ML20076K368
| ML20076K368 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Skagit |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1983 |
| From: | Jim R ECICTBYI, YAKIMA INDIAN NATION |
| To: | Chilk S, Mattson R, Rathburn D NRC, NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20076K370 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-48FR22730, RULE-PR-50, RULE-PR-51 48FR22730-13, NUDOCS 8307080435 | |
| Download: ML20076K368 (2) | |
Text
^-
~
1
,y. .4 f CONFEDER&TED TRIBES AND BANDS ESTA$LISHED BY THE GENEPmAL COUNCIL TFVATV OF KNE r W* VGll[]jfd(t({dif jdl[fff Th:B AL covNCIL CENTENNI AL KNE R IWA
;T i '":I
. q dd -
PCST OFFICE BOX 151 TCPPENISM. WASHINCTON S$948 .>\ f
..Ih _
hy g /f4/ June 30, 1983 [ ' o d, 3 , rg; M.
~
e ., .. 7 Q Mr. Sanuel Chilk, Secretary ,--
' =-l#r/- g g g Q
.: egnP7 g5 3 Nuclear Regulatory Ca mission fg y,.3' x/f7 ,g
%( g M d4 7/4) '
Washington, D.C. 20555 - Nd.,/ j ! MjUv Attention: Denra.s Rathbun; Roger J. Mattson _.
~
- ."; ' ~ ? ] ~'.=~h 6stbf
Dear Mr. Chilk and Cmmissioners:
)
&m- - twn f '
SUBJECT- Safety Goal Developnent Progra:1: Proposed Evaluation WPFL l6??A) Plan, 48 Fed. Reg.10772 (March 14,1983) Proposed Cmmission Policy Statenent on Severe Accidents and Related Views on Nuclear Reactor Regulation, - 48 Fed. Reg.16014 (April 13,1983) Requirements for Licensee Actions Regarding the Dispo-sition of Spent Fuel Upon Expiration of Reactor Opera-ting Licenses (48 Fed. Reg. 22730)
'Ihe Yakima Indian Nation herewith cmments on 3 proposed rules now under consideration by the Nuclear Regulatory Cmmission on the following subjects:
- 1. Safety Goals.
- 2. Policy on Severe Accidents.
- 3. Impact of on-site storage of spent fuel following the expiration of a reactor license.
On all 3 subjects the Yakima Indian Nation concurs with and supports the cmments by the Union of Concerned Scientists. The Yakama Indian Nation wishes to add additional cmments which reflect the particular concerns of the Yakima Indian Nation. These comnents cover all 3 proposed rules, and are as follows:
- 1. 'Diere is no reference in the proposed rules for safeguarding the Federal Treaty Rights of Sovereign Affected Indian Nations. The Yakima IndianNation has the Sacred Duty to protect the Treaty of 1855 on both Ceded and Reserved Lands,and to safeguard the Health, Safety and Culture of the Yakimas k6 l0
- 0. dL /!Iuus $.LUht/G,pff// "
Y%)da ft<fRbd, yll// lll 8307080435 830630 PDR PR PDR
,,'.u....
50 48FR22730 . .' ~~
. . . . . . . . . h. .
Page 'Ibn June 30,1983
- 2. The proposed rules fail to require dealing with each licensing issue on a case by case basis.
The Sovereign Rights of the Yakima Indian Nation cannot be properly protected by generalized rulemaking which may be sufficient protection for those sto are not Native Americans.
- 3. Public or Private Corporations do not behave as though they are directly and specifically bound by the terms of the Yakima Indian Nation Treaty.
Therefore; federal rules must be based upon recognition of the Treaty Pights of the Yakima Indian Nation. .
- 4. The proposed rules, particularly in the PRA methodology and radioactive source term inform-ation for severe accidents, fail to take into ~
consideration the fact that-the Yakima Indian Nation cannot be evacuated frcrn its Sacred I2nds. It is apparent from the present state of the proposed rules that the NPL is not informed on the Sovereign Rights of the Affected Yakima Indian Nation. The Yakima Indian Nation believes it will be both necessary and efficacious for the NRC to consult with the Yakima Indian Nation as it addresses the Yakirra Indian Nation ccxunents outlined above. The Yakima Indian Nation is ready to participate in such discussions. Please include this letter together with the attached correspondence into the record for the above proposed rules. In the same spirit, the Yakima Indian Nation suggests that the NRC invite the Yakima Indian Nation to play a formal role in the proposed 2 Year Evaluation Period, so that discussions may continue during the time of testing by experience. Sincerely, 4 A-h - Russell Jim, cilman Yakima Indian Nation , ER:vw i Enclosures
+ , ,
e
---w -, y y, , - - - - - - ,,-,-cy,y.--- -
yy g -
--,,.-.,.,m. .c m 9m-.
,.7 ,.,-p,,,w-p.,,,,.,9-,.,..y--gr%,-yy.-- ,,,-r--,,-,97 n,,,w, y-7 7 .-- -
g, , i CONFEDER ATED TRIBES ,AtJD B_ ANDS..
~ esTAhusHED Rv THE * * " ~ ~ 'cENERAL'corNc::
i TREATY or KNY t tm Vd.(lillA J/!t{tdi:;Yd/Wil Tn: Bat cccuc; ctNTtN NnL KN E 9. W i PCST OFFICE ECX 151 TCPPEN!SM. WASH;NGTON 95948 i i Janu':iry S , 19S2 I Nunaio J. Palladino, Chairman j Nuclear Regulatory Cc= mission Washington, D C. 20555 4
Subject:
Proposed Rulemaking on Storage and Disposal of
- Nuclear Waste, PR - 50 and 51 (Waste Confidence j Rulemaking.) '
i
Dear Mr. Palladino:
The Tribal Council of the Yakimas regrets that it was not possible for the Yakima Indian Nation to be invited to be present at the oral hearing on January ll, 19S2. In spite of this failure we have hope that a beginning has been made toward , a new relationship between Indian People and the NRC, in which ! the case of the Yakimas is but a present example. This letter 1 is designed to further this process of communication. Please understand that this letter is addressed to each of the five Commissioners because the central issue involves ' fundamental policy: That the NRC on the problems of nuclear I waste storace or disrosal has not procerly acaultted itself of l its responsibility toward Indians on tneir P.eservations near
- present or poteatlal sites for nuclear storace or disnosal.
i, First let it be understood that: 1
- 1. The Yakima Indian Nation is dedicated to the safety health, security, and protection of the Yakimas. The Treaty of 1855 between the Yakimas and the Federal Government of the United States
" is a vital instrument in carrying out this responsibility.
- 2. The Yakima Indian Nation is neither for nor against nuclear. In pursuit of #1 above, the Yakimas are for safety in nuclear contamination matters for the Yakimas, and therefore also l for their non-Innlan neicnbors.
l i
- 3. The Yakima Indian Nation has a particular and unusual stake in nuclear waste safety at llanford because: ;
i
- a. The Yakima Indian Nation in the Treaty of 1855 l ceded 9/10 of its Lands to the Federal Government, l an area now 25G of the total area of the state of
( Nash in;;t on , in return for Totally Reserved Lands l and o ther Ri!.;h ts" and. Retained Righi.s'within the 7 Ceded Lands. flW l gf. ,
~
- _ _ . , . _ - , . _ . _ . _ _ , ,_,______-.f.-__,_ . - _ . . . _ _ , _ _ , _ _ -
, 1
.~. . Nunaio J. Palladino, Chairman Page Two January 8, 19S2
- b. The Reservation of the '-ikimas which lies only 13 miles from Hanford, is by far the largest single land holding in the Hanford area, in fact, 1 1/2 times the area of the state of Rhode Island.
- c. Hanford lies within the area of Yakima Indian Nation Ceded Land.
- d. For the Yalsima Indian Nation the concept of evacuation because of nuclear is meaningless.
There can be no substitute for our Sacred Homeland.
- 4. The Yakima Treaty creceded the foundine of Washincton State by many years, and tne creation or the state has no bearing on tne terms of the Treaty between the Yakimas and the Federt.1 Government other than the !' Enabling Act" in the V.'ashington State Constitu tion which disallows state jurisdiction over Indians.
Wasnington State has never, and cannot now, represent the Yakima Indian Nation. The policies of the NRC have failed, to date, to take cognizance of this fact.
- 5. The Yakima Indian Nation believes that Acencies of the Federal Government. of which the NRC is one. have the oblication to uunold the laws of the United States. The Yakima Indian . Nation Treaty nignts have ceen upneld in the Courts of the United States as part of the Law of the Land.
- 6. Concerning the issue of storing or disposing of nuclear wastes at the Hanford Reservation, the Yakima Indian Nation asks that.the NRC. find no confidence that Hanford can be safely useo as a nuclear waste repository because:
- a. There is a lack of understanding cf Yakima Indian Nation Rights.
- b. There is present conflicting and inconclusive scientific argument recardine the geologic media and tecnnology for Haniord.
- c. There is strong managerial and scientific m idence that there is present contamination at lian f ord. c.h ich is no yet under control.
- d. There is a need to prevent further contamination to Yakima Indian Nation Lands and to the Columbia River over which we hold Treaty Rights.
0 -
- e. From the fact that Hanford is presently contamin-ated, it does not necessarily follo.'. that a " land use policy" of adding to that contamination is sound.
Nuncio J. Palladinc, Chairman Page Three January S, 1932
- 7. The Yakimas consider that the NRC oractice of limitinc announcements to entries in the Federat Eezister or ';RC procecures on Nuclear waste issues in an area involving the vital interests of the Yakima Indian Nation is not only inadequate but reveals a lack of understanding on the part of the NRC of the Guaranteed Rights of the Yakima Indian Nation. This is particularly true when the NRC not only had no evidence that the Yakimas were alreacy alerted. but also had no policy or practice of addressing ^those Rights peculiar to Treaty Tribes. The Yakimas are accustomed to spending their limited resources and time on other areas, such as the ever-present need to protect their Fish or their Water Rights. The Yakimas believe that it is encumbant upon the NRC to assure that the Yakimas are not misjudged in the protection of their own Rights by errors of omission on the part of the NRC.
- 8. The Yakima Indian Nation has both the right and obligation to be an integral part of the discussions and planning concerning the use of the Hanford Reservation land when subjects such as nuclear waste disposal are at issue. It is cart of the resnonsibility of the NRC to see to it that the Yakimas are invited anc neined to take cart in sucn ciscussicas.
The Yakimas are aware that early in the history of nuclear the extent of danger from radiation was seriously underestimated. P.*e know of failures to properly protect citiaens from nuclear radiation. In recent years with nuclear danger better understood and the staggering prc51em of nuclear waste dispcsal apparent, areas far from urban centers have been looked to as the place to store and dispose of nuclear wastes. These are among the areas where Indians hold Treaty Rights from the Federal Government. These are among the areas where beliefs other than the Judeo-Christian hold sway among the People, beliefs that the NRC must equally consider and protect. The Yakima Indian Nation asks each Commissioner of the NRC to:
- 1. Examine the policies of the NRC which have ignored Yakima Indian Nation Rights and alter those policies by,
- 2. Inviting the Yahima Indian Nation to join with the NRC i:. proceedings covering the fu ture of :Ian ford, and
- 3. Do so before making any binding decisions now concerning Hanford. and nuclear waste storage or disposal. ,
O Hunaio J. Palladino, Chairman Page Four January 8, 1982 As was stated in our opening paragraph, the Tribal Council of the Yakimas has written this letter with the intent of developing productive communications 'vich the NRC. As in all such efforts a constant ingredient must be goodwill. It is important for the Commission not to misread our efforts to maintain goodwill. The Commission should understand that unless the Commission takes immediate, aggressive steps i. response to the reasonable approach of this document, the Yakima Indian Nation will seek other means to prevent any continuation of the past abuses of the Rights and respect owed tc a Sovereign Nation. Please include this letter as part of our statement submitted for the duclear Waste Confidence Procedure Records (Parts 50 and 51 ','iaste Confidence Rulemaking) dated January 6, 1982, and address your response to Mr. Russell Jim, Tribal Councilman at the above address (telephone (509) S65-5121). Sincercly, m - 0,- Johnson Meninick, Chairman Yakima Tribal Council
/W --
. Russell Jim, Councilman Yakima Tribal Council se
r . ',
* ' ' ' ' "r CONFEDER ATED. TRIBES.XNO.2 ANDS - . . ... . GENERAL COU;;C:',.
ES ABL:SNED BY THE TREATY C7 :CNE 9.15'5 lgl,(*llll,j ,fjl({llljl lllllll TR:B AL CCCNc:L crsT:NN:AL JUNE 9. :su POST CFFICE EOX 151 TCPPEPMSH. WASHINGTOfJ M948 January 6, 1982 Mr. Samuel Chilk, Secretary Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Attention: Marshall Miller ,
Dear Mr. Chilk and Cc=missioners:
Subject:
Preposed Rulemaking on Storage and Disposal of Nuclear Waste, 10 CFR Parts 50 and 51 (Waste Confidence Rulemaking). The Yakima Indian Nation requests that the Commissioners accept and ccnsider as part of the Nuclear Waste Confidence Procedure Recorcs the following xords and ideas f rom the hearts of our People. Please be advised that this Tribe was not conquered by war. In the Treaty of 1855 we agreed to cede to the Federal Government but did not give up all our Rights to more than 1/4 of the present state of Washington. Our Totally Reserved Lands (13 times the size of the state of Rhode Island) lie just 13 miles irom Hanford and Hanford itself is on our Ceded Lands. Our paramount concern is for the health and safety of the future generations of our People and'those who live amongst us. There is apparent debate among experts on the safety of the geclogic site at Hanford. We believe that the Commissioners should appreciate that the value system of the Yakima Indian Nation expresses a unique relationship with Nature: i
- 1. The Reliaion of the Yakima Indian Peonle is inex-tricaoly bounc up in our Fooc Rignts and our Mineral Rights. The salmon and the waters of the rivers and streams are both vital parts of our constitutionally protected right to practice our religion.
- 2. United States Lecal precedent includes reference to Nulsance Law which aeclarcs that a neighbor does nct have the right to pollute or violate the area beyond his oven borders with noxious and poisonous elements which do violence to the use and enjoyment by neighbors of their own lands. This is particularly true where the polluter is the more recent "
land pp$ holder in the area." ' hI
#[ ..
0
c .
., . . ? .. ...
. !r . Samuel Chilk, Secretary Page Two January 6, 1982
- 3. Environmental Imnact Studies (which include Environ-mental Impact Statements, Safet:. Evaluation Reports, Socio-econcaic Impact Studies, and others) to date
~
from both 'bilblic and private organlaat;ons witnin the Columbia River Basin area have consistentl:. failed to look beyond the Judeo-Christian socio-economic heritage when investigating potential nuisances to neighbors from a given undertaking. The result has been repeated Nuisance Trespass on the Sovereign Rights of the Yakima Indian Nation guaranteed by the Treaty of 1855. Our Tribe possesses special knowledge and concerns that we believe are a valuable resource vehich the Commission should not overlook. We request therefore that the Comnission grant us enough time to assure that your pronosed rules are comprehencive enough to cover our concerns and values. Sincerely, A - a
. ~. -/.'.leNn i n 1 c k , Chairman Johnson m 3 Yakima Tribal Council
.r >
/ WJAdf< '
Russell Jim, Councilman Yakima Indian Nation g- t a
- .u.: n sy nc CONCEDERATED TRIBES AND EANDS c=.crw. comecn.
.77 GY :.*'." 1r, : S".S r
f.t s.
*
- r. v j.o." -*- ). ,, .
t h.o .e. .r.o 7.:3A.:.cc a; n. I'.' s'.; Oi?.5. S"5 PCST OmCE ECX 151 TOPPEMSH. WASHWOTON SW5 6 r e v. w.-,a--e -: ,c,
-- ,oco
-_v 1.w e_
=r---,-
----- o,o.
C.,-- .: un . vR e.n -w. n . c. C n w _ C C. _- _< . . e c
- r. .,
v y. L, C , e e .-
, 4 n .,
- n. o. s,..-- . , w
-Co.~4.. . ea_ o n r. ,., 4 . o ., e ., . , 7_ c.n d Public Works 7.,s""--s .^n,
- v D.L. ~0 0 v: ' O
Dear Gery:
- e.e.w n,a~ce.- kae -
4- d' w
' ed -"-. . " a. -'.t.".- o'
- --- --. . Cn.-
. ...r,c--
- p. - r . n. r..o .c. ,-- . <. w 24 ,.. .e- be keio.ce- - -- b sv^Da. b a t.. - .
s". C "- . d - -- 4- .' w ^
. ~'u 4 o.". a a-d d o C" *1 a ' ~u m' ~. # o .". o - ~~c
. k ' T. e -d e . -' '- l' T. d # n
.a.c 1c. _4 .,.,,,,e.w. _< p c. ,d b y s C .o g, a. p . c. , w o sc_... e n e .eo . wu ,, .e -w -. -o .. n e ,. c.
- .s - ,n. e .a
. - n. .;
y ou-
-. . ,e. e . o.e .-:' o w.- ,, . ,.. 2. , . c .o n - . e.C w .e..
- .- ~4- e-a
- e. .c.e m s. 7.. ". ' - .' o '- i o ,, s i n c ' "- d a_ s .e. . .a a_ _a_-
e--
-a'
---e.e.-as .
o-. e L. . a-n.- s ,, -, a .
.t. . u. .
- o. _ r u,.s-a - e o _
4
- , , .ne .. , , - n e --
e o...
- 1. The patal Bull of 1565 Sublica Deas which deal:
..-- ... .co"ve . e.g . y- . . . . . n e 'iT a c. a. .- . W a d .e'.k. e . = s . c- r. d u- a T - d4 e o "-o- 7 d4 - D. e- ^u
. - - ' e - a. - 4 '. a. d -- .T ..k
. . .- . e. e .
Sovereignty over .their La'nds and tha: the European owers were :nere ore c.liget
- o. .
to ne o:12:e with D thec over issues of sovereignty.
- 2. The Constitutional Convention by its first act c c "_ _' ..,a_ u~
. M. - -. M-senote' .Ceno.'e a""d 34 .".s e- --
persons and proper:v. . .
=
-. m.bo_ C m- ., s e . , , 4----.
me,, C..v - t, -, s
, ~
-. m. we r
.o_s-.un -,,/e , e 3,,,.,.,. 3 c . o . o.
. - .. e . . - w e
.w e e. . -
w s m,..e..a. ."..n'.,
. ae e.ea- c' .-.s so a_ e4 s... .
--de generally well understood.
^
. mk e r. a_d e . 1/ c- ' a_ /- T - d 4 n W.s . 4. o ' *. - 4. - S ov a_ . a_- i - . v estaclisnec by our younc;ng f a:bers wnere Inc.2n S^ve.-c4,,
. : 'dw- . o -.4. owe sck.e a_ . o . . . ' G o . e . _-a_ .. .
is not..co.widely~understo'd. o For a good description of this Reserved Inheren: Indian Sovereignty Chief. s,m e,e u...a.oru , liv .e cec -4s4o,. s 4, wo.ree o-
- -. , .. n. e a . 4 , ,
6 pe: 515 (1532) is Ibe recogninec authority as
L. .-p . .e.. , The Ecnorable Gary Eart yebruary 19, 1980
'Page Two .
to the Indian Reserved Rigt:s of control over , their destiny and their Lands. Also see yederal
~
Indian-LarDepartment o~f Interior, (175 W -~ Chapter II and VI, and M. Price, La .; and the American Indian, Ecbbs-Merril, (1973) Cnanter I. Tne Reference Section, Library of Congress is Ibe key resource center. C. Lands Ceded and Reserved bv Indians:
- 1. The Treaties: Under the Tri-Sovereignty System -
of Government (A, 2 above) Indian Nations and Tribes established centrol over their own People and occupied Lands. By Treaty or other agreemen; with the Tederal Government Indian Nations and - Tribes ceded some of the lands they occupied to the United St=.tes and agreed to become dependen Nations under International Law.
- 2. Ceded and Reserved: Just as any grantor may reserve certain r:gn:c in the lands granted and reserve the
- ~ total control over use af certain lands no
'c6h'veyed, so did the Indians grant or cede certain lands to the United States reserving cer: tin Richts in these Ceded areas and reserve total use and occupancy in the Lands not granted or Ceded. These Lands not ceded are commonly called Indian Reser-varions. The Reserved Rights of Use in areas Ceded are just as real. The Rights.:ba: Indian Tribes have in regards to both areas exis not by grant from the United States but by the fact that they were Reserved bz this Sovereign po er See United States v. Winans, 198.-US 371 (1905).
D. Reserved Richts:
- 1. The Rich: to Control Their Internal Affairs was reservec by Inclan Trices. By acnnowlecging dependency on the United S:1tes, Indians sub-mitted their power to make war, enter into Inter- !
national agreement an'd to contrcl Inter-Tribal foreign commerce.
- 2. Indian Warural Resources: / Indians agreed .to place some of tne1r natural resources in 1 trust relation-shin. with the United . States. The orka- T'beren
. ~
. Sovereign' powers were" retained. See Uni:bd States v.
Wheeler, 435 US 313 (1978). a g .
~ * , . v. ,
- m. w n_ =n
--- . a ,%_1._ n,-.. --.c -- . -..
T
. - ek .-,, , -.yw 1C, ---
_ 7 COO Page Three = r
-. .t. ~. e_ n e_ o:. J..uo. .4_e4,%,e .-_ T .a c' s e .- C o , c o_ . . .
- 1. The Issues of Use: An7 use concerr_S.us tk at may
... e _ _+ n_ - n_ . v, _ . .-m-- _ e y e,"c"
_ .. -- v e .D. ' o .b. . o. ~use..d o s-'. -'e_s 4-eiuhe. ou. c ' -'. ' ",
.".e c a_ - - >a_
_ - d 7'ade
----a c- T~2 a c' e --
4-which we have Reserved Rights. These Richts are Senarate and Anar: f rc= anr richts of control er
. ,,- o_
- - . - o_ e_ . o- -e---
w a .e ,u. -,- aw-av o_ ,, .,.u_. -e,-- . . ~ . .e . e a ,
.o e sc_ see
, , Lu_ - e c ---
ee- c.e 1 . ..b,,,,... . 1__<m..ec._c,_ Distric 236 F2c 321, Cert. cenzec 3'2 US 985; 330
- 0 c. ces, c e s : _9 c. 20s, Cer: ceniec aci L,S 9,,.
U _ _4 . ed - Cm . e a_ _c v. W's_"4. _.m .^_,- 4_ t 'L'n" a.c<8 ('c<0). _ . _ 9
-. m.. w. e T _e _e , , ,_ o <. m
_ -0 .w- n
-m-_, , , - .__.e . c- ,..-c n m , ,.< . . , 4_ n . . e _c o_ - . o_ -s 2,. _ m-.e. ...
C a . . ' 4 '.. '_ ,_ _ _ a_ - .s- co_ '__4___4_c_ 4e
- _k a_ -s . e a a_ _e .
.--o_m.c.
.v c,_ ",c- '3.._, _ ,---_ o.,. - : _ c_.-. e c ..e
..e.c z.s_.. w.e. 2 n e _, ,_
.ve s_ w.- e co,- - - . .,.,,- s w, e . 2"d - _4 s .v.o""c.s e.e se.
.s no < o c. , - (eu . e . D, . vc .
o,. . 4 - L%_ _; . m_ -s _e.-,- ec s . xc__ e . C ego ) oy
. o.. C' ac . e S.e.,. e-..oe. 27, 'o<C. -_ _ U.4 a_d States v Anderson Nc. 364 3 (U.S.D.C. Eastern D, ., s e , c . , n: ao _ . g. n, ) o y .,2 .4 c n c., e s -s ,m,,_. _o m , , c. < _o .
We trus: that the above su==ary will help in your presen-e
.,.4o,..o au~w o. a- o. ,ro 2 -. -.s -a-de - su on. le u e. o ' .# e ' -"- - . .v 4, 'C-- 0 d
concerning any Nuclear Waste Disposal Legislation. Let me close with these broad convictions which gave rise to those. points.
- 1. Indian Sovereign Authority must be brought into Euclear Waste Disposal Planning at Ibe very beginning so that the various rights and prerogatives involved
, can be negotiated in the liph of established Tri-en-
-- e.e < s,- - - : Gove -..o.uu.
I
~. T-d4-"
-- _a- 0. s-
. 4 - b. . *o ,Nc -Conc"- e"^e .. - -"-a". be se e '_".a_ ad e-e..
r- < c_
.. u,,_: e-,.
- -.e.
1
- 3. Congress must be the sole mediator of dispute.
- 4. Ccngressional stirulations as to conditions which control the inclusion of Indian Soverei Authorities be o,n.c4c.4e e .,.. pec4<<c ..w,. a L._4 s...,-,,.o- o.<
-_ .,e. e.i -.a o .. u--. -_ mm the Law will.exercis'e'no undue influence.
I ' . l
. S 1
I
.. 3
^
I. . l "O.
' .r . .
y.
- m. .w. e O n . v . .m.u l o .- Gn... ..r.
a
.r eu.--
. w . . n . .. .. 1c, ,
. c00 DnGp
.- . .T- ,
I.'"* *O 'w.'.'....t.- v, o n , G -. o -.~, , .'. c . s"O". S *- '.".w e 4 ". .
. be .'c"~g C. T.3d#'" .R ^w ".. ^. .' a. # "g .'I..
.b. 4 .C
- O .' .". -- .". .# ~ h ' v" . T. .# .#U . ~ u" e ." C' O C "-...e ." * "
- 4 *v."
. . .s.Su,,.Ce w.,..' u w4e. 4ac. _ .a24.
- v e uDo
< .: . A -- e
.5 - eCocSe., -- w e.
e --v - n
. .a Ca -
-ww"'.'*.,
O '. _. --.~* #" ** '. C .#S "." S S .' 0. .". A .' n
- Co..c'a u'.'"; ..~.o.~.
"_.O"u ~, S*s 2
b u-ae .r- *oed
.--w *..b e m.. 9-*.e . .4 1.,7 1 e *w ..=.o .l.= D O w . "1 h e './ eul...4 ...S .i n -A4.m
. c .,
J . -. s c *w -
}s% - .. <.C - ".
. "' c* ". 'w S ~Ow he
- O.# e V a ". y .
E .C C d. S ~ ' v.' " e 4 "
. ,V O " ' _# .i ". e e .# #. O ." S Ou -D e w ,. _1 .e O.< ,
l.* .a,p . . . .4C., ~ n<.w .4 ., e .. .e . v - Si:Ce r elv. "Ou s. .
.m ws s
.n. S S O , ., J .4 . , C O . . ., C .4.~ ,... ., ,
I ., d 4 **
*J
.2.1 4.. m.. . e. a u . .e n.
. ..s .c.. f. 0 3
.al-
,C** W
- 9. -n 4 ('.'.9u.
9 % o. *. ~...O.- - . . - .h. S $. -Q .j 4b. 9 ., _. g m *eg m S 49 9 9
$' 'h* g h
, 6% e
_ , . _ _ _ _ _ , - , m. _ *- .
A CONFEDERATED TRIBES AND BANDS DTAB*.:F:iED BY THE GENERAL COUNCIL TREATT OF JUNE 3.1o55 kg['[//fg //f(((g/f gYg/[(/f
~
TR;BAL COUNC:L CENTENNIAL JUNE 9.19% POST CFF:CE SOX 151 TOPPEN:SH, WASHINGTON 98348 August 30, 1982 Mr. G. C. Sorenson Manager -- Licensing Program Washington-Public Power _. ,~ Supply System P.O. Box 968 . 3000 George Washington'Way Richland, WA 99352 ,
Dear Mr. Sorenson:
The Yakima Indian Nation wishes you to be aware of the following: -
.. s._, ,
1.) As previous correspondence shows and details:
- a. The Yak'ima. Indian Nation $vas ignored in all of the licensing proceedings-and rules under the NRC for WPPSS :II nuclear power plant.
- b. The Yakima Indian Nation letter of September 22, 1981, to Dr. Rajender Auluck of the NRC complied with NRC rules for participation in the draft ~
EIS for WPPSS IL.
- g L.
- c. Weeks after the final EIS went for publication, a fact of which we were not and could not be aware, you made yourself available for a meeting.
- d. When the meeting was held between your staff and our staffpersons below Tribal Council level, we
- learned for the first time, that the final Environmental Statement was already published--
so that the meeting became meaningless.
- e. After the meeting NRC staff and WPPSS staff distorted the content of that meeting so as to strengthen the contention that NRC and WPPSS had in fact lived up to NRC rules--a contention the Yakima Indian Nation roundly denies.
+ < .
Mr. G. C. Sorenson Page Two August 30, 1982 2.) Your letter of July 13, 1982, to which this letter is a response, states that the Yakima Indian Nation
" Commented" on the WPPSS II EIS. This misrepresen-tation of the truth is a continuation of the pattern of events to date summarized in number 1 above.
For the Yakima Indian Nation to address the significant adverse impacts of WPPSS I, the NRC and WPPSS must first go back and truthfully address the still unresolved issues regarding WPPSS II and the Yakima Indian Nation. This letter or any part of it is not to be used by you as a " Comment" in your WPPSS I EIS. Sincerely, f 5 gwg C Russell Jim, Councilman Yakima Indian Nation cc: Nuncio Palladino Richard Black
<, i
~
, 1 s
', ' CONFEDERATED TRIBES AND SANDS I
(STAtti.!MIED !!Y THE GEN ERAL COUNC;; TRVA1\ DV W N Y;* 'M Nik'lillfl ll1tlll111 hilll Elf TR!HAL COUNCll. j CEN1ESM d.. UNE a vu PCST OFFICE BCx 151 i TOPPEN;Sn. WASHINGTCN 98948 i September 22, 1981 + Dr. Rajender Atluck Director, Divison of Licensing l Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
; U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 ,
i
Dear Dr. Auluck:
4 The Tribal Council of the Yakima Indian Nation asks that, before your office approves the WPPSS Environmental Impact Statement, WPPSS be required to consult concerning the content of that statement with the Yakima Indian Nation. We base this request upon the following facts: 1
- 1. The Yakima Tribal Reservation, one and one-i half timesthe size of the State of Rhode Island, has a border only l_3_ miles from the Hanford j Reservation, the site of the WPPSS plant.
- 2. The Yakimas are a Sovereign Nation with a Treaty with the Federal Government which guarantees to the Yakimas forever, particular securities, rights, and privileges in return for vast lands ceded to the Federal Government in 1855.
- 3. The Treaty also gives the Yakimas certain rights 4
and privileges over Ceded Lands, part of which ! lie within the Hanford Reservation. i i 4. The religious and cultural-beliefs and practices
) of the Yakimas, protected by the Treaty and
- Supreme Court decision, express a sacred, unique j relationship with Nature and the Environment.
. 5. In spite of all the foregoing, none of the elected representatives of the Ydima People'were ever consulted by the authors of the WPPSS Environmental i Impact Statement.
l 6. A careful reading of the WPPSS Environmental Impact Statement reveals that: j a. The only reference to Indian people in the l document is a vague reference to " Wanapuas",
- unidentified and" as a general term hf' only lpg' " historic interest, and even then in an insensitiv'e way.
l. y e s-- i 9 Gnh .
--,,.-.-,-.,r,.--,,,.--.,+,,-.y---,y- ,.,,w... ,,.,-.,r--
-,,---,,~,-.,_.,gm,-.m...-.m,-, - -,.,.m,,e =~7-- -,.y-m-%,
o,. c:
'.i.
Dr. Rajender Auluck Page Two September 22, 1981
- b. The document ignores the existence of the Yakima Indian Nation, its vaste adjacent Tribal Treaty Lands, and its particular concerns for the protection of its guranteed rights and privileges.
- c. The document in its brief reference in the text to " Indians" is behind the times, and reveals no sensitivity to. Indian Civil and Human Rights which today have become a matter of course in legislation and court decisions.
The Tribal Council asks, in addition, that your office consult with us before setting a time and place to begin discussions between the Yakima Indian Nation and the NRC licensing agent and the representatives of ViPPSS. Please contact Mr. Russell Jim, Tribal Councilman, at (509) 865-5121. Thank you for your consideration: Sincerely,
.m
- V
/lf thi.&c"% D '/y/ S (O.dL-e) r /c'/ Joli)nson'Meninick , Chairman
,/ Yakima Tribal Council Concur: ;
l
~_ l.u n w / p a s o, l m gLeonardTomaskin, Chairman Yakima General Council I
h i e n, , - , - , - , -- , , - - - - ,, -
---m}}