This process was started because of concern raised by a few Boulder residents in 1993 that there may be a Native American medicine wheel located on the Department of Commerce campus that would potentially be affected by the NOAA building project.
Medicine wheels, more properly, medicine circles, are considered by American Indian people to be areas of religious significance. Often times, historical and archeological documentation can verify the existence of such sacred sites. While in other instances, in the absence of tangible documentation, oral history from traditional tribal members or tribal elders can provide verification of an area of significance.
Under existing federal statute (see attachment), documented sacred sites can be protected, however, verification of the significance of an area is difficult. Identification and investigation of this concern was the initial catalyst for the consultation process.
TCPs are often hard to recognize and may not come to light through the conduct of archeological or historical surveys. The existence and significance of such locations often can be ascertained only through interviews and consultation with traditional cultural practitioners. Moreover, it must be recognized that requiring religious practitioners to fully disclose their beliefs about a traditional place may, from their perspective, require them to violate tradition in a manner that they believe to be destructive to the place, their culture and themselves.
Due to the unique circumstances surrounding government-to-government consultation, it is incumbent upon the Federal Government to respectfully balance Native American Indian cultural values with other public interests and to view potential TCPs in a culturally sensitive manner in federal agency planning and program implementation.
Procedures that are "business as usual" are often alien to the Native American Indian sovereign governments, therefore, agencies should not require tribal representatives to conform rigidly to procedures that may be alien to them. To require that they conform to our procedures is not in keeping with the spirit of the laws governing consultation. Negotiation and consultation with the sovereign nations requires that the federal agency be sensitive to and cognizant of cultural values, socioeconomic factors, and the administrative structure of the tribes, including economic circumstances, seasonal availability, or other constraints that may limit the ability of individuals and groups to participate and respond in a timely manner.
To initiate government-to-government consultation regarding concerns expressed about the DoC campus in Boulder, the federal agencies identified Native American Indian tribes having aboriginal ties to the Boulder Front Range area who were potentially affected by the NOAA project. These federally recognized tribes were identified through discussions with The Colorado State Historic Preservation Office, the Indian Affairs Coordinators of several federal agencies, and an independent consultant hired by GSA, as well as through suggestions from some of the tribes themselves. Fourteen (14) tribes accepted the governments invitation to enter into consultation. They were: The Ute Mountain Ute; The Southern Ute; The Northern Ute; The Jicarilla Apache; The Apache of Oklahoma; The Comanche; The Cheyenne and Arapaho of Oklahoma; The Kiowa of Oklahoma; The Pawnee of Oklahoma; The Northern Arapaho; The Eastern Shoshone; The Northern Cheyenne; The Rosebud Sioux; and The Oglala Sioux.
Initial meetings were conducted with each Tribal Government at its tribal office. These meetings included a presentation on the Federal Government's proposed project, the project impact on the possible TCP, discussions with tribal elders and religious practitioners, and a request that an official representative be appointed to represent the tribe in the consultations.
It was the intent of the consultations that each of the consulting tribes be provided a reasonable opportunity to participate as co-partners with the Federal Government in addressing the issue of the possible TCP. In addition to the initial visit to each tribal office, consultation consisted of additional meetings, telephone contacts, written correspondence and visits by federal agency representatives to the reservations of each tribe.
Tribal representative were kept closely informed with all available data on the property including the five cultural resource studies completed on the site. Federal project personnel personally appeared before tribal councils, culture committees, elder groups, Tribal Chairmen, individual Council members, treaty commissions, and traditional culture committees between April, 1994 and October 1995, to present project information and to hear the opinion and concerns of the tribes.
To provide each consulting tribe with the opportunity to do their own investigation of a possible TCP, and also to provide tribal representatives with the opportunity to discuss the issue with the other tribal representative and concerned members of the public, three inter-tribal consultation conferences were held in Boulder between October 1994 and May 1995. In addition three smaller meetings were held with tribal representatives in August, October, and November of 1995.
A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was written and signed that reflects the results and agreements coming from the consultation process. This agreement includes: an easement covering portions of the campus that are now protected for the tribes; the implementation of a tribal monitoring program during site excavation; and a programmatic agreement that will address the use and maintenance of these areas.
The tribal monitoring program is a critical element of the agreement
between the Federal Government and the Tribal Governments. The monitor
is a tribal representative from the Northern Arapaho tribe (one of the
fourteen consulting tribes) who is qualified in cultural resources
identification. The tribal monitor, who is full time on the site,
observes all excavation down to a depth of five feet. To date
(March, 1997) no cultural artifacts have been found.
1. The Executive Memorandum from the White House of April 29, 1994, regarding government-to-government relations with Native American sovereign Tribal Governments, which clarifies each federal agency's obligation to ensure that the Federal Government operates within a government-to-government relationship with federally recognized Native American tribes;
2. The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 as amended, and the Policy Statement on Native American Concerns, adopted by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, which directs federal agencies, in carrying out their responsibilities under Section 106 of the Act, to consult with Native American Indian tribes regarding the identification and treatment of Traditional Cultural Properties;
3. The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, which calls for the Federal Government to invite the participation of any affected Native American Indian tribe in the environmental review process;
4. The American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978, which guarantees the protection and preservation of the right of Native Americans Indians to practice their religion;
5. The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990, which protects Native American Indian cultural items that have ongoing historic, traditional or cultural importance central to a Native American Indian group or culture; and
6. National Park Service Bulletin #38, which provides guidelines for evaluating and documenting Traditional Cultural Properties (TCP).
** Since the time of these consultations, Executive Memoranda on Environmental Justice, Sacred Site Protection and Council on Environmental Quality revised draft guidelines further support consultations with federally recognized Tribal Governments.