Tribal Consultation Programmatic Agreement by wib16063

VIEWS: 35 PAGES: 25

									     Among the NDDOT; ND Division of FHWA; Fort Peck
Assiniboine & Sioux Tribes; Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa
Indians; Mandan, Hidatsa, Arikara Nation; Spirit Lake Dakotah
 Nation; Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate; Standing Rock Sioux Tribe;
Northern Cheyenne Tribe; Crow Tribe (Apsaalooke Nation); and
                Lower Sioux Indian Community.
 Upper Management Presentation
             to
NDDOT and ND Division of FHWA
       Visits to Reservations

Project Consultations – Field Reviews
     Jamestown Bypass Field Review
       And Consultation Meeting
Consultation with Spirit Lake Dakotah Nation, Sisseton-
    Wahpeton Oyate, Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.
           Highway 2 Field Review
Consultation with Ron LittleOwl – Three Affiliated
Tribes and Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
                     Beginning Efforts

           Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians
Initial Try at PA was abandoned – Conflict over Tribal Monitors

            A few years later we renewed our efforts
                    Went to each Reservation
                   Asked what they envisioned
       I wrote a first attempt based upon what we heard
Initial Meeting at each Reservation
 Discuss the types of projects we undertake, our varying
    levels of involvement, typical impacts, and typical cultural
    resource section involvement.
   The STIP
   Highways: adding lanes, city bypass, regrade, surfacing with
    safety work, grade raise, guardrail, bridge replacement, signing.
   Counties: widening, regrade, new routes, guardrail, bridge
    replacement, signing.
   Cities: widening, new streets, bridge replacements, lighting,
    signing.
   TE: bike paths (city and rural), rest areas, interpretive displays,
    tree planting, scenic byways/backways.
   Material Source Areas
Initial Meeting at each Reservation
 Discuss the laws, and regulations detailing mandated
  consultation relative to cultural resource issues for Federal
  Highway undertakings.

 Native American Graves Potection and Repatriation Act, ND
  State Burial Law, National Historic Preservation Act, National
  Environmental Policy Act

 Most NDDOT projects take place off Federal and Tribal lands.
  As a result, NAGPRA is not an issue or guiding law/regulation for
  Native American consultation on NDDOT projects. While NEPA
  has provisions for public involvement it does not specify Native
  American consultation. We are initiating the consultation
  process under NHPA.
Initial Meeting at each Reservation
   Issues that need resolution:

   What tribes should the NDDOT and FHWA consult with?

   Does each tribe want to be contacted for projects in all of North Dakota, or are there portions of the
    state we can exclude for specific tribes?

   Are there types of projects we can exclude from consultation at the project level and consult only if we
    identify cultural resources and have the potential to affect them?

   How does each tribe wish us to consult? The regulations provide for consultation at specific points
    throughout the Section 106 process, but do not stipulate methods of consultation.

   Do we want agreements reached today formalized in a Programmatic Agreement - formal document
    specified under the NHPA?

   Who is our consultation contact with each tribe? Should we pursue other interested parties within
    the tribe or should all contact be through the designated tribal official?

   Do you also want to continue to receive NEPA Solicitation of Views letters for all projects? Some
    projects?
            Meetings to Finalize the PA

•   November 2005
•   April 2006
•   Signing Ceremony November 2006
Reworking Previous
Draft of the
Programmatic
Agreement
April 2006 Meeting
Back row - Calvin Grinnell
(MHAN), Conrad Fisher (N
Cheyenne), George Reed, Jr.
(Crow), Kent Good (KGA –
Consultant), Brady Grant
(TMBCI), Byron Olson (SRTHPO
– Archaeologist), Greg Wermers
(NDDOT), Front row – Elgin
CrowsBreast (MHAN), Dianne
Desrosiers (SW Oyate), Jeani
Borchert (NDDOT), Mark
Schrader (FHWA), Frankie
Jackson (SW Oyate), and Bob
Christensen (NDDOT).
Working Through Issues
The Signing Ceremony
               Signing Ceremony
                November 2006
Tribes Represented:
 Spirit Lake Dakotah Nation
 Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
 Three Affiliated Tribes
 Turtle Mountain Band of
  Chippewa Indians
 Sissteon-Wahpeton Oyate
 Lower Sioux Indian
  Community
 Northern Cheyenne
 Crow
 Fort Peck Assiniboine and
  Sioux Tribes
            Signing Ceremony
             November 2006
All Nations Drum Group   Redrock Drum Group
             Signing Ceremony
              November 2006
Ambrose Littleghost, Spirit Conrad Fisher, Northern
Lake                        Cheyenne
             Signing Ceremony
              November 2006
                           Franky Jackson, Sissteon-
Curley Youpee, Fort Peck   Wahpeton
     Signing Ceremony
      November 2006
Elgin CrowsBreast, Three Affiliated
                 Just what does it do?

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/resourcecenter/teams/environm
                ent/tribal_consult.pdf
   The Programmatic Agreement
           Main Points
 Working as a group – 9 Reservations
 Acknowledges the joint commitment of the FHWA,
  the NDDOT and the Tribes to establish a relationship
  of mutual trust and respect
 Acknowledges that we all aspire to engage in
  meaningful, long-term planning for the appropriate
  consideration of cultural resources important to the
  tribes
 Includes a list of project types excluded from
  consultation
      The Programmatic Agreement
             Nuts and Bolts
 We have formed a Tribal Consultation Committee to meet
    at least 2 times during the year
   The Committee will consist of 2 members from each
    reservation, at least one from the NDDOT, and one from
    FHWA Division Office
   We will use the STIP in our meetings as part of efforts to
    notify them of upcoming projects
   We will provide them a packet of information for projects
    we will be working on in the near future to include maps,
    aerial coverage, or other pertinent illustrations
   The NDDOT will provide the Committee an explanation of
    decisions reached in regard to project effects on cultural
    resources of concern to the Committee
    The Programmatic Agreement
           Nuts and Bolts
 The NDDOT will continue to meet with the Tribes at each
  Committee member’s individual office at least once per
  year
 The FHWA and NDDOT acknowledge the need for
  confidentiality of certain tribal spiritual and cultural
  information that may be provided during the course of
  tribal consultation
 The NDDOT will host the meetings and will pay for up to
  two representatives from each participating reservation to
  attend (payment currently includes travel expenses, motels
  rooms, per diem, and a $300 fee)
      The Programmatic Agreement
       NDDOT Mission Statement
 Acknowledges the NDDOT’s commitment to the design
    and construction of a transportation system that
   1) safely moves people and goods;
   2) avoids, minimizes, and mitigates adverse effects on
    cultural resources;
   3) recognizes that consideration of tribal interest in
    preservation of significant cultural resources is important
    to Tribal well-being, growth, and prosperity; and
   4) responds to the needs of North Dakota communities and
    the Tribes.
           Implementing the PA
 The PA has been in use for 1.5 years
 The Committee has reviewed projects from the STIP level
    through Section 106 and NEPA compliance
   The Committee has taken bus trips to view specific project
    areas
   The Committee has conducted Sensitivity Training for
    NDDOT archaeological consultants
   The Committee is currently functioning as a Participating
    Agency through the NEPA process on a proposed new
    county road through the badlands of western North
    Dakota
   The Committee is working to get approval to implement a
    program of Tribal Monitors at the identification stage
                Ongoing Issues
 Confidentiality of Information


 Funding – financial rules (Federal and State) that
  impede effective consultation
    Meetings
    Food
    Tobacco
    Gifts

								
To top