TRIBAL PROTOCOL MANUAL

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards 

Division of Material, Safety, States, Tribal, and Rulemaking Programs

Federal, State, and Tribal LiaIson Branch

TRIBAL PROTOCOL MANUAL

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Chapter 1: Historical Perspective on Federal Government and Tribal Relations . . . . . 3

Section 1.A: Shaping the Relationship between Tribes and the Federal Government . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Section 1.B: Executive Orders and Memoranda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Section 1.C: Historic Overview of the Federal and Tribal Relationship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Section 1.D: Federal Government’s Trust Responsibility to Tribes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Section 1.E: “Government-To-Government”-What Does It Mean? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Section 1.F: NRC’s Case-By-Case Approach to Interactions with Native American Tribes . . . . . . . . 9

Chapter 2: Guidance on Tribal Protocols and Interactions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Section 2.A: Potential Cultural Differences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Section 2.B: Tribal Consultation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 

Section 2.C: Federal Laws Protecting Tribal Historic and Cultural Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Section 2.D: Initiating Dialogue with Native American Tribes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Section 2.E: Generic Guide to Arranging Meetings with Tribal Representatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Section 2.F: Meeting Etiquette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Section 2.G: Reservation Etiquette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Section 2.H: Recommended Behaviors and Other Communication Considerations . . . . . . . . . . 21

Chapter 3: NRC’s Tribal Contacts–Reference Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Section 3.A: NRC’s Tribal Liaison Point of Contact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Section 3.B: NRC’s Individual Program Office Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Section 3.C: NRC’s Technical and Financial Assistance to Tribes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Section 3.D: Federal Agency Tribal Web Site Links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Section 3.E: Tribes Located within a 50 Mile Radius of a Nuclear Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Section 3.F: Native American Media Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Section 3.G: Tribal Contact Links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Section 3.H: Miscellaneous Tribal Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Tribal Protocol Manual i

Tribal Protocol Manual 1

INTRODUCTION 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) recognizes the unique relationship that the Federal government 

has with Federally recognized Tribes. The NRC is committed to the development and implementation of agency 

policies and regulatory activities with Tribal implications. The “Tribal Protocol Manual” is intended to facilitate 

effective consultations and interactions between the NRC and Native American Tribes concerning activities within 

the scope of the NRC’s jurisdiction.

The Tribal Protocol Manual is a reference tool, produced from multiple sources, including interviews with NRC 

staff and management and other Federal agencies’ personnel and Tribal representatives experienced in working 

with Tribes. NRC management and staff can use this guide to develop and maintain government-to-government 

relationships with Tribal governments. This manual supplements working knowledge for NRC staff with Tribal 

outreach experience and provides practical guidance to NRC personnel who have had limited interactions with 

Native American Tribes.

In this manual, various names are used when describing Native American peoples, because there is no specifically 

established name to use when describing Native American people. As a point of reference, in a speech given 

November 5, 2009, before roughly 400 Federally recognized Tribes, President Obama addressed his audience 

using terms such as “Native Americans,” “First Americans,” “Tribal Nations,” and “Alaska Natives.”1 The 

terminology “Indian Tribe” and “Tribal officials” were utilized in President Clinton’s November 6, 2000, Executive 

Order 13175.2 The Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, uses the term “American Indian,” while 

the National Congress of American Indians prefers “Native American.” Accordingly, these terms will be used 

interchangeably throughout this manual.

Some Native American Tribes have a regulatory relationship with the NRC as licensees. This manual does not 

imply a regulatory relationship with license holding Native American Tribes different from other NRC licensees.

One important message to take away from this manual is that Tribes are unique governmental entities and are 

not extensions of State or local governments. Each Federally recognized Tribe is a domestic, dependent sovereign 

nation with its own customs, culture, concerns, interests and needs. NRC’s Tribal Protocol Manual is intended to 

assist NRC management and staff to recognize these distinctions and create a more open and productive working 

relationship with Native American Tribal governments.

1. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-president-during-opening-Tribal-nations-conference-interactive-discussion-w

2. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/memorandum-Tribal-consultation-signed-president
2 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

The NRC will uphold its trust relationship with the 

Tribes and is committed to a government-to-government 

relationship with the Tribes.

The NRC exercises its trust relationship in the context 

of its authorizing statutes, including the Atomic Energy 

Act of 1954 as amended (AEA), and implements its 

responsibility by assuring that Tribal members receive the 

same protections under implementing regulations that are 

available to other persons.

PREFACE
Tribal Protocol Manual 3

CHAPTER 1 Historical Perspective on Federal Government and Tribal Relations

SECTION 1.A 

Shaping the Relationship between Tribes 

and the Federal Government

As described by the United States Supreme Court over 

100 years ago, “the relationship between the United States 

and Indian Tribes is so unique, that nothing like it exists 

anywhere else in the world.”3

The relationship that exists today between the Federal 

Government and Native American Tribes developed over 

hundreds of years. It is based on the sovereignty possessed 

by Tribes that predates the formation of the United 

States, interactions between Tribes and the Europeans 

from the 15th and 16th centuries through the American 

Revolution and the adoption of the U.S. Constitution, 

Article I, Section 8, Clause 3. The adoption of the U.S. 

Constitution authorizes Congress to regulate commerce 

among foreign nations, the States and Indian tribes; and 

Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 authorizes the President, 

with consent of the Congress, to make treaties. These two 

constitutional provisions provided the constitutional basis 

for the Federal-Tribal relationship that has been shaped by 

subsequent treaties, laws, regulations, Executive Orders, 

administrative decisions, and Federal court decisions — 

all of which comprise Federal Indian law. 

Native American Tribes are regarded as sovereign nations; 

but because some powers are reserved exclusively to 

the Federal Government, Tribal sovereignty has limits. 

As a result, Federally recognized Indian Tribes are 

considered as sovereign “nations within a nation,” or 

“domestic, dependent nations or governments.” The 

Federal government recognizes the right of Indian Tribes 

to self-government and to exercise inherent sovereign 

powers over their members and territories. Tribal officials 

expect to be treated as sovereign nation representatives 

when interacting with the Federal government. A more 

detailed exploration and in-depth analysis of the “Duty of 

Protection” and the “Federal-Indian Trust Relationship” 

can be found in the “Legal Curriculum and Training 

Program of the Institute for the Development of Indian 

Law” available in the 1979 book The Federal-Indian 

Trust Relationship: Duty of protection: Legal Curriculum 

3 Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 30 U.S.1, 16 (1831). Also Morton v. Mancari, 417 

U.S. 535 (1974).

and Traiing Program of the Institute for the Development 

of Indian Law by Gilbert Hall, library copies of which 

can be found through: http://www.worldcat.org/title/

federal-indian-trust-relationship-duty-of-protection-legalcurriculum-and-training-program-of-the-institute-for-thedevelopment-of-indian-law/oclc/005100430.

SECTION 1. B 

Executive Orders and Memoranda

Executive Orders and Presidential Memoranda, 

dating back to Richard Nixon’s “Special Message on 

Indian Affairs” in 1970, have addressed legislation and 

policies concerning the American Indian community.4 

President Nixon’s 1970 speech condemned Tribal forced 

termination, endorsed Tribal self-determination, and 

changed the direction of Federal Tribal policy. President 

Nixon’s speech set the stage for the Executive Orders and 

Presidential Memoranda that would follow in years to 

come.

Executive Order 13175 In Executive Order 13175, 

entitled “Consultation and Coordination with Indian 

Tribal Governments” (Nov. 2000), President Clinton 

sought “...to establish regular and meaningful 

consultation and collaboration with Tribal officials in 

the development of Federal policies that have Tribal 

implications, to strengthen the United States governmentto-government relationships with Indian Tribes, and 

to reduce the imposition of unfunded mandates upon 

Indian Tribes.” Executive Order 13175 states “Policies 

that have Tribal implications” refers to regulations, 

legislative comments or proposed legislation and other 

policy statements or actions that have substantial direct 

effects on one or more Indian Tribes on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, or on 

the distribution of power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian Tribes.” The NRC uses 

this definition in deciding when to establish regular and 

meaningful consultation and collaboration with Tribal 

officials.

4 http://www.epa.gov/tp/pdf/president-nixon70.pdf. In 1970, President Nixon issued 

a “Special Message on Indian Affairs.” Subsequently, President Ronald Reagan, 

George H.W. Bush, William J. Clinton and George W. Bush issued policy statements 

regarding the Federal government’s relationship with Native American Tribes.
4 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

CHAPTER 1 Historical Perspective on Federal Government and Tribal Relations

Executive Order 13175 established policymaking criteria 

and consultation provisions for Federal departments and 

agencies. The Executive Order sets forth the following 

three fundamental principles to guide agencies when 

developing and implementing policies with Tribal 

implications: 

◗ “The United States has a unique legal relationship 

with Indian Tribal governments as set forth in the 

Constitution of the United States, treaties, statutes, 

Executive Orders, and court decisions. Since the 

formation of the Union, the United States has 

recognized Indian tribes as domestic dependent 

nations under its protection. The Federal Government 

has enacted numerous statutes and promulgated 

numerous regulations that establish and define a 

Tribal trust relationship with Indian tribes.”

◗ “Our Nation, under the law of the United States, in 

accordance with treaties, statutes, Executive Orders, 

and judicial decisions, has recognized the right 

of Indian tribes to self-government. As domestic 

dependent nations, Indian tribes exercise inherent 

sovereign powers over their members and territory. 

The United States continues to work with Indian tribes 

on a government-to-government basis to address 

issues concerning Indian Tribal self-government, Tribal 

trust resources, and Indian Tribal treaty and other 

rights.”

◗ “The United States recognizes the right of Indian 

tribes to self-government and supports Tribal 

sovereignty and self-determination.”

Because the NRC is an independent regulatory agency, 

the NRC is not required to implement the policies and 

procedures required in Executive Order 13175. The 

NRC, however, has stated that in exercising its regulatory 

authority, this agency, acts in a manner consistent with 

the fundamental precepts expressed in the Order.5 To 

that end, the Commission has adopted agency practices 

that ensure consultation and cooperation with Indian 

Tribal governments fully consistent with both President 

Clinton’s 1994 guidance and with Executive Order 

13175.6

5 Letter from Karen D. Cyr, General Counsel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission; to 

Rosalyn Rettman, Esq., Acting General Counsel, Office of Management and Budget 

(January 26, 2001).

6 Presidential Memorandum for Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, titled 

“Government to Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments,” 

April 29, 1994.

In a memorandum dated November 5, 2009, President 

Obama renewed the Federal Government’s commitment 

to fulfilling the consultation requirements of Executive 

Order 13175. In that memorandum, the President 

directed all Executive Department and Agency heads 

to submit to the Director of the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB), a detailed plan of actions to 

further implement the policies and directives stated in 

Executive Order 13175, in coordinated consultation 

with Indian Tribes and Tribal officials and to annually 

include a progress report on the status of each action. 

Each agency’s plans and reports were to designate 

an appropriate official to coordinate and oversee the 

progress of the documents required by the President’s 

memorandum. All reports were to be reviewed by 

the Director of OMB and submitted to the President 

and should include any improvements on the Tribal 

consultation progress. 

In addition, the Obama Administration holds annual 

Tribal summits at the White House and has created a 

White House Executive Tribal Council. 

SECTION 1. C 

Historic Overview of the Federal and 

Tribal Relationship 

The following chronology traces distinct eras — as 

viewed by some historians — of the relations between 

the United States and Native American Tribes. This 

section of the Tribal Protocol Manual is intended to 

inform the NRC staff and management of history from 

a Native American perspective.7 The eras provide a 

conceptual framework for understanding the dominant 

trends and large-scale shifts in the relationship between 

the Federal Government and the Tribes. These policies 

were often shaped and defined by the times in which 

they occurred. However, NRC staff should be aware 

that each Federally recognized Tribe has its own unique 

history and experience with the Federal Government. 

In general, these eras are: 

7 Digest of American Indian Law: Cases and Chronology/H. Barry Holt, Gary 

Forrester, ISBN 0-08377-0684-x (1990).
Tribal Protocol Manual 5

CHAPTER 1 Historical Perspective on Federal Government and Tribal Relations

◗ Treaties (1608-1870)

◗ Removal (1830-1850)

◗ Reservations (1850-1871)

◗ Assimilation (1871-1928)

◗ Reorganization (1928-1953)

◗ Termination (1953-1968)

◗ Self-Determination (1968-present)

Treaties (1608-1870) A treaty is a formal, 

written contract that defines the terms of an agreement 

between two sovereign nations. Treaties were the 

legal instruments by which the British and colonial 

governments defined United States-Indian relations. 

Between 1607 and 1776, Indian Tribes entered into 

175 treaties with the British and colonial governments. 

Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the United States 

Constitution authorizes the President, with the consent 

of Congress, to enter into treaties with Indian Tribes 

and thus govern the conduct of the Government 

in Indian relations. From 1787 to 1868, the U.S. 

government ratified 371 such treaties with Native 

American Tribes; no treaties have been ratified since 

1868. 

The staff should be aware that many of the treaties with 

Tribes entered into or ratified by the U.S. Government 

have been abrogated or limited by Acts of Congress 

and Federal case law. Litigation of the meaning, status 

and the specific Tribes and rights protected under 

treaties continues in the Federal courts. Because of the 

complexity and changing nature of Native American 

law, the staff should contact the Office of the General 

Counsel to obtain specific information on treaties or legal 

analyses of treaties. The staff should also recognize that 

State laws which pertain to persons and property residing 

within a State are generally preempted by Federal Indian 

law, which is derived from the extensive body of treaties, 

Executive Orders, Federal statutes, and Federal case law.

While provisions in the treaties between the U.S. 

government and Indian Tribes varied widely, it was 

common to include a guarantee of peace, a clarification 

of boundaries and an understanding of any specific lands 

ceded to the Federal government, a guarantee of Indian 

hunting and fishing rights (sometimes on ceded lands), 

a statement that the Tribe recognized the authority or 

protection of the U.S. government, and an agreement 

about trade regulation and travel of non-Indians in Indian 

territory. Many Tribal populations were required to move 

from their ancestral lands by the terms in a treaty.

Tribal nations, the United States, the Congress, the 

Federal courts, and states continue to grapple with 

questions relating to the nature of Indian property rights, 

the rights of individual Indians, and the power and 

jurisdiction of Federal, Tribal and State governments in 

Indian country. The breadth and complexity of treaties 

with Native American Tribes is too great to present in this 

manual, however, the staff is encouraged to consult other 

resources to obtain additional information. One source 

of primary documents on laws and treaties affecting 

Indian Tribes is the University of Oklahoma website on 

Indian Affairs: Laws and Treaties, compiled and edited 

by Charles J. Kappler at http://digital.library.okstate.

edu/kappler/ and Indian Affairs: Laws and Treaties, Vol. 

II (Treaties) at http://digital.library.okstate.edu/kappler/

Vol2/Toc.htm. See also the website Early Indian Treaties 

from the University of Nebraska at http://earlytreaties.

unl.edu/index.html. Additional sources of information 

on treaties include the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Tribal 

websites; these are identified in Sections 3.D and 3.F. 

One historically significant treaty is discussed here 

because it predates the U.S. Constitution and is generally 

considered the first official treaty between the United 

States and an Indian Tribe:

The Treaty with the Delaware Indians (1778). 

The treaty memorialized the parties’ agreement to grant 

forgiveness, perpetuate friendship, acknowledge allegiance 

by the Delaware Nation during time of war, and provide 

free passage for United States troops through Delaware 

lands. The Federal government promised provision of 

“articles of clothing, utensils and implements of war” and 

to build a fort in Delaware Nation country “for the better 

security of the old men, women and children, whilst their 

warriors are engaged against the common enemy.” The 

treaty recognized the Delaware Nation as a sovereign 

nation and guaranteed their territorial rights.
6 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

CHAPTER 1 Historical Perspective on Federal Government and Tribal Relations

Removal (1830-1850) Congress passed the 

Indian Removal Act8 which allowed and funded the 

removal of members of the Chickasaw, Choctaw, 

Creek, Seminole and Cherokee Nations from their 

lands. This legislation “was to provide for an exchange 

of lands with the Indians residing in any of the States 

or territories, and for their removal west of the river 

Mississippi.”9 President Andrew Jackson, an advocate 

of Indian Removal policy, oversaw this significant 

change in United States policy and law concerning the 

rights of Native Americans to practice their traditional 

ways of life in their homelands. The Act states, “it shall 

and may be lawful for the President to exchange any 

or all of such districts [west of the river Mississippi], so 

to be laid off and described, with any tribe or nation 

of Indians now residing within the limits of any of the 

states or territories, and with which the United States 

have existing treaties, for the whole or any part or 

portion of the territory claimed and occupied by such 

tribe or nation, within the bounds of any one or more 

of the states or territories, where the land claimed and 

occupied by the Indians, is owned by the United States, 

or the United States are bound to the state within 

which it lies to extinguish the Indian claim thereto.”10

The legislation in effect allowed the removal of Indian 

Tribes to western territories to allow non-Native 

American populations to move into the southeastern 

United States formerly occupied by those Tribes. The 

Choctaw Nation was the first to be removed in 1831 

followed by the removal of the Seminole Nation in 

1832, by the Creek Nation in 1834, the Chickasaw 

Nation in 1837, and finally removal of the Cherokee 

Nation in 1838. The Cherokee call their journey to 

Oklahoma the “Trail of Tears;” it has been estimated 

that approximately 4,000 of the 15,000 relocated 

Cherokee died en route to Oklahoma. Historians have 

recognized that many Native Americans suffered from 

exposure, disease, and starvation while en route to their 

western destinations. 

8 The full text of The Indian Removal Act is available at: https://www.mtholyoke.edu/

acad/intrel/removal.htm

9 The Indian Removal Act of 1830.

10 Id. (Emphasis added).

Reservations (1850-1871) Reservations are 

parcels of land allocated by the Federal government to the 

Indian Tribes for their use and management as sovereign 

entities. Tribal reservations were created when Indian 

Tribes that were relocated from their traditional homelands 

were relocated again to a more western territory. The 

Indian Appropriations Act of 1851 (formally referred 

to as the Appropriation Bill for Indian Affairs) allocated 

monies to move Tribes onto newly created reservations. 

Contemporary legislators and policy makers described 

reservations as a means to protect the Indian Tribes from 

encroachment by white settlers moving westward. The 

very Tribes being protected were often those who had 

earlier been removed to the western territories in the 

1830s. Indian Tribes were strongly opposed to this Federal 

policy that sought to impose an agrarian, geographically 

restricted way of life on Indian populations.

Assimilation (1871-1928) With the passage of 

the Dawes Act of 1887, the Federal government policy 

dramatically shifted from the allocation of communal 

(Tribal-owned) reservation lands to the assimilation of 

Native Americans into “mainstream” American society. 

This Act granted privately held landholdings to individual 

Indians, thus replacing the extensive communal Tribal 

holdings. Reservations were subdivided into smaller 

parcels to encourage Indians to engage in an agricultural 

economy (160 acres were allotted to families and 80 acres 

were allotted to individual persons). Other assimilation 

policies included educating Native American children 

in government boarding schools, which involved taking 

children from their families. The government run schools 

restricted the use of Native American languages and the 

practice of traditions, customs and religious ceremonies, 

and discouraged family visits. Tribes consider the Dawes 

Act to be one of the most destructive laws enacted by the 

U.S. government. The Indian Citizenship Act, granted 

U.S. citizenship to Native Americans in 1924. Although 

the 1924 Act granted Federal citizenship rights to Native 

Americans, many did not achieve full citizenship and 

suffrage rights until 1948. According to a survey by the 

Department of Interior, seven states still refused to grant 

Indians voting rights as late as 1938.
Tribal Protocol Manual 7

CHAPTER 1 Historical Perspective on Federal Government and Tribal Relations

At the request of the Secretary of the Interior, on June 

12, 1926, the Meriam Commission was charged with 

investigating the affairs of Indians living on reservations 

in the United States. The Meriam Commission was 

financed by the Rockefeller Foundation, not by any 

government agency or agent, in an effort to maintain 

unbiased standards for the survey.11 The investigation 

evaluated nearly all reservations and specifically examined 

the educational, industrial, social, and medical activities 

of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, as well as Indian 

property rights and economic conditions.12 The Meriam 

Commission identified significant deficiencies in the 

educational, industrial, social, and medical systems on 

Indian reservations in 26 States. The Meriam Report of 

1928, The Problem of Indian Administration, took aim 

at Indian boarding schools and recommended a shift in 

focus away from boarding facilities due to the substandard 

diet, education, and clothing they provided. “The survey 

staff finds itself obligated to say frankly and unequivocally 

that the provisions for the care of the Indian children in 

boarding schools are grossly inadequate.”13 Although 

the general abandonment of boarding schools did not 

take place until the 1970s, the Meriam Report led to the 

implementation of new Federal policies affecting Native 

Americans. The policies of the Assimilation era came 

under increasing attack with publication of the Meriam 

Report of 1928. The extensive Meriam Report: The 

Problem of Indian Administration detailing reservation 

conditions in the 1920s is available at http://www.narf.

org/nill/resources/meriam.htm.

Reorganization (1928-1953) Congress passed 

the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934,14 also known 

as the Wheeler-Howard Act, in order to implement 

reforms recommended following the Meriam Report. 

The Reorganization Act was enacted to decrease the 

Federal control of Indian affairs and to increase Indian 

self-government and responsibility. Significant parts 

11 Parman, Donald L. and Lewis Meriam, “Lewis Meriam’s Letters during the Survey 

of Indian Affairs 1926-1927 (Part 1).” Arizona and the West 24, 3 (Autumn, 

1992), 253-280.

12 Id. 

13 Meriam, Lewis, The Problem of Indian Administration at 11.

14 The full text of The Indian Reorganization Act is available at http://digital.library.

okstate.edu/kappler/Vol5/html_files/v5p0378.html.

of the law were the curtailment of the allotment of 

Tribal lands to individual Indians and restrictions on 

the alienation of allotted and Tribal lands. The Indian 

Reorganization Act provided economic development of 

Tribal lands and resources by establishing the rights of 

Tribes to establish businesses and other organizations, 

to establish a Tribal credit system, to home rule, 

and to provide vocational education and training to 

Tribes. The Indian Reorganization Act is considered 

by many Tribes and historians to be a cornerstone for 

independence of and self-determination by Native 

American Tribes.

Termination (1953-1968) The Termination era 

marks another major shift in Federal policy concerning 

Native Americans. House Concurrent Resolution 10815

stated, “it is the policy of Congress, as rapidly as possible, 

to make the Indians within the territorial limits of the 

United States subject to the same laws and entitled to 

the same privileges and responsibilities as are applicable 

to other citizens of the United States, to end their status 

as wards of the United States, and to grant them all 

of the rights and prerogatives pertaining to American 

citizenship;”16 H. Con. Res. 108 states that certain Indian 

Tribes and individual Indians “should be freed from 

Federal supervision and control and from all disabilities 

and limitations specially applicable to Indians: The 

Flathead Tribe of Montana, the Klamath Tribe of Oregon, 

the Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin, the Potawatomie 

Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska, and those members of 

the Chippewa Tribe who are on the Turtle Mountain 

Reservation, North Dakota.”17 This resolution served to 

“effectively terminate Federal trust protection of American 

Indian reservation lands.”18 This resulted in the immediate 

15 U.S. House of Representatives Resolution 108, Indians, 83rd Congress, 1953. (U.S. 

Statutes at Large, 67: B122.) August 1, 1953 | [H. Con. Res. 108].

16 Id. at 614. 

17 Id.

18 Daly, Heather Ponchetti, Fractured Relations at Home: The 1953 Termination 

Act’s Effect on Tribal Relations throughout Southern California Indian Country, 

The American Indian Quarterly, Volume 33, Number 4, Fall 2009 pp. 427-439. 

See also, Termination Policy 1953-1968, Council of Indian Nations (http://

www.nrcprograms.org/site/PageServer?pagename=cin_hist_terminationpolicy); 

Menominee Termination and Restoration, Milwaukee Public Museum (http://www.

mpm.edu/wirp/ICW-97.html); These articles discuss the various affects on and views 

of the many Tribes subject to termination. 
8 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

CHAPTER 1 Historical Perspective on Federal Government and Tribal Relations

withdrawal of all Federal aid, services, and protection, 

as well as the end of reservations for affected Indian 

Tribes. Terminated Tribes became subject to State laws, 

their reservation lands could be sold to non-Indians, 

and the Act in effect, reversed many of the economic 

and educational reforms that had been implemented 

during Reorganization. 

The relocation of Tribal people from Alaska Native 

villages into larger, commercial U.S. cities became 

a general trend after World War II. Due to Alaska’s 

late arrival to statehood status, Native American issues 

played out differently there. The discovery of oil in the 

Kenai Peninsula and Cook Inlet regions in 1957 and 

along the North Slope in 1968, brought the subject 

of native land ownership to the head of a conflict over 

State land selection. 

As Alaska did not become a State until 1959, Alaskan 

Tribes were not considered in the Termination Policy in 

1953. The uproar for Termination diminished before 

Alaskan Natives were considered. In the rush before 

Statehood became a reality, Alaskan Tribes hurried to 

file land claims with the Department of the Interior.

In 1966, the Secretary of the Interior, Stewart Udall, 

issued a moratorium on State land selections. In 1969, 

he declared 90% of Alaska off limits to any form of 

Federal land transfer. During this time frame, Alaskan 

Tribes were represented by the Alaska Federation of 

Natives, who lobbied tirelessly for a fair land claims 

settlement act and which resulted in the Alaska 

Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) http://www.

alaskool.org/projects/ancsa/reports/rsjones1981/ancsa_

history71.htm. This act was intended to both provide 

the State with land promised in gaining Statehood and 

the Natives with a 40 million acre land base. The act 

was signed into law by President Richard Nixon on 

December 18, 1971. It revoked previous land claims 

by many Alaskan natives. Initially, the legislation 

divided the land into twelve regional corporations 

(a thirteenth would be added later for natives living 

outside the State) and 220 local corporations. 

Tribal sovereignty was ended with the ANCSA and 

all Native rights were subject to State law. The Tribal 

village corporations owned only the surface of the 

selected land. Minerals located below the surface 

belonged to the regional corporations.

Self-Determination (1968-present) President 

Richard Nixon emphasized the importance of Tribal 

self-determination after pointing out the failure of the 

Termination policy in his Special Message on Indian 

Affairs speech.19 President Nixon condemned forced 

termination and recommended that U.S. policies 

concerning Indians should serve “to strengthen the 

Indian sense of autonomy without threatening his 

community.” The trust relationship between Native 

Americans and the United States government was 

reaffirmed and financial support for Tribes guaranteed.20

The passage of the Indian Self-Determination and 

Education Assistance Act21 in 1975 was a milestone 

in U.S.-Indian relations. The Act acknowledged 

the right of Tribal governments to contract with the 

U.S. government and to determine how to spend 

appropriated Federal funds for the benefit of their 

Tribal members.22

At the present time, Tribes actively assert their sovereign 

rights and have achieved greater political and economic 

independence through Tribal self-determination. 

Despite heightened Tribal and cultural awareness, Tribal 

assertiveness, and Federal Executive Orders and judicial 

rulings supporting these changes, many Tribes are 

discouraged by particular Federal policies or positions, 

a lack of adequate appropriations for Indian programs, 

and the perception of cultural insensitivity on the part 

of the Federal government.

19 President Nixon, Special Message on Indian Affairs, July 8, 1970 is available at: 

http://www.epa.gov/tp/pdf/president-nixon70.pdf; see also Newcomb, Steven, Don’t 

Treat Indian Nations as a Minority Group, Indian Country, dated October 14, 

2013 at http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2013/10/14/dont-let-tribesbe-turned-just-another-minority.

20 Id.

21 The Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act is available at http://

tm112.community.uaf.edu/files/2010/09/Self-DeterminationAct-19751.pdf; and 

its implementing regulations are available at http://www.bia.gov/cs/groups/mywcsp/

documents/collection/idc017334.pdf.

22 The Native American Constitution and Law Digitization Project is an excellent 

resource for identifying Tribal constitutions and codes for over 500 Federally recognized 

tribes. The Project is a cooperative effort among the University of Oklahoma Law 

Center and the National Indian Law Library (NILL) of the Native American Rights 

Fund, and Native American tribes who provide access to their Constitutions, Tribal 

Codes, and other legal documents. The website is http://thorpe.ou.edu/.
Tribal Protocol Manual 9

CHAPTER 1 Historical Perspective on Federal Government and Tribal Relations

SECTION 1.D 

Federal Government’s Trust 

Responsibility to Tribes 

The unique status of Tribes was explored in Seminole 

Nation v. United States (1942), where the Supreme Court 

explained that the Federal government is, “charged with 

moral obligations of the highest responsibility and trust.”23

The Federal government has a trust responsibility to 

Federally recognized Tribes, which applies to all executive 

departments and Federal agencies that deal with Native 

Americans, including the NRC. For Federal agencies 

that hold Tribal assets, the trust responsibility establishes 

fiduciary obligations to the Tribes, including duties to 

protect Tribal lands and cultural and natural resources 

for the benefit of Tribes and individual Tribal members/

land owners.24 In comparison, as an independent 

regulatory agency, the NRC exercises its fiduciary duty 

in the context of its authorizing statutes, including the 

Atomic Energy Act (AEA), and implements any fiduciary 

responsibility by ensuring that Tribal members receive the 

same protections under implementing regulations that are 

available to other persons.25

SECTION 1. E 

Government-To-Government—

What Does It Mean?

The Federal government has a unique legal and political 

relationship with Native American Tribes that arises from 

the authority of Congress to regulate interstate commerce 

under Article I of the Constitution and the power of the 

President to make treaties with the consent of Congress 

under Article II. This relationship has been defined and 

reinforced by treaties, Federal statutes, judicial decisions, and 

Executive Orders. The U.S. government recognizes Tribes 

23 Seminole Nations v. United States (1942) http://supreme.justa.com/cases/Federal/

us/316/386/case.html

24 White House Press Release, June 26, 2013, establishing the White House Council on 

Native American Affairs, at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/06/26/

executive-order-establishing-white-house-council-native-american-affairs. The 

Executive Order stated it was the policy of the Federal government to protect Tribal 

lands, environments, and natural resources, and promote respect for Tribal cultures, 

as a means of promoting and sustaining prosperous and resilient Tribal communities.

25 Skokomish v. F.E.R.C., 121 F.3d 1303 (9th Cir.1997). The Court held that the 

Federal Regulatory Energy Commission (FERC) did not need to provide a Tribe 

greater rights beyond what they would otherwise have under the Federal Power Act, 

when FERC is assigning preliminary power licenses.

as domestic sovereign nations, that is, the United States has 

acknowledged the inherent authority of Native American 

Tribes to govern themselves. Absent Congressional action, 

Tribes possess the right to self-government. The NRC 

exercises its regulatory authority in a manner consistent 

with the fundamental precepts expressed in Executive 

Order 13175, and supports meaningful consultation and 

collaboration with Tribal officials in the development of 

Federal policies that have Tribal implications. Chapter 4 of 

this Manual at Section 4.G defines and discusses the term 

Federally recognized Tribes. 

In establishing a government-to-government relationship 

with Federally recognized Tribal governments, the 

NRC acknowledges the status of Tribes as domestic 

dependent sovereign nations26, as being distinct from 

the status of special interest groups, stakeholders, nongovernmental organizations, or members of the general 

public. Additional guidance on consultation is contained 

in NRC Management Directive 5.1, “Intergovernmental 

Consultation” (ADAMS Accession No.: ML041770442). 

Individual NRC offices also provide guidance27 on 

Tribal consultation conducted under Section 106 of the 

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. 

Chapter 2, Section 2.D describes how the NRC plans 

and conducts government-to-government meetings, it 

also describes Federal restrictions and requirements for 

funding these meetings.

SECTION 1. F

NRC’s Case-By-Case Approach to 

Interactions with Native American 

Tribes 

The NRC’s regulatory actions, with the potential to affect 

to Tribal interests, offer both the NRC and the Tribes an 

opportunity to initiate outreach and communication with 

one another. The NRC staff will identify and initiate 

dialogue with Federally recognized Tribal governments as 

26 The phrase “domestic dependent sovereign nations” to characterize Tribes 

comes from the Cherokee Nation v. Georgia case (Cherokee Nation v. 

Georgia, 30 U.S.1, 16 (1831).

27 See, for example, LIC-203, Revision 3, “Procedural Guidance for Preparing 

Categorical Exclusions, Environmental Assessments, and Considering 

Environmental Issues.” (ADAMS Accession No.: ML12234A708)
10 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

CHAPTER 1 Historical Perspective on Federal Government and Tribal Relations

part of NRC licensing activities and when exercising its 

regulatory authority in uranium recovery activities, reactor 

operations and license renewal, high-level and low-level 

radioactive waste storage and disposal concerns, and spent 

fuel transportation and disposal. The NRC conducts 

outreach in an effort to encourage Tribes to participate in 

the NRC regulatory process when agency policies have 

a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian Tribes. 

The staff provides Tribes with information detailing the 

Commission’s mission and regulatory authority, and 

identifies opportunities for Tribal involvement. The NRC 

staff maintains regular communications with Tribes and 

Tribal organizations that are interested in NRC activities. 

Of course, Tribal officials are encouraged to initiate 

communications with the staff on any NRC-regulated 

activities. The NRC invites Tribal input throughout its 

decision-making processes. 

The following are a few examples of the NRC’s 

interactions with Tribal governments:

Power Reactor Inspections and License 

Renewal–Prairie Island Indian Community 

The Prairie Island Indian Community (PIIC) reservation 

is located adjacent to the Prairie Island Nuclear 

Generating Plant (PINGP), Units 1 and 2, in Welch, 

Minnesota. In 1997, after the PIIC expressed interest 

in accompanying NRC inspectors on inspections, the 

Commission determined that Tribal representatives could 

observe NRC inspections at the plant. The PIIC observed 

NRC radiation protection inspections at PINGP later that 

year, and was the first Tribe authorized to observe NRC 

inspections. 

In 2008, the NRC and the PIIC signed a Memorandum 

of Understanding (MOU) 27 granting the PIIC status 

as a Cooperating Agency for the purposes of preparing 

portions of the Supplemental Environmental Impact 

Statement for the proposed license renewal of the PINGP 

Units 1 and 2. The PIIC provided special expertise and 

assistance to the NRC staff in four areas: historic and 

archaeological resources, socioeconomics, land use, and 

environmental justice. This was an MOU dealing with 

the environmental review for a reactor license renewal.

In 2009, the President of the Prairie Island Indian 

Community Tribal Council participated, as an observer, 

in the Prairie Island Regional Lead License Renewal 

Program Inspection.

On October 3, 2012, the NRC signed another MOU28

with the PIIC establishing a cooperating agency 

relationship between the NRC and the PIIC in preparing 

an Environmental Assessment for the license renewal 

of PINGP’s independent spent fuel storage installation. 

The MOU also recognized the PIIC’s special expertise 

and access to information regarding historic and 

archaeological resources, socioeconomics, land use, and 

environmental justice. In addition, PIIC continues to 

observe cask loading, participate in inspections, tours, 

meetings and other regulatory activities at the site.

Proposed Waste Repository–Timbisha Shoshone 

Nation

The NRC conducted Tribal outreach on the proposed 

Yucca Mountain high-level waste repository site in 

Nevada with the Timbisha Shoshone Nation from 2001 

through 2008. The NRC hosted workshops for Native 

American Tribes with historical and cultural ties to the 

Yucca Mountain area in 2001 and 2003. During these 

outreach activities, NRC staff learned that the Timbisha 

Shoshone Nation had requested “affected status,” as 

permitted by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA). 

The U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) has the 

authority to grant affected status to Affected Tribes. 

Affected status specifically affords Tribes rights to notice, 

participation, consultation, and financial assistance in 

proceedings on the proposed waste repository. The NRC 

provided information on NRC regulations and hearing 

procedures to DOI representatives and supported a timely 

decision on the Tribe’s request. The NRC staff visited 

the Timbisha Shoshone reservation in Death Valley, 

California in 2006. The NRC staff discussed the Tribe’s 

affected status petition with DOI representatives at DOI 

headquarters in 2007. The Tribe first applied in 2001, 

and not having received an official determination on its 

request, the Tribe reapplied in 2006. In 2008 after DOI 

28 PIIC Memorandum of Understanding, (ADAMS ML12284A456).
Tribal Protocol Manual 11

CHAPTER 1 Historical Perspective on Federal Government and Tribal Relations

granted Timbisha Shoshone petition, NRC staff consulted 

with Timbisha Shoshone on participating in the NRC 

licensing and hearing process. The Timbisha Shoshone 

Tribe was admitted as a party to the Yucca Mountain 

hearings with eight admitted contentions in 2009.

On March 3, 2010, the U.S. Department of Energy 

(DOE) filed a motion with the NRC Atomic Safety 

and Licensing Board (Board) seeking permission to 

withdraw its application for authorization to construct 

the repository at Yucca Mountain, http://pbadupws.nrc.

gov/docs/ML1006/ML100621397.pdf. On September 

30, 2011, in response to a Commission order, the Board 

issued a Memorandum and Order suspending the 

licensing proceeding. The NRC suspended its Tribal 

outreach for Yucca Mountain until further notice, http://

pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1127/ML11273A041.pdf. 

In November 2013, the Commission directed the agency 

staff to complete work on the safety evaluation report on 

the Department of Energy’s construction authorization 

application for the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear 

waste repository. That action was in response to an 

August, 2013, decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for 

the District of Columbia Circuit ordering the agency to 

continue its review of the Yucca Mountain application 

at least until existing funds appropriated for the review 

are expended, http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/ML1332/

ML13322B228.pdf.

Uranium Recovery and Legacy Waste Associated 

with Uranium Mining and Milling-Located in 

New Mexico, Wyoming, Nebraska, and South 

Dakota 

The NRC met with representatives from Navajo Nation, 

the Hopi Tribe, the Pueblo of Acoma, and the Pueblo of 

Laguna governments in New Mexico and Arizona in 2007 

and 2008 to discuss regulatory issues related to uranium 

milling operations and environmental restoration. 

Beginning in late 2007, the NRC staff, the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, DOE, the Bureau of 

Indian Affairs, and the Indian Health Service participated 

in multiple briefings and roundtable discussions with the 

Navajo Nation, which resulted in the development of 

a 5-year plan to address legacy uranium mine and mill 

waste in Navajo Country. The plan addressed uranium 

contamination on Navajo lands and proposed solutions 

that were the subject of a Congressional committee 

hearing held by Congressman Henry A. Waxman on 

October 23, 2007. The NRC Staff also met face-to-face 

with senior Navajo government officials to discuss legacy 

concerns. The Navajo Nation Resources Committee, the 

Navajo Nation EPA, and the Navajo Nation Department 

of Justice were briefed on NRC responsibilities under the 

5-year plan in April 2008. 

In February and April of 2009, the NRC staff coordinated 

separate meetings with representatives of the Navajo 

Nation, Pueblo of Zuni, All Indian Pueblo Council, 

Pueblo of Laguna, and Pueblo of Acoma to discuss 

the licensing of uranium recovery facilities. At these 

meetings, NRC staff explained the licensing process, 

addressed related Native American concerns, and 

identified opportunities for Native American Tribal 

governments to participate in the licensing process.

The NRC initiated the National Historic Preservation 

Act (NHPA) Section 106 consultation with Tribes on 

the proposed Crow Butte License Renewal, Crow Butte 

North Trend, and Dewey Burdock in-situ uranium 

recovery projects in 2010. During the following 3 years, 

the NRC also initiated consultation with Tribes on the 

Ross, Marsland, and Three Crow projects. The NRC 

consults with more than 30 Tribes on these 6 uranium 

recovery licensing actions.

For each of these six projects, the NRC staff held faceto-face meetings to describe the proposed project, 

listened to Tribal comments and concerns, and facilitated 

identification of properties of cultural and religious 

significance to Tribes. Discussions were not limited to 

historic and cultural issues, but included other topics 

related to the proposed projects. The NRC staff also 

communicated with Tribal Historic Preservation Officers 

via phone, letters, and periodic status teleconferences.

During 2012 and 2013, 

interested consulting Tribes participated in field surveys 

to identify properties of cultural and religious significance 

at the six in-situ uranium recovery projects mentioned 

above.
12 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

CHAPTER 1 Historical Perspective on Federal Government and Tribal Relations

Potential Small Nuclear Power Reactor Proposed 

for Galena, AK–Alaskan Tribes Represented by 

the Yukon River Inter-Tribal Watershed Council 

(YRITWC)

The City of Galena initiated discussions with Toshiba 

Corporation in 2003 on the possibility of building a 

nuclear power reactor. In February 2005, NRC staff met 

with representatives of the Yukon River 

Inter-Tribal Watershed Council (YRITWC). This 

organization represents 53 Federally recognized Tribes 

in Alaska and 17 First Nations in Canada with Tribal 

territories located in the Yukon River Watershed. The 

NRC staff explained how Tribal governments could 

communicate concerns on the proposed siting of a 

nuclear reactor in Galena, Alaska. After its first meeting, 

the NRC established the Tribal Consultative Team to 

address concerns related to the siting of the facility and 

maintained regular communications with the YRITWC, 

as appropriate. The YRITWC held its 2009 Bi-Annual 

Summit in August 2009, and the NRC staff spoke 

with the Executive Director of the YRITWC and with 

individual Tribal leaders about the status of the proposed 

Galena nuclear power reactor. 
Tribal Protocol Manual 13

CHAPTER 2 Guidance on Tribal Protocols and Interactions

SECTION 2.A 

Potential Cultural Differences

Staff should recognize that differences may exist between 

how NRC and Tribal representatives view issues of 

regulatory concern to the NRC. These differences 

reflect the ways different cultures prioritize and interact. 

The NRC staff should not consider interactions with 

Tribal government officials only from their own cultural 

perspective, staff should be sensitive to the cultural 

perspectives of all persons with whom they interrelate. 

Cultural Differences May Exist In the Following Areas:

◗ Tribal representatives may seem to place less 

priority than Federal employees do on the timelines, schedules and agendas established by U.S. 

government agencies. The NRC staff approach 

to task management tends to be schedule-driven 

because of imminent deadlines, which may conflict 

with the expectations of Tribal representatives. Tribal 

governments have their own set of priorities and NRC 

staff needs to recognize important Tribal priorities.

◗ Tribes often seek consensus in their decisionmaking 

and for that reason place importance on face-to-face 

interactions. Tribal officials may request meetings in 

their offices so that Tribal members may be part of 

consensus decisionmaking. In planning where to hold 

meetings with Tribal representatives, NRC staff should 

recognize that Tribal governments face the same 

budgetary constraints as the Federal government and 

when possible, plan to hold meetings in locations that 

do not impose significant financial burden on Tribal 

budgets. 

◗ Native Americans treat Tribal elders with great respect 

regardless of whether they hold elected office or 

official position. Often the opinions of Tribal elders, 

who are not part of the elected government, will be 

sought during Tribal consultation with the NRC staff.

◗ Since consensus, group harmony, and cohesiveness are 

important values among Indian Tribes, the NRC staff 

should seek out group views as well as the opinions 

of individuals. However, it is also essential for Tribal 

governments to present official viewpoints to the NRC. 

◗ As is true of the overall American population, religious 

and spiritual beliefs vary widely among Native 

Americans. NRC staff should understand that the 

beliefs of all persons and groups should be discussed 

respectfully and protected from discussion in public 

forums. Where appropriate, the NRC staff can explain 

that the confidentiality of information concerning 

beliefs or the location of religious or cultural 

properties will be protected from public disclosure to 

the extent allowed under relevant laws. 

◗ Native religious and belief systems incorporate what 

Western religions identify as spiritual aspects, as 

well as the relationship of humans to the natural 

environment. Native religious beliefs involve respect 

for and protection of the Earth and its resources.

Some Native American Tribes believe all living things are 

interconnected—the spiritual world and natural world 

are one. Threats to the environment are often viewed 

as direct threats to Tribal health, culture, and spiritual 

well-being. In addition to being a food source, plants and 

animals also convey 

spiritual importance for Tribes. Accordingly, sites known 

for their abundance in gathering food or medicinal plants 

may often be historically and culturally significant.

Spirituality is also woven into Tribal lifestyles through 

ancestral teachings and beliefs that are handed down 

from generation to generation. In some Tribal cultures, 

celebrations, stories, songs, and dances teach skills as well 

as entertain. Additionally, some Tribes use subsistence 

activities, such as hunting, fishing, and foraging, to help 

teach the children respect for these activities and for the 

past. Because of cultural differences, NRC employees 

may misunderstand, or may be misunderstood by 

Tribal members. By practicing open communication, 

adaptability, and open mindedness in its interactions, 

NRC staff can develop positive working relationships with 

Tribal members.

SECTION 2. B 

Tribal Consultation

Consultation in this Manual refers to NRC’s goal to 

begin meaningful interactions with Tribal governments 

at the earliest stage possible on NRC regulatory actions 

or proposed projects with Tribal implications. NRC 

will coordinate with other Federal agencies (e.g. the U.S. 

Federal Emergency Management Agcency (FEMA), U.S. 

Department of Transportation (DOT), Bureau of Land 

Management, etc.) when NRC’s regulatory action creates 
14 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

CHAPTER 2 Guidance on Tribal Protocols and Interactions

a situation where those agencies regulatory roles have 

substantial direct effects on one or more Tribes.

To be meaningful and effective it is essential that 

consultation efforts begin early in agency consideration of 

an action or project. Consultation may take many forms 

and often includes:

1. establishing mutually agreed protocols for open and 

timely communication describing proposed agency 

actions,

2. establishing agency points of contact,

3. identifying tribal government leadership and staff 

level points of contact,

4. developing mutually agreeable schedules for meetings 

between Tribal officials and representatives and NRC 

management and staff,

5. providing opportunities for Tribes to raise concerns on 

the effects NRC licensing or regulatory activities may 

have on Tribal interests, and

6. inviting Tribal participation in the NHPA and NEPA 

process.

Designated representatives of the NRC have the authority 

to speak for the agency in a 

government-to-government exchange with designated 

Tribal leaders, officials, and staff. Through consultation, 

the NRC obtains Tribal views on proposed NRC actions 

and policies that have a direct substantial effect on one or 

more Indian tribes.

Staff should be cognizant that Tribal governments 

and leadership may take a more restrictive view of 

government-to-government consultation than the NRC 

staff. Tribal representatives may use “governmentto-government consultation” to refer to interactions 

between Tribal leadership and NRC management 

and/or Commissioners. Government-to-government 

consultation includes interactions between Tribal staff 

and to NRC staff, as well as interactions between staff 

and higher-level officials. When representatives of the 

Federal government and Tribal governments interact on 

issues within the scope of their authority, the interaction 

may be considered “government-to-government.” These 

interactions may include information-sharing meetings, 

presentations, preliminary discussions, introductory 

briefings, information-gathering sessions, teleconferences, 

written correspondence, and telephone conversations 

between staff-level employees. All of these interactions are 

important to the NRC meeting its obligation to consult 

effectively and meaningfully with Tribal governments. 

When planning consultation activities with Tribes, staff 

should ensure that Tribal representatives understand 

the objectives of the consultation and know whether 

participants will be at the leadership or staff level.

SECTION 2. C 

Federal Laws Protecting Tribal Historic 

and Cultural Resources

While the National Historic Preservation Act is the 

principal Federal law dealing with historic preservation, 

there are numerous other statutes that relate to various 

aspects of the Federal historic preservation program. These 

range from the protection of archeological sites on Federal 

lands, to the recognition of properties of traditional 

cultural or religious significance to Native Americans. 

Many Federal laws require the Federal government to 

consult with Tribal governments. NRC licensing actions 

and other agency regulatory undertakings may require 

compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, 

the National Historic Preservation Act, the Nuclear Waste 

Policy Act, and the Native American Graves Protection 

and Repatriation Act. The NRC staff should check with 

their program offices and the Office of General Counsel 

for specific guidance on complying with these statutory 

provisions.

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969, As Amended

The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 

U.S.C. §4321 et seq.) (1969) establishes a broad national 

framework for protecting our environment. NEPA 

requires all Federal agencies to 1) consider environmental 

impacts in their decision making, 2) inform the public 

of their decisions, and 3) document the process by 

which each agency made its informed decision. NEPA 

also established the Council on Environmental Quality 

(CEQ), which publishes the Council on Environmental 
Tribal Protocol Manual 15

CHAPTER 2 Guidance on Tribal Protocols and Interactions

Quality Regulations for Implementing NEPA (Title 40 

CFR Parts 1500 through 1508). NEPA also requires each 

Federal agency to issue its own individual implementing 

regulations. The NRC meets its NEPA responsibilities 

by complying with the NRC regulatory requirements set 

forth in Title 10 CFR Part 51.

National Historic Preservation Act of 

1966, As Amended

In the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966

(NHPA),29 Congress established a comprehensive program 

to preserve the historical and cultural foundation of 

the nation as a living part of community life. Section 

106 of the NHPA (16 U.S.C. Section 470f) is a crucial 

part of that program that requires Federal agencies to 

consider the effects on historic properties of projects they 

carry out, assist, fund, permit, license, or approve. All 

Federal agencies under the executive branch of the U.S. 

government are subject to the requirements of Section 

106. Complying with Section 106 is a Federal agency 

responsibility and, while applicants may be asked to carry 

out some of the tasks for completing a Section 106 review, 

the Federal agency remains responsible for all findings and 

determinations. Only when authorized by Federal statute 

may non-Federal entities be delegated legal responsibility 

for Section 106 compliance.

Section 106 requires Federal agencies to consider the 

effects on historic properties of projects they carry out, 

assist, permit, license, or approve (undertakings). Federal 

agencies must also provide the Advisory Council on 

Historic Preservation (ACHP) a reasonable opportunity 

to comment on such undertakings before the approval of 

the expenditure of any Federal funds on the undertaking 

or before the issuance of any license. Agencies comply 

with Section 106 through the process described in 

the implementing regulations, “Protection of Historic 

Properties” (36 CFR Part 800). The regulations 

implementing Section 106 can be found on the ACHP’s 

Web site at http://www.achp.gov/regs-rev04.pdf. A 

fundamental goal of the Section 106 process is to ensure 

29 http://www.achp.gov/nhpa.html. The National Historic Preservation Act was last 

amended in 2006 and a PDF version is available at the Advisory Council for 

Historic Preservation website listed above. 

that Federal agencies consult with interested parties to 

identify and evaluate historic properties, assess the effects 

of their undertakings on historic properties, and attempt 

to negotiate an outcome that will balance project needs 

and historic preservation values.

Section 106 review encourages, but does not mandate, a 

preservation outcome and recognizes that sometimes 

there is no way for a project to proceed without affecting 

historic properties. Based on the information gathered 

through the Section 106 process, a Federal agency may 

make an informed decision to approve, change, or 

deny a project. Therefore, the outcome of Section 106 

reviews can range from avoidance of historic properties 

to the acceptance of extensive adverse effects on historic 

properties. The Section 106 process ensures that a Federal 

agency assumes responsibility for the consequences of its 

undertakings on historic properties.

Although the Section 106 regulations do not mandate a 

timeframe within which a Federal agency must complete 

its review, the Federal agency should plan for the time 

needed to consult to resolve adverse effects to historic 

properties at the beginning of the project planning 

process. Depending on the circumstances and the 

consultation process, a Federal agency may conclude 

its Section 106 review with a finding of “no historic 

properties affected” or “no adverse effects to historic 

properties.” Should the proposed undertaking pose a 

threat of adverse effects on historic properties, the agency 

must consult to attempt to reach an agreement on how 

to resolve those adverse effects. Consulting parties 

participate with the Federal agency in the preparation 

of an agreement document, typically a Memorandum of 

Agreement (MOA) or Programmatic Agreement (PA), 

which establishes the agreed upon measures to resolve 

the adverse effect and the roles and responsibilities of 

the agency and the consulting parties. If the signatories 

cannot come to an agreement, the agency must request 

and consider ACHP comments. If an agreement is 

reached, the agency must implement all agreed upon 

measures set forth in the resulting MOA or PA.
16 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

CHAPTER 2 Guidance on Tribal Protocols and Interactions

Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as 

Amended

The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982, as Amended 

(NWPA) (42 U.S.C 10101 et seq.) provides for a role for 

affected Indian Tribes in activities related to the geologic 

disposal of radioactive waste and addresses grants that may 

be made to affected Indian Tribes. The NWPA includes 

rights of participation and consultation for affected Indian 

Tribes pertaining to repositories for defense waste and 

the disposal of high-level radioactive waste and spent 

nuclear fuel. The NRC is among the agencies required 

to provide affected Indian Tribe timely and complete 

information regarding determinations or plans made 

with respect to site characterization, siting, development, 

design, licensing, construction, operation, regulation, or 

decommissioning of the repository. The NRC regulations 

at 10 CFR Parts 60 (“Disposal of High-Level Radioacive 

Wastes in Geologic Repositories”) and 63 (“Disposal of 

High-Level ERadioacgive Wastes in Geologic Repository 

at Yucca Mountain, Nevada”)each include Subpart C, 

that addresses the participation — including participation 

in license reviews — and consultation of affected Indian 

Tribes. The NWPA provides for grants to affected Indian 

Tribes for participating in consultations relating to site 

characterization and siting decisions and participating in 

review activities.

The Native American Graves Protection 

and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA)

The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation 

Act (NAGPRA) (Public Law 101-601; 25 U.S.C. 

3001 through 3013) is a Federal law passed in 1990. 

NAGPRA provides a process for museums and Federal 

agencies to return certain Native American cultural items, 

human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, or 

objects of cultural patrimony to lineal descendants, and 

culturally affiliated Indian tribes and Native Hawaiian 

organizations. NAGPRA includes provisions for 

unclaimed and culturally unidentifiable Native American 

cultural items, intentional and inadvertent discovery of 

Native American cultural items on Federal and Tribal 

lands, and penalties for noncompliance and illegal 

trafficking. In addition, NAGPRA authorizes Federal 

grants to Indian tribes, Native Hawaiian organizations, 

and museums to assist with the documentation and 

repatriation of Native American cultural items, establishes 

the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation 

Review Committee to monitor the NAGPRA process 

and facilitate the resolution of disputes that may arise 

concerning repatriation under NAGPRA.

All Federal agencies are subject to NAGPRA. Although 

the NRC’s activities rarely involve public or private 

museums or Federal or Tribal lands, some agreements 

developed during the NHPA Section 106 process include 

provisions regarding the inadvertent discovery of Native 

American cultural items on private lands. All public 

and private museums that have received Federal funds, 

other than the Smithsonian Institution, are subject to 

NAGPRA. (Repatriation by the Smithsonian Institution 

is governed by the National Museum of the American 

Indian Act of 1989, 20 U.S.C. 80q.)

The principal steps of the NAGPRA repatriation process 

include the following. Federal agencies and museums 

identifying cultural items in their collections that are subject 

to NAGPRA and preparing inventories and summaries of 

the items. Federal agencies and museums consulting with 

lineal descendants, Indian tribes, and Native Hawaiian 

organizations regarding the identification and cultural 

affiliation of the cultural items listed in their NAGPRA 

inventories and summaries. Federal agencies and museums 

sending mandatory notices to lineal descendants, Indian 

tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations describing 

cultural items and lineal descendancy or cultural affiliation, 

and stating that the cultural items may be repatriated. The 

law requires the Secretary of the Interior to publish these 

notices in the Federal Register.

SECTION 2.D 

Initiating Dialogue with Native 

American Tribes

The NRC’s initial written contact announcing a licensing 

application and inviting the participation of an Indian 

Tribe in consultation should be made by an NRC Division 

Director or Deputy Director. When initiating this written 

correspondence, the addressee should be the leader of the 

Tribal government. Copies of correspondence may be sent 
Tribal Protocol Manual 17

CHAPTER 2 Guidance on Tribal Protocols and Interactions

to the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO), State 

Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), Tribal elders, and 

Tribal government officials, as appropriate. Subsequently, 

the NRC staff may send regular correspondence with 

Tribal officials or representatives, with copies sent to the 

Tribal leader, to keep leadership informed of consultation 

issues and progress.

Subsequent interactions with Tribal governments can be 

conducted by the NRC staff that contact and establish 

relationships with Tribal representatives who hold similar 

levels of authority. Communications can be through 

written correspondence, phone calls, or e-mails to the 

appropriate Tribal contact. The Staff-level personnel 

may also initiate requests on behalf of NRC management 

or in preparation for meetings with members of Tribal 

governments.

National Historic Preservation Act 

Consultation Responsibilities

As part of their Section 106 responsibilities, Federal 

agencies must consult with any Indian tribe that attaches 

religious and cultural significance to historic properties 

that may be affected by the agency’s undertakings. The 

NRC staff should also check with their program office to 

see if there is specific guidance for conducting the Section 

106 process or evaluating historic and cultural resources 

through the NEPA environmental reviews.

Tribal Historic Preservation Officers 

(THPOs)

In 1992, the U.S. Congress adopted amendments 

to the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) 

which authorized Indian Tribes to take over the 

functions of SHPOs on Tribal lands and appoint a 

Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO). The 

National Historic Preservation Act (P.L. 102-575) allows 

Federally recognized Indian Tribes to take on more 

formal responsibility for the preservation of significant 

historic properties on Tribal lands. Specifically, NHPA 

Section 101(d)(2) allows Tribes to assume any or all of the 

functions of a State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) 

with respect to Tribal lands (ACHP 2013), provided that 

the Secretary of the Interior determines that the Tribal 

preservation program and the Tribe’s plan that describes 

how the functions the Tribal preservation official proposes 

to assume will be carried out satisfy the requirements of 

Section 102(d)(2) of the NHPA (16 U.S.C. 470a). The 

decision to participate or not participate in the program 

rests with the Tribe.

As a formal participant in the National Historic 

Preservation program, a Tribe may assume official 

responsibility for a number of functions aimed at the 

preservation of significant historic properties. Those 

functions include identifying historic properties, 

maintaining inventories of culturally significant 

properties, nominating properties to National and Tribal 

registers of historic places, conducting NHPA Section 106 

reviews of Federal agency projects on Tribal lands, and 

conducting educational programs on the importance of 

preserving historic properties.

In cases in which a Tribe has not assumed the 

responsibilities of the SHPO for purposes of Section 106 

compliance on their Tribal lands, the Federal agency will 

consult with a designated representative of the Tribe, 

in addition to the SHPO, during review of projects 

occurring on, or affecting historic properties on, its Tribal 

lands. The Bureau of Indian Affairs and the National 

Park Service can provide initial contact information for 

these Tribes.30

The NHPA regulations at 36 CFR Part 800 (“Protection 

of Federal Properties”),instruct Federal agencies to also 

consult with Indian Tribes that attach religious and 

cultural significance to historic properties that may be 

affected by an agency undertaking, regardless of the 

location of the historic property. This consultation is 

referred to as Section 106 Tribal consultation, (§800.2 (c) 

2 ii (C).

This Web site lists Tribal Historic Preservation Officers 

that are members of the National Association of Tribal 

Historic Preservation Officers (NATHPO) and is available 

at: http://www.nathpo.org/THPO/state_list.htm.

30 The National Park Service maintains a list of Tribes that have not assumed the 

responsibility of the SHPO for purposes of Section 106 compliance on Tribal lands 

at http://grants.cr.nps.gov/THPO_Review/index.cfm.
18 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

CHAPTER 2 Guidance on Tribal Protocols and Interactions

State Historic Preservation Officers 

(SHPOs)

State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs) administer 

the national historic preservation program at the 

State level, review National Register of Historic Places 

nominations, maintain data on identified historic 

properties that have not been identified evaluated or 

nominated for placement on the National Register, and 

consult with Federal agencies during NHPA Section 106 

reviews (ACHP 2013). SHPOs are designated by the 

governor of their respective State or territory.

Federal agencies seek the views of the appropriate SHPO 

when identifying historic properties, evaluating the 

eligibility of historic properties for the National Register, 

and assessing effects of an undertaking on historic 

properties. Agencies also consult with SHPOs when 

developing Memoranda of Agreement concerning Section 

106 issues. This website lists State Historic Preservation 

Officers that are members of the National Association 

Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers: 

http://www.ncshpo.org/shpodirectory.shtml

SECTION 2. E

Generic Guide to Arranging 

Meetings with Tribal 

Representatives

Face-to-face meetings are an important part of 

government-to-government communications between 

Tribal governments and Federal agencies. Meetings may 

address issues of mutual concern, resolve issues in dispute 

defuse conflict and help avoid litigation. The NRC staff 

is encouraged to use the following information when 

planning and developing specific meeting strategies.

Pre-Meeting Planning:

NRC’s staff should conduct a pre-meeting before 

scheduling meetings in order to:

A. Identify the Tribal participant and their roles and 

positions within the Tribal community;

B. Identify the issues and topics for discussion, review, and 

evaluate the agency information to be presented, and determine whether the meeting is a high-level or staff level;

C. Identify the desired outcomes for the meeting;

D. Provide an opportunity for the Tribe to present a 

proposed meeting agenda in advance when planning 

meetings with Tribal leaders;

E. Share the NRC proposed agenda with the Tribe; and

F. Include suggestions from both the NRC and Tribal 

agendas in the final agenda.

Identifying and Planning:

A. Identify whether the meeting will be an informal 

meeting between specified NRC staff and Tribal technical representatives or a formal meeting between the 

NRC senior staff and the Tribal head or Tribal Council.

B. Identify those Tribal officials with whom the staff 

has established relationships. Consider using various 

meeting formats, including presentations followed 

by discussions, listening sessions, small “breakout” 

groups, and question and answer sessions, or a 

combination of formats.

Remember NRC meetings are often attended by Tribal 

representatives, as well as other parties with a vested 

interest in meeting topic(s), including:

◗ State or local government representatives

◗ representatives of local public interest groups

◗ contractors and/or consultants of Federal agencies

◗ other Federal agency employees

◗ license applicants and their consultants

◗ other consulting Tribes

In advance of a meeting the staff should try to identify the 

particular concerns and expected outcomes of the many 

participants that will attend the meeting.

Meeting Logistics:

Selected meeting sites or locations should be accessible to 

all parties from both a logistic and economic perspective.

Visual Aids:

Visual aids are very useful and greatly appreciated by 

many audiences. Maps, facility plans, and PowerPoint 

presentations can assist in illustrating NRC’s highly 

technical data to an audience. Remember that technical 
Tribal Protocol Manual 19

CHAPTER 2 Guidance on Tribal Protocols and Interactions

information properly explained in plain language is 

understood by non-technical audiences. Avoid the use of 

jargon and abbreviations for technical terms, government 

agencies, or NRC divisions. Take time to be sure that 

the presentation addresses information of relevance 

and interest to your audience, and is being understood. 

Reserve time for questions from the audience.

Refreshments:

The NRC recognizes that providing food during 

gatherings or meetings may be customary in Native 

cultures, however, under Federal law, food and 

refreshments are generally considered to be personal 

expenses that cannot be purchased using Federal 

funds. The Commission must comply with Federal law 

pertaining to the provision of food and/or refreshments 

at meetings. Prior to offering food or refreshment at an 

NRC hosted meeting, NRC staff should seek guidance 

from the Office of the General Counsel.

Another point that should be considered is that the 

Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the 

Executive Branch Regulations in 5 CFR Part 2635 

allow NRC employees to accept modest items of food 

and refreshments that are not part of a meal. The NRC 

employees may also accept food and drink offered as part 

of a meal as long as it does not exceed $20.00 in value 

for an occasion and $50.00 for the entire year from a 

party. The NRC staff should inform Tribal government 

representatives of these restrictions when arranging 

meetings to avoid potentially awkward situations.

Press or Media Involvement:

When the NRC staff anticipates media presence at a 

meeting, the staff should work with the Office of Public 

Affairs to issue a press release in advance of the meeting or 

bring copies of an official press statement to the meeting. 

Additional media outreach resources are identified in 

Section 3.F “Tribal Media Contact Resources.”

Meeting Outcomes or Conclusions:

When engaged in conducting meetings with Tribal 

representatives, the staff should:

A. Exchange information and ideas with the appropriate 

Tribal attendees;

B. Allow sufficient time for Tribal representatives to 

caucus among themselves. After the NRC staff and/or 

a license applicant make presentations, Tribal participants will often request the opportunity to caucus to 

discuss the presentation and seek consensus on issues 

involved and on the next steps in the consultation;

C. Solicit the views of Tribal attendees on the proposed 

NRC project or action; 

D. Reach agreement on processes or procedures for 

maintaining communication and resolving disputes.

NRC staff should not assume that commitments or 

agreements reached during a meeting will be final. 

Even when the parties have reached consensus, Tribal 

representatives may need to brief Tribal leaders and obtain 

their concurrence before decisions are finalized.

When preparing notes or summaries of the meeting, 

NRC staff should allow Tribal meeting participants the 

opportunity to review the NRC “draft” summary to 

ensure an accurate record of the views of all parties. If a 

meeting is transcribed, participants should be provided 

copies of the transcript and the opportunity to provide 

written corrections in the record.

When parties dispute or disagree on the substance of a 

meeting summary, the NRC staff should seek clarification 

of the issues and work to resolve the differences. Tribes 

generally prefer face-to-face meetings, but understand 

that budgetary and time constraints affect all parties and 

recognize that telephone conversations, teleconferences, 

and webinars are also needed. Following telephone 

calls or webinars, the staff should summarize the topics 

discussed, and any commitments made, and should 

identify outstanding issues. 

Reminder—The staff should follow the procedures 

used in general agency correspondence — written 

correspondence sent to a Tribal representative is followed 

up with a telephone call to the Tribal contact, if a reply is 

not received within the expected time period.
20 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

CHAPTER 2 Guidance on Tribal Protocols and Interactions

SECTION 2. F

Meeting Etiquette

Clear and respectful communication is paramount in 

Tribal meetings. When people from different cultural 

backgrounds meet, misunderstandings can occur. 

Cultural differences may be and often are manifested in 

differences in body language, response or lack of response 

to specific issues, cultural interpretations, and unexpressed 

expectations.

Potential communication challenges can be avoided 

by participating in cross-cultural awareness training, 

looking for possible personal bias and preconceived 

ideas, establishing professional relationships with Tribal 

representatives, and by openness to learning about Tribal 

customs. Tribal members place great value on listening and 

comments are held until all Tribal members have had an 

opportunity to speak. The NRC staff should be aware of 

this practice and provide time for people to speak without 

interruption. Tribal elders, in particular, are afforded great 

respect when speaking.

Generally, Tribal officials are comfortable participating in 

meetings conducted in English. At times, Tribal members, 

especially Tribal elders, may appreciate option of having 

an interpreter present at the meetings. The staff should 

contact NMSS’s Federal, State, and Tribal Liaison Branch 

for assistance in arranging for translators.

NRC staff should follow the same protocols in official 

meetings with Tribal leaders as they would with other 

government-leaders. The NRC staff should address Tribal 

leaders by their official titles and names. Tribal leaders 

should be introduced before other participants and invited 

to address the meeting first.

Often a Tribal representative, elder or spiritual leader will 

open a meeting with a prayer, a song, or an invocation. 

The NRC staff members may choose, but are not required 

to participate, in this custom. However, in such, staff 

should display respect for the Tribes’ customs and beliefs in 

this tradition.

Do not expect to convene a meeting immediately at 

the appointed time and recognize that the start may 

be delayed until all participants (or at least highlyrespected participants) are assembled. Understand that 

working through an agenda may not be important to all 

participants.

Staff and management should limit any promises and 

commitments to those within their authority or the 

agency’s statutory authority. Agency views, opinions, 

materials, and ideas must be presented honestly and openly, 

and must be clearly distinguished from personal viewpoints 

to avoid misunderstandings. Staff should limit discussions 

to subjects that fall within NRC statutory authority.

SECTION 2.G 

Reservation Etiquette

Tribes differ significantly in their willingness to allow 

visitors on parts of the reservation away from official 

buildings or tourist attractions. It is advisable to inquire in 

advance about specific Tribal rules, attitudes, and customs 

before visiting parts of the reservation away from “public” 

areas. Above all, the reservation is the home of the Tribe 

and its people and the privacy of the people should be 

respected.

Some things to know about visiting reservations include:

◗ Do not assume that you are free to wander the 

reservation or ask Tribal members direct questions 

about their lives. This may be considered particularly 

rude behavior.

◗ Pointing is considered offensive in many cultures; 

some Tribes attach cultural, religious, and metaphysical 

significance to pointing that makes it inappropriate.

◗ NRC staff may find it useful to develop personal 

working relationships with members of the Tribe who 

can help with communication and protocol information.

◗ Photography may be restricted. Ask permission to 

photograph individuals, ceremonies, or meetings. Do 

not assume that it is permissible or appropriate to take 

photographs.

◗ When visiting cultural or sacred sites, ask the Tribes 

how you should behave at the site. Be respectful of all 

artifacts. Refrain from handling or otherwise disturbing 

these artifacts. 
Tribal Protocol Manual 21

CHAPTER 2 Guidance on Tribal Protocols and Interactions

SECTION 2.H 

Recommended Behaviors and Other 

Communication Considerations

◗ Learn to pronounce the name of a Tribe correctly and 

always use the proper pronunciation. Be conscious 

of your conduct and behave conservatively and 

considerately because judgments about character 

are based on one’s actions, conduct, and responses. 

Opinions about credibility and integrity are often 

made during the first 5 minutes of conversation or 

introduction. Remember that you are a representative 

of the Federal government and the NRC; your actions 

should demonstrate the importance the NRC places on 

government-to-government relationship with Tribal 

nations.

◗ Avoid judgmental attitudes. Be flexible in conducting 

meetings and accept different views on decisionmaking.

◗ Keep your voice at a moderate or reasonable level. 

Speaking loudly may be interpreted as arrogant or 

disrespectful.

◗ Elders are highly respected in Tribal communities, 

whether or not they hold any official position. They are 

the repository for the continuity of Tribal culture and 

are often the source of considerable wisdom.

◗ Practice patience when speaking with and listening to 

Tribal elders and other Tribal representatives. Some 

Tribal members allow for greater pause time between 

speakers, even in their own language; a pause indicates 

the other person is considering what you said. Some 

Indian elders may respond by telling a story or an 

analogy to illustrate a point. A hurried followup 

question may disrupt their response to your initial 

questions. Therefore, if you are in a hurry, you may get 

no answer at all.

◗ NRC staff should give their undivided attention to 

the person who is speaking. If an issue is important 

enough to be discussed during consultation, it is 

important that all parties allot sufficient time to 

adequately discuss and ultimately resolve the issue. 

As is the case in all consultative and social situations, 

looking at your watch, yawning, walking out, raising 

your hand, or shaking your head while a Tribal elder is 

talking is considered rude behavior.

◗ Prolonged eye contact may be inappropriate, so be 

aware that making or holding eye contact may not be 

considered respectful behavior. While in meetings, 

maintaining direct eye contact for extended amounts 

of time with Tribal elders, leaders, and members is 

considered inappropriate in many Tribal cultures.

◗ When beginning an important discussion or when 

responding to questions by Tribal elders or officials, 

inappropriate laughter may be considered a lack of 

respect or seriousness or as belittling the subject 

matter.

◗ The NRC staff should dress respectfully as for any 

business meeting with elected officials or distinguished 

representatives of a government. Tribal leaders may 

expect professional, business attire to be worn by 

Federal workers at meetings held in the Washington, 

D.C. area and at NRC headquarters. Casual attire 

may be appropriate at meetings held at locations 

outside the metropolitan area, such as those held in 

states located in the West. Casual attire may also be 

appropriate for attendees who meet regularly with 

Tribal officials in informal settings.

◗ Tribal representatives may not be familiar with NRC 

terms, technical vocabulary, acronyms, vernacular, 

and standard operating procedures. The NRC staff 

should consider the prior experience, involvement, 

education, and training of the Tribe as related to the 

technical or licensing matter at hand. The NRC staff 

should determine the need to provide explanations for 

technical and licensing terms. The NRC staff should be 

respectful and not underestimate the knowledge of 

Tribal officials.

In summary, strong relationships are built on honesty. 

As representatives of a government agency, you should:

◗ RESPECT...Tribal interests, cultural diversity, customs, 

and agendas.

◗ RESPECT...Tribal Council leaders as officials of another 

government.

◗ LISTEN...carefully; ask questions for clarification.

◗ CONSIDER...what you say; do not promise what you 

may be unable to deliver.

◗ COMMUNICATE...because it is the key to successful 

relationships. Communication established early 

and often in the process results in more effective 

communication throughout the process. 

◗ FAMILIARIZATION YOURSELF...with Tribes’ specific 

information, get smart, understand the Tribal history 

and current Tribal issues, concerns, and expertise of the 

Tribe or Tribes you may find yourself working with. 
22 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

CHAPTER 2 Guidance on Tribal Protocols and Interactions

◗ HOLD FACE-TO-FACE MEETINGS to get to know 

the Tribe and its technical resource staff and 

council representatives. Meetings are the most 

effective method for achieving this important goal, 

followed by phone calls. Letters are essential, but 

can be bureaucratic and inefficient methods of 

communication. 

◗ ESTABLISH FAMILIARITY AND CONTINUITY...because 

they are essential elements for establishing and 

maintaining effective relationships.

◗ KEEP THE FOCUS WHERE IT BELONGS...because Tribes 

and their concerns should be highlighted during 

introductions and at the meeting table.

◗ BE ADAPTABLE...by exhibiting flexibility, sensitivity 

and empathy in Tribal relations.

◗ HAVE PATIENCE...take time to understand, 

communicate with, and work with the Tribes who 

have an interest in NRC activities.
Tribal Protocol Manual 23

CHAPTER 3 NRC’s Tribal Contacts–Reference Tools 

SECTION 3.A 

NRC’s Tribal Liaison Point of Contact

The Deputy Executive Director for Materials, Waste, 

Research, State, Tribal and Compliance Programs serves 

as the Agency’s designated official point of contact for 

Tribal governments and designated official for Tribal 

consultations. The Office of Nuclear Material Safety and 

Safeguards (NMSS), Division of Materials Safety, States, 

Tribal and Rulemaking (MSSTR), Federal, State, and 

Tribal Liaison Branch (FSTLB), maintains the day-today experience and knowledge management necessary to 

perform Tribal liaison efforts. NRC staff and the public 

are encouraged to contact FSTLB with any questions 

regarding outreach and communication with Native 

American Tribal communities and Tribal representatives.

Tribal_outreach.resource@nrc.gov

(301)415-7278

Division of Materials Safety, States, 

Tribal and Rulemaking

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards 

SECTION 3. B 

NRC’s Individual Program Office 

Descriptions 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR)

NRR conducts a broad range of regulatory activities in 

the four primary program areas of rulemaking, licensing, 

oversight, and incident response for commercial nuclear 

power reactors, and research and test reactors to protect 

the public health, safety, and the environment. http://

www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/organization/nrrfuncdesc.html

Office of New Reactors (NRO)

NRO provides safety oversight of the design, siting, 

licensing and construction of new commercial power 

reactors. NRO serves the public Interest by enabling the 

safe, secure, environmentally responsible use of nuclear 

power in meeting the Nation’s future energy needs. 

http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/organization/nrofuncdesc.html

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) 

RES provides independent expertise and information 

for making timely regulatory judgments, anticipating 

problems of potential safety significance, and resolving 

safety issues. It helps develop technical regulations 

and standards and collects, analyzes, and disseminates 

information about the operational safety of commercial 

nuclear power plants and certain nuclear materials 

activities. http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/organization/

resfuncdesc.html

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and 

Safeguards (NMSS) NMSS regulates activities 

that provide for the safe and secure production of 

nuclear fuel used in commercial nuclear reactors; the 

safe storage, transportation, and disposal of high- and 

low-level radioactive waste and spent nuclear fuel; and 

the transportation of radioactive materials regulated 

under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. 

NMSS develops and oversees the regulatory framework 

for the safe and secure use of nuclear materials; medical, 

industrial, academic, and commercial applications; 

uranium recovery activities; low-level radioactive waste 

sites; and the decommissioning of previously operating 

FEDERAL, STATE AND 

TRIBAL LIAISON BRANCH
24 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

CHAPTER 3 NRC’s Tribal Contacts–Reference Tools 

nuclear facilities and power plants. It works with Federal 

agencies, States, and Tribal and local governments on 

regulatory matters. In addition, NMSS conducts extensive 

environmental assessments in support of these regulatory 

functions. http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/organization/

nmssfuncdesc.html

Office of Nuclear Security and Incident 

Response (NSIR) NSIR oversees agency security policy 

for nuclear facilities and users of radioactive material. It 

provides a safeguards and security interface with other 

Federal agencies and maintains the agency’s emergency 

preparedness and incident response program. http://www.

nrc.gov/about-nrc/organization/nsirfuncdesc.html

Office of Small Business and Civil Rights 

(SBCR) SBCR supports the NRC mission in protecting 

people and the environment by enabling the agency to 

have a diverse and inclusive workforce, to advance equal 

employment opportunity for employees and applicants, 

to provide fair and impartial processing of discrimination 

complaints, to afford maximum practicable prime and 

subcontracting opportunities for small businesses, and to 

allow for meaningful and equal access to agency-conducted 

and financially-assisted programs and activities including 

partnerships with Minority Serving Institutions. http://

www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/organization/sbcrfuncdesc.html

Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer 

(CHCO) OCHCO provides human capital expertise 

and support to ensure that the NRC continues to attract, 

develop, and retain a high performing, diverse, and engaged 

workforce with the skills needed to carry out the NRC’s 

mission now and in the future. http://www.nrc.gov/aboutnrc/organization/ochcofuncdesc.html

Regional NRC Offices (RI, RII, RIII, and RIV) 

Regional Offices conduct inspection, enforcement (in 

conjunction with the Office of Enforcement), investigation, 

licensing, and emergency response programs for nuclear 

reactors, fuel facilities, and materials licensees. http://www.

nrc.gov/about-nrc/organization/regionsfuncdesc.html

SECTION 3. C 

NRC’s Technical and Financial Assistance 

to Tribes

The NRC provides financial and technical assistance to 

Tribes and Tribal members through programs funded 

primarily by SBCR and the OCHCO. The SBCR 

conducts outreach and provides technical assistance to 

Tribes to increase participation in the agency’s contracting 

opportunities. The NRC also has an educational grants 

program, including a Minority Serving Institutions 

Program, which provides technical assistance to Tribal 

colleges and universities to increase participation by these 

institutions in opportunities funded by the NRC. The 

NRC public Web site provides access to ADAMS and other 

document libraries which contain technical information. 

The NRC Web site also provides information on how to 

participate in NRC activities and licensing actions (http://

www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/state-tribal/tpm.html).

SECTION 3.D

Federal Agency Tribal Web Site Links 

1. U.S. Department of The Interior, Bureau of Indian 

Affairs http://www.bia.gov/

2. U.S. Department of Homeland Security http://www.dhs.

gov/publication/dhs-Tribal-consultation-policy

3. U.S. Department of Transportation

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/orders_

notices/index.cfm/go/document.information/

documentID/13763 4. U.S. Department of Energy 

http://energy.gov/congressional/office-congressional-andintergovernmental-affairs

5. U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency 

http://www.fema.gov/tribal

6. U.S. Department of Health And Human Services http://

www.hhs.gov/iea/tribal/index.html

7. U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

http://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/common/opennat.

asp?fileID=9745152

8. U.S. Federal Communications Commission 

www.fcc.gov/indians

9. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

http://www.epa.gov/Tribal/
Tribal Protocol Manual 25

CHAPTER 3 NRC’s Tribal Contacts–Reference Tools 

SECTION 3. E 

Native American Reservations and Trust Land within a 50-Mile Radius of a Nuclear Power Plant

As of August, 2014

Note: This map lists only those reservations and trust lands that fall within a 50-mile radius of a licensed nuclear reactor. The NRC anticipates that additional Tribes 

may have historical and cultural connections to these lands.) This table uses NRC-abbreviated reactor names and Native American Reservation and Trust land names.

PA

NY

ME

IN

WA

OR

CA

NV

MT

ID

UT

AZ NM 

CO

WY

TX

OK

KS

NE

SD

ND MN

IA

MO

AR

LA

MS AL GA

FL

SC

NC

VA

TN

KY

IL

OH

MI WI

WV

MD

DE

NJ

CT

RI

NH

VT

MA

Figure 50. map_native_american

ARIZONA

 Palo Verde

 Ak-Chin Indian Community

 Tohono O’odham 

 Trust Land

 Gila River Reservation 

 Maricopa Reserve

CALIFORNIA

 San Onofre*

 Pechanga Reservation

 of Luiseño Indians

 Pala Reservation

 Pauma & Yuima Reserve

 Rincon Reservation

 San Pasqual Reservation

 La Jolla Reservation

 Cahuilla Reservation

 Soboba Reservation

 Santa Ysabel

 Mesa Grande Reservation

 Barona Reservation

CONNECTICUT

 Millstone

 Mohegan Reservation

 Mashantucket Pequot 

 Reservation 

 Narragansett 

 Reservation

 FLORIDA

 St. Lucie

 Brighton Reservation

 (Seminole Tribes 

 of Florida)

 Fort Pierce Reservation

 Turkey Point

 Miccosukee 

 Reservation

 Hollywood Reservation 

 (Seminole Tribes 

 of Florida)

IOWA

 Duane Arnold

 Sac & Fox Trust Land

 Sac & Fox Reserve

LOUISIANA

 River Bend

 Tunica-Biloxi Reservation

MASSACHUSETTS

 Pilgrim

 Wampanoag 

 Tribe of Gay Head

 (Aquinnah) 

 Trust Land

MINNESOTA

 Monticello

 Shakopee Community

 Shakopee Trust Land

 Mille Lacs Reservation

 Prairie Island 

 Prairie Island Community

 Prairie Island Trust Land

 Shakopee Community

 Shakopee Trust Land

NEBRASKA

 Cooper

 Sac & Fox Trust Land

 Sac & Fox Reservation

 Kickapoo

 Fort Calhoun

 Winnebago Trust Land

 Omaha Reservation

 Winnebago Reservation

NEW YORK

 FitzPatrick

 Onondaga Reservation

 Oneida Reservation

 Nine Mile Point 

 Onondaga Reservation

 Oneida Reservation

NORTH CAROLINA

 McGuire 

 Catawba Reservation

SOUTH CAROLINA

 Catawba 

 Catawba Reservation

 Oconee

 Eastern Cherokee 

 Reservation

 Summer

 Catawba Reservation

WASHINGTON

 Columbia 

 Yakama Reservation

 Yakama Trust 

WISCONSIN

 Kewaunee*

 Oneida Trust Land

 Oneida Reservation

 Point Beach

 Oneida Trust Land

 Oneida Reservation

†

†
26 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

CHAPTER 3 NRC’s Tribal Contacts–Reference Tools 

SECTION 3. F

Native American Media Resources

Native American Media Outlets that Receive NRC 

Press Releases from the Office of Public Affairs:

1. Native Voice One (http://www.nv1.org/ )

2. Native American Times (http://www.nativetimes.com /)

3. Navajo Times (http://www.navajotimes.com/ )

4. Indian Country Today (http://www.

indiancountrytodaymedianetwork .com /)

5. Reznet News (http://www.reznetnews.org/ )

6. Native American Calling (http://www.

nativeamericacalling.com/)

7. National Native News (http://www.nativenews.net/)

8. Native American Public Telecommunications (http://

www.nativetelecom.org/)

9. Indianz (http://www.indianz.com/boardx/)

Media Outlets that Cover Native American News:

1. The Albuquerque Journal (http://www.abqjournal.com/)

2. Alaska Dispatch News (http://www.adn.com/)

3. Arizona Capitol Times (Tucson) (http://azcapitoltimes.com)

4. The Journal Record (Oklahoma City) (http://

journalrecord.com/)

5. Los Angeles Times (http://www.latimes.com/)

6. The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/) 

7. Phoenix New Times (http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com)

8. San Antonio Express News (http://www.mysanantonio.

com/)

9. San Diego Union Tribune (http://www.utsandiego.com/)

10. The Tulsa World (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/)

In addition to the above, Native American radio stations, 

public telecommunication broadcasts and Web sites can 

be accessed through the following Web pages: http://

www.nativepublicmedia.org/radio

SECTION 3.G

Tribal Contact Links:

To access the names and contact information of the 

Federally recognized Tribes, please use the following links:

◗ National Congress of American Indians Tribal Directory 

(http://www.ncai.org/tribal-directory)

◗ Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Tribal Leaders Directory http://www.bia.gov/cs/groups/

public/documents/text/idc002652.pdf

◗ In addition, the NRC recommends that interested parties visit the Bureau of Indian Affairs or Census Bureau 

Web sites to locate the most current maps of Tribal 

reservations and trust lands.

◗ Another helpful resource tool is the Library of 

Congress-“American Indian” link:

◗ http://www.loc.gov/law/help/guide/Federal/indians.

php.

State and Tribal Phonebook - Internal 

NRC Tool:

The NMSS “State and Tribal Phonebook” is an excellent 

source of up-to-date intergovernmental information. 

The State and Tribal Phonebook lists current contact 

information for State and Tribal government officials, 

including Governors, Governor-appointed State Liaison 

Officers, Radiation Control Program Directors, 10 

CFR Parts 71 (“Packaging and Transportatioin of 

Radioactive Material”) and Part 73 (“Physical Protection 

of Plants and Materials”) State Transportation contacts, 

Native American Tribal contacts, and State Emergency 

Management Directors. The NRC staff can access the 

State and Tribal Phonebook through the NMSS internal 

Web site homepage. Under “Quick Links”, click on 

“State & Tribal Phonebook,” which is identified by a 

U.S. yellow map icon. Select the map icon to open the 

application, allowing for the selection of custom report 

parameters. The State and Tribal Phonebook is intended 

for internal use only and contains personal information 

that is prohibited from being disseminated to the public.

NMSS manages the Web site, which is regularly updated 

and “help-desk” assistance is available for the application. 

The “State and Tribal Phonebook” is accessible 
Tribal Protocol Manual 27

CHAPTER 3 NRC’s Tribal Contacts–Reference Tools 

agencywide and allows users to customize information 

requests. The Phonebook customization allows: 1) 

distribution of NRC advisories;31 2) maintenance of 

distribution contacts for NRC mailings; 3) automatic 

printing of mailing labels (including First Class and 

Federal Express addresses) to specific individuals; 4) 

export of e-mail addresses through Microsoft Outlook; 

and 5) various sorting capabilities (i.e., geographical 

regions, facility types, and positions).

Contact:

For questions regarding the use of the “State and Tribal 

Phonebook,” generally or specifically as it pertains to 

Tribal Contacts, or assistance accessing the “State and 

Tribal Phonebook,” please contact Patricia McGradyFinneran by telephone at (301) 415-2326, or by e-mail at 

Patricia.McGrady-Finneran@nrc.gov.

SECTION 3.H

Miscellaneous Tribal Information

The NRC maintains communication directly with 

Federally recognized Tribes, as appropriate, of its regulatory 

and licensing processes. The Department of the Interior’s 

Bureau of Indian Affairs Web site provides useful 

information on how Federally recognized Tribes are defined 

under Federal law and provides lists of Tribes meeting these 

criteria: http://www.bia.gov/FAQs/index.htm.

How Is Federal Recognition Status 

Conferred?

The majority of Federally recognized Tribes received 

Federal recognition status through treaties, acts of 

Congress, presidential Executive Orders or other federal 

administrative actions, or Federal court decisions.

In 1978, the Department of the Interior issued Part 83 of 

Title 25 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Procedures 

for Establishing that an American Indian Group Exists as 

an Indian Tribe. The Federal Acknowledgment Process 

31 NUREG 1748, “Environmental Review Guidance for Licensing Actions Associated 

with NMSS Programs,” is found at: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/

nuregs/staff/sr1748/.

(FAP) is the Department of the Interior’s administrative 

process by which petitioning Indian groups that meet 

certain criteria are “acknowledged” as Indian tribes and 

their members become eligible to receive services provided 

to members of Federally recognized Indian tribes.

In 1994, Congress enacted Public Law 103-454, the 

Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act (108 Stat. 

4791), which established three ways by which Indian 

groups may become Federally recognized:

◗ By Act of Congress; 

◗ By the administrative procedures under 25 CFR Part 83 

(“Procedures for Establishing That an American Indian 

Group Exists as an Indian Tribe”); or By decision of a 

United States Court 

A Tribe whose relationship with the United States was 

expressly terminated by Congress may not use the Federal 

Acknowledgment Process to gain Federal recognition 

as an Indian Tribe, because federal recognition of a 

“terminated” Tribe can only be restored by Congress. The 

Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act requires the 

Bureau of Indian Affairs within the Department of the 

Interior to publish a list of the Federally recognized Tribes 

in the Federal Register on an annual basis. The most 

current list was published May 6, 2013 (78 FR 26384) 

at: http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/BIA/OIS/Tribal 

GovernmentServices/TribalDirectory/index.htm.

Requirements for a Tribe to Receive 

Federally Recognized Tribe Status

1. The Petitioner has been identified as an American Indian 

entity on a substantially continuous basis since 1900;

2. A predominant portion of the petitioning group 

comprises a distinct community;

3. The petitioner has maintained political influence or 

authority over its membership;

4. The group has governing documents that include its 

membership criteria;

5. The petitioner’s membership consists of individuals 

who descend from a historical Indian Tribe or from 

historical Indian Tribes, that combined and functioned 

as a single autonomous political entity;
28 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

CHAPTER 3 NRC’s Tribal Contacts–Reference Tools 

6. The membership of the petitioning group is composed 

primarily of persons who are not members of any 

acknowledged North American Indian Tribe;

7. Neither the petitioner nor its members are the 

subject of congressional legislation that has expressly 

terminated or forbidden the Federal relationship;

How To Contact Tribes That Are Not 

Federally Recognized 

NRC staff may contact Tribes that are not Federally 

recognized but are interested in a particular NRC 

regulatory activity. These Tribes are can be contacted 

in the same manner as any member of the public. 

These Tribes are not Federally recognized, but may be 

acknowledged by state law, and sometimes reside on 

state-recognized reservations. The NRC staff can use the 

Web sites listed below to assist in identifying Tribes that 

are not Federally recognized but have an interest in NRC 

regulatory activities.

◗ http://500nations.com/Tribes/Tribes_State-by-State.asp

◗ www.accessgenealogy.com/native

◗ www.manataka.org

Governors Interstate Indian Council

The Governors Interstate Indian Council (GIIC) is made 

up of state Indian Affairs Offices and Commissions 

from across the country and has been in existence since 

1949. The mission of GIIC is to promote and enhance 

government to government relations between the 

Tribes and states; respect and recognize the individual 

sovereignty of the Tribes and the states; support the 

preservation of traditional Indian culture, language and 

values; and encourage socioeconomic development aimed 

at Tribal self-sufficiency.

Additional information about the organization’s mission 

is available on the GIIC Web site: http://w1.paulbunyan.

net/~giic/. The Web site will be useful to NRC staff 

needing to locate contact information for State Indian 

Affairs Offices: http://w1.paulbunyan.net/~giic/pages/

office_directory.html. 

State Indian Affairs Offices may be found on the Web site 

under “Office Directory”. In addition, information on 

accessing State Government Web sites can be found on 

the GIIC website.

Major Tribal Culture Areas

A Culture Area is a region loosely defined by geography 

and climate comprised of Tribes that share cultural 

elements and environmental adaptations, such as, 

social and family organization, economic and political 

organization, religion and ceremonial practices, 

subsistence practices (hunter-gatherers, horticultural, 

pastoral, agricultural), language, settlement patterns 

and house types, material culture, and clothing and 

ornamentation. Eight major North American Tribal 

Culture Areas are recognized, although it is important to 

recognize that shared elements and adaptations are fluid.

1. Arctic and Subarctic

2. Eastern Woodlands

3. Southeast

4. Plains

5. Southwest

6. Plateau and Great Basin

7. Pacific Northwest

8. California

Types of Indian Lands

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

there are seven categories of Indian lands in the United 

States:

1. Reservations: Lands set apart for the use of designated 

Tribes.

2. Trust Lands: Lands held in trust by the U.S. 

government for Indians, usually a Tribe.

3. Checkerboard Lands: Lands that are a combination of 

nonmember owned parcels and Tribal parcels, resulting 

in a checkerboard pattern.
Tribal Protocol Manual 29

CHAPTER 3 NRC’s Tribal Contacts–Reference Tools 

4. Fee Lands: Lands owned by non-Indians within the 

boundaries of a reservation.

5. Dependent Indian Community: Lands set apart for 

Indian use under the superintendence of the U.S. 

government.

6. Allotments: Lands held in trust by the U.S. 

government for individual members of a Tribe.

7. Ceded Territory: Lands within a reservation or 

aboriginal area to which Tribal members retain specific 

rights, often the right to hunt, fish, and gather plants, 

despite ownership having been transferred from the 

Tribe, by a land sale or having been taken by the U.S. 

government.

To access specific information on Tribal reservations or 

Federal trust lands, the NRC staff recommends visiting 

the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) at: 

http://www.bia.gov/SiteMap/index.htm or U.S. Census 

websites at: http://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/

maps/2010Tribaltract.html

The Most Populous Tribes

Native Americans make up 0.9 percent of the total U.S. 

population. Tribes with the largest populations are listed 

below:

Tribe Population

1. Cherokee 308,013

2. Navajo 285,476

3. Sioux 131,048

4. Chippewa 115,859

5. Choctaw 88,913

6. Apache 64,869

7. Pueblo 59,337

8. Iroquois 48,365

9. Creek 44,085

10. Blackfeet 23,583

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2010 




United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

NUREG–2173

December 2014