eoient
On Native
American lands
Office of Solid Waste
U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
-------
OSWER Indian Program
-------
OSWER'S INDIAN PROGRAM
-------
Objectives of OSWER's Indian Program
To promote Tribal capability to
Manage hazardous and solid waste
Regulate underground storage tanks and oversee the cleanup
of releases
Assess sites and remediate previous releases
Prepare for chemical emergencies
To offer Tribes the opportunity to develop an integrated
environmental program on Indian lands by providing multi-media
assistance agreements, tailored to meet individual Tribe's needs
To expand and enhance EPA's presence on Indian lands by
leveraging EPA's limited resources with other Agencies (BIA, IMS,
ANA, HUD, FEMA) that also have responsibilities in Indian country
-------
Background
EPA's 1984 Indian policy recognized Tribal governments as
primary parties for
Setting standards
Making environmental policy decisions
Managing environmental programs on reservations
EPA is committed to encouraging and assisting Tribes in
assuming regulatory and program management responsibilities
On June 14, President Bush issued an Indian policy statement,
reaffirming a government-to-government relationship between
Indian tribes and the Federal government
-------
Catalysts For Action
Tribes are becoming increasingly aware of their environmental
responsibilities and liabilities under OSWER environmental
statutes
Tribes are increasingly seeking greater control over environmental
programs on their lands
-------
SARA Title III
In 1986, EPA informed Tribes of Title III provisions
Mailing provided fact sheet and planning information
In 1988, draft Indian policy developed by CEPP office indicated
EPA's intent to treat Tribes as States
Final rule promulgated July 26, 1990
Tribes would be treated as States unless they exercised other
options with States or other Tribes
-------
RCRA
RCRA provides no specific mechanism for delegation to Tribes
Tribes are defined as municipalities
EPA is responsible for implementing and enforcing Subtitle C
Tribes, like States, are responsible for solid waste
management (Subtitle D)
Recent court decisions (e.g., Mattie Blue Legs) have confirmed
that Tribes are subject to RCRA
Tribes have growing concerns over solid waste management and
the potential impact of proposed landfill criteria on Indian lands
Until recently, OSW's (HQ and Regions) role consisted largely of
providing technical assistance to specific Tribes
-------
RCRA (continued)
Need for a Tribal-wide approach to address these concerns lead
to development and implementation of a 1991 OSW Indian
strategy which focuses on four areas
Outreach and communication
Training
Technical assistance
Regulatory development
6
-------
OUST
RCRA amendments of 1984 included Subtitle I provisions
(Underground Storage Tanks)
Regional circuit rider program initiated in Fiscal Year 1988 for
Regions VIII, IX; has been expanded to include all 5 western
Regions
Regions began oversight of RP-lead corrective actions on
Indian lands in Fiscal Year 1989
Beginning in Fiscal Year 1990, the LUST Trust Fund was used
for Federal-lead corrective actions on Indian lands at selected
sites
-------
CERCLA
As enacted, CERCLA did not establish an explicit role for Indian
tribes or define the status of Indian lands with respect to
Superfund actions
SARA provisions
Afford Indian tribes "substantially the same treatment as
States" in Superfund program
Require survey of hazardous waste sites on Indian lands in
consultation with Indian tribes
Require Report to Congress on program needs of Tribes and
how Tribal participation in program administration could be
maximized
The NCR and Subpart O implement the mandates outlined in
CERCLA, as amended, and describe the process for Indian tribes
to apply for funds as well as carry out response activities
8
-------
OSW Indian Program
-------
OSW'S INDIAN PROGRAM
-------
Objectives of OSWs Indian Program
To assist Tribes in safely managing solid and hazardous waste
and implementing the requirements of RCRA
2> To promote Tribal capability in managing hazardous and solid
waste and in regulating waste-related activities
To expand and enhance EPA's RCRA presence on Indian lands by
leveraging EPA's limited resources with other Agencies (BIA, IMS,
HUD) that also have responsibilities in Indian country
6
-------
Background
RCRA provides no specific mechanism for delegation to Tribes
Under RCRA, Tribes are defined as municipalities
EPA is responsible for implementing and enforcing Subtitle C
Tribes, just like States, are responsible for solid waste
management
Menominee Indians (Wisconsin),, intend to seek RCRA
hazardous waste authorization; application is under
development
Proposed amendments to Subtitle C and Subtitle D rules
would allow Tribes to seek program delegation
Particular concern over waste management (hazardous and solid)
on Tribal land
Recent court decisions (e.g., Mattie Blue Legs) have
confirmed that Tribes are subject to RCRA requirements
-------
Background (continued)
Tribes are concerned about potential impact of proposed
landfill criteria
Many lack resources, technical expertise necessary to
comply; conflicting Tribal priorities
Particular concern about proper closure of old dumpsites
Waste management companies are courting Tribal leaders to
site commercial solid and hazardous waste facilities
Campo Mission Indians, California
Rosebud Sioux, South Dakota
Mississippi Choctaw
Incidents of illegal dumping have taken place on Tribal lands
8
-------
Background (continued)
Tribes are increasingly seeking greater control over environmental
programs on their lands
At the same time, several State legislatures are attempting to
assert jurisdiction over Indian lands
9
-------
Role of Other Federal Agencies
Bureau of Indian Affairs (Department of Interior)
Responsible for trust obligation; promotes Tribal economic
development
Indian Health Services (Public Health Service, HHS)
Provides, through HUD Housing, design, construction and
maintenance of sanitation facilities which could include solid
waste
10
-------
Role of Other Federal Agencies (continued)
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Provides, through Tribal Housing Authorities, funding for
home construction and maintenance and associated services
(water, sewage, and solid waste)
Administration for Native Americans (Health and Human Services)
Promotes economic and social self-sufficiency of Native
Americans through grants, training and technical assistance
11
-------
Current OSW/Regional Activities
In the past, Headquarters and Regional roles have been limited to
providing technical support to specific Tribes
Primarily on municipal solid waste management issues
2> Need for a nation-wide approach to address these concerns and
coordinate HQ and Regional efforts led to development and
implementation of a 1991 OSW Indian strategy which focuses on
four areas
Outreach and communication
Training
Technical assistance
Regulatory development
12
-------
Outreach and Coordination
Named an OSW Indian Coordinator
Published Native American Network (2 issues to date); provided to
Regions, States, and Tribes
Supported formation of Regional Tribal Environmental Coalitions
in Regions VIII and IV
Established contacts with other Federal agencies (BIA, HUD, IMS,
ANA)
Chair Solid Waste Focus Group, composed of representatives
of BIA, IMS, HUD, and ANA
Participate in BIA Task Force
Participate in regional meetings, training, with BIA, IHS, HUD
13
-------
Technical Assistance
Headquarters provided extramural funds ($150,000) to Regions to
support specific projects including:
$15K to Region IV to support recycling efforts at Cherokee,
North Carolina, and Miccosukee, Florida
$42K to Region VI to support community outreach and educa-
tion project on solid waste management at Zuni, New Mexico
$40K to Region IX to support the development of a hazardous
waste program on Arizona's Gila River reservation
$60K to Region X to continue support of the Native Alaskan
Solid Waste Management Project
$10K to Region I for the development of Indian cultural
sensitivity training for EPA HQ and Regional staff
With Region VIII, BIA, IMS and HUD and the Tribe, EPA is
providing funding for the development and implementation of a
pilot project for municipal solid waste collection at Fort Belknap
Montana
14
-------
Training
Funded participation of ten Tribal members in RCRA Orientation
and Train-the-Trainer workshops
Funded participation of Tribal trainers in first Native American
Workshop at University of Michigan
Provided RCRA training to BIA and IMS staff at area, regional and
national meetings
15
-------
I
Regulatory Development
Subtitle C
Regulatory workgroup formed to amend Part 271 authorization
regulations to allow program delegation to Tribes
Workgroup recommending that Tribal programs be as
stringent as Federal, but that partial authorization be allowed
Workgroup closure expected in fall 1991
Subtitle D
- Rule proposes that Tribes be eligible to apply for MSWLF
permit program approval to implement the revised MSWLF
criteria
16
-------
1992 and Beyond
Major goals are to enhance Tribal ability to manage solid and
hazardous waste and to maintain leadership in addressing waste-
related issues on Tribal land
In consultation with Regions, OSW is developing a national RCRA
Indian strategy for 1992 and beyond
We expect to continue successful activities initiated in 1991
Support for technical Tribal projects
Expansion of*cadre of Tribal trainers
Formation of Regional Tribal Environmental Coalitions
Promulgation of Subtitle C and Subtitle D rules
Continued publication of Native American Network
17
-------
1992 and Beyond (continued)
New initiatives may include:
Delivering Indian cultural and sensitivity training to all EPA
staff
Creating Regional technical assistance teams, composed of
EPA, IMS, and BIA staff, to respond to Tribal-specific issues
and concerns
Sponsoring a National Tribal Multi-Media Environmental
Conference
Developing and delivering environmental training specifically
directed at Tribal leaders
Supporting Tribal training on SIR and landfill criteria
Exploring the issues surrounding State/Tribal agreements, and
establishing workgroups consisting of EPA, States, and Tribes
18
-------
EPA Indian Policy
-------
1/8/J4
EPA POLICY FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
PROGRAMS ON INDIAN RESERVATIONS
INTRODUCTION
The President published a Federal Indian Policy on January 24, 1983,
supporting the primary role of Tribal Governments in matters affecting
American Indian reservations. That policy stressed two related thene*
(1) that the Federal Government will pursue the princiole of Indie-
"self-government" and (2) that it will work directly with Tribal
Governments on a "government-to-government" basis.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has previously issued general
statements of policy which recognize the importance of Tribal Governments
in regulatory activities that impact reservation environments. It is the
purpose of this statement to consolidate and expand on existing EPA Indian
Policy statements in a manner consistent with the overall Federal positir.
in support of Tribal "self-government" and "government-to-government" rela-
tions between Federal and Tribal Governments. This statement sets fort-i
the principles that will guide the Agency in dealing with Tribal Governments
and in responding to the problems of environmental management on American
Indian reservations in order to protect human health and the environment
The Policy is intended to provide guidance for EPA program managers in the
conduct of the Agency's congressionally mandated responsibilities. As
such, it applies to EPA only and does not articulate policy for other
Agencies in the conduct of their respective responsibilities.
It is important to emphasize that the implementation of regulato-v
programs which will realize these principles on Indian Reservations can.,,-:
be accomplished immediately. Effective implementation will take care'n
and conscientious work by EPA, the Tribes and many others. In many cases
it will require changes in applicable statutory authorities and regulations
It will be necessary to proceed in a carefully phased way, to learn fro;n
successes and failures, and to gain experience. Nonetheless, by beginning
work on the priority problems that exist now and continuing in the direction
established under these principles, over time we can significantly enhance
environmental quality on reservation lands.
POLICY
In carrying out our responsibilities on Indian reservations, the
fundamental objective of the Environmental Protection Agency is to protect
human health and the environment. The keynote of this effort will be to
give special consideration to Tribal interests in making Agency policy,
and to insure the close involvement of Tribal Governments in makiny
decisions and managing environmental programs affecting reservation lands.
To meet this objective, the Agency will pursue the following principles
60
-------
-2-
1 THE AGENCY STANDS READY TO WORK DIRECTLY WITH INDIAN TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS
ON A ONE-TO-ONE BASIS (THE "GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT" RELATIONSHIP. ?^H£c
THAN AS SUBDIVISIONS OF OTHER GOVERNMENTS.
EPA recognizes Tribal Governments as sovereign entities wiu P
authority and responsibility for the reservation populace. Accords; -.
EPA will work directly with Tribal Governments as the independent author- ,
for reservation affairs, and not as political subdivisions of State? v
other governmental units.
2 THE AGENCY WILL RECOGNIZE TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS AS THE PRIMARY PARTIFS
fW SETTING STANDARDS. MAKING ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY DECISIONS AND MANA: -
PROGRAMS FOR RESERVATIONS. CONSISTENT WITH AGENCY STANDARDS AND REGULAR) -
In keeping with the principle of Indian self-government, the ~*
will view Tribal Governments as the appropriate non-Federal parties
making decisions and carrying out program responsibilities af.^ - -
Indian reservations, their environments, and the health and wel.a-
the reservation populace. Just as EPA's deliberations and -ctivit^. v
traditionally involved the interests and/or participation of State K -
ments, EPA will look directly to Tribal Governments to play this lee-
for matters affecting reservation environments.
3 THE AGENCY WILL TAKE AFFIRMATIVE STEPS TO ENCOURAGE AND ASSIST
TRIBES IN ASSUMING REGULATORY AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT RESPONS13:1.
FOR RESERVATION LANDS.
The Agency will assist interested Tribal Governments in develop-
programs and in preparing to assume regulatory and program mana&»*-
'respons bilities for "reservation lands. Within the constraints of rr*
authority and resources, this aid will include Providing grants ana ,
assistance to'Tribes similar to that we provide Statei Governmen s.
Agency will encourage Tribes to assure delegable 17sPOn*lblJ1J1etsni Ir-
responsibilities which the Agency has tradUlonally delegated ^ -
Governments for non-reservation lands) under terms similar to ."
governing delegations to States.
Tribal Governments are willing and able "to assume full re^or
bility-,for- delegable programs, the Agency will retain response
for managing programs for reservations (unless the State has an ,;,:
g?anrof jurisdiction from Congress sufficient to support delegat,.,-.
the State Government). Where EPA retains such responsibility, the n&e
w 11 eScourai t" Tribe to participate In policy-making and to as
appropriate lesser or partial roles in the management of reserv
programs.
-------
-3-
4. THE AGENCY WILL TAKE APPROPRIATE STEPS TO REMOVE EXISTING LEGAL AND
PROCEDURAL IMPEDIMENTS TO WORKING DIRECTLY AND EFFECTIVELY WITH TRIBAL
GOVERNMENTS ON RESERVATION PROGRAMS.
A number of serious constraints and uncertainties in the language
of our statutes and regulations have limited our ability to work directly
and effectively with Tribal Governments on reservation problems. As
Impediments in our procedures, regulations or statutes are Identified
which limit our ability to work effectively with Tribes consistent with
this Policy, we will seek to remove those impediments.
5. THE AGENCY, IN KEEPING WITH THE FEDERAL TRUST RESPONSIBILITY, WILL
ASSURE THAT TRIBAL CONCERNS AND INTERESTS ARE CONSIDERED WHENEVER ERA'S
ACTIONS AND/OR DECISIONS MAY AFFECT RESERVATION ENVIRONMENTS.
EPA recognizes that a trust responsibility derives from the his-
torical relationship between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes
as expressed in certain treaties and Federal Indian Law. In keeping
with that trust responsibility, the Agency will endeavor to protect
the environmental interests of Indian Tribes when carrying out its
responsibilities that may affect the reservations.
6. THE AGENCY WILL ENCOURAGE COOPERATION BETWEEN TRIBAL, STATE AND
LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO RESOLVE ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS OF MUTUAL CONCERN.
Sound environmental planning and management require the cooperation
and mutual consideration of neighboring governments, whether those
governments be neighboring States, Tribes, or local units of government.
Accordingly, EPA will encourage early communication and cooperation
among Tribes, States and local governments. This is not intended to
lend Federal support to any one party to the Jeopardy of the interests
of the other. Rather, 1t recognizes that in the field of environmental
regulation, problems are often shared and the principle of comity
between equals and neighbors often serves the best interests of both.
7. THE AGENCY WILL WORK WITH OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES WHICH HAVE RELATED
RESPONSIBILITIES ON INDIAN RESERVATIONS TO ENLIST THEIR INTEREST AND
SUPPORT IN COOPERATIVE EFFORTS TO HELP TRIBES ASSUME ENVIRONMENTAL
PROGRAM RESPONSIBILITIES FOR RESERVATIONS.
EPA will seek and promote cooperation between Federal agencies to
protect human health and the environment on reservations. We will
work with other agencies to clearly Identify and delineate the roles,
responsibilities and relationships of our respective organizations and
to assist Tribes in developing and managing environmental programs for
reservation lands.
-------
-4-
8. THE AGENCY WILL STRIVE TO ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES
AND REGULATIONS ON INDIAN RESERVATIONS.
In those cases where facilities owned or managed by Tribal Governments
are not in compliance with Federal environmental statutes, EPA will *ork
cooperatively with Tribal leadership to develop means to achieve compliance,
providing technical support and consultation as necessary to enable Trical
facilities to comply. Because of the distinct status of Indian Tribes and the
complex legal issues involved, direct EPA action through the judicial or
administrative process will be considered where the Agency determines, in its
judgment, that: (1) a significant threat to human health or the environment
exists, (2) such action would reasonably be expected to achieve effective
results in a timely manner, and (3) the Federal Government cannot utilize
other alternatives to correct the problem in a timely fashion.
In those cases where reservation facilities are clearly owned or managed
by private parties and there is no substantial Tribal interest or control
involved, the Agency will endeavor to act in cooperation with the affected
Tribal Government, but will otherwise respond to noncomphance by private
parties on Indian reservations as tne Agency would to noncompliance by the
private sector elsewhere in the country. Where the Tribe has a substantial
proprietary interest in, or control over, the privately owned or managed
facility, EPA will respond as described in the first paragraph above.
9. THE AGENCY WILL INCORPORATE THESE INDIAN POLICY GOALS INTO ITS PLANNING
AND MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING ITS BUDGET, OPERATING GUIDANCE, LEGISLA-
TIVE INITIATIVES, MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM AND ONGOING POLICY AND
REGULATION DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES.
«
It 1s a central purpose of this effort to ensure that the principles
of this Policy are effectively Institutionalized by incorporating them into
the Agency's ongoing and long-term planning and management processes. Agency
managers will Include specific programmatic actions designed to resolve prob-
lems on Indian reservations in the Agency's existing fiscal year and long-term
planning and management processes.
William D. Ruckelshaus
-------
/60S">,
; ** 'i UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
\«yJyp>T WASHINGTON O C 20460
NOV 81984
OF
MEMORANDUM T>" -OM.N.STRATOP
SUBJECT: Indian Policy Implementation Guidance
FROM: Alvin L. Aim ^^^-S ^ ^ <^
Deputy Administrator
TO: Assistant Administrators
Regional Administrators
General Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The Administrator has signed the attached EPA Indian Policy. :ms
document sets forth the broad principles that will guide the Agency in
its relations with American Indian Tribal Governments and in the adminis-
tration of EPA programs on Indian reservation lands.
This Policy concerns more than one hundred federally-recognized
Tribal Governments and the environment of a geographical area that is
larger than the combined area of the States of Maryland, New Jersey,
Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire and Maine. It is an
important sector of the country, and constitutes the remaining lands of
America's first stewards of the environment, the American Indian Tribes.
The Policy places a strong emphasis on Incorporating Tribal Govern-
ments into the operation and management of EPA's delegable programs.
This concept is based on the President's Federal Indian Policy published
on January 24, 1983 and the analysis, recommendations and Agency Input
to the EPA Indian Work Group's Discussion Paper, Administration of
Environmental Programs on American Indian Reservations (July 1983).
TIMING AND SCOPE
Because of the Importance of the reservation environments, we must
begin immediately to incorporate the principles of EPA's Indian Policy
into the conduct of our everyday business. Our established operating
procedures (including long-range budgetary and operational planning acti-
vities) have not consistently focused on the proper role of Tribal Govern-
ments or the special legal and political problems of program management
on Indian lands. As a result, it will require a phased and sustained
effort over time to fully implement the principles of the Policy and to
take the steps outlined in this Guidance.
65
-------
-2-
Some Regions and Program Offices have a".-eaciy v.5e .T3i;ijjj.l starts
along the lines of the Policy and Guidance. I jalieve uat 2 clear
Agency-wide policy will enable all programs to build -in theie efforts so
that, within the limits of our legal and budgetary constraints, che Agency
as a whole can make respectable progress in the next year.
As we begin the first year of operations under the Indian Policy, *e
cannot expect to solve all of the problems we will face in administen'r.g
programs under the unique legal and political circumstances presented by
Indian reservations. We can, however, concentrate on specific priority
prpblems and issues and proceed to address these systematically and care-
fully in the first year. With this general emphasis, I believe that we
can make respectable progress and establish good precedents for working
effectively with Tribes. 8y working within a manageable scope and pace,
we can develop a coordinated base which can be expanded, and, as appropriate,
accelerated in the second and third years of operations under the Policy.
In addition to routine application of the Policy and this Guidance in
the conduct of our everyday business, the first year's implementation effort
will emphasize concentrated work on a discrete number of representative
problems through cooperative programs or pilot projects. In the Regions,
this effort should include the identification and initiation of work on
priority Tribal projects. At Headquarters, it should involve the resolution
of the legal, policy and procedural problems which hamper our ability to
implement the kinds of projects identified by the Regions.
The Indian Work Group (IWG), which is chaired by the Director of the
Office of Federal Activities and composed of representatives of key regional
i d headquarters offices, will facilitate and coordinate these efforts.
r-v IWG will begin immediately to help identify the specific projects
.--CP ,-nay be ripe for implementation and the problems needing resolution
|." "-,e first year'.
Because we are starting in "mid-stream," the implementation effort
will necessarily require some contribution of personnel time and funds.
While no one program will be affected in a major fashion, almost all Agency
programs are affected to some degree. I do not expect the investment in
projects on Indian Lands to cause any serious restriction in the States'
funding support rr *n their ability to function effectively. > prsserve
the flexibility of each Region and each program, we have "it set a target
for allocation of FY 85 funds. I am confident, however, mat Regions and
program offices can, through readjustment of existing resources, demonstrate
significant and credible progress In the Implementation of EPA's Policy in
the next year.
-------
Subject to these constraints, Regions and program managers should now
initiate actions to implement the principles of the Indian Policy. The
eight categories set forth below will direct our initial implementation
activities. Further guidance will be provided by the Assistant Adminis-
trator for External Affairs as experience indicates a need for such guidance.
1. THE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR EXTERNAL AFFAIRS WILL SERVE AS
LEAD AGENCY CLEARINGHOUSE AND COORDINATOR FOR INDIAN POLICY MATTERS.
This responsibility will include coordinating the development of
appropriate Agency guidelines pertaining to Indian issues, the
implementation of the Indian Policy and this Guidance. In this effort
the Assistant Administrator for External Affairs will rely upon the
assistance and support of the EPA Indian Work Group.
2. THE INDIAN WORK GROUP (IWG) WILL ASSIST AND SUPPORT THE ASSISTANT
ADMINISTRATOR FOR EXTERNAL AFFAIRS IN DEVELOPING AND RECOMMENDING DETAILED
GUIDANCE AS NEEDED ON INDIAN POLICY AND IMPLEMENTATION MATTERS. ASSISTANT
ADMINISTRATORS, REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS AND THE GENERAL COUNSEL SHOULD
DESIGNATE APPROPRIATE REPRESENTATIVES TO THE INDIAN WORK GROUP AND PROVIDE
THEM WITH ADEQUATE TIME AND RESOURCES NEEDED TO CARRY OUT THE IWG'S
RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER THE DIRECTION OF THE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS.
The Indian Work Group, (IWG) chaired by the Director of the Office of
Federal Activities, will be an important entity for consolidating the
experience and advice of the key Assistant and Regional Administrators on
Indian Policy matters. It will perform the following functions: identify
specific legal, policy, and procedural impediments to working directly
with Tribes on reservation problems; help develop appropriate guidance
for overcoming such Impediments; recommend opportunities for implementation
of appropriate programs or pilot projects; and perform other services 1n
support of Agency managers in implementing the Indian Policy.
The initial task of the IWG will be to develop recommendations and
suggest priorities for specific opportunities for program implementation
in the first year of operations under the Indian Policy and this Guidance.
To accomplish this, the General Counsel and each Regional and Assistant
Administrator must be actively represented on the IWG by a staff member
authorized to speak for his or her office. Further, the designated
representative(s) should be afforded the time and resources, including
travel, needed to provide significant staff support to the work of the
IWG.
-------
-4-
3. ASSISTANT AND REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS SHOULD UNDERTAKE ACTIVE OUTREACH AND
I IAISON WITH TRIBES, PROVIDING ADEQUATE INFORMATION TO ALLOW THEM TO WORK
WITH US IN AN INFORMED WAY.
In the first thirteen years of the Agency's existence, we have worked
hard to establish working relationships with State Governments, providing
background Information and sufficient interpretation and explanations to
enable them to work effectively with us 1n the development of cooperative
State programs under our various statutes. In a similar manner, EPA managers
should try to establish direct, face-to-face contact (preferably on the
reservation) with Tribal Government officials. This liaison is essential to
understanding Tribal needs, perspectives and priorities. It will also foster
Tribal understanding of EPA's programs and procedures needed to deal effec-
tively with us.
4. ASSISTANT AND REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS SHOULD ALLOCATE RESOURCES TO MEET
TRIBAL NEEDS, WITHIN THE CONSTRAINTS IMPOSED BY COMPETING PRIORITIES AND BY
OUR LEGAL AUTHORITY.
As Tribes move to assume responsibilities similar to those borne by EPA
or State Governments, an appropriate block of funds must be set aside to
support reservation abatement, control and compliance activities.
Because we want to begin to implement the Indian Policy now, we cannot
wait until FY 87 to formally budget for programs on Indian lands. Accordingly,
for many programs, funds for initial Ind'ci projects in FY 85 and FY 86
will need to come from resources currently planned for support to ZPA-and
State-managed programs meeting similar objectives. As I street, earlier, we
jo net expect to resolve all problems and address all environmental needs on
^enervations immediately. However, «<= Can make a significant beginning
-vnnout unduly restricting our ability to fund ongoing programs.
I am asking each Assistant Administrator and Regional Administrator to
take measures within his or her discretion and authority to provide sufficient
scofr time and grant funds to allow the Agency to initiate projects on Indian
iand; i. TY 85 and FY 86 that will constitute a respectable step towards
implementation of the Indian Policy.
5. ASSISTANT AND REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS. WITH LEGAL SUPPORT PROVIDED BY THE
GENERAL COUNSEL. SHOULD ASSIST TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS IN PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AS
THEY HAVE DONE FOR THE STATES.
The Agency has provided extensive staff work and assistance to State
Governments over the years In the development of environmental programs
and program management capabilities. This assistance has become a routine
aspect of Federal/State relations, enabling and expediting the States'
assumption of delegable programs under the various EPA statutes. This "front
end" investment has promoted cooperation and Increased State involvement
in the regulatory process.
-------
-5-
As the Agency begins to deal with Tribal Government*
reservation environmental programming, we will find a
-------
-6-
8. ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATORS, REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS AND THE GENERAL COUNSEL
SHOULD WORK COOPERATIVELY WITH TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE WITH
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUTES AND REGULATIONS ON INDIAN RESERVATIONS, CONSISTENT
WITH THE PRINCIPLE OF INDIAN SELF-GOVERNMENT.
The EPA Indian Policy recognizes Tribal Governments as the key
governments having responsibility for matters affecting the health and
welfare of the Tribe. Accordingly, where tribally owned or managed
facilities do not meet Federally established standards, the Agency will
endeavor to work with the Tribal leadership to enable the Tribe to
achieve compliance. Where reservation facilities are clearly owned or
managed by private parties and there is no substantial Tribal interest
or control involved, the Agency will endeavor to act in cooperation with the
affected Tribal Government, but will otherwise respond to noncompliance by
private parties en Indian reservations as we do to noncompliance by the
private sector off-reservation.
Actions to enable and ensure compliance by Tribal fa-: , ities with
Federal statutes and regulations Include providing consultation and
technical support to Tribal leaders and managers concerning the impacts
of noncompliance on Tribal health and the reservation environment
and steps needed to achieve such compliance. As appropriate, EPA may
also develop compliance agreements with Tribal Governments and work
cooperatively with other Federal agencies to assist Tribes in meeting
Federal standards.
Because of the unique legal and political status of Indian Tribes
in the Federal System, direct EPA actions against Tribal facilities
through the judicial or administrative process will be considered where
the Agency determines, in its judgment, that: (1) a significant threat to
human health or the environment exists, (2) such action would reasonably be
expected to achieve effective results in a timely manner, and (3) the Federal
Government cannot utilize other alternatives to correct the problem in a
timely fashion. Regional Administrators proposing to initiate such action
should first obtain concurrence from the Assistant Administrator for Enforce-
ment and Compliance Monitoring, who will act in consultation with the Assis-
tant Administrator for External Affairs and the General Counsel. In emergency
situations, the Regional Administrator may Issue emergency Temporary Restrain-
ing Orders, provided that the appropriate procedures set forth in Agency
delegations for such actions are followed.
-------
-7-
9. ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATORS, REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS AND THE GENERAL COUNSEL
SHOULD BEGIN TO FACTOR INDIAN POLICY GOALS INTO THEIR LONG-RANG ^PLANNING AND
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING BUDGET,
ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS AND PERFORMANCE STANDARDS.
In order to carry out the principles of the EPA Indian Policy and work
effectively with Tribal Governments on a long-range basis, it will be necessary
to .Institutionalize the Agency's policy goals 1n the management systems that
regulate Agency behavior. Where we have systematically Incorporated State needs
concerns and cooperative roles Into our budget, Operating Guidance, management
accountability systems and performance standards, we must now begin to factor the
Agency's Indian Policy goals Into these same procedures and activities.
Agency managers should begin to consider Indian reservations and Tribes
when conducting routine planning and management activities or carrying out
special policy analysis activities. In addition, the IWG, operating under the
direction of the Assistant Administrator for External Affairs and with
assistance from the Assistant Administrator for Policy, Planning and Evaluation,
will identify and recommend specific steps to be taken to ensure that Indian
Policy goal's are effectively Incorporated and institutionalized in the Agency's
procedures and operations.
Attachment
-------
EPA Jurisdiction Policy
-------
"* UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20480
.*,, JUL 1 0 1991
MEMORANDUM
THE ADMINISTRATOR
SUBJECT: EPA/State/Tribal Relations
TO: Assistant Administrators
General Counsel
Inspector General
Regional Administrators
Associate Administrators
Staff Office Directors
Earlier this year I shared with you my views concerning
EPA's Indian Policy, its implementation and its future direction.
I would now like to further emphasize my commitment to the Policy
by endorsing the attached paper that was coordinated by Region
VIZI on EPA/State/Tribal Relations.
This paper was prepared to formalize the Agency's role in
strengthening tribal governments' management of environmental
programs on reservations. The paper notes that the differences
between the interests of tribal and state governments can be very
sensitive and sometimes extend well beyond the specific issues of
environmental protection. It reaffirms the general approach of
the Agency's Indian Policy and recommends the strengthening of
tribal capacity for environmental management. I believe the
Agency should continue its present policy, making every effort to
support cooperation and coordination between tribal and state
governments, while maintaining our commitment to environmental
quality.
I encourage you to promote tribal management of
environmental programs and work toward that goal.
Please distribute this document to states and tribes in your'
region.
William K.
Attachment
cc. Headquarters Program Office Directors
Regional Office Directors
'siiaa an fl»eyo«J Pa0w
-------
FEDERAL, TRIBAL AND STATE ROLES IN THE PROTECTION
AND REGULATION OF RESERVATION ENVIRONMENTS
A Concept Paper
I. BACKGROUND
William Reilly, in his first year as EPA Administrator,
reaffirmed the 1984 EPA Indian Policy and its implicit promise to
protect the environment of Indian reservations as effectively as
the Agency protects the environment of the rest of the country.
The EPA Indian Policy is premised on tribal self-determination,
the principle that has been set forth as federal policy by
Presidents Nixon, Reagan, and Bush. Self-determination is the
principle recognizing the primary role of tribal governments in
determining the future course of reservation affairs. Applied to
the environmental arena in the EPA Indian Policy, this principle
looks to tribal governments to manage programs to protect human
health and the environment on Indian reservations.
II- TRIBAL, STATE AND FEDERAL EXPECTATIONS
The Agency is sensitive to the fact that tribal and state
governments have serious and legitimate interests in the
effective control and regulation of pollution sources on Indian
reservations. EPA shares these concerns and, moreover, has a
responsibility to Congress under the environmental statutes to
assure that effective and enforceable environmental programs are
developed to protect human health and the environment throughout
the nation, including Indian reservations.
Indian tribes, for whom human welfare is tied closely to the
land, see protection of the reservation environment as essential
to preservation of the reservations themselves. Environmental
degradation is viewed as a form of further destruction of the
remaining reservation land base, and pollution prevention is
viewed as an act of tribal self-preservation that cannot be
entrusted to others. For these reasons, Indian tribes have
insisted that tribal governments be recognized as the proper
governmental entities to determine the future quality of
reservation environments.
-------
State governments, in turn, recognize that the environmental
integrity of entire ecosystems cannot be regulated in isolation.
Pollution in the air and water, even the transportation of
hazardous materials in everyday commerce, is not restricted to
political boundaries. Accordingly, state governments claim a
vital interest in assuring that reservation pollution sources are
effectively regulated and, in many cases, express an interest in
managing reservation environmental programs themselves, at least
for non-Indian sources located on the reservations. In addition,
some state officials have voiced the concerns of various non-
Indians who live or conduct business within reservation
boundaries, many of whom believe that their environmental or
business interests would be better represented by state
government than by the tribal government.
Although the Agency hears these particular concerns
expressed most often through tribal and state representatives,
respectively, the Agency is aware that most of these concerns are
shared by both tribes and states. For example, tribal
governments are not alone in holding the view that future
generations depend on today's leaders to manage the environment
wisely. Many state officials argue the same point with the same
level of conviction as tribal leaders. Conversely, tribal
governments share with states the awareness that individual
components of whole ecosystems cannot be regulated without regard
to management of the other parts. Tribal governments have also
shown themselves to share the states' sensitivity to the concerns
and interests of the entire reservation populace, whether those
interests are the interests of Indians or non-Indians. In the
Agency's view, tribes and states do not differ on the importance
of these goals. Where they differ at all, they differ on the
means to achieve them.
EPA fully shares with tribes and states their concerns for
preservation of the reservation as a healthy and viable
environment, for rational and coordinated management of entire
ecosystems, and, thirdly, for environmental management based on
adequate input both from regulated businesses and from the
populace whose health the system is designed to protect.
Moreover, the Agency believes that all of these interests and
goals can be accommodated within the framework of federal Indian
policy goals and federal Indian law.
III. EPA POLICY
The EPA Indian Policy addresses the subject of state and
tribal roles within reservation boundaries as follows:
1) First, consistent with the President's policy, the
Agency supports the principle of Indian self-government:
-------
"In keeping with the principle of Indian self-government,
the Agency will view Tribal Governments as the appropriate
non-Federal parties for making decisions and carrying out
program responsibilities affecting Indian reservations,
their environments, and the health and welfare of the
reservation populace. Just as EPA's deliberations and
activities have traditionally involved the interests and/or
participation of State Governments, EPA will look directly
to Tribal Governments to play this lead role for matters
affecting reservation environments."
2) Second, the Agency encourages cooperation between state,
tribal and local governments to resolve environmental issues
of mutual concern:
"Sound environmental planning and management require the
cooperation and mutual consideration of neighboring
governments, whether those governments be neighboring
States, Tribes or local units of government. Accordingly,
EPA will encourage early communication and cooperation among
Tribes, States and local governments. This is not intended
to lend Federal support to any one party to the jeopardy of
the interests of the other. Rather, it recognizes that in
the field of environmental regulation, problems are often
shared and the principle of comity between equals often
serves the best interests of both."
IV. PRINCIPLES AND PROCEDURES FOR EPA ACTION
EPA program managers will be guided by the following
principles and procedures regarding tribal and state roles in the
management of programs to protect reservation environments.
1 . The Agency will follow the principles and procedures
set forth in the EPA Policy for the Administration of
Environmental Programs on Indian Reservations and the
accompanying Implementation Guidance, both signed on
November 8, 1984.
2. The Agency will, in making decisions on program
authorization and other matters where jurisdiction over
reservation pollution sources is critical, apply federal law as
found in the U.S. Constitution, applicable treaties, statutes and
federal Indian law. Consistent with the EPA Indian Policy and
the interests of administrative clarity, the Agency will view
Indian reservations as single administrative units for regulatory
purposes. Hence, as a general rule, the Agency will authorize a
tribal or state government to manage reservation programs only
where that government can demonstrate adequate jurisdiction over
pollution sources throughout the reservation. Where, however, a
tribe cannot demonstrate jurisdiction over one or more
-------
reservation sources, the Agency will retain enforcement primacy
for those sources. Until EPA formally authorizes a state or
tribal program, the Agency retains full responsibility for
program management. Where EPA retains such responsibility, it
will carry out its duties in accordance with the principles set
forth in the EPA Indian Policy.
3. Under both authorized and EPA-administered programs for
reservations, the Agency encourages cooperation between tribes
and states, acting in the spirit of neighbors with a mutual self-
interest in protecting the environmental and the health and
welfare of the reservation populace. Such cooperation can take
many forms, including notification, consultation, sharing of
technical information, expertise and personnel, and joint
tribal/state programming. While EPA will in all cases be guided
by federal Indian law, EPA Indian Policy and its broad
responsibility to assure effective protection of human health and
the environment, the Agency believes that this framework allows
flexibility for a wide variety of cooperative agreements and
activities, provided that such arrangements are freely negotiated
and mutually agreeable to both tribe and state. The Agency will
not act in such a manner as to force such agreements.
4. The Agency urges states to assist tribes in developing
environmental expertise and program capability. The Agency has
assisted in funding state environmental programs for two
decades, with the result that, today, state governments have a
very capable and sophisticated institutional infrastructure to
set and enforce environmental standards consistent with local
state needs and policies. As the country now moves to develop an
infrastructure of tribal institutions to achieve the same goals,
state governments can play a helpful and constructive role in
helping to develop and support strong and effective tribal
institutions. The State of Wisconsin has worked with the
Menominee Tribe to develop a joint tribal/state RCRA program that
can serve as a model of mutually beneficial cooperation for other
states and tribes.
5. The Agency urges tribes to develop an Administrative
Procedures Act (APA) or other means for public notice and comment
in the tribal rule-making process. Many tribes now working with
EPA to develop environmental standards and regulatory programs
have already taken the initiative in establishing such techniques
for obtaining community input into tribal decision-making. Such
tribes have enacted APAs and held public meetings to gather input
from both Indian and non-Indian residents of the reservation
prior to setting tribal environmental standards for their
reservations. The Agency generally requires states and tribes to
provide for adequate public participation as a prerequisite for
approval of state or tribal environmental programs. The Agency
believes that public input into major regulatory decisions is an
important part of modern regulatory governance that contributes
-------
significantly to public acceptance and therefore the
effectiveness of regulatory programs. The Agency encourages all
tribes to follow the example of those tribes that have already
enacted an APA.
6. Where tribal and State governments, managing regulatory
programs for reservation and state areas, respectively, may
encounter transboundary problems arising from inconsistent
standards, policies, or enforcement activities, EPA encourages
the tribal and state governments to resolve their differences
through negotiation at the local level. EPA, in such cases, is
prepared to act as a moderator for such discussions, if
requested. Where a statute such as the Clean Water Act
designates a conflict-resolution role for EPA in helping to
resolve tribal/state differences, EPA will act in accordance with
the statute. Otherwise, EPA will respond generally to such
differences in the same manner that EPA responds to differences
between states.
V. CONCLUSION
The Agency believes that where an ecosystem crosses
political boundaries, effective regulation calls for coordination
and cooperation among all governments having a regulatory role
impacting the ecosystem. Many differences among tribes and
states, like differences among states, are a natural outgrowth of
decentralized regulatory programs; these differences are best
resolved locally by tribes and states acting out of mutual
concern for the environment and the health of the affected
populace. EPA actions and decisions made in carrying out its
role and responsibilities will be consistent with federal law and
the EPA Indian Policy. Within this framework, the Agency is
convinced that the environmental quality of reservation lands can
be protected and enhanced to the benefit of all.
-------
WGA Report
-------
COOPERATION ON
SOLID WASTE
MANAGEMENT:
TRIBES AND STATES
Results of a Survey and Five Case Studies
September 1991
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction and Executive Summary 1
Map - Tribes and States Responding to Survey 3
Survey Results
Summary of Results 4
State By State Results of Survey 7
Tribe By Tribe Results of Survey 8
Case Studies
Regional Landfill: Campo Band of Mission Indians 9
Joint Planning: The Umatilla Tribe 12
Cooperative Management: The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma 15
Out-Of-State Regional Landfill: The Rosebud Sioux 17
Regional Planning: Northwest New Mexico Council of Governments 19
Other Tribal Action and Concerns on Current Solid Waste Management .... 22
Mechanisms and Considerations to Enhance Cooperation 23
Appendix I: State Survey 24
Tribal Survey 26
Appendix II: Survey Respondents and Other Contacts 29
-------
INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction
Indian tribes, local communities, state agencies, and private entrepreneurs in the western
states are beginning to address the challenge of providing environmentally-sound solid waste
management services. In many rural parts of the West, Indian tribes and local communities
may be confronted with both existing facilities which are environmentally inadequate and
limited resources to improve and operate those facilities in accordance with updated
regulations.
Pending new federal regulations for landfllls will make managing solid waste even more
expensive. As such, multi-jurisdictional cooperative arrangements will likely become
necessary to achieve the economies of scale to be able to afford state-of-the-art landfills.
Most states in the West are encouraging this type of regional planning for solid waste
management.
Federally-recognized Indian tribes are sovereign governments, created under treaty with the
federal government at the time the tribes were given reservation status. In acknowledging
them as independent governments, federal agencies agree to work with the tribes on a
government-to-government basis. How tribal sovereignty operates in the context of local
and/or state solid waste management planning raises many issues and concerns on both
sides.
Multi-jurisdictional solid waste management solutions are rapidly developing throughout
parts of the West. Adjacent jurisdictions may find that an important window of opportunity
is available -but only temporarily - with respect to their participation in these cooperative
solid waste management solutions.
Executive Summary
* Nine of the fourteen states surveyed are currently including tribes in statewide solid
waste planning.
* Seventeen of the thirty tribes surveyed anticipate cooperative solid waste
management efforts in the future.
* There are a number of cooperative solid waste management efforts currently
underway, mostly on a local government to tribe basis.
* The largest barriers to cooperation from the tribal perspective are insufficient
financial resources and staff, as well as political factors. States said no established
relationship, lack of resources, and the uncertain status of tribes under RCRA were
the biggest barriers.
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION
-------
* States' concerns about tribes rushing to accept offers to host out-of-state waste
facilities appear unfounded. Most tribes considered offers for solid waste facilities
cautiously and unfavorably. Half of the surveyed tribes had been approached to host
facilities and all but four rejected these offers almost immediately.
* The five case studies show that good communication and planning, as well as respect
for tribes' sovereign status, are important to successful cooperative efforts and to
avoiding potential court battles.
In consideration of the need for technical assistance, policy resources, and information, it
may prove necessary for tribes to consider the movement toward cooperative efforts with
adjacent jurisdictions, whether that may include state, county, municipal, private, or other
tribes, to properly plan and manage solid waste. Regionalization and cooperation may
provide benefits in:
* allowing communities to achieve economies of scale through better utilization of
capital and more efficient management than by independent operation;
* providing access to technology, information, and funding offered by neighboring
jurisdictions;
* developing political and social support from other jurisdictions;
* centralizing waste streams, recycling, and disposal to eliminate small, inefficient sites;
* serving as a means to implement a government to government approach to minimize
conflict by reaching mutually acceptable and agreeable solutions.
Concerns from tribal and state managers that prompted action to seek cooperative- solid
waste management solutions were pending RCRA regulations and the availability of funding
for closures and siting of landfills on reservation lands. The costs of upgrading and closing
illegal dumps for the tribes were off-set by cooperation and negotiation with counties, states,
and private companies. Tribes who decided to implement a cooperative approach
considered and evaluated their choices in light of their available resources and capability.
By developing an effective program plan to manage solid waste on a regional level, tribal,
state, and local governments accomplished both environmental and economic development
goals. The states made efforts to learn about tribal issues, concerns, and to understand
them in the context of tribal authority, tradition, and social impacts; essentially an
understanding of the basis of tribal regulatory authority. States promoted tribal participation
in intergovernmental approaches to solid waste management on the local level and state-
wide.
The following report is based on all the above considerations, coming from a survey taken
from tribal and state governments.
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION
-------
COOPERATIVE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
TRIBES AND STATES RESPONDING TO SURVEY
Tribal survey respondent
State survey respondent
Case study
-------
SURVEY RESULTS
Methodology and Purpose of Study
The Council of Energy Resource Tribes (CERT) and the Western Governors' Association
(WGA) cosponsored a workshop in March, 1991 on common environmental concerns faced
by western states and tribes. One key issue expressed by both tribal and state leaders was
the lack of information available on successful intergovernmental cooperative efforts on
solid waste management. WGA responded by developing a survey for tribes and states to
assess the current status of cooperative solid waste efforts. In addition to the survey, five
tribal solid waste efforts were developed into case studies to analyze their approach and the
issues that arise when designing tribal solid waste management.
Questionnaires were sent to 100 tribes and 16 states, of which 30 tribes and 14 states
responded. The report is based upon information from the surveys received in time to
include in the analysis. Using the information from the surveys, WGA followed up on key
issues for the case studies. Analysis of the overall survey is also included. The primary
purpose of the survey is to serve as a source of information to tribal and state environmental
officials and decision makers. A copy of the survey instruments are included in appendix
I.
The survey covers a wide range of reservations and states. WGA chose the larger land
based reservations which were most likely to have implemented solid waste programs or
developed projects on Indian land. States were chosen primarily for the existence of
reservations within the state.
The survey is intended to:
Assess and evaluate current tribal-state-local solid waste programs.
Identify problem areas and barriers to cooperative management.
Identify areas of productive potential collaboration.
Determine areas of consensus among tribes and states.
Highlight five cases of cooperative/regional efforts in solid waste management.
Point out recommendations, resources, and contacts for follow-up.
Cooperation
All but one of the states responding to the survey indicated that they are currently
encouraging substate regional planning on solid waste management and nine states are
currently including tribes in these planning efforts. For example, South Dakota's solid waste
plan provides for the inclusion or exlusion of tribes in regional efforts as the tribes choose.
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION
-------
Nebraska is including all reservations in its current planning effort.
From the tribal perspective, twenty-one tribes indicated they were currently working with
other jurisdictions on solid waste management. The primary parties that tribes indicated
they were working with were local governments and federal agencies. This is not surprising
given that solid waste management has historically been a local management issue. For
example, the Northern Cheyenne tribe cooperates with the county on hauling trash and uses
the Rosebud county landfill. Only four tribes indicated they were working with state
governments on solid waste issues. Eighty percent of the tribes surveyed anticipate
cooperative solid waste management efforts in the future.
States were asked if any municipal or county governments in their state were working with
tribes on solid waste management. Thirteen of the fourteen states indicated that these types
of cooperative efforts were occurring in their states. For example, South Dakota indicated
that Rapid City is working with Pine Ridge reservation to help regionalize solid waste
disposal, and is helping the tribe in regard to complying with a federal court order to close
14 disposal sites.
Tribes were asked if they had been approached to host a facility for regional solid waste
management. Half (15) of the tribes indicated they had been approached, primarily by
private companies. Of those that indicated they had been approached, only four indicated
they were even considering the proposals. One tribal leader responded:
"Having traveled extensively in the North and Eastern parts of the United States,
I recall many millions of acres of unoccupied lands with population densities
similar to ours. This poses the question of why should New York, for example,
ship solid wastes to Oklahoma instead of New York's western half of their state.
If the disposition of their waste would not harm the environment in Oklahoma, it
should pose no problem for western New York!" (Charles Dawes, Chief of Ottawa
Tribe, Oklahoma).
Types of Cooperation/Assistance
States were asked what types of assistance they provide on solid waste issues to tribes
currently. Information sharing is the predominant type of assistance currently being
provided; however seven states indicated they offer planning assistance and three states
indicated they offer funding assistance. In response to a similar question when asked what
types of assistance tribes would find most useful, tribes indicated they would welcome
assistance with planning (24), information sharing (23), recycling (22), and funding (25).
The only issue tribes were not enthusiastic about receiving state assistance on was facility
siting (11). Only half of the tribes surveyed indicated they receive funding or technical
assistance from federal agencies, such as the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Indian Health
Service, Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the Environmental
Protection Agency.
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION
-------
Barriers to Cooperation
In an effort to identify barriers to successful cooperative efforts between tribes and states,
these surveys asked respondents which barriers they faced in cooperating with other
jurisdictions. Tribes indicated that insufficient financial resources (23) and staff (20) were
the biggest barriers followed by political factors (19) and no established relationship (12).
States, on the other hand, cited lack of resources (7), uncertain status of tribes under RCRA
(6), and no established relationship (9) as the primary barriers.
Benefits to Cooperation
A final question in the survey focused on potential benefits of cooperative solid waste
management. All but one state indicated that better environmental protection would be the
benefit of cooperation while tribes indicated that in addition to better environmental
protection, costs would be reduced for managing solid waste as well. Tribal governments
see the advantage of cooperative planning for solid waste management with other
jurisdicitons as a means to upgrade cooperation and establish a formal relationship with
non-tribal governments. One tribe recommended that state agencies appoint a designated
contact person to negotiate agreements and mediate disputes. State officials suggest a
clearer procedure for handling solid waste responsibilities and review of solid waste issues.
The states view EPA as a possible vehicle to facilitate participation of tribes in regional and
state planning.
Conclusion
Tribes and states were asked to comment on solid waste management within their
jurisdictions and many responded by commenting on what they would like to see happening
on solid waste management. Some tribes responded by adding they would like to see a
better form of dissemination of information on solid waste management between states and
tribes. Others feel there is potential for cooperation between states and tribes once the
state recognizes tribal jurisdiction over Indian land. The control of management and
operation of solid waste facilities on reservation are crucial concerns to tribes. Since most
tribes are lacking in financial and staff resources, state technical assistance and help in
leveraging federal funds could strengthen tribes' management capacity. Almost all of the
tribes are in the process of planning solid waste management strategies.
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION
-------
2
DJ
m
ya
z
o
o
3
A*
o
t_4
?0
03
>
8
O
9
5
o
Alaska
California
Idaho
Minnesota
Hontana
Nebraska
Hew Mexico
North Dakota
Oklahoma
Oregon
2 South Dakota
Utah
Washington
Wyoming
STATE BY
(1)
State Encouraging
Substate Regional
Solid Waste Mgmt
V
V
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
STATE RESULTS OF WGA/CERT COOPERATIVE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SURVEY
<2>
Tribes Included
In Planning Effort
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
N
Y
N
N
<3)
Type of State
Assistance
To Tribes
P.IS.F
P.IS
IS
P.IS.F
P.IS
P.IS
P,F,RP,0
IS
P.IS
IS.O
IS.O
IS
IS
<«>
Barriers To
Cooperation With
Tribes
LR.LI
US.PF
US.NER.LR
NER.LR
LR.PF.LI
US.NER.PF
US.NER.LR
NER.LR, LI
HER
US.NER.LI
NER.PF
US.LR.PF.LI
NER
<5)
Municipal or
County/Tribal
Cooperation
Y
Y C
Y - C
Y - C
Y C
N
Y - M.C
Y - H
Y
Y - C
Y - M
Y - C
Y - C
Y - C
<5a)
State
Role In
Local Effort
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
N
Y
N
Y
N
Y & N
N
(6)
Potential
Benefits to
Cooperative SUM
BEP
BEP
BEP
RC.BEP
RC.BEP.O
RC.BEP
RC.BEP.O
BEP
RC.BEP
RC.BEP
RC.BEP.O
RC.BEP
RC.BEP
BEP
1. Y=Yes; N=No
2. Y=Yes; N=No
3. P=Planning; IS= Information Sharing; Founding; RP=Recycling Programs; 0=0ther
i>. US=Uncertain Status under RCRA; NER=No Established Relationship; LR=Lack of Resources
PF=Political Factors; LI=Lack of Information
5. Y=Yes; N=No; C=County; M=Municipal
Sa.Y=Yes; N=No
6. RC=Reduced Costs; BEP=Better Environmental Protection; 0=0ther
-------
TRIBE BY TRIBE RESULTS OF WGA/CERT COOPERATIVE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT SURVEY
(1)
Current
Intergovmnt
Sol id Waste
Efforts
L
F.L
L
L,S
N
L
T
F
L
Y
N
F
N
F
L
N
F
L
N
L
L
T
L
N
N
N
F
T.L.F.S
N
Y
(2) (3) (4) (5)
Anticipate
Future Cooper. Barriers To Desired Kinds Approached to
Efforts Cooperation of Cooperation Host Facility
Y
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
N
Y
Y
Y
IFR,IS.NER,NC,PF
IFR,NER,PF,0
PF
IFR.IS.PF
NER.PF
IFR.IS.PF
IFR,IS,NER,PF,LI
IFR.PF
None
IFR.IS.NC.PF.L1
IFR.IS
IFR,IS.NC.PF;LI
IFR.PF
IFR.IS.NER
IFR.IS
IFR.IS.NER.PF.O
IFR.NER.PF,
IS.PF
IFR.IS.PF
IFR.IS
IFR.IS.PF, LI, 0
IFR.IS
IFR.IS.NER.NC.PF
IFR.IS
NER.LI
IFR.IS, LI
IFR.IS.PF
IFR.IS. HER, NC, LI
IFR.IS. HER, PF, LI
P.IS.FS.RP.F
P.RP.F
IS
IS.F
IS.RP.F
P.RP.F.O
P.IS.FS.RP.F.O
P.IS.FS.RP.F.O
P.RP.F
P.IS.FS
P.IS.FS.F.O
IS.FS.RP.F
P.IS.RP.F
P.IS.RP.F
IS.RP.F
P.RP.F
P.IS.FS.RP.F.O
P.IS.RP.F
P.1S.F
P.IS
P.RP.F
P.IS.FS.RP.F
P.IS.FS.RP.F
P.IS.FS.RP.F
P.IS.RP.F
None
P.IS.F
P.IS.FS.RP.F
IS.FS.RP.F
RP.O
N
Y - P
N
Y - P
N
Y - P.L
N
Y
Y - P
Y
N
N
N
N
N
Y - P.L
N
Y - P
N
Y
Y - P
Y - P
N
N
Y - P.L
Y - P
N
Y
Y - P
(6) (7)
Benefits of
Assistance From Cooperative
BI A. IMS, or HUD Solid Waste Mgmt
Limited
BIA.HUD.1HS.EPA
BIA
IHS.BIA
IHS
N
Y
Limited
IHS, HUD
IHS
IHS- limited
IHS- limited
IHS
N
N
IHS
IHS
Limited
N
Limited
N
N
N
N
N
N
Limited
N
N
BIA, IHS, HUD
RC, BEP, 0
None
RC, BEP, 0
RC
None
BEP.O
RC.BEP
RC, BEP.O
RC.BEP
RC.BEP
BEP,0
RC.BEP
BEP
RC.BEP
BEP
RC.BEP
RC. BEP.O
RC.BEP
RC.BEP.O
BEP
RC.BEP
RC.BEP
RC.BEP
RC.BEP
RC
RC.O
RC.BEP
RC.BEP
RC.BEP
RC.BEP.O
Acoma Pueblo
Blackfeet Tribe
Campo Band
Cherokee Nation
Cheyenne River
Cotvilie
Eight N.Pueblos
Ft. Belknap
Ft. Peck
Hualapai
Jicarilla Apache
Kalispel
Kioua
Loguna Pueblo
OO Lummi Council
Menominee
Nez Perec
Northern Cheyenne
Oneida Nation
Ottawa
Red Lake Chippewa
Rosebud Sioux
Saginaw Chippewa
Salish & Kootenai
Seneca Nation
Southern Ute
Umatilla
WY Indian Council
Yankton Sioux
Zuni Pueblo
1. F=Federal; S=State; L=Local; T=Tribe; N=None
2. Y=Yes; N=No
3. IFR=lnsufficient Financial Resources; IS=Insufficient Staff; NER=No Established Relationship; NC=No Contacts; PF=Political Factors
LI=Lack of information; 0=0ther
4. P=Planning; IS=Information Sharing; FS=Facility Siting; RP=Recycling Program; F=Funding; 0=0ther
5. Y=Yes; N=No; P=Private Company; L=Local or County; S=State
6. Y=Yes; N=No; BIA=Bureau of Indian Affairs; IHS=Indian Health Service; HUO=Dept. of Housing end Urban Dev.
7. RC=Reduced Costs; BEP=Better Environmental Protection; 0=0ther Comments/Benefits
-------
CASE STUDIES
The following five tribes were identified as case studies for their different approaches to
solid waste management. Although each case is specific to the individual tribe,
considerations in the approach are worth examining in regard to why each tribe made a
decision toward some type of cooperative agreement. WGA is not suggesting that every
tribe and state follow these examples, but rather consider their own situation as they relate
to the cases. Common factors exist between all tribes; one is every tribe must make some
effort to live and work within, and outside, the communities in which they live.
Regional Landfill: Campo Band of Mission Indians
Tribal Description
The Campo Reservation, located near the southeastern corner of California and within San
Diego County, covers 15,480 acres. The Campo Band of Mission Indians are comprised of
280 tribal members, not a very large tribe, but one that has taken initiative to develop a
solid waste plan with an outside private entity. The Campo Indians have decided to use
their land base, their most viable natural resource, as a means to promote economic
development on the reservation. The proposed plans include regional landfill, recycling,
and composting facilities for the reservation and San Diego County.
Most tribes are in the process of developing solid waste plans to see what is most feasible,
both economically and environmentally. In the case of Campo, the tribe considered what
would be the most efficient, but profitable, venture with regard to their chief resource - the
land. Like most tribes, Campo considers the needs and interests of the people. Most tribal
people have impact on decision making by the council, but with Campo, decisions are
settled by a general council form of agreement. All the tribal members are council
members with voting power and tribal officials do not vote. The general decision making
by the people directly is not required, but the tribe believes the process, although slow and
often tedious, is beneficial in the long run as decisions tend to be discussed inside and out.
Public hearings are also held across the reservation to solicit comments and participation
from the general public. If every tribal member does not attend, a 30-day comment period
follows for those who were not included. Non-tribal members can also come and comment.
In regard to the development of the solid waste facilities, 90% of the tribal members voted
in favor of development.
Facility Planning and Description
The success of Campo's solid waste plan contributes not only to direct communication with
the tribal people, but also the slow incremental approach to planning the effort. When
venturing on a project, some tribes make the mistake of only looking at projects with short-
term economic considerations, but Campo took a long range view and planned for the Jong
term. Campo initiated the project in 1987 and has taken careful steps to plan the site'and
find a suitable contractor as well as to develop regulations.
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION
-------
Campo became interested in hosting a regional landfill when San Diego county did a study
and identified two prospective sites ten miles from the reservation. The tribe learned of the
study and, since the prospective sites were only ten miles from the reservation, the tribe
approached San Diego County and asked to be put on the site selection list. At Campo's
request, they were added to the study in 1989. Campo contacted the attorney general of
California, the state regulatory agencies, and the state departments to invite them as
participants in the project, but very little interest was demonstrated. The tribe is trying to
work out some type of state-tribal cooperative regulatory agreement and the project
continues to be an "open project" as the tribe welcomes any oversight on part of the state.
Following up on the tribe's selection as a prospective site, Campo approached seven major
waste companies, then selected the one that offered the best deal - financially and
environmentally. Campo proceeded in their plan by taking the following steps:
1. Campo hired legal representation, a financial consultant, and environmental
experts. Campo also formed a tribal EPA office and a tribal development
corporation to be responsible for interviewing and negotiating with outside
companies.
2. The tribe leased one square mile of their reservation for use as a regional
solid waste landfill.
3. The tribe required the selected company to cover the costs of developing
regulations, permitting, construction, operating, and any other costs
associated with management of the facility.
4. Campo negotiated a payment in lieu of taxes (PILT) with the company.
Transport of the waste is two-tiered. Payments will be:
- $1.25/ton by truck
- $0.25/ton by rail
Base limit on the PILT begins at $12,500/month and the tribe anticipates the
limit to be raised to $50,000/month once actual transport begins.
5. Campo adopted regulations that would require a double clay liner of 2 ft.
(twice the size of the state's requirement of 1 ft.), a special synthetic liner and
leachate removal system, a synthetic plastic covering, and a system to control
the buildup of methane gas.
6. The money from the PILT payments will go into the Campo EPA office.
7. 20-30 tribal members will have employment once the landfill project is
operational.
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION 10
-------
8. Campo also initiated two other regional projects through separate contracts:
- a recycling facility developed by Campo Projects Corporation, a subsidiary
of a New York recycling firm
- a composting facility through another separate contract
State/Local Issues
Campo has not been without problems in their plan as state concern over tribal capacity for
management has come to the forefront. Michael Connolly from Campo's EPA office has
commented that Campo is keeping the state posted and tribal regulations were reviewed by
the state board. The comments made by the board were taken into consideration and
incorporated in the redrafting of the tribal regulations.
Still, California assemblyman Steve Peace has sponsored legislation that would require the
state to oversee any landfill or hazardous waste facility on Indian land without first
submitting the site to state inspection and permitting requirements. Peace argues that state
regulations are more vigorous than federal laws which currently govern the reservation. The
criticism arises out of the assumption that tribal regulations are less stringent than the
state's, therefore attracting private firms to tribal lands to avoid regulations. While Peace's
bill is going through the House, tribes across California have vowed to fight the bill and
contend they are exempt from state jurisdiction, but the bill is expected to be signed by the
governor anyway if passed.
San Diego County also expressed concern by Campo's initiative to take on the project
singlehandedly. Campo did approach the county and offered to contract with them to have
the county officials oversee their regulations and essentially submit the proposed landfill to
the same state inspections as off-reservation permits. Campo insists that they would like the
county and state's cooperation, but has made it specifically clear that the two governments
have no jurisdiction over tribal decision-making and regulatory functions. San Diego
officials are nervous about the discussions, but overall the tribal staff have been cooperative
and the county is still interested in working with the tribe, once the dust has settled.
Lessons Learned
The Campo tribe has a sovereign right to retain authority over the decision-making over
their own developments, especially with the regulatory functions of tribal environmental
projects under the authorization of RCRA Subtitle D and legal precedents. Cooperative
efforts often require conflicting parties to meet and resolve their dispute by setting out in
clear terms what the limits are of each participating party. Intergovernmental relationships
between states, tribes, or local governments can only work when each party respects the
governmental authority of the other, without trying to infringe upon those rights, and
working within the infrastructure of combined understanding. Communication, as simple
as it may seem, is also key to a good working relationship. Litigation only results in
dragging on the dispute without actually resolving anything except that the state and the
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION 11
-------
tribe are still at odds.
Contacts:
Michael Connolly, Campo EPA Office, 1779 Campo Truck Trail, Campo, Ca 91906,
(619)478-9046
Gary Stephany, Director of Environmental Health, San Diego County
P. O. Box 85361, San Diego, CA 92186-5261, (619) 338-2177
Brian Runkel, California EPA, Executive Officer, 555 Capitol Mall, P. O. Box 2815
Sacramento, CA 95812 (916)445-3846
Robert Conheim, Chief Council, principal contact for Native American solid waste issues,
1020 Ninth Street, Suite 100, Sacramento, CA 95814 (916)323-0131
Joint Planning: The Umatilla Tribe
Tribal Description
The Umatilla tribe of Oregon, with 1,652 members, does not have an enacted solid waste
management plan, but is actively seeking involvement and evaluating prospective plans. The
tribe's initiative involves negotiation with Umatilla County and the Environmental
Protection Agency for solid waste planning for the reservation, and possibly regionally with
surrounding jurisdictions. Umatilla is also part of a tribal task force initiated four years ago
with the Indian Health Service, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and other departments.
Tribal Solid Waste Efforts
The Tribal Task Force, comprised of members from the tribe and federal agencies, reviews
plans from border towns on regional planning, including a landfill and transfer station, and
will decide if, and how, the tribe could be involved. The objective of the task force is to
define the problem of solid waste and put together a tribal-wide or possibly region wide
solid waste plan with the help of EPA. Two people from the BIA and IHS are on the tribal
task force board and are presently searching for funding sources to assist the Umatilla tribe
in closing their only landfill.
In the process of closing the existing landfill due to RCRA Subtitle D requirements, the
tribe is now considering handling its solid waste by contracting for a transfer station. With
the help of EPA Region 10, Northwest Renewable Resources, and federal agencies,
Umatilla tribe is putting together a plan to present to the tribal governing body. Several
options are available, including proposals from two private waste companies, Waste
Management, Inc. (WMI) and Tidewater Barge. The tribe expressed interest in a proposed
transfer station from WMI to serve the region, but no follow-up action was taken.
Following WMI's offer, Tidewater approached the tribe for a transfer station as well.
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION 12
-------
WMI's interest declined after Tidewater's offer, realizing Tidewater, located in Arlington,
was closer to the reservation and would cost less to the tribe to accept their contract. So far,
Tidewater has sent representatives to Umatilla to discuss the proposal. The tribe is still
interested, but is in the process of evaluation. Presently, the tribe is discussing the proposed
transfer station with local communities and border towns to encourage their participation
in the plan to make the option more cost effective. One of the considerations for the
proposed transfer station is the need for access to the freeway to transport the waste by
truck.
State/Local Involvement
The Umatilla tribe's involvement with the state of Oregon is limited to technical assistance.
Although Oregon encourages the tribe to work with local governments, the state does not
have an official part in the effort. The state is concerned about open dump sites on the
reservation and would like to see them closed, but leaves solid waste management to the
local areas. The Umatilla tribe generally works well with the state and follows the
Department of Environmental Quality standards. The tribe also has a high success rate
on the federal level working with the BIA, IHS, and EPA. Working on the local and federal
level has been more efficient for the tribe and their current efforts are aimed toward
cooperation with those parties.
Umatilla County has a good working relationship with Umatilla tribe. The county is proud
of their relationship with the tribe and supports tribal efforts on economic development on
land-use, roadwork, and other projects as they come up to improve the self-reliance of the
tribe. Within the last 5-7 years, the working relationship between the county and tribe has
improved through communication, support, and initiative expressed by both sides.
Umatilla County set up a solid waste committee involving county and tribal members to set
regulations, hear complaints, and review franchises. The county has never been approached
on any joint landfill efforts with the tribe as a landfill already exists on the reservation and
the county utilizes one in Pendleton. The tribe did look at the possibility of utilizing the
landfill in Pendleton, but the option was not economically feasible. As for a new landfill
on the reservation, the tribe doe not want the liability so the best option as of now is the
transfer station. Recently, the Umatilla tribe has contracted with a private hauler to move
small amounts of waste to an off-reservation landfill. The current 50 acre reservation
landfill is 2/3 full and serves 385 customers, but due to RCRA requirements, it will be
closed. The tribe does not have the funds to maintain or upgrade the landfill to meet the
new RCRA standards.
Glenn Youngman of Umatilla county anticipates discussion of a regional landfill, but it will
be considered when the time is appropriate. The tribe and the county of Umatilla most
likely have one of the best working relationships in the country as far as multi-jurisdictional
efforts and support. Both the tribal leadership and county will work hard to maintain this
relationship as they both believe it to be of high importance.
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION 13
-------
Northwest Renewable Resources
The tribe's involvement with Northwest Renewable Resources (NRR) goes back three years
and now involves the planning of a solid waste management strategy for Umatilla. NRR and
EPA coordinated efforts and resources for a feasibility study to identify the direction the
tribes could consider. Northwest continues to facilitate assistance internally until the time
Umatilla decides what course of action to follow. EPA Region 10 is involved in the
planning effort and encourages tribal negotiation with counties. EPA is interested in
regional development and would like to see Umatilla as a model project for cooperation
with other jurisdictions. NRR recently compiled an Indian Land Tenure and Economic
Development study as part of their effort to address tribal problems of ownership patterns
and jurisdictional ambiguity to facilitate better working relationships with local
municipalities.
Northwest Renewable Resources is a non-profit organization which was formed in the early
1980s and acts as a mediator in natural resource disputes. NRR achieves this by acting as
the facilitator in meetings with resource managers and policy makers from corporations,
tribes, government agencies, and environmental organizations to work toward consensus
decisions. The NRR Center was founded in 1984 by leaders of industry, Indian tribes, and
environmental organizations to serve as a forum to meet and resolve conflicts over natural
resource management. The cooperative approach to solving problems is increasingly
regarded by resource managers as the best method for resolving conflicts. NRR tries to
discourage all parties from litigation.
NRR has two people on staff who work on short-term and long-term projects on solid waste
management for tribes and counties to eventually build a long term relationship between
governments. Currently, NRR is working on the "tribes and counties" project, with multi-
jurisdictional efforts on land-use planning and solid waste management. NRR's interest in
Umatilla is to define a working relationship with other jurisdictions and act as the neutral
"third-party" to provide information and suggestions of possible avenues. NRR is working
with EPA to implement a new initiative to develop institutional linkages between tribal and
local governments in the states of Washington, Oregon, and Idaho for the purpose of
facilitating regional cooperation on solid waste management.
Lessons Learned
Northwest Renewable Resource's philosophy is one tribes, states, local, and county
governments should build upon in consideration of solid waste management. By
cooperatively seeking solutions and improving communication between surrounding
jurisdictions, governments can work together to seek resolution to issues of natural resource
management. By focusing on sound planning principles rather than on-going disputes of
land ownership and jurisdictional issues, a common understanding of the facts and needs can
be evaluated to develop a working relationship which will result in lasting positive changes.
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION 14
-------
Contacts:
Dave Tovey, Umatilla, Director of Enterprise Department, (503) 276-3873.
Umatilla Tribal Landfill Dept, (503) 276-8296.
Glenn Youngman, Umatilla County, Courthouse, 216 SE 4th, Pendleton, OR 97801
(503) 276-7111.
Shirley Soloman, Northwest Renewable Resources, Project Director, 1411 Fourth Avenue,
Suite 1510, Seattle, WA 98101, (206) 467-1640.
Cooperative Management: The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma
Tribal Description
The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, with 66,000 tribal members, has a good cooperative
working relationship with the state of Oklahoma. George Bearpaw, Director of the
Community Development Program for the tribe, replied that he supposed there could have
been a question of sovereignty over complying with the state on regulatory programs, but
it has never come up as an issue as far as solid waste management has been concerned.
(This may be a result of the lack of a distinct Cherokee reservation in Oklahoma.) Solid
waste is a universal problem that has to be dealt with on a comprehensive level, not an
isolated issue individual to tribal land. Indian tribes have had certain conflicts with other
jurisdictions because of the question of sovereignty and the importance of retaining authority
over land and the people, but the Cherokee people comprehend the solid waste problem
as encompassing all people who must take equal responsibility. Sharing that responsibility
by cooperation has benefited the Cherokee Nation in their solid waste plans in funding,
resources, information, and technical assistance.
Solid Waste Cooperative Management
Not only does the Cherokee nation cooperate with the state, counties, municipalities, and
federal agencies on solid waste management issues, the tribe also established a Solid Waste
Research Institute to address regional solid waste problems. The tribe currently owns and
operates a state permitted sanitary landfill with municipalities in Adair county. The tribe
manages the landfill on the reservation and the county is allowed to use the landfill. The
facility was set up several years ago as a service for the area and to rid the tribe of the
problem of illegal dumping. Currently, a problem of open dumps on the reservation still
exists and the tribe is identifying illegal dumps with county sanitarians.
The tribe applied for and received a state permit to operate a sanitary landfill on Indian
land. The state helps the tribe by handling inspections of the landfill and issues permits on
the land. The state is also providing technical training to the tribe to assist members in
managing tribal facilities. The tribe generally follows Oklahoma solid waste standards and
regulations. Everyone pays fees for the landfill plus tipping scales are required for
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION 15
-------
commercial, non-commercial, and residential areas. Recently, the Oklahoma legislature
passed a law which imposed a fee on waste generated out of state, but transported for
disposal in Oklahoma landfills. The Cherokee assessed the fee against the out-of-state
generator and collected the fees. The state is currently in the process of entering into an
agreement with the Cherokee in regard to the disbursement of the fees. Historically, the
state departments have had a good working relationship with the Oklahoma tribes and plan
to continue that relationship. The state believes they have jurisdiction over all environmental
activities in the state and they will continue to assert that jurisdiction.
Federal agencies have offered some assistance to the Cherokee with their planning. IHS has
provided sanitarian assistance on solid waste management and funded several projects. The
BIA has funded some assessments on dump sites and clean-up on tribal land. In the private
sector, the tribe has been approached by a firm in Arkansas to serve as a host for
composting and other waste, but no new developments are being considered at this time.
A recycling facility has also been set up, in cooperation with the city of Sallisaw and
Sequoyah County. Cherokee obtained funds from the Indian Health Service (IHS), the
tribe, and the state matched the $100,000 grant to build the facility. In this particular
project in cooperation with Sallisaw, the county participated by donating the land for the
facility and the tribe built the facility then turned over the site to the county. The facility
serves tribal members and the county, but hires handicapped people through the services
of People, Inc. The tribe is also working with the county committee on a county-wide pick
up system for waste and with Delaware County to obtain $75,000 to set up a "green box"
project initiated by the county for the purpose of setting up a solid waste system.
The Solid Waste Research Institute
In the spring of 1987, Wilma Mankiller (tribal chief at that time) began to gather tribal
officials to look at trash as a serious problem and requested that an organization be formed
to look at solid waste solutions. Cherokee helped to establish and fund a private institute,
the Solid Waste Research Institute (SWRI), to get private interests, state, county, tribal, and
municipal governments to address solid waste issues. The non-profit chartered organization
was funded through the Environmental Protection Agency, the tribe, and the state in the
first year, but now in its second year SWRI is funded solely by the state.
SWRI has board members from the tribe, state legislature, federal representatives, various
state agencies, and Oklahoma State University. The organization serves as a planning tool
to identify funds and solid waste solutions. One problem identified by the organization is
the lack of available funding for implementation of solid waste programs rather than just
for planning, especially with the new RCRA regulations pending. As part of the solution,
the tribe is looking for funds from Phillips Petroleum and other companies for long term
funding and projects.
Currently, Cherokee is working with SWRI on a regional stance on solid waste issues and
looking at possibly buying a huge land base to start a big landfill for all counties involved.
An environmental bill initiated by state members has been proposed to start developing
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION 16
-------
environmental curriculum for an education program for Oklahoma, including tribal
education.
Lessons Learned
According to George Bearpaw, the key to the success of Cherokee's solid waste planning
efforts has been "a lot of cooperation." In the past the tribe competed with other agencies
and governments for certain projects and funds, but they have gone beyond that stage and
reached a mutual understanding between other jurisdictions on the issue of solid waste
management. The tribe had to educate themselves to reach a cooperative level because a
sound environmental plan is of concern to everyone. Bearpaw's advice to other tribes is "If
we don't get to that point [of cooperation], it never works."
CONTACTS:
George Bearpaw, Director of Community Development Program, (918) 456-0671,
Ext. 416
Fenton Rood or Barbara Rauch, Oklahoma State Dept. of Health, Solid Waste Management
Service, P. O. Box 83551, 1000 NE Tenth, Oklahoma City, OK 73152
(405) 271-7159
Out-Of-State Regional Landfill: The Rosebud Sioux
Tribal Description
The Rosebud reservation is located on the southern end of South Dakota. The 15,438
member tribe is only one of the bands of Sioux nations located within the mid-western
states. Like all people, the Sioux people generate waste and that waste has to be dealt with
in a sound manner. From the perspective of Cleve Neiss, the tribal official for the
Emergency Preparedness Program, priority for solid waste management is to close and clean
up all landfills, 14 total. Grants have been made available from BIA and IHS on equipment
and upgrading, but more money and grants need to be negotiated to clean up and close all
open landfills to meet new regulations. As part of solving their solid waste problems on the
reservation, tribal officials hope that by developing a regional landfill some of their
problems can be handled while also developing the economy of the Rosebud Sioux.
Solid Waste Controversy
Environment versus economics. Development versus desecration. The council versus the
people. These are the issues facing the Rosebud Sioux as they propose to build a regional
landfill facility with O & G Industries, Inc., of Torrington, Connecticut to accept out-of-
state solid waste. The siting of the 5,760 acre landfill has become a highly emotional and
controversial issue among the people of the reservation and other concerned residents in
the state.
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION 17
-------
The landfill, if built, will be available to anyone, on- or off-reservation, who wants to use
it and tipping fees would be waived for tribal members. O & G Industries has set up a
subsidiary to propose and build the solid waste and incinerator ash landfill. RSW, a two-
person firm, would be given major "control over the waste facility and the monitoring of
surface and groundwater. The proposed transport would be 1.0 - 5.0 million tons/year.
RSW's agreement with the tribe would give the Rosebud $1.00/ton and give tribal members
much needed employment. To the company, the site for the landfill, north of Cedar Butte,
is ideal because it is located above 1,000 to 1,500 feet of pure shale with the water table
about 2,000 feet below. The proposed landfill will cost about $20-30 million to develop and
will receive waste for 25-30 years from municipalities in an area from Colorado to
Mississippi.
Opposition to the landfill from the people revolves around the proposed site, traditional
values, and disbelief of promised benefits proposed by RSW. The site north of Cedar Butte
may be remote, but it is also the site of the Good Road Cemetery, a burial site of significant
traditional importance to the Sioux. If built, the cemetery will border the landfill. No
matter what the landfill could represent to the tribe in dollars, the group of opposers called
the Good Road Coalition still view it as a desecration of ancestral lands and an overall
potential threat to the environment. The coalition has challenged the company and
supporters of the landfill by declaring they will fight the proposal and defeat it as the Pine
Ridge Reservation had earlier defeated' the same proposal from the same company.
Accusations have been made against the tribal council for not informing the people about
the landfill until the council already decided to accept the contract. A barrier of distrust
between the council and the people prevents them from meeting and seeking a mediated
agreement.
Concern also exists regarding infrastructure requirements associated with the proposed
facility. Local roads, rail lines, and utilities currently in existence are not adequate to meet
the needs of the landfill. Who would absorb the costs of upgrading the infrastructure has
not been determined.
Other Tribal Action
Apart from the landfill, Cleve Neiss has other solid waste plans he hopes to implement for
the reservation. Among those plans are community education, a task force of tribal leaders
from each tribe to address environmental issues, a management plan for education for
environmental curriculum, and a recycling project. The Rosebud also formed a coalition
with the Oglala Sioux on environmental concerns. Both tribes have solid waste codes and
are also working together in all areas of solid waste RCRA Subtitle D management policies.
The tribes also initiated information sharing and meetings for all federal agencies. Rosebud
is helping their neighbor, the Yankton Sioux, by sharing their code and management plan
since Yankton does not have a code of its own. Cleve has cited major setbacks to the solid
waste plan as no available funding, no information from the EPA, and very little assistance
in solid waste issues, including information on RCRA Subtitle D, but has received assistance
from the Indian Health Service.
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION 18
-------
State Involvement
The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) in South Dakota has
offered the tribe technical assistance regarding the landfill facility and will participate on
the Environmental Impact Statement meetings, but the majority of the tribe's cooperative
effort has been with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The state is interested in improved
relations with tribes, has invited the tribes in South Dakota to DENR's first annual recycling
conference in September 1991, and DENR's first recycling directory has been sent to all
tribes in South Dakota. In addition, some tribes already receive the quarterly DENR
newsletter.
Lessons Learned
Rosebud's plans for solid waste management could end before it has a chance to begin. At
this point in time, the difficulty of Rosebud's solid waste initiatives revolves around the
controversy of the landfill. The tribal council consider it necessary as a means of solving
the reservation's solid waste disposal problems and developing the economy, but the people
say no. Cleve Neiss, a supporter of the landfill project, suggests a better form of
dissemination of information on solid waste. The tribe, the people, and the state need to
be informed in all areas of proposed solid waste management as well as to improve
communicative efforts between the people, the tribe, and other concerned parties.
Contacts
Cleve Neiss, Emergency Preparedness Program, P. O. Box 430, Rosebud, SD, 57570
(605) 747-2424.
David Templeton or Terry Keller, Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources, Joe Foss
Building, 523 East Capitol, Pierre, SD 57501-3181, (605) 773-3153.
Regional Planning: Northwest New Mexico Council of Governments, Navajo Tribe and
Zuni Pueblo
Description
State regulations and general concern for the environment have prompted action to develop
a regional solid waste management plan in northwest New Mexico. The Northwest New
Mexico Council of Governments (NWNMCOG), headquartered in Gallup, New Mexico,
initiated a regional study in October 1990 by contacting tribes and counties to invite them
to meetings. Working through NWNMCOG, three different counties, six municipalities and
the Zuni Pueblo are conducting a solid waste management study for the tri-county region.
The cooperative effort was stimulated by the New Mexico Solid Waste Act, enacted in
March 1990, which requires communities to find a way to reduce the amount of solid waste
disposed in landfills by 25 percent. The Act also calls for stricter state regulations on the
management of all solid waste facilities, including permits, management, and closures.
NWNMCOG completed "Phase One: Needs Assessment" in late May and is presently in
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION 19
-------
"Phase Two: Policy Development" for their solid waste plan. A 20 year Solid Waste
Management Plan is the priority for Northwest New Mexico.
Cooperative Regional Planning
One consideration is to look at a possible transfer station that would serve the reservations.
The state legislature imposed strict regulations and although Indian tribes are exempt from
those regulations, they still follow equally strict federal guidelines. NWNMCOG is not
particularly interested in a landfill because the tribes must first upgrade current landfills to
meet current RCRA requirements. Funding for the organization comes from the Indian
Health Service (IHS), state agencies, and the state to develop the regional plan. A
consulting team, led by R. W. Beck and Associates, is assisting these communities to comply
with state and federal standards. At present time, NWNMCOG is still in the stage of
talking and meeting with tribes located within the tri-county area. The scope of the study
for the tri-county area will include:
evaluate the region's existing solid waste management systems
assess the need for new or different solid waste management systems or facilities
identify alternatives for addressing that need
calculate how inter-regional cooperation could help individual communities control
costs and other risks anticipated as part of complying with new government
requirements
chart the next steps that will be required to pursue the needed changes
NWNMCOG is also looking at ways to involve local officials, businesses, and citizens and
to meet the greater expenses of the new plan. The draft report will be available in
September of 1991 and the final report in November 1991.
The Navajo Tribe has talked with NWNMCOG and hopes to join efforts. The Navajo tribe
has a solid waste code, but no current plan for enforcement of standards. The state of the
environment on the Navajo reservation is an open-dump situation. Federal-facilities exist,
but are beyond potential for growth. As far as Navajo is concerned, there are no funds
available to promote a sound solid waste management plan. Cooperative efforts with
NWNMCOG might prove profitable for the Navajo.
One of the priorities for NWNMCOG is to coordinate with Navajo planning efforts. In
related activities, the Indian Health Service hired a Solid Waste Management Coordinator
to serve the Navajo Tribe and a Navajo Solid Waste Management Code will be adopted in
Winter of 1991, modeled after New Mexico regulations.
Zuni has taken the initiative of surveying the waste problem on its reservation by conducting
a survey within the tribe and submitting a management report to EPA to apply for a grant
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION 20
-------
for a compost and pile up project. Zuni has an enacted solid waste project which includes
a recycling center which serves tribal members and some people from the outside, (mainly
Window Rock schools on the Navajo reservation), a community education program,
development of school curriculum and task force to involve as many programs as possible
including the BIA, IHS, and the community. A video documentary will also be completed
by August 1991 on what Zuni is doing to reduce their solid waste. The video will be
available to other tribes.
Lessons Learned
Stricter regulations prompted action for the region of Northwest New Mexico. By
coordinating efforts together with counties, municipalities, and tribal reservations, Northwest
New Mexico Council of Governments is ensuring that the area citizens receive affordable,
environmentally-sound solid waste services while complying with state and federal
regulations.
Contacts:
Northwest New Mexico Council of Governments, Patricia Lynstrom, Executive Director,
(505) 722-4327.
Glenda House, Zuni Utilities Dept., (505) 782-5654.
Louise Linkin, Navajo EPA, (602)729-5282.
Other Tribal Action and Concerns on Current Solid Waste Management
Nez Perce Tribe. Idaho
The Nez Perce Tribe has attended Idaho Region II "Regional Solid Waste Advisory
Committee" meetings since December 1988 on a regular basis, but is not a recognized
member of the committee and would like to be. The tribe also participated in EPA Region
10 "Municipal Solid Waste Needs Assessment" by Ross and Associates in 1989.
"States and local governments need to recognize the right and ability of the tribe to manage
the resources and examine issues within the exterior boundaries of the reservation that may
threaten the health, welfare, and stability of the Tribe. We have legitimate concerns
regarding environmental issues in Indian Country since it is our homeland and retained by
us by virtue of Treaty, statute, or executive order. We realize that the state and local
governments do have a concern; however, it should not preclude us from sitting at the table
as equals to discuss our mutual problems and find technically appropriate solutions."
(Gwendolyn B. Carter, Health and Human Services)
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION 21
-------
Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians. Minnesota
Solid waste management is being planned and all options will be addressed including the
possibility of joining the regional solid waste movement in the state of Minnesota. IHS,
HUD, and EPA representatives meet quarterly to address common issues on Indian land,
solid waste is one serious topic being looked at in the area of Minnesota, Wisconsin, and
Michigan. Red Lake recently received approval for a proposal submitted to EPA Region
V for a study on solid waste generated on the reservation.
Saginaw Chippewa Tribe. Michigan
The Saginaw Chippewa Tribe is involved with a cooperative recycling program with Isabella
County. The tribe is implementing a county-wide recycling program on a voluntary basis,
initiated by both tribe and county by mutual consent and hopes to begin the project in the
fall. The county has always been interested in working with tribes and contributes to costs
on projects. The tribe also has a seat on the Local Regional Planning Commission Board,
involving discussions and decision making on regional based issues.
Fort Peck. Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes. Montana
Fort Peck tribes are members of the Valley County Solid Waste District. The tribes lease
land to the city of Poplar in Roosevelt County for a landfill. Tribes are also involved in the
tribal-city coalition on local recycling and talking about county recycling by Rural County
Development Districts. They are interested in regionalization on a local level.
Wyoming Indian Affairs Council. Wyoming
The Wyoming Indian Affairs Council is involved in the planning of a project for the
establishment of a Wind River Reservation landfill system and to clean up the old "thirty-
odd" existing hazardous pits. The effort involves many entities, including Wind River
Business Councils, Wyoming Indian Affairs Council, Tribal Environmental Quality, Fremont
County Commission, County Landfill Board, reservation schools, reservation private
businesses, IHS, BIA, city of Lander, city of Riverton, and Wyoming state government.
Currently the solid waste plan is the top priority on the part of Wyoming Governor Mike
Sullivan and two tribal chairmen, Burton Hutchinson of the Northern Arapaho Tribe and
past chairman of the Eastern Shoshone Tribe, John Washakie.
Potential benefits of cooperation with state or local governments, "would be another
example of how solid waste cooperation and coordination can benefit both the Indian and
non-Indian world." (Gary Maier and Perry Mathews, Wyoming Indian Affairs Council)
Oneida Indian Nation. New York
"I believe that careful planning is a key to the best use and development of projects related
to solid waste management. As more information becomes available I hope that we can all
share in the best technologies for a solution to a difficult problem we all face." (Ray
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION 22
-------
Halbritter, Oneida Nation Representative)
Yankton. South Dakota
The Yankton tribe is in the process of developing a reservation-wide solid waste code. This
is dependent upon funding from other federal agencies. At present time, the tribe does not
have equipment, personnel or training to effectively manage or operate a landfill.
Fort Belknap
"Inter-agency cooperation and who actually addresses the solid waste problem is still the
mystery. An example, we at Fort Belknap have been working with an inter-agency group
on solid waste since approximately the latter part of 1988."
Northern Cheyenne. Montana
"States want tourists and they [the tourists] leave trash on reservation. Also the tribe has
no jurisdiction over these people that the states promote. States don't want to take care of
the solid waste left behind by these people." (Edwin Dahle, President, Northern Cheyenne)
Mechanisms and Considerations for Strengthening State-Tribal Cooperation on Solid Waste
Tribal Considerations for Regional/Cooperative Efforts
Develop Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to pledge that tribes and
states will seek cooperative solutions and address environmental issues of
mutual concern so that litigation can be avoided.
Develop priorities and consider available resources - What is needed and what
do the tribes have/not have the capability to provide. Develop an effective
program plan that accomplishes both tribal environmental and economic
development goals.
Take a long range view and plan for the long term. Tribes must understand
the real costs of solid waste management if managing their own waste, using
cooperative management with other jurisdictions, contracting for off-
reservation management, or siting a large-scale regional facility.
Initiate discussion and communication between neighboring jurisdictions.
Someone has to take the first step.
Understand state concerns.
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION 23
-------
itions for Regional/
Develop Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to further cement
commitment between tribes and states to achieve common goals.
Avoid endangering the sovereignty of tribe by infringing upon the right of the
tribe to its determine own goals, policies, and destiny.
Remember that the most precious resource of the tribe is its*right to self-
government. Allow for growth of the potential to produce policies that will
reflect the nature and tenure of society in which Indian people choose to live.
(i.e. have confidence in the capability of the tribe to protect its own resources
and people)
Assist in, or offer, training and technical assistance to tribes.
Initiate discussion and communication between state and tribal agencies.
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION 24
-------
APPENDIX I
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION
-------
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION AND
THE COUNCIL OF ENERGY RESOURCE TRIBES
SOLID WASTE SURVEY
This survey is being conducted by the Western Governors' Association. Please forward
the survey to the appropriate official and ask him/her to complete it and return it to WGA
by July 1,1991. This survey may be mailed to Western Governors' Association, ATTN:
Jill Peters, 60017th Street, Suite 1705 South Tower, Denver, CO, 80202, or faxed to (303)
534-7309. Please feel free to call Jill Peters or Chris McKinnon at (303) 623-9378 if you
have any questions regarding the survey or its use.
Name of person completing survey.
Office
Tribe
Telephone Number.
Please use the space provided. Attach additional sheets if necessary. '
1. Are you currently working with any state, local, or other tribal government on
planning, facility siting, information sharing, or other solid waste management
issues?
Yes No
1a. If so, please describe current efforts.
1 b. Who is the best contact person for further information on these cooperative efforts?
Name
Phone Number
2. If you are not currently involved in cooperative solid waste management efforts, do
you anticipate these types of efforts in the future?
Yes No
-------
3. What are the barriers, if any, in cooperating with state, local, or other tribal
governments on solid waste planning? (Check more than one if appropriate)
Insufficient financial resources
Insufficient staff
No established relationship
No contacts
Political factors
Lack of information
Other
4. What kinds of efforts would you find useful, or like to be involved with, in working
with state, local, or other tribal governments on solid waste issues?
Planning
Information sharing
Facility siting
Recycling programs
Funding
Other
5. Has your tribe been approached to host a facility for regional solid waste
management? (By private company, state, or local governments). Please describe
briefly.
6. Does the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Indian Health Service (IHS), and the
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) provide assistance to the
tribe in solid waste management?
Yes No
6a. If so, please describe.
-------
7. What would be the potential benefits of cooperative solid waste management with
state or local governments?
Reduced costs
Better environmental protection
Other
8. Please provide any additional comments that might be useful to WGA in relation to
solid waste management on your reservation, (or within your tribe)
K>lid-wi\inbe
Thankiyou for participating in this survey!
-------
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION AND
THE COUNCIL OF ENERGY RESOURCE TRIBES
SOLID WASTE SURVEY
This survey is being conducted by the Western Governors' Association. Please forward
the survey to the appropriate official and ask him/her to complete it and return it to WGA
by July 17,1991. This survey may be mailed to Western Governors' Association, ATTN:
Jill Peters, 600 17th Street, Suite 1705 South Tower, Denver, CO, 80202, or faxed to (303)
534-7309. Please feel free to call Jill Peters or Chris McKinnon at (303) 623-9378 if you
have any questions regarding the survey or its use.
Name of person completing survey.
Office
State
Telephone Number,
Please use the space provided. Attach additional sheets if necessary.
1. Is the state currently encouraging substate regional planning on solid waste
management?
Yes No
2. Are tribes being included in these planning efforts?
Yes No
3. What types of assistance, if any, does the state provide to tribes on solid waste
management?
Planning
Information sharing
Funding
.Recycling programs
Other
4. What are the barriers, if any, to cooperating with the tribes on solid waste
management?
Uncertain status of tribes in the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(1976)
No established relationship
Lack of resources
Political Factors
Lack of information
-------
Other
5. To your knowledge, are any municipal or county governments in your state
cooperating with tribes on solid waste management?
Yes No
5a. If so, please identify the city or county and a contact person, if possible.
5b. Did the state have any part in this effort?
Yes No
6. What would be te potential benefits of cooperative solid waste management with
tribal governments?
Reduced costs
Better environmental protection
Other
7. Please provide any additional comments that might be useful to WGA in solid
waste management within your state in relation to tribes.
toluj-wi\st»le
Thank you for participating in this survey!
-------
APPENDIX II
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION
-------
Survey Respondents and Other Contacts for Solid Waste Information
ALASKA
Glenn J. Miller, P.E.
Manager, Solid Waste Program
Alaska Dept. of Envir. Quality
(907)465-2671
ARIZONA
Carrie Bender
Chairperson, Hualapai Tribal Council
Arizona
(602)769-2216
CALIFORNIA
Robert F. Conheim
California Integrated Waste Mgmt. Board
(916)323-0131
Mike Connolly
Campo Envir. Protection Agency
Campo Band of Mission Indians, Cal.
(619)478-9046
COLORADO
Tom Brown
Utilities
Southern Ute
(303)563-4634
IDAHO
Jerome E. Jankowski
Idaho Dept. of Health & Welfare,
Dept. of Environmental Quality
(208)334-5882
Gwendolyn B. Carter
Health and Human Services
Nez Perce Tribe, Idaho
(208)843-2253
MICHIGAN
William R. Mardeza
Saginaw Chippewa Tribe
Michigan
(517)772-5700
MINNESOTA
Thomas Osdoba
Minnesota Office of Waste Management
(612)649-5773 .
Gary Gefroh
IHS Service Unit Sanitarian
Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians
Minnesota
(218)679-3341
MONTANA
Ralph N. Smith
Montana Dept. of Health & Envir. Sci.
Solid & Hazardous Waste Bureau
(406)444-1430
Rhonda R. Swaney, Dept. Head
Natural Resources Dept.
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes
Montana
(406)675-2700
Stewart Miller
Director of Planning Office
Blackfeet Tribe, Montana
(406)338-7406
Debi Madison
Office of Envir. Protection
Ft. Peck Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes
Montana
(406)768-5155
Arthur A. Stiffarm
Fort Belknap Planning Dept.
Montana
(406)353-2205
Edwin Dahle
President, Northern Cheyenne Tribe
Montana
(406)477-8284
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION
25
-------
NEBRASKA
Joe Francis
Nebraska Dept. of Envir. Control
(402)471-4210
NEW MEXICO
Charles A. Hules
New Mexico Dept. - Solid Waste Bureau
(505)827-2924
Ramona Homer
Tribal Refuse Program
Laguna Pueblo, New Mexico
(505)243-3716
Patricia Lynstrom, Exec. Director
Northwest New Mexico Council of Govs.
(505)722-4327
Glenda House
Zuni Utilities Dept., Solid Waste Project
New Mexico
(505)782-5654
Lee Martinez, Jr.
Community Development Office
Jicarilla Apache Tribe
New Mexico
(505)759-3370
Ralph Kopansky
Policy Analyst-Planner
Eight Northern Indian Pueblos Council
New Mexico
(505)852-4265
NEW YORK
Ray Halbritter
Oneida Nation Representative
Oneida Indian Nation, New York
(315)697-8251
Calvin John
President, Seneca Nation of Indians
New York
(716)945-1790
Stuart Jemison
Planning Director
Seneca Nation of Indians
(716)532-4900
NORTH DAKOTA
Martin Schock, Director
North Dakota Div. of Waste Mgmt.
(701)221-5166
OKLAHOMA
Fenton Rood, Barbara Rauch
Oklahoma State Dept. of Health
Solid Waste Mgmt. Service
(405)271-7159
Dwayne Beavers
Cherokee Haz. Waste Mgmt. Office
Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma
(918)458-5496
George Bearpaw
Director, Community Development
Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma
(918)456-0671, ext. 416
Charles Dawes
Chief, Ottawa Tribe of Oklahoma
(918)540-1536
Ted Lonewolf
Tribal Administrator
Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma
(405)654-2300
OREGON
Tim Davison
Oregon Dept. of Environmental Quality
(503)229-5965
N. Andrew Du Mont, Executive Director
Health Administration
Umatilla Indian Reservation
Oregon
(503)276-7990
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION
26
-------
Dave Tovey, Director
Enterprise Dept.
Umatilla Reservation
(503)276-3873
SOUTH DAKOTA
David Templeton
South Dakota Office of Waste Mgmt.
(605)773-3153
Cleve Neiss
Emergency Preparedness Program
Rosebud Sioux Tribe, South Dakota
(605)747-2424
Gordon Shields
E.D.A Program
Yankton Sioux Tribe
South Dakota
(605)384-3641
Dave Nelson
Pesticide Enforcement Officer/Director
Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe
South Dakota
(605)964-6558
UTAH
Ralph Bohn, Rusty Lundberg
Utah Div. of Solid & Haz. Waste
(801)538-6170
WASHINGTON
Randy Martin
Washington Dept. Ecology, Solid, & Haz.
Waste Program
(206)459-6418
Frank Friedlander
Colville Confederated Tribes
Washington
(509)634-4711
Bruce Didesch
Reservation Attorney
Colville Confederated Tribes
Washington
(509)634-4711
Dave Bonga
Planning
Kalispel Tribe of Indians
Washington
(509)445-1147
Tim Hosteller
Resource Planning
Lummi Indian Business Council
Washington
(206)647-6278
WISCONSIN
Gary Schuettpelz
Menominee Tribal Clinic, Envir. Health
Wisconsin
(715)799-3361
WYOMING
Dave Finley
Wyoming Dept. of Envir. Quality
(307)777-7752
Gary Maier, Perry Mathews
Wyoming Indian Affairs Council
Gary - (307)777-6770
Perry - (307)856-9828
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION
27
-------
Environmental Protection Agency
A RCRA Information Exchange/Native American Network
Contact: Judi Kane, Editor (202)382-5096
Newsletter Order Number - EPA/530-SW
RCRA/Superftmd Hotline (800)424-9346
Solid Waste Information Clearinghouse (SWICH)
Collects and disseminates information on MSW
To learn more about SWICH or accessible bulletin board
call SWICH Hotline (800)67-SWICH
or write SWICH, P. O. Box 7219, Silver Spring, MD 20910
Tribal Organizations
Indigenous Environmental Issues Network
Contact Chris Peters, Seventh Generation, for information (916) 625-4257.
or Jackie Warledo, Indian Lands Toxic Coordinator, GreenPeace (918) 742-2125.
The network deals with issues affecting native lands and is open to
membership to native people and organizations dealing with environmental
issues and will offer information, resources, organizing strategies, and
spiritual support in defense of lands. Network will also sponsor an annual
environmental issues conference and serve as a clearinghouse to enable members
to gain public awareness through media coverage. The conference is tentatively
scheduled for Washington state at a site to be announced.
National Tribal Environmental Council, Boulder, Colorado.
Tribal membership organization to provide need of tribes.
The organization is just forming, but most business will be conducted in Washington, DC.
Council of Energy Resource Tribes,
1999 Broadway, Suite 2600
Denver, CO 80202
(303)297-CERT
Non-profit Organizations
Northwest Renewable Resources Center
1411 Fourth Avenue, Suite 1510
Seattle, WA 98101
(206)623-7361
fax (206)467-1640
Center works on a fee-for-service basis.
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION 28
-------
This report was made possible, in part, by a grant from the Ford Foundation.
WESTERN GOVERNORS' ASSOCIATION
------- |