ML18186A229

E-mail from Sandra Talley D. White on Feedback on Slides for Webinar

ML18186A229
Person / Time
Issue date:	04/19/2018
From:	Sandra Talley Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
To:	Duane White Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
Poy S
Shared Package
ML18184A262	List: ML18184A278 ML18184A296 ML18184A302 ML18184A372 ML18184A381 ML18184A386 ML18184A408 ML18184A415 ML18184A418 ML18184A420 ML18184A423 ML18184A438 ML18184A440 ML18184A441 ML18184A449 ML18184A451 ML18186A199 ML18186A208 ML18186A209 ML18186A214 ML18186A227 ML18186A228 ML18186A229 ML18186A235 ML18186A277 ML18186A303 ML18186A317 ML18186A319 ML18186A357 ML18186A369 ML18186A388 ML18186A410 ML18186A416 ML18186A422 ML18186A423 ML18186A430 ML18186A436
References
Download: ML18186A229 (2)

Text

From:

Talley, Sandra To:

White, Duncan Cc:

Michalak, Paul; Einberg, Christian; Crawford, Carrie; Firth, James

Subject:

Feedback on slides for webinar Date:

Thursday, April 19, 2018 4:34:15 PM Hello Duncan:

I had to run earlier today, but here are my comments.

• the section on process could be consolidated to a statement such as we have been working with WY since 2015 in developing the application. Then I would move to present day.

• The section publication of draft agreement should follow.

• Fold MOA and PA discussion into the What happens next section.

• The what is different slide should explain what accordance with Section 274o means for environmental reviews and hearings. For participants who are used to NEPA and the hearing process, the agency should be clear on the differences with respect to Tribal participation. Even if you plan to state it verbally, it is nice to have it written in the slides.

• While the slide states that WY will follow State requirements for cultural resources, NRC should explicitly state that NHPA consultation requirements will not apply and Tribal consultation with NRC will end.

• I recall a request for confirmation, during the teleconference, that Tribes would be able to comment on applications and regulations. Again I think NRC should explicitly state that this is not NEPA or NHPA participation. When WY submits their information for the WY slide, I would suggest that it explain whether there will be a Tribal process or if Tribes will be permitted to participate in a public process. For Tribes who are used to having a government to government relationship, this distinction should be clear. This is especially important to make the point for Tribes whom we have invited who are not in WY. They should understand that if WY will have any sort of Tribal consultation process, that it will not apply to them.

I think you have mentioned that WY will only address concerns of Tribes in WY and thus, I assume the teleconference today was aimed at getting buy-in from the governments of the WY Tribes that the issues of concern to them were being addressed in the webinar.

Regardless of what happens in WY, NRC has to maintain relationships with all of the Tribes in the region for other regulatory work. In that regard, I think the presentation would have been better, if the presentation specifically acknowledged and addressed the questions posed by the Tribes in the phone calls that I made to all 28 nations.

I will not be able to participate during the teleconference as I have a meeting on the 26th. I will view the recording.

Thanks, Sandy

Sandra T. Talley Senior Liaison Project manager Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards

(301) 415-8059 Sandra.talley@nrc.gov