NATIVE AMERICAN TRADITIONAL
CULTURAL PROPERTIES
PROGRESS REPORT
DON PEDRO PROJECT
FERC NO. 2299
Prepared for:
Turlock Irrigation District – Turlock, California
Modesto Irrigation District – Modesto, California
Prepared by:
HDR Engineering, Inc.
January 2013
Native American Traditional Cultural Properties
Progress Report
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Description
Section No.
1.0 Page No.
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 General Description of the Don Pedro Project .................................................... 1-1 1.2 Relicensing Process ............................................................................................. 1-3 1.3 Study Plan ............................................................................................................ 1-3 2.0 STUDY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES.......................................................................... 2-1 3.0 STUDY AREA ................................................................................................................ 3-1 4.0 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................ 4-1 5.0 RESULTS ....................................................................................................................... 5-1 6.0 DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS ................................................................................... 6-1 7.0 STUDY VARIANCES AND MODIFICATIONS........................................................ 7-1 8.0 REFERENCES............................................................................................................... 8-1 List of Figures
Description
Figure No.
Page No.
Figure 1.1-1. Don Pedro Project location. ................................................................................. 1-2 List of Attachments
Attachment A
Attachment B
Map of the Area of Potential Effects
Native American Consultation Log – PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL; NOT
FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
i
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
List of Acronyms
ac ................................acres
ACEC .........................Area of Critical Environmental Concern
AF ..............................acre-feet
ACOE.........................U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
ADA ...........................Americans with Disabilities Act
AIRFA........................American Indian Religious Freedom Act
ALJ .............................Administrative Law Judge
APE ............................Area of Potential Effect
ARMR ........................Archaeological Resource Management Report
ARPA .........................Archaeological Resources Protection Act
BA ..............................Biological Assessment
BDCP .........................Bay-Delta Conservation Plan
BLM ...........................U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management
BLM-S .......................Bureau of Land Management – Sensitive Species
BMI ............................Benthic macroinvertebrates
BMP ...........................Best Management Practices
BO ..............................Biological Opinion
CalEPPC ....................California Exotic Pest Plant Council
CalSPA.......................California Sports Fisherman Association
CAS ............................California Academy of Sciences
CCC............................Criterion Continuous Concentrations
CCIC ..........................Central California Information Center
CCSF ..........................City and County of San Francisco
CCVHJV ....................California Central Valley Habitat Joint Venture
CD ..............................Compact Disc
CDBW........................California Department of Boating and Waterways
CDEC .........................California Data Exchange Center
CDFA .........................California Department of Food and Agriculture
CDFG .........................California Department of Fish and Game (as of January 2013, Department
of Fish and Wildlife)
CDMG........................California Division of Mines and Geology
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
ii
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
List of Acronyms
CDOF .........................California Department of Finance
CDPH .........................California Department of Public Health
CDPR .........................California Department of Parks and Recreation
CDSOD ......................California Division of Safety of Dams
CDWR........................California Department of Water Resources
CE ..............................California Endangered Species
CEII ............................Critical Energy Infrastructure Information
CEQA .........................California Environmental Quality Act
CESA .........................California Endangered Species Act
CFR ............................Code of Federal Regulations
cfs ...............................cubic feet per second
CGS ............................California Geological Survey
CH&SC ......................California Health and Safety Code
CMAP ........................California Monitoring and Assessment Program
CMC...........................Criterion Maximum Concentrations
CNDDB......................California Natural Diversity Database
CNPS..........................California Native Plant Society
CORP .........................California Outdoor Recreation Plan
CPC ............................California Penal Code
CPRC .........................California Public Resources Code
CPUE .........................Catch Per Unit Effort
CRAM ........................California Rapid Assessment Method
CRLF..........................California Red-Legged Frog
CRRF .........................California Rivers Restoration Fund
CSAS..........................Central Sierra Audubon Society
CSBP ..........................California Stream Bioassessment Procedure
CT ..............................California Threatened Species
CTR ............................California Toxics Rule
CTS ............................California Tiger Salamander
CVRWQCB ...............Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board
CWA ..........................Clean Water Act
CWHR........................California Wildlife Habitat Relationship
Districts ......................Turlock Irrigation District and Modesto Irrigation District
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
iii
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
List of Acronyms
DLA ...........................Draft License Application
DPRA .........................Don Pedro Recreation Agency
DPS ............................Distinct Population Segment
EA ..............................Environmental Assessment
EC ..............................Electrical Conductivity
EFH ............................Essential Fish Habitat
EIR .............................Environmental Impact Report
EIS..............................Environmental Impact Statement
EPA ............................U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
ESA ............................Federal Endangered Species Act
ESRCD.......................East Stanislaus Resource Conservation District
ESU ............................Evolutionary Significant Unit
EWUA........................Effective Weighted Useable Area
FERC..........................Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
FFS .............................Foothills Fault System
FL ...............................Fork length
FMU ...........................Fire Management Unit
FOT ............................Friends of the Tuolumne
FPC ............................Federal Power Commission
ft/mi ............................feet per mile
FWCA ........................Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
FYLF ..........................Foothill Yellow-Legged Frog
g..................................grams
GIS .............................Geographic Information System
GLO ...........................General Land Office
GPS ............................Global Positioning System
HCP ............................Habitat Conservation Plan
HHWP ........................Hetch Hetchy Water and Power
HORB ........................Head of Old River Barrier
HPMP.........................Historic Properties Management Plan
ILP..............................Integrated Licensing Process
ISR .............................Initial Study Report
ITA .............................Indian Trust Assets
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
iv
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
List of Acronyms
kV...............................kilovolt
m ................................meters
M&I............................Municipal and Industrial
MCL ...........................Maximum Contaminant Level
mg/kg .........................milligrams/kilogram
mg/L ...........................milligrams per liter
mgd ............................million gallons per day
mi ...............................miles
mi2 ..............................square miles
MID ............................Modesto Irrigation District
MOU ..........................Memorandum of Understanding
MSCS .........................Multi-Species Conservation Strategy
msl ..............................mean sea level
MVA ..........................Megavolt Ampere
MW ............................megawatt
MWh ..........................megawatt hour
mya .............................million years ago
NAE ...........................National Academy of Engineering
NAGPRA ...................Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act
NAHC ........................Native American Heritage Commission
NAS............................National Academy of Sciences
NAVD 88 ...................North American Vertical Datum of 1988
NAWQA ....................National Water Quality Assessment
NCCP .........................Natural Community Conservation Plan
NEPA .........................National Environmental Policy Act
ng/g ............................nanograms per gram
NGOs .........................Non-Governmental Organizations
NHI ............................Natural Heritage Institute
NHPA.........................National Historic Preservation Act
NISC ..........................National Invasive Species Council
NMFS.........................National Marine Fisheries Service
NOAA ........................National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NOI ............................Notice of Intent
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
v
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
List of Acronyms
NPS ............................U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service
NRCS .........................National Resource Conservation Service
NRHP .........................National Register of Historic Places
NRI.............................Nationwide Rivers Inventory
NTU ...........................Nephelometric Turbidity Unit
NWI............................National Wetland Inventory
NWIS .........................National Water Information System
NWR ..........................National Wildlife Refuge
NGVD 29 ...................National Geodetic Vertical Datum of 1929
O&M ..........................operation and maintenance
OEHHA......................Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
ORV ...........................Outstanding Remarkable Value
PAD............................Pre-Application Document
PDO............................Pacific Decadal Oscillation
PEIR ...........................Program Environmental Impact Report
PGA............................Peak Ground Acceleration
PHG............................Public Health Goal
PM&E ........................Protection, Mitigation and Enhancement
PMF............................Probable Maximum Flood
POAOR ......................Public Opinions and Attitudes in Outdoor Recreation
ppb..............................parts per billion
ppm ............................parts per million
PSP .............................Proposed Study Plan
QA ..............................Quality Assurance
QC ..............................Quality Control
RA ..............................Recreation Area
RBP ............................Rapid Bioassessment Protocol
Reclamation ...............U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation
RM .............................River Mile
RMP ...........................Resource Management Plan
RP...............................Relicensing Participant
RSP ............................Revised Study Plan
RST ............................Rotary Screw Trap
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
vi
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
List of Acronyms
RWF ...........................Resource-Specific Work Groups
RWG ..........................Resource Work Group
RWQCB .....................Regional Water Quality Control Board
SC...............................State candidate for listing under CESA
SCD ............................State candidate for delisting under CESA
SCE ............................State candidate for listing as endangered under CESA
SCT ............................State candidate for listing as threatened under CESA
SD1 ............................Scoping Document 1
SD2 ............................Scoping Document 2
SE ...............................State Endangered Species under the CESA
SFP .............................State Fully Protected Species under CESA
SFPUC .......................San Francisco Public Utilities Commission
SHPO .........................State Historic Preservation Office
SJRA ..........................San Joaquin River Agreement
SJRGA .......................San Joaquin River Group Authority
SJTA ..........................San Joaquin River Tributaries Authority
SPD ............................Study Plan Determination
SRA ............................State Recreation Area
SRMA ........................Special Recreation Management Area or Sierra Resource Management
Area (as per use)
SRMP .........................Sierra Resource Management Plan
SRP ............................Special Run Pools
SSC ............................State species of special concern
ST ...............................California Threatened Species under the CESA
STORET ....................Storage and Retrieval
SWAMP .....................Surface Water Ambient Monitoring Program
SWE ...........................Snow-Water Equivalent
SWRCB......................State Water Resources Control Board
TAC............................Technical Advisory Committee
TAF ............................thousand acre-feet
TCP ............................Traditional Cultural Properties
TDS ............................Total Dissolved Solids
TID .............................Turlock Irrigation District
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
vii
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
List of Acronyms
TMDL ........................Total Maximum Daily Load
TOC............................Total Organic Carbon
TRT ............................Tuolumne River Trust
TRTAC ......................Tuolumne River Technical Advisory Committee
UC ..............................University of California
USDA.........................U.S. Department of Agriculture
USDOC ......................U.S. Department of Commerce
USDOI .......................U.S. Department of the Interior
USFS ..........................U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service
USFWS ......................U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service
USGS .........................U.S. Department of the Interior, Geological Survey
USR ............................Updated Study Report
UTM ...........................Universal Transverse Mercator
VAMP ........................Vernalis Adaptive Management Plan
VELB .........................Valley Elderberry Longhorn Beetle
VRM ..........................Visual Resource Management
WPT ...........................Western Pond Turtle
WSA ...........................Wilderness Study Area
WSIP ..........................Water System Improvement Program
WWTP .......................Wastewater Treatment Plant
WY .............................water year
μS/cm .........................microSeimens per centimeter
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
viii
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
1.0
INTRODUCTION
1.1
General Description of the Don Pedro Project
Turlock Irrigation District (TID) and Modesto Irrigation District (MID) (collectively, the
Districts) are the co-licensees of the 168-megawatt (MW) Don Pedro Project (Project) located on
the Tuolumne River in western Tuolumne County in the Central Valley region of California.
The Don Pedro Dam is located at river mile (RM) 54.8 and the Don Pedro Reservoir formed by
the dam extends 24-miles upstream at the normal maximum water surface elevation of 830 ft
above mean sea level (msl; NGVD 29). At elevation 830 ft, the reservoir stores over 2,000,000
acre-feet (AF) of water and has a surface area slightly less than 13,000 acres (ac). The watershed
above Don Pedro Dam is approximately 1,533 square miles (mi2).
Both TID and MID are local public agencies authorized under the laws of the State of California
to provide water supply for irrigation and municipal and industrial (M&I) uses and to provide
retail electric service. The Project serves many purposes including providing water storage for
the beneficial use of irrigation of over 200,000 ac of prime Central Valley farmland and for the
use of M&I customers in the City of Modesto (population 210,000). Consistent with the
requirements of the Raker Act passed by Congress in 1913 and agreements between the Districts
and City and County of San Francisco (CCSF), the Project reservoir also includes a “water bank”
of up to 570,000 AF of storage. CCSF may use the water bank to more efficiently manage the
water supply from its Hetch Hetchy water system while meeting the senior water rights of the
Districts. CCSF’s “water bank” within Don Pedro Reservoir provides significant benefits for its
2.6 million customers in the San Francisco Bay Area.
The Project also provides storage for flood management purposes in the Tuolumne and San
Joaquin rivers in coordination with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). Other important
uses supported by the Project are recreation, protection of the anadromous fisheries in the lower
Tuolumne River, and hydropower generation.
The Project Boundary extends from approximately one mile downstream of the dam to
approximately RM 79 upstream of the dam. Upstream of the dam, the Project Boundary runs
generally along the 855 ft contour interval which corresponds to the top of the Don Pedro Dam.
The Project Boundary encompasses approximately 18,370 ac with 78 percent of the lands owned
jointly by the Districts and the remaining 22 percent (approximately 4,000 ac) is owned by the
United States and managed as a part of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Sierra
Resource Management Area.
The primary Project facilities include the 580-foot-high Don Pedro Dam and Reservoir
completed in 1971; a four-unit powerhouse situated at the base of the dam; related facilities
including the Project spillway, outlet works, and switchyard; four dikes (Gasburg Creek Dike
and Dikes A, B, and C); and three developed recreational facilities (Fleming Meadows, Blue
Oaks, and Moccasin Point Recreation Areas). The location of the Project and its primary
facilities is shown in Figure 1.1-1.
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
1-1
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
1.0 Introduction
Figure 1.1-1.
Don Pedro Project location.
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
1-2
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
1.0 Introduction
1.2
Relicensing Process
The current FERC license for the Project expires on April 30, 2016, and the Districts will apply
for a new license no later than April 30, 2014. The Districts began the relicensing process by
filing a Notice of Intent and Pre-Application Document (PAD) with FERC on February 10, 2011,
following the regulations governing the Integrated Licensing Process (ILP). The Districts’ PAD
included descriptions of the Project facilities, operations, license requirements, and Project lands
as well as a summary of the extensive existing information available on Project area resources.
The PAD also included ten draft study plans describing a subset of the Districts’ proposed
relicensing studies. The Districts then convened a series of Resource Work Group meetings,
engaging agencies and other relicensing participants in a collaborative study plan development
process culminating in the Districts’ Proposed Study Plan (PSP) and Revised Study Plan (RSP)
filings to FERC on July 25, 2011 and November 22, 2011, respectively.
On December 22, 2011, FERC issued its Study Plan Determination (SPD) for the Project,
approving, or approving with modifications, 34 studies proposed in the RSP that addressed
Cultural and Historical Resources, Recreational Resources, Terrestrial Resources, and Water and
Aquatic Resources. In addition, as required by the SPD, the Districts filed three new study plans
(W&AR-18, W&AR-19, and W&AR-20) on February 28, 2012 and one modified study plan
(W&AR-12) on April 6, 2012. Prior to filing these plans with FERC, the Districts consulted
with relicensing participants on drafts of the plans. FERC approved or approved with
modifications these four studies on July 25, 2012.
Following the SPD, a total of seven studies (and associated study elements) that were either not
adopted in the SPD, or were adopted with modifications, formed the basis of Study Dispute
proceedings. In accordance with the ILP, FERC convened a Dispute Resolution Panel on April
17, 2012 and the Panel issued its findings on May 4, 2012. On May 24, 2012, the Director of
FERC issued his Formal Study Dispute Determination, with additional clarifications related to
the Formal Study Dispute Determination issued on August 17, 2012.
This progress report describes the objectives, methods, and results of the Traditional Cultural
Properties Study (CR-02) as implemented by the Districts in accordance with FERC’s SPD and
subsequent study modifications and clarifications. Documents relating to the Project relicensing
are publicly available on the Districts’ relicensing website at www.donpedro-relicensing.com.
1.3
Study Plan
The Districts’ continued operation and maintenance (O&M) and/or recreation activities at the
Don Pedro Project (Project) has the potential to affect Traditional Cultural Properties (TCP).
The potential effects may be direct (e.g., result of ground-disturbing activities), indirect (e.g.,
public access to Project areas), or cumulative (e.g., caused by a Project activity in combination
with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future projects). This study focuses on
investigating the potential for Project-related activities to affect TCPs.
FERC’s SPD approved without modifications the Districts’ Native American Traditional
Cultural Properties study plan as provided in the Districts’ RSP filing. The Districts are in the
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
1-3
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
1.0 Introduction
process of carrying out the Native American Traditional Cultural Properties study consistent with
the FERC approved study plan.
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
1-4
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
2.0
STUDY GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
FERC licenses may permit activities that may “…cause changes in the character or use of
historic properties, if any such historic properties exist…” (36 Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) § 800.16[d]). FERC must therefore comply with Section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966, as amended, and its implementing regulations at 36 CFR Part
800 that require any federal department or independent agency having authority to license any
undertaking to take into account the effects of the undertaking on historic properties.
As defined under 36 CFR 800.16(l), historic properties are prehistoric or historic sites, buildings,
structures, objects, districts, or locations of traditional use or beliefs that are included in, or
eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). Historic properties are
identified through a process of evaluation against specific criteria found at 36 CFR 60.4.
To be considered a historic property, a TCP must have integrity and meet at least one of the
NRHP criteria. When a place of traditional practices is evaluated as eligible for listing on the
NRHP, it is termed a TCP. A TCP is defined as any property that is “…eligible for inclusion in
the National Register because of its association with cultural practices or beliefs of a living
community that (a) are rooted in that community’s history, and (b) are important in maintaining
the continuing cultural identity of the community” [NR Bulletin 38 (Parker and King 1998:1)].
TCPs are further defined in National Register Bulletin 38 (Parker and King 1998:1) as:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
Locations associated with the traditional beliefs of a Native American group about its
origins, its cultural history, or the nature of the world.
A rural community, whose organization, buildings and structures, or patterns of land use
reflect the cultural traditions valued by its long-term residents.
An urban neighborhood that is the traditional home of a particular cultural group, and that
reflects its beliefs and practices.
Locations where Native American religious practitioners have historically gone and are
known or thought to go to today, to perform ceremonial cultural rules of practice.
The primary goal of this study is to assist FERC in meeting its compliance requirements under
Section 106 of the NHPA, as amended, by determining if licensing of the Project will have an
adverse effect on eligible TCPs. The objective of this particular study is to identify TCPs that
may potentially be affected by Project O&M, evaluate their eligibility to the NRHP, and identify
Project-related activities that may affect eligible TCPs, and/or locations of ethnographic use. At
a later date, the results of the study will then be used to develop the Historic Properties
Management Plan (HPMP), which will ensure that all cultural resources identified within the
area of potential effects (APE) will be appropriately considered and managed during the life of
the new FERC license.
The Project is also subject to compliance with other relevant federal laws including the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Archaeological Resources Protection Act (ARPA) of
1974 (16 USC 469), the American Indian Religious Freedom Act (AIRFA) of 1978 (42 USC
1996 and 1996a), the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
2-1
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
2.0 Study Goals and Objectives
1990 (25 USC 3001), Executive Order 11593 (Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural
Environment) of 1971 (16 USC 470), the American Antiquities Act of 1906, and Executive
Order 13007 (Indian Sacred Sites) of 1996 (73 Federal Register 65, pp. 18293-24).
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
2-2
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
3.0
STUDY AREA
The study area investigated to accomplish the current study is the APE. As defined in 36 CFR
800.16(d), the APE is “...the geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may directly
or indirectly cause changes in the character or use of historical properties, if any such properties
exist.” The APE for the Don Pedro Project relicensing study effort is defined as including all
lands within the FERC boundary that are (1) within 100 ft. beyond the normal maximum water
surface elevation (830 ft.), (2) within designated Project facilities and formal recreation use
areas, (3) within informal recreation use areas identified by the Don Pedro Recreation Agency1,
(4) within the Red Hills Area of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC), or (5) along the
reservoir edges, especially the reservoir reaches, where there are portions of intermittent and
perennial flowing streams. If, at a later time, the Districts propose Project activities that are
outside of the APE that may affect resources addressed by this study, the APE will be expanded,
if necessary, to include these areas. As well, should large resources, such as TCPs, be identified
that continue outside of the Project APE, those resources will be recorded in their entirety, if
appropriate and accessible (i.e., linear resources such as roads may not be followed out to their
terminus), and the APE may be expanded to incorporate them if it is determined that Project
O&M could affect these areas. If unforeseen Project-related activities are planned to be
undertaken outside of the APE in the future, the Section 106 process will be triggered prior to
implementation of the activities. APE maps are provided here as Attachment A.
1
The FERC approved Native American Traditional Cultural Properties Study Plan specified that if informal recreation areas
were found to extend beyond the Project APE during the study, these areas would be surveyed at that time and the APE
expanded to incorporate the informal recreation areas up to the FERC Project Boundary. No such areas have, to date, been
identified.
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
3-1
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
4.0
METHODOLOGY
As detailed in the FERC approved study plan, the study approach consists of the following seven
steps:
Step 1 - Obtain SHPO Concurrence on the APE. As required under Section 106 [36 CFR §
800.4(a)(1)], maps depicting the APE were submitted to SHPO in a letter dated December 21,
2011 for formal review, comment, and concurrence. The SHPO concurred with the APE in a
letter dated January 9, 2012. Both of these letters were filed with FERC on March 12, 2012, as
required in the FERC approved study plan.
The Districts may request that SHPO concur with a modified APE during the study if the
Districts determine that the Project affects historic properties outside the APE previously
approved by the SHPO.
Step 2 – Conduct Archival Research. The Districts performed initial archival research while
preparing the PAD. In Step 2 of the current study, the Districts have conducted additional
archival research and continue to do so. This includes conducting archival research at the
following places, as appropriate:

Bancroft Library, University of California, Berkeley

California State Library, California History Room and Government Publications

Bureau of Land Management, Mother Lode Field Office Data Files

Turlock Museum and Archives

Modesto Museum and Archives

Sierra Miwuk Tribal Archives

Tuolumne County Assessor’s and Recorder’s Offices

Tuolumne County Historical Society

Southern Tuolumne County Historical Society

Archives of the Hetch Hetchy Water and Power/San Francisco Public Utility Commission

Oral Histories of Project Personnel and/or Local Residents, Historians, or Enthusiasts

Turlock Irrigation District and Modesto Irrigation District

Other appropriate Tribal, private, state, or federal repositories identified during the research
Step 3 – Perform Tribal Consultation and Identification of Resources. Following the
ethnographic literature review in Step 2, the next step in identifying potential TCPs involves
extensive Tribal consultation. Consultation, fieldwork and potential TCP documentation is being
undertaken in accordance with Section 106 of the NHPA, as amended, and is consistent with
National Register Bulletin No. 38, Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Identification of
Traditional Cultural Properties.
Written permission from the BLM California State
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
4-1
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
4.0 Methodology
Archaeologist is being acquired prior to conducting any field work or field visits on BLM land,
as related to ethnographic research.
In order to facilitate Tribal consultation, the Districts sought to retain the services of a qualified,
professional anthropologist who meets the standards for ethnography as defined in Appendix II
of National Register Bulletin No. 38. The Districts invited the affected Tribes and other
interested cultural/Tribal stakeholders to comment on potential candidates prior to retaining an
anthropologist to complete the study. Following a brief comment period in which no comments
were received from the Tribes, the Districts contracted Dr. Michael Moratto in early 2012. Dr.
Moratto is a Senior Cultural Resources Specialist with Applied EarthWorks, Inc. and has over 40
years of experience in cultural studies throughout California. The Districts held an initial study
meeting on April 18, 2012, to introduce Dr. Moratto and to provide an overview of the
implementation of the Native American Traditional Cultural Properties Study. All affected
Tribes and stakeholders with an interest in cultural resources were invited to the meeting. A
representative of FERC and one tribal representative, Reba Fuller of the Tuolumne Band of MeWuk Indians, attended the meeting.
Dr. Moratto, in consultation with designated Tribal representatives (e.g., Tribal Chairs or other
representatives designated by the Tribal Chairs), are determining the scope and breadth of
interviews. Dr. Moratto then contacts the appropriate Tribe(s) and interested Tribal and cultural
stakeholders to arrange for interviews at times and locations acceptable to those Tribal
interviewees (see Attachment B, the Native American Consultation Log). Tribal interviewees
and the consultant plan to visit the APE together to accurately define potential TCPs.
Interviews have been conducted on a one-on-one basis or on a group basis, as determined by the
interviewees (see Attachment B, the Native American Consultation Log). The oral traditions and
information collected during the interviews will be used to help define potential TCPs in the
APE and to assist in making sound judgments and management decisions in Project planning.
All information gathered will be kept confidential and respectfully documented by the
consultant.
If participating Indian Tribes do not wish to disclose the locations of any potential TCPs, the
Districts will instead work with the Tribes to identify the general issues and concerns that the
Tribe(s) may have regarding potential impacts of Project operations and maintenance (O&M)
activities to TCPs. The Districts will work with the Tribes and appropriate land management
agencies to develop mutually agreeable measures to address identified Project effects to TCPs.
Step 4 – Conduct Archaeological Site Visit. Tribal interviewees or a physically capable Tribal
representative and the Districts’ consultant may want to visit archaeological sites identified
during the study or during the Historic Properties Study. The purpose of the visit would be to
provide Tribal representatives the opportunity to examine prehistoric archaeological sites
encountered during the Historic Properties Study field work, and for the consultant to obtain
additional information on potential TCPs. After the site visit(s), Tribal representatives may
choose to share additional TCP information. BLM will be involved with any site visits on BLMadministered land. BLM may request to meet in advance with those Tribal representatives who
wish to visit prehistoric sites on BLM-administered land. This is prudent and reasonable as
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
4-2
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
4.0 Methodology
BLM has ongoing management obligations for resources on lands under its management,
regardless of whether these resources are within the FERC Project Boundary. BLM keeps
information about archaeological sites and all Native American-related cultural resources
confidential. Written permission from the BLM California State Archaeologist is being acquired
prior to conducting any field work or field visits on BLM land related to ethnographic research.
Step 5 – Evaluate National Register of Historic Places Eligibility. Following completion of Step
4, the Districts’ ethnographer will evaluate the eligibility of identified TCPs for listing on the
NRHP using data collected from the field studies described above. The NRHP codifies the
criteria used to evaluate most cultural resources at 36 CFR 60.4, as follows:
National Register Criteria for Evaluation. The quality of significance in American
history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites,
buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting,
materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the
broad pattern of our history;
that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past;
that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of
construction or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic
values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components
may lack individual distinction;
that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important to prehistory or
history.
However, amendments to the NHPA in 1992 [§101(d)(6)(A)] specify that properties of
traditional religious and cultural importance to an Indian Tribe may be determined eligible for
inclusion in the NRHP because of their “association with cultural practices or beliefs of a living
community that are: (1) rooted in that community’s history; and (2) are important in maintaining
the continuing cultural identity of the community.” Therefore, a TCP can only be significant if it
meets these two criteria. If sacred areas or religious locations are identified that do not meet
these criteria, they will also be evaluated following the Section 106 process. Formal evaluations
will be submitted to the SHPO for concurrence.
As well, properties not normally considered for listing in the NRHP (i.e., cemeteries, birthplaces,
or graves of historical figures; properties owned by religious institutions or used for religious
purposes; structures that have been moved from their original locations; reconstructed historical
buildings; properties primarily commemorative in nature; and properties that have achieved
significance within the past 50 years) may qualify if they are contributing elements of districts
that meet the criteria for evaluation or can apply the Criteria Considerations found at 36 CFR
60.
Step 6 - Identify and Assess Potential Project Effects on National Register-Eligible Properties.
As required under 36 CFR § 800.5, the Districts will identify and assess, in consultation with the
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
4-3
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
4.0 Methodology
SHPO, BLM, and potentially affected Indian Tribes, any adverse effects on TCPs resulting from
Project O&M activities. Adverse effects are defined as follows:
An adverse effect is found when an undertaking may alter, directly or indirectly, any of
the characteristics of a historic property that qualify the property for inclusion in the
National Register in a manner that would diminish the integrity of the property's
location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association. Consideration
shall be given to all qualifying characteristics of a historic property, including those that
may have been identified subsequent to the original evaluation of the property's eligibility
for the National Register. Adverse effects may include reasonably foreseeable effects
caused by the undertaking that may occur later in time, be farther removed in distance or
be cumulative (36 CFR § 800.5(a)(1)).
Step 7 - Reporting. The Districts will prepare a technical report prepared to current professional
standards consistent with the Archaeological Resource Management Report (ARMR) Guidelines
(OHP 1990). The report will include the following sections: (1) Study Goals and Objectives; (2)
Environmental and Cultural Setting; (3) Methods and Analysis; (4) Results; (5) Discussion; and
(6) Conclusions2. The report will include an evaluation plan with a detailed assessment of
Project effects. Copies of this report will be provided to the affected Indian Tribes, BLM,
SHPO, Central California Information Center, and FERC. Copies of the final report and detailed
locations of identified properties will be withheld from public disclosure in accordance with
Section 304 (16 U.S.C. 4702-3) of the NHPA (as amended). Concurrence on report
recommendations will be sought from SHPO. BLM and other interested parties will review the
cultural report, evaluation plan, and other documents, before they are sent to SHPO for
concurrence. If any portion of the documentation for a traditional property is deemed too
sensitive for distribution by the affected Tribes, the Districts’ consultant will work with the
concerned groups.
The results of the study will be reported in Exhibit E of the License Application, which will
include a summary of the information and findings of the Study Plan. Figures and other
pertinent data supporting the summary in Exhibit E will be appended to the License Application.
The cultural records and other sensitive information will be included in a confidential appendix
withheld from public disclosure, in accordance with Section 304 (16 U.S.C. 4702-3) of the
NHPA as amended.
2
The report will meet all of the reporting requirements of the BLM-issued Cultural Resource Use Permit.
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
4-4
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
5.0
RESULTS
The primary goal of this study is to assist FERC in meeting its compliance requirements under
Section 106 of the NHPA, as amended, by determining if issuing a new license for the Project
will have an adverse effect on eligible TCPs. The objective of this particular study is to identify
TCPs that may potentially be affected by Project O&M activities, evaluate their eligibility to the
NRHP, and identify reasonable measures to avoid or minimize Project-related effects.
To date, no TCPs have been identified; however, the study is not yet completed. Regarding the
seven study steps presented above, Step 1 has been completed, Steps 2 and 3 are in progress, and
Steps 4 through 7 remain to be completed. The results of Step 1, which consisted of consulting
with SHPO and FERC on the determination of the APE, are summarized above under Section
4.0 Methodology. Activities completed thus far under Steps 2 and 3 are summarized below.
Step 2 - Archival Research. To date, the following archives have been investigated for data
related to Native American use of the Project area.

The Carlo M. De Ferrari Archive of Tuolumne County, Sonora, CA

The personal library of local ethnographer Shelly Davis-King, Standard, CA

The personal library of Michael Moratto, Westlake Village, CA

The Tuolumne County Central Library, Sonora, CA

The Tuolumne County Museum and Research Center, Sonora, CA

Bureau of Land Management, Mother Lode Field Office Data Files

California Historical Resources Information System, Central California Information Center,
Turlock, CA
Several of these repositories were identified and visited in addition to the list of archives
described under Section 4.0 Methodology. As well, additional archival research, at the locations
described under Section 4.0, will also be conducted, as appropriate. However, not all of those
listed will be visited, as Dr. Moratto has determined that some of these locations, such as the
archives of the Hetch Hetchy Water and Power/San Francisco Public Utility Commission which
focuses on the 20th century history of the Hetch Hetchy system, will not have substantive
information relevant to Native American use of the APE. Dr. Moratto and his associate
researchers have also found that some of the repositories listed under Section 4.0, such as the
Turlock and Modesto Museums, would likely have both limited local information and
information that is the same as other repositories, such as the Tuolumne County Museum and
Research Center. As such, such redundant and limited repositories will not be visited as part of
the study.
Final results of the archival research will be included in the technical report to be prepared under
Step 7, as described above.
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
5-1
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
5.0 Results
Step 3 - Tribal Consultation and Identification of Resources. This step includes retaining the
services of a qualified cultural specialist to conduct the study. It also includes conducting
interviews with Tribal representatives to help identify potential TCPs that may be within the
APE. As described under Section 4.0 Methodology, the Districts have contracted with Dr.
Michael Moratto to complete the Native American Traditional Cultural Properties Study. Dr.
Moratto has been facilitating the archival research efforts detailed under Step 2 and has also been
consulting with Tribal representatives that may have knowledge of the Project APE. To date, Dr.
Moratto has conducted 14 interviews with Tribal representatives from three groups (the
Tuolumne Band of Me-wuk Indians, the Southern Sierra Miwuk Nation, and the Chicken Ranch
Rancheria) and one unaffiliated Yokuts/Miwuk individual that lives in Chinese Camp, California
near the Project. All Tribal consultation conducted to date as part of this study is provided in
Attachment B.
The Districts anticipate completing the study consistent with the schedule provided in the FERC
approved study plan:

Planning/Pre-field Arrangements.....................................January 2012 – February 2012

Field Work (Steps 1, 2, and 3) .........................................March 2012 – December 2012

Office Work (Steps 4 ,5, and 6) .......................................January 2013 – July 2013

Study Proposal Consultation ............................................As needed and Quarterly Reports

Report Preparation (Step 7) .............................................August 2013 – September 2013

Report Review by Agencies and Tribes3 (Step 7) ............September 2013 – October 2013

Report Submittal to SHPO4 (Step 7) ................................October 2013 – November 2013

Draft TCP Sections of the HPMP5 ...................................July 2013 – October 2013

Report Issuance ................................................................January 2014
3
4
5
Non-confidential portions only.
Non-confidential portions only.
Though the HPMP is not the outcome of the proposed study, the results of the study will be used to help draft an HPMP for the
Project relicensing efforts. The FERC generally requests a draft HPMP be submitted with the draft license application and a
final HPMP be submitted with the final license application. However, the participating Tribes and agencies, or SHPO, may
not be able to complete a review of the draft HPMP until all cultural resources management reports documenting completed
studies are provided to Tribes, agencies, and the SHPO.
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
5-2
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
6.0
DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS
The study is in progress, thus no discussion or findings are available at this time.
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
6-1
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
7.0
STUDY VARIANCES AND MODIFICATIONS
There are no variances to the study at this time. However, there is one modification to the study.
The FERC approved Native American Traditional Cultural Properties Study Plan stated that
“Prior to conducting fieldwork on BLM lands, the ethnographer and other Districts’ consultants
will possess a valid Cultural Resource Use Permit issued through the BLM California State
Office and will obtain a Field Authorization through the BLM Mother Lode Field Office.” Since
the study plan was approved, the Districts have received communication from the BLM, via
email, on October 17, 2012 that a Cultural Resource Use Permit and Field Authorization is not
required prior to conducting ethnographic work on BLM-administered lands as part of the FERC
relicensing process. However, written permission from the BLM California State Archaeologist
is required prior to conducting any field work or field visits on BLM land related to ethnographic
research. Therefore, the Districts must obtain written permission from the BLM California State
Archaeologist, and provide any necessary supporting materials, prior to conducting field work or
field visits on BLM land related to ethnographic work.
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
7-1
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299
8.0
REFERENCES
California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP). 1990. Archaeological Resource Management
Reports (ARMR): Recommended contents and format. State of California, Department of
Parks and Recreation, Sacramento, California.
Parker, P.L., and Thomas F.K. 1998. Guidelines for evaluating and documenting Traditional
Cultural Properties. Revised. National Register Bulletin 38. U.S. Department of the
Interior, National Park Service, National Register, History, and Education Division,
Washington, D.C.
CR-02
Traditional Cultural Properties
8-1
Initial Study Report
Don Pedro Project, FERC No. 2299