Donna L. Powaukee
Manager
Nez Perce Tribe
Department of Environmental
Restoration and Waste Management
David F. Conrad
Acting Director
Council of Energy
Resource Tribes Environmental Program
Kristie L. Baptiste
Policy Analyst
Nez Perce Tribe
Department of Environmental
Restoration and Waste Management
The Nez Perce Tribe has been involved with the Department of Energy's environmental management efforts since as early as 1987, during a predecessor Office's tenure during the Basalt Waste Isolation Pilot Project. From that time until now, the Nez Perce Tribe has initiated a number of activities which serve to broaden the scope of what have been considered "tribal" issues. The latest demonstration of sustained effort by the Nez Perce Tribe has been in the area of weapons-usable fissile materials disposition decision making. The Nez Perce Tribe developed an idea of how it should proceed to involve itself in the decision making process, and when confronted with the prospect of missing this opportunity and having other Tribes potentially miss out on the opportunity and duty to be involved in decisions of such magnitude, the Nez Perce Tribe changed its plans and developed a mechanism for other Tribes to be involved as well. This effort demonstrated leadership in the arena of tribal involvement in nuclear waste decision making, and is setting the stage for future tribal involvement.
INTRODUCTION
The Nez Perce Tribe has been in the Mid-Columbia River region since time immemorial; stories are alive today recalling floods that geologists estimate took place around 10,000 years ago. In that time, the Tribe has seen many changes, including the arrival of non-Indians. The government-to-government relationship between the Nez Perce Tribe and the United States began in 1806 when the Nez Perce befriended the Lewis and Clark expedition. By 1855 the non-Indian population had grown to such an extent that pressure from that population growth moved the two governments to sign a treaty. In 1924 Indians living in the United States were made U.S. citizens, and only twenty years later operations began at Hanford. Hanford operations affected Nez Perce rights protected by the Treaty of 1855, but it was not until 1982 and the passage of the Nuclear Waste Policy Act that the Nez Perce became eligible to officially participate in the protection their rights from U.S. federal facilities operation. In 1987, the Nez Perce Tribe became involved in the study regarding the Basalt Waste Isolation Pilot Project, which heralded the beginning of the Nez Perce scientific and technical expertise in the nuclear arena. In 1994, the Nez Perce Tribe signed a cooperative agreement with the U.S. Department of Energy signaling a new era and level of federal compliance with its special trust responsibility to Tribes that it impacts with its decisions and operations. Under the cooperative agreement the Nez Perce Tribe has the flexibility to address issues such as plutonium disposition, which are not purely Hanford-related.
BACKGROUND
The end of the cold war brought about a huge surplus of weapons-usable plutonium. As nuclear warheads are dismantled across the globe, plans are underway to decide the fate of the long-lived radioactive material, plutonium. What the United States does with its plutonium affects what other countries will do with theirs. Tribal leaders and their constituents have not been deeply involved in the discussion of available options for the disposition of this material. This was an opportunity to become involved in the global dismantlement of the world's nuclear arsenal, but just as importantly it was to make a decision which would have impacts on generations of our own people for tens of thousands of years. The U.S. Department of Energy has the responsibility to consult with Indian Tribes before it takes actions that will affect them or their rights, before moving on to the public comment period. The Department of Energy, Office of Fissile Materials did not consult with Tribes before the release of the draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for public comment, yet this clearly represented a case where tribes would be affected by the decision. Many Department of Energy people had trouble seeing why Tribes were involved, after all, this was not about "cultural resources" or fishing rights, it was about nuclear disarmament, political in-fighting about states taking their fair share of waste, and complex technical issues. This was not the typical issue Tribes had been involved with, and therefore a number of collateral issues presented themselves: How could the Nez Perce educate the Department of Energy to the breadth of tribal involvement, the Nez Perce Tribe was venturing into uncharted waters for Tribes and could set back other Tribes if it did not produce a successful Forum; and the shape and tone of this Forum would have an impact on the development of similar efforts for the Nez Perce Tribe.
ISSUE IDENTIFICATION
It became readily apparent that Tribes were not approaching the plutonium disposition options as a matter of purely political power or technical feasibility, but, the Nez Perce Tribe extrapolated, they would need to approach it from a different angle. The Nez Perce Tribe would design the Forum to conceptualize the disposition options from a tribally defined approach. For example, many American Indian Tribes live near or adjacent to areas affected by Department of Energy operations, and as such are involved to varying degrees in clean-up activities. Absent is the information of impacts resulting from the development of atomic weapons in Indian Tribes and Indian peoples. There are many unanswered questions relating to Indian resources and people from the affects of Department of Energy sites. How does the development of the nuclear past and future affect the Indian way of life? How do disposition options comport with tribal traditions and beliefs? How do disposition options affect other Tribes? How do the interests of other Tribes get integrated into a Tribe-specific position? These are but a few of the questions raised as Tribes began the exploration of plutonium disposition options.
THE NATIONAL TRIBAL PLUTONIUM FORUM
In October of 1995, the Washington State League of Women Voters and the Washington State branch of the Physicians for Social Responsibility hosted a Plutonium Roundtable, to which the Nez Perce Tribe was invited to speak from a respondents panel. This was a two part meeting, the first being a evening-and-following-morning meeting in Kennewick, Washington and the second having the same structure, but held in Seattle. It is in the Nez Perce comments at these meetings that we find the seeds for the National Tribal Plutonium Forum.
The Nez Perce Tribe's representative commented that the ethical implications of plutonium siting required that the Tribe develop a dialogue within itself in order to come to grips with what was really being decided with these disposition options. The ethical implications are inter-generational, as well as national. How one Tribe decides may have impacts on other communities, and the decision makers must be aware of what potential ramifications these decisions will have. For Tribes with cultural, treaty, religious, and natural resources decisions weighing heavily before them, the insights that those tribal leaders have gained would be invaluable in bringing their intellectual and spiritual acumen to bear on the plutonium disposition options. From the time the Plutonium Roundtable disbanded until January 1996 the Nez Perce Tribe began to develop its concept of what could be accomplished given the situation, coalition support, timing, funding, and public comment deadline approaching in May.
The Plutonium Roundtable planning group consisted of a number of stakeholder groups from the Northwest, but did not include any Tribes. Ms. Betty Tabbutt of the Washington League of Women Voters pushed to include the Tribes involved with Hanford cleanup, and of these the Nez Perce took the lead on developing a plutonium disposition tribal involvement mechanism of national proportions. The Nez Perce Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Department developed a concept for a forum for tribal leaders. Time did not allow for the development of a plan for the gradual building of tribe-specific grassroots dialogues which would then lead to a national meeting, so the Nez Perce pursued support from the Department of Energy's Office of Materials Disposition for a National Tribal Plutonium Forum through a coalition of Northwest stakeholders. Not until one month prior to the dates of the Forum did, the Nez Perce Tribe receive the final word that all obstacles had been removed and they could proceed. From that time on, the logistical work of organizing such an event took place; there were rooms to book, travel to arrange, invitations and funds to go out through a tribal bureaucracy, there were briefing books to put together, there were invitational phone calls to make, there were experts to invite, and coalition support to maintain and coordinate, there were briefings to prepare and statements for public consumption to write, all while continuing to educate staff about plutonium disposition options and the policies and interests involved.
The coalition's support for the Forum made it possible. The League of Women Voters and the Physicians for Social Responsibility provided the disposition expert contacts, the Department of Energy Office of Fissile Materials provide funding for expert travel, the Council of Energy Resource Tribes provided planning support, the Nez Perce Tribe provided its personnel, administration, and name to the design and execution of the Forum, the University of Washington--Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation provided the Forum locus, the Department of Energy Office of Environmental Management provided advocacy support from the Richland Operations Office and Headquarters, the National Tribal Environmental Council provided a majority of the funding for tribal travel through its cooperative agreement with the Office of Environmental Management, the Hanford Advisory Board provided advocacy support, the State of Washington Department of Ecology provided personnel and equipment to record the proceedings, the State of Oregon provided expert advice and advocacy support, and the attending Tribes provided their support through their presence.
The Forum itself was designed to bring together a balanced panel of experts to elucidate the disposition options. These experts were arranged by the Northwest plutonium disposition coalition, because of their previous experience in hosting this type of event, and because there was to be a public meeting on the disposition options during the evening between the two-day Tribal Forum. Tribal Forum information sessions on the disposition options were open to the public, however, the facilitated sessions between Tribes and experts were for the benefit of tribal participants only. This closure was to allow free and open discussion of concerns and/or sensitive issues for Tribes such as cultural resources concerns. The experts would give their professional points and counterpoints on the issues in front of the tribal leaders and their top policy advisors, after which the Council of Energy Resource Tribes facilitated a discussion of the issues. This concept for the Forum was designed to take tribal leaders and their top policy advisors, with little-to-no experience in plutonium disposition and make them conversant in the dialogue.
OUTCOMES
The initially anticipated outcome was to have developed for the attending Tribes a working knowledge of the impacts associated with various disposition options and a simple way of assembling this into comments regarding the Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement on the Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials. This originally intended outcome changed during the course of the Forum. The newly expected outcome was a framework that tribal leaders could use when reading the Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement on the Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials to inspire their thoughts and uncover new questions about potential impacts to their interests and others'. By engaging in the facilitated session the tribal policymakers and Plutonium experts defined six key issue areas. In each issue area a team described examples, offered some considerations for tribal evaluation of the Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement on the Storage and Disposition of Weapons-Usable Fissile Materials, and examined the possible long-term considerations.
SUMMARY
The impact of the National Tribal Plutonium Forum is unclear at this time. Ultimately, the impact will be judged not only in terms of what, if any, influence tribal comments had on the plutonium disposition options, but also on if and how Tribes continue their work on issues of concern to them. The Nez Perce Tribe identified an issue area of concern and took a leadership role in bringing the issue before the national tribal attention, but it did more than that. The Nez Perce National Tribal Plutonium Forum challenged, the Department of Energy's and others' concept of what is considered a "tribal issue" and successfully sponsored a Forum to discuss complex ethical and moral assumptions which underlie complex political and technical issues. This could be the start of a trend in nuclear waste siting decision making. The Nez Perce Tribe is committed to staying actively involved in this and other decision scenarios.
EXHIBITS
National Tribal Plutonium Forum Agenda
National Tribal Plutonium Forum Tribal Participants
Six Key Issue Areas
The issue areas were identified through the facilitated sessions, where tribal participants and plutonium experts broke into groups and worked together to articulate their concerns. Six groups developed six issue areas, using a system of cards and markers, and limiting their comments to a few words. What follows are the issue areas as reported back to the group as a whole.
Issue Statement: What kinds of support do the Tribes need to participate fully in the dialogue on plutonium disposition, what kind of support does the U.S. Department of Energy need from Tribes to assist them with this and how is this communicated?
Examples
Tribal Questions for Study of the PEIS
Long-term Considerations
Issue statement: This is a national issue not just tribal communities or local/host communities are affected.
Examples
Tribal Questions for Study of the PEIS
Long-term Considerations
Issue statement: How do we increase and maintain visibility of tribal standing?
Examples
Tribal Questions for Study of the PEIS
Long-term Considerations
Issue Statement: Risk to culture, health, and environment are inseparable
Examples
Tribal Questions for Study of the PEIS
Long-term Considerations
Additional Concerns
Issue statement: Tribes must develop and maintain profound, proactive, and continuing involvement in this plutonium dialogue and other related issues of concern.
Examples
Tribal Questions for study of the PEIS
Long-term Considerations
Issue statement: How do you identify the values and process we want this to live up to?
Examples
Tribal Questions for Study of the PEIS
Long-term Considerations
Additional Concerns