statement.
Comment 2.1. ‘‘While the 6 principles
[of the NRC Tribal Policy Statement]
originally proposed serve as foundation
of which to build upon, the [U.S.
Department of Energy] DOE National
Transportation Stakeholders Forum
Tribal Caucus believes the proposed
principles should be expanded to
include an additional Principle Policy
Statement #7. Specifically, it is
recommended that the existing policy
statement include:
PRINCIPLE POLICY STATEMENT #7
7. NRC is committed to collaborating
with tribes in regulatory activities that
may have the potential of affecting
tribal interests.’’
Response 2.1. The NRC disagrees with
this comment. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement is consistent with EO 13175,
which states ‘‘Policies that have tribal
implications refers to regulations,
legislative comments or proposed
legislation, and other policy statements
or actions that have substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian Tribes, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00099
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2407
Government and Indian Tribes.’’ The
suggested language could be interpreted
to require the NRC to seek consultation
and collaboration on all of NRC’s
activities because they have the
potential to impact Tribal members even
if the activity has no greater potential
effect on Tribal members than the
general public. For example, health and
safety regulations relating to welllogging or medical use of byproduct
material could fall under this definition.
Therefore, the NRC limited the
obligation for the NRC to specifically
seek Tribal consultation to activities
defined in EO 13175 and those for
which Tribal consultation is required
under Federal statute. However, Tribes
can always request consultation with
the NRC regarding ‘‘regulatory activities
that may have the potential of affecting
Tribal interests.’’ The NRC would
evaluate such requests on a case-by-case
basis.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 2.2. [The commenter
suggested including the underlined text
in the discussion of policy principle 1.]
‘‘The NRC shall respect Indian Tribal
self-government and sovereignty, will
honor Tribal treaty and other rights, and
meet responsibilities that arise from the
unique relationship between the Federal
government and Indian Tribal
governments. Further, the NRC shall
encourage states to recognize the
Federal government’s trust relationship
with Tribes and incorporate this
recognition in their own practices.’’
Response 2.2. The NRC disagrees with
this comment. Our understanding of the
phrase ‘‘Tribal rights’’ would also cover
‘‘tribal treaty and other rights,’’ so the
change is unnecessary.
Section 274b. of the AEA authorizes
the NRC to enter into agreements with
States so that the NRC relinquishes, and
the State assumes, regulatory authority
over the radioactive material and
activities specified in the agreement.
The NRC approves the agreement if the
NRC finds the State program adequate to
protect public health and safety and
compatible with the NRC’s regulatory
program. The NRC periodically reviews
the State’s program, but the NRC does
not mandate to the State how they
should interact with Tribal governments
when implementing these regulatory
requirements and the States apply their
own laws to implement their radiation
control program for the specified AEA
radioactive materials covered in the
Agreement.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
E:\FR\FM\09JAN1.SGM
09JAN1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
2408
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2017 / Notices
Comment 2.3. [The commenter
suggested including the underlined text
in the discussion of policy principle 2,
‘‘The NRC Recognizes and Is Committed
to a Government-to-Government
Relationship With Indian Tribes.’’] ‘‘The
NRC recognizes the right of each Indian
Tribe to self-governance and supports
Tribal sovereignty and selfdetermination. The NRC recognizes
Tribal governments as dependent
domestic sovereign nations,
independent from State governments,
with separate and distinct authorities
with inherent sovereign powers over
their members and territory.’’
Response 2.3. The NRC agrees with
this comment. The second sentence of
the discussion related to Policy
Principle 2 now reads, ‘‘The NRC
recognizes Tribal governments as
dependent domestic sovereign nations,
independent from State governments,
with separate and distinct authorities
with inherent sovereign powers over
their members and territory, consistent
with applicable statutes and
authorities.’’
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has
been revised to reflect the comment.
Comment 2.4. [The Commenter
suggested including the underlined text
in the discussion of policy principle 4,
‘‘The NRC Will Engage in Timely
Consultation.’’] ‘‘The NRC will provide
timely notice to, and consult with,
Tribal governments on NRC’s regulatory
and non-regulatory actions that have
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes. Tribal officials may
request that the NRC engage in
government-to-government consultation
with them on matters that have not been
identified by the NRC to have
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes. The NRC will make
efforts to honor such requests, taking
into consideration the nature of the
activity at issue, past consultation
efforts, available resources, timing
issues, and other relevant factors. The
NRC will establish early communication
and begin consultation at the earliest
permissible stage, as appropriate. The
NRC will consult in good faith
throughout the agency decisionmaking
process and develop and maintain
regular and meaningful effective
communication, coordination, and
cooperation with Indian Tribes. The
NRC representatives for consultations
with Tribal officials or representatives
will be of an appropriate rank of NRC
representatives and level of interaction
commensurate with the circumstances
and who shall have decision-making
power. The appropriate level of
interaction will be determined by past
and current practices, continuing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:14 Jan 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
dialogue between NRC and Tribal
governments, and program office
consultation procedures.’’
Response 2.4. The NRC agrees in part
and disagrees in part with this
comment. The term ‘‘regulatory action’’
is used to reflect the scope of the NRC’s
mission as a regulatory agency, and no
change has been made to the existing
text. ‘‘Effective communication’’ already
reflects that communication should be
ongoing during the consultation
process. The text has been revised to
reflect that ‘‘The NRC representatives
for consultations with Tribal officials or
representatives will be of an appropriate
rank and the level of interaction will be
commensurate with the circumstances.
The appropriate level of interaction will
be determined by a discussion between
the NRC and Tribal governments, and
program office consultation procedures
and guidance. Participating Tribal and
NRC representatives will serve as
respective decisionmakers, based on the
established agenda and to the extent
possible.’’
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has
been revised to reflect the comment.
Comment 2.5. [The commenter
suggested including the underlined text
in the discussion of Policy Principle 5,
‘‘The NRC Will Coordinate with Other
Federal Agencies.’’] ‘‘The NRC Will
Coordinate With Other Federal Agencies
and States. When the Commission’s
action involves other Federal agencies
and States, the NRC will perform its
Tribal consultation jointly with other
Federal agencies and States, as
appropriate.’’
Response 2.5. The NRC agrees in part
and disagrees in part with this
comment. The NRC coordinates with
other Federal agencies and with States,
as appropriate, during consultations.
For example, when following the
regulatory procedures related to the
NHPA and National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) the NRC coordinates
with the State by communicating with
the State Historic Preservation Officer,
who is included as a consulting party
under the NHPA, or the State agency
regarding State listed species of concern
for environmental impact
determinations on specific resource
areas. The NRC disagrees that Policy
Principle 5 should be revised to include
States since the Principle is limited to
Federal coordination.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 2.6. ‘‘The ACHP
recommends defining interactions and
using interactions consistently
throughout the document. In certain
cases, interactions could be confused
PO 00000
Frm 00100
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
with more formal government to
government consultations.’’
Response 2.6. The NRC agrees with
this comment. The definition of
interaction has been included in the
discussion section of the policy
statement to identify activities covered
by the term ‘‘interaction.’’
The discussion section related to the
NRC Tribal Policy Statement has been
revised as a result of the comment.
Comment 2.7. ‘‘The ACHP
recommends defining substantial direct
effects in order to provide clarity to the
NRC’s practices addressing Executive
Order 13175.’’
Response 2.7. The NRC disagrees with
this comment. The use of ‘‘substantial
direct effects’’ is consistent with the
language used in EO 13175, which also
does not define the term. Since the
Tribal Policy Statement covers a vast
range of regulatory activities, the NRC
has not defined ‘‘substantial direct
effects’’ in the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC will consider
including criteria in future guidance
documents to determine whether an
activity has a ‘‘substantial direct effect’’
on one or more Indian Tribes.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 2.8. ‘‘The ACHP
recommends specifying outreach should
be done in addition to formal
government to government consultation
with Native Americans tribes and/or
Native Hawaiian Organizations. Also,
the NRC should include a definition for
outreach. Outreach and consultation
should be discussed as two separate
activities conducted by the NRC.’’
Response 2.8. The NRC agrees in part
and disagrees in part with this
comment. The NRC agrees that outreach
is distinct from government-togovernment consultation. The NRC
Tribal Policy Statement reflects the
distinction between outreach and
consultation by putting forth two
separate and distinct policy principles
related to outreach and consultation. In
an effort to provide clarification
regarding the distinction between
outreach and consultation, Policy
Principle 3 has been revised.
The NRC agrees that a definition of
outreach should be included in the
Discussion Section in an effort to
provide further clarification The
purpose of NRC’s Tribal outreach can be
broad, ranging from participation in
standing Tribal meetings hosted by
Federal partners and Tribal
organizations, to conducting
informational meetings related to a
licensing project or rulemaking, to an
informational webinar. The NRC Tribal
E:\FR\FM\09JAN1.SGM
09JAN1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2017 / Notices
liaison team continues to seek new
opportunities to engage Tribal
representatives.
The NRC disagrees that the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement’s discussion of
outreach should include Native
Hawaiian Organizations. The Tribal
Policy Statement pertains to
consultation with Tribal Governments
recognized by the Federally Recognized
Indian Tribe List Act of 1994, 25 U.S.C.
479a. (See response to Comment 4.1 for
additional information regarding the
Native Hawaiian Organizations.)
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has
been revised as a result of the comment.
Comment 2.9. ‘‘The ACHP
recommends stating [in the discussion
of policy principle 4, ‘‘The NRC Will
Engage in Timely Consultation’’] that it
is the federal agency’s responsibility to
engage in consultation. It is not the
tribe’s responsibility to request
engagement in consultation.’’
Response 2.9. The NRC agrees in part
and disagrees in part with this
comment. The NRC agrees that it is its
responsibility to initiate consultation
when Tribal consultation is required
under Federal statute. The discussion of
Policy Principle 4 has been revised to
clarify that the NRC also engages in
consultation when required under
Federal statute. However, the NRC
disagrees with the suggestion to state
specifically in Policy Principle 4 that ‘‘it
is the federal agency’s responsibility to
engage in consultation’’ or that ‘‘it is not
the tribe’s responsibility to request
engagement in consultation.’’ As stated
in Policy Principle 4 the NRC will
provide timely notice and consult in
good faith with Tribal Governments on
NRC regulatory actions that have
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes as well as those regulatory
actions for which Tribal consultation is
required under Federal statute. In some
circumstances, Federally recognized
Tribes may request to engage in
consultation on matters that have not
been identified by the NRC as having
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes or for which Tribal
consultation is not required under
Federal statute. The NRC can make a
good faith effort to invite Tribes to
consult, but cannot mandate their
participation in the process.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has
been revised to address this comment,
in part.
Comment 2.10. ‘‘The Policy and
Manual generally reflect the differences
between outreach and consultation.
However, there are several specific
spots, discussed below, where the
language is unclear or the terms are
used interchangeably. Confusion as to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:14 Jan 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
whether the NRC is engaged in outreach
or consultation or the scope of
consultation can result in confusion and
delay. The Tribes may even get the
impression that the NRC is only
pretending to consult; see, for example,
the eighth bullet on page 6 of the letter
from the Seneca Nation of Indians,
dated April 1, 2013, in this docket.
‘‘Principles 3 and 4 of the Policy are
potentially confusing as they use the
terms ‘consult’ and ‘outreach’
interchangeably. In addition, these
Principles state that they apply to
‘regulatory actions’ without clarifying
whether what is meant are policy
setting, rulemaking, issuing guidance, or
a licensing action. As reflected in
Section 1.D and associated note 25 of
the Manual, as a regulatory agency, the
NRC fulfills the fiduciary obligation to
Tribes by ensuring uniform treatment
action in providing protection under its
implementing regulations. On the other
hand, where the NRC is engaged in
setting policy, issuing rules, or
providing guidance that directly impact
Tribes, consultation on subjects within
the scope of the impact may be
appropriate where the impact is
significant. To minimize confusing
ambiguity, the following clarifications
are suggested:
A. The Policy
(1) In Principle 3, replace ‘consult’
with ‘inform’ in the first sentence and
replace ‘NRC regulatory actions that
have substantial direct impacts on one
or more Indian Tribe’ with ‘NRC
regulatory actions, including licensing
actions, in which one or more Indian
Tribes have an interest.’ This
clarification ensures that outreach to
Indian Tribes will include any
regulatory action of interest to a Tribe.’’
Response 2.10. The NRC disagrees in
part and agrees in part with this
comment. The NRC recognizes that
consultation and outreach are distinct
terms that should not be used
interchangeably. The NRC disagrees
with the proposed changes to Policy
Principle 3, but agrees that Policy
Principle 3 should be revised to provide
greater clarity. ‘‘Consult’’ has been
removed from the first sentence, but
‘‘regulatory actions that have substantial
direct impacts on one or more Indian
Tribe’’ remains. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement reflects the distinction
between outreach and consultation by
setting forth two separate and distinct
policy principles related to outreach
and consultation. In an effort to provide
clarification regarding the distinction
between outreach and consultation,
Policy Principle 3 has been revised. The
purpose of NRC’s Tribal outreach can be
PO 00000
Frm 00101
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2409
broad, ranging from participation in
standing Tribal meetings hosted by
Federal partners and Tribal
organizations to conducting
informational meetings related to a
licensing project or rulemaking to an
informational webinar. The NRC Tribal
liaison team continues to seek new
opportunities to engage Tribal
representatives.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has
been revised as a result of the comment.
Comment 2.11. ‘‘In Principle 4,
replace ‘on NRC’s regulatory actions’
with ‘prior to the NRC issuing policies,
rules, or guidance’ in the first sentence.
This clarification reflects that
consultation on NRC licensing actions
would generally not be consistent with
the NRC’s statutory authority. This
clarification also harmonizes the Policy
with the Presidential directive for
agencies to consult on policies with
tribal implications, E.O. [Executive
Order] 13175, § I(a), Nov. 6, 2000.’’
Response 2.11. The NRC agrees in
part and disagrees in part with this
comment. The focus of E.O. 13175 is
specifically related to consultation on
‘‘policies that have Tribal implications’’
(i.e., ‘‘regulations, legislative comments
on proposed legislation, and other
policy statements or actions that have
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes’’). The revised text
proposed by the commenter would
harmonize the Policy Statement with
the E.O. by replacing the term ‘‘NRC’s
regulatory actions’’ with a specific set of
activities that are consistent with the
activities covered in the E.O. However,
the NRC Tribal Policy Statement covers
a broader set of activities than those
covered in the EO. Not all NRC Tribal
consultation is related to ‘‘policies,
rules, or guidance’’ as noted in the
comment. The NRC licensing actions
may also trigger Tribal consultation
under other Federal statutes. Therefore,
the discussion of Policy Principle 4 has
been revised to clarify the broader set of
activities covered by the Policy
Statement.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has
been revised to address the comment, in
part.
Comment 2.12. ‘‘Consistent with the
practices of other agencies, the Policy
designates an official to facilitate
meaningful and timely consultations
with Indian Tribes. See generally, E.O.
[Executive Order] 13175, § 5(a), Nov. 6,
2000. The designated official is to work
with other NRC personnel to ensure
Tribal implications have been
considered. The conclusions from these
intra-agency considerations should be
documented in the papers provided to
the Commission (SECY papers), much
E:\FR\FM\09JAN1.SGM
09JAN1
2410
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2017 / Notices
the way the conclusions of the Chief
Financial Officer or legal office are
reflected now. Such documentation
would serve to provide timely feedback
to the Commission, to be mindful with
the resource implications associated
with formal Tribal consultations, and to
show respect for the solemnity of
conducting Tribal consultations on a
Government-to-Government basis. Also,
the second sentence of the first
paragraph under ‘Designated Official
and Tribal Liaisons’ is an ambiguous,
run-on sentence that does not clarify
that where the NRC is engaged in setting
policy, issuing rules, or providing
guidance that directly impact Tribes,
consultation on subjects within the
scope of the impact may be appropriate
where the impact is significant as
reflected in Comment 2, above. It is
suggested that sentence be split into
four sentences that read:
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
The designated Official shall ensure that
agency program personnel have considered
the Tribal implications related to their
responsibilities within the NRC’s scope of
jurisdiction. Where programs, policies,
rulemaking or guidance are proposed to the
Commission, the conclusions from review of
these considerations shall be briefly
discussed; specifically whether or not there
potentially are direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes. The designated official shall
facilitate meaningful and timely consultation
concerning the development, administration,
and enforcement of NRC’s policy,
rulemaking, or guidance actions that have a
substantial direct effect on one or more
Indian Tribes, including obtaining
Commission approval to initiate formal
consultation with one or more Indian Tribes
on subjects within the scope of such
substantial direct effects. Prior Commission
approval to initiate consultation is not
required where consultation is required by a
Federal statute.’’
Response 2.12. The NRC agrees in
part and disagrees in part with this
comment. The NRC agrees that the
‘‘designated official’’ should be involved
in regulatory actions that have Tribal
implications, but disagrees with the
commenter’s suggested edits and related
implications. Some of the commenter’s
proposed language would introduce
procedures that are not appropriate for
a high-level policy statement. The NRC
would consider developing specific
procedures in a future guidance
document. Regulatory actions involving
Tribal consultation, would be reviewed
by the Office of the Executive Director
for Operations, including the designated
official, before being sent to the
Commission. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement identifies the Deputy
Executive Director for Materials, Waste,
Research, State, Tribal, Compliance,
Administration, and Human Capital
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:14 Jan 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
Programs as the ‘‘designated official’’ for
purposes of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement, and not pursuant to E.O.
13175, as noted by the commenter. The
NRC agrees that the second sentence of
the section titled, ‘‘Designated Officials
and Tribal Liaisons,’’ referenced by the
commenter should be restructured and
has divided it into two sentences.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has
been revised to reflect part of the
comment.
3. Outreach and Consultation
Multiple commenters provided input
related to the use of the terms
‘‘outreach’’ and ‘‘consultation’’ in the
policy principles of the NRC Tribal
Policy Statement.
Comment 3.1. ‘‘The NTAA [National
Tribal Air Association] supports
Principle No. 3 which provides:
The NRC Will Conduct Outreach to
Indian Tribes.
The NRC will consult and coordinate
with Indian Tribes, as appropriate,
related to its regulatory actions with
Tribal implications and will seek
additional opportunities for general
outreach. The NRC will participate in
national and regional Tribal conferences
and summits hosted by Federal agencies
and Tribal organizations, and will seek
Tribal representation in NRC meetings
and advisory committees concerning
NRC regulatory actions that have
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes.
While the NTAA supports Principle
No. 3, it does not find that current NRC
outreach to Indian Tribes is being done
or happening in a timely manner. For
example, apart from some local efforts,
the NTAA is unaware of any venue
where Tribes are being brought together
to discuss radiation issues and air
quality impacts from the nuclear
program. The NTAA finds that NRC
must be more diligent in conducting
outreach on all issues as they are
brought to the attention of the NRC by
Tribes, the NTAA, or other Tribal
organizations.’’
Response 3.1. The NRC agrees in part
and disagrees in part with this
comment. The NRC agrees with the
commenter’s support of the NRC Tribal
Policy Principle 3. The NRC disagrees
that the NRC has not conducted
outreach to Indian Tribes in a timely
manner. While the NRC has not hosted
particular meetings to bring Tribes
together to discuss radiation issues and
air quality impacts from the nuclear
program, the NRC has participated in
national and regional Tribal conferences
and summits hosted by Federal agencies
and Tribal organizations. Additionally,
the NRC has provided instructor-led
PO 00000
Frm 00102
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
training sessions at multiple Tribal
Colleges and Universities to inform
Tribes regarding NRC’s mission, basic
health physics, radiation safety, and
environmental review. The NRC will
continue to provide training, as needed,
to Tribes who are affected by regulated
activities and will seek outreach
opportunities.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 3.2. ‘‘Principle No. 4:
Development of a Consultation Plan.
The NTAA recommends that Principle
No. 4 require the NRC to also develop
a comprehensive Tribal consultation
plan for NRC regulatory and nonregulatory actions having potentially
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes. Although Tribes consider
consultation to be very important,
Tribes have limited resources and time
to expend on it. The NRC must be
sensitive to this fact and make every
effort to provide Tribes with any
additional resources and assistance that
they might require to engage in effective
consultation. Some recommendations to
help the NRC to conduct effective
consultation with Tribes include:
1. Develop guidance on how the NRC
intends to assure that consultation
meetings result in meaningful dialogue
rather than simply pro forma
consultation;
2. Assign a Tribal liaison to the
specific NRC action who has extensively
worked with Tribes on similar issues;
and
3. Provide adequate time to Tribes to
review and provide comments
concerning proposed NRC actions well
beyond the 30- to 60-day periods
provided to the public to make its
comments.’’
Response 3.2. The NRC disagrees in
part and agrees in part with this
comment. The NRC staff has developed
an implementation plan that will be
revised to reflect the final NRC Tribal
Policy Statement. The NRC disagrees
that Policy Principle 4 should state
specifically that the NRC has to develop
a comprehensive Tribal consultation
plan for NRC regulatory and nonregulatory actions having potentially
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes. The NRC agrees that the
NRC should consider development of
consultation plans for actions that have
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes as well as those regulatory
actions for which Tribal consultation is
required under Federal statute, in an
effort to promote more effective
consultations. The NRC Tribal liaison
staff will continue to work in
conjunction with program office staff
E:\FR\FM\09JAN1.SGM
09JAN1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2017 / Notices
during licensing and other regulatory
actions, and may be assigned to specific
sites or actions, as resources and staffing
permit. The NRC strives to establish an
effective consultation process and will
consider time allowed for Tribal
engagement, including Tribal review
and comment of relevant documents, on
a case by case basis, as appropriate,
during the regulatory process.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 3.3. ‘‘Further, the NRC must
engage in government-to-government
consultation with individual Tribes and
not groups of Tribes which might occur
as part of an outreach session at a
conference or other similar gathering.
Such a consultation approach is
necessary for a number of reasons. First,
it provides for more candid
conversations between the individual
Tribe and NRC than would occur
otherwise during a group meeting.
Second, each Tribe’s circumstances are
unique and must be treated as such by
the NRC. A group meeting of Tribes
would only give short shrift to these
circumstances. Third, most cultural
resources information is protected from
release under statutory exemptions to
the Freedom of Information Act.
Discussion of such information by an
individual Tribe as part a group meeting
of Tribes risks its release to the general
public and potentially endangers Tribal
cultural sites and practices. Finally, the
subject matter may be so unique that
government-to-government consultation
between the individual Tribe and NRC
provides the best opportunity for a
resolution to the situation versus a
group meeting of Tribes where any
number of Tribal issues could be
discussed in a finite period of time.’’
Response 3.3. The NRC agrees with
this comment. The NRC does not
consider outreach during a conference
to be consultation. The NRC will make
an effort to engage Tribes on a
government-to-government basis, and
will consider whether it is more
appropriate to consult individually or
simultaneously with multiple Tribes, on
a case-by-case basis, taking into
consideration site-specific facts,
resource limitations, and preference of
consulting Tribes.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 3.4. ‘‘The NRC will consult
and coordinate with Indian Tribes, as
appropriate, related to its regulatory
actions with Tribal implications and
will seek additional opportunities for
general outreach. The NRC will
participate in national and regional
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:14 Jan 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
Tribal conferences and summits hosted
by Federal agencies and Tribal
organizations, and will seek Tribal
representation in NRC meetings and
advisory committees concerning NRC
regulatory actions that have substantial
direct effects on one or more Indian
Tribes.
‘‘Attending major tribal conferences
and meetings is an excellent way of
interacting with Indian tribes. As well,
NRC staff should endeavor to attend
meetings of other federal agencies that
attract tribal representatives.
‘‘. . . [I]t is important to recognize
that while there might not be delineated
reservation or Trust lands in a given
area that does not necessarily mean that
there are no tribes interested in or
impacted by NRC regulatory actions.
Many tribes were forcibly removed from
their ancestral lands or ceded vast tracts
of land to the federal government
through treaties and have retained or
reserved rights (fishing, hunting,
gathering) for these lands or these lands
contain archaeological, cultural or
historical resources, including
important sacred sites.’’
Response 3.4. The NRC agrees with
this comment. The NRC agrees that
attending conferences and meetings is
an effective way of engaging Tribes and
that the NRC staff should attend
meetings held by other Federal agencies
that attract Tribal representatives. The
NRC staff participates in Tribal meetings
hosted by other Federal agencies,
including conferences hosted by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
the U.S. Department of Energy, and the
U.S. Department of Transportation,
along with meetings hosted by interTribal organizations, including the
National Congress of American Indians.
The NRC also agrees that Tribes may
have an interest in areas that do not
have current reservation or trust lands.
The current location and geographic
proximity to NRC regulated sites is not
the sole consideration of the NRC when
engaging in outreach with Tribes. The
NRC also considers whether there are
Tribes that have historic and cultural
ties to the land in question.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 3.5. [The Commenter
provided input specific to policy
principle 4, ‘‘The NRC Will Engage in
Timely Consultation.’’] ‘‘Early and
frequent consultation must be the
cornerstone of the government-togovernment relationship. Publishing a
notice in the Federal Register is not
consultation. It should be noted that
sometime the consultative process can
take time.’’
PO 00000
Frm 00103
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2411
Response 3.5. The NRC agrees with
this comment. The definition of
‘‘consultation’’ and Policy Principle 4
have been revised to provide further
clarification. The revisions clarify that
consultation is a process and may
include, but is not limited to, providing
for mutually-agreed protocols, timely
communication, coordination,
cooperation, and collaboration and
provides opportunities for appropriate
Tribal officials or representatives to
meet with NRC management or staff to
achieve a mutual understanding
between the NRC and the Tribes of their
respective interests and perspectives.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
4. NRC’s Government-to-Government
Relationship With Tribes
Comment 4.1. ‘‘The ACHP
recommends including Alaska Natives
and Native Hawaiians in the NRC Tribal
Policy Statement and the Tribal Protocol
Manual. The NRC is responsible for
licensing materials in Alaska and
Hawaii. Additionally, the NRC should
avoid homogenizing Native American
tribes and reference Native American
communities [in the Tribal Protocol
Manual], not the Native American
community.’’
Response 4.1. The NRC disagrees in
part and agrees in part with this
comment. The NRC disagrees that the
NRC Tribal Policy Statement should
include Native Hawaiian Organizations.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement and
Tribal Protocol Manual pertain to
consultation with Tribal governments
recognized by the Federally Recognized
Indian Tribe List Act of 1994, 25 U.S.C.
479a. The definition of Indian Tribe
includes Alaska Native Tribes. The
United States has recognized and
implemented a special political and
Trust Responsibility with the Native
Hawaiian community through programs
and services that are, in many respects,
analogous to, but separate from the
programs and services enacted for
Federally recognized Indian Tribes.
However, Native Hawaiian
Organizations are not governmental
entities. As a result, Native Hawaiian
Organizations are not covered by the
NRC Tribal Policy Statement. The NRC
does comply with statutory obligations
to consult with Native Hawaiian
Organizations. For example, the NRC
consults with Native Hawaiian
Organizations, as appropriate, under
Section 106 of the NHPA.
The NRC agrees with the comment,
‘‘the NRC should avoid homogenizing
Native American Tribes’’ and recognizes
distinctions between Federally
E:\FR\FM\09JAN1.SGM
09JAN1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
2412
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2017 / Notices
recognized Tribes, as noted in the Tribal
Protocol Manual. The Tribal Protocol
Manual has been revised to reflect the
suggested change from ‘‘community’’ to
‘‘communities.’’
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 4.2. ‘‘Taken together, both
the Tribal Protocol Manual and the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement (and their
respective Federal Register notices)
provide important historical
information, such as various treaties,
Congressional Acts affecting Indian
tribes and rights, and a discussion of the
Federal Trust Responsibility. This
information provides the proper
historical context critical to
understanding the unique relationship
federally recognized Indian Tribes have
with the Federal Government. This
point is underscored in the Tribal
Protocol Manual, which notes that
Indian tribes are not the public or
special interest groups, but are, in fact,
governments. This point is important in
understanding why tribes desire to have
a government-to-government
relationship with the NRC and do not
wish to be considered ‘stakeholders’.’’
Response 4.2. The NRC agrees with
this comment. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement and Tribal Protocol Manual
underscore the NRC’s commitment to a
government-to-government relationship
with Indian Tribes. The NRC Tribal
Policy Statement formalizes the NRC’s
commitment to engaging Indian Tribes
on a government-to-government basis,
providing opportunities for
participation in the NRC’s regulatory
process beyond those available to
members of the general public or
interested stakeholders, consistent with
the principles articulated in E.O. 13175.
No changes were made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement or Tribal
Protocol Manual as a result of the
comment.
Comment 4.3. [The commenter
provided input on policy principle 2,
‘‘The NRC Recognizes and Is Committed
to a Government-to-Government
Relationship with Indian Tribes.’’]
‘‘It should be noted that there are
differences among tribes and that there
is no ‘one size, fits all’ approach when
it comes to interacting with and
understanding Indian tribes. Each tribe
is unique and should be treated as such.
There should not be a ‘standard process’
as recommended by some commenters.’’
Response 4.3. The NRC agrees with
this comment. The NRC recognizes
distinctions between Federally
recognized Tribes, as noted in the Tribal
Protocol Manual. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement does not prescribe a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:14 Jan 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
‘‘standard process’’ for interacting with
Tribes. Instead, it identifies policy
principles that guide the NRC’s
interactions with Indian Tribes.
No changes were made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
5. Additional Comments
Comment 5.1. ‘‘The Nuclear
Regulatory Commission should look to
the policies and practices of the
Environmental Protection Agency [EPA]
in developing its relationship with tribal
governments. In particular, the EPA
identified certain tribal governments to
be granted with the same treatment as
states, allowing the tribes to have
primacy in civil jurisdiction with
regards to enforcement of EPA
regulations on tribal lands. The NRC
should consider implementing a similar
policy with some or all tribal
governments.’’
Response 5.1. The NRC disagrees with
this comment. Unlike States, the AEA
does not authorize Tribal governments
to assume regulatory authority over
AEA radioactive material. However, the
NRC has treated Federally recognized
Tribes in a similar manner to States in
some instances. For example, Tribal
governments can participate in a
program to receive advance notification
of shipments of certain types of
radioactive material and spent nuclear
fuel under the Tribal Advance
Notification Rule.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 5.2. ‘‘NRC needs to be
committed to the Tribal Policy
Statement. If not, policies can be easily
side-stepped. NRC needs to implement
these policies.’’
Response 5.2. The NRC agrees with
this comment. The Commission
approved a Tribal Policy Statement
Implementation Plan in March 2015
(ADAMS Accession No. ML15078A039),
which aligns the agency’s Tribal
activities with policy principles in the
NRC Tribal Policy Statement. The NRC
staff will utilize the plan to implement
the NRC Tribal Policy Statement, and
will update it, as appropriate.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of
this comment.
Comment 5.3. ‘‘The NRC should
encourage tribal participation on
working groups.’’
Response 5.3. The NRC agrees with
this comment. The NRC will consider
inviting Tribes to participate on working
groups related to regulatory actions that
have substantial direct effects on one or
more Indian Tribes, as appropriate.
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 5.4. ‘‘As subject-matter
experts, the NRC will invite tribal
representatives to participate on
working groups developed for those
activities that have the potential of
impacting tribal interests, including but
not limited to: Integrated Performance
Evaluation Program [(IMPEP)] Reviews,
Rule-making and other related activities
impacting our tribal governments.’’
Response 5.4. The NRC disagrees in
part and agrees in part with this
comment. The NRC disagrees with the
threshold for Tribal working group
participation set by the commenter’s
language, ‘‘for those activities that have
the potential of impacting Tribal
interests.’’ The NRC agrees that it may
invite Tribal representatives to
participate on working groups on
matters that have substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian Tribes, as
appropriate. This is consistent with
Policy Principle 3 on the NRC outreach
to Indian Tribes, which states ‘‘The NRC
will encourage Tribal governments to
communicate their preferences to NRC
staff during outreach activities and will
seek to provide information about
opportunities for Tribal participation in
NRC meetings and advisory committees
concerning NRC regulatory actions that
have substantial direct effects on one or
more Indian Tribes, as appropriate.’’
Because the NRC does not have
statutory authority to enter into
agreements with Tribes like it does with
States, Tribal government employees
cannot participate in IMPEP Reviews as
a review team member in the same
manner as an Agreement State
government employee. However, IMPEP
reports are publically available and
meetings are open to the public.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 5.5. ‘‘Further, the NRC will
present a yearly report to tribal
organizations describing all agency
undertakings involving or relating to
Indian Tribes.’’
Response 5.5. The NRC disagrees with
this comment. The NRC has no current
plans to present an annual report
describing ‘‘all agency undertakings
involving or relating to Indian Tribes.’’
As part of the NRC Tribal Policy
implementation Plan, the NRC staff
prepares an annual report of the
agency’s implementation of the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement, including some
of the agency’s Tribal-related
interactions. While the report is
intended for internal use, it will be
available on the NRC’s public Web site.
E:\FR\FM\09JAN1.SGM
09JAN1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2017 / Notices
It will also be available in hardcopy,
upon request.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 5.6. ‘‘Yes, extend the
comment period.’’
Response 5.6. The NRC agrees with
this comment. The comment period was
extended for the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement from 120 days to 180 days.
The NRC considers comments received
after the end of the comment period if
it is practical to do so, but the NRC is
able to assure consideration only for
comments received on or before the
comment period closes.
No changes were made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 5.7. ‘‘We believe that the
key to effectively implementing the
Tribal Policy Statement is via actions
that will protect Indian people, lands,
and resources. Toward that end, an
evaluation of existing staff guidance is
a strong start. This evaluation should
not be limited to the Tribal Protocol
Manual, but all NRC staff guidance.’’
Response 5.7. The NRC agrees with
this comment. The NRC staff has
reviewed numerous agency and officelevel guidance documents to determine
if changes were necessary before the
Commission approves the final NRC
Tribal Policy Statement, ensuring that
the guidance documents are consistent
with policy principles in the NRC Tribal
Policy Statement. The NRC will revise
guidance, as needed, to reflect the
policy principles of the final NRC Tribal
Policy Statement.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 5.8. ‘‘We suggest that the
NRC work with a number of tribes,
representing a cross-section of NRC
regulatory activities, as well as the
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to gain a
better understanding of Indian land
tenure and the potential consequences
of contamination to Indian lands.
‘‘We understand that the NRC may
possibly be developing a guidance
document pertaining to the National
Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)
Section 106 consultation. We applaud
this effort. We recommend that the NRC
work with tribes, the Advisory Council
on Historic Preservation (ACHP),
industry (limited participation), and
possibly other federal agencies to
develop this guidance document.
‘‘Finalizing and fully implementing
the Tribal Protocol Manual will also
help NRC staff to be informed on tribal
issues. Training, awareness, and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:14 Jan 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
continuity of staff are also key elements
of an effective tribal program.’’
Response 5.8. The first part of this
comment related to Indian land tenure
is out of scope of the NRC Policy
Statement. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement is an agencywide, high-level
document that encompasses a broad
range of NRC Tribal interactions,
consultation, and outreach. NRC
disagrees in part and agrees in part with
the remainder of the comment. The NRC
is in the process of finalizing NHPA
Section 106 guidance for uranium
recovery licensing. The NRC sought
input from NRC Staff, ACHP, Tribal
governments, industry representatives,
and members of the public. The NRC
published the draft Interim Staff
Guidance, FSME–ISG–02, ‘‘Guidance for
Conducting the Section 106 Process of
the National Historic Preservation Act
for Uranium Recovery Licensing
Actions,’’ for public review and
comment on June 18, 2014 (79 FR
34792). On September 3, 2014, the NRC
extended the comment period (79 FR
52374). The NRC staff is in the process
of developing the final program specific
guidance. The NRC staff has reviewed
staff guidance documents and
concluded that no guidance documents
directly contradict the NRC Tribal
Policy Statement. The NRC staff review
identified documents that will need to
be revised to be consistent with the final
NRC Tribal Policy Statement. Guidance
will be updated as scheduled, and will
incorporate the final NRC Tribal Policy
Statement, as appropriate. The NRC staff
has also developed and implemented a
Tribal cultural sensitivity training that
is available agencywide.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
6. Out of Scope Comments
Comment 6.1. ‘‘We have reviewed the
comment letters submitted in 2013 by
other entities on the Tribal Protocol
Manual (most notably those
representing the uranium mining
industry) and found the comments to be
self-serving, ill-informed and insensitive
[to] tribal history, culture and tradition.
These commenters complained that the
Section 106 process was ‘too
cumbersome, time consuming, and
costly for the uranium recovery
industry’ and that the pace of the
consultation should be accelerated and
standardized. Moreover, the
commenters suggested that the NRC
should not be making an exhaustive
effort to identify all potentially
impacted Indian tribes. In other words,
hurry up and get it done!
PO 00000
Frm 00105
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2413
The NRC has an obligation under the
NHPA to ensure that its actions do not
have adverse impacts. The NRC also has
an obligation to federally recognized
Indian tribes.
With regard to tribes delaying the
process or lacking incentive to work
with the NRC, it should be noted that it
can be a burden (financially and
technically) to effectively participate in
NRC proceedings.’’
Response 6.1. This comment is out of
scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement because the comment centers
on specific statutory requirements to
consult with Tribes under NHPA. The
NRC Tribal Policy Statement is an
agencywide, high-level document that
encompasses a broad range of NRC
Tribal interactions, consultation, and
outreach. It does not prescribe
procedural requirements for fulfilling
NHPA consultation requirements. The
NRC upholds all statutory obligations to
consult with Federally recognized
Tribes, including consultation
responsibilities under the NHPA and
NEPA.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 6.2. ‘‘The NEPA process (for
either [an] EA [environmental
assessment] or EIS [environmental
impact statement]) does not ensure that
environmental issues and concerns
identified by the impacted tribes will be
addressed adequately, as EA’s or EIS’s
are disclosure tools that do not and
cannot offer remedies or mitigation. It is
through the NRC’s Atomic Safety and
Licensing Board (ASLB) adjudicatory
process that identified issues can be
addressed (if the Board admits the
affected tribe as an intervener because
the tribe has articulated a deficiency
with an application before the NRC).
Achieving intervener status is a difficult
and costly undertaking, given the high
legal and regulatory standards to be met.
Nevertheless, this is a huge barrier that
many tribes cannot overcome and this
should be recognized a severe limitation
to effective participation by any tribes
impacted by NRC licensing actions.’’
Response 6.2. This comment is out of
scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement is an agency-wide, high-level
document that encompasses a broad
range of NRC Tribal interactions,
consultation, and outreach. It does not
prescribe procedural requirements for
fulfilling NEPA Tribal consultations.
The process for achieving intervenor
status before an NRC Atomic Safety and
Licensing Board (or other NRC
adjudicator) is outside the scope of the
NRC Tribal Policy Statement. Under the
E:\FR\FM\09JAN1.SGM
09JAN1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
2414
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2017 / Notices
NRC Tribal Policy Statement, the NRC
will provide timely notice and consult
in good faith with Tribal governments
on NRC’s regulatory actions that have
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes. In addition, Tribes will
have the opportunity to raise
environmental, historic, and cultural
issues during the NEPA environmental
review and NHPA process. This process
provides an additional opportunity to
address the Tribe’s concerns with a
proposed licensing action. Good faith
efforts to consult with Indian Tribes
under the NRC Tribal Policy Statement
or during the NEPA and NHPA review
process may also have the potential to
resolve issues outside the hearing
process.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 6.3. ‘‘In 2013, the NRC
finalized its advance notification rule
(10 CFR 71.97) that allows Indian tribes
to receive advance notification of
shipments of irradiated reactor fuel
through reservation land (not Trust
lands). To participate, interested tribes
must ‘opt in’ and complete safeguards
training. Although the NRC was very
flexible with some of the prerequisites,
the fact that no tribe is currently
participating in this pre-notification
program should cause the NRC to pause
and ask why. It could be that it is just
too cumbersome for the tribes to
participate, due to a lack of resources
(staff, financial, etc.) or competing
priorities for resources.’’
Response 6.3. This comment is out of
scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement is an agencywide, high-level
document that encompasses a broad
range of NRC Tribal interactions,
consultation, and outreach. The Tribal
Advance Notification Rule amended
NRC regulations to require licensees to
provide advance notification to
participating Federally recognized
Tribal governments regarding shipments
of irradiated reactor fuel and certain
types of nuclear waste for any shipment
that passes within or across their
reservations (77 FR 34194). After
reviewing public comments received
during the development of the Tribal
Advance Notification Rule, the NRC
staff concluded that Tribes should have
the option of whether to opt into the
program because the program requires
training, certain equipment, and has
civil and criminal penalties for noncompliance. As of July of 2016, one
Indian Tribe completed the process of
enrolling in the Tribal Advance
Notification Program. A list of
participating Tribes is maintained on
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:14 Jan 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
the NRC Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/
about-nrc/state-tribal/tribal-advancenotification.html#tribes.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 6.4. ‘‘Principle No. 4: An
Example of Lack of Implementation. In
2012, the NRC proposed an Advance
Notification Rule, by which Indian
Tribes would receive advance
notification of shipments of irradiated
reactor fuel and other nuclear wastes
transported across their reservations.
(‘‘Tribal Advance Notification’’ at https://
www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/state-tribal/
tribal-advance-notification.html#def
(last visited on April 12, 2015).)
‘‘Yet, the NRC claims that ‘there are
no tribes that have the prerequisite
required to receive advance
notifications.’ (‘‘Tribal Advance
Notification’’ at https://www.nrc.gov/
about-nrc/state-tribal/tribal-advancenotification.html#defl (last visited on
April 12, 2015).)
‘‘Nuclear waste is being transported
through a number of reservations
weekly by unmarked trucks (e.g.,
missing placards) and Indian Tribes of
these reservations have not been made
privy to the transportation schedules for
the waste. Knowing the schedule would
enable Tribes to protect their reservation
environments by having emergency
response teams in place in case of any
accidental waste releases. Regardless of
whether Tribes meet the aforementioned
prerequisite, the NRC should still be
actively consulting with Tribes on
shipments across their reservations and
other NRC actions having potentially
substantial air quality and other direct
effects on one or more Tribes.
‘‘The NTAA has also seen several
inconsistencies in the reporting of the
number of regulated facilities in Indian
Country. The NTAA finds that, an
update of NRC’s maps or inventories of
regulated facilities, would help the NRC
to more effectively contact and identify
Tribes about NRC regulatory and nonregulatory actions having substantial air
quality and other direct effects on one
or more Tribes.’’
Response 6.4. This comment is out of
scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement in part. The NRC Tribal
Policy Statement is an agencywide,
high-level document that encompasses a
broad range of NRC Tribal interactions,
consultation, and outreach. The Tribal
Advance Notification Rule amended
NRC regulations to require licensees to
provide advance notification to
participating Federally recognized
Tribal governments regarding shipments
of irradiated reactor fuel and certain
types of nuclear waste for any shipment
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
that passes within or across their
reservations (77 FR 34194). After
reviewing public comments received
during the development of the Tribal
Advance Notification Rule, the NRC
staff concluded that Tribes should have
the option of whether to opt into the
program because the program requires
training, certain equipment, and has
civil and criminal penalties for noncompliance. As of July of 2016, one
Indian Tribe completed the process of
enrolling in the Tribal Advance
Notification Program. A list of
participating Tribes is maintained on
the NRC Web site at: https://
www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/state-tribal/
tribal-advance-notification.html#tribes.
The NRC continues to update maps of
Tribal reservation and trust lands within
a 50-mile radius of NRC-regulated
nuclear power plants. The NRC staff is
developing tools that they may utilize to
identify Tribal lands near other NRCregulated facilities.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 6.5. ‘‘Hire natives to be
liaisons with our own people. Create
trust, transparency and rapport. These
people have been deceived and betrayed
since the white man stepped foot on this
land. It’s very important to really reach
the native people and it’s high time they
got many seats at the round table. Thank
you for your work and hope it can
improve to genuinely include First
Nation’s peoples.’’
Response 6.5. This comment is out of
scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement is an agencywide, high-level
document that encompasses a broad
range of NRC Tribal interactions,
consultation, and outreach. However,
the NRC does seek to foster a diverse
workplace. The Office of the Chief
Human Capital Officer participates in
extensive recruitment, including the
American Indian Science and
Engineering Society’s annual
conference. Additionally, the NRC’s
Office of Small Business and Civil
Rights promotes diversity by sponsoring
Equal Employment Opportunity
Advisory Committees, including the
Native American Advisory Committee
(NAAC). The NAAC recommends
initiatives and approaches to attract
qualified Native Americans and Alaskan
Natives to the NRC and to support and
retain the Native American and Alaskan
Native employees of the NRC. The
Committee has also forged a working
relationship with the American Indian
Science and Engineering Society
through a memorandum of
understanding. For clarification, the
E:\FR\FM\09JAN1.SGM
09JAN1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2017 / Notices
listed activities do not cover the ‘‘First
Nations [of Canada]’’ referenced by the
commenter.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 6.6. ‘‘Lastly, the NRC will
ensure there are mechanisms in place to
prevent an unfunded mandate upon any
tribe, including but not limited to
requirements of acquiring GSA safe or
other supplies or materials as stipulated
in the in the advance notification rule.’’
Response 6.6. This comment is out of
scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement is an agencywide, high-level
document that encompasses a broad
range of NRC Tribal interactions,
consultation, and outreach. The Tribal
Advance Notification Rule amended
NRC regulations to require licensees to
provide advance notification to
participating Federally recognized
Tribal governments regarding shipments
of irradiated reactor fuel and certain
types of nuclear waste for any shipment
that passes within or across their
reservations (June 11, 2012; 77 FR
34194). After reviewing public
comments received during the
development of the Tribal Advance
Notification Rule, the NRC staff
concluded that Tribes should have the
option of whether to opt into the
program because the program requires
training, certain equipment, and has
civil and criminal penalties for noncompliance. The NRC is committed to
ensuring that Tribal Nations are
informed of the requirements for
receiving Safeguards Information and
sensitive information. It is the
responsibility of all Tribal governments
that volunteer to participate in the
Tribal Advance Notification program to
ensure that the information is secure
and used in a manner that will provide
for the protection of the public health
and the environment.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 6.7. ‘‘It is important to note,
even though NRC has expanded
educational tools for Radiation
Workshops as open communication
protocol, there is a need for Native
speakers to provide the information.
Non-English speakers attend the
workshops and do not comprehend the
contents. More workshops related to
DOE Radiation site locations throughout
Indian Country is strongly urged that
NRC has oversight. Many of these sites
are under DOE–LM [DOE Office of
Legacy Management] and not
necessarily under DOE–EM [DOE Office
of Environmental Management] as it
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:14 Jan 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
seems there is a communication barrier,
and updated cleanups by site is missing,
especially with transport of radioactive
sludge from holding/evaporation ponds.
‘‘Many transport routes go through
Native communities, and are not part of
the DOE–EM START [Stakeholder Tool
for Assessing Radioactive
Transportation] programming. It may be
missing out of other regulatory
components as 108(c) under DOE for
transport. Consideration for links for the
public with RECA [Radiation Exposure
Compensation Act] benefits and
DownWinder Web sites under NRC is
important as many suffer the health
devastation of cancer due to radiation.’’
Response 6.7. This comment is out of
scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement is an agencywide, high-level
document that encompasses a broad
range of NRC Tribal interactions,
consultation, and outreach. Previously
the NRC staff received similar feedback
on the inclusion of non-English
speakers in the NRC’s Tribal Training
Program. The NRC will consider the
inclusion of Native speakers when
arranging future training sessions for
Tribes. DOE–EM START programming
is not administered by the NRC, and
therefore is not covered by the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement. The RECA
benefits are administered by the
Department of Justice’s program for
claims relating to atmospheric nuclear
testing and claims relating to uranium
industry employment. The NRC does
not oversee the program, make related
determinations, or administer payment
of claims. The Downwinder Web sites
are maintained by the U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services and do
not fall under the NRC’s jurisdiction.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
Comment 6.8. [The commenter quoted
policy principle 5, ‘‘The NRC Will
Coordinate with Other Federal
Agencies,’’ stating ‘‘When the
Commission’s action involves other
Federal agencies, the NRC will perform
its Tribal consultation jointly with other
Federal agencies, as appropriate.’’]
‘‘This will be especially important if/
when shipments of spent nuclear fuel to
a federal repository or an interim storage
facility commence. Shipments of spent
nuclear fuel will involve the NRC, the
US Department of Energy (DOE) and the
US Department of Transportation
(DOT). Equally important is the
engagement of federal agencies involved
in the uranium mining regulation (i.e.,
the Bureau of Indian Affairs or the
Bureau of Land Management).’’
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2415
Response 6.8. This comment is out of
scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement is an agencywide, high-level
document that encompasses a broad
range of NRC Tribal interactions,
consultation, and outreach. The NRC
currently coordinates with other Federal
agencies, as appropriate, on issues
within its regulatory jurisdiction,
including the shipment of spent nuclear
fuel and licensing and regulation of
uranium recovery facilities. Currently,
there is neither a Federal repository for
spent nuclear fuel nor an interim storage
facility but the NRC will follow the
Tribal Policy Statement and appropriate
regulations when processing any
applications for these facilities. The
NRC does have regulations that govern
the transport of spent nuclear fuel and
implements them in coordination with
relevant Federal agencies, including the
DOE and the DOT. The NRC does not
have regulatory authority over uranium
mining facilities. However, the NRC
does have regulatory authority over
uranium recovery and uranium milling
facilities and coordinates with other
Federal agencies, as appropriate,
including the Bureau of Land
Management and EPA, during the
consultation process.
No change has been made to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement as a result of the
comment.
V. Procedural Requirements
Congressional Review Act Statement
This final NRC Tribal Policy
Statement is a rule as defined in the
Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C.
801–808). However, the Office of
Management and Budget has not found
it to be a major rule as defined in the
Congressional Review Act.
Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
This Policy Statement does not
contain new or amended information
collection requirements and, therefore,
is not subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq.).
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day
of January, 2017.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
Tribal Policy Statement
The purpose of this Tribal Policy
Statement is to set forth principles to be
followed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) to promote effective
government-to-government interactions
with Federally recognized American
Indian and Alaska Native Tribes, and to
E:\FR\FM\09JAN1.SGM
09JAN1
2416
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2017 / Notices
encourage and facilitate Tribal
involvement in the areas that the NRC
has jurisdiction. It seeks to provide
agencywide principles to achieve
consistency but also encourage customtailored approaches to consultation and
coordination that reflect the
circumstances of each situation and the
preference of each Tribal government. It
is the NRC’s expectation that all
program and regional office consultation
and coordination practices will be
consistent with or adhere to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement. This NRC
Tribal Policy Statement is based on the
United States Constitution, treaties,
statutes, Executive Orders, judicial
decisions, and the unique relationship
between Indian Tribes and the Federal
government.1
The following principles will guide
the NRC’s interaction with Indian
Tribes:
1. The NRC Recognizes the Federal
Trust Relationship With and Will
Uphold Its Trust Responsibility to
Indian Tribes
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
The NRC shares the Federal
government’s unique Trust Relationship
with, and Trust Responsibility to,
Indian Tribes. Under the Federal Trust
Doctrine, the United States—and the
individual agencies of the Federal
government—owe a fiduciary duty to
Indian Tribes. The nature of that duty
depends on the underlying substantive
laws (i.e., treaties, statutes, agreements)
creating the duty. The NRC exercises its
Trust Responsibility in the context of its
authorizing statutes including the
Atomic Energy Act, the Energy
Reorganization Act of 1974, the Nuclear
Waste Policy Act of 1982, the Low-Level
Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1985,
and the Uranium Mill Tailings
Radiation Control Act of 1978, as
amended. As an independent regulatory
agency that does not hold in trust Tribal
lands or assets or provide services to
Federally recognized Tribes, the NRC
fulfills its Trust Responsibility through
implementation of the principles of the
Tribal Policy Statement, by providing
protections under its implementing
regulations, and through recognition of
additional obligations consistent with
1 This Tribal Policy Statement is not intended to,
and does not, grant, expand, create, or diminish any
rights, benefits, or trust responsibilities, substantive
or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity in any
cause of action by any party against the United
States, the Commission, or any person. This Tribal
Policy Statement does not alter, amend, repeal,
interpret, or modify Tribal sovereignty, any treaty
rights of any Indian Tribes, or preempt, modify, or
limit the exercise of such rights. Nothing herein
shall be interpreted as amending or changing the
Commission’s regulations.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:14 Jan 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
other applicable treaties and statutory
authorities.
2. The NRC Recognizes and Is
Committed to a Government-toGovernment Relationship With Indian
Tribes
The NRC recognizes the right of each
Indian Tribe to self-governance and
supports Tribal sovereignty and selfdetermination. The NRC recognizes
Tribal governments as dependent
domestic sovereign nations,
independent from State governments,
with separate and distinct authorities
with inherent sovereign powers over
their members and territory, consistent
with applicable statutes and authorities.
3. The NRC Will Conduct Outreach to
Indian Tribes
The NRC will conduct outreach to
keep Indian Tribes informed about the
agency’s actions and plans, as
appropriate, related to its regulatory
actions that have substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian Tribes.
The NRC will participate in national
and regional Tribal conferences and
summits hosted by Federal agencies,
Tribal governments, and Tribal
organizations, as appropriate. The NRC
will encourage Tribal governments to
communicate their preferences to NRC
staff during outreach activities and will
seek to provide information about
opportunities for Tribal participation in
NRC meetings and advisory committees
concerning NRC regulatory actions that
have substantial direct effects on one or
more Indian Tribes, as appropriate.
4. The NRC Will Engage in Timely
Consultation
The NRC will provide timely notice
and consult in good faith with Tribal
governments on NRC’s regulatory
actions that have substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian Tribes as
well as those regulatory actions for
which Tribal consultation is required
under Federal statute.
Tribal officials may also request that
the NRC engage in consultation with
them on matters that have not been
identified by the NRC to have
substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes as well as those regulatory
actions for which Tribal consultation is
not required under Federal statute. The
NRC will make efforts to grant such
requests, taking into consideration the
nature of the activity at issue, past
consultation efforts, available resources,
timing issues, and other relevant factors.
The NRC will establish early
communications and begin consultation
as soon as practicable. The NRC will
consult in good faith throughout the
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
agency decisionmaking process and
develop and maintain effective
communication, coordination, and
cooperation with Indian Tribes. The
NRC representatives for consultations
with Tribal officials or representatives
will be of an appropriate rank and the
level of interaction will be
commensurate with the circumstances.
The appropriate level of interaction will
be determined by a discussion between
the NRC and Tribal governments, and
program office consultation procedures
and guidance. Participating Tribal and
NRC representatives will serve as
respective decisionmakers, based on the
established agenda and to the extent
possible.
5. The NRC Will Coordinate With Other
Federal Agencies
When the Commission’s action
involves other Federal agencies, the
NRC will perform its Tribal consultation
jointly with other Federal agencies, as
appropriate and to the extent possible.
6. The NRC Will Encourage
Participation by State-Recognized Tribes
The NRC recognizes the distinction
between Indian Tribes who are
Federally recognized and those who are
not. The NRC will reach out to States to
identify the appropriate Staterecognized Tribes to invite to participate
in its regulatory process, including
opportunities related to rulemaking,
licensing and decommissioning.
Designated Official and Tribal Liaisons
The Deputy Executive Director for
Materials, Waste, Research, State,
Tribal, Compliance, Administration,
and Human Capital Programs serves as
the NRC’s designated official for Tribal
consultations. The designated official
will ensure that the agency program
personnel have considered the Tribal
implications related to their
responsibilities within the NRC’s
jurisdiction. The designated official will
also make efforts to facilitate meaningful
and timely consultation and
coordination regarding NRC’s regulatory
actions that have substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian Tribes as
well as those regulatory actions for
which Tribal consultation is required
under Federal statute.
The designated official will be
supported by staff who have functional
responsibility to serve as
intergovernmental liaisons to Indian
Tribes. These NRC Tribal liaisons will
facilitate government-to-government
consultation by serving as the agency’s
primary points of contact for Indian
Tribes, coordinating with the
appropriate office or personnel
E:\FR\FM\09JAN1.SGM
09JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 5 / Monday, January 9, 2017 / Notices
regarding programmatic inquiries, and
will facilitate the appropriate level of
communication and exchange of
information between Tribal officials and
the NRC staff. The Tribal liaisons will
also educate the NRC staff about Tribal
issues including cultural sensitivity and
the Federal Trust Responsibility. The
designated official will have the
authority to delegate tasks to the NRC
Tribal liaisons as he/she deems fit.
[FR Doc. 2017–00091 Filed 1–6–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–79719; File No. SR–
NYSEArca–2016–143]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE
Arca, Inc.; Order Approving Proposed
Rule Change, as Modified by
Amendment No. 1 Thereto, Introducing
NYSE OptX
January 3, 2017.
I. Introduction
On November 3, 2016, NYSE Arca,
Inc. (the ‘‘Exchange’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) pursuant to Section
19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4
thereunder,2 a proposed rule change to
introduce NYSE OptX, an order entry
platform that will allow for the
submission of Qualified Contingent
Cross orders (‘‘QCC Orders’’) by OTP
Holders and OTP Firms. On November
15, 2016, the Exchange filed
Amendment No. 1 to the proposal.3 The
proposed rule change, as modified by
Amendment No. 1, was published for
comment in the Federal Register on
November 22, 2016.4 The Commission
received no comment letters on the
proposed rule change. This order
approves the proposed rule change, as
modified by Amendment No. 1.
II. Description of the Proposed Rule
Change
The Exchange proposes to introduce
NYSE OptX, an order entry platform
that will allow OTP Holders 5 and OTP
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 In Amendment No. 1, the Exchange clarified
that QCC Orders sent through NYSE OptX to the
Exchange for execution will comply with the order
format and EOC entry requirements established by
the Exchange, which are set forth in Exchange Rule
6.67.
4 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79327
(November 16, 2016), 81 FR 83890 (‘‘Notice’’).
5 The term ‘‘OTP Holder’’ refers to a natural
person, in good standing, who has been issued an
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
2 17
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:14 Jan 06, 2017
Jkt 241001
Firms 6 (collectively, ‘‘OTPs’’) to submit
QCC Orders to the Exchange. According
to the Exchange, OTPs currently send
QCC Orders to the Exchange through the
use of third-party front end order
management systems or by calling Floor
Brokers and relaying their orders by
telephone.7
According to the Exchange, NYSE
OptX is an order entry platform that will
utilize a combination of Instant
Messaging (‘‘IM’’) and browser-based
technology to allow OTPs to submit
QCC Orders for execution on the
Exchange’s trading system.8 To execute
a QCC Order through NYSE OptX, an
OTP will send the order in plain text to
NYSE OptX,9 which will then translate
the message into a pre-populated order
ticket with details of the order and
return the order ticket to the OTP in a
browser-based URL. The OTP will then
confirm the order ticket and submit the
order to the Exchange for execution, or
send the order to a Floor Broker for
execution. After an order is executed on
the Exchange, NYSE OptX will remit
details of the execution back to the OTP.
According to the Exchange, NYSE
OptX is designed as an alternative to
front end order management systems
and the use of telephones for the
sending of QCC Orders to the
Exchange.10 The Exchange notes that
NYSE OptX will not provide OTPs with
the capability to send any other type of
orders or the capability to send QCC
Orders for execution to other options
markets.11 Further, OTPs will continue
OTP, or has been named as a Nominee. An OTP
Holder must be a registered broker or dealer
pursuant to Section 15 of the Act, or a nominee or
an associated person of a registered broker or dealer
that has been approved by the Exchange to conduct
business on the Exchange’s Trading Facilities. See
Exchange Rule 1.1(q).
6 The term ‘‘OTP Firm’’ refers to a sole
proprietorship, partnership, corporation, limited
liability company, or other organization in good
standing that holds an OTP or upon which an
individual OTP Holder has conferred trading
privileges on the Exchange’s Trading Facilities
pursuant to and in compliance with Exchange
Rules. An OTP Firm must be a registered broker or
dealer pursuant to Section 15 of the Act. See
Exchange Rule 1.1(r).
7 See Notice, supra note 4, at 83891.
8 See id. The Exchange represents that NYSE
OptX will not require any changes to the
Exchange’s communication or surveillance rules.
Id. at 83891, n.9.
9 The Exchange states that OTPs will be required
to provide all the essential information regarding
the QCC Order when sending it to NYSE OptX,
including the price of the option and the stock, the
size and side of the order, and delta. The Exchange
further represents that QCC Orders sent to the
Exchange for execution will comply with the order
format and EOC entry requirements established by
the Exchange. See Notice, supra note 4, at 83891,
n.11. See also Exchange Rule 6.67—Order Format
and System Entry Requirements.
10 See Notice, supra note 4, at 83891.
11 See id.
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
2417
to be able to submit QCC Orders through
the use of a third-party front end order
management system, or by telephone, as
they currently do.12 The Exchange notes
that use of OptX to send QCC Orders to
the Exchange is optional and
voluntary.13
The Exchange stated that it will
announce the effective date of NYSE
OptX in a Trader Update to be
published no later than 90 days
following approval of this proposal, and
that such effective date will be no later
than 270 days following publication of
the Trader Update.14
III. Discussion and Commission
Findings
After careful review, the Commission
finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with the requirements of
Section 6 of the Act 15 and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to a
national securities exchange.16 In
particular, the Commission finds that
the proposed rule change is consistent
with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,17 which
requires, among other things, that the
rules of a national securities exchange
be designed to prevent fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices, to
promote just and equitable principles of
trade, to foster cooperation and
coordination with persons engaged in
regulating, clearing, settling, processing
information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to
remove impediments to and perfect the
mechanism of a free and open market
and a national market system, and, in
general, to protect investors and the
public interest and that the rules not be
designed to permit unfair
discrimination between customers,
issuers, brokers, or dealers.
In particular, the Commission notes
that, according to the Exchange, NYSE
OptX will provide OTPs an alternative
to third-party front end order
management systems and the use of
telephones to send QCC Orders to the
Exchange.18 Such an alternative may
help protect the interests of investors by
12 See
id.
id.
14 See id.
15 15 U.S.C. 78f.
16 In approving this proposed rule change, the
Commission has considered the proposed rule’s
impact on efficiency, competition, and capital
formation. See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
17 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
18 See Notice, supra note 4, at 83891. As stated
above, the Exchange represented that OTPs will be
required to provide all the essential information
regarding the QCC Order when sending the order
to NYSE OptX and QCC Orders sent to the
Exchange for execution will comply with the order
format and EOC entry requirements established by
the Exchange. Id. at 83891, n.11.
13 See
E:\FR\FM\09JAN1.SGM
09JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 5 (Monday, January 9, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2402-2417]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-00091]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2012-0235]
Tribal Policy Statement
AGENCY: Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Policy statement; issuance.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this
Statement of Policy to set forth principles to be followed by the NRC
staff to promote effective government-to-government interactions with
American Indian and Alaska Native Tribes, and to encourage and
facilitate Tribal involvement in the areas over which the Commission
has jurisdiction. It provides agencywide guidelines that achieve
consistency, but also encourage custom-tailored approaches to
consultation and coordination that reflect the circumstances of each
situation and the preference of each Tribal government. It is the NRC's
expectation that all program and regional office consultation and
coordination practices will be consistent with or adhere to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement.
DATES: This policy statement is effective on January 9, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Please refer to Docket ID NRC-2012-0235 when contacting the
NRC about the availability of information regarding this document. You
may obtain publicly-available information related to this document
using any of the following methods:
Federal Rulemaking Web site: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and search for Docket ID NRC-2012-0235. Address
questions about NRC dockets to Carol Gallagher; telephone: 301-415-
3463; email: Carol.Gallagher@nrc.gov. For technical questions, contact
the individual listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document.
NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System
(ADAMS): You may obtain publicly-available documents online in the
ADAMS Public Documents collection at https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. To begin the search, select ``ADAMS Public Documents'' and
then select ``Begin Web-based ADAMS Search.'' For problems with ADAMS,
please contact the NRC's Public Document Room (PDR) reference staff at
1-800-397-4209, 301-415-4737, or by email to pdr.resource@nrc.gov. The
ADAMS accession number for each document referenced in this document
(if that document is available in ADAMS) is provided the first time
that a document is referenced. The Tribal Policy Statement, in its
entirety, is in the attachment to this document.
NRC's PDR: You may examine and purchase copies of public
documents at the NRC's PDR, Room O1-F21, One White Flint North, 11555
Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kevin O'Sullivan, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555-0001; telephone: 301-415-8112, email:
Tribal_Outreach.Resource@nrc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
II. Discussion
III. Opportunity for Public Participation
IV. Procedural Requirements
I. Background
The purpose of the NRC Tribal Policy Statement is to establish
policy principles to be followed by the NRC to promote effective
government-to-government interactions with Indian Tribes, and to
encourage and facilitate Tribal involvement in the areas over which the
Commission has jurisdiction. The NRC licenses and regulates the
Nation's civilian use of radioactive materials to protect public health
and safety, common defense and security, and the environment under the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (AEA) (42 U.S.C. 2011). Other
statutory provisions such as the National Historic Preservation Act
(NHPA) (54 U.S.C. 300101) can require Tribal consultation as part of
the NRC's evaluation of agency activities during licensing actions,
rulemaking, or policy development. The NRC complies with statutory
provisions and NRC regulatory
[[Page 2403]]
provisions that require Tribal consultation and interacts with Tribal
governments accordingly.
A. NRC Previous Interactions with Indian Tribes
Historically, the NRC has had limited, but significant,
interactions with Indian Tribes. The Commission has upheld statutory
obligations to consult with Tribes under Federal law and acted in a
manner consistent with the spirit of certain Presidential initiatives
pertaining to Tribal consultation and coordination. However, the NRC
has not previously formalized an agencywide policy statement.
Many Federally recognized Tribes have an interest in public health
and safety and environmental protection associated with NRC regulatory
activities that include uranium recovery, commercial nuclear power, and
nuclear waste transportation, disposal, and storage activities. The NRC
has exercised its Trust Responsibility in the context of its
authorizing statutes, including the AEA. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement formally reflects the NRC's recognition of the Federal Trust
Responsibility and the NRC's commitment to a government-to-government
relationship, which is distinct from interactions with members of the
public, with Federally recognized Tribes. The NRC will make efforts to
consult in good faith with Indian Tribes on agency actions that have
substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes as well as
those regulatory actions for which Tribal consultation is required
under Federal Statute. Under the NRC's policy, the NRC or Tribal
governments can request consultation on regulatory activities that have
Tribal implications. The NRC's policy is to consult on a government-to-
government basis with Tribal governments as soon as practicable on NRC
regulatory actions with Tribal implications.
On November 6, 2000, President Clinton issued Executive Order (EO)
13175, ``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments''
(65 FR 67249). Executive Order 13175 states, ```Policies that have
Tribal implications' refers to regulations, legislative comments or
proposed legislation, and other policy statements or actions that have
substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal government and Indian Tribes, or on
the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
government and Indian Tribes.'' Executive Order 13175, established the
following principles to guide agencies when forming and implementing
policies with potential Tribal implications:
The United States has a unique legal relationship with
Indian Tribal governments as set forth in the Constitution of the
United States, treaties, statutes, EOs, and court decisions. The
Federal government recognizes Indian Tribes as domestic dependent
nations under its protection and has enacted statutes and promulgated
regulations that establish and define a trust relationship with Indian
Tribes.
The Federal government has recognized the right of Indian
Tribes to self-government with inherent sovereign powers over their
members and territory. The United States continues to work with Indian
Tribes on a government-to-government basis to address issues concerning
Tribal self-government, Tribal trust resources, and Indian Tribal
treaty and other rights.
The United States recognizes the right of Indian Tribes to
self-government and supports Tribal sovereignty and self-determination.
As an independent regulatory agency, the NRC is exempt from the
requirements of certain EOs, including EO 13175. However, on January
26, 2001, the Commission sent correspondence to the Office of
Management and Budget stating that ``. . . in exercising its regulatory
authority this agency [NRC] acts in a manner consistent with the
fundamental precepts expressed in the Order [EO 13175]'' (ADAMS
Accession No. ML010260297). To that end, the Commission has developed
agency practices for Tribal consultation consistent with the principles
articulated in EO 13175.
The NRC's past practice for government-to-government interaction
with Federally recognized Tribes has reflected the spirit of the
relevant EOs, without establishing a formal policy. The NRC has
interacted with Tribal governments on a case-by-case basis, allowing
the NRC and the Tribes to initiate communication and consultation. The
NRC staff has also maintained working relationships with Tribal
governments and Tribal organizations that have an interest in NRC
regulated activities.
B. Development of the Draft Tribal Policy Statement
In SECY-96-187, ``Policy Issues Raised in Meeting with Prairie
Island Dakota Indian Representatives'' (ADAMS Accession No.
ML16293A128), the NRC staff provided to the Commission an analysis of
Tribal issues. The paper centered on issues raised by representatives
from the Prairie Island Dakota Indian Community including: (1) Entering
into a Memorandum of Understanding with the NRC; 2) allowing Tribal
representatives to observe inspections at the Prairie Island Nuclear
Generating Plant; and 3) developing a formal policy on cooperation with
Federally recognized Tribes. In the Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM)
dated November 13, 1996, the Commission approved the staff's
recommendation not to develop a formal policy on cooperation with
Federally recognized Tribal governments at that time, but to continue
addressing Native American issues on a case-by-case basis and operating
with Tribal governments on a government-to-government basis (ADAMS
Accession No. ML16293A154).
On January 8, 2009, the Commission issued SRM-M081211, from the
December 11, 2008, ``Briefing on Uranium Recovery,'' directing the NRC
staff to develop and implement an internal protocol for interaction
with Native American Tribal Governments that would allow for custom
tailored approaches to address both the NRC and Tribal interests on a
case-by-case basis (ADAMS Accession No. ML090080206). The Commission
also directed the NRC staff to assess what policies other Federal
agencies have for interactions with Native American Tribal Governments
and to report those findings, which could determine the efficacy of an
NRC Tribal Policy Statement, to the Commission. The NRC staff responded
to this Commission direction in SECY-09-0180, ``U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission Interaction with Native American Tribes'' (ADAMS Accession
No. ML092920384). The staff communicated the determination that the
NRC's case-by-case approach to interaction was effective and met the
needs of the Commission and the Tribes. The staff concluded that Tribal
interactions would not benefit from a formal Tribal policy at that
time. The NRC staff also developed NUREG-2173, ``NRC Tribal Protocol
Manual: Guidance for NRC Employees,'' as an internal protocol for
interacting with Tribal governments (ADAMS Accession No. ML092990559).
On May 22, 2012, the Commission issued the SRM for COMWDM-12-0001,
``Tribal Consultation Policy Statement and Protocol'' (ADAMS Accession
No. ML121430233), directing the NRC staff to provide a proposed Policy
Statement and protocol on consultation with Tribal governments. The
Commission also directed the NRC staff to do the following when
developing the proposed policy
[[Page 2404]]
statement: (1) Use the existing ``Tribal Protocol Manual: Guidance for
NRC Employees,'' and the NRC staff's ongoing efforts outlined in SECY-
09-0180 as a starting point and the basis for developing the proposed
policy statement and protocol; (2) seek input from the Tribes and the
public on how to improve the existing manual; (3) clearly articulate in
the policy statement and protocol that the NRC's actions must be in
accordance with its governing statutes and regulations; (4) respect and
reflect in the policy statement and protocol sensitivity to the
distinction made in executive orders and statutes between Indian Tribes
who are Federally recognized and those who are not; (5) indicate in the
policy statement and protocol that the NRC will conduct outreach to
State-recognized Tribes on a case-by-case basis; (6) explore additional
opportunities within our current regulatory processes for information
sharing and outreach to State-recognized Tribes; and (7) make the
protocol prominently publicly available on the NRC's public Web site.
The Commission also specified that the proposed policy statement should
serve as a high-level foundation for the protocol and should echo the
language and spirit of the relevant Presidential Memoranda and EOs.
The NRC staff formed an agency working group to develop a proposed
NRC Tribal Policy Statement and to revise the NRC Tribal Protocol
Manual. On October 12, 2012 (77 FR 62269), the NRC requested public
comment on the NRC Tribal Protocol Manual and requested suggestions for
the development of a proposed NRC Tribal Policy Statement to establish
policy principles to be followed by the NRC to promote effective
government-to-government interactions with Indian Tribes, and to
encourage and facilitate involvement by Indian Tribes in the areas over
which the Commission has jurisdiction. The public comment period was
open for 180 days, and the NRC received a total of six comment letters
from two Tribal governments, two mining associations, one inter-Tribal
organization, and a Tribal college.
Informed by internal working group representatives, external
outreach, and review of similar policies at other Federal agencies, the
NRC developed the proposed NRC Tribal Policy Statement. The NRC engaged
with Tribal governments and other interested parties by: (1)
Collaborating with the National Congress of American Indians to conduct
mass mailings to Federally recognized Tribes; and (2) participating in
Tribal meetings hosted by Tribal organizations and other Federal
agencies (these meetings included attendees from Federally recognized
and State-recognized Tribes). Additionally, the NRC staff reviewed
Tribal policy statements of executive departments, their related
agencies, and other independent agencies and provided their findings to
the Commission.
The proposed NRC Tribal Policy Statement was consistent with the
language of EO 13175 and was intended to cover a broad range of Tribal
consultations, outreach, and interactions conducted by NRC staff. The
proposed NRC Tribal Policy Statement applied to Federally recognized
Indian Tribes as defined by the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List
Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 479a). It also encouraged participation by
State-recognized Tribes in the NRC's regulatory process. On December 1,
2014, the NRC published the proposed NRC Tribal Policy Statement in the
Federal Register for public comment (79 FR 71136). (See Section III,
``Opportunity for Public Participation,'' of this document for
additional information.)
C. Development of the Final NRC Tribal Policy Statement
After the December 2014 publication of the proposed NRC Tribal
Policy Statement in the Federal Register, the NRC staff engaged in
internal and external collaboration and outreach to inform the final
NRC Tribal Policy Statement. The NRC staff also sought comments on the
final NRC Tribal Policy Statement through participation in external
conferences and presentations, periodic telephone calls,
teleconferences, and webinars. The NRC staff continued to participate
in standing Tribal meetings hosted by Federal partners and Tribal
organizations and initiated additional outreach to Tribal leadership
through various regional or affiliated Tribal leadership councils. A
list of all outreach efforts can be found in NRC Tribal Liaison Annual
Report Fiscal Year 2015 (ADAMS Accession No. ML15247A011).
The final NRC Tribal Policy Statement reflects responses to both
internal and external comments. The final NRC Tribal Policy Statement
applies to all NRC staff and activities within the NRC's regulatory
jurisdiction. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement is written at a high
level to cover a wide variety of interactions, consultation, and
outreach to Indian Tribes, including Federally recognized American
Indian and Alaska Native Tribes.
II. Discussion
Within the context of this discussion, the following definitions
will apply unless otherwise indicated:
Consultation means efforts to conduct meaningful and timely
discussions between the NRC and Tribal governments on the NRC's
regulatory actions that have substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes and those regulatory actions for which Tribal
consultation is required under Federal statute. The NRC's Tribal
consultation allows Indian Tribes the opportunity to provide input on
regulatory actions with Tribal implications and those where Tribal
consultation is required, and is different from the outreach and public
comment periods. The consultation process may include, but is not
limited to, providing for mutually-agreed protocols, timely
communication, coordination, cooperation, and collaboration. The
consultation process provides opportunities for appropriate Tribal
officials or representatives to meet with NRC management or staff to
achieve a mutual understanding between the NRC and the Tribes of their
respective interests and perspectives.
Indian Tribe means any American Indian or Alaska Native Tribe,
Band, Nation, Pueblo, or other organized group or community that the
Secretary of the Interior acknowledges to exist as an Indian Tribe
pursuant to the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25
U.S.C. 479a).
Interaction means reciprocal actions involving the NRC and Indian
Tribes, and may include, but is not limited to, outreach, consultation,
coordination, training, and information exchanges. Interactions may be
oral or written and can take place remotely (through electronic media)
or in face-to-face meetings.
Outreach means NRC staff efforts to inform Indian Tribes about the
agency's actions and plans. Outreach includes sharing information and
encouraging Tribal governments to communicate their concerns and
interests to NRC staff.
Regulatory Actions with Tribal Implications refers to regulations,
legislative comments or proposed legislation, and other policy
statements or actions that have substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government
and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities
between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes.
Tribal Official means an elected, appointed, or designated official
or
[[Page 2405]]
employee of an Indian Tribe or authorized intertribal organization.
Trust Responsibility means a fiduciary duty, on the part of the
United States, to protect Tribal treaty rights, lands, assets, and
resources, as well as a duty to carry out the mandates of Federal law
with respect to Indian Tribes. The NRC exercises its Trust
Responsibility in the context of its authorizing statutes, which
include the AEA, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, the Nuclear
Waste Policy Act of 1982, the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of
1985, and the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978, as
amended. As an independent regulatory agency that does not hold in
trust Tribal lands or assets, or provide services to Federally
recognized Tribes, the NRC fulfills its Trust Responsibility through
implementation of the principles of the Tribal Policy Statement, by
providing protections under its implementing regulations, and through
recognition of additional obligations consistent with other applicable
treaties and statutory authorities.
III. Opportunity for Public Comment
On December 1, 2014 (79 FR 71136), the NRC published a Federal
Register notice requesting public comments on the proposed NRC Tribal
Policy Statement. The original 120-day comment period was extended to
180 days (ending on May 31, 2015) through an additional Federal
Register notice that was published on February 5, 2015 (80 FR 6553).
A. Overview of Public Comments
The NRC received nine comment submissions, including comments from
two representatives from Federally recognized Tribes, two
representatives from inter-Tribal organizations, a Federal agency, an
electric utility company, and three individuals who did not provide an
organizational affiliation.
Comments and responses related to the proposed NRC Tribal Policy
Statement are listed in this section, and comments are quoted directly
from comment submissions. The NRC Tribal Protocol Manual was published
concurrently with the proposed Policy Statement in the Federal Register
for public comment; comments and related responses will be published
separately, with the exception of overlapping comments that cover both
the NRC Tribal Policy Statement and the NRC Tribal Protocol Manual.
The following table lists the commenter's name and affiliation,
ADAMS accession number for the comment submission, and the document
related to each comment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comment Submission
Commenter Name Affiliation ADAMS Accession No. Document
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charlene Dwin Vaughn................. Advisory Council on ML15154A842............ Proposed Tribal Policy
Historic Preservation Statement
(ACHP).
R. Budd Haemer....................... Indiana Michigan Power. ML15155A564............ Proposed Tribal Policy
Statement and Tribal
Protocol Manual
Richard Arnold....................... National Transportation ML15175A161............ Proposed Tribal Policy
Stakeholders Forum Statement
Tribal Caucus.
Bill Thompson........................ National Tribal Air ML15124A013............ Proposed Tribal Policy
Association. Statement
Philip R. Mahowald................... Prairie Island Indian ML15159A181............ Proposed Tribal Policy
Community. Statement and Tribal
Protocol Manual
Heather Westra....................... Prairie Island Indian ML15065A219............ Proposed Tribal Policy
Community. Statement
Cassandra Bloedel.................... Private Citizen........ ML15159A179............ Proposed Tribal Policy
Statement
Doreen Dupont........................ Private Citizen........ ML15159A180............ Proposed Tribal Policy
Statement
Savannah Halleaux.................... Private Citizen........ ML14345A750............ Proposed Tribal Policy
Statement
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Public Comment Analysis
The NRC has reviewed every comment submission and has identified 42
unique comments requiring NRC consideration and response. Comments and
the NRC responses are presented in this section. The comments generally
fell within the following categories: NRC's Trust Responsibility as a
Federal agency; suggested changes to the language of the NRC Tribal
Policy Statement; NRC's Tribal outreach and consultation; and NRC's
government-to-government relationship with Tribes. Commenters provided
additional comments that did not fall within those categories as well
as comments that were out of scope of the NRC Tribal Policy Statement;
these comments have been included at the end of this section, along
with NRC responses.
1. NRC's Trust Responsibility as a Federal Agency
Multiple commenters provided input related to the NRC's Trust
Responsibility to Federally recognized Tribes as a Federal agency.
Comment 1.1. ``Politics should not come into play in the Trust
Relationship. The Trust Relationship requires more in terms of
interactions access, and voice.''
Response 1.1. The NRC agrees with this comment. The NRC upholds its
Trust Relationship with Federally recognized Tribes without
consideration of politics. In achieving its mission, the NRC adheres to
the principles of good regulation--independence, openness, efficiency,
clarity, and reliability. The NRC seeks to use the highest possible
standards of ethical performance and professionalism with regard to
regulatory activities. Tribal governments and others are encouraged to
participate in the regulatory process to provide relevant facts and
opinions pertaining to an action. The NRC considers many, and possibly
conflicting public interests, when making decisions that are based on
objective, unbiased assessments of all information, and must be
documented with reasons explicitly stated.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 1.2. ``It is inconsistent to say that the Trust
Responsibility is met simply by meeting standards for the general
public. Need to recognize the uniqueness of Tribes and the Trust
Relationship. Trust relationship requires more than simply meeting what
is required.''
Response 1.2. The NRC agrees with this comment. Under the Federal
Trust Doctrine, the United States--and the individual agencies of the
Federal government--owe a fiduciary duty to Indian Tribes. The nature
of that duty depends on the underlying substantive laws (i.e.,
treaties, statutes, agreements) creating the duty. The NRC exercises
its Trust Responsibility under its authorizing statutes including the
AEA, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, the Nuclear Waste Policy
Act of 1982, the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy
[[Page 2406]]
Act of 1985, and the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of
1978, as amended. As an independent regulatory agency that does not
hold in trust Tribal lands or assets or provide services to Federally
recognized Tribes, the NRC fulfills its Trust Responsibility through
implementation of the principles of the Tribal Policy Statement, by
providing protections under its implementing regulations, and through
recognition of additional obligations consistent with other applicable
treaties and statutory authorities. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement
formally reflects the NRC's recognition of the Federal Trust
Responsibility and the NRC's commitment to a government-to-government
relationship with Federally recognized Tribes that is distinct from
interactions with members of the public. The NRC will consult in good
faith with Indian Tribes on agency actions that have substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian Tribes as well as those agency actions
for which Tribal consultation is required under Federal Statute.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has been revised to reflect the
comment, in part.
Comment 1.3. ``NRC has not historically met its Trust
Responsibilities. Tribal Advance Notification Rule and the requirement
for tribes to `opt-in' is inconsistent with the Tribal Policy
Statement. States do not have to opt-in, while Tribes have to. Tribes
should be given the opportunity to `opt-out.'''
Response 1.3. The NRC disagrees with the comment that the NRC has
not historically met its Trust Responsibility. Under the Federal Trust
Doctrine, the United States--and the individual agencies of the Federal
Government--owe a fiduciary duty to Indian Tribes. The nature of that
duty depends on the underlying substantive laws (i.e., treaties,
statutes, agreements) creating the duty. The NRC exercises its Trust
Responsibility under its authorizing statutes including the AEA, the
Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of
1982, the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1985, and the
Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978, as amended. As an
independent regulatory agency that does not hold in trust Tribal lands
or assets or provide services to Federally recognized Tribes, the NRC
fulfills its Trust Responsibility through implementation of the
principles of the Tribal Policy Statement, by providing protections
under its implementing regulations, and through recognition of
additional obligations consistent with other applicable treaties and
statutory authorities. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement formally
reflects the NRC's recognition of the Federal Trust Responsibility and
the NRC's commitment to a government-to-government relationship with
Federally recognized Tribes that is distinct from interactions with
members of the public. In addition to affording Tribal members
protections under its implementing regulations, the NRC will consult in
good faith with Indian Tribes on agency actions that have substantial
direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes as well as those agency
actions for which Tribal consultation is required under Federal
statute.
While the comment related to the Tribal Advance Notification Rule
is out of scope of the NRC Tribal Policy Statement, the NRC believes
the Tribal Advance Notification Rule is consistent with the NRC Tribal
Policy Statement because it requires Tribal governments to opt-in to
participate in the advanced notification program. The Advance
Notification to Native American Tribes of Transportation of Certain
Types of Nuclear Waste (Tribal Advance Notification Rule) amends NRC
rules to require licensees to provide advance notification to
participating Federally recognized Tribal governments regarding
shipments of irradiated reactor fuel and certain types of nuclear waste
for any shipment that passes within or across their reservations (77 FR
34194). After reviewing public comments received during the development
of the Tribal Advance Notification Rule, the NRC staff concluded that
Tribes should have the option of whether to opt into the program
because the program requires training, certain equipment, and has civil
and criminal penalties for non-compliance.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has been revised to reflect the
comment, in part.
Comment 1.4. ``The ACHP [Advisory Council on Historic Preservation]
recommends expanding the discussion on trust responsibility [related to
policy principle 2 on Trust Responsibility] and including an
acknowledgement of trust responsibility. For more information about
trust responsibility, please reference the Bureau of Indian Affairs
[BIA] definition of trust responsibility (https://www.bia.gov/FAQs/).''
Response 1.4. The NRC agrees with this comment. In comparison with
the BIA, the NRC is an independent regulatory agency and does not hold
in trust Tribal lands or assets or provide services to Federally
recognized Tribes. Under the Federal Trust Doctrine, the United
States--and the individual agencies of the Federal Government--owe a
fiduciary duty to Indian Tribes. The nature of that duty depends on the
underlying substantive laws (i.e., treaties, statutes, agreements)
creating the duty. The NRC exercises its Trust Responsibility in the
context of its authorizing statutes including the AEA, the Energy
Reorganization Act of 1974, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, the
Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1985, and the Uranium Mill
Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978, as amended. As an independent
regulatory agency that does not hold in trust Tribal lands or assets or
provide services to Federally recognized Tribes, the NRC fulfills its
Trust Responsibility through implementation of the principles of the
Tribal Policy Statement, by providing protections under its
implementing regulations, and through recognition of additional
obligations consistent with other applicable treaties and statutory
authorities. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement formally recognizes the
unique relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes
and describes NRC's continuing commitment to a government-to-government
relationship with Tribal governments that is distinct from the
interactions that the agency has with members of the public. The
discussion section of Policy Principle 1 has been revised to provide
further clarification and acknowledgment of the NRC's Trust
Responsibility.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has been revised to reflect the
comment.
Comment 1.5. ``To Indian tribes, upholding a Trust relationship
with Indian tribes means more to Indian tribes than just ensuring the
tribal members receive the same protections that are available to other
persons (i.e., the general public). In our view, the NRC is required to
do more, not less.
``The `trust responsibility' that the federal government owes to
Indian tribes imposes both substantive and procedural duties on the
federal government.''
Response 1.5. The NRC agrees with the comment. Under the Federal
Trust Doctrine, the United States--and the individual agencies of the
Federal Government--owe a fiduciary duty to Indian Tribes. The nature
of that duty depends on the underlying substantive laws (i.e.,
treaties, statutes, agreements) creating the duty. The NRC exercises
its Trust Responsibility under its authorizing statutes including the
AEA, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, the Nuclear Waste Policy
Act of 1982, the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy
[[Page 2407]]
Act of 1985, and the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of
1978, as amended. As an independent regulatory agency that does not
hold in trust Tribal lands or assets or provide services to Federally
recognized Tribes, the NRC fulfills its Trust Responsibility through
implementation of the principles of the Tribal Policy Statement, by
providing protections under its implementing regulations, and through
recognition of additional obligations consistent with other applicable
treaties and statutory authorities. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement
formally reflects the NRC's recognition of the Federal Trust
Responsibility and the NRC's commitment to a government-to-government
relationship with Federally recognized Tribes that is distinct from
interactions with members of the public.
Other procedural components for carrying out interactions with
Tribal governments are articulated in the Tribal Protocol Manual and
specific agency regulations and guidance documents.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has been revised to reflect the
comment.
Comment 1.6. ``PIIC [Prairie Island Indian Community] believes that
the trust responsibility must mean more than solely complying with
existing statutes and regulations. Compliance of this type is no
different than what is owed to the general public. In order for the
trust responsibility to have any vitality, Federal agencies must
exercise a higher responsibility when taking action that may affect a
tribe. This is especially true when the issues concern lands held in
trust by the United States for a tribe and the tribal cultural and
historic resources and a tribe's ancestral homeland.''
Response 1.6. The NRC agrees with this comment. Under the Federal
Trust Doctrine, the United States--and the individual agencies of the
Federal Government--owe a fiduciary duty to Indian Tribes. The nature
of that duty depends on the underlying substantive laws (i.e.,
treaties, statutes, agreements) creating the duty. The NRC exercises
its Trust Responsibility under its authorizing statutes including the
AEA, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, the Nuclear Waste Policy
Act of 1982, the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1985, and
the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act of 1978, as amended. As
an independent regulatory agency that does not hold in trust Tribal
lands or assets or provide services to Federally recognized Tribes, the
NRC fulfills its Trust Responsibility through implementation of the
principles of the Tribal Policy Statement, by providing protections
under its implementing regulations, and through recognition of
additional obligations consistent with other applicable treaties and
statutory authorities. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement formally
reflects the NRC's recognition of the NRC's commitment to a government-
to-government relationship with Federally recognized Tribes with
respect to agency actions that have a substantial direct effect on one
or more Indian Tribes that is distinct from interactions with members
of the public. The NRC also upholds the statutory obligation to consult
with Federally recognized Tribes under Section 106 of the NHPA, which
is intended to protect historic properties that may be affected by a
Federal undertaking. The NHPA requirement to engage in Tribal
consultation applies regardless of the location of the historic
property and can include Tribal ancestral lands that are not part of
the Tribe's current reservation or trust lands.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has been revised to reflect the
comment.
2. Suggested changes to the language of the NRC Tribal Policy Statement
Multiple commenters proposed changes to the language of the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement or to the discussion section that defines terms
utilized throughout the NRC Tribal Policy Statement.
Comment 2.1. ``While the 6 principles [of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement] originally proposed serve as foundation of which to build
upon, the [U.S. Department of Energy] DOE National Transportation
Stakeholders Forum Tribal Caucus believes the proposed principles
should be expanded to include an additional Principle Policy Statement
#7. Specifically, it is recommended that the existing policy statement
include:
PRINCIPLE POLICY STATEMENT #7
7. NRC is committed to collaborating with tribes in regulatory
activities that may have the potential of affecting tribal interests.''
Response 2.1. The NRC disagrees with this comment. The NRC Tribal
Policy Statement is consistent with EO 13175, which states ``Policies
that have tribal implications refers to regulations, legislative
comments or proposed legislation, and other policy statements or
actions that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian
Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes.'' The suggested language
could be interpreted to require the NRC to seek consultation and
collaboration on all of NRC's activities because they have the
potential to impact Tribal members even if the activity has no greater
potential effect on Tribal members than the general public. For
example, health and safety regulations relating to well-logging or
medical use of byproduct material could fall under this definition.
Therefore, the NRC limited the obligation for the NRC to specifically
seek Tribal consultation to activities defined in EO 13175 and those
for which Tribal consultation is required under Federal statute.
However, Tribes can always request consultation with the NRC regarding
``regulatory activities that may have the potential of affecting Tribal
interests.'' The NRC would evaluate such requests on a case-by-case
basis.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 2.2. [The commenter suggested including the underlined text
in the discussion of policy principle 1.] ``The NRC shall respect
Indian Tribal self-government and sovereignty, will honor Tribal treaty
and other rights, and meet responsibilities that arise from the unique
relationship between the Federal government and Indian Tribal
governments. Further, the NRC shall encourage states to recognize the
Federal government's trust relationship with Tribes and incorporate
this recognition in their own practices.''
Response 2.2. The NRC disagrees with this comment. Our
understanding of the phrase ``Tribal rights'' would also cover ``tribal
treaty and other rights,'' so the change is unnecessary.
Section 274b. of the AEA authorizes the NRC to enter into
agreements with States so that the NRC relinquishes, and the State
assumes, regulatory authority over the radioactive material and
activities specified in the agreement. The NRC approves the agreement
if the NRC finds the State program adequate to protect public health
and safety and compatible with the NRC's regulatory program. The NRC
periodically reviews the State's program, but the NRC does not mandate
to the State how they should interact with Tribal governments when
implementing these regulatory requirements and the States apply their
own laws to implement their radiation control program for the specified
AEA radioactive materials covered in the Agreement.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
[[Page 2408]]
Comment 2.3. [The commenter suggested including the underlined text
in the discussion of policy principle 2, ``The NRC Recognizes and Is
Committed to a Government-to-Government Relationship With Indian
Tribes.''] ``The NRC recognizes the right of each Indian Tribe to self-
governance and supports Tribal sovereignty and self-determination. The
NRC recognizes Tribal governments as dependent domestic sovereign
nations, independent from State governments, with separate and distinct
authorities with inherent sovereign powers over their members and
territory.''
Response 2.3. The NRC agrees with this comment. The second sentence
of the discussion related to Policy Principle 2 now reads, ``The NRC
recognizes Tribal governments as dependent domestic sovereign nations,
independent from State governments, with separate and distinct
authorities with inherent sovereign powers over their members and
territory, consistent with applicable statutes and authorities.''
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has been revised to reflect the
comment.
Comment 2.4. [The Commenter suggested including the underlined text
in the discussion of policy principle 4, ``The NRC Will Engage in
Timely Consultation.''] ``The NRC will provide timely notice to, and
consult with, Tribal governments on NRC's regulatory and non-regulatory
actions that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian
Tribes. Tribal officials may request that the NRC engage in government-
to-government consultation with them on matters that have not been
identified by the NRC to have substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes. The NRC will make efforts to honor such requests, taking
into consideration the nature of the activity at issue, past
consultation efforts, available resources, timing issues, and other
relevant factors. The NRC will establish early communication and begin
consultation at the earliest permissible stage, as appropriate. The NRC
will consult in good faith throughout the agency decisionmaking process
and develop and maintain regular and meaningful effective
communication, coordination, and cooperation with Indian Tribes. The
NRC representatives for consultations with Tribal officials or
representatives will be of an appropriate rank of NRC representatives
and level of interaction commensurate with the circumstances and who
shall have decision-making power. The appropriate level of interaction
will be determined by past and current practices, continuing dialogue
between NRC and Tribal governments, and program office consultation
procedures.''
Response 2.4. The NRC agrees in part and disagrees in part with
this comment. The term ``regulatory action'' is used to reflect the
scope of the NRC's mission as a regulatory agency, and no change has
been made to the existing text. ``Effective communication'' already
reflects that communication should be ongoing during the consultation
process. The text has been revised to reflect that ``The NRC
representatives for consultations with Tribal officials or
representatives will be of an appropriate rank and the level of
interaction will be commensurate with the circumstances. The
appropriate level of interaction will be determined by a discussion
between the NRC and Tribal governments, and program office consultation
procedures and guidance. Participating Tribal and NRC representatives
will serve as respective decisionmakers, based on the established
agenda and to the extent possible.''
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has been revised to reflect the
comment.
Comment 2.5. [The commenter suggested including the underlined text
in the discussion of Policy Principle 5, ``The NRC Will Coordinate with
Other Federal Agencies.''] ``The NRC Will Coordinate With Other Federal
Agencies and States. When the Commission's action involves other
Federal agencies and States, the NRC will perform its Tribal
consultation jointly with other Federal agencies and States, as
appropriate.''
Response 2.5. The NRC agrees in part and disagrees in part with
this comment. The NRC coordinates with other Federal agencies and with
States, as appropriate, during consultations. For example, when
following the regulatory procedures related to the NHPA and National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) the NRC coordinates with the State by
communicating with the State Historic Preservation Officer, who is
included as a consulting party under the NHPA, or the State agency
regarding State listed species of concern for environmental impact
determinations on specific resource areas. The NRC disagrees that
Policy Principle 5 should be revised to include States since the
Principle is limited to Federal coordination.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 2.6. ``The ACHP recommends defining interactions and using
interactions consistently throughout the document. In certain cases,
interactions could be confused with more formal government to
government consultations.''
Response 2.6. The NRC agrees with this comment. The definition of
interaction has been included in the discussion section of the policy
statement to identify activities covered by the term ``interaction.''
The discussion section related to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement
has been revised as a result of the comment.
Comment 2.7. ``The ACHP recommends defining substantial direct
effects in order to provide clarity to the NRC's practices addressing
Executive Order 13175.''
Response 2.7. The NRC disagrees with this comment. The use of
``substantial direct effects'' is consistent with the language used in
EO 13175, which also does not define the term. Since the Tribal Policy
Statement covers a vast range of regulatory activities, the NRC has not
defined ``substantial direct effects'' in the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC will consider including criteria in future guidance
documents to determine whether an activity has a ``substantial direct
effect'' on one or more Indian Tribes.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 2.8. ``The ACHP recommends specifying outreach should be
done in addition to formal government to government consultation with
Native Americans tribes and/or Native Hawaiian Organizations. Also, the
NRC should include a definition for outreach. Outreach and consultation
should be discussed as two separate activities conducted by the NRC.''
Response 2.8. The NRC agrees in part and disagrees in part with
this comment. The NRC agrees that outreach is distinct from government-
to-government consultation. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement reflects
the distinction between outreach and consultation by putting forth two
separate and distinct policy principles related to outreach and
consultation. In an effort to provide clarification regarding the
distinction between outreach and consultation, Policy Principle 3 has
been revised.
The NRC agrees that a definition of outreach should be included in
the Discussion Section in an effort to provide further clarification
The purpose of NRC's Tribal outreach can be broad, ranging from
participation in standing Tribal meetings hosted by Federal partners
and Tribal organizations, to conducting informational meetings related
to a licensing project or rulemaking, to an informational webinar. The
NRC Tribal
[[Page 2409]]
liaison team continues to seek new opportunities to engage Tribal
representatives.
The NRC disagrees that the NRC Tribal Policy Statement's discussion
of outreach should include Native Hawaiian Organizations. The Tribal
Policy Statement pertains to consultation with Tribal Governments
recognized by the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994,
25 U.S.C. 479a. (See response to Comment 4.1 for additional information
regarding the Native Hawaiian Organizations.)
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has been revised as a result of the
comment.
Comment 2.9. ``The ACHP recommends stating [in the discussion of
policy principle 4, ``The NRC Will Engage in Timely Consultation'']
that it is the federal agency's responsibility to engage in
consultation. It is not the tribe's responsibility to request
engagement in consultation.''
Response 2.9. The NRC agrees in part and disagrees in part with
this comment. The NRC agrees that it is its responsibility to initiate
consultation when Tribal consultation is required under Federal
statute. The discussion of Policy Principle 4 has been revised to
clarify that the NRC also engages in consultation when required under
Federal statute. However, the NRC disagrees with the suggestion to
state specifically in Policy Principle 4 that ``it is the federal
agency's responsibility to engage in consultation'' or that ``it is not
the tribe's responsibility to request engagement in consultation.'' As
stated in Policy Principle 4 the NRC will provide timely notice and
consult in good faith with Tribal Governments on NRC regulatory actions
that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes as
well as those regulatory actions for which Tribal consultation is
required under Federal statute. In some circumstances, Federally
recognized Tribes may request to engage in consultation on matters that
have not been identified by the NRC as having substantial direct
effects on one or more Indian Tribes or for which Tribal consultation
is not required under Federal statute. The NRC can make a good faith
effort to invite Tribes to consult, but cannot mandate their
participation in the process.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has been revised to address this
comment, in part.
Comment 2.10. ``The Policy and Manual generally reflect the
differences between outreach and consultation. However, there are
several specific spots, discussed below, where the language is unclear
or the terms are used interchangeably. Confusion as to whether the NRC
is engaged in outreach or consultation or the scope of consultation can
result in confusion and delay. The Tribes may even get the impression
that the NRC is only pretending to consult; see, for example, the
eighth bullet on page 6 of the letter from the Seneca Nation of
Indians, dated April 1, 2013, in this docket.
``Principles 3 and 4 of the Policy are potentially confusing as
they use the terms `consult' and `outreach' interchangeably. In
addition, these Principles state that they apply to `regulatory
actions' without clarifying whether what is meant are policy setting,
rulemaking, issuing guidance, or a licensing action. As reflected in
Section 1.D and associated note 25 of the Manual, as a regulatory
agency, the NRC fulfills the fiduciary obligation to Tribes by ensuring
uniform treatment action in providing protection under its implementing
regulations. On the other hand, where the NRC is engaged in setting
policy, issuing rules, or providing guidance that directly impact
Tribes, consultation on subjects within the scope of the impact may be
appropriate where the impact is significant. To minimize confusing
ambiguity, the following clarifications are suggested:
A. The Policy
(1) In Principle 3, replace `consult' with `inform' in the first
sentence and replace `NRC regulatory actions that have substantial
direct impacts on one or more Indian Tribe' with `NRC regulatory
actions, including licensing actions, in which one or more Indian
Tribes have an interest.' This clarification ensures that outreach to
Indian Tribes will include any regulatory action of interest to a
Tribe.''
Response 2.10. The NRC disagrees in part and agrees in part with
this comment. The NRC recognizes that consultation and outreach are
distinct terms that should not be used interchangeably. The NRC
disagrees with the proposed changes to Policy Principle 3, but agrees
that Policy Principle 3 should be revised to provide greater clarity.
``Consult'' has been removed from the first sentence, but ``regulatory
actions that have substantial direct impacts on one or more Indian
Tribe'' remains. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement reflects the
distinction between outreach and consultation by setting forth two
separate and distinct policy principles related to outreach and
consultation. In an effort to provide clarification regarding the
distinction between outreach and consultation, Policy Principle 3 has
been revised. The purpose of NRC's Tribal outreach can be broad,
ranging from participation in standing Tribal meetings hosted by
Federal partners and Tribal organizations to conducting informational
meetings related to a licensing project or rulemaking to an
informational webinar. The NRC Tribal liaison team continues to seek
new opportunities to engage Tribal representatives.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has been revised as a result of the
comment.
Comment 2.11. ``In Principle 4, replace `on NRC's regulatory
actions' with `prior to the NRC issuing policies, rules, or guidance'
in the first sentence. This clarification reflects that consultation on
NRC licensing actions would generally not be consistent with the NRC's
statutory authority. This clarification also harmonizes the Policy with
the Presidential directive for agencies to consult on policies with
tribal implications, E.O. [Executive Order] 13175, Sec. I(a), Nov. 6,
2000.''
Response 2.11. The NRC agrees in part and disagrees in part with
this comment. The focus of E.O. 13175 is specifically related to
consultation on ``policies that have Tribal implications'' (i.e.,
``regulations, legislative comments on proposed legislation, and other
policy statements or actions that have substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian Tribes''). The revised text proposed by the
commenter would harmonize the Policy Statement with the E.O. by
replacing the term ``NRC's regulatory actions'' with a specific set of
activities that are consistent with the activities covered in the E.O.
However, the NRC Tribal Policy Statement covers a broader set of
activities than those covered in the EO. Not all NRC Tribal
consultation is related to ``policies, rules, or guidance'' as noted in
the comment. The NRC licensing actions may also trigger Tribal
consultation under other Federal statutes. Therefore, the discussion of
Policy Principle 4 has been revised to clarify the broader set of
activities covered by the Policy Statement.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has been revised to address the
comment, in part.
Comment 2.12. ``Consistent with the practices of other agencies,
the Policy designates an official to facilitate meaningful and timely
consultations with Indian Tribes. See generally, E.O. [Executive Order]
13175, Sec. 5(a), Nov. 6, 2000. The designated official is to work
with other NRC personnel to ensure Tribal implications have been
considered. The conclusions from these intra-agency considerations
should be documented in the papers provided to the Commission (SECY
papers), much
[[Page 2410]]
the way the conclusions of the Chief Financial Officer or legal office
are reflected now. Such documentation would serve to provide timely
feedback to the Commission, to be mindful with the resource
implications associated with formal Tribal consultations, and to show
respect for the solemnity of conducting Tribal consultations on a
Government-to-Government basis. Also, the second sentence of the first
paragraph under `Designated Official and Tribal Liaisons' is an
ambiguous, run-on sentence that does not clarify that where the NRC is
engaged in setting policy, issuing rules, or providing guidance that
directly impact Tribes, consultation on subjects within the scope of
the impact may be appropriate where the impact is significant as
reflected in Comment 2, above. It is suggested that sentence be split
into four sentences that read:
The designated Official shall ensure that agency program
personnel have considered the Tribal implications related to their
responsibilities within the NRC's scope of jurisdiction. Where
programs, policies, rulemaking or guidance are proposed to the
Commission, the conclusions from review of these considerations
shall be briefly discussed; specifically whether or not there
potentially are direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes. The
designated official shall facilitate meaningful and timely
consultation concerning the development, administration, and
enforcement of NRC's policy, rulemaking, or guidance actions that
have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian Tribes,
including obtaining Commission approval to initiate formal
consultation with one or more Indian Tribes on subjects within the
scope of such substantial direct effects. Prior Commission approval
to initiate consultation is not required where consultation is
required by a Federal statute.''
Response 2.12. The NRC agrees in part and disagrees in part with
this comment. The NRC agrees that the ``designated official'' should be
involved in regulatory actions that have Tribal implications, but
disagrees with the commenter's suggested edits and related
implications. Some of the commenter's proposed language would introduce
procedures that are not appropriate for a high-level policy statement.
The NRC would consider developing specific procedures in a future
guidance document. Regulatory actions involving Tribal consultation,
would be reviewed by the Office of the Executive Director for
Operations, including the designated official, before being sent to the
Commission. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement identifies the Deputy
Executive Director for Materials, Waste, Research, State, Tribal,
Compliance, Administration, and Human Capital Programs as the
``designated official'' for purposes of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement, and not pursuant to E.O. 13175, as noted by the commenter.
The NRC agrees that the second sentence of the section titled,
``Designated Officials and Tribal Liaisons,'' referenced by the
commenter should be restructured and has divided it into two sentences.
The NRC Tribal Policy Statement has been revised to reflect part of
the comment.
3. Outreach and Consultation
Multiple commenters provided input related to the use of the terms
``outreach'' and ``consultation'' in the policy principles of the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement.
Comment 3.1. ``The NTAA [National Tribal Air Association] supports
Principle No. 3 which provides:
The NRC Will Conduct Outreach to Indian Tribes.
The NRC will consult and coordinate with Indian Tribes, as
appropriate, related to its regulatory actions with Tribal implications
and will seek additional opportunities for general outreach. The NRC
will participate in national and regional Tribal conferences and
summits hosted by Federal agencies and Tribal organizations, and will
seek Tribal representation in NRC meetings and advisory committees
concerning NRC regulatory actions that have substantial direct effects
on one or more Indian Tribes.
While the NTAA supports Principle No. 3, it does not find that
current NRC outreach to Indian Tribes is being done or happening in a
timely manner. For example, apart from some local efforts, the NTAA is
unaware of any venue where Tribes are being brought together to discuss
radiation issues and air quality impacts from the nuclear program. The
NTAA finds that NRC must be more diligent in conducting outreach on all
issues as they are brought to the attention of the NRC by Tribes, the
NTAA, or other Tribal organizations.''
Response 3.1. The NRC agrees in part and disagrees in part with
this comment. The NRC agrees with the commenter's support of the NRC
Tribal Policy Principle 3. The NRC disagrees that the NRC has not
conducted outreach to Indian Tribes in a timely manner. While the NRC
has not hosted particular meetings to bring Tribes together to discuss
radiation issues and air quality impacts from the nuclear program, the
NRC has participated in national and regional Tribal conferences and
summits hosted by Federal agencies and Tribal organizations.
Additionally, the NRC has provided instructor-led training sessions at
multiple Tribal Colleges and Universities to inform Tribes regarding
NRC's mission, basic health physics, radiation safety, and
environmental review. The NRC will continue to provide training, as
needed, to Tribes who are affected by regulated activities and will
seek outreach opportunities.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 3.2. ``Principle No. 4: Development of a Consultation Plan.
The NTAA recommends that Principle No. 4 require the NRC to also
develop a comprehensive Tribal consultation plan for NRC regulatory and
non-regulatory actions having potentially substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian Tribes. Although Tribes consider consultation to be
very important, Tribes have limited resources and time to expend on it.
The NRC must be sensitive to this fact and make every effort to provide
Tribes with any additional resources and assistance that they might
require to engage in effective consultation. Some recommendations to
help the NRC to conduct effective consultation with Tribes include:
1. Develop guidance on how the NRC intends to assure that
consultation meetings result in meaningful dialogue rather than simply
pro forma consultation;
2. Assign a Tribal liaison to the specific NRC action who has
extensively worked with Tribes on similar issues; and
3. Provide adequate time to Tribes to review and provide comments
concerning proposed NRC actions well beyond the 30- to 60-day periods
provided to the public to make its comments.''
Response 3.2. The NRC disagrees in part and agrees in part with
this comment. The NRC staff has developed an implementation plan that
will be revised to reflect the final NRC Tribal Policy Statement. The
NRC disagrees that Policy Principle 4 should state specifically that
the NRC has to develop a comprehensive Tribal consultation plan for NRC
regulatory and non-regulatory actions having potentially substantial
direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes. The NRC agrees that the
NRC should consider development of consultation plans for actions that
have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes as well as
those regulatory actions for which Tribal consultation is required
under Federal statute, in an effort to promote more effective
consultations. The NRC Tribal liaison staff will continue to work in
conjunction with program office staff
[[Page 2411]]
during licensing and other regulatory actions, and may be assigned to
specific sites or actions, as resources and staffing permit. The NRC
strives to establish an effective consultation process and will
consider time allowed for Tribal engagement, including Tribal review
and comment of relevant documents, on a case by case basis, as
appropriate, during the regulatory process.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 3.3. ``Further, the NRC must engage in government-to-
government consultation with individual Tribes and not groups of Tribes
which might occur as part of an outreach session at a conference or
other similar gathering. Such a consultation approach is necessary for
a number of reasons. First, it provides for more candid conversations
between the individual Tribe and NRC than would occur otherwise during
a group meeting. Second, each Tribe's circumstances are unique and must
be treated as such by the NRC. A group meeting of Tribes would only
give short shrift to these circumstances. Third, most cultural
resources information is protected from release under statutory
exemptions to the Freedom of Information Act. Discussion of such
information by an individual Tribe as part a group meeting of Tribes
risks its release to the general public and potentially endangers
Tribal cultural sites and practices. Finally, the subject matter may be
so unique that government-to-government consultation between the
individual Tribe and NRC provides the best opportunity for a resolution
to the situation versus a group meeting of Tribes where any number of
Tribal issues could be discussed in a finite period of time.''
Response 3.3. The NRC agrees with this comment. The NRC does not
consider outreach during a conference to be consultation. The NRC will
make an effort to engage Tribes on a government-to-government basis,
and will consider whether it is more appropriate to consult
individually or simultaneously with multiple Tribes, on a case-by-case
basis, taking into consideration site-specific facts, resource
limitations, and preference of consulting Tribes.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 3.4. ``The NRC will consult and coordinate with Indian
Tribes, as appropriate, related to its regulatory actions with Tribal
implications and will seek additional opportunities for general
outreach. The NRC will participate in national and regional Tribal
conferences and summits hosted by Federal agencies and Tribal
organizations, and will seek Tribal representation in NRC meetings and
advisory committees concerning NRC regulatory actions that have
substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes.
``Attending major tribal conferences and meetings is an excellent
way of interacting with Indian tribes. As well, NRC staff should
endeavor to attend meetings of other federal agencies that attract
tribal representatives.
``. . . [I]t is important to recognize that while there might not
be delineated reservation or Trust lands in a given area that does not
necessarily mean that there are no tribes interested in or impacted by
NRC regulatory actions. Many tribes were forcibly removed from their
ancestral lands or ceded vast tracts of land to the federal government
through treaties and have retained or reserved rights (fishing,
hunting, gathering) for these lands or these lands contain
archaeological, cultural or historical resources, including important
sacred sites.''
Response 3.4. The NRC agrees with this comment. The NRC agrees that
attending conferences and meetings is an effective way of engaging
Tribes and that the NRC staff should attend meetings held by other
Federal agencies that attract Tribal representatives. The NRC staff
participates in Tribal meetings hosted by other Federal agencies,
including conferences hosted by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, the U.S. Department of Energy, and the U.S. Department of
Transportation, along with meetings hosted by inter-Tribal
organizations, including the National Congress of American Indians. The
NRC also agrees that Tribes may have an interest in areas that do not
have current reservation or trust lands. The current location and
geographic proximity to NRC regulated sites is not the sole
consideration of the NRC when engaging in outreach with Tribes. The NRC
also considers whether there are Tribes that have historic and cultural
ties to the land in question.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 3.5. [The Commenter provided input specific to policy
principle 4, ``The NRC Will Engage in Timely Consultation.''] ``Early
and frequent consultation must be the cornerstone of the government-to-
government relationship. Publishing a notice in the Federal Register is
not consultation. It should be noted that sometime the consultative
process can take time.''
Response 3.5. The NRC agrees with this comment. The definition of
``consultation'' and Policy Principle 4 have been revised to provide
further clarification. The revisions clarify that consultation is a
process and may include, but is not limited to, providing for mutually-
agreed protocols, timely communication, coordination, cooperation, and
collaboration and provides opportunities for appropriate Tribal
officials or representatives to meet with NRC management or staff to
achieve a mutual understanding between the NRC and the Tribes of their
respective interests and perspectives.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
4. NRC's Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes
Comment 4.1. ``The ACHP recommends including Alaska Natives and
Native Hawaiians in the NRC Tribal Policy Statement and the Tribal
Protocol Manual. The NRC is responsible for licensing materials in
Alaska and Hawaii. Additionally, the NRC should avoid homogenizing
Native American tribes and reference Native American communities [in
the Tribal Protocol Manual], not the Native American community.''
Response 4.1. The NRC disagrees in part and agrees in part with
this comment. The NRC disagrees that the NRC Tribal Policy Statement
should include Native Hawaiian Organizations. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement and Tribal Protocol Manual pertain to consultation with
Tribal governments recognized by the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe
List Act of 1994, 25 U.S.C. 479a. The definition of Indian Tribe
includes Alaska Native Tribes. The United States has recognized and
implemented a special political and Trust Responsibility with the
Native Hawaiian community through programs and services that are, in
many respects, analogous to, but separate from the programs and
services enacted for Federally recognized Indian Tribes. However,
Native Hawaiian Organizations are not governmental entities. As a
result, Native Hawaiian Organizations are not covered by the NRC Tribal
Policy Statement. The NRC does comply with statutory obligations to
consult with Native Hawaiian Organizations. For example, the NRC
consults with Native Hawaiian Organizations, as appropriate, under
Section 106 of the NHPA.
The NRC agrees with the comment, ``the NRC should avoid
homogenizing Native American Tribes'' and recognizes distinctions
between Federally
[[Page 2412]]
recognized Tribes, as noted in the Tribal Protocol Manual. The Tribal
Protocol Manual has been revised to reflect the suggested change from
``community'' to ``communities.''
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 4.2. ``Taken together, both the Tribal Protocol Manual and
the NRC Tribal Policy Statement (and their respective Federal Register
notices) provide important historical information, such as various
treaties, Congressional Acts affecting Indian tribes and rights, and a
discussion of the Federal Trust Responsibility. This information
provides the proper historical context critical to understanding the
unique relationship federally recognized Indian Tribes have with the
Federal Government. This point is underscored in the Tribal Protocol
Manual, which notes that Indian tribes are not the public or special
interest groups, but are, in fact, governments. This point is important
in understanding why tribes desire to have a government-to-government
relationship with the NRC and do not wish to be considered
`stakeholders'.''
Response 4.2. The NRC agrees with this comment. The NRC Tribal
Policy Statement and Tribal Protocol Manual underscore the NRC's
commitment to a government-to-government relationship with Indian
Tribes. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement formalizes the NRC's commitment
to engaging Indian Tribes on a government-to-government basis,
providing opportunities for participation in the NRC's regulatory
process beyond those available to members of the general public or
interested stakeholders, consistent with the principles articulated in
E.O. 13175.
No changes were made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement or Tribal
Protocol Manual as a result of the comment.
Comment 4.3. [The commenter provided input on policy principle 2,
``The NRC Recognizes and Is Committed to a Government-to-Government
Relationship with Indian Tribes.'']
``It should be noted that there are differences among tribes and
that there is no `one size, fits all' approach when it comes to
interacting with and understanding Indian tribes. Each tribe is unique
and should be treated as such. There should not be a `standard process'
as recommended by some commenters.''
Response 4.3. The NRC agrees with this comment. The NRC recognizes
distinctions between Federally recognized Tribes, as noted in the
Tribal Protocol Manual. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement does not
prescribe a ``standard process'' for interacting with Tribes. Instead,
it identifies policy principles that guide the NRC's interactions with
Indian Tribes.
No changes were made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a result
of the comment.
5. Additional Comments
Comment 5.1. ``The Nuclear Regulatory Commission should look to the
policies and practices of the Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] in
developing its relationship with tribal governments. In particular, the
EPA identified certain tribal governments to be granted with the same
treatment as states, allowing the tribes to have primacy in civil
jurisdiction with regards to enforcement of EPA regulations on tribal
lands. The NRC should consider implementing a similar policy with some
or all tribal governments.''
Response 5.1. The NRC disagrees with this comment. Unlike States,
the AEA does not authorize Tribal governments to assume regulatory
authority over AEA radioactive material. However, the NRC has treated
Federally recognized Tribes in a similar manner to States in some
instances. For example, Tribal governments can participate in a program
to receive advance notification of shipments of certain types of
radioactive material and spent nuclear fuel under the Tribal Advance
Notification Rule.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 5.2. ``NRC needs to be committed to the Tribal Policy
Statement. If not, policies can be easily side-stepped. NRC needs to
implement these policies.''
Response 5.2. The NRC agrees with this comment. The Commission
approved a Tribal Policy Statement Implementation Plan in March 2015
(ADAMS Accession No. ML15078A039), which aligns the agency's Tribal
activities with policy principles in the NRC Tribal Policy Statement.
The NRC staff will utilize the plan to implement the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement, and will update it, as appropriate.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of this comment.
Comment 5.3. ``The NRC should encourage tribal participation on
working groups.''
Response 5.3. The NRC agrees with this comment. The NRC will
consider inviting Tribes to participate on working groups related to
regulatory actions that have substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes, as appropriate.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 5.4. ``As subject-matter experts, the NRC will invite
tribal representatives to participate on working groups developed for
those activities that have the potential of impacting tribal interests,
including but not limited to: Integrated Performance Evaluation Program
[(IMPEP)] Reviews, Rule-making and other related activities impacting
our tribal governments.''
Response 5.4. The NRC disagrees in part and agrees in part with
this comment. The NRC disagrees with the threshold for Tribal working
group participation set by the commenter's language, ``for those
activities that have the potential of impacting Tribal interests.'' The
NRC agrees that it may invite Tribal representatives to participate on
working groups on matters that have substantial direct effects on one
or more Indian Tribes, as appropriate. This is consistent with Policy
Principle 3 on the NRC outreach to Indian Tribes, which states ``The
NRC will encourage Tribal governments to communicate their preferences
to NRC staff during outreach activities and will seek to provide
information about opportunities for Tribal participation in NRC
meetings and advisory committees concerning NRC regulatory actions that
have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes, as
appropriate.'' Because the NRC does not have statutory authority to
enter into agreements with Tribes like it does with States, Tribal
government employees cannot participate in IMPEP Reviews as a review
team member in the same manner as an Agreement State government
employee. However, IMPEP reports are publically available and meetings
are open to the public.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 5.5. ``Further, the NRC will present a yearly report to
tribal organizations describing all agency undertakings involving or
relating to Indian Tribes.''
Response 5.5. The NRC disagrees with this comment. The NRC has no
current plans to present an annual report describing ``all agency
undertakings involving or relating to Indian Tribes.'' As part of the
NRC Tribal Policy implementation Plan, the NRC staff prepares an annual
report of the agency's implementation of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement, including some of the agency's Tribal-related interactions.
While the report is intended for internal use, it will be available on
the NRC's public Web site.
[[Page 2413]]
It will also be available in hardcopy, upon request.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 5.6. ``Yes, extend the comment period.''
Response 5.6. The NRC agrees with this comment. The comment period
was extended for the NRC Tribal Policy Statement from 120 days to 180
days. The NRC considers comments received after the end of the comment
period if it is practical to do so, but the NRC is able to assure
consideration only for comments received on or before the comment
period closes.
No changes were made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a result
of the comment.
Comment 5.7. ``We believe that the key to effectively implementing
the Tribal Policy Statement is via actions that will protect Indian
people, lands, and resources. Toward that end, an evaluation of
existing staff guidance is a strong start. This evaluation should not
be limited to the Tribal Protocol Manual, but all NRC staff guidance.''
Response 5.7. The NRC agrees with this comment. The NRC staff has
reviewed numerous agency and office-level guidance documents to
determine if changes were necessary before the Commission approves the
final NRC Tribal Policy Statement, ensuring that the guidance documents
are consistent with policy principles in the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC will revise guidance, as needed, to reflect the
policy principles of the final NRC Tribal Policy Statement.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 5.8. ``We suggest that the NRC work with a number of
tribes, representing a cross-section of NRC regulatory activities, as
well as the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to gain a better
understanding of Indian land tenure and the potential consequences of
contamination to Indian lands.
``We understand that the NRC may possibly be developing a guidance
document pertaining to the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)
Section 106 consultation. We applaud this effort. We recommend that the
NRC work with tribes, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
(ACHP), industry (limited participation), and possibly other federal
agencies to develop this guidance document.
``Finalizing and fully implementing the Tribal Protocol Manual will
also help NRC staff to be informed on tribal issues. Training,
awareness, and continuity of staff are also key elements of an
effective tribal program.''
Response 5.8. The first part of this comment related to Indian land
tenure is out of scope of the NRC Policy Statement. The NRC Tribal
Policy Statement is an agencywide, high-level document that encompasses
a broad range of NRC Tribal interactions, consultation, and outreach.
NRC disagrees in part and agrees in part with the remainder of the
comment. The NRC is in the process of finalizing NHPA Section 106
guidance for uranium recovery licensing. The NRC sought input from NRC
Staff, ACHP, Tribal governments, industry representatives, and members
of the public. The NRC published the draft Interim Staff Guidance,
FSME-ISG-02, ``Guidance for Conducting the Section 106 Process of the
National Historic Preservation Act for Uranium Recovery Licensing
Actions,'' for public review and comment on June 18, 2014 (79 FR
34792). On September 3, 2014, the NRC extended the comment period (79
FR 52374). The NRC staff is in the process of developing the final
program specific guidance. The NRC staff has reviewed staff guidance
documents and concluded that no guidance documents directly contradict
the NRC Tribal Policy Statement. The NRC staff review identified
documents that will need to be revised to be consistent with the final
NRC Tribal Policy Statement. Guidance will be updated as scheduled, and
will incorporate the final NRC Tribal Policy Statement, as appropriate.
The NRC staff has also developed and implemented a Tribal cultural
sensitivity training that is available agencywide.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
6. Out of Scope Comments
Comment 6.1. ``We have reviewed the comment letters submitted in
2013 by other entities on the Tribal Protocol Manual (most notably
those representing the uranium mining industry) and found the comments
to be self-serving, ill-informed and insensitive [to] tribal history,
culture and tradition. These commenters complained that the Section 106
process was `too cumbersome, time consuming, and costly for the uranium
recovery industry' and that the pace of the consultation should be
accelerated and standardized. Moreover, the commenters suggested that
the NRC should not be making an exhaustive effort to identify all
potentially impacted Indian tribes. In other words, hurry up and get it
done!
The NRC has an obligation under the NHPA to ensure that its actions
do not have adverse impacts. The NRC also has an obligation to
federally recognized Indian tribes.
With regard to tribes delaying the process or lacking incentive to
work with the NRC, it should be noted that it can be a burden
(financially and technically) to effectively participate in NRC
proceedings.''
Response 6.1. This comment is out of scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement because the comment centers on specific statutory
requirements to consult with Tribes under NHPA. The NRC Tribal Policy
Statement is an agencywide, high-level document that encompasses a
broad range of NRC Tribal interactions, consultation, and outreach. It
does not prescribe procedural requirements for fulfilling NHPA
consultation requirements. The NRC upholds all statutory obligations to
consult with Federally recognized Tribes, including consultation
responsibilities under the NHPA and NEPA.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 6.2. ``The NEPA process (for either [an] EA [environmental
assessment] or EIS [environmental impact statement]) does not ensure
that environmental issues and concerns identified by the impacted
tribes will be addressed adequately, as EA's or EIS's are disclosure
tools that do not and cannot offer remedies or mitigation. It is
through the NRC's Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) adjudicatory
process that identified issues can be addressed (if the Board admits
the affected tribe as an intervener because the tribe has articulated a
deficiency with an application before the NRC). Achieving intervener
status is a difficult and costly undertaking, given the high legal and
regulatory standards to be met. Nevertheless, this is a huge barrier
that many tribes cannot overcome and this should be recognized a severe
limitation to effective participation by any tribes impacted by NRC
licensing actions.''
Response 6.2. This comment is out of scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement is an agency-wide, high-
level document that encompasses a broad range of NRC Tribal
interactions, consultation, and outreach. It does not prescribe
procedural requirements for fulfilling NEPA Tribal consultations. The
process for achieving intervenor status before an NRC Atomic Safety and
Licensing Board (or other NRC adjudicator) is outside the scope of the
NRC Tribal Policy Statement. Under the
[[Page 2414]]
NRC Tribal Policy Statement, the NRC will provide timely notice and
consult in good faith with Tribal governments on NRC's regulatory
actions that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian
Tribes. In addition, Tribes will have the opportunity to raise
environmental, historic, and cultural issues during the NEPA
environmental review and NHPA process. This process provides an
additional opportunity to address the Tribe's concerns with a proposed
licensing action. Good faith efforts to consult with Indian Tribes
under the NRC Tribal Policy Statement or during the NEPA and NHPA
review process may also have the potential to resolve issues outside
the hearing process.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 6.3. ``In 2013, the NRC finalized its advance notification
rule (10 CFR 71.97) that allows Indian tribes to receive advance
notification of shipments of irradiated reactor fuel through
reservation land (not Trust lands). To participate, interested tribes
must `opt in' and complete safeguards training. Although the NRC was
very flexible with some of the prerequisites, the fact that no tribe is
currently participating in this pre-notification program should cause
the NRC to pause and ask why. It could be that it is just too
cumbersome for the tribes to participate, due to a lack of resources
(staff, financial, etc.) or competing priorities for resources.''
Response 6.3. This comment is out of scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement is an agencywide, high-level
document that encompasses a broad range of NRC Tribal interactions,
consultation, and outreach. The Tribal Advance Notification Rule
amended NRC regulations to require licensees to provide advance
notification to participating Federally recognized Tribal governments
regarding shipments of irradiated reactor fuel and certain types of
nuclear waste for any shipment that passes within or across their
reservations (77 FR 34194). After reviewing public comments received
during the development of the Tribal Advance Notification Rule, the NRC
staff concluded that Tribes should have the option of whether to opt
into the program because the program requires training, certain
equipment, and has civil and criminal penalties for non-compliance. As
of July of 2016, one Indian Tribe completed the process of enrolling in
the Tribal Advance Notification Program. A list of participating Tribes
is maintained on the NRC Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/state-tribal/tribal-advance-notification.html#tribes.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 6.4. ``Principle No. 4: An Example of Lack of
Implementation. In 2012, the NRC proposed an Advance Notification Rule,
by which Indian Tribes would receive advance notification of shipments
of irradiated reactor fuel and other nuclear wastes transported across
their reservations. (``Tribal Advance Notification'' at https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/state-tribal/tribal-advance-notification.html#def
(last visited on April 12, 2015).)
``Yet, the NRC claims that `there are no tribes that have the
prerequisite required to receive advance notifications.' (``Tribal
Advance Notification'' at https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/state-tribal/tribal-advance-notification.html#def_ (last visited on April 12,
2015).)
``Nuclear waste is being transported through a number of
reservations weekly by unmarked trucks (e.g., missing placards) and
Indian Tribes of these reservations have not been made privy to the
transportation schedules for the waste. Knowing the schedule would
enable Tribes to protect their reservation environments by having
emergency response teams in place in case of any accidental waste
releases. Regardless of whether Tribes meet the aforementioned
prerequisite, the NRC should still be actively consulting with Tribes
on shipments across their reservations and other NRC actions having
potentially substantial air quality and other direct effects on one or
more Tribes.
``The NTAA has also seen several inconsistencies in the reporting
of the number of regulated facilities in Indian Country. The NTAA finds
that, an update of NRC's maps or inventories of regulated facilities,
would help the NRC to more effectively contact and identify Tribes
about NRC regulatory and non-regulatory actions having substantial air
quality and other direct effects on one or more Tribes.''
Response 6.4. This comment is out of scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement in part. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement is an agencywide,
high-level document that encompasses a broad range of NRC Tribal
interactions, consultation, and outreach. The Tribal Advance
Notification Rule amended NRC regulations to require licensees to
provide advance notification to participating Federally recognized
Tribal governments regarding shipments of irradiated reactor fuel and
certain types of nuclear waste for any shipment that passes within or
across their reservations (77 FR 34194). After reviewing public
comments received during the development of the Tribal Advance
Notification Rule, the NRC staff concluded that Tribes should have the
option of whether to opt into the program because the program requires
training, certain equipment, and has civil and criminal penalties for
non-compliance. As of July of 2016, one Indian Tribe completed the
process of enrolling in the Tribal Advance Notification Program. A list
of participating Tribes is maintained on the NRC Web site at: https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/state-tribal/tribal-advance-notification.html#tribes. The NRC continues to update maps of Tribal
reservation and trust lands within a 50-mile radius of NRC-regulated
nuclear power plants. The NRC staff is developing tools that they may
utilize to identify Tribal lands near other NRC-regulated facilities.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 6.5. ``Hire natives to be liaisons with our own people.
Create trust, transparency and rapport. These people have been deceived
and betrayed since the white man stepped foot on this land. It's very
important to really reach the native people and it's high time they got
many seats at the round table. Thank you for your work and hope it can
improve to genuinely include First Nation's peoples.''
Response 6.5. This comment is out of scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement is an agencywide, high-level
document that encompasses a broad range of NRC Tribal interactions,
consultation, and outreach. However, the NRC does seek to foster a
diverse workplace. The Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer
participates in extensive recruitment, including the American Indian
Science and Engineering Society's annual conference. Additionally, the
NRC's Office of Small Business and Civil Rights promotes diversity by
sponsoring Equal Employment Opportunity Advisory Committees, including
the Native American Advisory Committee (NAAC). The NAAC recommends
initiatives and approaches to attract qualified Native Americans and
Alaskan Natives to the NRC and to support and retain the Native
American and Alaskan Native employees of the NRC. The Committee has
also forged a working relationship with the American Indian Science and
Engineering Society through a memorandum of understanding. For
clarification, the
[[Page 2415]]
listed activities do not cover the ``First Nations [of Canada]''
referenced by the commenter.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 6.6. ``Lastly, the NRC will ensure there are mechanisms in
place to prevent an unfunded mandate upon any tribe, including but not
limited to requirements of acquiring GSA safe or other supplies or
materials as stipulated in the in the advance notification rule.''
Response 6.6. This comment is out of scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement is an agencywide, high-level
document that encompasses a broad range of NRC Tribal interactions,
consultation, and outreach. The Tribal Advance Notification Rule
amended NRC regulations to require licensees to provide advance
notification to participating Federally recognized Tribal governments
regarding shipments of irradiated reactor fuel and certain types of
nuclear waste for any shipment that passes within or across their
reservations (June 11, 2012; 77 FR 34194). After reviewing public
comments received during the development of the Tribal Advance
Notification Rule, the NRC staff concluded that Tribes should have the
option of whether to opt into the program because the program requires
training, certain equipment, and has civil and criminal penalties for
non-compliance. The NRC is committed to ensuring that Tribal Nations
are informed of the requirements for receiving Safeguards Information
and sensitive information. It is the responsibility of all Tribal
governments that volunteer to participate in the Tribal Advance
Notification program to ensure that the information is secure and used
in a manner that will provide for the protection of the public health
and the environment.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 6.7. ``It is important to note, even though NRC has
expanded educational tools for Radiation Workshops as open
communication protocol, there is a need for Native speakers to provide
the information. Non-English speakers attend the workshops and do not
comprehend the contents. More workshops related to DOE Radiation site
locations throughout Indian Country is strongly urged that NRC has
oversight. Many of these sites are under DOE-LM [DOE Office of Legacy
Management] and not necessarily under DOE-EM [DOE Office of
Environmental Management] as it seems there is a communication barrier,
and updated cleanups by site is missing, especially with transport of
radioactive sludge from holding/evaporation ponds.
``Many transport routes go through Native communities, and are not
part of the DOE-EM START [Stakeholder Tool for Assessing Radioactive
Transportation] programming. It may be missing out of other regulatory
components as 108(c) under DOE for transport. Consideration for links
for the public with RECA [Radiation Exposure Compensation Act] benefits
and DownWinder Web sites under NRC is important as many suffer the
health devastation of cancer due to radiation.''
Response 6.7. This comment is out of scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement is an agencywide, high-level
document that encompasses a broad range of NRC Tribal interactions,
consultation, and outreach. Previously the NRC staff received similar
feedback on the inclusion of non-English speakers in the NRC's Tribal
Training Program. The NRC will consider the inclusion of Native
speakers when arranging future training sessions for Tribes. DOE-EM
START programming is not administered by the NRC, and therefore is not
covered by the NRC Tribal Policy Statement. The RECA benefits are
administered by the Department of Justice's program for claims relating
to atmospheric nuclear testing and claims relating to uranium industry
employment. The NRC does not oversee the program, make related
determinations, or administer payment of claims. The Downwinder Web
sites are maintained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services and do not fall under the NRC's jurisdiction.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
Comment 6.8. [The commenter quoted policy principle 5, ``The NRC
Will Coordinate with Other Federal Agencies,'' stating ``When the
Commission's action involves other Federal agencies, the NRC will
perform its Tribal consultation jointly with other Federal agencies, as
appropriate.''] ``This will be especially important if/when shipments
of spent nuclear fuel to a federal repository or an interim storage
facility commence. Shipments of spent nuclear fuel will involve the
NRC, the US Department of Energy (DOE) and the US Department of
Transportation (DOT). Equally important is the engagement of federal
agencies involved in the uranium mining regulation (i.e., the Bureau of
Indian Affairs or the Bureau of Land Management).''
Response 6.8. This comment is out of scope of the NRC Tribal Policy
Statement. The NRC Tribal Policy Statement is an agencywide, high-level
document that encompasses a broad range of NRC Tribal interactions,
consultation, and outreach. The NRC currently coordinates with other
Federal agencies, as appropriate, on issues within its regulatory
jurisdiction, including the shipment of spent nuclear fuel and
licensing and regulation of uranium recovery facilities. Currently,
there is neither a Federal repository for spent nuclear fuel nor an
interim storage facility but the NRC will follow the Tribal Policy
Statement and appropriate regulations when processing any applications
for these facilities. The NRC does have regulations that govern the
transport of spent nuclear fuel and implements them in coordination
with relevant Federal agencies, including the DOE and the DOT. The NRC
does not have regulatory authority over uranium mining facilities.
However, the NRC does have regulatory authority over uranium recovery
and uranium milling facilities and coordinates with other Federal
agencies, as appropriate, including the Bureau of Land Management and
EPA, during the consultation process.
No change has been made to the NRC Tribal Policy Statement as a
result of the comment.
V. Procedural Requirements
Congressional Review Act Statement
This final NRC Tribal Policy Statement is a rule as defined in the
Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801-808). However, the Office of
Management and Budget has not found it to be a major rule as defined in
the Congressional Review Act.
Paperwork Reduction Act Statement
This Policy Statement does not contain new or amended information
collection requirements and, therefore, is not subject to the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of January, 2017.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Annette L. Vietti-Cook,
Secretary of the Commission.
Tribal Policy Statement
The purpose of this Tribal Policy Statement is to set forth
principles to be followed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) to promote effective government-to-government interactions with
Federally recognized American Indian and Alaska Native Tribes, and to
[[Page 2416]]
encourage and facilitate Tribal involvement in the areas that the NRC
has jurisdiction. It seeks to provide agencywide principles to achieve
consistency but also encourage custom-tailored approaches to
consultation and coordination that reflect the circumstances of each
situation and the preference of each Tribal government. It is the NRC's
expectation that all program and regional office consultation and
coordination practices will be consistent with or adhere to the NRC
Tribal Policy Statement. This NRC Tribal Policy Statement is based on
the United States Constitution, treaties, statutes, Executive Orders,
judicial decisions, and the unique relationship between Indian Tribes
and the Federal government.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This Tribal Policy Statement is not intended to, and does
not, grant, expand, create, or diminish any rights, benefits, or
trust responsibilities, substantive or procedural, enforceable at
law or in equity in any cause of action by any party against the
United States, the Commission, or any person. This Tribal Policy
Statement does not alter, amend, repeal, interpret, or modify Tribal
sovereignty, any treaty rights of any Indian Tribes, or preempt,
modify, or limit the exercise of such rights. Nothing herein shall
be interpreted as amending or changing the Commission's regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following principles will guide the NRC's interaction with
Indian Tribes:
1. The NRC Recognizes the Federal Trust Relationship With and Will
Uphold Its Trust Responsibility to Indian Tribes
The NRC shares the Federal government's unique Trust Relationship
with, and Trust Responsibility to, Indian Tribes. Under the Federal
Trust Doctrine, the United States--and the individual agencies of the
Federal government--owe a fiduciary duty to Indian Tribes. The nature
of that duty depends on the underlying substantive laws (i.e.,
treaties, statutes, agreements) creating the duty. The NRC exercises
its Trust Responsibility in the context of its authorizing statutes
including the Atomic Energy Act, the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974,
the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, the Low-Level Radioactive Waste
Policy Act of 1985, and the Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act
of 1978, as amended. As an independent regulatory agency that does not
hold in trust Tribal lands or assets or provide services to Federally
recognized Tribes, the NRC fulfills its Trust Responsibility through
implementation of the principles of the Tribal Policy Statement, by
providing protections under its implementing regulations, and through
recognition of additional obligations consistent with other applicable
treaties and statutory authorities.
2. The NRC Recognizes and Is Committed to a Government-to-Government
Relationship With Indian Tribes
The NRC recognizes the right of each Indian Tribe to self-
governance and supports Tribal sovereignty and self-determination. The
NRC recognizes Tribal governments as dependent domestic sovereign
nations, independent from State governments, with separate and distinct
authorities with inherent sovereign powers over their members and
territory, consistent with applicable statutes and authorities.
3. The NRC Will Conduct Outreach to Indian Tribes
The NRC will conduct outreach to keep Indian Tribes informed about
the agency's actions and plans, as appropriate, related to its
regulatory actions that have substantial direct effects on one or more
Indian Tribes. The NRC will participate in national and regional Tribal
conferences and summits hosted by Federal agencies, Tribal governments,
and Tribal organizations, as appropriate. The NRC will encourage Tribal
governments to communicate their preferences to NRC staff during
outreach activities and will seek to provide information about
opportunities for Tribal participation in NRC meetings and advisory
committees concerning NRC regulatory actions that have substantial
direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes, as appropriate.
4. The NRC Will Engage in Timely Consultation
The NRC will provide timely notice and consult in good faith with
Tribal governments on NRC's regulatory actions that have substantial
direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes as well as those regulatory
actions for which Tribal consultation is required under Federal
statute.
Tribal officials may also request that the NRC engage in
consultation with them on matters that have not been identified by the
NRC to have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes as
well as those regulatory actions for which Tribal consultation is not
required under Federal statute. The NRC will make efforts to grant such
requests, taking into consideration the nature of the activity at
issue, past consultation efforts, available resources, timing issues,
and other relevant factors.
The NRC will establish early communications and begin consultation
as soon as practicable. The NRC will consult in good faith throughout
the agency decisionmaking process and develop and maintain effective
communication, coordination, and cooperation with Indian Tribes. The
NRC representatives for consultations with Tribal officials or
representatives will be of an appropriate rank and the level of
interaction will be commensurate with the circumstances. The
appropriate level of interaction will be determined by a discussion
between the NRC and Tribal governments, and program office consultation
procedures and guidance. Participating Tribal and NRC representatives
will serve as respective decisionmakers, based on the established
agenda and to the extent possible.
5. The NRC Will Coordinate With Other Federal Agencies
When the Commission's action involves other Federal agencies, the
NRC will perform its Tribal consultation jointly with other Federal
agencies, as appropriate and to the extent possible.
6. The NRC Will Encourage Participation by State-Recognized Tribes
The NRC recognizes the distinction between Indian Tribes who are
Federally recognized and those who are not. The NRC will reach out to
States to identify the appropriate State-recognized Tribes to invite to
participate in its regulatory process, including opportunities related
to rulemaking, licensing and decommissioning.
Designated Official and Tribal Liaisons
The Deputy Executive Director for Materials, Waste, Research,
State, Tribal, Compliance, Administration, and Human Capital Programs
serves as the NRC's designated official for Tribal consultations. The
designated official will ensure that the agency program personnel have
considered the Tribal implications related to their responsibilities
within the NRC's jurisdiction. The designated official will also make
efforts to facilitate meaningful and timely consultation and
coordination regarding NRC's regulatory actions that have substantial
direct effects on one or more Indian Tribes as well as those regulatory
actions for which Tribal consultation is required under Federal
statute.
The designated official will be supported by staff who have
functional responsibility to serve as intergovernmental liaisons to
Indian Tribes. These NRC Tribal liaisons will facilitate government-to-
government consultation by serving as the agency's primary points of
contact for Indian Tribes, coordinating with the appropriate office or
personnel
[[Page 2417]]
regarding programmatic inquiries, and will facilitate the appropriate
level of communication and exchange of information between Tribal
officials and the NRC staff. The Tribal liaisons will also educate the
NRC staff about Tribal issues including cultural sensitivity and the
Federal Trust Responsibility. The designated official will have the
authority to delegate tasks to the NRC Tribal liaisons as he/she deems
fit.
[FR Doc. 2017-00091 Filed 1-6-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P