Shoshone-Bannock Tribes - Idaho Power

Responses to CommentsIdaho Power CompanyPreservation Officer, responded to the March 5 letter by expressing the Idaho SHPO’s approvalof the river APE in a letter to IPC dated March 13, 1998. In addition, when the FormalConsultation Package for Relicensing (FCP) was published and distributed, the tribes wereprovided the opportunity to comment (IPC, 1997, Formal consultation Package for Relicensing:Hells Canyon Project [FERC No. 1971], 3 volumes, Boise, ID, p. VIII-630). In this exhibit, theriver APE is also referred to as downstream areas (FCP Exhibit E p. 871-CD).The tribes were not notified of the results of the 1998 decisions because Bruce Womack, thenUSFS archaeologist, told Mr. Druss that the USFS did not have to consult with the tribes about asurface inventory. It should be noted that the tribes were consulted more than a year earlier, inJanuary 1997, when the FCP was distributed. The Shoshone-Bannock Tribes did not commenton the FCP (see the specific resources issues in the FLA, Consultation Appendix, section I fordocumentation of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes’ failure to respond).RESPONSE TO COMMENT SBT1-177The ethnographic section is on a confidential CD with other confidential reports. This can beobtained from the BLM or USFS. The Shoshone-Bannock Tribes have declined to participate inan ethnographic study of the HCC.RESPONSE TO COMMENT SBT1-178This comment is too unclear for IPC to try to respond. To what is the Shoshone-Bannock Tribesreferring?RESPONSE TO COMMENT SBT1-179The Historic Properties Management Plan: Hells Canyon Complex (HPMP; called the CulturalResources Management Plan: Hells Canyon Complex [CRMP] in the DLA) (Technical ReportE.4-15) is a working document, incorporating consultation with and input from agencies, tribes,and the public to protect known archaeological sites. Under the terms of a ProgrammaticAgreement (PA) in effect over the term of the new license, FERC, tribal, agency, and publicconsultation will assist IPC in refining the HPMP as the need arises. In addition, periodic reviewand active management of the HPMP would ensure that its actions are integrated with PM&Emeasures from other resources.RESPONSE TO COMMENT SBT1-180The reference in this comment is presumably referring to the Oregon “Sites of ParticularConcern” (DLA, section E.4.1.3.2.2.1.) and Idaho “Sites of Particular Concern”(section E.4.1.3.2.2.2.). Protection measures for the sites below Hells Canyon Dam, includingthese sites, are described in the FLA, sections E.4.2.5.1.5. and E.4.2.5.1.6. The FERC will reviewthese measures consistent with its trust responsibilities under the FPA.Page 74Hells Canyon Complex