The Federal Highway Administration's Resource Center has published a case study of a tribal consultation success story from North Dakota that demonstrates effective best practices in tribal consultation. In Their Own Light: A Case Study in Effective Tribal Consultation, includes an overview of the regulatory and cultural context for tribal consultation; highlights lessons learned by the respective tribes, FHWA's North Dakota Division, and the North Dakota DOT in implementation the programmatic agreement; and offers insights for other FHWA divisions and state DOTs in developing programmatic agreements with tribes.

[back to top]

The National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, in collaboration with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and with funding from the National Park Service, has published a study, Best Practices Study on Tribal Consultation in Historic Preservation [PDF 3.67mb]. The study examines best practices in tribal consultation for Section 106 undertakings.  It provides federal agencies and tribes with guidance on how to engage in successful consultations, based on a nationwide survey of all federal preservation officers and federally recognized tribes.  The study’s results affirm the value and importance of early consultation. Tribes define success differently than their federal agency partners, however, viewing the establishment of good relations as more a measure of success than completing a project and coming to an agreement on resolving adverse effects.

[back to top]

New Echota Traditional Cultural Property Study [PDF 25kb] New Echota was the first capitol of the Cherokee Nation, dating from 1825-1838. This site is a National Historic Landmark. The Georgia Department of Transportation (DOT) had long-term plans to replace a bridge and conduct some road improvements near New Echota. In anticipation of these future projects, the DOT and the state Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) office implemented a study to determine if the site was a traditional cultural property eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. This study involved extensive consultation with three federally-recognized Cherokee tribes. This proactive consultation with the tribes resulted in the development of a good working relationship among the three tribes, Georgia DOT, and FHWA. The FHWA also funded the creation of a video on the New Echota study. This video serves as a training tool for evaluating the National Register eligibility of traditional cultural properties, and demonstrates the importance of proactive tribal consultation. The video can be purchased from Georgia DOT, by contacting the Department’s Map Sales Unit at (404) 656-5336 or at: OTDCustomersrv@dot.state.ga.us.

Memorandum of Understanding between the FHWA, Seminole Nation of Oklahoma, and the Georgia DOT [PDF 25kb].Georgia DOT has developed Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) with seven of the 15 non-resident tribes that have historical or cultural links with the state.

[back to top]

Iowa Tribal Consultation Process: Initiatives and Recommendations [PDF 140kb]. The FHWA and the Iowa Department of Transportation initiated activities to establish an acceptable consultation process with tribes having a current and/or historic interest in Iowa lands.  An article in FHWA’s July 2002 Successes in Streamlining Newsletter also describes these efforts.

The Iowa DOT, FHWA, and the Iowa State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) have developed a Programmatic Agreement (PA) for implementing Section 106 [PDF 679kb] in the state. The PA has a section on tribal consultation. The PA includes a Tribal Notification Form to be used to contact tribes early in the project development process.

Iowa FHWA and DOT have also developed a programmatic memorandum of understanding template that establishes the parameters of tribal notification and consultation on projects in the state.  This programmatic MOU is used as an addendum to the above mentioned PA.  The purpose of these agreements is to focus tribal consultation on those undertakings that are truly of concern to tribes. The MOU template also includes an Appendix A, which outlines the tribal consultation process to be used by the Section 106 parties. For a copy of the MOU and the appendix, contact Mark Kerper, Iowa DOT, at: mark.kerper@dot.iowa.gov.

[back to top]

The Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT) has developed statewide consultation procedures in collaboration with the four tribes that have tribal lands in Kansas. The FHWA also contacted 31 tribes that have expressed an interest in being consulted about transportation projects in Kansas.

[back to top]

Programmatic Agreement with the Caddo Nation of Oklahoma [PDF 410kb]. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development has a programmatic agreement with the Caddo Nation of Oklahoma on how and when the Department is to consult with the tribe.

[back to top]

Government-to-Government Transportation Accord. [DOC 63kb] agreement stipulates a commitment between eleven tribes, MnDOT, and the FHWA to establish a government-to-government partnership on transportation matters. This partnership is intended to demonstrate mutual respect for each other; enhance, improve, and foster cooperation on transportation projects; and facilitate respectful resolution of inter-governmental differences with regard to transportation issues.

Tribes and Transportation e-Handbook.  Through a cooperative effort, MnDOT, FHWA Minnesota Division, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Minnesota tribes, Minnesota counties, and the Headwaters Regional Development Commission, this handbook serves as an online resource guide for tribal and government officials working on transportation projects serving tribal land in Minnesota.

Under the section “Agreements, Policies, and Procedures” of the e-Handbook there are Section 106 agreement documents stipulating consultation procedures with the Bois Fort band of Chippewa Indians, Fond du Lac of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians, Grand Portage band of Chippewa Indians, and Lower Sioux Indian Community. Under the section “Preserving Cultural and Historic Properties,” is a listing of resources to help protect Native American history and culture in Minnesota.

[back to top]

Hoover Dam Bypass Project. The management team for this project won national recognition for its multiple agency partnering and coordination efforts, particularly in the area of tribal consultation. This project involved extensive consultation with tribes in terms of impacts to significant archaeological resources. Stan Rice, President of the Yavapai Prescott Indian Tribe stated, “We have reviewed the materials prepared by the government to government consultation on the Hoover Dam Bypass Project and concur that consultation was held in an exemplary manner.” See related article in NDOT News, Winter 2002 Edition [PDF 2.71mb].

[back to top]

Tribal Consultation Workshop, April 12, 2005 [PDF 5.15mb] The FHWA Ohio Division, with assistance from the Ohio Department of Transportation, sponsored a workshop for Federally Recognized Native American Tribal Governments located in the State of Oklahoma and surrounding states which are recognized as having ancestral ties to Ohio. The workshop was intended to strengthen government-to-government relationships and streamline the coordination of transportation programs and projects with tribal governments. The workshop was held in Tulsa, Oklahoma.

[back to top]

Federal Highway – Pennsylvania Division Intertribal Summit, 2003 [PDF 1.16mb].  In September 2003, the Pennsylvania Division of FHWA, in cooperation with the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT), hosted an Intertribal Summit on Section 106 issues. The report on the summit serves as a primer on organizing an intertribal summit, providing information on logistics, costs, protocols, format, etc. The primary goal of the summit was to establish a foundation for future consultation among non-resident federally-recognized tribes, the Pennsylvania FHWA and PennDOT.  The report also includes information on similar tribal summits that have been held in Iowa, Idaho, Minnesota, New Mexico, and Washington State. 

In response to the intertribal summit, the Pennsylvania FHWA and PennDOT have developed a newsletter that summarizes the results of three intertribal meetings held in Wisconsin and Oklahoma.

PennDOT has also developed interim guidelines for tribal consultation [PDF 67kb]. Fourteen federally recognized tribes have been identified as having an interest in Pennsylvania.  Developed before the intertribal summit in 2003 (see above), the interim guidelines establishes a protocol for consultation and includes standardized communication and response forms to streamline the consultation process.

[back to top]

The FHWA, the Rhode Island DOT, the Narragansett Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation executed a programmatic agreement that applies to transportation undertakings that have "no effect" on historic properties.

The Rhode Island DOT, the FHWA and the Narragansett Indian Tribe have also executed a Memorandum of Understanding [PDF 233kb] that establishes a new consultation process.  The focus of this MOU is on tribal monitoring of DOT projects.

[back to top]

Programmatic Agreement [PDF 44kb] for the consultation process among FHWA, TxDOT and the Tonkawa Tribe of Oklahoma. Texas DOT has programmatic agreements with 12 tribes, ten located outside of the state and two within the state. These PAs stipulate when TxDOT is to consult with a tribe and which types of projects require consultation. Some tribes have indicated that they want to be consulted on all projects in the state, while other tribes are only interested in projects within a few counties. The PA with the Tonkawa Tribe of Oklahoma is included above as an example.

To facilitate consultation with tribes, TxDOT has created a layer in the statewide GIS database that indicates areas of concern to tribes. This data layer is accessible to all TxDOT staff. When TxDOT staff work on a project, they can pull up project area maps at their workstations and identify which tribes need to be contacted given the county or counties in which the project is located. With this GIS layer in place, TxDOT has dramatically reduced the number of documents that have to be sent to tribes, and tribes now have much less paperwork to deal with.

[back to top]