Tribal Transportation Programs - University of Alaska Fairbanks

142 Pages·2003·0.99 MB·English

NCHRP
NATIONAL
COOPERATIVE
HIGHWAY
RESEARCH
PROGRAM
SYNTHESIS 366
Tribal Transportation Programs
A Synthesis of Highway Practice
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2007 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE*
OFFICERS
Chair:Linda S. Watson,CEO, LYNX–Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority, Orlando
Vice Chair:Debra L. Miller, Secretary, Kansas DOT, Topeka
Executive Director:Robert E. Skinner, Jr.,Transportation Research Board
MEMBERS
J. BARRY BARKER,Executive Director, Transit Authority of River City, Louisville, KY
MICHAEL W. BEHRENS,Executive Director, Texas DOT, Austin
ALLEN D. BIEHLER,Secretary, Pennsylvania DOT, Harrisburg
JOHN D. BOWE, President, Americas Region, APL Limited, Oakland, CA
LARRY L. BROWN, SR.,Executive Director, Mississippi DOT, Jackson
DEBORAH H. BUTLER,Vice President, Customer Service, Norfolk Southern Corporation and Subsidiaries, Atlanta, GA
ANNE P. CANBY,President, Surface Transportation Policy Partnership, Washington, DC
NICHOLAS J. GARBER,Henry L. Kinnier Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville
ANGELA GITTENS,Vice President, Airport Business Services, HNTB Corporation, Miami, FL
SUSAN HANSON,Landry University Professor of Geography, Graduate School of Geography, Clark University, Worcester, MA
ADIB K. KANAFANI,Cahill Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley
HAROLD E. LINNENKOHL,Commissioner, Georgia DOT, Atlanta
MICHAEL D. MEYER,Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta
MICHAEL R. MORRIS,Director of Transportation, North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington
JOHN R. NJORD,Executive Director, Utah DOT, Salt Lake City
PETE K. RAHN, Director,Missouri DOT, Jefferson City
SANDRA ROSENBLOOM,Professor of Planning, University of Arizona, Tucson
TRACY L. ROSSER,Vice President, Corporate Traffic, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Bentonville, AR
ROSA CLAUSELL ROUNTREE,Executive Director, Georgia State Road and Tollway Authority, Atlanta
HENRY G. (GERRY) SCHWARTZ, JR., Senior Professor,Washington University, St. Louis, MO
C. MICHAEL WALTON,Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin
STEVE WILLIAMS,Chairman and CEO, Maverick Transportation, Inc., Little Rock, AR
EX OFFICIO MEMBERS
THAD ALLEN(Adm., U.S. Coast Guard), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington, DC
THOMAS J. BARRETT(Vice Adm., U.S. Coast Guard, ret.), Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT
MARION C. BLAKEY,Federal Aviation Administrator, U.S.DOT
JOSEPH H. BOARDMAN,Federal Railroad Administrator, U.S.DOT
JOHN A. BOBO, JR.,Acting Administrator, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, U.S.DOT
REBECCA M. BREWSTER,President and COO, American Transportation Research Institute, Smyrna, GA
GEORGE BUGLIARELLO,Chancellor, Polytechnic University of New York, Brooklyn, and Foreign Secretary, National Academy
of Engineering, Washington, DC
J. RICHARD CAPKA,Federal Highway Administrator, U.S.DOT
SEAN T. CONNAUGHTON,Maritime Administrator, U.S.DOT
EDWARD R. HAMBERGER,President and CEO, Association of American Railroads, Washington, DC
JOHN H. HILL, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT
JOHN C. HORSLEY,Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC
J. EDWARD JOHNSON,Director, Applied Science Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, John C. Stennis
Space Center, MS
WILLIAM W. MILLAR,President, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, DC
NICOLE R. NASON,National Highway Traffic Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT
JEFFREY N. SHANE,Under Secretary for Policy, U.S.DOT
JAMES S. SIMPSON, Federal Transit Administrator, U.S.DOT
CARL A. STROCK(Lt. Gen., U.S. Army), Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC
*Membership as of March 2007.
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM
NCHRP
SYNTHESIS 366
Tribal Transportation Programs
A Synthesis of Highway Practice
CONSULTANTS
STUART MECK
REBECCA RETZLAFF
and
JIM SCHWAB
American Planning Association
Chicago, Illinois
SUBJECTAREAS
Planning and Administration and Energy and Environment
Research Sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
in Cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD
WASHINGTON, D.C.
2007
www.TRB.org
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM NCHRPSYNTHESIS 366
Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective
approach to the solution of many problems facing highway
Project 20-5 (Topic 36-16)
administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local
ISSN 0547-5570
interest and can best be studied by highway departments ISBN 978-0-309-09779-6
individually or in cooperation with their state universities and Library of Congress Control No. 2006940151
others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation
©2007 Transportation Research Board
develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to
highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a
coordinated program of cooperative research.
In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the COPYRIGHT PERMISSION
American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for
Officials initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research
obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the
program employing modern scientific techniques. This program is copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein.
supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce
member states of the Association and it receives the full cooperation material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes.
and support of the Federal Highway Administration, United States Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be
Department of Transportation. used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, or Transit
The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, method, or
practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document
was requested by the Association to administer the research
for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment
program because of the Board’s recognized objectivity and
of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the
understanding of modern research practices. The Board is uniquely
material, request permission from CRP.
suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee
structure from which authorities on any highway transportation
subject may be drawn; it possesses avenues of communications and
cooperation with federal, state, and local governmental agencies, NOTICE
universities, and industry; its relationship to the National Research The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National
Council is an insurance of objectivity; it maintains a full-time Cooperative Highway Research Program conducted by the Transportation
research correlation staff of specialists in highway transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National
matters to bring the findings of research directly to those who are in Research Council. Such approval reflects the Governing Board’s judgment that
a position to use them. the program concerned is of national importance and appropriate with respect
The program is developed on the basis of research needs to both the purposes and resources of the National Research Council.
The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and
identified by chief administrators of the highway and transportation
to review this report were chosen for recognized scholarly competence and
departments and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific
with due consideration for the balance of disciplines appropriate to the project.
areas of research needs to be included in the program are proposed
The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research
to the National Research Council and the Board by the American
agency that performed the research, and, while they have been accepted as
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. appropriate by the technical committee, they are not necessarily those of the
Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, the American
qualified research agencies are selected from those that have Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, or the Federal
submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation.
contracts are the responsibilities of the National Research Council Each report is reviewed and accepted for publication by the technical
and the Transportation Research Board. committee according to procedures established and monitored by the
Transportation Research Board Executive Committee and the Governing
The needs for highway research are many, and the National
Board of the National Research Council.
Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant
contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of
mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program,
however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or
duplicate other highway research programs.
Published reports of the
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM
are available from:
Transportation Research Board
Business Office
500 Fifth Street, NW
NOTE: The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the
Washington, DC 20001
National Research Council, the Federal Highway Administration, the American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, and the individual and can be ordered through the Internet at:
states participating in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore
not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear
herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. Printed in the United States of America
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished schol-
ars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology
and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in
1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and techni-
cal matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Acad-
emy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration
and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for
advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs
aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achieve-
ments of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the
services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining
to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of
Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative,
to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the
Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate
the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and
advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Acad-
emy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences
and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the
scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both the Academies and
the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. William A. Wulf are chair and vice chair,
respectively, of the National Research Council.
The Transportation Research Board is a division of the National Research Council, which serves the
National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. The Board’s mission is to promote
innovation and progress in transportation through research. In an objective and interdisciplinary setting,
the Board facilitates the sharing of information on transportation practice and policy by researchers and
practitioners; stimulates research and offers research management services that promote technical
excellence; provides expert advice on transportation policy and programs; and disseminates research
results broadly and encourages their implementation. The Board’s varied activities annually engage more
than 5,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and
private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is
supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of
the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the
development of transportation. www.TRB.org
www.national-academies.org
NCHRP COMMITTEE FOR PROJECT 20-5 COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS STAFF
CHRISTOPHER W. JENKS, Director, Cooperative Research
CHAIR Programs
GARY D. TAYLOR, CTE Engineers CRAWFORD F. JENCKS, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research
Programs
MEMBERS EILEEN DELANEY, Director of Publications
THOMAS R. BOHUSLAV, Texas DOT
DONN E. HANCHER, University of Kentucky NCHRP SYNTHESIS STAFF
DWIGHT HORNE, Federal Highway Administration STEPHEN R. GODWIN, Director for Studies and Special Programs
YSELA LLORT, Florida DOT JON WILLIAMS, Associate Director, IDEA and Synthesis Studies
WESLEY S.C. LUM, California DOT GAIL STABA, Senior Program Officer
JAMES W. MARCH, Federal Highway Administration DONNA L. VLASAK, Senior Program Officer
JOHN M. MASON, JR., Pennsylvania State University DON TIPPMAN, Editor
CATHERINE NELSON, Oregon DOT CHERYL KEITH, Senior Program Assistant
LARRY VELASQUEZ, New Mexico DOT
PAUL T. WELLS, New York State DOT TOPIC PANEL
LINDA L. AITKEN,Minnesota Department of Transportation
FHWA LIAISON JODY CLARK,Salamanca, New York
WILLIAM ZACCAGNINO LEWIS GEORGE,Catawba Indian Nation
LEROY GISHI,Bureau of Indian Affairs
TRB LIAISON RONALD HALL,Colorado State University
STEPHEN F. MAHER JOHN HEALY,Fort Belknap Indian Community
SHELDON KIPP,Bureau of Indian Affairs
MARTINE A. MICOZZI,Transportation Research Board
RICHARD ROLLAND,Eastern Washington University
DICK WINCHELL,Eastern Washington University
TIM PENNEY,Federal Highway Administration (Liaison)
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The American Planning Association (APA) could not have com- ering information for us, responding to our often tedious questions, and
pleted a study of this nature and magnitude without the cooperation of clarifying numerous points as we attempted to refine each profile. These
a wide range of knowledgeable individuals involved in tribal transporta- individuals were truly the work horses of the project in helping us
tion programs. In addition to Tim Penney, Native American Coordina- develop a study that was thorough and accurate. We cannot thank them
tor for FHWA, whose agency underwrote the study and who provided enough.
valuable insights on policy issues and program management, we wish We also interviewed the director of each TTAP around the nation for
to extend our gratitude to the entire review panel for their numerous their overall observations, specific regional insights, and comments on
comments, suggestions, and hours of devotion in guiding us toward an the tribal profiles that helped us refine our questions. Two of these direc-
accurate understanding of our subject matter. They include: Linda L. tors, Richard Rolland and Ronald Hall, also served on the review panel.
Aitken, Tribal Liaison for the Minnesota Department of Transportation; In addition, we must thank Evan Hong, Director of the TTAP that serves
Jody Clark, a member of the Seneca Nation; Lewis George, Director of California and Nevada tribes; James Self, Director of the TTAP at Okla-
Planning and Development for the Catawba Nation; LeRoy Gishi, homa State University that serves tribes in Oklahoma, Texas, and
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Washington, D.C.; Ronald Hall, Direc- Kansas; Dennis Trusty, Director of the Northern Plains TTAP, based at
tor of the Tribal Technical Assistance Program (TTAP), Colorado State the United Tribes Technical College, Bismarck, North Dakota; Bernard
University, who was particularly adept in advising us on legal issues; D. Alkire, Director of the TTAP at Michigan Technical University; and
John Healy, Transportation Specialist for the Fort Belknap Indian Com- Cheryl Cloud, Manager for that TTAP, whose organization serves tribes
munity; Sheldon Kipp, BIA Southwest Regional Office, Albuquerque, in the vast area east of the Mississippi River. All took the time to par-
New Mexico; Richard Rolland, Director of the Northwest and Alaska ticipate in lengthy interviews and to review our work in their respective
Tribal Technical Assistance Programs; and Dick Winchell, Professor of geographic areas.
Urban and Regional Planning, Eastern Washington University. These Finally, four individuals affiliated with APA assisted in significant
individuals helped us develop our questionnaire, refine our thinking, ways to advance the report: Lora Lucero, APA staff attorney and editor
and identify numerous sources of information that, in some cases, might of Planning & Environmental Law, reviewed and revised chapter two
have been sufficiently obscure to elude our search if we had not been and added some valuable material to the early drafts; Lynn Ross,
pointed in the right direction. If mistakes remain, it is the result of our research associate, who helped enormously in contacting tribes and
shortcomings and not theirs. securing interviews; Olivia Starr served as an intern in the later stages
In addition, we wish to thank every tribal contact listed in Appendix A. of the project and was indispensable at soliciting additional informa-
As there are more than 30, we shall incorporate them by reference here; tion and identifying gaps in what we were presenting; and librarian
however, in many, if not most, cases, each one devoted long hours gath- Shannon Paul.
FOREWORD Highway administrators, engineers, and researchers often face problems for which infor-
By Staff mation already exists, either in documented form or as undocumented experience and prac-
Transportation tice. This information may be fragmented, scattered, and unevaluated. As a consequence,
Research Board full knowledge of what has been learned about a problem may not be brought to bear on its
solution. Costly research findings may go unused, valuable experience may be overlooked,
and due consideration may not be given to recommended practices for solving or alleviat-
ing the problem.
There is information on nearly every subject of concern to highway administrators and
engineers. Much of it derives from research or from the work of practitioners faced with
problems in their day-to-day work. To provide a systematic means for assembling and eval-
uating such useful information and to make it available to the entire highway community,
the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials—through the
mechanism of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program—authorized the
Transportation Research Board to undertake a continuing study. This study, NCHRP Proj-
ect 20-5, “Synthesis of Information Related to Highway Problems,” searches out and syn-
thesizes useful knowledge from all available sources and prepares concise, documented
reports on specific topics. Reports from this endeavor constitute an NCHRP report series,
Synthesis of Highway Practice.
This synthesis series reports on current knowledge and practice, in a compact format,
without the detailed directions usually found in handbooks or design manuals. Each report
in the series provides a compendium of the best knowledge available on those measures
found to be the most successful in resolving specific problems.
PREFACE This synthesis provides information that will prove useful to tribal governments, and
state, local, and federal agencies, in determining the state of tribal transportation programs,
and the steps needed to assist tribes in developing the capacity to effectively perform and
manage transportation-related functions. The study identifies innovations and model prac-
tices among tribal transportation programs. It summarizes the history and legal and admin-
istrative evolution of tribal transportation programs within the larger context of issues of
tribal sovereignty and relationships with federal, state, and local governments, and local and
regional planning agencies. The report serves as a milestone signifying the inclusion of
tribal governments as an essential component of the transportation community and assesses
future tribal capacity and resource needs.
Overall, 30 tribes of all sizes from across the nation were chosen for surveying and study;
at least one from every state with a large number of tribes. The study also examined the
extant literature in the field. In addition, extensive interviews were undertaken with direc-
tors of Transportation Technical Assistance Program centers, with Tim Penney of FHWA,
and with several officials of the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Stuart Meck, Rebecca Retzlaff, and Jim Schwab, American Planning Association,
Chicago, Illinois, collected and synthesized the information and wrote the report. The
members of the topic panel are acknowledged on the preceding page. This synthesis is an
immediately useful document that records the practices that were acceptable within the
limitations of the knowledge available at the time of its preparation. As progress in
research and practice continues, new knowledge will be added to that now at hand.
CONTENTS
1 SUMMARY
3 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
Purpose of Report, 3
Organization of Report, 4
Study Approach, 4
7 CHAPTER TWO POLITICAL AND INSTITUTIONAL
STRUCTURE OF TRIBES
Tribal Organization and Authority, 7
Tribal Sovereignty, 8
Tribes and Federal Government, 10
Tribes, States, and Local Governments, 10
Tribal Transportation Programs, 12
15 CHAPTER THREE THEMES AND MODELS
Common Themes from Case Studies, 15
Innovative and Model Practices, 30
33 CHAPTER FOUR CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS
FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
36 REFERENCES
37 GLOSSARY
39 APPENDIX A TRIBAL PROFILES
Alabama–Coushatta Tribe
Bad River Band of Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians
Bois Forte Band of Chippewa
Cherokee Nation
Coeur D’Alene Tribe
Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes
Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation
Craig Community Association
Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians
Eastern Shoshone and Northern Arapahoe
Native Village of Eyak
Fort Belknap Indian Community
Ho-Chunk Nation
Hoopa Valley Tribe
Kawerak, Inc.
Makah Tribe
Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation
Navajo Nation
Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation
Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe
Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians
Sac and Fox of the Mississippi in Iowa
Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe
Seminole Nation of Oklahoma
The Shoshone–Bannock Tribes
Southern Ute Indian Tribe
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe
Tohono O’Odham
Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska
Pueblo of Zuni
124 APPENDIX B TIMELINE OF EVENTS IN TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION
125 APPENDIX C TRIBAL CONTACTS FOR QUESTIONNAIRES
128 APPENDIX D SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS
SUMMARY Indian tribal transportation is undergoing significant change; however, relatively little sig-
nificant research has examined where such programs currently are and where they are headed.
This report attempted to establish a baseline for future research by examining numerous
essential details of 30 programs from across the nation, from New England to Alaska, from
Texas to North Dakota. The programs surveyed were large, small, and in between. The study
also examined the extant literature of the field and summarizes the history and legal and
administrative evolution of tribal transportation programs within the larger context of issues
of tribal sovereignty and relationships with the federal government, states, and local and
regional planning. In addition, the study includes extensive interviews with directors of the
Transportation Technical Assistance Program (TTAP) centers, with Tim Penney of FHWA,
and several Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) officials.
The primary vehicle for federal aid to tribal transportation remains the Indian Reservation
Roads (IRR) program. Today, the program consists of more than 25,700 miles of BIA and
tribally owned public roads and 800 bridges, plus 25,600 miles of state, county, and local
government public roads. Authorizations for the IRR program and the BIA maintenance
funds cover only a small fraction of the ongoing needs of tribes, although those authoriza-
tions are steadily increasing, and a new Tribal Transportation Allocation Methodology
(TTAM) is in place to determine direct allocations to individual tribes. The profiles gener-
ated from this study, however, reveal that numerous tribes are seeking, experimenting with,
or implementing additional sources of revenue to fund their transportation needs, including
creative grant writing, flexible financing to borrow against future IRR allocations, tribal tax
and casino revenues, and profit-making tribal enterprises that identify and fill market niches
in the larger regional economy.
Much of what was learned through the synthesis survey was highly contextual. Tribal
transportation managers and their staffs, along with their tribal governments, often make very
specific initiatives and programs work in unique circumstances. For instance, the develop-
ment of tribal transit programs often depends on the proximity of the reservation to neigh-
boring jurisdictions that either already operate transit systems, can cooperate with the tribe
in serving common needs, or can benefit from expansion of the tribal system, at the same
time that tribes lacking such proximity find ways to develop an appropriate level of transit
service in relative isolation.
As a result of these adaptations to circumstance, tribes have incorporated a full range of
responses to opportunities for self-determination and the use of outside assistance such as
contractors. However, there is a marked tendency among the tribes surveyed to have taken
full control of the preparation of long-range transportation plans, with two-thirds of the tribes
surveyed having done this work in-house, and almost none relying on the BIA for a function
that is in effect the central element of decision making for their own transportation futures.
Likewise, two-thirds of these tribes reported that they had taken charge of developing and
maintaining their own inventory of transportation facilities, the central element of the BIA
formula for determining tribal shares through TTAM. Moreover, there is clearly a growing
determination among tribes to assume greater responsibilities for program operation through