Laserfiche WebLink
<br />00541 <br /> <br />REVISED DRAFT (#10)- August 11, 2004 <br />Clean Version <br /> <br />and for ensuring compliance with the requirements of ARPA and its implementing <br />regulations. An ARPA permit requires the consent of the Tribe with jurisdiction over the <br />reservation. As noted in section F of Part 7 of this Consultation Plan, tribal laws regulate <br />the excavation of archaeological resources within the Hualapai and Navajo Reservations. <br />In any case in which the tllA is considering the issuance of an ARPA permit, in the <br />context of that permit process the relevant Tribe will have an opportunity to determine <br />whether tribal laws apply to any such excavation or removal. <br /> <br />(4) Sacred Sites subject to AIRFA and Executive Order 13007 <br /> <br />Protocol (g) - Indian sacred sites. <br /> <br />AIRFA establishes federal policy of protecting the right of Indian people to <br />conduct traditional religious practices at sites that hold religious importance, a policy that <br />is reinforced by Executive Order 13007 with respect to Indian sacred sites on federal <br />lands. If any proposed action or on-going activity may result in adverse impacts on an <br />Indian sacred site, as defined in Executive Order No. 13007, the concerned Tribe(s) and <br />federal agency(ies) may initiate (or continue) consultation pursuant to the NHPA <br />consultation provisions of these Protocols (Protocols (b) and (c)). In the alternative, the <br />Tribes and federal agency(ies) may engage in consultation to accommodate tribal access <br />to and use of the sacred site without exploring issues relating to whether the site is <br />eligible for the National Register and in compliance with E.O. 13007. It may be possible <br />for adequate accommodation to be realized without engaging in NHPA consultation. <br />This does not relieve the Federal agency of its responsibilities under NHP A; rather, <br />sacred sites consultation under this subsection should inform the Federal agency's <br />conduct in carrying out NHP A consultation. (For example, a sacred site may be <br />potentially eligible for the National Register as a TCP, but if adequate accommodation <br />can be realized without using the NHP A process, the concerned Tribe may decide not to <br />provide the information that would be needed for evaluating National Register <br />eligibility.) <br /> <br />PART 6. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS <br /> <br />[NOTE: After cuts in response to comments, the remaining parts are all rather <br />short, and so I have combined what's left into one part with three section <br />headings.] <br /> <br />A. Confidentiality <br /> <br />The Parties recognize that inherent contradictions may arise between mandates for <br />dissemination of information into the public domain and tribal traditions or restrictions on <br />dissemination and control of knowledge or information. With respect to information <br />relating to the location or character of a traditional cultural property, the agencies are <br />authorized under section 9 of the Archaeological Resources Protection Act, 16 V.S.C. <br /> <br />32 <br />