Comment submitted by A. Kujan

Document ID: EPA-HQ-OA-2010-0992-0009
Document Type: Public Submission
Agency: Environmental Protection Agency
Received Date: January 23 2011, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Date Posted: January 25 2011, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Start Date: December 15 2010, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Due Date: February 16 2011, at 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time
Tracking Number: 80bd0453
View Document:  View as format xml

View Comment

EPA-HQ-OA-2010-0992 Proposed Final Policy on Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribes Federal Register Volume 75, Number 240 (Wednesday, December 15, 2010) Pages 78198-78202 As a member of the concerned public and a citizen of our nation, it is of importance to be informed and involved in decisions affecting our country. In addition, as a member of one of our national tribes, it is of further concern to be knowledgeable in matters affecting native peoples as well. I have read the proposed policy for EPA consultation and coordination with the Indian tribes and I feel it is a good policy overall. There is one point that I find troublesome in reference to the Notification Phase. In section V, part A the Consultation Process is discussed. Number 2, the notification phase, is as follows: “2. Notification Phase: EPA notifies the tribes of activities that may be appropriate for consultation.” While I understand that the breadth of EPA activities is enormous, it is of concern to me that the tribes are only to be notified of activities that “may” be appropriate for consultation. From my view, tribes should be notified of all activities which have any concern or affect upon them or their lands as otherwise described in the document. Whether a consultation may be deemed appropriate can be in the eyes of the beholder. Since tribal officials have the right to request a consultation, even if one is not initially considered necessary, it only makes logical sense that they should be informed of all activities so they might be able to make such a decision in the first place. Apart from this particular issue, it is my belief that the proposed regulation is otherwise sound. I appreciate the opportunity to voice my opinion and concerns. Regards, Alicia Kujan

Related Comments

    View All
Total: 30
Comment submitted by Katherine Krueger, Staff Attorney, Quileute Indian Tribal, Quileute Natural Resources
Public Submission    Posted: 12/20/2010     ID: EPA-HQ-OA-2010-0992-0003

Feb 16,2011 11:59 PM ET
Comment submitted by Don Greenwaldt, Tidewater Transit
Public Submission    Posted: 01/10/2011     ID: EPA-HQ-OA-2010-0992-0004

Feb 16,2011 11:59 PM ET
Comment submitted by R. Milligan
Public Submission    Posted: 01/12/2011     ID: EPA-HQ-OA-2010-0992-0006

Feb 16,2011 11:59 PM ET
Anonymous public comment
Public Submission    Posted: 01/19/2011     ID: EPA-HQ-OA-2010-0992-0007

Feb 16,2011 11:59 PM ET
Comment submitted by C. Baasch
Public Submission    Posted: 01/25/2011     ID: EPA-HQ-OA-2010-0992-0008

Feb 16,2011 11:59 PM ET