Geothermal Projects and Indian Tribes: Dealing with Cultural Resources Issues Michael P. O’Connell Stoel Rives LLP 206-386-7692 O R.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
ODOT’s Section 106 Training
Advertisements

SAFETEA-LU Efficient Environmental Review Process (Section 6002) Kelly Dunlap.
Cultural Resources Categorical Exclusion Training Class.
Presented by: The Ohio Department of Transportation 1 36 CFR Part 800 Protection of Historic Properties Section 106 Managing the Environmental & Project.
The Section 106 Review Process: Introduction and Overview
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA)
Program Alternatives under 36 CFR Part 800 Dave Berwick Army Affairs Coordinator Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
Local Government Environmental Training: Archaeology April 2, 2009.
FOIA and NEPA Federal Highway Administration Environmental Conference June 2006.
Section 106, Section 4(f) and You!: The Role of Consulting Parties in Transportation Projects Kevin Mock, Historic Preservation Specialist Pennsylvania.
Heritage Resources Management and the Wildland Fire Suppression Undertaking.
NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT of 1966 as amended Garry J. Cantley Regional Archeologist Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Section 106 The reasons, the actions, the participants.
The Fly in the Ointment: Consultation Under Section 106 and Other Laws Related to Historic Preservation Peacekeeper Conference, 1985.
NHPA, Section 106, and NEPA Highlights and Misconceptions.
Environmental Review Todd Levine Architectural historian, environmental reviewer, Connecticut Freedom Trail coordinator, Washington- Rochambeau Revolutionary.
Module 15 Environmental Considerations Civil Works Orientation Course - FY 11.
Federal Preservation Activities: Part 1. What did With Heritage So Rich (1965) and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 provide to administer.
A BEGINNERS GUIDE TO SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF THE SECTION 106 REVIEW PROCESS TENNESSEE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE: REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE SECTION.
Connecticut Department of Transportation Bureau of Policy & Planning.
Sacred Sites. Documentation Documentation: Forest Supervisor or Ranger District Offices may document Sacred site (s) information in a variety of ways.
Our mission ead and execute environmental programs and provide expertise that enables Army training, operations, acquisition and sustainable military communities.
Ohio Historic Preservation Office
THE FOUR STEP SECTION 106 PROCESS: AN INTRODUCTION TENNESSEE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE SECTION All reproduction rights reserved.
COSCDA Workshop Renovation, Reconstruction and Renewal of Historic Properties and Neighborhoods Section 106 and Programmatic Agreements Overview.
Cultural Resource Management An Introduction to Federal Heritage Preservation and the Law.
1 Overview of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)  Objective: Clarify the roles of NEPA and Negotiated Rulemaking Clarify the roles of NEPA and Negotiated.
SAFETEA-LU Changes  Exemption of the Interstate System from Section 4(f) [Section 6007]  de minimis impacts to historic sites [Section 6009(a)]  de.
Environmental Planning CULTURAL RESOURCES CH 5 - HO # 13
Mitigation in the Section 106 Process Dave Berwick Army Program Manager Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
What is the purpose of the Class I Redesignation Guidance? Provides guidance for tribes who are considering redesignating their areas as Class I areas.
L O N G B E A C H, C A. Dean McMath Regional Environmental Programs Manager FAA – Southwest Region NEPA Essentials Selected Special.
Department of Natural Resources Historic Preservation Division Working Through The S106 Process FY 2015 CDBG Applicant Workshop December 4 th, 2014Meg.
CHAPTER 3 SCOPING AND AGENCY COORDINATION. Scoping - the procedure for determining the appropriate level of study of a proposed project/activity - process.
Productive SB 18 Consultation Michelle LaPena, Esq. LaPena Law Corporation 2001 N Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA (916)
1 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING CULTURAL RESOURCES LAWS AND REGULATIONS CH 5 CH 5 HO # 13, 13a, 13b
CULTURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION
SAFETEA-LU Section 6002 “ Efficient Environmental Reviews for Project Decisionmaking”
Integrating Other Laws into BLM Planning. Objectives Integrate legal requirements into the planning process. Discuss laws with review and consultation.
By Rachel Coleman.  “ The head of any federal agency having direct or indirect jurisdiction over a proposed federal or federally assisted undertaking.
Locally Administered Federal-Aid Project Initiation Workshop Prospectus Part 3 and NEPA Requirements Presenter: Howard Postovit; ODOT Region 5 Region Environmental.
Cooperating Agency Status Presented by Horst Greczmiel Associate Director, NEPA Oversight Council on Environmental Quality Washington, DC September 14,
Army BRAC Historic Preservation Opportunities and Challenges.
1 Historic Preservation Webinar "Reporting Through PAGE and to PMC"
NRC Environmental Reviews for Uranium Recovery Applicants and Licensees James Park (301)
Categorical Exclusion Training Class
Historic Preservation Memoranda of Agreement. What is an MOA? As part of the Section 106 review process, it is an agreement among an agency official,
By: Dean Suagee Director First Nations Environmental Law Program Vermont Law School PROTECTING SACRED LANDS AND TRADITIONAL CULTURAL PLACES WITH CULTURAL.
NEPA and Section 106: An Introduction WISDOT MEETING NOVEMBER 3-4, 2015.
South Dakota State Historic Preservation Office and the Nebraska National Forests and Grasslands July 24, 2013 National Grasslands Visitor Center.
NATIONAL NAGPRA What is The National NAGPRA program?
Suzanne Derrick Technical Director – Cultural Resources FCC Section 106 Process and the Archeology of Tower Siting Panelist Presentation May 4, 2016.
Integration of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) NEPA and NHPA A Handbook for Integrating NEPA and.
The National Register. The National Register of Historic Places The National Register of Historic Places is authorized by Section 101 (a)(1)(A)of the.
Welcome to the Public Comment Hearing on the Proposed Regulatory Update to the California Environmental Quality Act AB 52, Gatto (2014) Heather Baugh Assistant.
Anth January 2012.
National Treasures: Brownfields and the National Historic Preservation Act Brownfields 2006 Boston, MA.
Deepwater Horizon (MC 252) Oil Spill: Section 106 Compliance
Program Overview: Tribal Preservation Program and HPF Grants to Tribes
Pedestrian Survey.
Monte Mills Alexander Blewett III School of Law University of Montana
Midterm Review Public Archaeology.
May 8, 2018 Marion Werkheiser, Cultural Heritage Partners
Cultural Resources Categorical Exclusion Training Class – Presented by the Office of Environmental Services.
Navigating the SHPD Review Process
National Historic Preservation Act
The Role of the SHPO John Pouley, Assistant State Archaeologist
Protecting What We Love Building What We Need – The “H” Factor
National Historic Preservation Act
National Historic Preservation Act
Presentation transcript:

Geothermal Projects and Indian Tribes: Dealing with Cultural Resources Issues Michael P. O’Connell Stoel Rives LLP O R E G O N W A S H I N G T O N C A L I F O R N I A U T A H I D A H O

Principle Federal Laws  National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), Section 106, 16 U.S.C. § 470f Federal agency must “take into account the effect of the undertakings on any” properties listed on or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places.  National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) Federal agency must evaluate impacts of proposed action and alternatives on cultural resources

Federal Land  NHPA and NEPA apply to federal agency actions  Native American Graves and Repatriation Act (“NAGPRA”) protects Indian human remains, funerary objects and cultural resources  Archaeological Resources Protection Act (“ARPA”) requires permit for removal of NAGPRA protected objects  NAGPRA and ARPA require agency consultation with tribes

Federal Land Cases  Pit River Indian Tribe v. Forest Service, (9 th Cir. 2006) (BLM and Forest Service geothermal project approvals set aside for failure to take into account impacts on tribal cultural resources)  Comanche Nation v. U.S., (W.D. Okla. 2008) (Army construction project enjoined for failure to take into account impacts on tribal cultural resources)

Indian Reservations  Tribal cultural resource protection laws  NHPA and NEPA apply to federal actions  NAGPRA and ARPA apply  Attakai v. United States, (D. Ariz. 1990) (enjoined range fencing project pending consultation; consultation determined no tribal historic properties were affected)

Other Land  Most states have laws protecting Indian graves and cultural resources  NHPA and NEPA when federal action is involved

Other Land Cases  Lummi Nation v. Golder Associates, Inc., (W.D. Wash. 2002) ($4.25 million to settle state-law claims regarding impacts on Indian graves; site abandoned)  Port Angeles Graving Dock (Washington DOT abandoned site after three years and over $80 million investment, despite prior (inadequate) consultation with SHPO)

Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs)  Properties of “traditional religious and cultural importance” to federally recognized Indian tribes may be “eligible for inclusion on the National Register.” 16 U.S.C. § 470a(d)(6)(A)  “Federal Agency shall consult with any Indian tribe... that attaches religious and cultural significance to [such] properties,” 16 U.S.C. § 470a(d)(6)(B)

NHPA Section 106  Federal agency must “take into account the effect of the undertakings on any” properties listed on or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places.  Like NEPA, section 106 is a “stop, look, and listen” procedural statute  Compliance is federal agency’s responsibility

Section 106 Process  Section 106 regulations apply to all federal agencies. 36 C.F.R. Part 800  Section 106 regulations prescribe a rigorous, multi-step process

1. Identify Interested Parties and Tribes  Agency official “shall make a reasonable and good faith effort to identify any Indian tribe... that might attach religious and cultural significance to historic properties in the area of potential effects [APE] and invite them to be consulting parties.” 36 C.F.R. § 800.3(f)(2)  Interested tribes may be hundreds of miles from the APE

2. APE Determination  APE is area where undertaking may cause alterations to character or use of historic properties  Regulations require agencies to consult with the SHPO or tribes for this step; failure to do so may generate disputes regarding APE scope  Some section 106 consultations establish one APE for traditional historic properties and another for TCPs

3. Identify Historic Properties Within APE  Consult with SHPO and any Indian tribe that might attaches religious and cultural significance to historic properties in the APE  Agency’s level of effort: Reasonable and good faith effort to carry out appropriate identification efforts “[T]ake into account confidentiality concerns of Indian tribes.” 36 C.F.R. § 800.4(b)(1) Phased identification may be used for linear projects, large areas, or where access to property is restricted – § 800.4(b)(2)

4. National Register Listing Eligibility  For properties outside reservation, agency needs SHPO concurrence; inside reservations, THPO or Indian tribe  If SHPO/THPO does not concur, eligibility issue goes to the Keeper of the National Register  Agency must acknowledge that Indian tribes have “special expertise” in assessing eligibility of TCPs

National Register Eligibility (cont’d)  If the agency and Indian tribe disagree on eligibility: The action agency may agree to regard the property as eligible and proceed to next step of assessing adverse effects Tribe may request the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) to request an eligibility determination by the Secretary of the Interior under 36 C.F.R. Part 63

5. Assessment of Adverse Effects  Agency must consider the views of Indian tribes  An adverse effect exists if an undertaking may alter any characteristic that qualifies a property for National Register listing in a manner that would “diminish the integrity of the property’s location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association.”

Assessment of Adverse Effects  If a timely objection is made, the agency must consult with the objector or request ACHP review. If the ACHP timely responds, the agency must prepare a summary “that contains the rationale for the decision and evidence of consideration of the [ACHP’s] opinion” The agency can adopt the ACHP’s response or affirm it’s no adverse effect determination; either way, the agency’s section 106 responsibilities are fulfilled.

Assessment of Adverse Effects  Agency and Indian tribe may agree to mitigation measures that support a no adverse effect determination

7. Resolution of Adverse Effects  Avoidance, minimization, and mitigation If agreement is reached at this step, set it forth in MOA  Required MOA signatories –Action agency –SHPO/THPO (if effects are within a reservation)  Invited signatories are not mandatory –Indian tribes may be invited to sign for effects outside reservation

Resolution of Adverse Effects  Inadvertent discoveries protocol May be included in MOA If not, and inadvertent discovery is encountered, consultation must be initiated  Muckleshoot Indian Tribe v. Forest Service, (Forest Service failed to consider alternatives that could have protected tribal member cultural and religious uses in land exchange)

8: Failure to Resolve Adverse Effects  Consultation may be terminated by agency, SHPO/TPHO or ACHP  Unless THPO or tribe is involved for on- reservation impacts, a tribe cannot terminate a consultation

9. Section 106 Program Alternatives  Authorized by 36 C.F.R. § Alternate procedures Programmatic Agreements (PAs) for phased identification, large areas, corridor projects – 36 C.F.R § (b)(2) ACHP approval required  Agency proposing program alternatives must consult with affected tribes

Confidentiality  Tribes frequently are concerned that providing information may lead to looting or impede their use of sites  Under section 304,16 U.S.C. § 470w-3(a), an agency may withhold information from public disclosure That would cause an invasion of privacy Risk harm to historic resources Impede use of a traditional religious site by practitioners

Confidentiality (cont’d)  Agency head must determines that the information qualifies under section 304(a) and the Secretary of the Interior must determines who may have access.  Information not so protected is subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act and NHPA regulations, 36 C.F.R. § 800.2(d)(2)

Inadvertent Discoveries  PA or MOA may address what to do – if so, implement the plan  If not: Initiate consultation if discovery occurs after section 106 process is completed and agency has not approved the undertaking If agency, SHPO, and Indian tribes agree that property is of value solely for data recovery purposes, data recovery may be conducted under Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act

Inadvertent Discoveries If undertaking has been approved and construction has commenced, agency must determine actions that resolve adverse effects, notify SHPO, interested tribes, and ACHP within 48 hours of discovery; SHPO, tribes, and ACHP have 48 hours to respond; agency must take recommendations into account, carry out appropriate actions, and report to SHPO, tribes and ACHP  On federal and Indian reservation lands, NAGPRA and ARPA also apply

Resources  Consultation with Indian Tribes in the Section 106 Review Process: A Handbook (ACHP November 2008)  Policy Statement Regarding Treatment of Burial Sites, Human Remains and Funerary Objects (ACHP 2007)  S. Hutt et al, Cultural Property Law: A Practitioner’s Guide to the Management, Protection, and Preservation of Heritage Resources (American Bar Association 2004)  T. King, Places That Count, Traditional Cultural Properties in Cultural Resource Management (2003)  T. King, Cultural Resource Laws and Practice: An Introductory Guide (2000)  Bulletin 38, Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties, National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior