Petition for Declaratory Relief and in Alternative Informal Request for Commission Action

Home , Goshute, Simpson Springs

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of ) ) ) UINTAH BASIN ELECTRONIC ) TELECOMMUNICATIONS, LLC ) D/B/A STRATA NETWORKS ) )

To: The Commission

PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF AND IN ALTERNATIVE INFORMAL REQUEST FOR COMMISSION ACTION

NORTHWEST BAND OF SHOSHONE NATION SKULL VALLEY BAND OF GOSHUTE INDIANS

Stephen Díaz Gavin RIMON, P.C. 1717 K Street, N.W., Suite 900 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 871-3772 [email protected]

Their Counsel

Dated: March 27, 2020

Summary

Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (“NHPA”) provides that Native

American tribes be afforded the opportunity to be consulted regarding the means by which adverse effects on historic property will be considered before the construction of the undertaking.1 In the context of antenna towers and communications facilities, the Commission has made clear that applicants and licensees are required to assess whether certain proposed facilities may significantly affect the environment, as defined in Section 1.1307 of the Rules, specifically including construction that might disturb Native American religious sites. In re Sprint Corporation (Consent Decree), 33 FCC Rcd 3440

(Enforcement Bur. 2018). See also In re Nationwide Agreement Regarding the Section 106 [NHPA] Review

Process (Section 106 Agreement), 20 FCC Rcd 1073 (2004).

The D.C. Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals has only recently reiterated that the Commission has a binding legal duty under the NHPA to consider the impact of radio tower constructions on sites of historical, cultural and religious importance to the Native American tribes. United Keetoowah Band of

Cherokee Indians in Okla. v. FCC, 933 F.3d 728 (D.C. Cir. 2019). At no point since the enactment of the

NHPA (in 1966) has the FCC not required historic-preservation review of wireless facilities. Id. at 736.

Uintah Basin Electronic Telecommunications, LLC d/b/a Strata Networks (“Strata”), licensee of cellular radio station KNKN236, has constructed no fewer than five antenna tower sites without first submitting the towers to review pursuant to Section 106 of the NHPA. Strata through its agents has made a series of TCNS filings, which demonstrate that Strata constructed a series of antenna towers beginning in 2001 without submitting them to Section 106 review.

1 54 U.S. Code § 306102(b)(5). ii

The Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation and the Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians of Utah (collectively the “Tribes”), pursuant to Section 5(d) of the Administrative Procedures Act and

Section 1.2 of the Commission’s Rules, request a Declaratory Ruling from the Commission that the radio antenna towers used by Strata for its cellular system have been constructed in violation of the

National Historic Preservation Act (“NHPA”) and consequently should (a) be ordered to cease operation immediately, (b) be deenergized and (c) ordered to have their radio station antennas removed as a result of the violation of federal law.

In the alternative, and pursuant to Section 1.41 of the Commission’s Rules, the Tribes request that the Commission investigate the facts and circumstances under which these towers were originally built and then determine whether it should order Strata immediately cease operating the radio facilities located on the towers and/or determine what remedial efforts can possibly be made so that the towers have been brought into compliance with the NHPA

iii

Table of Contents

Item Page No.

I. Background 2

II. Parties and Interest 4

Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation 5

Skull Valley Band of Goshute 7

The Interest of the Tribes 9

III. The Strata Towers Were Constructed without Undergoing Section 106 10 Review

IV. The Commission Must Follow its Own Rules and Sanction Strata for its 12 Failure to Comply with the NHPA

Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20554

In the Matter of ) ) ) UINTAH BASIN ELECTRONIC ) TELECOMMUNICATIONS, LLC ) D/B/A STRATA NETWORKS ) )

To: The Commission

PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF AND IN ALTERNATIVE INFORMAL REQUEST FOR COMMISSION ACTION

THE NORTHWEST BAND OF SHOSHONE NATION (“Shoshone”) and THE

SKULL VALLEY BAND OF GOSHUTE INDIANS (“Goshute”) (together Shoshone and

Goshute the “Tribes”), through counsel and pursuant to Section 5(d) of the Administrative Procedures

Act (“APA”)1 and Section 1.2(a) of the Commission’s Rules,2 hereby request a Declaratory Ruling from

the Commission that the radio antenna towers used by the cellular radio facilities licensed to Uintah Basin

Electronic Telecommunications, LLC d/b/a Strata Networks (“Strata”) have been constructed in

violation of the National Historic Preservation Act (“NHPA”)3 and consequently should (a) be ordered to cease operation immediately, (b) be deenergized and (c) ordered to have their radio station antennas removed as a result of the violation of federal law. In the alternative, and pursuant to Section 1.41 of the

Commission’s Rules4, the Tribes request that the Commission investigate the facts and circumstances

under which these towers were originally built and then determine whether it should order Strata

immediately cease operating the radio facilities located on the towers and/or determine what remedial

1 5 U.S.C. § 554(e). 2 47 C.F.R. § 1.2(a). 3 54 U.S.C. § 300101, et seq. 4 47 C.F.R. § 1.41.

efforts can possibly be made so that the towers have been brought into compliance with the NHPA. In

support whereof, the following is respectfully set forth.5

I. Background

1. Strata is the holder of cellular radio station license KNKN236 issued by the Commission.

Strata has built and operates towers at least as far back in time as 2001 to provide service authorized by

its license that were constructed without having undertaken its responsibilities under Section 106 of the

NHPA, as listed in Exhibit 1 to this Petition. These towers cannot simply be dismissed as so-called

“Twilight Towers” for which Strata and the Commission should not bear any responsibility6. The fact

is that those towers were erected in violation of the NHPA.

2. Although in the Twilight Towers notice the Commission initiated a further proceeding to

consider a Program Comment to address the issue of Twilight Towers, the Tribes note that nearly 2 ½ years later, the Program Comment has still not been finalized at the FCC itself, much less formally

presented to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (“ACHP”). Indeed, like so much in WT

Docket 17-79, the Commission’s proceeding is completely at a standstill. On August 9, 2019, the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit vacated in principal part and remanded the Commission’s Second

5 The Tribes have previously filed a Petition to Deny the renewal of Strata’s license. See File No. 0008814164. The issues raised herein relate substantially to that Petition to Deny. Accordingly, this Petition should be associated with that file. 47 C.F.R. § 1.2(b). 6 The Tribes are aware that the Commission has proposed a draft Program Comment that would effectively result in “grandfathering” towers constructed in the period 2001-05 without demonstrating compliance with the NHPA. See Public Notice, “Comment Sought on Draft Program Comment for the Federal Communications Commission’s Review of Collocations on Certain Towers Constructed without Documentation of Section 106 Review” in WT Docket No. 17-79, 33 FCC Rcd 10715 (2017) (“Twilight Towers Notice”). Therein, the Commission noted that “FCC will not take enforcement action relating to the construction of Twilight Towers based on the failure to follow any particular method of considering historic preservation issues or otherwise based on the good faith deployment of Twilight Towers.” Id., at 10718.

- 2 -

Report and Order in WT Docket 17-79. See United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Okla. v. FCC,

933 F.3d 728 (D.C. Cir. 2019). More than seven months later, however, essentially nothing has happened in the proceeding, other than the Commission’s acknowledging, as directed by the vacatur of the Second Report and Order in WT Docket 17-79, that like all wireless undertakings, “deployments of small wireless facilities are subject to review to the same extent as larger wireless facilities pursuant to the [NHPA] and the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.”7 Despite the vacatur and remand,

the Commission has taken no further action to date.8

3. Thus, the present state of the law is clear: At the time of the Strata constructions, the

Commission’s environmental rules did then and still require licensees and applicants to evaluate

whether proposed facilities may affect historic properties under the NHPA. See 47 C.F.R. §

1.1307(a)(4). Thus, there should have been a determination made of the Strata sites under the NHPA prior to their initial construction. Strata failed to do so when they constructed the towers.

4. Section 106 of the NHPA provides that a federal agency “having direct or indirect jurisdiction over a proposed Federal or federally assisted undertaking … prior to the issuance of any license, shall take into account the effect of the undertaking on any historic property.” A federal undertaking includes “a project, activity or program” that is “carried out by or on behalf of the Federal agency,”

“carried out with Federal financial assistance,” or that requires “a Federal permit, license, or approval.”

54 U.S.C. § 300320(3); 36 C.F.R. § 16(y). In reviewing the NHPA, the courts have read this definition broadly, stating that “Congress intended to expand the definition of an 'undertaking'—formerly limited

7 In the Matter of Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment (Order), 34 FCC Rcd 9366, 9367 (Wireless Tel. Bur. 2019). 8 47 U.S.C. § 402(h).

- 3 -

to federally funded or licensed projects—to include projects requiring a federal 'permit' or merely

federal 'approval’”9 such as cellular telephone license. It is a requirement upon the Commission and not an option.10

5. Although Strata is not required under Section 319 of the Communications Act to have the

Commission grant prior approval to each and every antenna tower site that it builds to fulfill its

obligations under its FCC license KNKN23611, the fact that the Commission issues an underlying

license triggers the Commission’s obligation to consider the impact of Strata’s antenna towers under

Section 106 of the NHPA.12 The fact that the Strata towers are already built or that they can be

classified as “Twilight Towers” is beside the point. The requirement to consider the impacts of an

undertaking like the Strata towers cannot be unilaterally wiped away. In United Keetoowah, the U.S. Court

of Appeals determined that the Commission had acted arbitrarily and capriciously and in violation of

the APA in unilaterally exempting an entire class of towers from procedures to be reviewed under the

NHPA.13

II. Parties and Interest

6. As a petition for declaratory relief or in the alternative, an informal request for Commission

action, the Tribes must “ ‘set forth clearly and concisely the facts relied upon, the relief sought, the statutory and/or regulatory provisions (if any) pursuant to which the request is filed, … and the interest

9 CTIA-Wireless Ass´n v. F.C.C., 466 F.3d 105, 106 (D.C. Cir. 2006), citing Sheridan Kalorama Historical Ass'n v. Christopher, 49 F.3d 750, 766 (D.C. Cir. 1995). 10 Id. 11 47 U.S.C. § 319. 12 United Keetoowah v. FCC, supra, 933 F.3d at 736. 13 Id.

- 4 -

of the person submitting the request’.”14 Accordingly, attached is the Declaration of Gary J. Montana,

which sets forth the Tribes’ interest. Further, the facts upon which the Tribes rely are the statements of

Strata and its agents in filings with the Commission, of which the Commission can take official notice15.

7. Strata is the licensee of cellular facilities licensed as station KNKN236. By its own admission,

Strata has built and operates towers to provide service authorized by its License that were constructed

without having undertaken its responsibilities under Section 106 of the NHPA.

8. As noted above, under Section 106 of the NHPA, there should have been a review of the

historical, cultural and religious impacts of the construction of those towers prior to their being built.

Further, the Commission’s environmental rules did then and still require licensees and applicants to

evaluate whether proposed facilities may affect historic properties under the NHPA. See 47 C.F.R. §

1.1307(a)(4).

9. Both Tribes have a substantial interest in the restoration and remediation of the sites damaged

by Strata. Similarly, both Tribes have suffered a concrete injury to their religious and cultural heritage as

a result of the conduct of Strata, which has ignored its legal responsibilities for sites of historic,

archeological and religious importance to the Tribes.

Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation

10. The Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation is a federally recognized tribe of Shoshone

people, located in Box Elder County, Utah. They are also known as the Northwestern Band of

14 47 C.F.R. § 1.41, cited in In re Tennant, 359 F.3d 523, 528 (D.C. Cir. 2004). 15 The facts on which the Petition is based are the representations of Strata and its agents in the Form 620 filings made by and on behalf of Strata. Facts contained in submissions to the Commission are facts of which official notice may be taken. Midwest Television, Inc. v. F.C.C., 426 F.2d 1222, 1229 (D.C. Cir. 1970).

- 5 -

Shoshoni Indians that are associated with the State of Idaho, Band of Northwest Shoshone. The tribe's

reservation, the Washakie Reservation, located near the Utah-Idaho border, is 189-acres large. It is

located near Washakie, Utah, although their aboriginal lands stretched into the States of Colorado,

Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, Utah and Nevada.16

11. The Shoshone people are related and call themselves Newe or Neme (the People). Prior to

contact with Europeans, the Newe groups formed small extended-family groupings that traveled

extensively as seminomadic hunter-gathers to survive. Horses, guns, white contact, and disease

destroyed most of their social organization, resulting in more formal identities and band loyalties. Pre-

contact identities did exist to some extent according to the influence of horse ownership and resource

consumption.

12. The Shoshone people lived for hundreds of years and as mentioned, roamed areas of Wyoming,

Utah, Nevada, Montana and Idaho. When horses were introduced to the tribe in the early 1700’s, many

tribal members were able to travel over great distances to hunt many types of game to feed their

families. Groups of extended families traveled together and would gather in larger camps during the

year for protection against enemies, to trade, and to socialize.

13. There were three major bands of Northwestern Shoshone at the time the first Mormon

pioneers began settling northern Utah. Chief Little Soldier headed the misnamed “Weber Ute” group

of about 400, who occupied Weber Valley down to its entry into the Great Salt Lake. Chief Pocatello

commanded a similar number of Shoshone, who ranged from Grouse Creek in northwestern Utah

16 See attached Declaration of Gary J. Montana, which is Exhibit 1 hereto. Unless otherwise noted, the facts contained in this section regarding Parties and Standing are based on this Declaration.

- 6 -

eastward along the northern shore of Great Salt Lake to the Bear River. The third division of about

450 people, under Chief Bear Hunter, resided in Cache Valley and along the lower reaches of the Bear

River. Bear Hunter was regarded as the principal leader of the Northwestern Shoshone, being

designated by Mormon settlers as the war chief who held equal status with Washakie when the Eastern and Northwestern groups met.

14. What became the Northwestern Band of Shoshone Indians was part of those groups that survived by living off the land. The expression “So-so goi” means “those who travel on foot.” The old ones called the Shoshone by that name. When horses became available, the So-so-goi joined mounted hunting groups in annual harvests.

15. On April 29, 1987, the Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation became a federally recognized tribe, separate from other bands of Shoshones. The Northwestern Band of Shoshone were additional signers to the Treaty of Box Elder of 1863.

Skull Valley Band of Goshute

16. The Skull Valley Indian Reservation is located in Tooele County, Utah, approximately 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. It is inhabited by the Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians of Utah, a federally recognized tribe. On October 12, 1863, the band first signed a treaty with the U.S. federal government. In 1917, President Woodrow Wilson signed an executive order established the reservation.

17. The Goshute (Gosiute) refer to themselves as the Newe [nɨwɨ] or Newenee [nɨwɨnɨɨ] ('Person' or

- 7 -

speaking peoples used variants including Kusiutta / Kusiyuttah, Kusiyuttah, Newenee, Gusiyuta, or Kusiyutah when referring to the Goshute People.

18. English variants included: Goshutes, Go-sha-utes, Goship-Utes, Goshoots, Gos-ta-Utes, Gishiss, Goshen

Utes, Kucyut, and Gosiutsi. These names suggest a closer affinity among the Goshute and Ute Peoples than other Numic-speaking groups, such as the Shoshone and Paiute, however Ute, Uin-tah or Utah

Indian were often used as catch-all terms by Anglo-American settlers.

19. The Goshute occupied much of what is now the State of Utah and eastern Nevada. In aboriginal times, they practiced subsistence hunting and gathering and exhibited fairly simple social structure. Organized primarily in nuclear families, the Goshutes hunted and gathered in family groups and often cooperated with other family groups that usually made up a village. The Goshute are an indigenous peoples of the Great Basin, and their traditional territory extends from the Great Salt Lake

(Goshute: Tĭ'tsa-pa - "Fish Water" or Pi'a-pa - "Great Water") to the Uintah Range - to the Steptoe

Range in Nevada, and south to Simpson Springs (Goshute term: Pi'a-pa or Toi'ba). Within this area,

the Goshutes were concentrated in three areas: Deep Creek Valley near Ibapah (Ai-bim-pa / Ai'bĭm-pa

- "White Clay Water" referring to Deep Creek) on the Utah-Nevada border, Simpson’s Springs farther southeast, and the Skull (Goshute: Pa'ho-no-pi / Pa'o-no-pi) and Tooele Valleys.

20. In the 18th and 19th centuries, Navajo and Ute slave raiders preyed upon the Goshute. Unlike

their neighbors, the Goshutes only obtained horses in the late 19th century. The Goshute diet

depended on the grasslands, and consisted mostly of rats, lizards, snakes, rabbits, insects, grass-seed,

and roots. They could not have horses, since horses would trample the grassland and diminish their

food sources.

- 8 -

21. There were five divisions or subtribes: Most Goshutes gathered with other families only two or

three times a year, typically for pine nut harvests, communal hunts for no more than two to six weeks,

and winter lodging which was for a longer period. These gatherings often lasted no more than two to

six weeks, although winter gatherings were longer, with families organizing under a dagwani, or village

headman.

22. The Goshutes hunted lizards, snakes, small fish, birds, gophers, rabbits, rats, skunks, squirrels,

and, when available, pronghorn, bear, coyote, deer, elk, and bighorn sheep. Hunting of large game was

usually done by men, the hunters sharing large game with other members of the village. Women and

children gathered harvesting nearly 100 species of wild vegetables and seeds, the most important being

the pine nut. They also gathered insects the most important being red ants, crickets and grasshoppers.

However a family was able to provide for most of its needs without assistance. Their traditional arts include beadwork and basketry.

23. Prior to contact with the Mormons, the Goshutes wintered in the Deep Creek Valley in dug out

houses built of willow poles and earth known as wiki-ups. In the spring and summer, they gathered

wild onions, carrots and potatoes, and hunted small game in the mountains.

The Interest of the Tribes

24. Both Tribes have a substantial interest in the preservation of traditional cultural properties, and

places of cultural and religious concern within Utah. This includes the restoration and remediation of

sites damaged by antenna towers that were constructed and are operated on these lands by Strata in

violation of federal law, including the NHPA and the National Environmental Protection Act. By

granting the Petition, the Commission can redress the injury to the Tribes. See generally N.J. TV Corp. v.

FCC, 393 F.3d 219, 221 (D.C. Cir. 2004), citing Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992).

- 9 -

25. The NHPA specifically provides that Indian tribes such as Shoshone and Goshute would be

afforded the opportunity to be consulted regarding the means by which adverse effects on historic

property will be considered before the construction of the undertaking.17 In light of the failure to

consult the Tribes prior to the construction of these towers, which were concededly constructed

without regard to NHPA, the Tribes have suffered a concrete injury which cannot be remedied unless the Commission grants the relief requested in this Petition.

III. The Strata Towers Were Constructed without Undergoing Section 106 Review

26. The facts supporting the relief requested by the Tribes are set forth in filings made by Strata

itself.

27. In conjunction with the filing of its application for renewal of license for KNKN236, Strata’s

consultant, SWCA Environmental Consultants, filed five (5) Form 620 TCNS notifications for its

transmitter sites. The TCNS filings, which are Exhibits 267 to this Petition, report on towers which were constructed between 2001 and 2015 without complying with Strata’s NHPA obligations. In each of the Form 620 document packages, Strata acknowledges that it did not comply with the Section 106 process. In no case were either of the Tribes, which have a significant interest in Utah sites, ever notified by Strata or SWCA of these tower constructions.

28. For example, regarding its Bridgeland facility (Exhibit 2 hereto), SWCA reports as follows:

“The Bridgeland telecommunications facility includes an existing 100-foot-tall shelf-supported steel

lattice tower and associated equipment box with a 40-×60-foot (0.06-acre) lease pad, constructed in

17 54 U.S. Code § 306102(b)(5).

- 10 -

2015, in Section 4, Township 4 South, Range 3 West.” Letter from Melanie Medeiros, Principal SWCA

Investigator, to Allen Bennion of Strata (Ex. 2, p. 1). The letter – written to Strata – continues on that

“Although the existing tower was generally evaluated under the FCC compliance rules and regulations,

STRATA did not complete Section 106 historic review prior to construction of the Bridgeland tower because they mistakenly believed that historic review of the tower required under Section 106 of the

NHPA and the FCC's National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) rules completed for the original

Bridgeland tower was also applicable to the new tower,” citing a March 18, 2019 “personal communication” from Strata’s Bennion to SWCA’s Medeiros. Id. (emphasis supplied).

29. Similar explanations are offered for the other tower sites for KNKN236. For example, in the filing for the Sadlier site (Exhibit 3 hereto), there is an exchange of correspondence between Bennion and Medeiros, in this case, a letter dated June 1, 2019 from Medeiros to Bennion. With respect to

Sadlier, Mederios recounts that Strata had contracted SWCA in 2011 regarding a tower constructed in

2005. Again, the failure to have engaged in Section 106 consultation is attributed to a misunderstanding. “Upon discovery of the oversight, STRATA notified the FCC of the omission of

NEPA and historic preservation reviews and commissioned completion of these studies.” (Exhibit 3, p.1).

30. Strata makes similar statements regarding its Naples and Uintah High School sites (Exhibits 4 and 5). For example, in the case of the Naples facility, by letter dated June 1, 2019, SWCA’s Ms.

Medeiros advises Mr. Bennion of Strata that Strata contracted SWCA in 2011 to review the towers, that the Naples tower had been constructed in 2001 and that “STRATA did not complete Section 106 historic review prior to construction of the Naples tower.” Again, this is attributed to an “oversight” and that the FCC had been informed. (Exhibit 4, p. 1).

- 11 -

IV. The Commission Must Follow its Own Rules and Sanction Strata for its Failure to Comply with the NHPA

31. As a general principal of administrative law, an administrative agency must follow its own

rules.18 This principal has been held specifically to apply to the Commission. Reuters, Ltd. v. F.C.C., 781

F.2d 946, 947 (D.C. Cir. 1986) (“A precept which lies at the foundation of the modern administrative

state is that agencies must abide by their rules and regulations.”). In this case, it is the rules and

regulations that govern obligations for the Commission and licensees who engage in the undertakings to comply with the NHPA.

32. The Commission has made clear that applicants and licensees are required to assess whether certain proposed facilities may significantly affect the environment, as defined in Section 1.1307 of the

Rules, specifically including construction that might disturb Native American religious sites. In re Sprint

Corporation (Consent Decree), 33 FCC Rcd 3440 (Enforcement Bur. 2018). Like the site builders in Sprint, where Sprint accepted paying a $10,000,000 settlement payment to the Commission, Strata has constructed the towers notwithstanding that “all required environmental and historic preservation reviews were not completed prior to starting construction.” Id., at ¶ 4. See also Mobilitie, LLC, 33 FCC

Rcd 3450 (Enforcement Bur. 2018); see also In re Nationwide Agreement Regarding the Section 106 [NHPA]

Review Process (Section 106 Agreement), 20 FCC Rcd 1073 (2004).

33. The D.C. Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals has only recently reiterated that the Commission has a binding legal duty under the NHPA to consider the impact of radio tower constructions on sites of historical, cultural and religious importance to the Native American tribes. United Keetoowah Band v.

18 Service v. Dulles, 354 U.S. 363, 388-89 (1957).

- 12 -

F.C.C., supra. At no point since the enactment of the NHPA (in 1966) has the FCC not required

historic-preservation review of wireless facilities. Id. at 736.

34. Section 106 of the NHPA provides that a federal agency “having direct or indirect jurisdiction

over a proposed Federal or federally assisted undertaking … prior to the issuance of any license, shall

take into account the effect of the undertaking on any historic property.” A federal undertaking

includes “a project, activity or program” that is “carried out by or on behalf of the Federal agency,”

“carried out with Federal financial assistance,” or that requires “a Federal permit, license, or approval.”

Id. § 300320(3); 36 C.F.R. 16(y). In reviewing the NHPA, the courts have read this definition broadly,

stating that “Congress intended to expand the definition of an 'undertaking'—formerly limited to federally funded or licensed projects—to include projects requiring a federal 'permit' or merely federal

'approval.’”

35. The statutory requirement for making the Section 106 determination, as noted above, occurs prior to the issuance of any authorization and so, therefore, prior to constructing the facility. Thus, constructing in year 2005, contracting with a consultant in 2011 and finally reporting this original failure to meet Section 106 responsibilities in 2019, as was the case, for example, with Strata’s Sadlier towers, comes nowhere close to the requirements under the statute. Here, the Commission never was able to undertake such a review because Strata never made any effort to engage in the consultation process until now, long after construction. It can fulfill its obligations under the NHPA and its own rules by granting the relief requested by the Tribes.

36. The Commission’s rules and policies require that the impacts on the religious, cultural and historic interests of the Tribes to have been considered. These towers were constructed without regard to the Tribes’ interest. As the Reuters court noted, “Simply stated, rules are rules, and fidelity to the rules

- 13 -

which have been properly promulgated, consistent with applicable statutory requirements, is required of those to whom Congress has entrusted the regulatory missions of modern life.”19 Accordingly, the

Commission should declare that the Strata towers were improperly constructed for failure to comply with the NHPA.

WHEREFORE, in light of the foregoing, the Tribes request that the Commission have been constructed in violation of the NHPA and consequently should (a) be ordered to cease operation immediately, (b) be deenergized and (c) ordered to have their radio station antennas removed. . In the alternative, the Commission should investigate the facts and circumstances under which these towers were originally built and then determine whether it should order Strata immediately cease operating the radio facilities located on the towers and/or determine what remedial efforts can possibly be made so that the towers have been brought into compliance with the NHPA

Respectfully submitted,

NORTHWEST BAND OF SHOSHONE NATION SKULL VALLEY BAND OF GOSHUTE INDIANS

By: ______Stephen Díaz Gavin RIMON, P.C. 1717 K Street, N.W., Suite 900 Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 871-3772 [email protected]

Their Counsel

Dated: March 27, 2020

19 Reuters v. F.C.C., supra, 781 F.2d at 952.

- 14 -

Declaration of Gary J. Montana Petition for Declaratory Relief and in the Alternative Informal Request for Commission Action Exhibit 1 Page 1 of 6

Declaration of Gary J. Montana

I, Gary J. Montana, do hereby state the following:

Background

1. I am a practicing attorney and have practiced federal Indian law for more than thirty (30) years.

2. I am presently Senior Attorney at Montana & Associates, LLC, as well as Senior Instructor of

nearly fifty (50) subjects relating to federal recognized Indian tribal issues regarding various matters of

concern. i.e. Historic Preservation, Treaty Rights, Enrollment etc.

3. I have taught a course on Tribal Historic Preservation for nearly ten (10) years, including, but not

limited to, instructing and certifying tribal historic preservation monitors for site review in the field.

4. I estimate that I have taught nearly 250 tribal employees on the legal mechanics of the National

Historic Preservation Act, 54 U.S.C. §300101 et seq. (the “NHPA”), Section 106 specifically.

5. Montana & Associates has certified at a minimum of 170 tribal historic preservation field

monitors to review sites relating to FCC applicants as part of the Section 106 consultation process.

Interest of the Tribes

6. The Indian tribes that I represent specifically include the Northwest Band of the Shoshone

Nation (“Shoshone”) and the Skull Valley Band of Goshute (collectively Shoshone and Gashute the

“Tribes”).

7. At the direction of and with the authorization of the Tribes, I am making this Declaration in

support of the Tribes’ “Petition for Declaratory Relief and in the Alternative Informal Request for

Commission Action” submitted to the Federal Communications Commission regarding antenna tower sites related to a cellular telephone system licensed to Uintah Basin Electronic Telecommunications, LLC Declaration of Gary J. Montana Petition for Declaratory Relief and in the Alternative Informal Request for Commission Action Exhibit 1 Page 2 of 6

d/b/a Strata Networks (“Strata”).

8. I have personally reviewed the Form 620 TCNS filings made by Strata and which are Exhibits 2-

6 to this Petition.1 The factual allegations in the Petition related to the Strata towers are based on facts contained in those Form 620 TCNS filings.

9. I have also personally reviewed the foregoing Petition being filed on behalf of the Tribes and

have authorized its filing, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Tribes in these matters.

10. Strata has constructed as many as five (5) radio antenna towers in the State of Utah on lands of

historic, cultural and religious importance to the Tribes for the operation of Strata’s cellular telephone

facilities for which Strata has not made the proper studies and consultations with Native American tribes,

including Shoshone and Gashute, in violation of Section 106 of the NHPA.

11. The Tribes have a specific and concrete interest in the NHPA process. The locations of the

Strata towers are on lands of historic, cultural and religious interest to the Tribes.

12. Congress specifically set forth in the NHPA that the Tribes be consulted. They Tribes have

suffered an injury in the form of damage to sites of historic, religious and cultural importance to the

Tribes and the failure to have been consulted originally when the towers were constructed.

Northwestern Band of Shoshone

13. The Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation is a federally recognized tribe of Shoshone

people, located in Box Elder County, Utah. They are also known as the Northwestern Band of Shoshoni

Indians that are associated with the State of Idaho, Band of Northwest Shoshone. The tribe's reservation,

the Washakie Reservation, located near the Utah-Idaho border, is 189-acres large. It is located near

Washakie, Utah, although their aboriginal lands stretched into the States of Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho,

1 TCNS file numbers 183958, 183956, 183957, 128961/183955 and 187668. Declaration of Gary J. Montana Petition for Declaratory Relief and in the Alternative Informal Request for Commission Action Exhibit 1 Page 3 of 6

Montana, Utah and Nevada.

14. The Shoshone people are related and call themselves Newe or Neme (the People). Prior to

contact with Europeans, the Newe groups formed small extended-family groupings that traveled

extensively as seminomadic hunter-gathers to survive. Horses, guns, white contact, and disease

destroyed most of their social organization, resulting in more formal identities and band loyalties. Pre- contact identities did exist to some extent according to the influence of horse ownership and resource consumption.

15. The Shoshone people lived for hundreds of years and as mentioned, roamed areas of Wyoming,

Utah, Nevada, Montana and Idaho. When horses were introduced to the tribe in the early 1700’s, many tribal members were able to travel over great distances to hunt many types of game to feed their families.

Groups of extended families traveled together and would gather in larger camps during the year for protection against enemies, to trade, and to socialize.

16. There were three major bands of Northwestern Shoshone at the time the first Mormon pioneers began settling northern Utah. Chief Little Soldier headed the misnamed “Weber Ute” group of about

400, who occupied Weber Valley down to its entry into the Great Salt Lake. Chief Pocatello commanded a similar number of Shoshone, who ranged from Grouse Creek in northwestern Utah eastward along the northern shore of Great Salt Lake to the Bear River. The third division of about 450 people, under Chief

Bear Hunter, resided in Cache Valley and along the lower reaches of the Bear River. Bear Hunter was regarded as the principal leader of the Northwestern Shoshone, being designated by Mormon settlers as the war chief who held equal status with Washakie when the Eastern and Northwestern groups met.

17. What became the Northwestern Band of Shoshone Indians was part of those groups that survived by living off the land. The expression “So-so goi” means “those who travel on foot.” The old ones called the Shoshone by that name. When horses became available, the So-so-goi joined mounted Declaration of Gary J. Montana Petition for Declaratory Relief and in the Alternative Informal Request for Commission Action Exhibit 1 Page 4 of 6

hunting groups in annual harvests.

18. On April 29, 1987, the Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation became a federally recognized tribe, separate from other bands of Shoshones. The Northwestern Band of Shoshone were additional signers to the Treaty of Box Elder of 1863.

Skull Valley Band of Goshute

19. The Skull Valley Indian Reservation is located in Tooele County, Utah, approximately 45 miles southwest of Salt Lake City. It is inhabited by the Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians of Utah, a federally recognized tribe. On October 12, 1863, the band first signed a treaty with the U.S. federal government. In 1917, President Woodrow Wilson signed an executive order established the reservation.

20. The Goshute (Gosiute) refer to themselves as the Newe [nɨwɨ] or Newenee [nɨwɨnɨɨ] ('Person' or

'People'), though at times have used the term Kutsipiuti (Gutsipiuti) or Kuttuhsippeh, meaning "People of the dry earth" or "People of the Desert" (literally: "dust, dry ashes People"). Neighboring Numic-speaking peoples used variants including Kusiutta / Kusiyuttah, Kusiyuttah, Newenee, Gusiyuta, or Kusiyutah when referring to the Goshute People.

21. English variants included: Goshutes, Go-sha-utes, Goship-Utes, Goshoots, Gos-ta-Utes, Gishiss, Goshen

Utes, Kucyut, and Gosiutsi. These names suggest a closer affinity among the Goshute and Ute Peoples than other Numic-speaking groups, such as the Shoshone and Paiute, however Ute, Uin-tah or Utah Indian were often used as catch-all terms by Anglo-American settlers.

22. The Goshute occupied much of what is now the State of Utah and eastern Nevada. In aboriginal times, they practiced subsistence hunting and gathering and exhibited fairly simple social structure.

Organized primarily in nuclear families, the Goshutes hunted and gathered in family groups and often Declaration of Gary J. Montana Petition for Declaratory Relief and in the Alternative Informal Request for Commission Action Exhibit 1 Page 5 of 6

cooperated with other family groups that usually made up a village.2 The Goshute are an indigenous

peoples of the Great Basin, and their traditional territory extends from the Great Salt Lake (Goshute:

Tĭ'tsa-pa - "Fish Water" or Pi'a-pa - "Great Water") to the Uintah Range - to the Steptoe Range in Nevada,

and south to Simpson Springs (Goshute term: Pi'a-pa or Toi'ba). Within this area, the Goshutes were

concentrated in three areas: Deep Creek Valley near Ibapah (Ai-bim-pa / Ai'bĭm-pa - "White Clay Water"

referring to Deep Creek) on the Utah-Nevada border, Simpson’s Springs farther southeast, and the Skull

(Goshute: Pa'ho-no-pi / Pa'o-no-pi) and Tooele Valleys.

23. In the 18th and 19th centuries, Navajo and Ute slave raiders preyed upon the Goshute. Unlike

their neighbors, the Goshutes only obtained horses in the late 19th century. The Goshute diet depended

on the grasslands, and consisted mostly of rats, lizards, snakes, rabbits, insects, grass-seed, and roots.

They could not have horses, since horses would trample the grassland and diminish their food sources.

24. There were five divisions or subtribes: Most Goshutes gathered with other families only two or

three times a year, typically for pine nut harvests, communal hunts for no more than two to six weeks,

and winter lodging which was for a longer period. These gatherings often lasted no more than two to six

weeks, although winter gatherings were longer, with families organizing under a dagwani, or village

headman.

25. The Goshutes hunted lizards, snakes, small fish, birds, gophers, rabbits, rats, skunks, squirrels,

and, when available, pronghorn, bear, coyote, deer, elk, and bighorn sheep. Hunting of large game was

usually done by men, the hunters sharing large game with other members of the village. Women and

children gathered harvesting nearly 100 species of wild vegetables and seeds, the most important being

2Dennis R. Defa, Goshute Indians, in UTAH HISTORY ENCYCLOPEDIA 228,(Allan Kent Powell ed., 1994); Chamberlin, Ralph V. (1911). "The ethno-botany of the Gosiute Indians of Utah" (PDF). Memoirs of the American Anthropological Association. 2: 330–384. Declaration of Gary J \lonrana Pcrir1on for Declaratory Relief and in rhe . \lternam-e l nformal Rec1ucst for Commission. \uion I·:xhibit I Page 6 of 6 the pine nut. They also gathered insects the most: important being red ants, crickets and grasshoppers. f Jo\veyer a family was able to proYide for most of its needs \Vithout assistance. Their traditional arts include bcadwork and basketry.

26. Prior to contact \vith the Mormons, the (;oshutes wintered in the Deep Creek \'alley in dug out houses built of willow poles and earth known as wiki-ups. Tn the spring and summer, they gathered wild onions, carrots and potatoes, and hunted small game in the mountains.

T declare under penalty of perjury ·that the aboYe is true and accurate to best of my knowledge.

0------... , Dated: March _, 2020 Gary .J. Montana Petition for Declaratory Ruling -- Exhibit 2 Bridgeland Tower

July 8, 2019

Allen Bennion STRATA Networks 211 East 200 North Roosevelt, Utah 84066 RE: Literature Review, Cultural Resource Inventory, and Visual Effects Analysis for the Bridgeland Telecommunications Facility, Duchesne County, Utah Dear Mr. Bennion:

In 2019, SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) was contracted by STRATA Networks to conduct cultural and historical resource investigations for the Bridgeland cellular telecommunications facility located on private land 0.61 mile north/northeast of Bridgeland in Duchesne County, Utah (Figure 1). The Bridgeland telecommunications facility includes an existing 100-foot-tall shelf-supported steel lattice tower and associated equipment box with a 40- ×60-foot (0.06-acre) lease pad, constructed in 2015, in Section 4, Township 4 South, Range 3 West. Access to the tower is via an existing dirt road. The current Bridgeland tower replaced an older 40- foot-tall wooden monopole tower located immediately to the west of the current tower. The purpose of these investigations is to provide information required by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to meet their federal requirements under Section 106 of the amended National Historic Preservation Act, as outlined in the FCC Nationwide Programmatic Agreement (PA) for the review of effects to historic properties (FCC 04-222). Although the existing tower was generally evaluated under the FCC compliance rules and regulations, STRATA did not complete Section 106 historic review prior to construction of the Bridgeland tower because they mistakenly believed that historic review of the tower required under Section 106 of the NHPA and the FCC's National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) rules completed for the original Bridgeland tower was also applicable to the new tower (Allen Bennion, STRATA, personal communication to Melanie Medeiros, SWCA, March 18, 2019). Upon discovery of the oversight, STRATA commissioned completion of NEPA and historic preservation reviews for the current Bridgeland tower. The area of potential effects (APE) for direct effects, as defined by the guidelines set forth in the PA, consists of the area that would be directly impacted as a result of facility construction. For the Bridgeland location, the APE for direct effects is defined by the 0.06-acre parcel containing the physical footprint of the tower and associated equipment box (Figure 2). The PA defines the area of visual effects as 0.5 mile from the tower location for telecommunications towers less than 200 feet in height (Figures 3–10; also see Figure 1); the Bridgeland tower is a 100-foot-tall shelf- Mr. Allen Bennion July 8, 2019 Page 2

supported steel lattice tower. Specifically, the APE for visual effects extends 0.5 mile from the tower location. At the time of the inventory, the Bridgeland telecommunications tower and associated equipment were already in place at the site. The evaluation of the direct effects APE and visual effects APE was conducted after the installation of the tower and associated equipment to assess whether any historic properties were adversely impacted by the completed construction, and if any historic properties will be impacted by the continued operation and use of the completed telecommunications facility. The access road was existing prior to installation of the Bridgeland tower; no upgrades to the existing road were made in association with the construction of the Bridgeland tower. This letter report summarizes the work conducted by SWCA, including the results of a file search conducted through the Utah Division of State History (UDSH), field investigation of the APE for direct effects and the APE for visual effects, and an evaluation of the potential impacts of the project on historic properties. Cultural resources work for the project was conducted under authority of a Public Lands Policy Coordination Office permit issued to Melanie Medeiros of SWCA and Utah State Antiquities Project Number U-19-ST-0426. Photographs of the area surveyed are provided in Attachment A. Literature Review SWCA conducted a file search through an examination of project and site files stored on PreservationPro and maintained by the Utah Division of State History on June 17, 2019, to identify known cultural resources located within the APE for direct effects and the APE for visual effects for this facility. In summary, eight previous projects have been conducted within 0.5 mile of the survey area (Table 2); these projects do not intersect with the direct effects APE for the current project. One archaeological site has been previously recorded within the visual effect APEs for the current project (Table 2; Figure 11). The site has been determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).

Table 1. Previous Projects Identified within 0.5 Mile of the Direct Effects APE

Project Title Consultant Number

U81MB0853 Duchesne River Area Canal Rehabilitation Program MESA U82BE0729 Duchesne River Area Canal Rehabilitation Program Bureau of Reclamation U83BE0671 Duchesne River Area Canal Rehabilitation Program Borrow Areas Bureau of Reclamation U90AK0059 Arcadia Road Survey vic. Bridgeland Archaeological Research Consultants U03ST0975 Three Cell Towers SWCA U12MQ1140 Cultural Resource Inventory of Jones and DeMille’s Lake Boreham Dam Montgomery Archaeological Road Realignment and Public Facilities Corridor, Duchesne County, Utah Consultants U13HO0407 Myton Cell Tower Project, Duchesne County, Utah Bighorn Archaeological Consultants U14MQ0350 Cultural Resource Inventory of Jones and DeMille’s Lake Boreham Dam Montgomery Archaeological Road Realignment and Public Facilities Corridor, Duchesne County, Consultants Utah: Additional Survey for WCD Pipeline

Mr. Allen Bennion July 8, 2019 Page 3

Table 2. Previously Recorded Sites Identified within 0.5 Mile of the Survey Area

Associated Site Number Class Type National Register of Project Historic Places Number Eligibility

U11MQ0761 42DC376 Historic Irrigation Canal–– Determined eligible Duchesne Feeder Canal

SWCA also examined General Land Office (GLO) plat maps and several geographic information systems (GIS) layers for potential cultural resources in or near the survey area. These layers, available from state and federal agencies, include National Register of Historic Places properties, Utah historic trails, Utah historic districts, historical topographic maps, areas of critical environmental concern, and other historical aerial imagery. From these sources, no potential historic features are depicted within or crossing the direct effects APE for the current project. The 1939 Duchesne, Utah, 1:125,000-scale quadrangle shows the access road to the Bridgeland tower as an unimproved road trending northwest/southeast across the top of Blue Bench towards it southeastern tip as well as the Duchesne Feeder Canal in its modern alignment trending around the base of Blue Bench and the town of Bridgeland south of Blue Bench. The quadrangle also depicts a network of both unimproved and improved roads in the vicinity of the tower, including U.S. Highway 40, as well as multiple unlabeled structures. The 1964, Bridgeland, Utah, 1:24,000-scale quadrangle shows many of the same features. A pipeline is also depicted trending generally southeast/northwest across Blue Bench, north of the Bridgeland tower. A review of aerial imagery indicates that several other communications towers are also present on top of Blue Bench, at least one of which is in the immediate vicinity of the Bridgeland tower. The BLM GLO records database was also searched for the section (Section 4) in which the project area is located. GLO records indicate that 12 patents were issued for Section 4 between 1905 and 1937 (BLM 2019). Of these 12 patents, three were issued under the 1865 Indian Fee Patent, six were issued under the 1887 Indian Allotment Act, two were issued under the 1820 Sale–Cash Entry Act, and one was issued under the 1904 Indian Reissue Trust Act. However, the land on which the Bridgeland tower is located was patented by Webb Lumpkin, a Euroamerican settler, in 1918 under the 1820 Sale–Cash Entry Act. The Bridgeland telecommunications facility is located on land that is currently owned by STRATA (Duchesne County Recorder’s Office 2017).

Cultural Resource Inventory SWCA cultural resource specialist Stephanie Slaughter conducted a cultural resource survey of the APE for direct effects on June 18, 2019. The survey area included the 0.06-acre lease pad containing the existing Bridgeland tower and the associated equipment box (Figure 2). The access road was not surveyed because it was existing prior to the construction of the tower in 2015 and because no improvements were made to that portion of the road for the current project. The field methods used in this survey followed Utah State Historic Preservation (SHPO) guidelines for conducting cultural resource inventories in Utah. Field personnel inspected the inventory area using a series of parallel, 15-m-wide transects across the inventory area; however, survey transects were adjusted when necessary to ensure full coverage of the inventory area. Archaeologists examined the ground surface for artifacts, features, and other prehistoric or Mr. Allen Bennion July 8, 2019 Page 4

historic material evidence such as charcoal-stained sediments, as well as aboveground features and structures. If present, special attention was paid to animal burrows to assess the potential for subsurface archeological deposits. If landscape features such as depressions, ditches, mounds, and areas of differential vegetation had been present, they also would have been examined in particular for evidence of the exposure of archaeological materials. Per Utah SHPO guidelines, site and isolated find definitions are based on those provided in the Utah Bureau of Land Management Guidelines for Identifying Cultural Resources, Handbook H-8110 (BLM 2002). No artifacts were collected during the survey. The Bridgeland tower and associated infrastructure is on the relatively narrow and flat tread near the south edge of a strath terrace (Blue Bench) overlooking the Duchesne River to the south; Antelope Creek converges with the river to the southeast. The terrace risers are steep with eroding river cobbles and gravels. Vegetation in the immediate vicinity of the tower consists of a mix of both native and invasive species. Juniper trees are present at the margins of the tread, and the tread itself is covered with bunchgrasses, dropseed, sagebrush, rabbitbrush, and a diverse variety of saltbush, prickly pear cactus, and various forbs including onion, bladderpod, and primrose. Observed invasive species include cheatgrass, mustard, and halogeton. Irrigated agricultural is present in the surrounding area, and riparian environments exist along the Duchesne River to the south and nearby irrigation canals. To the northwest of the tower is a shallow sandsheet, but no eolian deposition is present within 200 feet of the direct APE. A road cut on the north side of the tower shows cobbles with very little sediment matrix (Figure 12). Soils on the tread consists of Kilroy loam, 1 to 8 percent loams, which are characterized as well- developed, well-drained loam to clay loam to gravelly loam alluvium derived from sandstone, shale, limestone, and quartzite and common on strath terraces and fan remnants. The underlying geology of Blue Bench itself is characterized as Quaternary-aged piedmont alluvium common on gravel-capped benches over Unita Formation sedimentary rocks associated with the Paleogene (Early Tertiary) period (NRCS 2019; UGS 2019). Several towers are present on the tread, and a buried water tank is present at the far southeastern tip of Blue Bench. No cultural resources were observed within the direct effects APE during survey. Based on the geological environment, which significantly predates human occupation of North America, and the presence of shallow very gravelly loam and the lack of eolian deposits in the immediate vicinity of the tower, it is unlikely that any significant intact subsurface deposits of cultural material were disturbed during construction of the tower and associated infrastructure, and it is unlikely that the future use and operation of the facility will result in any adverse effects on historic properties. Therefore, it is SWCA’s professional opinion that No Historic Properties are Present within the APE for direct effects. Visual Effects Analysis The analysis of visual effects of the proposed facility consists of evaluating the critical viewshed of historic properties within the APE for visual effects. The critical viewshed is the intended historic view of a historic property that captures the character-defining elements of the property, including setting and feeling. The critical viewshed also includes the intended view from the historic property that captures the character-defining elements of the setting and feeling of the property. Therefore, in order for the facility to have an effect on historic properties within the APE for visual effects, it must be visible within the viewshed when looking at a historic property or within the intended viewshed looking from the property. The APE for visual effects includes the area within which Mr. Allen Bennion July 8, 2019 Page 5 effects from installing the tower could impact historic properties, in this case, through visual intrusion. Based on the results of the UDSH file search, one previously recorded historic property is within the 0.5-mile APE for visual effects. The Duchesne Feeder Canal is a historic irrigation canal that begins at the Lake Fork River to the northeast of the project area and trends generally south and west, winding around the base of Blue Bench in the vicinity of the Bridgeland tower, and connecting with the Duchesne River approximately 7.90 miles west/southwest of the tower. The historic viewshed and setting of the canal remains largely intact with very little modern development in the immediate vicinity of the canal (see Figures 3–10). Bridgeland itself is a very small town consisting of a few farmsteads and ranches and situated between the base of Blue Bench and U.S. Highway 40; a single oil and gas well pad is present immediately south of E. River Road, which runs through the town. From the canal, the Bridgeland tower is visible on the distant horizon (see Figure 11). Atop the bench, only a power pole on the very southern edge of the bench is also visible; the other cellular towers on top of the bench are set farther away from the southern edge of the bench and are therefore not visible. However, the telecommunication facility does not create a strong contrast against the surrounding area as the tower is not particularly tall, and the canal is very close to the base of the bench, which limits the impact the tower makes on the canal’s viewshed. Thus, while the installation of the Bridgeland tower contributed to the cumulative visual effect to the historic viewshed, it did not do so in a manner that negatively affected the integrity of 42DC376. Therefore, it is SWCA’s professional opinion that there is No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties within the APE for visual effects. Summary and Recommendations In summary, it is our professional opinion that No Historic Properties are Present in the APE for direct effects and that there is No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties within the APE for visual effects. Therefore, the undertaking resulted in No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties; no additional work is recommended. Please feel free to contact us if you need additional information or would like SWCA to conduct any additional services on your behalf. Sincerely,

Melanie Medeiros Principal Investigator Attachments: Attachment A. Photographs

References Cited:

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 2002 Bureau of Land Management Guidelines for Identifying Cultural Resources, Handbook H-8110. Bureau of Land Management, Salt Lake City, Utah.

2019 Official Website of the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management General Land Office Records. Online database available at: http://www.glorecords.blm.gov/default.aspx. Accessed July 3, 2019. Mr. Allen Bennion July 8, 2019 Page 6

Duchesne County Recorder’s Office 2017 Duchesne County Parcel Viewer, Parcel ID Nos. 00-0034-8267 and 00-0004-7732. Available at: http://maps.duchesne.utah.gov/flexviewers/Parcels/default.htm. Accessed July 3, 2019.

Natural Resources Conservation Service 2019 Web Soil Survey: Soil Map, Duchesne Area, Parts of Duchesne, Utah, and Wasatch Counties. Electronic application available at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/. Accessed July 3, 2019.

Utah Geological Survey 2019 Geologic Maps. Electronic application available at: http://geology.utah.gov/apps/intgeomap/index.html. Accessed July 3, 2019. Mr. Allen Bennion July 8, 2019 Page 7

Figure 1. Location of the project and the APE for visual effects.

Mr. Allen Bennion July 8, 2019 Page 8

Figure 2. Aerial map showing the APE for direct effects.

Figure 3. View from the Bridgeland tower Figure 4. View from the Bridgeland tower facilities (facing north). facilities (facing west).

Figure 5. View from the Bridgeland tower Figure 6. View from the Bridgeland tower facilities (facing south). facilities (facing east).

Figure 7. View towards the Bridgeland tower Figure 8. View towards the Bridgeland tower facilities (facing east). facilities (facing north).

Figure 9. View towards the Bridgeland tower Figure 10. View towards the Bridgeland facilities (facing west). tower facilities (facing south).

Figure 11. View towards the Bridgeland Figure 12. View of sediment profile in road tower facilities from 42DC376 (facing north). cut, tape at 1 m, on terrace tread (facing southwest).

FCC Form 620 FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Approved by OMB 3060 – 1039 New Tower (NT) Submission Packet Notification Date: See instructions for File Number: public burden estimates General Information 1) (Select only one) ( NE ) NE – New UA – Update of Application WD – Withdrawal of Application

2) If this application is for an Update or Withdrawal, enter the file number of the pending application File Number: currently on file.

Applicant Information

3) FCC Registration Number (FRN): 0001601079

4) Name: Uintah Basin Electronic Telecommunications d/b/a STRATA Networks

Contact Name

5) First Name: Allen 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Bennion 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Wireless Supervisor

Contact Information And 10) P.O. Box: 157 11) Street Address: 2085 US-40 /Or

12) City: Vernal 13) State: UT 14) Zip Code: 84078

15) Telephone Number: (435)622-5231 16) Fax Number:

17) E-mail Address: [email protected]

Consultant Information

18) FCC Registration Number (FRN): 0025883711

19) Name: SWCA Environmental Consultants

Principal Investigator

20) First Name: Melanie 21) MI: 22) Last Name: Medeiros 23) Suffix:

24) Title: Project Manager, M.A., RPA

Principal Investigator Contact Information And 25) P.O. Box: 26) Street Address: 295 Interlocken Blvd. Suite 300 /Or

27) City: Broomfield 28) State: CO 29) Zip Code: 80021

30) Telephone Number: (303)487-1183 31) Fax Number:

32) E-mail Address: [email protected]

1 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Professional Qualification

33) Does the Principal Investigator satisfy the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

34) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

Additional Staff

35) Are there other staff involved who meet the Professional Qualification Standards of the Secretary of the Interior? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

If “YES,” complete the following:

36) First Name: Stephanie 37) MI: 38) Last Name: Slaughter 39) Suffix:

40) Title: Cultural Resource Specialist, M.A.

41) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

2 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Site Information Tower Construction Notification System

1) TCNS Notification Number: 187668

Site Information

2) Positive Train Control Filing Subject to Expedited Treatment Under Program Comment: ( ) Yes ( X ) No

3) Site Name: Bridgeland Telecommunications Facility

4) Site Address: Southeastern tip of Blue Bench above Duchesne River

5) Detailed Description of Project:

The Bridgeland telecommunications facility includes an existing 100 foot tall shelf supported steel lattice tower and associated equipment box with a 40 by 60 foot lease pad, constructed in 2015. Access is via en existing dirt road.

6) City: Bridgeland 7) State: UT 8) Zip Code: 84021

9) County/Borough/Parish: DUCHESNE

10) Nearest Crossroads: E. River Road and 12000W

11) NAD 83 Latitude (DD-MM-SS.S): 40-10-14.2 ( X ) N or ( ) S

12) NAD 83 Longitude (DD-MM-SS.S): 110-13-42.4 ( ) E or ( X ) W

Tower Information

13) Tower height above ground level (include top-mounted attachments such as lightning rods): ______30.4 ( ) Feet ( X ) Meters

14) Tower Type (Select One):

( ) Guyed lattice tower

( X ) Self-supporting lattice

( ) Monopole

( ) Other (Describe): 2

Project Status

15) Current Project Status (Select One):

( ) Construction has not yet commenced

( ) Construction has commenced, but is not completed Construction commenced on: ______

01/01/2015 ( X ) Construction has been completed Construction commenced on: ______

Construction completed on: ______12/31/2015_____

3 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Determination of Effect

14) Direct Effects (Select One):

( X ) No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE)

( ) No Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on one or more Historic Properties in APE

15) Visual Effects (Select One):

( ) No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE)

( ) No Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( X ) No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on one or more Historic Properties in APE

4 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

1) Have Indian Tribes or Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs) been identified that may attach religious and cultural significance to historic properties which may be affected by the undertaking within the APEs for direct and visual ( X ) Yes ( ) No effects?

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______187668 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Blackfeet Nation

Contact Name

5) First Name: Virgil 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Edwards 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Deputy THPO

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______07/17/2019 11) Date Replied ______08/07/2019

( ) No Reply

( X ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Crow Tribe

William Big Day

THPO

07/18/2019

5 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______187668 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Eastern Shoshone Tribe

Contact Name

5) First Name: Josh 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Mann 8) Suffix:

9) Title: THPO

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______07/18/2019 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Fort Belknap Indian Community

Michael Blackwolf

THPO

07/18/2019

6 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______187668 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians

Contact Name

5) First Name: Daniel 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Bulletts 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Environmental Program Director

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______07/18/2019 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Kiowa Indian Tribe THPO

George Carter

07/17/2019

7 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______187668 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation

Contact Name

5) First Name: Montana & Associates 6) MI: 7) Last Name: LLC 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Attorney

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______07/17/2019 11) Date Replied ______07/26/2019

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( X ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe

Candelora Lehi

Tribal Administrator

07/17/2019

8 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______187668 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Cultural Resources

Contact Name

5) First Name: Romelia 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Martinez 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Cultural Resources Tech II

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______07/18/2019 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians

Montana & Associates LLC

Attorney

07/18/2019 07/26/2019

9 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______187668 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Southern Ute Tribe

Contact Name

5) First Name: SUIT 6) MI: 7) Last Name: NAGPRA 8) Suffix:

9) Title:

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______07/18/2019 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Ute Indian Tribe

Betsy L Chapoose

Cultural Rights & Protection Director

07/18/2019

10 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Other Tribes/NHOs Contacted

Tribe/NHO Information

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name:

Contact Name

3) First Name: 4) MI: 5) Last Name: 6) Suffix:

7) Title:

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: /Or

10) City: 11) State: 12) Zip Code:

13) Telephone Number: 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address:

16) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______18) Date Replied ______

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

11 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Historic Properties Properties Identified

1) Have any historic properties been identified within the APEs for direct and visual effect? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

2) Has the identification process located archaeological materials that would be directly affected, or sites that are of ( ) Yes ( ) No cultural or religious significance to Tribes/NHOs? X

3) Are there more than 10 historic properties within the APEs for direct and visual effect? ( ) Yes ( ) No If “Yes”, you are required to attach a Cultural Resources Report in lieu of adding the Historic Property below. X

Historic Property

4) Property Name: Duchesne Feeder Canal

5) SHPO Site Number: 42DC376

Property Address

6) Street Address: North/northeast of Bridgeland on Blue Bench

7) City: Bridgeland 8) State: UT 9) Zip Code: 84021

10) County/Borough/Parish: DUCHESNE

Status & Eligibility

11) Is this property listed on the National Register? ( ) Yes ( X ) No Source: ______

12) Is this property eligible for listing on the National Register? ( X ) Yes ( ) No Source: ______Utah Historic Preservation Office

13) Is this property a National Historic Landmark? ( ) Yes ( X ) No

14) Direct Effects (Select One):

( X ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

15) Visual Effects (Select One):

( ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( X ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

12 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Local Government Involvement

Local Government Agency

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name: Duchesne County Planning and Zoning Department, Planning and Zoning Commission

Contact Name

3) First Name: Michael 4) MI: 5) Last Name: Hyde 6) Suffix:

7) Title: Community Development Director, AICP

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: 734 North Center Street /Or

10) City: Duchesne 11) State: UT 12) Zip Code: 84021

13) Telephone Number: (435)738-1152 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address:

16) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( X ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______07/09/2019 18) Date Replied ______07/29/2019

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( X ) Replied/Other

Although the facility is located near the Duchesne Feeder Canal, we feel that the facility has no adverse impacts on the canal.

Additional Information

19) Information on local government’s role or interest (optional):

Canals traverse private property and generally do not attract public visitation. The presence of a communications tower in the vicinity (and at a much higher elevation) is thus not of major concern or effect.

13 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Local Government Involvement

Local Government Agency

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name: Duchesne County History Center

Contact Name

3) First Name: Margie 4) MI: 5) Last Name: Burdick 6) Suffix:

7) Title:

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: 130 South Center Street /Or

10) City: Duchesne 11) State: UT 12) Zip Code: 84021

13) Telephone Number: (435)738-0436 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address: [email protected]

16) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( X ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______07/09/2019 18) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Additional Information

19) Information on local government’s role or interest (optional):

14 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Other Consulting Parties Other Consulting Parties Contacted

1) Has any other agency been contacted and invited to become a consulting party? ( ) Yes ( X ) No

Consulting Party

2) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

3) Name:

Contact Name

4) First Name: 5) MI: 6) Last Name: 7) Suffix:

8) Title:

Contact Information And 9) P.O. Box: 10) Street Address: /Or

11) City: 12) State: 13) Zip Code:

14) Telephone Number: 15) Fax Number:

16) E-mail Address:

17) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

18) Date Contacted ______19) Date Replied ______

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Additional Information

20) Information on other consulting parties’ role or interest (optional):

15 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Designation of SHPO/THPO

1) Designate the Lead State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) based on the location of the tower.

SHPO/THPO

Name: ______Utah State Historical Society

2) You may also designate up to three additional SHPOs/THPOs if the APEs include multiple states. If the APEs include other countries, enter the name of the National Historic Preservation Agency and any state and provincial Historic Preservation Agency.

SHPO/THPO Name: ______

Certification

I certify that all representations on this FCC Form 620 Submission Packet and the accompanying attachments are true, correct, and complete.

Party Authorized to Sign

First Name: MI: Last Name: Suffix:

Signature: Date: ______

FAILURE TO SIGN THIS APPLICATION MAY RESULT IN DISMISSAL OF THE APPLICATION AND FORFEITURE OF ANY FEES PAID.

WILLFUL FALSE STATEMENTS MADE ON THIS FORM OR ANY ATTACHMENTS ARE PUNISHABLE BY FINE AND/OR IMPRISONMENT (U.S. Code, Title 18, Section 1001) AND/OR REVOCATION OF ANY STATION LICENSE OR CONSTRUCTION PERMIT (U.S. Code, Title 47, Section 312(a)(1)), AND/OR FORFEITURE (U.S. Code, Title 47, Section 503).

16 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Attachments :

Type Description Date Entered

Map Documents Maps 09/09/2019

Area of Potential Effects APE Description 09/09/2019

Local Government Involvement Local Govt Involvement 09/09/2019

Public Involvement Public Involvement 09/09/2019

Historic Properties for Visual Effects Historic Properties for Visual APE 09/09/2019

Historic Properties for Direct Effects Historic Properties for Direct APE 09/09/2019

Photographs Photographs 09/09/2019

Additional Site Information Project Description 09/09/2019

Other Cultural Resource Report 09/09/2019

Resumes/Vitae Resumes_Medeiros_Slaughter 09/09/2019

Tribal/NHO Involvement Tribal Involvement Record_Draft_2019 09/09/2019

17 of 17 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Project location and the APE for visual effects.

Aerial map showing the APE for direct effects. Area of Potential Effects: The area of potential effects (APE) for direct effects, as defined by the guidelines set forth in the PA, consists of the area that would be directly impacted as a result of facility construction. For the Bridgeland location, the APE for direct effects is defined by the 0.06-acre parcel containing the physical footprint of the tower and associated equipment box.

The PA defines the area of visual effects as 0.5 mile from the tower location for telecommunications towers less than 200 feet in height; the Bridgeland tower is an 100-foot-tall monopole tower. Specifically, the APE for visual effects extends 0.5 mile from the tower location.

July 9, 2019

Duchesne County Offices Planning and Zoning Department, Planning and Zoning Commission 734 North Center Street P.O. Box 910 Duchesne, Utah 84021

RE: Invitation to Comment on the Bridgeland Telecommunications Facility, Duchesne County, Utah

To Whom It May Concern,

This letter provides supporting information for the purposes of coordination on project effects for the Bridgeland Telecommunications Facility, Duchesne County, Utah. This coordination is being conducted pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (Title 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 800) by SWCA Environmental Consultants, on behalf of STRATA Networks, to ensure that historic properties were not adversely impacted by the undertaking.

SWCA conducted a file search through the Utah Division of State History, a field investigation of the area of potential effects (APE) for direct effects and visual effects, and an evaluation of the potential impacts of the project on historic properties. No Historic Properties are Present in the APE for direct effects, but one historic property, 42DC376, the Duchesne Feeder Canal, is present in the APE for visual effects. The Bridgeland tower itself is visible on the distant horizon from the nearby canal, and stands out on the landscape as one of the few instances of modern development in the immediate area. However, the telecommunication facility does not create a strong contrast against the surrounding area as the tower is not particularly tall, and the canal is very close to the base of the bench, which limits the impact the tower makes on the canal’s viewshed, and the use of galvanized steel helps to limit the reflectivity of the tower itself. Thus, while the

1 Duchesne County Planning and Zonning Commission July 9, 2019 Page 2 installation of the Bridgeland tower contributed to the cumulative visual effect to the historic viewshed, it did not do so in a manner that negatively affected the integrity of 42DC376 (Duchesne Feeder Canal). Therefore, the undertaking resulted in No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties and no additional work is recommended. A letter seeking concurrence with these findings will be submitted to the Utah State Historic Preservation Office and coordination is on-going with the FCC.

SWCA is providing this information to you in compliance with Section 106 and offers you an opportunity to provide any additional input or comment on the project’s potential effects on historic properties. Please note that we are requesting your review as part of the Section 106 process outlined in the FCC’s Nationwide Programmatic Agreement only and not as part of the local zoning process. Please direct any questions or comment regarding the project and this letter or attached material to SWCA.

Sincerely,

Melanie Medeiros, M.A. Registered Professional Archaeologist 37843972 SWCA Environmental Consultants [email protected] 303.487.1183 office / 720.249.3441 direct

Attachment: Project maps and photograph

2 Duchesne County Planning and Zonning Commission July 9, 2019 Page 3

Figure 1. Location of the project and the APE for visual effects.

3 Duchesne County Planning and Zonning Commission July 9, 2019 Page 4

Figure 2. Aerial map showing the cell tower APE for direct effects.

4 Duchesne County Planning and Zonning Commission July 9, 2019 Page 5

Figure 3. View towards the Bridgeland tower facilities from 42DC376 (facing north).

July 9, 2019

Duchesne County History Center 130 S. Center Street Duchesne, Utah 84021

RE: Invitation to Comment on the Bridgeland Telecommunications Facility, Duchesne County, Utah

To Whom It May Concern,

1 Duchesne County History Center July 9, 2019 Page 2

Therefore, the undertaking resulted in No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties and no additional work is recommended. A letter seeking concurrence with these findings will be submitted to the Utah State Historic Preservation Office and coordination is on-going with the FCC.

Sincerely,

Melanie Medeiros, M.A. Registered Professional Archaeologist 37843972 SWCA Environmental Consultants [email protected] 303.487.1183 office / 720.249.3441 direct

Attachment: Project maps and photograph

2 Duchesne County History Center July 9, 2019 Page 3

Figure 1. Location of the project and the APE for visual effects.

3 Duchesne County History Center July 9, 2019 Page 4

Figure 2. Aerial map showing the cell tower APE for direct effects.

4 Duchesne County History Center July 9, 2019 Page 5

Figure 3. View towards the Bridgeland tower facilities from 42DC376 (facing north).

July 9, 2019

Uintah Basin Standard 268 South Main Street Roosevelt, Utah 84066 Attn: [email protected]

Subject: Request for Public Notice on Bridgeland Telecommunications Facility, Duchesne County, Utah

SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA), on behalf of STRATA Networks, would like to place the following ad in your paper for print on the next available date. Please place this ad in the paper and send an email confirmation of the ad to the email noted below. The following is the text of the Public Notice:

______

STRATA Networks, provides this notice regarding the Bridgeland Cellular Telecommunication Facility, Duchesne County, Utah. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is reviewing the Bridgeland telecommunications facility for potential impacts to historic properties. The Bridgeland telecommunications facility includes an existing 100-foot-tall shelf-supported steel lattice tower and associated equipment box with a 40- ×60-foot (0.06-acre) lease pad, constructed in 2015, in Section 4, Township 4 South, Range 3 West. Access to the tower is via an existing dirt road. Any interested party wishing to submit comments regarding the potential effects of the Bridgeland facility may have on any historic property may send comments to: Bridgeland Telecommunications Facility c/o SWCA Environmental Consultants, 295 Interlocken Blvd. Suite 300, Broomfield, CO 80021, or via telephone at 720-249-3441.

Sincerely,

Melanie Medeiros SWCA Environmental Consultants [email protected] 720-249-3441 Historic Properties Identified in the APE for Visual Effects: Based on the results of the UDSH file search, one previously recorded historic property is within the 0.5-mile APE for visual effects. The Duchesne Feeder Canal (42DC376) is a historic irrigation canal that begins at the Lake Fork River to the northeast of the project area and trends generally south and west, winding around the base of Blue Bench in the vicinity of the Bridgeland tower, and connecting with the Duchesne River approximately 7.90 miles west/southwest of the tower. The historic viewshed and setting of the canal remains largely intact with very little modern development in the immediate vicinity of the canal. Bridgeland itself is a very small town consisting of a few farmsteads and ranches and situated between the base of Blue Bench and U.S. Highway 40; a single oil and gas well pad is present immediately south of E. River Road, which runs through the town. From the canal, the Bridgeland tower is visible on the distant horizon. Atop the bench, only a power pole on the very southern edge of the bench is also visible; the other cellular towers on top of the bench are set farther away from the southern edge of the bench and are therefore not visible. However, the telecommunication facility does not create a strong contrast against the surrounding area as the tower is not particularly tall, and the canal is very close to the base of the bench, which limits the impact the tower makes on the canal’s viewshed. Thus, while the installation of the Bridgeland tower contributed to the cumulative visual effect to the historic viewshed, it did not do so in a manner that negatively affected the integrity of 42DC376. Therefore, it is SWCA’s professional opinion that there is No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties within the APE for visual effects. Historic Properties in APE for Direct Effects: SWCA conducted a file search through an examination of project and site files stored on PreservationPro and maintained by the Utah Division of State History on June 17, 2019, to identify known cultural resources located within the APE for direct effects and the APE for visual effects for this facility. In summary, eight previous projects have been conducted within 0.5 mile of the survey area; these projects do not intersect with the direct effects APE for the current project. One archaeological site, 42DC376, the Duchesne Feeder Canal, has been previously recorded within the visual effect APEs for the current project. The site has been determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).

SWCA cultural resource specialist Stephanie Slaughter conducted a cultural resource survey of the APE for direct effects on June 18, 2019. The survey area included the 0.06-acre lease pad containing the existing Bridgeland tower and the associated equipment box. The access road was not surveyed because it was existing prior to the construction of the tower in 2015 and because no improvements were made to that portion of the road for the current project.

The Bridgeland tower and associated infrastructure is on the relatively narrow and flat tread near the south edge of a strath terrace (Blue Bench) overlooking the Duchesne River to the south; Antelope Creek converges with the river to the southeast. The terrace risers are steep with eroding river cobbles and gravels. Vegetation in the immediate vicinity of the tower consists of a mix of both native and invasive species. Juniper trees are present at the margins of the tread, and the tread itself is covered with bunchgrasses, dropseed, sagebrush, rabbitbrush, and a diverse variety of saltbush, prickly pear cactus, and various forbs including onion, bladderpod, and primrose. Observed invasive species include cheatgrass, mustard, and halogeton. Irrigated agricultural is present in the surrounding area, and riparian environments exist along the Duchesne River to the south and nearby irrigation canals. To the northwest of the tower is a shallow sandsheet, but no eolian deposition is present within 200 feet of the direct APE. A road cut on the north side of the tower shows cobbles with very little sediment matrix. Soils on the tread consists of Kilroy loam, 1 to 8 percent loams, which are characterized as well-developed, well-drained loam to clay loam to gravelly loam alluvium derived from sandstone, shale, limestone, and quartzite and common on strath terraces and fan remnants. The underlying geology of Blue Bench itself is characterized as Quaternary-aged piedmont alluvium common on gravel-capped benches over Unita Formation sedimentary rocks associated with the Paleogene (Early Tertiary) period. Several towers are present on the tread, and a buried water tank is present at the far southeastern tip of Blue Bench.

No cultural resources were observed within the direct effects APE during survey. Based on the geological environment, which significantly predates human occupation of North America, and the presence of shallow very gravelly loam and the lack of eolian deposits in the immediate vicinity of the tower, it is unlikely that any significant intact subsurface deposits of cultural material were disturbed during construction of the tower and associated infrastructure, and it is unlikely that the future use and operation of the facility will result in any adverse effects on historic properties. Therefore, it is SWCA’s professional opinion that No Historic Properties are Present within the APE for direct effects.

Figure 3. View from the Bridgeland tower Figure 4. View from the Bridgeland tower facilities (facing north). facilities (facing west).

Figure 5. View from the Bridgeland tower Figure 6. View from the Bridgeland tower facilities (facing south). facilities (facing east).

Figure 7. View towards the Bridgeland tower Figure 8. View towards the Bridgeland tower facilities (facing east). facilities (facing north).

Figure 9. View towards the Bridgeland tower Figure 10. View towards the Bridgeland facilities (facing west). tower facilities (facing south).

Figure 11. View towards the Bridgeland Figure 12. View of sediment profile in road tower facilities from 42DC376 (facing north). cut, tape at 1 m, on terrace tread (facing southwest).

Additional Site Information: The Bridgeland telecommunications facility includes an existing 100- foot-tall shelf-supported steel lattice tower and associated equipment box with a 40- ×60-foot (0.06- acre) lease pad, constructed in 2015, in Section 4, Township 4 South, Range 3 West. Access to the tower is via an existing dirt road. The current Bridgeland tower replaced an older 40-foot-tall wooden monopole tower located immediately to the west of the current tower.

July 8, 2019

Table 1. Previous Projects Identified within 0.5 Mile of the Direct Effects APE

Project Title Consultant Number

Mr. Allen Bennion July 8, 2019 Page 3

Table 2. Previously Recorded Sites Identified within 0.5 Mile of the Survey Area

Associated Site Number Class Type National Register of Project Historic Places Number Eligibility

U11MQ0761 42DC376 Historic Irrigation Canal–– Determined eligible Duchesne Feeder Canal

Melanie Medeiros Principal Investigator Attachments: Attachment A. Photographs

References Cited:

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 2002 Bureau of Land Management Guidelines for Identifying Cultural Resources, Handbook H-8110. Bureau of Land Management, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Utah Geological Survey 2019 Geologic Maps. Electronic application available at: http://geology.utah.gov/apps/intgeomap/index.html. Accessed July 3, 2019. Mr. Allen Bennion July 8, 2019 Page 7

Figure 1. Location of the project and the APE for visual effects.

Mr. Allen Bennion July 8, 2019 Page 8

Figure 2. Aerial map showing the APE for direct effects.

BRIDGELAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY TCNS No. 187668

Initial TCNS TCNS Response SWCA Submittal Per Tribal Response Additional Clearance Tribe Contact TCNS Response TCNS Preferences on file Comments Contact Date TCNS Preferences Date Outreach Received Blackfeet Nation Virgil Edwards, 7.10.2019 8.7.2019 Email received via TCNS The Blackfeet Nation reviews all TCNS No submittal due to – If the Applicant discovers – 8.7.2019 Deputy THPO indicating no interest in this site. notices. The tribe requests street and email received on archaeological remains or John Murray, THPO topographic maps of the location and well 8.7.2019 from Virgil resources during as any other pertinent information on the Edwards, Deputy THPO. construction, the Applicant proposed project. The Blackfeet Tribal should immediately stop Historic Preservation Office has initiated a construction and notify the Research and Review Fee of $400.00 for appropriate Federal Agency each TCNS matter. and the Tribe. Eastern Shoshone Josh Mann, THPO 7.10.2019 – – The Eastern Shoshone Tribe has Submitted via online established a new online procedure for FCC Tribal 106 system on TCNS review/research. Online submissions 9.9.2019 can now be completed at http://app.tribal106.com. Please include: SHPO response letter, cultural survey report with photos & maps, FCC Form 620 or 621. The Eastern Shoshone has an established fee of $500 per consultation.

Kiowa Indian George Carter, 7.10.2019 – – None on file. Submitted via hard Tribe of Kiowa Treasurer copy on 9.9.2019 to Oklahoma George Carter. Southern Ute Alden Naranjo, 7.10.2019 – – Form 620 to be submitted; no interest in Submitted via email to Tribe NAGPRA Coor. reviewing if no response within 30 days sunagpra@southernute- after receipt of Form 620 nsn.gov & ebbox@southernute- nsn.gov and in hard copy on 9.9.2019.

Ute Indian Tribe Betsy Chapoose, 7.10.2019 – – None on file. Submitted via email to Cultural Rights & [email protected] Protection Director and in hard copy on 9.9.2019

Kaibab Band of Daniel Bulletts, 7.10.2019 – – If the applicant receives no response with — Paiute Indians Environmental 30 days after notification through TCNS, Program Director the tribe has no interest in participating in pre-construction reivew for the proposed site. The applicant, however, must immediately notify the tribe in the event archaeological properties or human remains are discovered.

San Juan Southern Candelora Lehi, 7.10.2019 – – If the applicant receives no response with — Paiute Tribe Tribal 30 days after notification through TCNS, Administrator the tribe has no interest in participating in pre-construction reivew for the proposed site. The applicant, however, must immediately notify the tribe in the event archaeological properties or human remains are discovered.

1 BRIDGELAND TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY TCNS No. 187668

Northwestern Gary Montana, 7.10.2019 7.26.2019 Email received via TCNS stating Please send a letter via email to Submitted via email on Band of Shoshone Attorney interest in site and requesting to Skullvalleybandofgoshutefcctcns@outlook. 9.9.2019 to be contacted. com to initiate consultation. Non- northwesternbandshos compliant towers require a fee of $1500. honetcnsfcctcns@outlo ok.com. Skull Valley Band Gary Montana, 7.10.2019 7.26.2019 Email received via TCNS stating Please send a letter via email to Submitted via email on of Goshute Attorney interest in site and requesting to Skullvalleybandofgoshutefcctcns@outlook. 9.9.2019 to Indians be contacted. com to initiate consultation. Non- Skullvalleybandofgoshu compliant towers require a fee of $1500. [email protected].

Shoshone- Romelia Martinez, 7.10.2019 – – Reviews all new tower builds. No Submitted via email to Bannock Tribes Cultural Resources associated fee listed. [email protected] Tech II om & [email protected] and in hard copy on 9.9.2019.

Crow Tribe William Big Day, 7.10.2019 – – None on file. Submitted via email to THPO William.bigday@crow- nsn.gov & Veronica.Spottedbear@ crow-nsn.gov and in hard copy on 9.9.2019.

Fort Belknap Michael Blackwolf, 7.10.2019 – – None on file. Submitted via email to Community THPO mblackwolf@ftbelknap. org; thpocompliance@ftbelk nap.org and in hard copy on 9.9.2019.

2 Resume

MELANIE MEDEIROS, M.A., RPA, PROJECT MANAGER / ARCHAEOLOGIST

Ms. Medeiros is a project manager and archaeologist in SWCA’s Denver, Colorado, office. She has 12 years of experience in cultural resources management as a professional archaeologist and four years of experience conducting archaeological investigations as a graduate research assistant with the University of Arizona. She has conducted archaeological and environmental research throughout the western U.S., including in Arizona, California, Colorado, Kansas, New Mexico, Texas, Utah, Nevada, and Wyoming.

Her experience has focused on conducting cultural resources work, including historical research, survey and mitigation, site recordation and National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligibility assessments, and data analysis for development and infrastructure projects, particularly those related to the oil and gas industry, to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA/Sections 106 and 110), and state and local historic preservation laws. She has coordinated with clients and federal, state, and local agencies and consulting Native American groups; prepared technical reports (Class I and Class III survey reports, treatment plans, and data recovery reports), peer-reviewed documents, and cultural resources YEARS OF EXPERIENCE sections for environmental reports (environmental assessments [EAs] / environmental impact statements [EISs]); and participated in on-going public 16 outreach efforts on behalf of agencies and clients. Ms. Medeiros has also EXPERTISE served as a senior technical and copy editor for cultural and environmental Regional Specialty: Southwest, reports prepared for a variety of projects conducted throughout the western Colorado Plateau, Great Basin, U.S. She is also a trained ground stone analyst. Intermountain Cultural Specialty: Western Puebloan SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE (denotes project experience prior to SWCA) archaeology, Basketmaker II–Pueblo IV Communications Towers Section 106 and NEPA Reviews, Kern, Los Angeles, periods Riverside, San Bernardino Counties, California; Cheyenne, Denver, El Paso, Moffat, National Historic Preservation Act, Park, Pueblo, Rio Blanco, Weld Counties, Colorado; Custer County, Idaho; Sections 106/110 Duchesne, Uintah, and Wasatch Counties, Utah; Sweetwater County, Wyoming; Commnet/AT&T; CTCI, Southern California Edison, STRATA Networks, and Terracon National Environmental Policy Act Imperial Natural Resources Trona Mining Cultural Resource Surveys, Sweetwater Artifact Expertise: Ground stone analysis County, Wyoming Wyoming Environmental Resource Support; Campbell, Carbon, and Sublette EDUCATION Counties, Wyoming; EOG Resources, Inc. M.A., Anthropology; University of Arizona; 2005 Environmental Surveys for CPS and Anomaly Dig Projects; Adams, Arapahoe, Cheyenne, Elbert, Morgan, and Weld Counties, Colorado; Carbon, Fremont, Hot B.A. summa cum laude, Classical Springs, Laramie, Park, Sweetwater Counties, Wyoming; Colorado Interstate Gas Studies and Interdepartmental Archaeology; Cornell College; 2003 Rangeview Pipeline Gathering System Cultural and Natural Resource Evaluations; Weld County, Colorado; Saddle Butte Pipeline, LLC. REGISTRATIONS / CERTIFICATIONS Environmental Surveys for the Kiowa to Denver Pipeline Replacement, Arapahoe, Registered Prof. Archaeologist; Register Douglas, and Elbert Counties, Colorado; Phillips 66 of Professional Archaeologists; 2015 Environmental Surveys for the Borger to Denver Pipeline Replacement, Lincoln and PERMITS Otero Counties, Colorado; Phillips 66 State of Colorado Archaeological Permit Well Field Development; Duchesne and Uintah Counties, Utah; Crescent Point Energy for Survey and Testing, Statewide (2019-75562) Geothermal Leasing Environmental Assessment for 8 Parcels; Multiple Counties; Utah Bureau of Land Management Utah; Utah Bureau of Land Management, State Office, and U.S. Forest Service Cultural Resource Use Permit Cove Fort Potential Expansion Environmental Assessment; Cove Fort, Millard County, (17UT55126), Principal Investigator Utah; Enel Green Power North America, Inc. Utah Public Lands and Policy Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Cultural Resource Inventories; Multiple Counties. Coordination Office, Principal Investigator (No. 48) Southern Parkway Project; Washington County, Utah; Utah Dept. of Transportation UNEV Pipeline Project; Multiple Counties, Utah and Nevada; Holly Energy Resume

STEPHANIE SLAUGHTER, M.A., CULTURAL RESOURCES SPECIALIST

Stephanie Slaughter is an archaeologist and field supervisor for SWCA’s Denver office, where she performs cultural resources work and leads small crews in the field. She also assists with report writing and preparation.

Ms. Slaughter has over 25 years of experience and has worked throughout the United States. She has extensive experience with Section 106 compliance projects and has worked with several government agencies. She has experience working on a variety of prehistoric and historic sites including site documentation, evaluative testing, excavation, and experience with Colorado Level II documentation. Ms. Slaughter has also been the primary author of a number of medium-sized cultural resource reports, and assisted in the writing, editing, and preparation of several large reports.

SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE ( denotes project experience prior to SWCA) Ajax Mine Ground Assessment Survey; Cripple Creek & Victor Gold Mining Company; Teller County, Colorado. Appel and Shivers Wells; Anadarko Petroleum Corporation; Platteville, Weld County, Colorado. Brancucci HZ Wells; Anadarko Petroleum Corporation; Wattenberg, Weld County, Colorado. CCA - Cedar Creek Anticline, Coral Creek Unit, East Lookout Butte Unit, and Pennel Unit Pipelines and Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) Development Project; Denbury Onshore, LLC; Multiple Counties, Montana. Chokecherry and Sierra Madre Cultural Resources and Madre Environmental Training and Compliance Monitoring; Power Company of Wyoming, LLC; Carbon County, Wyoming. YEARS OF EXPERIENCE 27 Cheyenne River 3D Cultural Resource Services; T-C Oil Company, LLC; Newcastle, Multiple Counties, Multiple States. EXPERTISE CIG Line 78A Anomaly Digs Cultural Resources Survey; Colorado Interstate Gas Section 106 and 110 of the National Company; Hot Springs County, Wyoming. Historic Preservation Act Historic and prehistoric artifact analysis, Clean Line Plains and Eastern 2016 Cultural Field Surveys TO16; Clean Line curation, technical illustration Energy Partners LLC; Multiple Counties, Multiple States. Identification, recordation, testing, and Colby Pipeline Replacement; Tallgrass Energy Partners, LP; Thomas County, excavation of prehistoric and historic Kansas. sites Copper Ridge Subdivision Cultural Resources Support, Interpretive Signage, and EDUCATION Project Summaries; CR Loveland Investments, LLC; Loveland, Larimer County, M.A., Archaeology; Colorado State Colorado. University, Fort Collins, Colorado; 2010 Crescent Point Well Field Development; Crescent Point Energy Corp.; Duchesne B.A., Anthropology e: Archaeology; County, Utah. University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado; 1992 Crested Butte Archaeological Monitoring; Hord|Coplan|Macht; Crested Butte, Gunnison County, Colorado. PERMITS Crow Reservation Irrigation Project Cultural Resource Surveys; Bartlett & West, History Colorado Archaeological Permit (75562), Project Archaeologist; CO Inc.; Crow Agency, Big Horn County, Montana. TRAINING Cultural Resources Support for Olsson/PDC Energy Stonebreaker Section 404 SafeLand USA, PEC Safety; 2017 Permitting; Olsson Associates Inc.; Keenesburg, Weld County, Colorado. Section 106, National Park Service; Cultural Resources Support for PDC's Proposed Bross Well Pad; Olsson 2003 Associates Inc.; Kersey, Weld County, Colorado. MSHA training, MSHA; 2016 Page | 1 Resume

CWCB Emergency Watershed Protection Program – Cultural Resource Support; Olsson Associates Inc.; Multiple Counties, Colorado. Denver Water Williams Fork; The City and County of Denver; County, Colorado. Discovery DJ Services LLC Phase 2 Environmental Pipeline Permitting; Rocky Mountain Midstream LLC; Brighton, Multiple Counties, Colorado. Eastfield Meter Station Environmental Support; Colorado Interstate Gas Company; Weld County, Colorado. . Edge Energy Environmental Services; Edge Energy II, LLC; Weld County, Colorado. Enerplus Natural and Cultural Resource Survey; Enerplus Resources; Weld County, Colorado. Federal Corridor Preliminary Review; Anadarko Petroleum Corporation; Platteville, Weld County, Colorado. Federal DB Farms; Anadarko Petroleum Corporation; Platteville, Weld County, Colorado. JEI Great Western Baseline LE, Brant LD, and Ottesen LE Well Pads; James Enterprises, Inc.; Brighton, Multiple Counties, Colorado. JEI StCroix Reporting Support; James Enterprises, Inc.; Washington County, Colorado. Rangeview Pipeline Gathering System Cultural and Natural Resource Evaluations; Saddle Butte Pipeline, LLC; Weld County, Colorado. Matrix Air Force Academy; Matrix Design Group, Inc.; Colorado Springs, El Paso County, Colorado. Mewbourn 3 Residue East Pipeline Permitting; DCP Operating Company, LP; Weld County, Colorado. Noble DP 703 and DP9 Environmental and Cultural Resource Surveys; Noble Energy, Inc.; Weld County, Colorado. Northridge Development Class III Inventory; Olsson Associates Inc.; Weld County, Colorado. Plan of Operation Support to Eagle-Gypsum Mine; Tierra Group International; Gypsum, Eagle County, Colorado. Portland Mine Site Ground Assessment; Cripple Creek & Victor Gold Mining Company; Teller County, Colorado. Pueblo Mem Airport Wildlife Perimeter Fence; Dibble Engineering; Pueblo, County, Colorado. Riley Ridge to Natrona Pipeline – 2015, 2016; Denbury Onshore, LLC; Multiple Counties, Wyoming. Rocky Mountain Regional Airport CR Support; Navarro Research and Engineering, Inc.; Broomfield, Broomfield County, Colorado. Sand Creek Environmental Assessment Cultural Resources Survey; EOG Resources, Inc.; Converse County, Wyoming. Sarchet 4-32HZ Well Site; Anadarko Petroleum Corporation; Platteville, Weld County, Colorado. Segment 55; Tallgrass Operations, LLC; Multiple Counties, Multiple States. SGM Ratliff and Root Salinity Project - Mancos Pipeline; SGM, Inc.; Mancos, Montezuma County, Colorado. Site Wide Historic Review - Cripple Creek & Victor Gold Mine 2019; Cripple Creek & Victor Gold Mining Company; Teller County, Colorado. Ski Cooper Cultural Resource Survey; ICF International; Lake County, Colorado. Slaterpaull Ault Pump House Archaeological Monitoring; Hord|Coplan|Macht; Ault, Weld County, Colorado. STRATA Networks 16 Towers Cultural and Natural Resource Services; STRATA Networks; Multiple Counties, Multiple States. Tallgrass Cheyenne Connector Pipeline; Tallgrass Operations, LLC; Weld County, Colorado.

Page | 2 Resume

Tallgrass REX Cheyenne Hub Enhancement; Tallgrass Operations, LLC; Weld County, Colorado. Tallgrass Platteville Extension Pipeline Natural and Cultural Resource Survey; Tallgrass Colorado Pipeline, Inc.; Weld County, Colorado. Tallgrass REX Missouri Ground Bed Installation; Tallgrass Energy Partners, LP; Buchanan County, Missouri. Taproot Rockies Midstream USFS Permitting Support; Taproot Rockies Midstream LLC; Keota, Weld County, Colorado. TC Oil Well Pad Section 7, T8S, R1E in SD and WY; T-C Oil Company, LLC; County, South Dakota. Torrey and Bierstadt Well Pads; Anschutz Exploration Corporation; Rio Blanco County, Colorado. Trailblazer 601/602 Environmental Support; Tallgrass Operations, LLC; Ponca City, Multiple Counties, Multiple States. Tungsten Village Cultural Resources Support; Olsson Associates Inc.; Nederland, Boulder County, Colorado. Uinta Wind Energy Project Cultural Resource Survey; Invenergy, LLC; Limon, Multiple Counties, Colorado. USAFA Site Condition Assessments; LG2 Environmental Solutions, Inc; Colorado Springs, El Paso County, Colorado. Wishbone Wells; Anadarko Petroleum Corporation; Platteville, Weld County, Colorado. WPX Energy Williston, LLC; WPX Energy Williston, LLC; Mandaree, Multiple Counties, North Dakota.

; ; . Role: Staff Archaeologist/Project Director. Conduct independent field studies including inventory and evaluations, edit site forms, cartography, artifact illustrations, prepare, write, and edit project reports, curate and analyze artifacts, create database for artifact analysis; serve as mentor for less experienced crew.

3 D Seismic Project; Noble Energy; Weld County, Colorado. Conducted a Class III intensive survey of more than 160 miles of 3 D seismic on the Pawnee National Grasslands. Role: Senior Crew Chief. Recorded and assessed eligibility, tested numerous sites. Assisted project director with coordination and management of data.

Site Excavations; Wyoming Interstate Company; Moffat County, Colorado. Directed the excavation of site 5MF6255, a 7,000+ year old house pit site located along the Yampa River. Excavation was performed as part of the Wyoming Interstate Company’s Piceance Basin Lateral pipeline project. Role: Field Director.

Siphon 4; Denver Water; Boulder and Jefferson Counties. Conducted a Level II documentation of the Siphon 4 of the South Boulder Diversion Canal and Conduit. Role: Project Director/Manager.

Historic Trails Inventory; ; Fremont, Lincoln, Natrona, Sublette, Sweetwater, and Uinta Counties, Wyoming. Conducted and supervised three crews of three on a cultural resources inventory of approximately 250 miles of the historic Oregon, California, Mormon Pioneer, and Pony Express Trails. The field work included identification and documentation of trail trace and cultural resources within the survey corridor, with an emphasis on artifacts and sites associated with the Trails’ period of significance, 1842-1869. The office phase included management of personnel in writing and production of the site documentation and inventory report.

Grand Junction Airport; ; Mesa County, Colorado. Conducted and supervised a crew of six on a Class III cultural resources inventory for the proposed expansion of the Grand Junction Airport. Role: Project Director.

Phase III Mitigation; ; Eagle County, Colorado. Conducted Phase III mitigation of a prehistoric campsite in a planned unit development. Role: Field Director.

Redwine South Nucla 5-22 Pipeline; ; Montrose County, Colorado. Assisted in the partial inventory of nine miles of pipeline for the Redwine South Nucla 5-22 Pipeline project. Included site recording, National Register of Historic Places evaluations, and management recommendations of numerous prehistoric lithic scatters and open camps, and one historic homestead. Role: Field Technician/Assistant Crew Chief.

Proposed Pipeline; El Paso Corporation; Weld County, Colorado. Conducted and supervised two crews on a Class III intensive survey of approximately 7 miles of proposed pipeline. Included facilities such as meter stations, extra work spaces, and staging areas.

Page | 3 Resume

Role: Project Manager. Produced Class III report and monitor and unanticipated discoveries plan for Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the State Historic Preservation Office, as well as Cultural Resources section (RR4) of the NEPA document.

Phase I Block Inventory; ; Eagle County, Colorado. Conducted a Phase I block inventory of 175 acres for a residential and recreational development in Dotsero. Role: Crew Chief.

Class III Cultural Resources Inventory; Colorado Division of Wildlife; Moffat County, Colorado. Conducted a Class III cultural resources inventory of approximately 180 acres for a Colorado Division of Wildlife habitat enhancement project. Role: Project Manager.

; ; Routt County, Colorado. Role: Project Director. Conducted a Class III inventory of nearly 500 acres for Twentymile Coal Company in Routt County, Colorado. Documented and tested sites.

; ; Fremont and Gunnison Counties. Role: Project Director. Conducted a Class III inventory of approximately 400 acres for Bear Creek Environmental in Fremont and Gunnison Counties.

; ; Douglas County, Colorado. Role: Project Director. Conducted test excavations at the Schweiger Ranch Historic Site for the Schweiger Ranch Foundation in Douglas County, Colorado, part of a Colorado Historic Fund grant to the foundation to evaluate features discovered during renovations.

; ; Sweetwater County, Wyoming. Role: Project Director. Conducted a Class III inventory of three well pads and associated access roads for TriHydro Corporation in Sweetwater County, Wyoming. Documented and evaluated sites, produced the report. 12/12/2014 – 12/16/2014; 06/09/2015 – 06/13/2015

; ; Jackson County, Colorado. Role: Project Director. Conducted a Class III inventory of 31.2 miles of 2D seismic lines and associated access roads for Green River Energy Resources in Jackson County, Colorado. Recorded and evaluated sites, produced the report.

; ; Duchesne County, Utah. Role: Crew Chief. Monitored construction of an access road to well pads in the Ashley National Forest for LINN Energy in Duchesne County, Utah.

; ; Rush County, Kansas. Role: Project Director. Conducted a Class III inventory of 4.7 miles of pipeline replacement for Olsson Associates in Rush County, Kansas. Survey included pedestrian survey supplemented with shovel probes. Recorded and evaluated sites; produced the report.

; ; Weld County, Colorado. Role: Project Director. Conducted a Class III inventory of 639 acres for Noble Energy's proposed Development Project 205 and 206 in Weld County, Colorado. Recorded and evaluated sites; produced the report.

; ; Duchesne County, Utah. Role: Crew Chief. Conducted Class III intensive inventory of large blocks for Linn Energy on the Ashley National Forest in Duchesne County, Utah. Assisted in the report preparation.

; ; Adams and Arapahoe Counties. Role: Project Manager. Conducted inspection of the open pipeline trench for the Bronco Pipeline natural gas pipeline for ConocoPhillips Company and Adams and Arapahoe Counties. Managed crew through trench inspection period; produced the report.

; ; Arapahoe County, Colorado. Role: Project Manager. Conducted a monitor of the construction of the State Blanca 1-H well pad and access road for ConocoPhillips Company in Arapahoe County, Colorado. Well is located on the Former Lowry Bombing and Gunnery Range. Produced the addendum report.

; ; Adams and Arapahoe Counties, Colorado. Role: Project Manager. Conducted a Class III intensive inventory of approximately 8 miles of the Bronco Pipeline natural gas pipeline for ConocoPhillips in Adams and Arapahoe Counties, Colorado. Recorded and evaluated sites; produced the report.

; ; Logan County, Colorado. Role: Project Director. Conducted a Class III intensive inventory of 1296 acres for Colorado Highlands Wind Farm Expansion, Phase 2, for Alliance Power in Logan County, Colorado. Recorded and evaluated sites; produced the report.

; ; Weld County, Colorado. Role: Project Director. Conducted a Class III intensive inventory of 1097 acres for a proposed energy development project for Noble Energy in Weld County, Colorado. Recorded and evaluated sites, produced report.

Page | 4 Resume

; ; Norton County, Kansas. Role: Project Director. Conducted a Class III intensive inventory of approximately 1 mile of pipeline replacement for Olsson Associates in Norton County, Kansas. Survey included pedestrian survey supplemented with shovel probes. Recorded and evaluated sites.

; ; Rio Blanco County, Colorado. Role: Crew Chief. Conducted a Class III intensive inventory of a 3D seismic project for Uintah Group in Rio Blanco County, Colorado. Recorded prehistoric and historic sites, including historic oil field facilities; assisted in report preparation.

; ; Dunn County, North Dakota. Role: Assistant Crew Chief. Conducted a Class III intensive inventory for a electrical transmission powerline in Dunn County, North Dakota.

; ; Morton County, North Dakota. Role: Crew Chief. Conducted a Class III intensive inventory of the Minn-Kota transmission line between Center and Mandan in Morton County, North Dakota.

; ; Corson County, South Dakota. Role: Assistant Crew Chief. Conducted Class III intensive inventory of a block on the Standing Rock Reservation in Corson County, South Dakota.

; ; Boulder and Jefferson Counties, Colorado. Role: Project Director/Manager. Conducted a Level II documentation of the Siphon 4 of the South Boulder Diversion Canal and Conduit in Boulder and Jefferson Counties, Colorado for Denver Water. 05/29/2013, 06/19/2013 – 06/29/2013

; ; Logan County, Colorado. Role: Project Director. Conducted Class III intensive inventory of 1992 acres for the Colorado Highlands Wind Farm Expansion for Alliance Power in Logan County, Colorado. Recorded and assessed eligibility of sites; produced report and site forms.

; ; Uintah County, Utah, and Rio Blanco County, Colorado. Role: Project Director. Conducted Class III intensive inventory of 5 well pads for Banko Petroleum in Uintah County, Utah, and Rio Blanco County, Colorado. Recorded and assessed eligibility of sites. Wrote report.

; ; Garfield, Mesa, and Pitkin Counties. Role: Project Director. Conducted Class III intensive inventory of 7 well pads for SG Interests in Garfield, Mesa, and Pitkin Counties.

; ; Duchesne County, Utah. Role: Crew Chief. Conducted Class III intensive inventory of large blocks for Berry Petroleum on the Ashley National Forest in Duchesne County, Utah.

; ; Pitkin County, Colorado. Role: Project Director. Conducted metal detector testing of site 5PT37, the historic town of Ashcroft, along proposed access road corridor for Newland Project Resources in Pitkin County, Colorado. Also performed the archaeological monitor of the road construction and realignment of a hiking trail, as well as wrote the mitigation/monitor report.

; ; Weld County, Colorado. Role: Crew Chief. Conducted Class III intensive survey of approximately 1 mile of mitigation survey for Noble Energy on the Pawnee National Grassland in Weld County, Colorado. Produced report and site forms.

; ; Rio Blanco County, Colorado. Role: Project Director. Supervised 3 crews and conducted Class III intensive inventory of approximately 1300 acres for ExxonMobil in Rio Blanco County, Colorado for mule deer habitat treatment.

; ; Sweetwater County, Wyoming. Role: Project Manager. Managed the inventory, testing, monitor and report production of several well pads in the Rush Unit for ConocoPhillips Company in Sweetwater County, Wyoming.

; ; Weld County, Colorado. Role: Senior Crew Chief. Class III intensive survey of 160+ miles of 3D seismic for Noble Energy in Weld County, Colorado, on the Pawnee National Grasslands. Recorded and assessed eligibility, tested numerous sites. Assisted project director with coordination and management of data. 04/03/2012 – 05/31/2012, 08/13/2012 – 08/16/2012

; ; Weld County, Colorado. Role: Project Manager. Conducted and supervised 2 crews on a Class III intensive survey of approximately 7 miles of proposed pipeline for El Paso Corporation in Weld County, Colorado. Included facilities such as meter stations, extra work

Page | 5 Resume

spaces, and staging areas. Produced Class III report and monitor and unanticipated discoveries plan for FERC and SHPO, as well as Cultural Resources section (RR4) of NEPA document.

; ; Douglas County, Colorado. Role: Project Co-Manager. Conducted Class III cultural resources inventory for the replacement and upgrade of the Platte Canyon Reservoir spillway for Denver Water in Douglas County, Colorado. Recorded and assessed for eligibility the dam and spillway. Conducted archival research for the Level II documentation of the spillway.

; ; Fremont, Lincoln, Natrona, Sublette, Sweetwater, and Uinta Counties. Role: Project Director. Conducted and supervised three crews of three on a cultural resources inventory of approximately 250 miles of the historic Oregon, California, Mormon Pioneer, and Pony Express Trails through Fremont, Lincoln, Natrona, Sublette, Sweetwater, and Uinta Counties in central and western Wyoming. The field work included identification and documentation of trail trace and cultural resources within the survey corridor, with an emphasis on artifacts and sites associated with the Trails' period of significance, 1842-1869. The office phase included management of personnel in writing and production of the site documentation and inventory report.

; ; Mesa County, Colorado. Role: Project Mentor/Crew Chief. Conducted and provided guidance to junior crew chief in the survey and reporting of two well pads in Mesa County, Colorado, for EnCana Oil and Gas.

; ; Weld County. Role: Project Manager. Managed the survey and reporting of a ca. 1200â€™ long pipeline in Weld County for Noble Energy.

; ; Rio Blanco County, Colorado. Role: Project Director. Conducted and supervised two crews of two on a Class III cultural resources inventory of approximately 450 acres for mule deer habitat treatment for Exxon-Mobil in Rio Blanco County, Colorado.

; ; Pitkin County, Colorado. Role: Project Mentor. Provided assistance and guidance to crew chief for Snowmass bike trails and Aspen Pandora ski trails in Pitkin County, Colorado.

; ; Lincoln County, Wyoming. Role: Project Director. Assisted in the survey and recordation of the Oregon/California/Mormon Trail in Lincoln County, Wyoming. Conducted the project as a field test for appropriate technology and methodology to be used in larger project recording the emigrant trails through Wyoming for AECOM.

; ; Campbell, Johnson and Natrona counties, Wyoming. Role: Crew Chief. Assisted in the survey of several pipeline reroutes, facilities, access roads, site revisits, and site evaluations in Campbell, Johnson and Natrona counties, Wyoming for AECOM’s Greencore CO2 proposed pipeline. 05/31/10 – 06/05/10, 08/16/10 – 08/20/10, 09/27/10-10/07/10

; ; Mesa County, Colorado. Role: Project Director. Conducted and supervised a crew of six on a Class III cultural resources inventory for the proposed expansion of the Grand Junction Airport in Mesa County, Colorado.

; ; Moffat County, Colorado. Role: Project Manager. Conducted a Class III cultural resources inventory of approximately 180 acres in Moffat County, Colorado for a Colorado Division of Wildlife habitat enhancement project.

; ; Jefferson County. Role: Project Manager. Managed two projects for Denver Water including a Class III inventory for a dam upgrade in south Denver, and a Phase II photo documentation of an eligible water feature between Denver and Boulder, both in Jefferson County.

; ; Weld County, Colorado. Role: Project Manager. Conducted a Class III cultural resources inventory of five 10-acre well pads and associated access roads for Buys & Associates in Weld County, Colorado.

; ; Fremont County, Wyoming. Role: Project Director. Conducted the salvage of features discovered in a pipeline trench at site 48FR1711, a prehistoric open camp site in Fremont County, Wyoming for Bitter Creek Pipeline LLC.

; ; Fremont County, Wyoming. Role: Field Director. Conducted and supervised a crew of eight on the excavation of site 48FR1419, a prehistoric camp site in Fremont County, Wyoming for Bitter Creek Pipeline LLC.

; ; Rio Blanco County, Colorado; Sweetwater County, Wyoming. Role: Field Director. Conducted numerous inventories for well pads and associated access roads in Rio Blanco County, Colorado for ExxonMobil, and in Sweetwater County, Wyoming for ConocoPhillips Company.

Page | 6 Resume

; ; Weld, Morgan, and Adams counties, Colorado. Role: Crew Chief. Conducted open trench inspection along portions of the High Plains Pipeline project for Colorado Interstate Gas Company (CIG) in Weld County, Colorado. Also inventoried small reroutes for the pipeline in Weld, Morgan, and Adams counties, Colorado.

; ; Fremont County, Wyoming. Role: Project Director. Directed the Lost Cabin to Madden pipeline project for Bitter Creek Pipeline, LLC, in Fremont County, Wyoming. Included inventory of approximately 12 miles of pipeline corridor, both original and reroutes; evaluative testing of several sites; and archaeological right-of-way monitoring and open trench inspection during pipeline construction. 09/07 – 10/07; 04/08; 07/08; 09/08 – 11/08

; ; Montrose County, Colorado. Role: Field Technician/Assistant Crew Chief. Assisted in the partial inventory of nine miles of pipeline for the Redwine South Nucla 5-22 Pipeline project in Montrose County, Colorado. Included site recording, NRHP evaluations, and management recommendations of numerous prehistoric lithic scatters and open camps, and one historic homestead.

; ; Sublette County, Wyoming. Role: Field Director. Directed the inventory of 17 40-acre well pads in Sublette County, Wyoming, as well as the recording and testing of several prehistoric lithic scatters and open camps.

; ; Sublette County, Wyoming. Role: Field Director. Directed the inventory (and associated site testing) of over 950 acres of BLM land in Sublette County, Wyoming for EnCana Oil and Gas (USA), Inc.'s proposed temporary personnel housing project.

; ; Weld County, Colorado. Role: Crew Chief. Assisted in the completion of additional fieldwork for the CIG High Plains Pipeline Project in Weld County, Colorado.

; ; Moffat County, Colorado. Role: Field Director. Directed the excavation of site 5MF6255, a 7,000+ year old house pit site located along the Yampa River in Moffat County, Colorado. Excavation was performed as part of the Wyoming Interstate Company's (WIC) Piceance Basin Lateral pipeline project.

; ; Rio Blanco County, Colorado. Role: Field Director. Directed the excavation of prehistoric camp site, 5RB5174, in Rio Blanco County, Colorado, for the WIC Piceance Basin Lateral pipeline project.

; ; Sweetwater, Lincoln, Uinta, and Sublette counties, Wyoming. Role: Field Director. Surveyed various well pads in Sweetwater, Lincoln, Uinta, and Sublette counties, Wyoming, and supervised testing of several sites in Sublette County for various companies, including Stone Energy, Inc., Hunter Energy LLC, Burlington Resources, and Cabot Oil and Gas.

; ; Sweetwater County, Wyoming. Role: Field Director. Directed the survey of six block inventories for CIG in Sweetwater County, Wyoming, and supervised associated site testing.

; ; Sweetwater County, Wyoming. Role: Field Director. Directed the survey of four miles of pipeline for CIG in Sweetwater County, Wyoming.

; ; Yuma County, Colorado. Role: Field Director. Surveyed numerous 10-acre well pads for the Houston Energy Company in Yuma County, Colorado.

; ; Yuma and Washington Counties, Colorado. Role: Field Director. Directed the linear survey of about 30 miles of pipeline and access roads for Cheyenne Plains Pipeline Company in Yuma and Washington Counties, Colorado.

; ; Sweetwater County, Wyoming. Role: Field Director. Surveyed several 40-acre well pads and associated access roads and pipelines for Burlington Resources in Sweetwater County, Wyoming.

; ; Garfield County, Colorado. Role: Field Director. Directed the block survey of six 40-acre well pads and associated access roads and pipelines for EnCana Oil & Gas in Garfield County, Colorado.

; ; Garfield County, Colorado. Role: Field Director. Directed two crews for the block survey of eight 40-acre well pads and associated access roads for EnCana Oil & Gas in the Gant Gulch GAP, Garfield County, Colorado.

Page | 7 Resume

; ; Sweetwater County, Wyoming, and Rio Blanco and Moffat counties, Colorado. Role: Field Director. Directed the linear survey of over 100 miles of access road for the WIC Piceance Basin Lateral pipeline in Sweetwater County, Wyoming, and Rio Blanco and Moffat counties, Colorado.

; ; Wamsutter, Wyoming to Greasewood Gulch, Colorado. Role: Field Director. Directed the linear survey of 140 miles of pipeline from Wamsutter, Wyoming to Greasewood Gulch, Colorado for the WIC Piceance Basin Lateral pipeline in Sweetwater County, Wyoming and Rio Blanco and Moffat Counties, Colorado; also directed associated site testing.

; ; Moffat County, Colorado. Role: Field Director. Directed the block survey of 1000 acres on Kennicott Coal Mine lease land in Moffat County. Colorado.

; ; Garfield County, Colorado. Role: Field Director. Directed the block survey of nearly 2000 acres on Grass Mesa for EnCana Oil and Gas Companyâ€™s Geographic Area Plans (GAP) in Garfield County, Colorado.

; ; Grand County, Colorado. Role: Field Director. Directed the block survey of nearly 2000 acres in Middle Park for a land exchange between the BLM and a private party in Grand County, Colorado.

; ; Kit Carson, Morgan, Washington, Weld, and Yuma Counties, Colorado. Role: Crew Chief/Field Technician. Phase I linear and block inventories of access roads, extra work spaces, and staging areas for the CIG Cheyenne Plains pipeline in Kit Carson, Morgan, Washington, Weld, and Yuma Counties, Colorado.

; ; Sweetwater County, Wyoming. Role: Crew Chief/Field Technician. Phase I block inventory of a section for proposed energy development for Ensign Operations Company in Sweetwater County, Wyoming.

; ; Wyoming. Role: Laboratory Analyst. Curation and analysis of lithic artifacts from two sites in southwestern Wyoming: Maxon Ranch and Nomad; included creation and management of a Microsoft Access database.

; ; Montrose County, Colorado. Role: Crew Chief/Field Technician. Phases I and II linear and block inventories of well pads and pipelines for Cabot-Sabertooth in Montrose County, Colorado.

; ; Eagle County, Colorado. Role: Field Director. Phase III mitigation of a prehistoric campsite in a planned unit development in Eagle County, Colorado.

; ; Sweetwater County, Wyoming. Role: Crew Chief. Phase III block excavation of two prehistoric campsites, the Maxon Ranch and Nomad sites, for Questar in Sweetwater County, Wyoming.

; ; Douglas County, Colorado. Role: Crew Chief. Phase III block excavation of the Sarah Gulch site, a prehistoric lithic procurement/campsite along a gas pipeline for CIG in Douglas County, Colorado.

; ; Mesa County, Colorado. Role: Crew Chief. Phase I block inventory of several parcels for the BLM, Grand Junction Field Office for a fuel reduction project in Mesa County, Colorado.

; ; Snake River, Teton County, Wyoming. Role: Crew Chief. Phase I block inventory and Phase II testing of a proposed land development on the east bank of the Snake River, Teton County, Wyoming.

; ; Converse County, Wyoming. Role: Crew Chief. Phase III mitigation of a prehistoric campsite for Colorado CIG in Converse County, Wyoming.

; ; Kit Carson, Morgan, Washington, Weld, and Yuma Counties, Colorado. Role: Crew Chief. Phase I linear inventory of the CIG Cheyenne Plains pipeline in Kit Carson, Morgan, Washington, Weld, and Yuma Counties, Colorado; also Phase II testing of a site along the route.

; ; Laramie, Platte and Converse counties, Wyoming and Weld County, Colorado. Role: Crew Chief. Phase I linear inventory of a proposed natural gas pipeline for Wyoming Interstate Company (WIC) in Laramie, Platte and Converse counties, Wyoming and Weld County, Colorado.

Page | 8 Resume

; ; Weld County, Colorado. Role: Crew Chief. Phase I linear inventory of a proposed natural gas pipeline for CIG in Weld County, Colorado; also Phase II testing of a stone ring site along the proposed alignment.

; ; Adams, Arapahoe, Douglas, and El Paso counties, Colorado. Role: Crew Chief. Phase I linear inventory of a natural gas pipeline for CIG in Adams, Arapahoe, Douglas, and El Paso counties, Colorado; also Phase II testing of several sites along the proposed alignment.

; ; Dotsero (Eagle County), Colorado. Role: Crew Chief. Phase I block inventory of 175 acres for a residential and recreational development in Dotsero (Eagle County), Colorado.

; ; Fort Morgan, Colorado. Role: Crew Chief. Phase I linear and block inventory of a storage field update for CIG south of Fort Morgan, Colorado.

; ; Pueblo, Colorado. Role: Crew Chief. Phase I block inventory for a meter station for CIG north of Pueblo, Colorado.

; ; southwestern Wyoming. Role: Assistant Crew Chief. Phase I block inventory for oil and gas exploration in southwestern Wyoming.

; ; Nephi, Utah (Carbon, Sanpete, and Juab counties). Role: Crew Chief. Phase I linear inventory of proposed access roads and reroutes for the proposed natural gas pipeline for CIG from Price to west of Nephi, Utah (Carbon, Sanpete, and Juab counties).

; ; Watkins, Colorado. Role: Crew Chief. Phase I block and linear inventory for a storage field update for CIG northeast of Watkins, Colorado.

; ; Price to west of Nephi, Utah (Carbon, Sanpete, and Juab counties). Role: Crew Chief. Phase I linear inventory of a proposed natural gas pipeline for CIG from Price to west of Nephi, Utah (Carbon, Sanpete, and Juab counties); also, Phase II testing of sites along the proposed alignment.

; ; Oak Creek, Colorado. Role: Assistant Crew Chief. Phase I inventory of seismic lines and drill pads for Cyprus Twentymile Coal Company in Oak Creek, Colorado.

; ; southwestern Wyoming. Role: Assistant Crew Chief. Phase II recordation and testing of sites for proposed well pads, pipelines, and access roads in southwestern Wyoming.

; ; Wheatland, Wyoming. Role: Assistant Crew Chief. Phase I linear inventory of a proposed reroute of the Medicine Bow Pipeline for WIC around Wheatland, Wyoming.

; ; Cheyenne Compressor Station, Colorado to Douglas, Wyoming. Role: Assistant Crew Chief. Phase I linear inventory of the proposed Medicine Bow natural gas Pipeline for WIC from the Cheyenne Compressor Station, Colorado to Douglas, Wyoming. Also Phase II testing of several sites along the proposed alignment.

; ; Sinclair to Lost Cabin, Wyoming. Role: Assistant Crew Chief. Phase I linear inventory of a proposed natural gas pipeline for WIC from Sinclair to Lost Cabin, Wyoming. Also Phase II testing of several sites along the proposed alignment.

; ; Red Desert, Wyoming. Role: Field Technician. Phase II testing of sites along a proposed natural gas pipeline in the Red Desert, Wyoming.

; ; Vernal, Utah (Uintah County). Role: Field Technician. Phase I linear inventory of a proposed natural gas pipeline in Vernal, Utah (Uintah County). Also Phase I block and linear inventory for proposed well pads and pipelines in southwestern Wyoming.

; ; Lake Sacagawea, Montrail County, North Dakota. Role: Field Technician. Phase III block excavation of a PaleoIndian (Agate Basin) bison bone bed/kill site for the Army Corps of Engineers on Beacon Island in Lake Sacagawea, Montrail County, North Dakota.

; ; Colorado Springs, Colorado. Role: Student Research Assistant. Predictive archaeological modeling project for the Fort Carson Military Reservation, Colorado Springs, Colorado. Responsible for data compilation and categorization of prehistoric archaeological sites, data compilation on previous archaeological surveys, and preparation of chapters on Environmental Background and Prehistoric Overview.

Page | 9 Resume

; ; Joliet, Illinois to South Bend, Indiana. Role: Field Technician. Phase I linear inventory for a proposed natural gas pipeline for Vector Oil Company from Joliet, Illinois to South Bend, Indiana.

; ; Chicago, Illinois. Role: Field Technician. Phase I linear inventory of a proposed natural gas pipeline for Lakehead Gas company west of Chicago, Illinois.

; ; New York State, from Erie, Pennsylvania to New York City. Role: Field Technician. Phase I linear survey of a proposed natural gas pipeline for Columbia Gas Company along the Southern Tier counties of New York State, from Erie, Pennsylvania to New York City.

; ; Columbus, Ohio. Role: Field Technician. Phase II testing of a prehistoric site, for an ODOT expansion project in Columbus, Ohio.

; ; central Michigan through northwestern Minnesota/Canada. Role: Field Technician. Phase I linear inventory for a proposed natural gas pipeline for Great Lakes Gas Company from central Michigan through northwestern Minnesota/Canada. Also Phase II testing of several sites along the proposed alignment.

; ; Washington, Indiana. Role: Field Technician. Phase I block inventory for a proposed corn processing plant in Washington, Indiana.

; ; Moundsville, West Virginia. Role: Field Technician. Phase I linear and block inventory for a proposed natural gas pipeline for Columbia Gas Company in Moundsville, West Virginia.

; ; Beckley, West Virginia. Role: Field Technician. Phase II testing of a prehistoric site for Columbia Gas Company south of Beckley, West Virginia.

; ; Richmond, Kentucky. Role: Field Technician. Phase II testing of two prehistoric sites on the Bluegrass Army Depot, for the U.S. Army, east of Richmond, Kentucky.

; ; Cincinnati, Ohio. Role: Field Technician. Phase I linear inventory for an ODOT expansion project of Highway 22 in Cincinnati, Ohio.

; ; Charleston, West Virginia. Role: Field Technician. Phase I linear inventory of a proposed natural gas pipeline and road access for Columbia Gas Company east of Charleston, West Virginia.

; ; Charleston, West Virginia. Role: Field Technician. Phase III excavation of a multi-component prehistoric site for a compressor station expansion project for Columbia Gas Company, 16 miles east of Charleston, West Virginia.

; ; Dayton, Ohio. Role: Field Technician. Phase II testing of a 19th century distillery located southeast of Dayton, Ohio.

; ; Indianapolis, Indiana. Role: Field Technician. Phase I block inventory of sections of Fort Benjamin Harrison for the U.S. Army north of Indianapolis, Indiana.

; ; Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Role: Field Technician. Phase I linear inventory for a proposed natural gas pipeline for Columbia Gas Company in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.

; ; southwestern Pennsylvania. Role: Field Technician. Phase I linear inventory of a proposed natural gas pipeline for Columbia Gas Company in southwestern Pennsylvania.

; ; Wind River and Big Horn Basins, Wyoming. Role: Field Technician. Phase II testing of several prehistoric sites along the Express Oil Pipeline trench alignment in the Wind River and Big Horn Basins, Wyoming.

; ; . Role: Staff Archaeologist. Office post-field work, edit site forms, write site and feature descriptions, prepare project reports, cartography, illustrate and curate artifacts.

; ; Eureka (Eureka County), Nevada. Role: Crew Chief. Phase I block inventory for the Homestake Mining Company in Eureka (Eureka County), Nevada.

; ; Alturas (Modoc County), California to Reno (Washoe County), Nevada. Role: Crew Chief. Phase I linear inventory of proposed road access for the proposed 345kV transmission power line for Sierra Pacific Power Company from Alturas (Modoc County), California to Reno (Washoe County), Nevada. Included on company permit for the state of Nevada.

Page | 10 Resume

; ; Eureka (Eureka County), Nevada. Role: Assistant Crew Chief. Phase I block inventory and recordation of the Williamsburg and Bullwacker Mines in the historic mining district for Homestake Mining Company in Eureka (Eureka County), Nevada.

; ; ureka (Eureka County), Nevada. Role: Assistant Crew Chief. Phase I block inventory and recordation of the historic Holly Mine and Holly Extension mining complexes in the historic mining district for Homestake Mining Company in Eureka (Eureka County), Nevada.

; ; Reno (Washoe County), Nevada. Role: Field Technician. Phase II testing of prehistoric and historic sites for the development of an office park south of Reno (Washoe County), Nevada.

; ; Susanville (Lassen County), California. Role: Field Technician. Phase I linear inventory of a proposed reroute for the proposed 345kV transmission power line for Sierra Pacific Power Company northeast of Susanville (Lassen County), California.

; ; Eureka (Eureka County), Nevada. Role: Field Technician. Phase I sample inventories of mining claims on BLM land for the Homestake Mining Company in Eureka (Eureka County), Nevada.

; ; Sparks (Washoe County), Nevada. Role: Field Technician. Phase II testing of prehistoric sites for a sports complex development for the city of Sparks (Washoe County), Nevada.

; ; Reno (Washoe County), Nevada. Role: Field Technician. Phase I block inventory for a housing development north of Reno (Washoe County), Nevada.

; ; Atlanta, Georgia. Role: Field Technician. Phase III excavation of a prehistoric site for a proposed reservoir for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers south of Atlanta, Georgia.

; ; western Arkansas and eastern Oklahoma. Role: Field Technician. Phase I block inventory of the Ouachita National Forest and Wilderness Areas for the 1994 timber sale for the U.S. National Forest Service in western Arkansas and eastern Oklahoma.

; ; Elkton, Colorado. Role: Field Technician. Phases I through III inventory, testing, and excavation of an historic mining district centered on Elkton, Colorado for the Cripple Creek/Victor Mining Company, west of Victor, Colorado.

; ; northeast Texas. Role: Field Technician. Phase II testing of a prehistoric site for Texas DOT in northeast Texas.

; ; southern Idaho. Role: Field Technician. Phase II testing of several prehistoric sites along the proposed natural gas pipeline for Northwest Gas Company in southern Idaho.

; ; . Role: Laboratory Technician. Data entry, input of project reports, generation of computer diagrams, entry of database information, flotation of macrofloral samples, catalog pollen samples, assisted in extraction of pollen and phytoliths from soil samples. 08/21/00 – 05/01/02; 06/91 – 05/94

; ; Douglas County, Colorado. Role: Excavation volunteer. Excavated at the Scott Spring site in Douglas County, Colorado, an archaeological site south of Denver with the focus on the Pleistocene levels. The goal was to determine presence or absence of human occupation at these levels. The site is administered by the Denver Museum of Nature and Science. 06/2010; 07/13/2012 – 07/14/2012

; ; . Role: Assistant Illustrator. Assisted in artifact illustrations for the master's thesis of David E. Wrobleski, unpublished manuscript on file at the University of Nevada, Reno.

; ; . Role: Laboratory Technician. Analysis of lithic debitage, input of data.

Page | 11 Petition for Declaratory Ruling -- Exhibit 3 Sadlier Tower

June 1, 2019

Allen Bennion STRATA Networks 211 East 200 North Roosevelt, Utah 84066 RE: Literature Review, Cultural Resource Inventory, and Visual Effects Analysis for the Sadlier Telecommunications Facility, Uintah County, Utah Dear Mr. Bennion:

In 2011, SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) was contracted by STRATA Networks to conduct cultural and historical resource investigations for the Sadlier cellular telecommunications facility located on private land in the town of Sadlier in Uintah County, Utah (Figure 1). The Sadlier telecommunications facility includes an existing 40-foot-tall wooden monopole tower and associated equipment box with a 25- ×30-foot (0.01-acre) lease pad, constructed in December 2005, on Split Mountain in the northeast quarter of Section 10, Township 5 South, Range 22 East. The purpose of these investigations is to provide information required by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to meet their federal requirements under Section 106 of the amended National Historic Preservation Act, as outlined in the FCC Nationwide Programmatic Agreement (PA) for the review of effects to historic properties (FCC 04-222). Although the existing tower was generally evaluated under the FCC compliance rules and regulations, STRATA did not complete Section 106 historic review prior to construction of the Sadlier tower because their understanding was that the site was exempt from historic review required under Section 106 of the NHPA and the FCC's National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) rules because the tower is less than 200 feet in height. Upon discovery of the oversight, STRATA notified the FCC of the omission of NEPA and historic preservation reviews and commissioned completion of these studies. The area of potential effects (APE) for direct effects, as defined by the guidelines set forth in the PA, consists of the area that would be directly impacted as a result of facility construction. For the Sadlier location, the APE for direct effects is defined by the 0.01-acre parcel containing the physical footprint of the tower and associated equipment box (Figure 2). The PA defines the area of visual effects as 0.5 mile from the tower location for telecommunications towers less than 200 feet in height (see Figure 1); the Sadlier tower is an 100-foot-tall monopole tower. Specifically, the APE for visual effects extends 0.5 mile from the tower location. At the time of the inventory, the Sadlier telecommunications tower and associated equipment were already in place at the site. The evaluation of the direct effects APE and visual effects APE Mr. Allen Bennion June 1, 2019 Page 2

was conducted after the installation of the tower and associated equipment to assess whether any historic properties were adversely impacted by the completed construction, and if any historic properties will be impacted by the continued operation and use of the completed telecommunications facility. This letter report summarizes the work conducted by SWCA, including the results of a file search conducted through the Utah Division of State History (UDSH), field investigation of the APE for direct effects and the APE for visual effects, and an evaluation of the potential impacts of the project on historic properties. Cultural resources work for the project was conducted under authority of a Public Lands Policy Coordination Office permit issued to Elisabeth Robinson of SWCA and Utah State Antiquities Project Number U-11-ST-1180. Photographs of the area surveyed are provided in Attachment A. Literature Review

SWCA conducted a file search at the Utah Division of State History on November 28, 2011, to identify known cultural resources located within the APE for direct effects and the APE for visual effects for this facility. The file search was subsequently updated on May 17, 2019 through an examination of project and site files stored on PreservationPro. In summary, seven previous projects have been conducted within 0.5 mile of the survey area (Table 1). One of these projects, the Book Cliffs Conservation Initiative (U92BL0224), completely covers the direct APE for the Sadlier telecommunications facility.

Table 1. Previous Projects Identified within 0.5 Mile of the Direct Effects APE

Project Title Consultant Number

U92BL0224 Book Cliffs Conservation Initiative Bureau of Land Management U94BL0270 Book Cliffs RMP Land Sale Amendment Bureau of Land Management U97W70409 Access Roads along the Hayden-Vernal Transmission Line Western Area Power Administration U98JB0045 Uintah Water Conservancy Dam Project JBR U01AY0705 Harward River Irrigation Project An Independent Archaeologist U03BL0468 Jensen Water Pipeline Bureau of Land Management U12A10323 Hayden-Vernal Transmission Line Project in Uintah County Alpine Archaeological Consultants

No previously recorded archaeological sites are present with the direct effects APE for the current project, although two archaeological sites have been previously recorded within the visual effect APE (Table 2). Both sites have been recommended not eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).

Table 2. Previously Recorded Sites Identified within 0.5 Mile of the Survey Area

Associated Site Number Class Type National Register of Project Historic Places Number Eligibility

U01AY0705 42UN2958 Historic Irrigation Canal (unnamed) Not eligible (recommended) Mr. Allen Bennion June 1, 2019 Page 3

Associated Site Number Class Type National Register of Project Historic Places Number Eligibility

U15MM0147 42UN7944 Historic Hayden-Vernal 138kV Not eligible Transmission Line (recommended)

In addition, four previously recorded structures are located within 0.5-mile APE for visual effects (Table 3). Two of these are of historic age, and one, 5336 E 4000 South, has been recommended eligible for the NRHP. None of the structures are located within the APE for direct effects

Table 3. Historic Structures Identified within the 0.5 Mile Visual Effects APE

Construction Property Name Street Address City Date Original Use Evaluation Photo Point — 5336 E 4000 South Vernal 1930 Residential Eligible 1

— 5337 E 4000 South Vernal 1975 Residential Out-of-Period –

— 5338 E 4000 South Vernal 1940 Residential Not Eligible –

— 5839 E 4000 South Vernal 1970 Residential Out-of-Period –

SWCA also examined General Land Office (GLO) plat maps dating to 1879 and 1952 and several geographic information systems (GIS) layers for potential cultural resources in or near the project area. These layers, available from state and federal agencies, include National Register of Historic Places properties, Utah historic trails, Utah historic districts, historical topographic maps, areas of critical environmental concern, and other historical aerial imagery. From these sources, no potential historic features are depicted within or crossing the direct effects APE for the current project. However, the 1879 GLO plat map depicts an unnamed northeast/southwest-trending road hugging the base of Split Mountain, and several named houses or farmsteads southeast of the project area, in Section 25, T5S, R22E. This road does not appear on the 1952 GLO plat map, although the previously recorded unnamed canal (42UN2958) is depicted in its modern alignment. Several unnamed structures are also present in the sections surrounding the project area, and U.S. Highway 40 is shown trending northeast, on the west side of Ashley Creek. The 1965 Naples, 7.5-minute quadrangle depicts the Hayden-Vernal Transmission Line trending east/west through the northern half of Section 10, T5S, R22E, as well as numerous roads, both improved and unimproved, and structures in the general vicinity of the project. However, no features are depicted in the direct APE. The BLM GLO records database was also searched for the section (Section 10) in which the project area is located. GLO records indicate that seven patents were issued for Section 10 between 1896 and 1975 (BLM 2017). Of these seven patents, one was issued under the 1820 Sale–Cash Act, six were issued under the 1862 Homestead Entry Act, and one was issued under the 1894 Utah Enabling Act. In 1875, Don and Stella Sadlier received a patent under the 1820 Sale–Cash Act for the land on which the Sadlier telecommunications facility is located (BLM Accession Number UTU 016452C). According to the Uintah County Assessor’s Office, the land (Parcel No. 060550035) is still within the Sadlier family (Uintah County Assessor 2015). Mr. Allen Bennion June 1, 2019 Page 4

Cultural Resource Inventory

SWCA cultural resource specialist Kiera Westwater conducted a cultural resource survey of the APE for direct effects on November 30, 2011. The survey area included the 0.01-acre lease pad containing the existing Sadlier tower and the associated equipment box (Figure 2). The field methods used in this survey followed Utah State Historic Preservation (SHPO) guidelines for conducting cultural resource inventories in Utah. Field personnel inspected the inventory area using a series of parallel, 15-m-wide transects across the inventory area; however, survey transects were adjusted when necessary to ensure full coverage of the inventory area. Archaeologists examined the ground surface for artifacts, features, and other prehistoric or historic material evidence such as charcoal-stained sediments, as well as aboveground features and structures. If present, special attention was paid to animal burrows to assess the potential for subsurface archeological deposits. If landscape features such as depressions, ditches, mounds, and areas of differential vegetation had been present, they also would have been examined in particular for evidence of the exposure of archaeological materials. Per Utah SHPO guidelines, site and isolated find definitions are based on those provided in the Utah Bureau of Land Management Guidelines for Identifying Cultural Resources, Handbook H-8110 (BLM 2002). No artifacts were collected during the survey. The Sadlier tower and associated infrastructure is on top of a mesa within a northeast/southwest- trending line of mesa dissected by drainages immediately west of Sunshine Bench. The tower overlooks Ashley Valley to the west and southwest, and Ashley Creek trends northeast/southwest approximately 0.90 mile to the southwest. Several farm complexes lie at the base of the mesa. Vegetation in the immediate vicinity of the tower is typical of the Uinta Basin Floor, and consists of a sagebrush and shadscale vegetative community. Irrigated agricultural land is present in the surrounding area, and riparian environments exist along the unnamed canal below the butte and nearby irrigation canals. Soils within the surveyed area consist of very shallow (0–6 inches), erosional and weakly developed Holocene- and Pleistocene-aged alluvial clay deposits overlying bedrock associated with the Upper Cretaceous Mancos Shale (NRCS 2017; UGS 2017). No cultural resources were observed within the direct effects APE during survey. Based on the geological and depositional environment, which contains erosional and very shallow deposits overlying bedrock, it is very unlikely that any significant intact subsurface deposits of cultural material were disturbed during construction of the tower and associated infrastructure, and it is unlikely that the future use and operation of the facility will result in any adverse effects on historic properties. Therefore, it is SWCA’s professional opinion that No Historic Properties are Present within the APE for direct effects. Visual Effects Analysis

APE for visual effects, it must be visible within the viewshed when looking at a historic property or within the intended viewshed looking from the property. The APE for visual effects includes the area within which effects from installing the tower could impact historic properties, in this case, through visual intrusion. Based on the results of the UDSH file searches, one historic structure eligible for the NRHP— 5336 E 4000 South, Vernal, Utah (see Table 3)—is present within the APE for visual effects. The historic viewshed and setting of the historic structure is largely intact, although modern development in the vicinity of the structure including paved roads and overhead transmission lines have affected the viewshed and setting to a limited degree. Although the Sadlier tower is visible from the historic structure, the tower is at the outer limits of the visual effects APE, and because of the height of the tower (only 40 feet), the tower does not stand out on the landscape. Thus, while the installation of the Sadlier tower contributed to the cumulative visual effect to the historic viewshed, it did not do so in a manner that negatively affected the integrity of 5336 E 4000 South, Vernal, Utah. Therefore, it is SWCA’s professional opinion that there is No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties within the APE for visual effects. Summary and Recommendations

In summary, it is our professional opinion that No Historic Properties are Present in the APE for direct effects and that there is No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties within the APE for visual effects. Therefore, the undertaking resulted in No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties; no additional work is recommended. Please feel free to contact us if you need additional information or would like SWCA to conduct any additional services on your behalf. Sincerely,

Melanie Medeiros Michael J. Retter Cultural Resource Specialist Principal Investigator Attachments: Attachment A. Photographs

References Cited:

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 2002 Bureau of Land Management Guidelines for Identifying Cultural Resources, Handbook H-8110. Bureau of Land Management, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Natural Resources Conservation Service 2017 Web Soil Survey: Soil Map. Electronic application available at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/. Accessed May 20, 2019. Mr. Allen Bennion June 1, 2019 Page 6

Uintah County Assessor’s Office 2015 Real Property Owner Information, Serial ID No. 06:055:0035. Available at: http://co.uintah.ut.us/nonsubprocessselect.php?serial=060550035&rpttype=prop&sub mit=Submit+Query. Accessed May 20, 2019.

Utah Geological Survey 2017 Geologic Maps. Electronic application available at: http://geology.utah.gov/apps/intgeomap/index.html. Accessed May 20, 2019. Mr. Allen Bennion June 1, 2019 Page 7

Figure 1. Location of the project and the APE for visual effects.

Mr. Allen Bennion June 1, 2019 Page 8

Figure 2. Aerial map showing the APE for direct effects.

Figure 3. Overview of the Sadlier facility Figure 4. Overview of the Sadlier facility (facing southwest). (facing west).

Figure 5. Overview from the Sadlier facility Figure 6. Overview from the Sadlier facility (facing south). towards the historic property (facing southwest).

Figure 7. Overview from the Sadlier facility Figure 8. Overview from the Sadlier facility (facing west). (facing north).

Figure 9. Overview from the Sadlier facility Figure 10. Overview from the historic (facing east). structure (5336 E 4000 South) towards the Sadlier facility (facing northeast).

FCC Form 620 FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Approved by OMB 3060 – 1039 New Tower (NT) Submission Packet Notification Date: See instructions for File Number: 0005196355 public burden estimates General Information 1) (Select only one) ( UA ) NE – New UA – Update of Application WD – Withdrawal of Application

2) If this application is for an Update or Withdrawal, enter the file number of the pending application File Number: currently on file. 0005196355

Applicant Information

3) FCC Registration Number (FRN): 0001601079

4) Name: UINTAH BASIN ELECTRONIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS d/b/a Strata Networks

Contact Name

5) First Name: Allen 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Bennion 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Wireless Supervisor

Contact Information And 10) P.O. Box: 11) Street Address: 2085 US-40 /Or

12) City: Vernal 13) State: UT 14) Zip Code: 84066

15) Telephone Number: (435)622-5231 16) Fax Number:

17) E-mail Address: [email protected]

Consultant Information

18) FCC Registration Number (FRN): 0018188805

19) Name: SWCA, Inc. /b/a SWCA Environmental Consultants

Principal Investigator

20) First Name: Michael 21) MI: J 22) Last Name: Retter 23) Suffix:

24) Title: Principal Investigator, M.A., RPA_2019

Principal Investigator Contact Information And 25) P.O. Box: 26) Street Address: 295 Interlocken Blvd. Suite 300 /Or

27) City: Broomfield 28) State: CO 29) Zip Code: 80021

30) Telephone Number: (303)487-1183 31) Fax Number:

32) E-mail Address: [email protected]

1 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Professional Qualification

33) Does the Principal Investigator satisfy the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

34) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

Additional Staff

35) Are there other staff involved who meet the Professional Qualification Standards of the Secretary of the Interior? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

If “YES,” complete the following:

36) First Name: Kiera 37) MI: 38) Last Name: Westwater 39) Suffix:

40) Title: Archaeologist/GIS Specialist

41) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

36) First Name: Melanie 37) MI: A 38) Last Name: Medeiros 39) Suffix:

40) Title: Project Manager (2019) M.A., RPA

41) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

2 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 36) First Name: Elisabeth 37) MI: A 38) Last Name: Robison 39) Suffix:

40) Title: Project Manager (2011/2012) M.A., RPA

41) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

3 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Site Information Tower Construction Notification System

1) TCNS Notification Number: 183958

Site Information

2) Positive Train Control Filing Subject to Expedited Treatment Under Program Comment: ( ) Yes ( X ) No

3) Site Name: Sadlier Telecommunications Facility

4) Site Address: 5200 E 4000 S

5) Detailed Description of Project:

Monopole tower and associated equipment structure.

6) City: Jensen 7) State: UT 8) Zip Code: 84035

9) County/Borough/Parish: UINTAH

10) Nearest Crossroads: E 4000 S and 6800 E

11) NAD 83 Latitude (DD-MM-SS.S): 40-24-05.4 ( X ) N or ( ) S

12) NAD 83 Longitude (DD-MM-SS.S): 109-25-24.5 ( ) E or ( X ) W

Tower Information

13) Tower height above ground level (include top-mounted attachments such as lightning rods): ______15.2 ( ) Feet ( X ) Meters

14) Tower Type (Select One):

( ) Guyed lattice tower

( ) Self-supporting lattice

( X ) Monopole

( ) Other (Describe): 2

Project Status

15) Current Project Status (Select One):

( ) Construction has not yet commenced

( ) Construction has commenced, but is not completed Construction commenced on: ______

06/15/2005 ( X ) Construction has been completed Construction commenced on: ______

Construction completed on: ______12/30/2005_____

4 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Determination of Effect

14) Direct Effects (Select One):

( X ) No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE)

( ) No Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on one or more Historic Properties in APE

15) Visual Effects (Select One):

( ) No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE)

( ) No Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( X ) No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on one or more Historic Properties in APE

5 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183958 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Blackfeet Nation

Contact Name

5) First Name: Virgil 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Edwards 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Deputy THPO

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/20/2019 11) Date Replied ______03/22/2019

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( X ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Crow Tribe

William Big Day

THPO

03/21/2019

6 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183958 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Eastern Shoshone Tribe

Contact Name

5) First Name: Josh 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Mann 8) Suffix:

9) Title: THPO

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/21/2019 11) Date Replied ______04/10/2019

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( X ) Replied/Other

Fort Belknap Indian Community

Michael Blackwolf

THPO

03/21/2019

7 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183958 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians

Contact Name

5) First Name: Daniel 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Bulletts 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Environmental Program Director

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/21/2019 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Kiowa Indian Tribe THPO

George Carter

03/20/2019 03/20/2019

8 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183958 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation

Contact Name

5) First Name: Montana & Associates 6) MI: 7) Last Name: LLC 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Attorney

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/20/2019 11) Date Replied ______03/27/2019

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( X ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe

Candelora Lehi

Tribal Administrator

03/20/2019

9 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183958 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Cultural Resources

Contact Name

5) First Name: Romelia 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Martinez 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Cultural Resources Tech II

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/21/2019 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians

Montana & Associates LLC

Attorney

03/21/2019 03/27/2019

10 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183958 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Southern Ute Tribe

Contact Name

5) First Name: SUIT 6) MI: 7) Last Name: NAGPRA 8) Suffix:

9) Title:

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/21/2019 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Ute Indian Tribe

Betsy L Chapoose

Cultural Rights & Protection Director

03/21/2019

11 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Other Tribes/NHOs Contacted

Tribe/NHO Information

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name:

Contact Name

3) First Name: 4) MI: 5) Last Name: 6) Suffix:

7) Title:

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: /Or

10) City: 11) State: 12) Zip Code:

13) Telephone Number: 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address:

16) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______18) Date Replied ______

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

12 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Historic Properties Properties Identified

1) Have any historic properties been identified within the APEs for direct and visual effect? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

2) Has the identification process located archaeological materials that would be directly affected, or sites that are of ( ) Yes ( ) No cultural or religious significance to Tribes/NHOs? X

Historic Property

4) Property Name: None

5) SHPO Site Number: None

Property Address

6) Street Address: 5336 E 4000 South

7) City: Vernal 8) State: UT 9) Zip Code: 84078

10) County/Borough/Parish: UINTAH

Status & Eligibility

11) Is this property listed on the National Register? ( ) Yes ( X ) No Source: ______

12) Is this property eligible for listing on the National Register? ( X ) Yes ( ) No Source: ______Utah State Historic Preservation Office

13) Is this property a National Historic Landmark? ( ) Yes ( X ) No

14) Direct Effects (Select One):

( X ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

15) Visual Effects (Select One):

( ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( X ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

13 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Local Government Involvement

Local Government Agency

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name: Uintah Count Community Development

Contact Name

3) First Name: Dale 4) MI: 5) Last Name: Peterson 6) Suffix:

7) Title:

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: 152 E 100 N /Or

10) City: Vernal 11) State: UT 12) Zip Code: 84078

13) Telephone Number: (435)781-5336 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address: [email protected]

16) Preferred means of communication:

( X ) E-mail

( ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______01/04/2005 18) Date Replied ______06/15/2005

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( X ) Replied/Other

Approved with no issues.

Additional Information

19) Information on local government’s role or interest (optional):

14 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Local Government Involvement

Local Government Agency

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name: Uintah County Planning and Zoning Division, Planning Commission

Contact Name

3) First Name: William 4) MI: 5) Last Name: Stringer 6) Suffix:

7) Title:

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: 152 E 100 N Third Floor /Or

10) City: Vernal 11) State: UT 12) Zip Code: 84078

13) Telephone Number: (435)781-5300 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address:

16) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( X ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______07/09/2019 18) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Additional Information

19) Information on local government’s role or interest (optional):

15 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Local Government Involvement

Local Government Agency

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name: Uintah County Heritage Museum

Contact Name

3) First Name: L. 4) MI: 5) Last Name: Fullbright 6) Suffix:

7) Title:

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: 155 E. Main Street /Or

10) City: Vernal 11) State: UT 12) Zip Code: 84078

13) Telephone Number: (435)789-7399 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address: [email protected]

16) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( X ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______07/09/2019 18) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Additional Information

19) Information on local government’s role or interest (optional):

16 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Other Consulting Parties Other Consulting Parties Contacted

1) Has any other agency been contacted and invited to become a consulting party? ( ) Yes ( X ) No

Consulting Party

2) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

3) Name:

Contact Name

4) First Name: 5) MI: 6) Last Name: 7) Suffix:

8) Title:

Contact Information And 9) P.O. Box: 10) Street Address: /Or

11) City: 12) State: 13) Zip Code:

14) Telephone Number: 15) Fax Number:

16) E-mail Address:

17) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

18) Date Contacted ______19) Date Replied ______

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Additional Information

20) Information on other consulting parties’ role or interest (optional):

17 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Designation of SHPO/THPO

1) Designate the Lead State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) based on the location of the tower.

SHPO/THPO

Name: ______Utah State Historical Society

SHPO/THPO Name: ______

Certification

I certify that all representations on this FCC Form 620 Submission Packet and the accompanying attachments are true, correct, and complete.

Party Authorized to Sign

First Name: MI: Last Name: Suffix:

Signature: Date: ______

FAILURE TO SIGN THIS APPLICATION MAY RESULT IN DISMISSAL OF THE APPLICATION AND FORFEITURE OF ANY FEES PAID.

18 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Attachments :

Type Description Date Entered

Resumes/Vitae Elizabeth Robinson Resume 04/25/2012

Resumes/Vitae Kiera Westwater Resume 04/25/2012

Resumes/Vitae Resume_Retter & Medeiros 09/10/2019

Area of Potential Effects APE Description 09/10/2019

Tribal/NHO Involvement Tribal Involvement Summary_2012 09/10/2019

Tribal/NHO Involvement Tribal Involvement Record_2019 (draft) 09/10/2019

Local Government Involvement Local Govt Involvement_2012 09/10/2019

Local Government Involvement Local Govt Involvement_2019 09/10/2019

Public Involvement Public Involvement_2012 09/10/2019

Public Involvement Public Involvement_2019 09/10/2019

Historic Properties for Visual Effects Historic Properties for Visual APE 09/10/2019

Historic Properties for Direct Effects Historic Properties for Direct APE 09/10/2019

Photographs Photographs 09/10/2019

Additional Site Information Project Description 09/10/2019

Map Documents Maps 09/10/2019

Other SHPO Response_2014 09/10/2019

Other Cultural Resource Report 09/10/2019

19 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Petition for Declaratory Ruling -- Exhibit 4 Naples Tower

June 1, 2019

Allen Bennion STRATA Networks 211 East 200 North Roosevelt, Utah 84066 RE: Literature Review, Cultural Resource Inventory, and Visual Effects Analysis for the Naples Telecommunications Facility, Uintah County, Utah Dear Mr. Bennion:

In 2011, SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) was contracted by STRATA Networks to conduct cultural and historical resource investigations for the Naples cellular telecommunications facility located on private land in the town of Naples in Uintah County, Utah (Figure 1). The Naples telecommunications facility includes an existing 100-foot-tall concrete monopole tower and associated equipment box with a 25- ×30-foot (0.01-acre) lease pad, constructed in May 2001, in an existing commercial lot in Section 31, Township 4 South, Range 22 East. Access to the tower is through the paved commercial lot. The purpose of these investigations is to provide information required by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to meet their federal requirements under Section 106 of the amended National Historic Preservation Act, as outlined in the FCC Nationwide Programmatic Agreement (PA) for the review of effects to historic properties (FCC 04-222). Although the existing tower was generally evaluated under the FCC compliance rules and regulations, STRATA did not complete Section 106 historic review prior to construction of the Naples tower. Upon discovery of the oversight, STRATA notified the FCC of the omission of NEPA and historic preservation reviews and commissioned completion of these studies. The area of potential effects (APE) for direct effects, as defined by the guidelines set forth in the PA, consists of the area that would be directly impacted as a result of facility construction. For the Naples location, the APE for direct effects is defined by the 0.01-acre parcel containing the physical footprint of the tower and associated equipment box (Figure 2). The PA defines the area of visual effects as 0.5 mile from the tower location for telecommunications towers less than 200 feet in height (see Figure 1); the Naples tower is an 100-foot-tall monopole tower. Specifically, the APE for visual effects extends 0.5 mile from the tower location. At the time of the inventory, the Naples telecommunications tower and associated equipment were already in place at the site. The evaluation of the direct effects APE and visual effects APE was conducted after the installation of the tower and associated equipment to assess whether any historic properties were adversely impacted by the completed construction, and if any historic Mr. Allen Bennion June 1, 2019 Page 2

properties will be impacted by the continued operation and use of the completed telecommunications facility. This letter report summarizes the work conducted by SWCA, including the results of a file search conducted through the Utah Division of State History (UDSH), field investigation of the APE for direct effects and the APE for visual effects, and an evaluation of the potential impacts of the project on historic properties. Cultural resources work for the project was conducted under authority of a Public Lands Policy Coordination Office permit issued to Elizabeth Robinson of SWCA and Utah State Antiquities Project Number U-11-ST-1179. Photographs of the area surveyed are provided in Attachment A. Literature Review

SWCA conducted a file search at the Utah Division of State History on November 28, 2011, to identify known cultural resources located within the APE for direct effects and the APE for visual effects for this facility. The file search was subsequently updated on May 17, 2019, through an examination of project and site files stored on PreservationPro. In summary, one previous project has been conducted within 0.5 mile of the survey area (Table 1); this projects does not intersect with the direct effects APE for the current project. No archaeological sites are have been previously recorded within either the direct or visual effect APEs for the current project (Table 2).

Table 1. Previous Projects Identified within 0.5 Mile of the Direct Effects APE

Project Title Consultant Number

U84BC0863 Survey along US 40 and Borrow Pit Brigham Young University, Office of Public Archaeology

Four previously recorded structures are located within 0.5-mile APE for visual effects (Table 2). All four of the structures are of historic age. One of the structures, 1599 S. Highway 40, is eligible for the NRHP. None of the structures are located within the APE for direct effects.

Table 2. Historic Structures Identified within the 0.5 Mile Visual Effects APE

Construction Property Name Street Address City Date Original Use Evaluation Photo Point — 1599 S. Highway 40 Davis 1945 Residential Eligible –

— 150 E 1750 South Naples 1940 Residential Not eligible –

— 292 E 1750 South Naples 1920 Residential Not eligible –

— 535 E 1900 South Naples 1925 Residential Not eligible –

school in the general vicinity of the Naples tower; by 1955, U.S. Highway 40 trends north/south immediately west of the tower. The 1965 Naples, 7.5-minute quadrangle depicts substantially more structures in the immediate vicinity of the Naples tower, including one unnamed structure immediately west of the tower adjacent to U.S. Highway 40. This building is still present today and currently houses a business, Spectra IT. The BLM GLO records database was also searched for the section and lot (Section 31, Lot 2) in which the project area is located (BLM 2019). In 1891, one patent was issued to Rodney B. Remington for Lots 2 and 3, the SE¼NW¼ and the NE¼SW¼ of Section 31, Township 4 South, Range 22 East under the 1862 Homestead Entry Act (BLM 2019:Accession No. UT0200_.098). No cultural resources potentially associated with the patentee were identified during the survey. The Naples telecommunications facility is located on land that is currently privately owned (Uintah County Recorder’s Office 2015). Cultural Resource Inventory

SWCA cultural resource specialist Kiera Westwater conducted a cultural resource survey of the APE for direct effects on November 30, 2011. The survey area included the 0.01-acre lease pad containing the existing Naples tower and the associated equipment box (Figure 2). The field methods used in this survey followed Utah State Historic Preservation (SHPO) guidelines for conducting cultural resource inventories in Utah. Field personnel inspected the inventory area using a series of parallel, 15-m-wide transects across the inventory area; however, survey transects were adjusted when necessary to ensure full coverage of the inventory area. Archaeologists examined the ground surface for artifacts, features, and other prehistoric or historic material evidence such as charcoal-stained sediments, as well as aboveground features and structures. If present, special attention was paid to animal burrows to assess the potential for subsurface archeological deposits. If landscape features such as depressions, ditches, mounds, and areas of differential vegetation had been present, they also would have been examined in particular for evidence of the exposure of archaeological materials. Per Utah SHPO guidelines, site and isolated find definitions are based on those provided in the Utah Bureau of Land Management Guidelines for Identifying Cultural Resources, Handbook H-8110 (BLM 2002). No artifacts were collected during the survey. The Naples tower and associated infrastructure is in the Ashley Valley within an existing commercial lot approximately 600 feet southwest of a southeast-flowing tributary of Ashley Creek. U.S. Highway 40 trends north/south to the west of the tower, and 1900 S Street trends generally west/southeast south of the tower; a public park is situated to the east. No vegetation is present within the tower lease pad, although a riparian environment is present along the tributary to the north and various grasses and weeds are present along the fenced boundary of the commercial lot. The eastern and southern portions of the commercial lot contain modern trash and scattered equipment. Soils within the surveyed area consist of loam to very gravelly sandy loam piedmont and basin alluvium commonly found on fan remnants and strath terraces associated with the Pleistocene and Holocene (NRCS 2017; UGS 2019). No cultural resources were observed within the direct effects APE during survey. Based on the depositional environment, which has been heavily disturbed by modern development prior to installation of the Naples tower, it is unlikely that any significant intact subsurface deposits of Mr. Allen Bennion June 1, 2019 Page 4

cultural material were disturbed during construction of the tower and associated infrastructure, and it is unlikely that the future use and operation of the facility will result in any adverse effects on historic properties. Therefore, it is SWCA’s professional opinion that No Historic Properties are Present within the APE for direct effects. Visual Effects Analysis

The analysis of visual effects of the proposed facility consists of evaluating the critical viewshed of historic properties within the APE for visual effects. The critical viewshed is the intended historic view of a historic property that captures the character-defining elements of the property, including setting and feeling. The critical viewshed also includes the intended view from the historic property that captures the character-defining elements of the setting and feeling of the property. Therefore, in order for the facility to have an effect on historic properties within the APE for visual effects, it must be visible within the viewshed when looking at a historic property or within the intended viewshed looking from the property (Figures 3–8). The APE for visual effects includes the area within which effects from installing the tower could impact historic properties, in this case, through visual intrusion. Based on the results of the UDSH file searches, one previously recorded historic property, a parlor house at 1599 S. Highway 40 (1599 S. 1500 E Street), is located within the 0.5-mile APE for visual effects. The Naples tower is visible from the historic property (Figure 9). However, there is substantial modern development in the area including modern residences and commercial buildings, roads, and overhead power lines which has impacted the historic setting and viewshed of the property. However, the tower does not create a strong contrast against the surrounding area as several other vertical intrusions, including power poles and tall trees, are also visible within the viewshed, and the use of galvanized steel helps to limit to reflectively of the tower itself. Thus, while the installation of the Naples tower contributed to the cumulative visual effect to the historic viewshed, it did not do so in a manner that negatively affected the integrity of 1599 S. Highway 40 (1599 S. 1500 E Street). Therefore, it is SWCA’s professional opinion that there is No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties within the APE for visual effects. Summary and Recommendations

Melanie Medeiros Principal Investigator

Attachments: Attachment A. Photographs

Mr. Allen Bennion June 1, 2019 Page 5

References Cited:

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 2002 Bureau of Land Management Guidelines for Identifying Cultural Resources, Handbook H-8110. Bureau of Land Management, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Uintah County Recorder’s Office 2015 Uintah County Interactive Map, Parcel ID No. 051320063. Available at: http://co.uintah.ut.us/departments/a_- _e_departments/community_development/interactive_map/index.php. Accessed May 30, 2019.

Natural Resources Conservation Service 2017 Web Soil Survey: Soil Map. Electronic application available at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/. Accessed May 30, 2019.

Utah Geological Survey 2019 Geologic Maps. Electronic application available at: http://geology.utah.gov/apps/intgeomap/index.html. Accessed May 30, 2019. Mr. Allen Bennion January 5, 2018 Page 6

Figure 1. Location of the project and the APE for visual effects.

Mr. Allen Bennion June 1, 2019 Page 7

Figure 2. Aerial map showing the APE for direct effects.

Figure 2. Overview of the Naples facility Figure 3. Overview of the Naples facility location (facing east). location (facing southeast).

Figure 4. Overview from the Naples facility Figure 5. Overview from the Naples facility location (facing west). location towards the historic property (facing north).

Figure 6. Overview from the Naples facility Figure 7. Overview from the Naples facility location (facing south). location (facing east).

Figure 9. Overview from the historic property towards the Naples facility (facing south).

FCC Form 620 FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Approved by OMB 3060 – 1039 New Tower (NT) Submission Packet Notification Date: See instructions for File Number: 0005196326 public burden estimates General Information 1) (Select only one) ( UA ) NE – New UA – Update of Application WD – Withdrawal of Application

2) If this application is for an Update or Withdrawal, enter the file number of the pending application File Number: currently on file. 0005196326

Applicant Information

3) FCC Registration Number (FRN): 0001601079

4) Name: UINTAH BASIN ELECTRONIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS d/b/a Strata Networks

Contact Name

5) First Name: Allen 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Bennion 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Wireless Supervisor

Contact Information And 10) P.O. Box: 11) Street Address: 2085 US-40 /Or

12) City: Vernal 13) State: UT 14) Zip Code: 84066

15) Telephone Number: (435)622-5231 16) Fax Number:

17) E-mail Address: [email protected]

Consultant Information

18) FCC Registration Number (FRN): 0018188805

19) Name: SWCA, Inc. /b/a SWCA Environmental Consultants

Principal Investigator

20) First Name: Michael 21) MI: J 22) Last Name: Retter 23) Suffix:

24) Title: Principal Investigator, M.A., RPA_2019

Principal Investigator Contact Information And 25) P.O. Box: 26) Street Address: 295 Interlocken Blvd. Suite 300 /Or

27) City: Broomfield 28) State: CO 29) Zip Code: 80021

30) Telephone Number: (303)487-1183 31) Fax Number:

32) E-mail Address: [email protected]

1 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Professional Qualification

33) Does the Principal Investigator satisfy the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

34) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

Additional Staff

35) Are there other staff involved who meet the Professional Qualification Standards of the Secretary of the Interior? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

If “YES,” complete the following:

36) First Name: Kiera 37) MI: 38) Last Name: Westwater 39) Suffix:

40) Title: Archaeologist/GIS Specialist

41) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

36) First Name: Melanie 37) MI: A 38) Last Name: Medeiros 39) Suffix:

40) Title: Project Manager (2019) M.A., RPA

41) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

2 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 36) First Name: Elisabeth 37) MI: 38) Last Name: Robinson 39) Suffix:

40) Title: Project Manager (2011/2012) M.A., RPA

41) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

3 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Site Information Tower Construction Notification System

1) TCNS Notification Number: 183956

Site Information

2) Positive Train Control Filing Subject to Expedited Treatment Under Program Comment: ( ) Yes ( X ) No

3) Site Name: Naples Telecommunications Facility

4) Site Address: 1827 South 1500 East

5) Detailed Description of Project:

Monopole tower with associated equipment structure. Equipment structure is in a fenced area measuring approximately 20 x 30 feet.

6) City: Naples 7) State: UT 8) Zip Code: 84078

9) County/Borough/Parish: UINTAH

10) Nearest Crossroads: 1500 E Street and 1900 S Street

11) NAD 83 Latitude (DD-MM-SS.S): 40-25-44.8 ( X ) N or ( ) S

12) NAD 83 Longitude (DD-MM-SS.S): 109-29-56.4 ( ) E or ( X ) W

Tower Information

13) Tower height above ground level (include top-mounted attachments such as lightning rods): ______35.0 ( ) Feet ( X ) Meters

14) Tower Type (Select One):

( ) Guyed lattice tower

( ) Self-supporting lattice

( X ) Monopole

( ) Other (Describe): 2

Project Status

15) Current Project Status (Select One):

( ) Construction has not yet commenced

( ) Construction has commenced, but is not completed Construction commenced on: ______

03/15/2001 ( X ) Construction has been completed Construction commenced on: ______

Construction completed on: ______09/28/2001_____

4 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Determination of Effect

14) Direct Effects (Select One):

( X ) No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE)

( ) No Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on one or more Historic Properties in APE

15) Visual Effects (Select One):

( ) No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE)

( ) No Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( X ) No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on one or more Historic Properties in APE

5 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183956 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Blackfeet Nation

Contact Name

5) First Name: Virgil 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Edwards 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Deputy THPO

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/20/2019 11) Date Replied ______03/22/2019

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( X ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Crow Tribe

William Big Day

THPO

03/21/2019

6 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183956 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Eastern Shoshone Tribe

Contact Name

5) First Name: Josh 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Mann 8) Suffix:

9) Title: THPO

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/21/2019 11) Date Replied ______04/10/2019

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( X ) Replied/Other

Fort Belknap Indian Community

Michael Blackwolf

THPO

03/21/2019

7 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183956 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians

Contact Name

5) First Name: Daniel 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Bulletts 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Environmental Program Director

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/21/2019 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Kiowa Indian Tribe THPO

George Carter

03/20/2019 03/20/2019

8 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183956 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation

Contact Name

5) First Name: Montana & Associates 6) MI: 7) Last Name: LLC 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Attorney

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/20/2019 11) Date Replied ______03/27/2019

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( X ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe

Candelora Lehi

Tribal Administrator

03/20/2019

9 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183956 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Cultural Resources

Contact Name

5) First Name: Romelia 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Martinez 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Cultural Resources Tech II

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/21/2019 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians

Montana & Associates LLC

Attorney

03/21/2019 03/27/2019

10 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183956 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Southern Ute Tribe

Contact Name

5) First Name: SUIT 6) MI: 7) Last Name: NAGPRA 8) Suffix:

9) Title:

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/21/2019 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Ute Indian Tribe

Betsy L Chapoose

Cultural Rights & Protection Director

03/21/2019

11 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Other Tribes/NHOs Contacted

Tribe/NHO Information

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name:

Contact Name

3) First Name: 4) MI: 5) Last Name: 6) Suffix:

7) Title:

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: /Or

10) City: 11) State: 12) Zip Code:

13) Telephone Number: 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address:

16) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______18) Date Replied ______

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

12 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Historic Properties Properties Identified

1) Have any historic properties been identified within the APEs for direct and visual effect? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

2) Has the identification process located archaeological materials that would be directly affected, or sites that are of ( ) Yes ( ) No cultural or religious significance to Tribes/NHOs? X

Historic Property

4) Property Name: 1599 S. Highway 40

5) SHPO Site Number: N/A

Property Address

6) Street Address: 1599 S. Highway 40 (1599 S. 1500 E Street)

7) City: Naples 8) State: UT 9) Zip Code: 84078

10) County/Borough/Parish: UINTAH

Status & Eligibility

11) Is this property listed on the National Register? ( ) Yes ( X ) No Source: ______

12) Is this property eligible for listing on the National Register? ( X ) Yes ( ) No Source: ______Utah State Historic Preservation Office

13) Is this property a National Historic Landmark? ( ) Yes ( X ) No

14) Direct Effects (Select One):

( X ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

15) Visual Effects (Select One):

( ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( X ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

13 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Local Government Involvement

Local Government Agency

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name: Naples City Government

Contact Name

3) First Name: Craig 4) MI: 5) Last Name: Blunt 6) Suffix:

7) Title: Naples City Manager

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: 1420 E 2850 S /Or

10) City: Naples 11) State: UT 12) Zip Code: 84078

13) Telephone Number: (435)789-9090 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address:

16) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( X ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______10/02/2000 18) Date Replied ______03/15/2001

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( X ) Replied/Other

Approved.

Additional Information

19) Information on local government’s role or interest (optional):

14 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Local Government Involvement

Local Government Agency

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name: Uintah County Planning and Zoning Division, Planning Commission

Contact Name

3) First Name: William 4) MI: 5) Last Name: Stringer 6) Suffix:

7) Title: Planning Commission Chair

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: 152 E 100 N /Or

10) City: Vernal 11) State: UT 12) Zip Code: 84078

13) Telephone Number: (435)781-5300 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address:

16) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( X ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______07/09/2019 18) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Additional Information

19) Information on local government’s role or interest (optional):

15 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Other Consulting Parties Other Consulting Parties Contacted

1) Has any other agency been contacted and invited to become a consulting party? ( ) Yes ( X ) No

Consulting Party

2) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

3) Name:

Contact Name

4) First Name: 5) MI: 6) Last Name: 7) Suffix:

8) Title:

Contact Information And 9) P.O. Box: 10) Street Address: /Or

11) City: 12) State: 13) Zip Code:

14) Telephone Number: 15) Fax Number:

16) E-mail Address:

17) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

18) Date Contacted ______19) Date Replied ______

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Additional Information

20) Information on other consulting parties’ role or interest (optional):

16 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Designation of SHPO/THPO

1) Designate the Lead State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) based on the location of the tower.

SHPO/THPO

Name: ______Utah State Historical Society

SHPO/THPO Name: ______

Certification

I certify that all representations on this FCC Form 620 Submission Packet and the accompanying attachments are true, correct, and complete.

Party Authorized to Sign

First Name: MI: Last Name: Suffix:

Signature: Date: ______

FAILURE TO SIGN THIS APPLICATION MAY RESULT IN DISMISSAL OF THE APPLICATION AND FORFEITURE OF ANY FEES PAID.

17 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Attachments :

Type Description Date Entered

Resumes/Vitae Elizabeth Robinson Resume 04/24/2012

Resumes/Vitae Kiera Westwater Resume 04/24/2012

Resumes/Vitae Resume_Retter & Medeiros 09/12/2019

Map Documents Maps 09/12/2019

Area of Potential Effects APE Description 09/12/2019

Tribal/NHO Involvement Tribal Involvement Summary_2012 09/12/2019

Tribal/NHO Involvement Tribal Involvement Record_2019 (draft) 09/12/2019

Local Government Involvement Local Govt Involvement_2012 09/12/2019

Local Government Involvement Local Govt Involvement_2019 09/12/2019

Public Involvement Public Involvement_2012 09/12/2019

Public Involvement Public Involvement_2019 09/12/2019

Historic Properties for Visual Effects Historic Properties for Visual APE 09/12/2019

Historic Properties for Direct Effects Historic Properties for Direct APE 09/12/2019

Photographs Photographs 09/12/2019

Additional Site Information Project Description 09/12/2019

Other Cultural Resource Report 09/12/2019

Other SHPO Response_2014 09/12/2019

18 of 18 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Petition for Declaratory Ruling -- Exhibit 5 Uintah High School Tower

June 1, 2019

Allen Bennion STRATA Networks 211 East 200 North Roosevelt, Utah 84066 RE: Literature Review, Cultural Resource Inventory, and Visual Effects Analysis for the Uintah High School Telecommunications Facility, Uintah County, Utah Dear Mr. Bennion:

In 2011, SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) was contracted by STRATA Networks to conduct cultural and historical resource investigations for the Uintah High School cellular telecommunications facility located immediately north of Uintah High School at approximately 750 North 1850 West in the town of Vernal in Uintah County, Utah (Figure 1). The Uintah High School telecommunications facility includes an existing 80-foot-tall concrete monopole tower and associated equipment box with a 30- ×45-foot (0.03-acre) lease pad, constructed in July 2002, and associated 275-foot-long dirt access road in Section 16, Township 4 South, Range 21 East. The purpose of these investigations is to provide information required by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to meet their federal requirements under Section 106 of the amended National Historic Preservation Act, as outlined in the FCC Nationwide Programmatic Agreement (PA) for the review of effects to historic properties (FCC 04-222). Although the existing tower was generally evaluated under the FCC compliance rules and regulations, STRATA did not complete Section 106 historic review prior or evaluation of the tower site under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) prior to construction of the Uintah High School tower. Upon discovery of the oversight, STRATA notified the FCC of the omission of historic preservation and NEPA reviews and commissioned completion of these studies. The area of potential effects (APE) for direct effects, as defined by the guidelines set forth in the PA, consists of the area that would be directly impacted as a result of facility construction. For the Uintah High School location, the APE for direct effects is defined by the 0.03-acre parcel containing the physical footprint of the tower and associated equipment box and the approximately 275-foot-long, 80- to 10-foot-wide dirt access road (Figure 2). The PA defines the area of visual effects as 0.5 mile from the tower location for telecommunications towers less than 200 feet in height (see Figure 1); the Uintah High School tower is an 80-foot-tall monopole tower. Specifically, the APE for visual effects extends 0.5 mile from the tower location. At the time of the inventory, the Uintah High School telecommunications tower and associated equipment were already in place at the site. The evaluation of the direct effects APE and visual Mr. Allen Bennion June 1, 2019 Page 2

effects APE was conducted after the installation of the tower and associated equipment to assess whether any historic properties were adversely impacted by the completed construction, and if any historic properties will be impacted by the continued operation and use of the completed telecommunications facility. This letter report summarizes the work conducted by SWCA, including the results of a file search conducted through the Utah Division of State History (UDSH), field investigation of the APE for direct effects and the APE for visual effects, and an evaluation of the potential impacts of the project on historic properties. Cultural resources work for the project was conducted under authority of a Public Lands Policy Coordination Office permit issued to Elizabeth Robinson of SWCA and Utah State Antiquities Project Number U-11-ST-1181. Photographs of the area surveyed are provided in Attachment A. Literature Review SWCA conducted a file search at the Utah Division of State History on November 28, 2011, to identify known cultural resources located within the APE for direct effects and the APE for visual effects for this facility. The file search was subsequently updated on May 17, 2019, through an examination of project and site files stored on PreservationPro. In summary, three previous projects have been conducted within 0.5 mile of the survey area (Table 2); these projects do not intersect with the direct effects APE for the current project. No previously recorded archaeological sites are present within the direct effects APE for the current project, although two archaeological sites have been previously recorded within the visual effect APEs (Table 2). One of the sites, 42UN5195, has been determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP); the second site, 42UN5471, is recommended not eligible for the NRHP.

Table 1. Previous Projects Identified within 0.5 Mile of the Direct Effects APE

Project Title Consultant Number

U80BE0428 12-Inch Sewer Line Crossing, Steinaker Service Canal Bureau of Reclamation U06BS1405 Vernal City Main Street Project Baseline U13HO0432 Verbal (Steinaker) Service Canal Project Bighorn Archaeological Consultants

Table 2. Previously Recorded Sites Identified within 0.5 Mile of the Project Area

Associated Site Number Class Type National Register of Project Historic Places Number Eligibility

— 42UN5195 Historic Irrigation ditch—Ashley Eligible (determined) Central Canal U06BS01405 42UN5471 Historic Irrigation ditch—Steinaker Not eligible Feeder Canal (recommended)

In addition, four previously recorded structures are located within 0.5-mile APE for visual effects (Table 3). Three of the structures are of historic age, and all four structures are recommended not eligible for the NRHP. None of the structures are located within the APE for direct effects. Mr. Allen Bennion June 1, 2019 Page 3

Table 3. Historic Structures Identified within the 0.5 Mile Visual Effects APE

Construction Property Name Street Address City Date Original Use Evaluation Photo Point — 822 N 1500 West Ashley 1905 Residential Not Eligible –

— 620 N 1500 West Maeser 1935 Residential Not Eligible –

— 881 N 1500 West Maeser 1920 Residential Not Eligible –

— SR 121 Bridge Vernal 1970 Road/Transportation Not Eligible –

SWCA also examined General Land Office (GLO) plat maps and several geographic information systems (GIS) layers for potential cultural resources in or near the survey area. These layers, available from state and federal agencies, include National Register of Historic Places properties, Utah historic trails, Utah historic districts, historical topographic maps, areas of critical environmental concern, and other historical aerial imagery. From these sources, no potential historic features are depicted within or crossing the direct effects APE for the current project. Several quadrangle maps dating between 1917 and 1965 depict several unnamed structures in the general vicinity of the Uintah High School tower as well as more substantial development associated with the town of Vernal to the southeast. The 1965 Vernal, 7.5-minute quadrangle depicts both the Ashley Central Canal and the Steinaker Service Canal in the section containing the tower; a natural drainage that flows along the northern boundary of the open field appears to connect to the Ashley Central Canal to the east. The BLM GLO records database was also searched for the section (Section 16) in which the project area is located. GLO records indicate that 11 patents were issued for Section 16 between 1887 and 1922 (BLM 2019). Of these 11 patents, four were issued under the 1862 Homestead Entry Act and one was issued under the 1894 Utah Enabling Act. The remaining six patents are characterized as Indemnity List Base Lands, patented by the United States. In 1887, Martin Oaks was granted a patent under the 1862 Homestead Entry Act for the land on which the Uintah High School tower is located. However, in 1922, this land was included in an indemnity list base land patent granted to the United States. The land on which the tower is located is currently owned by the Uintah School District (Uintah County Assessor’s Office 2015). Cultural Resource Inventory

SWCA cultural resource specialist Kiera Westwater conducted a cultural resource survey of the APE for direct effects on November 30, 2011. The survey area included the 0.03-acre lease pad containing the existing Uintah High School tower and the associated equipment box (Figure 2) and the 275-foot access road that was newly constructed/upgraded as part of the current project. The field methods used in this survey followed Utah State Historic Preservation (SHPO) guidelines for conducting cultural resource inventories in Utah. Field personnel inspected the inventory area using a series of parallel, 15-m-wide transects across the inventory area; however, survey transects were adjusted when necessary to ensure full coverage of the inventory area. Archaeologists examined the ground surface for artifacts, features, and other prehistoric or historic material evidence such as charcoal-stained sediments, as well as aboveground features and structures. If present, special attention was paid to animal burrows to assess the potential for subsurface archeological deposits. If landscape features such as depressions, ditches, mounds, and areas of differential vegetation had been present, they also would have been examined in Mr. Allen Bennion June 1, 2019 Page 4

particular for evidence of the exposure of archaeological materials. Per Utah SHPO guidelines, site and isolated find definitions are based on those provided in the Utah Bureau of Land Management Guidelines for Identifying Cultural Resources, Handbook H-8110 (BLM 2002). No artifacts were collected during the survey. The Uintah High School tower and associated infrastructure is in an open field at the far northeastern corner of Uintah High School. Prior to construction of the tower and as recently as the late 1990s, the field had been used for agricultural purposes. Since then, the field has been impacted by additional disturbances associated with an unidentified structure located in the southern half of the field. Vegetation in the immediate vicinity of the tower is typical of the Uinta Basin Floor, and consists of a sagebrush and shadscale vegetative community. At the time of survey, the field was overgrown with grasses. Irrigated agricultural land is present in the surrounding area, and riparian environments exist along the Ashley Central Canal to the north and the Steinaker Service Canal to the west and along other nearby irrigation canals. Soils within the surveyed area consist of moderately deep (<60 inches), well developed loam alluvium associated with the Holocene (NRCS 2017; UGS 2017). No cultural resources were observed within the direct effects APE during survey. Although the geological and depositional environment in the vicinity of the tower is conducive to the preservation of cultural materials, given the amount of prior disturbance to the soils in the vicinity of the tower, it is unlikely that any significant intact subsurface deposits of cultural material were disturbed during construction of the tower and associated infrastructure, and it is unlikely that the future use and operation of the facility will result in any adverse effects on historic properties. Therefore, it is SWCA’s professional opinion that No Historic Properties are Present within the APE for direct effects. Visual Effects Analysis

The analysis of visual effects of the proposed facility consists of evaluating the critical viewshed of historic properties within the APE for visual effects. The critical viewshed is the intended historic view of a historic property that captures the character-defining elements of the property, including setting and feeling. The critical viewshed also includes the intended view from the historic property that captures the character-defining elements of the setting and feeling of the property. Therefore, in order for the facility to have an effect on historic properties within the APE for visual effects, it must be visible within the viewshed when looking at a historic property or within the intended viewshed looking from the property. The APE for visual effects includes the area within which effects from installing the tower could impact historic properties, in this case, through visual intrusion. Based on the results of the UDSH file searches, one previously recorded historic property is located within the 0.5-mile APE for visual effects. The Ashley Central Canal trends generally northwest/southeast through agricultural fields, pasture, and residential areas in the immediate vicinity of the visual effects APE. The historic viewshed and setting of the canal has been impacted by historic and modern development associated with the town of Vernal and it’s neighboring towns. The tower is on the property of Uintah High School, modern paved roadways with stop signs and streetlights are present to the east and south, a transmission line trends east/west south of the tower, and there are numerous modern buildings on the landscape. The Uintah High School tower itself is clearly visible from the canal. However, the telecommunication facility does not create a strong Mr. Allen Bennion June 1, 2019 Page 5 contrast against the surrounding area as several other vertical intrusions, including power poles and tall trees, are also visible within the viewshed, and the use of galvanized steel helps to limit to reflectively of the tower itself. Thus, while the installation of the Uintah High School tower contributed to the cumulative visual effect to the historic viewshed, it did not do so in a manner that negatively affected the integrity of 42UN5195. Therefore, it is SWCA’s professional opinion that there is No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties within the APE for visual effects. Summary and Recommendations

In summary, it is our professional opinion that no historic properties are present in the APE for direct effects and that there is no adverse effect to the single historic property present in the APE for visual effects. Therefore, the undertaking resulted in No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties; no additional work is recommended. Please feel free to contact us if you need additional information or would like SWCA to conduct any additional services on your behalf. Sincerely,

Melanie Medeiros Michael J. Retter Cultural Resource Specialist Principal Investigator Attachments: Attachment A. Photographs

References Cited:

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) 2002 Bureau of Land Management Guidelines for Identifying Cultural Resources, Handbook H-8110. Bureau of Land Management, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Natural Resources Conservation Service 2017 Web Soil Survey: Soil Map. Electronic application available at: http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/app/. Accessed May 20, 2019.

Unitah County Assessor’s Office 2017 Real Property Owner Information, Serial No. 04:093:0003. Available at: http://co.uintah.ut.us/nonsubprocessselect.php?serial=040930003&rpttype=prop&sub mit=Submit+Query. Accessed May 20, 2019.

Utah Geological Survey 2017 Geologic Maps. Electronic application available at: http://geology.utah.gov/apps/intgeomap/index.html. Accessed May 20, 2019. Mr. Allen Bennion June 1, 2019 Page 6

Figure 1. Location of the project and the APE for visual effects.

Mr. Allen Bennion June 1, 2019 Page 7

Figure 2. Aerial map showing the APE for direct effects.

Figure 3. View from the Uintah High School Figure 4. View from the Uintah High School facility looking north. facility looking east.

Figure 5. View from the Uintah High School Figure 6. View from the Uintah High School facility looking south. facility looking west.

Figure 7. Overview of the Uintah High School Figure 8. Overview of the Uintah High facility looking north. School facility looking west.

FCC Form 620 FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Approved by OMB 3060 – 1039 New Tower (NT) Submission Packet Notification Date: See instructions for File Number: 0005196247 public burden estimates General Information 1) (Select only one) ( UA ) NE – New UA – Update of Application WD – Withdrawal of Application

2) If this application is for an Update or Withdrawal, enter the file number of the pending application File Number: currently on file. 0005196247

Applicant Information

3) FCC Registration Number (FRN): 0001601079

4) Name: UINTAH BASIN ELECTRONIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS d/b/a Strata Networks

Contact Name

5) First Name: Allen 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Bennion 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Wireless Supervisor

Contact Information And 10) P.O. Box: 11) Street Address: 2085 US-40 /Or

12) City: Vernal 13) State: UT 14) Zip Code: 84066

15) Telephone Number: (435)622-5231 16) Fax Number:

17) E-mail Address: [email protected]

Consultant Information

18) FCC Registration Number (FRN): 0018188805

19) Name: SWCA, Inc. /b/a SWCA Environmental Consultants

Principal Investigator

20) First Name: Michael 21) MI: J 22) Last Name: Retter 23) Suffix:

24) Title: Project Manager, M.A., RPA_2019

Principal Investigator Contact Information And 25) P.O. Box: 80021 26) Street Address: 295 Interlocken Blvd. Suite 300 /Or

27) City: Broomfield 28) State: CO 29) Zip Code: 80021

30) Telephone Number: (303)487-1183 31) Fax Number:

32) E-mail Address: [email protected]

1 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Professional Qualification

33) Does the Principal Investigator satisfy the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

34) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

Additional Staff

35) Are there other staff involved who meet the Professional Qualification Standards of the Secretary of the Interior? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

If “YES,” complete the following:

36) First Name: Kiera 37) MI: 38) Last Name: Westwater 39) Suffix:

40) Title: Archaeologist/GIS Specialist_2012

41) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

36) First Name: Elisabeth 37) MI: 38) Last Name: Robison 39) Suffix:

40) Title: Project Manager (2011/2012) M.A., RPA

41) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

2 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 36) First Name: Melanie 37) MI: A 38) Last Name: Medeiros 39) Suffix:

40) Title: Project Manager (2019) M.A., RPA

41) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

3 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Site Information Tower Construction Notification System

1) TCNS Notification Number: 183957

Site Information

2) Positive Train Control Filing Subject to Expedited Treatment Under Program Comment: ( ) Yes ( X ) No

3) Site Name: Uintah High School Telecommunications Facility

4) Site Address: 1836 West 500 North

5) Detailed Description of Project:

Monopole tower with associated equipment structure within an approximately 40- x 30-foot fenced area.

6) City: Vernal 7) State: UT 8) Zip Code: 84078

9) County/Borough/Parish: UINTAH

10) Nearest Crossroads: 1700 W Street and 500 N Street

11) NAD 83 Latitude (DD-MM-SS.S): 40-27-57.6 ( X ) N or ( ) S

12) NAD 83 Longitude (DD-MM-SS.S): 109-22-49.3 ( ) E or ( X ) W

Tower Information

13) Tower height above ground level (include top-mounted attachments such as lightning rods): ______26.8 ( ) Feet ( X ) Meters

14) Tower Type (Select One):

( ) Guyed lattice tower

( ) Self-supporting lattice

( X ) Monopole

( ) Other (Describe): 2

Project Status

15) Current Project Status (Select One):

( ) Construction has not yet commenced

( ) Construction has commenced, but is not completed Construction commenced on: ______

01/15/2002 ( X ) Construction has been completed Construction commenced on: ______

Construction completed on: ______07/31/2002_____

4 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Determination of Effect

14) Direct Effects (Select One):

( X ) No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE)

( ) No Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on one or more Historic Properties in APE

15) Visual Effects (Select One):

( ) No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE)

( ) No Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( X ) No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on one or more Historic Properties in APE

5 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183957 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Blackfeet Nation

Contact Name

5) First Name: Virgil 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Edwards 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Deputy THPO

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/20/2019 11) Date Replied ______03/22/2019

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( X ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Crow Tribe

William Big Day

THPO

03/21/2019

6 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183957 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Eastern Shoshone Tribe

Contact Name

5) First Name: Josh 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Mann 8) Suffix:

9) Title: THPO

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/21/2019 11) Date Replied ______04/10/2019

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( X ) Replied/Other

Fort Belknap Indian Community

Michael Blackwolf

THPO

03/21/2019

7 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183957 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians

Contact Name

5) First Name: Daniel 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Bulletts 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Environmental Program Director

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/21/2019 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Kiowa Indian Tribe THPO

George Carter

03/20/2019 03/20/2019

8 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183957 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Northwestern Band of Shoshone Nation

Contact Name

5) First Name: Montana & Associates 6) MI: 7) Last Name: LLC 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Attorney

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/20/2019 11) Date Replied ______03/27/2019

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( X ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe

Candelora Lehi

Tribal Administrator

03/20/2019

9 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183957 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Cultural Resources

Contact Name

5) First Name: Romelia 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Martinez 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Cultural Resources Tech II

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/21/2019 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians

Montana & Associates LLC

Attorney

03/21/2019 03/27/2019

10 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______183957 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______12

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Southern Ute Tribe

Contact Name

5) First Name: SUIT 6) MI: 7) Last Name: NAGPRA 8) Suffix:

9) Title:

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______03/21/2019 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Ute Indian Tribe

Betsy L Chapoose

Cultural Rights & Protection Director

03/21/2019

11 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Other Tribes/NHOs Contacted

Tribe/NHO Information

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name:

Contact Name

3) First Name: 4) MI: 5) Last Name: 6) Suffix:

7) Title:

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: /Or

10) City: 11) State: 12) Zip Code:

13) Telephone Number: 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address:

16) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______18) Date Replied ______

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

12 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Historic Properties Properties Identified

1) Have any historic properties been identified within the APEs for direct and visual effect? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

2) Has the identification process located archaeological materials that would be directly affected, or sites that are of ( ) Yes ( ) No cultural or religious significance to Tribes/NHOs? X

Historic Property

4) Property Name: Ashley Central Canal

5) SHPO Site Number: 42UN5195

Property Address

6) Street Address: Trends NW/SE between 2500 W Street and 1500 W Street

7) City: Vernal 8) State: UT 9) Zip Code: 84078

10) County/Borough/Parish: UINTAH

Status & Eligibility

11) Is this property listed on the National Register? ( ) Yes ( X ) No Source: ______

12) Is this property eligible for listing on the National Register? ( X ) Yes ( ) No Source: ______Utah Historic Preservation Office

13) Is this property a National Historic Landmark? ( ) Yes ( X ) No

14) Direct Effects (Select One):

( X ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

15) Visual Effects (Select One):

( ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( X ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

13 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Local Government Involvement

Local Government Agency

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name: Uintah County Community Development

Contact Name

3) First Name: Matt 4) MI: 5) Last Name: Cazier 6) Suffix:

7) Title: Director

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: 152 E 100 N /Or

10) City: Vernal 11) State: UT 12) Zip Code: 84078

13) Telephone Number: (435)789-5336 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address: [email protected]

16) Preferred means of communication:

( X ) E-mail

( ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______07/15/2002 18) Date Replied ______01/15/2003

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( X ) Replied/Other

Approved, no public concerns.

Additional Information

19) Information on local government’s role or interest (optional):

14 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Local Government Involvement

Local Government Agency

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name: Uintah County Planning and Zoning Department, Planning Commission

Contact Name

3) First Name: William 4) MI: 5) Last Name: Stringer 6) Suffix:

7) Title:

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: 152 E 100 N /Or

10) City: Vernal 11) State: UT 12) Zip Code: 84078

13) Telephone Number: (435)781-5300 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address:

16) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( X ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______07/09/2019 18) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Additional Information

19) Information on local government’s role or interest (optional):

15 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Local Government Involvement

Local Government Agency

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name: Uintah County Heritage Museum

Contact Name

3) First Name: L. 4) MI: 5) Last Name: Fullbright 6) Suffix:

7) Title:

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: 155 E. Main Street /Or

10) City: Vernal 11) State: UT 12) Zip Code: 84078

13) Telephone Number: (435)789-7399 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address: [email protected]

16) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( X ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______07/09/2019 18) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Additional Information

19) Information on local government’s role or interest (optional):

16 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Other Consulting Parties Other Consulting Parties Contacted

1) Has any other agency been contacted and invited to become a consulting party? ( ) Yes ( X ) No

Consulting Party

2) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

3) Name:

Contact Name

4) First Name: 5) MI: 6) Last Name: 7) Suffix:

8) Title:

Contact Information And 9) P.O. Box: 10) Street Address: /Or

11) City: 12) State: 13) Zip Code:

14) Telephone Number: 15) Fax Number:

16) E-mail Address:

17) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

18) Date Contacted ______19) Date Replied ______

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Additional Information

20) Information on other consulting parties’ role or interest (optional):

17 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Designation of SHPO/THPO

1) Designate the Lead State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) based on the location of the tower.

SHPO/THPO

Name: ______Utah State Historical Society

SHPO/THPO Name: ______

Certification

I certify that all representations on this FCC Form 620 Submission Packet and the accompanying attachments are true, correct, and complete.

Party Authorized to Sign

First Name: MI: Last Name: Suffix:

Signature: Date: ______

FAILURE TO SIGN THIS APPLICATION MAY RESULT IN DISMISSAL OF THE APPLICATION AND FORFEITURE OF ANY FEES PAID.

18 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Attachments :

Type Description Date Entered

Resumes/Vitae Resume_Retter & Medeiros 09/09/2019

Resumes/Vitae Resume_Robison 09/09/2019

Resumes/Vitae Resume_Westwater 09/09/2019

Map Documents Maps 09/09/2019

Area of Potential Effects APE Description 09/09/2019

Tribal/NHO Involvement Tribal Involvement Record_2019 (draft) 09/09/2019

Tribal/NHO Involvement Tribal Involvement Summary_2012 09/09/2019

Local Government Involvement Local Govt Involvement_2012 09/09/2019

Local Government Involvement Local Govt Involvement_2019 09/09/2019

Public Involvement Public Involvement_2012 09/09/2019

Public Involvement Public Involvement_2019 09/09/2019

Historic Properties for Visual Effects Historic Properties for Visual APE 09/09/2019

Historic Properties for Direct Effects Historic Properties for Direct APE 09/09/2019

Photographs Photographs 09/09/2019

Additional Site Information Project Description 09/09/2019

Other Cultural Resource Report 09/09/2019

19 of 19 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Petition for Declaratory Ruling -- Exhibit 6 Lapoint Tower

August 18, 2015

Allen Bennion STRATA Networks 211 East 200 North Roosevelt, Utah 84066

RE: Literature Review, Cultural Resource Inventory, and Visual Effects Analysis for the Lapoint Telecommunications Facility, Uintah County, Utah

Dear Mr. Bennion,

In 2015, SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) was contracted by STRATA Networks to conduct cultural and historical resource investigations for the Lapoint cellular telecommunications facility located on a butte north of the town of Lapoint, Utah (Figure 1). STRATA Networks plans to remove and replace the existing wooden pole in this location and construct a new 100-foot-tall self-supporting tower and a 44- by 42-foot equipment facility adjacent to the existing facility on private land in Section 5, Township 1 South, Range 2 East, in Uintah County, Utah. The purpose of these investigations is to provide information required by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to meet their federal requirements under Section 106 of the amended National Historic Preservation Act, as outlined in the FCC nationwide Programmatic Agreement (PA) for the review of effects to historic properties (FCC 04-222). Although the original telecommunications tower, consisting of the existing wooden pole and facility, was subject to Section 106 consultation,1 the new tower requires additional Section 106 consultation because it does not fall under the exclusion categories as outlined in the nationwide PA (FCC 04-222).

The area of potential effects (APE) for direct effects as defined by the guidelines set forth in the PA consists of the area that would be directly impacted as a result of facility construction. For the Lapoint location, the APE for direct effects is defined by a 44- by 42-foot compound area containing the physical footprint of the tower and associated equipment building. The fenced-in area of the existing facility will be maintained, with the new 44- by 42-foot area added to the original area. Following re-location of the antennas to the new self-supporting lattice tower, the existing H-Frame will be left in place. A new propane tank, cement generator pad, and H-Frame structure will be located in the area of the original facility. The existing graveled access road that is used to access other adjacent cellular communications towers on the butte will be used to access the Lapoint tower and facility. The PA defines the area of visual effects as 0.5 mile from the tower location for telecommunications towers less than 200 feet in height (see Figure 1); the Lapoint tower is a 100-foot-tall self-supporting lattice tower. Specifically, the APE for visual

1 Robinson, Liz. 2011. Direct and Indirect Effects Assessment for the Telecommunications Location Huber Site. Letter report submitted to STRATA Networks and the Utah State Historic Preservation Office, December 7, 2011.

Mr. Allen Bennion August 18, 2015 Page 2 effects extends 0.5 mile from the tower location. This letter report summarizes the work conducted by SWCA including the results of a file search conducted through the Utah Division of State History (UDSH), field investigation of the APE for direct effects and the APE for visual effects, and an evaluation of the potential impacts of the project on historic properties.

At the time of the inventory, the new tower and associated infrastructure had not been constructed. The following evaluation of the APE for direct effects and APE for visual effects was conducted before the installation of the self-supporting lattice tower and facility to assess whether any historic properties would be adversely impacted by the construction, and if any historic properties would be impacted by construction of the new tower at the telecommunications facility.

SWCA conducted a file search through the UDSH on July 10, 2015, to identify known cultural resources located within the APE for direct effects for this proposed facility. The file search results did not reveal any known archaeological sites located within the APE for direct effects. SWCA cultural resource specialist Sarah Baer conducted cultural resource surveys of the APE for direct effects on July 15, 2015. The survey area included the proposed 44- by 42-foot tower and facility area for a total of 0.06 acre inventoried (Figure 2). The location of the Lapoint tower and associated infrastructure is on a large butte overlooking the town of Lapoint to the south. The surface sediment consists of light tan residual soils with numerous large rocks and gravels. Based on the deposition, it is unlikely that any significant intact subsurface deposits of cultural material would be disturbed during construction of the tower and associated infrastructure and it is unlikely that the future use and operation of the facility would result in any adverse effects on historic properties. Therefore, it is SWCA’s professional opinion that No Historic Properties are Present within the APE for direct effects.

Based on the results of the UDSH file search, one previously recorded cultural resource is located within the 0.5-mile APE for visual effects. The previously recorded cultural resource within the APE for visual effects is 42UN002679, the historic Ouray Valley Canal, which is recommended eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Although the property is within the APE for visual effects, the visual integrity does not contribute to the eligibility of 42UN002679; the site has been recommended eligible for its association with the historic Uintah Basin irrigation development in the early twentieth century under Criterion A. The general historic viewshed of the area is currently impacted by other radio, overhead, and cellular towers on the butte. From the canal, modern commercial and residential buildings and overhead utilities

Mr. Allen Bennion August 18, 2015 Page 3 are also visible. Although the proposed tower will be visible from the canal, the majority of the tower will be hidden by the ridge and the tower will not be sky-lined. The weak contrast of the tower will be similar to existing power lines visible along the canal. The APE for visual effects includes only a small portion of the overall canal and modern impacts also affect this property outside of the APE of visual effects, consequently the current project only contributes a minor effect on the property. Therefore, it is anticipated that the installation of the proposed tower will result in No Adverse Effects on Historic Properties in the APE for visual effects.

In summary, it is our professional opinion that No Historic Properties are Present in the APE for direct effects and the proposed project will have No Adverse Effects on Historic Properties in the APE for visual effects. Therefore, the proposed undertaking will result in No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties and no additional work is recommended. Please feel free to contact us if you need additional information or would like SWCA to conduct any additional services on your behalf.

Sincerely,

Sarah Baer Michael Retter Cultural Resource Specialist Principal Investigator

Mr. Allen Bennion August 18, 2015 Page 4

Figure 1. Location of the project and the APE for visual effects.

Mr. Allen Bennion August 18, 2015 Page 5

Figure 2. Aerial map showing the APE for direct effects.

Figure #1 View from project area, facing Figure #2 View from project area, facing north. east.

Figure #3 View from project area, facing Figure #4 View from project area, facing south. west.

Figure #5 View toward project area, facing Figure #6 View toward project area, facing north. east.

Figure #7 View toward project area, facing Figure #8 View toward project area, facing west. south.

Figure #7 View from project area towards Figure #8 View from 42UN002679, historic 42UN002679, historic canal, facing canal, towards project area, facing northeast. southwest.

FCC Form 620 FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Approved by OMB 3060 – 1039 New Tower (NT) Submission Packet Notification Date: 7AM EST 08/20/2015 See instructions for File Number: 0006919963 public burden estimates General Information 1) (Select only one) ( NE ) NE – New UA – Update of Application WD – Withdrawal of Application

2) If this application is for an Update or Withdrawal, enter the file number of the pending application File Number: currently on file.

Applicant Information

3) FCC Registration Number (FRN): 0001601079

4) Name: UINTAH BASIN ELECTRONIC TELECOMMUNICATIONS d/b/a Strata Networks

Contact Name

5) First Name: Bruce 6) MI: H 7) Last Name: Todd 8) Suffix:

9) Title: General Manager

Contact Information And 10) P.O. Box: 157 11) Street Address: 211 East 200 North /Or

12) City: Vernal 13) State: UT 14) Zip Code: 84066

15) Telephone Number: (435)646-5007 16) Fax Number:

17) E-mail Address: [email protected]

Consultant Information

18) FCC Registration Number (FRN): 0021675194

19) Name: SWCA Environmental Consultants

Principal Investigator

20) First Name: Michael 21) MI: J 22) Last Name: Retter 23) Suffix:

24) Title: Principal Investigator

Principal Investigator Contact Information And 25) P.O. Box: 26) Street Address: 295 Interlocken Boulevard, Suite 300 /Or

27) City: Broomfield 28) State: CO 29) Zip Code: 80021

30) Telephone Number: (303)487-1183 31) Fax Number:

32) E-mail Address: [email protected]

1 of 14 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Professional Qualification

33) Does the Principal Investigator satisfy the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

34) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

Additional Staff

35) Are there other staff involved who meet the Professional Qualification Standards of the Secretary of the Interior? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

If “YES,” complete the following:

36) First Name: Sarah 37) MI: 38) Last Name: Baer 39) Suffix:

40) Title: Archaeologist

41) Areas of Professional Qualification:

( X ) Archaeologist

( ) Architectural Historian

( ) Historian

( ) Architect

( ) Other (Specify) ______

2 of 14 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Site Information Tower Construction Notification System

1) TCNS Notification Number: 128961

Site Information

2) Positive Train Control Filing Subject to Expedited Treatment Under Program Comment: ( ) Yes ( X ) No

3) Site Name: Lapoint Cell Tower

4) Site Address: Outside of Lapoint, Utah

5) Detailed Description of Project:

Replacement of wooden pole with self supported lattice tower array 100-feet tall with equipment and fenced area

6) City: Lapoint 7) State: UT 8) Zip Code: 84078

9) County/Borough/Parish: UINTAH

10) Nearest Crossroads: Lapoint, Utah

11) NAD 83 Latitude (DD-MM-SS.S): 40-25-13.0 ( X ) N or ( ) S

12) NAD 83 Longitude (DD-MM-SS.S): 109-47-59.5 ( ) E or ( X ) W

Tower Information

13) Tower height above ground level (include top-mounted attachments such as lightning rods): ______30.5 ( ) Feet ( X ) Meters

14) Tower Type (Select One):

( ) Guyed lattice tower

( X ) Self-supporting lattice

( ) Monopole

( ) Other (Describe): 2

Project Status

15) Current Project Status (Select One):

( X ) Construction has not yet commenced

( ) Construction has commenced, but is not completed Construction commenced on: ______

( ) Construction has been completed Construction commenced on: ______

Construction completed on: ______

3 of 14 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Determination of Effect

14) Direct Effects (Select One):

( X ) No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE)

( ) No Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on one or more Historic Properties in APE

15) Visual Effects (Select One):

( ) No Historic Properties in Area of Potential Effects (APE)

( ) No Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( X ) No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on one or more Historic Properties in APE

4 of 14 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______128961 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______7

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Crow Tribe

Contact Name

5) First Name: Emerson 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Bull Chief 8) Suffix:

9) Title: THPO

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______07/16/2015 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Eastern Shoshone Tribe

Wilfred Ferris III

THPO

07/16/2015 07/15/2015

5 of 14 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______128961 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______7

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians

Contact Name

5) First Name: Daniel 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Bulletts 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Environmental Program Director

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______07/16/2015 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe

Candelora Lehi

Tribal Administrator

07/15/2015

6 of 14 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______128961 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______7

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, Cultural Resources

Contact Name

5) First Name: Carolyn 6) MI: 7) Last Name: Smith 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Cultural Resources Coordinator

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______07/16/2015 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Southern Ute Tribe

Alden Naranjo

NAGPRA Coordinator

07/16/2015

7 of 14 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Tribal/NHO Involvement

2a) Tribes/NHOs contacted through TCNS Notification Number: ______128961 Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______7

2b) Tribes/NHOs contacted through an alternate system: Number of Tribes/NHOs: ______0

Tribe/NHO Contacted Through TCNS

3) Tribe/NHO FRN:

4) Tribe/NHO Name: Ute Indian Tribe

Contact Name

5) First Name: Betsy 6) MI: L 7) Last Name: Chapoose 8) Suffix:

9) Title: Cultural Rights & Protection Director

Dates & Response 10) Date Contacted ______07/16/2015 11) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

8 of 14 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Other Tribes/NHOs Contacted

Tribe/NHO Information

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name:

Contact Name

3) First Name: 4) MI: 5) Last Name: 6) Suffix:

7) Title:

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: /Or

10) City: 11) State: 12) Zip Code:

13) Telephone Number: 14) Fax Number:

15) E-mail Address:

16) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______18) Date Replied ______

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

9 of 14 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Historic Properties Properties Identified

1) Have any historic properties been identified within the APEs for direct and visual effect? ( X ) Yes ( ) No

2) Has the identification process located archaeological materials that would be directly affected, or sites that are of ( ) Yes ( ) No cultural or religious significance to Tribes/NHOs? X

Historic Property

4) Property Name: Ouray Valley Canal

5) SHPO Site Number: 42UN002679

Property Address

6) Street Address: UT-88

7) City: Lapoint 8) State: UT 9) Zip Code: 84078

10) County/Borough/Parish: UINTAH

Status & Eligibility

11) Is this property listed on the National Register? ( ) Yes ( X ) No Source: ______

12) Is this property eligible for listing on the National Register? ( X ) Yes ( ) No Source: ______IMACS Site form 42UN002679

13) Is this property a National Historic Landmark? ( ) Yes ( X ) No

14) Direct Effects (Select One):

( X ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

15) Visual Effects (Select One):

( ) No Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( X ) No Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

( ) Adverse Effect on this Historic Property in APE

10 of 14 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Local Government Involvement

Local Government Agency

1) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

2) Name: Uintah County Building/Planning/Zoning

Contact Name

3) First Name: Matthew 4) MI: 5) Last Name: Cazier 6) Suffix:

7) Title: Director

Contact Information And 8) P.O. Box: 9) Street Address: 152E 100N /Or

10) City: Vernal 11) State: UT 12) Zip Code: 84078

13) Telephone Number: (435)781-5336 14) Fax Number: (435)781-5352

15) E-mail Address: [email protected]

16) Preferred means of communication:

( X ) E-mail

( ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

17) Date Contacted ______07/27/2015 18) Date Replied ______

( X ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Additional Information

19) Information on local government’s role or interest (optional):

11 of 14 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Other Consulting Parties Other Consulting Parties Contacted

1) Has any other agency been contacted and invited to become a consulting party? ( ) Yes ( X ) No

Consulting Party

2) FCC Registration Number (FRN):

3) Name:

Contact Name

4) First Name: 5) MI: 6) Last Name: 7) Suffix:

8) Title:

Contact Information And 9) P.O. Box: 10) Street Address: /Or

11) City: 12) State: 13) Zip Code:

14) Telephone Number: 15) Fax Number:

16) E-mail Address:

17) Preferred means of communication:

( ) E-mail

( ) Letter

( ) Both

Dates & Response

18) Date Contacted ______19) Date Replied ______

( ) No Reply

( ) Replied/No Interest

( ) Replied/Have Interest

( ) Replied/Other

Additional Information

20) Information on other consulting parties’ role or interest (optional):

12 of 14 FCC Form 620 May 2014

Designation of SHPO/THPO

1) Designate the Lead State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) or Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO) based on the location of the tower.

SHPO/THPO

Name: ______Utah State Historical Society

SHPO/THPO Name: ______

Certification

I certify that all representations on this FCC Form 620 Submission Packet and the accompanying attachments are true, correct, and complete.

Party Authorized to Sign

First Name: Sarah MI: Last Name: Baer Suffix:

Signature: Sarah Baer Date: 08/19/2015 ______

FAILURE TO SIGN THIS APPLICATION MAY RESULT IN DISMISSAL OF THE APPLICATION AND FORFEITURE OF ANY FEES PAID.

13 of 14 FCC Form 620 May 2014 Attachments :

Type Description Date Entered

Resumes/Vitae Resumes 08/19/2015

Map Documents Project Location Map 08/19/2015

Map Documents Direct APE Map 08/19/2015

Area of Potential Effects Area of Potential Effects 08/19/2015

Tribal/NHO Involvement Tribal Contact and TCNS 08/19/2015

Local Government Involvement Local Government Letter 08/19/2015

Public Involvement Public Notice 08/19/2015

Public Involvement Public Notice Confirmation 08/19/2015

Historic Properties for Visual Effects Historic Properties for Visual Effects 08/19/2015

Historic Properties for Direct Effects Historic Properties for Direct Effects 08/19/2015

Photographs Photos 08/19/2015

Other Cultural Report 08/19/2015

Additional Site Information Additional Site Information 08/19/2015

14 of 14 FCC Form 620 May 2014 MICHAEL J. RETTER, M.A., RPA Principal Investigator - Archaeologist

Education / Training Mr. Retter is a principal investigator and cultural resources manager with more than 14 years of  M.A., Anthropology, University of experience. He conducts full-spectrum projects on the Western Ontario, 2001 cultural environment through application of his expertise  B.A., Visual Arts and Anthropology, across the following fields and subdisciplines: University of Western Ontario, 1998 anthropology, archaeology, historic archaeology, tribal consultation, and cultural landscapes, particularly for Registration / Certification National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) Section 106  Registered Professional and Section 110 compliance. He also works with diverse Archaeologist, 2004 teams on multidisciplinary projects, including those with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements. Expertise Mr. Retter is responsible for all aspects of project completion and leads teams through all project  Prehistoric archaeology of the components including project scoping, budgeting, Northern Plains, Rocky Mountains, research design, performance, results analysis, final Great Basin, and Columbia Plateau reporting, and project oversight and review. He has regions reviewed, managed, and been involved in NHPA/Section  Historic site and trail assessments 106 and NEPA projects in Arizona, California, Colorado,  Excavation of historic and prehistoric Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, New Mexico, North sites Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah,  Ceramic technology and decorative Washington, and Wyoming, as well as Ontario Heritage techniques Act compliance projects in Ontario, Canada. These project areas include the specific ranges of the Northern and Southern Plains, Rocky Mountains, Great Basin, Relevant Projects Pacific Coast, Columbia Plateau regions, and the Great  Lostwood Tower Archaeological Lakes region. Monitoring and Test Excavations; Mr. Retter is well-versed in the policies and procedures Mountrail County, North Dakota governing the NHPA, Section 106 recommendations, and  Keystone XL Pipeline and remains up-to-date on the requirements for conducting Transmission Line Project; Phillips, and recording archaeological surveys mandated by such Valley, McCone, Dawson, Prairie, governing agencies as the Federal Energy Regulatory and Fallon Counties, Montana Commission, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Forest Service, Division of Wildlife, Surface Transportation  Greencore CO2 Pipeline Project, Campbell, Fremont, Johnson, and Board, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and State Historic Natrona Counties, Wyoming; and Preservation Offices. Powder River County, Montana In the discipline of archaeology, Mr. Retter holds or is  Cultural Surveys, NHPA & NEPA listed on official government permits (state and federal) Compliance for the Paradise 230-kV throughout several of the Rocky Mountain western region Transmission Line Project; Pinedale states. He has authored or co-authored over 100 County, Wyoming professional reports prepared for private- and public-  Cultural Surveys for the Dakota, sector clients. Minnesota, and Eastern Railroad In addition to Cultural Resource Management (CRM), Mr. Powder River Basin Expansion Retter has 6 years of formal training and over 18 years Project; Wyoming and South Dakota experience with multiple photographic formats including  Cultural Surveys, NHPA & NEPA black and white film, photo-plate etching, photo- Compliance for the Paradise 230-kV lithography, and digital media. Mr. Retter has displayed Transmission Line Project; Pinedale his photographs at art galleries in London, and Toronto, County, Wyoming Ontario, Canada.

SARAH BAER, M.A., RPA Archaeologist

Education / Certification Ms. Baer is an archaeologist and field director with over eight years of experience. She conducts full-spectrum  M.A., Anthropology, Brigham projects in anthropology, archaeology, and historic ar- Young University; Provo, Utah, 2003 chaeology, to fulfill National Historic Preservation Act  B.A., Anthropology, Brigham (NHPA), and Section 106 compliance. Ms. Baer is respon- Young University; Provo, Utah, sible for all aspects of project scoping, research design, 2001 logistics, field inventory, excavation, evaluative testing,  A.A., Science, Ricks College; Provo, mapping, laboratory analysis, and results compilation Utah, 1998 and reporting. Ms. Baer serves on SWCA federal and  Registered Professional state permits to lead archaeological investigations Archaeologist throughout Rocky Mountain West, Great Basin, and Great Plains Regions, and extending into the American South- Training west.  Issues in Section 106: An Advanced As a cultural resource specialist, Ms. Baer has expertise in Seminar NHPA – Section 106 actions and compliance and Secre-  Comprehensive NEPA tary of Interior Guidelines. Her abilities extend to support-  PSMJ Resources, Inc. Project ing cultural resource reviews in all levels of federal, state, Management Bootcamp and local actions, such as providing impacts analyses for National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance and documentation. Although specializing in prehistoric Expertise archaeology, Ms. Baer maintains a broad base of  Report writing / project knowledge applicable to the requirements of historic management archaeology, tribal consultation and the ethnography of  Artifact analysis the Contact period, standing structure review, and historic preservation in general.  Logistics, inventory, and testing  Great Basin and American Ms. Baer is well-versed in the policies and procedures Southwest / Plains governing the NHPA, Section 106 recommendations, and remains up-to-date on the requirements for conducting Relevant Projects and recording archaeological surveys mandated by such governing agencies as the Army Corps of Engineers,  El Paso Ruby Pipeline Project, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Bureau of Land Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, and Management, U.S. Forest Service, Division of Wildlife, Oregon Surface Transportation Board, and State Historic Preser-  Jonah 3D Geophysical Seismic vation Offices. Ms. Baer has worked on a variety of Project, Sublette County, Wyoming projects throughout the western United States including  Jim Bridger 3D Geophysical Seismic seismic, pipeline, transmissions lines, telecommunica- Project, Sweetwater County, tions, and portions of various environmental assessments. Wyoming  South Laramie 3D Geophysical Ms. Baer is an active and contributing member of Seismic Project, Sweetwater County, SWCA’s public outreach program. She regularly visits Wyoming local schools as a guest speaker on archaeology, as well  Keystone XL Project, Phillips, Valley, as assisting in the creation of lesson plans. Ms. Baer also and McCone Counties, Montana serves as the Colorado Coordinator for Project Archaeol- ogy.

For Official Use Only: Disclosure of site locations prohibited (43 CFR 7.18)

1N 2E 1S 2E

GF Lapoint Cell Tower

I:\Projects\26000-26999\26229_STRATACellTower\MXD\Report\CR\ProjectLocation\ProjectLocation_Lapoint.mxd

Miles Legend 0 0.25 0.5 1 Km GF Proposed Cell Tower 0 0.25 0.5 1 1:24,000 APE for Visual Effects Base Map: USGS 7.5' Topographic Map Township/Range USA_Topo_Maps, Esri Online Service Boundary © 2013 National Geographic Society, i-cubed 295 Interlocken Blvd. Township 1S Range 2E, T1N R2E Suite 300 Broomfield, CO 80021 Quadrangle: Lapoint, UT (1965) Uninta County, Utah Phone: 303.487.1183 Fax: 303.487.1245 NAD 1983 UTM Zone 12N 7/8/2015 ± www.swca.com For Official Use Only: Disclosure of site locations prohibited (43 CFR 7.18)

Lapoint Cell Tower GF

I:\Projects\26000-26999\26229_STRATACellTower\MXD\Report\CR\DirectAPE\DirectAPE_Lapoint.mxd

Feet Legend 0 30 60 120 Meters GF Proposed Cell Tower 0 10 20 40 1:800 APE for Direct Effects Base Map: World_Imagery, Esri Online Service Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community 295 Interlocken Blvd. Suite 300 Township 1S Range 2E Broomfield, CO 80021 Quadrangle: Lapoint, UT (1965) Uninta County, Utah Phone: 303.487.1183 Fax: 303.487.1245 NAD 1983 UTM Zone 12N 7/8/2015 ± www.swca.com Additional Site Information: STRATA Networks plans to remove and replace the existing wooden pole in this location and construct a new 100-foot-tall self-supporting tower and a 44- by 42-foot equipment facility adjacent to the existing facility on private land in Section 5, Township 1 South, Range 2 East, in Uintah County, Utah.

Area of Potential Effects: The area of potential effects (APE) for direct effects as defined by the guidelines set forth in the PA consists of the area that would be directly impacted as a result of facility construction. For the Lapoint location, the APE for direct effects is defined by a 44- by 42-foot compound area containing the physical footprint of the tower and associated equipment building. The fenced-in area of the existing facility will be maintained, with the new 44- by 42-foot area added to the original area. Following re-location of the antennas to the new self-supporting lattice tower, the existing H-Frame will be left in place. A new propane tank, cement generator pad, and H-Frame structure will be located in the area of the original facility. The existing graveled access road that is used to access other adjacent cellular communications towers on the butte will be used to access the Lapoint tower and facility.

The PA defines the area of visual effects as 0.5 mile from the tower location for telecommunications towers less than 200 feet in height; the Lapoint tower is a 100-foot-tall self-supporting lattice tower. Specifically, the APE for visual effects extends 0.5 mile from the tower location. Tribal Contact Record for the Proposed Lapoint Tower Cellular Telecommunications Facility

The tribal consultation process for the proposed project was initiated through the Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS) on July 9, 2015 (TCNS # 128961). The notification was sent to seven federally –recognized American Indian Tribes that have set their geographic preferences in the TCNS system to include the proposed project area. SWCA began follow-up communication with the tribes to assess the level of interest in the project on July 22, 2015 and continued to attempt to contact through August 14, 2015. The tribal preferences provided in the TCNS summary email (attached and paraphrased in table below) were used as guidelines for communications; however general requests for documentation, including default requests for payment for review of reports or additional studies, were not accommodated as part of this phase of consultation. Efforts to contact tribal representatives were focused on tribes without TCNS preferences on file to determine interest in the projects; however limited response was received. Additional communications and/or accommodating automated requests to complete the consultation process will be at the discretion of STRATA Networks and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC).

Tribe Dates Contacted Response TCNS Preferences on file Crow Tribe 07/09/15 (TCNS) None TCNS review is processed through the Crow website. A $350 consultation fee is required for all documents submitted for review. Eastern Shoshone Tribe 07/09/15 (TCNS) None The Eastern Shoshone request to be consulted for the proposed tower based on the locational information submitted through the TCNS notification system. Documents can be submitted through the consultation website. A consultation fee of $400 fee is required for all documents submitted for review. San Juan Southern Paiute 07/09/15 (TCNS) None If applicant receives no response from the San Juan Tribe Southern Paiute Tribe within 30 days after notification through TCNS, the tribe has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the proposed site. The applicant must notify the tribe in the event archaeological properties or human remains are discovered during construction.

Applicant’s Name: STRATA Networks TCNS #: 128961

Tribe Dates Contacted Response TCNS Preferences on file Kaibab Paiute Tribe 07/09/15 (TCNS) None If applicant receives no response from the Kaibab Paiute Tribe within 30 days after notification through TCNS, the tribe has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the proposed site. The applicant must notify the tribe in the event archaeological properties or human remains are discovered during construction. Southern Ute Tribe 07/09/15 (TCNS) None The Southern Ute Tribe requests a copy of the 620 form in order to review the proposed new tower. Ute Indian Tribe 07/09/15 (TCNS); None None. 07/22/15 left message; 08/14/15 left message Shoshone-Bannock Tribes 07/09/15 (TCNS); None The Shoshone Bannock Tribe reviews projects involving 07/22/15 left message; new tower construction. The tribe requests a Class III 08/14/15 left message report, maps of the location, ethnographic information, a stop work order, and a copy of the 620 form for review.

Applicant’s Name: STRATA Networks TCNS #: 128961

Sarah Baer

From: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2015 8:50 AM To: Sarah Baer Subject: Proposed Tower Structure Info - Email ID #4272211

Dear Sarah Baer,

Thank you for submitting a notification regarding your proposed construction via the Tower Construction Notification System. Note that the system has assigned a unique Notification ID number for this proposed construction. You will need to reference this Notification ID number when you update your project's Status with us.

Below are the details you provided for the construction you have proposed:

Notification Received: 07/09/2015

Notification ID: 128961 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: STRATA Networks Consultant Name: Sarah Baer Street Address: 295 Interlocken Blvd., Suite 300 City: Broomfield State: COLORADO Zip Code: 80021 Phone: 303-487-1183 Email: [email protected]

Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 40 deg 25 min 13 sec N Longitude: 109 deg 47 min 59.5 sec W Location Description: Outside of Lapoint, Utah City: Lapoint State: UTAH County: UINTAH Detailed Description of Project: Replacement of wooden pole with self supported lattice tower array 100-feet tall with equipment and fenced area Ground Elevation: 1834 meters Support Structure: 30.5 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 30.5 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 1864.5 meters above mean sea level

1 Sarah Baer

From: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2015 7:02 AM To: Sarah Baer Cc: [email protected] Subject: Reply to Proposed Tower Structure (Notification ID: 128961) - Email ID #4277013

Dear Sarah Baer,

Thank you for using the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The purpose of this email is to inform you that an authorized user of the TCNS has replied to a proposed tower construction notification that you had submitted through the TCNS.

The following message has been sent to you from THPO Wilfred Ferris III of the Eastern Shoshone Tribe in reference to Notification ID #128961:

The Eastern Shoshone Tribe has established a new online procedure for FCC TCNS review/consultation. Online submissions can now be completed at http://app.tribal106.com . The data platform is currently being administered by a third party who are providing consultation servicing through the online system on behalf of the Eastern Shoshone Tribe. For questions, please call Shastelle Swan or Neal Rosette at 406-395-4700

Based on the location of the proposed project and the pole(s) that you will be constructing as part of the Section 106 process in our particular aboriginal homelands, we are REQUESTING TO BE CONSULTED on this proposed project.

Please utilize the Tribal 106 NHPA consultation processing system website. Online submissions can be completed at http://app.tribal106.com

The Eastern Shoshone Tribe through the Historic Preservation Department has established a fee of $400.00 per consultation. We are only accepting checks at this time. If you have questions, please feel free to contact Mr. Wilfred Ferris, III THPO at [email protected] .

Sincerely, Wilfred J. Ferris, III, THPO Eastern Shoshone Tribe

For your convenience, the information you submitted for this notification is detailed below.

Notification Received: 07/09/2015 Notification ID: 128961 Tower Owner Individual or Entity Name: STRATA Networks Consultant Name: Sarah Baer Street Address: 295 Interlocken Blvd., Suite 300 City: Broomfield State: COLORADO

1 Zip Code: 80021 Phone: 303-487-1183 Email: [email protected]

Structure Type: LTOWER - Lattice Tower Latitude: 40 deg 25 min 13.0 sec N Longitude: 109 deg 47 min 59.5 sec W Location Description: Outside of Lapoint, Utah City: Lapoint State: UTAH County: UINTAH Detailed Description of Project: Replacement of wooden pole with self supported lattice tower array 100-feet tall with equipment and fenced area Ground Elevation: 1834.0 meters Support Structure: 30.5 meters above ground level Overall Structure: 30.5 meters above ground level Overall Height AMSL: 1864.5 meters above mean sea level

2 Sarah Baer

From: [email protected] Sent: Friday, July 17, 2015 1:01 AM To: Sarah Baer Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: NOTICE OF ORGANIZATION(S) WHICH WERE SENT PROPOSED TOWER CONSTRUCTION NOTIFICATION INFORMATION - Email ID #4273899

Dear Sir or Madam:

Thank you for using the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) Tower Construction Notification System (TCNS). The purpose of this electronic mail message is to inform you that the following authorized persons were sent the information you provided through TCNS, which relates to your proposed antenna structure. The information was forwarded by the FCC to authorized TCNS users by electronic mail and/or regular mail (letter).

Persons who have received the information that you provided include leaders or their designees of federally- recognized American Indian Tribes, including Alaska Native Villages (collectively "Tribal Nations"), Native Hawaiian Organizations (NHOs), and State Historic Preservation Officers (SHPOs). For your convenience in identifying the referenced Tribal Nations and NHOs and in making further contacts, the City and State of the Seat of Government for each Tribal Nation and NHO, as well as the designated contact person, is included in the listing below. We note that Tribal Nations may have Section 106 cultural interests in ancestral homelands or other locations that are far removed from their current Seat of Government. Pursuant to the Commission's rules as set forth in the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement for Review of Effects on Historic Properties for Certain Undertakings Approved by the Federal Communications Commission (NPA), all Tribal Nations and NHOs listed below must be afforded a reasonable opportunity to respond to this notification, consistent with the procedures set forth below, unless the proposed construction falls within an exclusion designated by the Tribal Nation or NHO. (NPA, Section IV.F.4).

The information you provided was forwarded to the following Tribal Nations and NHOs. If a Tribal Nation or NHO does not respond within a reasonable time, you should make a reasonable effort at follow-up contact, unless the Tribal Nation or NHO has agreed to different procedures (NPA, Section IV.F.5). In the event a Tribal Nation or NHO does not respond to a follow-up inquiry, or if a substantive or procedural disagreement arises between you and a Tribal Nation or NHO, you must seek guidance from the Commission (NPA, Section IV.G). These procedures are further set forth in the FCC's Declaratory Ruling released on October 6, 2005 (FCC 05- 176).

1. NAGPRA Coordinator Alden Naranjo - Southern Ute Tribe - Ignacio, CO - electronic mail and regular mail Details: Under the following 6 conditions, the Southern Ute Indian Tribe does not need to review the proposed tower (PLEASE NOTE THAT THE FORM 620 IS MANDATORY IF THE PROPOSED TOWER NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED. IF YOU DO NOT SEND US THE FORM 620 FOR TOWERS THAT NEED TOBE REVIEWED, PLEASE CONSIDER THE MATTER TO BE AN OPEN MATTER, AND DO NOT PROCEED WITH CONSTRUCTION. WE WILL NOT MAKE ANY DETERMINATIONS UNTIL WE ARE ABLE TO REVIEW THE FORM 620): 1

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed extensions to increase the height of already existing towers.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed collocations on already existing towers.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed structures that are to bep laced on rooftops.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed structures that are within a city's limits, if the proposed structure is to be located on a disturbed road that has already been gravelled.

The Southern Ute Indian Trib e does NOT need to review proposed structures that are to be placed on pastures that have already been plowed or cultivated.

The Southern Ute Indian Tribe does NOT need to review proposed structures that are merely extensions inheight of an already existing structure.

For all other proposed areas, the Southern Ute Indian Tribe DOES NEED a copy of the Form 620. Please send the Form 620 via regular mail and be sure to INCLUDE THE FAX # of the company in order to receive a reply:

Alden Naranjo, NAGPRA Coodinator, P.O. Box 737, Mail Stop #73, Ignacio, Colorado 81137

If the applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Southern Ute Indian Tribe within 30 days AFTER YOU HAVE SENT THE FORM 620 to the Tribe (including color photographs and resumes), then the Southern Ute Indian Tribe has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the site.

2. THPO Emerson Bull Chief - Crow Tribe - Crow Agency, MT - electronic mail and regular mail Details: The Crow Tribe handles TCNS matters through our Tribal Nation's website. Please consult crowthpo.org for further information. Sincerely, Emerson Bull Chief, THPO [email protected]

3. THPO Wilfred Ferris III - Eastern Shoshone Tribe - Fort Washakie, WY - electronic mail and regular mail Details: The Eastern Shoshone Tribe has established a new online procedure for FCC TCNS review/consultation. Online submissions can now be completed at http://app.tribal106.com. The data platform is currently being administered by a third party who are providing consultation servicing through the online system on behalf of the Eastern Shoshone Tribe. For questions, please call Shastelle Swan or Neal Rosette at 406-395-4700

Please utilize the Tribal 106 NHPA consultation processing system website. Online submissions can be completed at http://app.tribal106.com

The Eastern Shoshone Tribe through the Historic Preservation Department has established a fee of $400.00 per consultation. We are only accepting checks at this time. All checks should be mailed to the following address:

CCCRPD-EST PO Box 87 Box Elder, MT 59521

If you have questions, please feel free to contact Mr. Wilfred Ferris, III THPO at [email protected]

Sincerely, Wilfred J. Ferris, III, THPO Eastern Shoshone Tribe

4. Environmental Program Director Daniel Bulletts - Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians - Fredonia, AZ - electronic mail and regular mail

If the applicant/tower builder receives no response from the Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians within 30 days after notification through TCNS, the Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians has no interest in participating in pre- construction review for the proposed site. The Applicant/tower builder, howeve r, must immediately notify the Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians in the event archaeological properties or human remains are discovered during construction, consistent with Section IX of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement and applicable law.

5. Tribal Administrator Candelora Lehi - San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe - Tuba City, AZ - electronic mail

If the applicant/tower builder receives no response from the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe within 30 days after notification through TCNS, the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe has no interest in participating in pre-construction review for the proposed site. The Applicant/tower builder, howeve r, must immediately notify the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe in the event arch aeological properties or human remains are discovered during construction, consistent with Section IX of the Nationwide Programmatic Agreement and applicable law.

6. Cultural Rights & Protection Director Betsy L Chapoose - Ute Indian Tribe - Ft. Duchesne, UT - electronic mail and regular mail

7. Cultural Resources Coordinator Carolyn Smith - Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, Cultural Resources - Fort Hall, ID - electronic mail and regular mail Details: Cultural Resources Coordinator Carolyn Smith-Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Cultural Resources-Fort Hall, Idaho-electronic and regular mail Details: All proposed projects will be reviewed by staff in the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes Heritage Tribal Office HeTO. Response time is dependent upon the contents of the materials, research and whether The Tribes HeTO receives all the information requested. Proposed projects involving collocations will also be reviewed on a case to case basis unless absolutely no ground disturbance is involved. The Tribes HeTO reviews all proposed new tower projects located within our inherent ancestral lands and requires the following information. 1. A Class III Cultural Resource Survey Report 2. A map clearly illustrating all archaeological, including non-listed on the NRHP site locations and historical site locations within the direct and visual APE relevant to the proposed project site particularly in areas portraying a high concentration of archaeological sites. And all information regarding the sites, e.g. site form, photos 3. A topographic and regional map clearly illustrating the proposed tower site area 4. Pre-contact information regarding Native American Tribes in the proposed project area. Past land uses of the Area of Potential Effect 5. A copy of the applicants Stop Work Order with acknowledgement and inclusion of the Tribes Inadvertent Discovery Claus, consistent with Section IX of the Nationwide PA and applicable law 6. FCC Form 620, New Tower NT Submission Packet Thank you, Carolyn Smith, Cultural Resources Coordinator Shoshone-Bannock Tribes HeTO P.O. Box 306 Fort Hall, ID 83203 208-236-1086 [email protected] [email protected]

The information you provided was also forwarded to the following SHPOs in the State in which you propose to construct and neighboring States. The information was provided to these SHPOs as a courtesy for their information and planning. You need make no effort at this time to follow up with any SHPO that does not respond to this notification. Prior to construction, you must provide the SHPO of the State in which you propose to construct (or the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, if the project will be located on certain Tribal lands), with a Submission Packet pursuant to Section VII.A of the NPA.

8. Deputy SHPO Carol Griffith - Arizona State Parks - Phoenix, AZ - electronic mail

9. Deputy SHPO William Collins - Arizona State Parks - Phoenix, AZ - electronic mail

10. Dr. Chris Merritt - Utah State Historical Society - Salt Lake City, UT - electronic mail

"Exclusions" above set forth language provided by the Tribal Nation or SHPO. These exclusions may indicate types of PTC wayside pole notifications that the Tribal Nation or SHPO does not wish to review. TCNS automatically forwards all notifications to all Tribal Nations and SHPOs that have an expressed interest in the geographic area of a proposal. However, if a proposal falls within a designated exclusion, you need not expect any response and need not pursue any additional process with that Tribal Nation or SHPO. Exclusions may also set forth policies or procedures of a particular Tribal Nation or SHPO (for example, types of information that a Tribal Nation routinely requests, or a policy that no response within 30 days indicates no interest in participating in pre-construction review).

Please be advised that the FCC cannot guarantee that the contact(s) listed above opened and reviewed an electronic or re gular mail notification. The following information relating to the proposed tower was forwarded to the person(s) listed above:

If you have any questions or comments regarding this notice, please contact the FCC using the electronic mail form located on the FCC's website at: http://wireless.fcc.gov/outreach/notification/contact-fcc.html.

You may also call the FCC Support Center at (877) 480-3201 (TTY 717-338-2824). Hours are from 8 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday (except Federal holidays). To provide quality service and ensure security, all telephone calls are recorded.

Thank you, Federal Communications Commission

July 27, 2015

Matthew Cazier Director 152 E 100 N Vernal, Utah, 84078

RE: Invitation to Comment on Lapoint Telecommunications Facility, Uintah County, Utah

Dear Mr. Cazier,

This letter provides supporting information for the purposes of consultation on project effects for the Lapoint Telecommunications Facility, Uintah County, Utah. This consultation is being conducted pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (Title 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 800) by SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA), on behalf of STRATA Networks, to ensure that historic properties are not adversely impacted by the current undertaking.

In 2015, SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA) was contracted by STRATA Networks to conduct cultural and historical resource investigations for the Lapoint cellular telecommunications facility located on a butte north of the town of Lapoint, Utah (Figures 1 and 2). STRATA Networks plans to remove and replace the existing wooden pole in this location and construct a new 100-foot-tall self-supporting tower and a 44- by 42-foot equipment facility adjacent to the existing facility on private land in Section 5, Township 1 South, Range 2 East, in Uintah County, Utah. The purpose of these investigations is to provide information required by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to meet their federal requirements under Section 106 of the amended National Historic Preservation Act, as outlined in the FCC nationwide Programmatic Agreement (PA) for the review of effects to historic properties (FCC 04-222).

SWCA conducted a file search through the Utah State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), a field investigation of the area of potential effects (APE) for direct effects and visual effects, and an evaluation of the potential impacts of the project on historic properties. There are No Historic Properties Present in the direct effects APE. The proposed project will have No Adverse Effects on Historic Properties in the APE for visual effects. Therefore, the proposed undertaking will Matthew Cazier June 27, 2015 Page 2 result in No Adverse Effect on Historic Properties by the construction of the Lapoint telecommunications facility. A letter seeking concurrence with these findings has been submitted to the Utah SHPO.

SWCA is providing this information to you in compliance with Section 106 and offers you an opportunity to provide any additional input or comment on the project’s potential effects on historic properties. Please note that we are requesting your review as part of the Section 106 process only and not as part of the local zoning process. Please direct any questions or comment regarding the project and this letter or attached material to SWCA.

Sincerely,

Sarah Baer SWCA Environmental Consultants [email protected] 303-487-1183

Attachment: Project maps

Matthew Cazier June 27, 2015 Page 3

Figure 1. Location of the project and the APE for visual effects. Matthew Cazier June 27, 2015 Page 4

Figure 2. Aerial map showing the APE for direct effects.

July 23, 2015

Vernal Express 60 East 100 North Vernal, Utah 84078 Attn: [email protected]

Subject: Request for Public Notice on Lapoint Telecommunications Facility, Uintah County, Utah

SWCA Environmental Consultants (SWCA), on behalf of STRATA Networks, would like to place the following ad in your paper for print on the next available date. Please place this ad in the paper and send an email confirmation to the address noted below. The following is the text of the Public Notice: ______

STRATA Networks, provides this notice regarding the Lapoint Cellular Telecommunication Tower, Uintah County, Utah. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is reviewing the Lapoint telecommunications facility for potential impacts to historic properties. STRATA Networks plans to remove and replace the existing wooden pole in this location and construct a new 100-foot-tall self-supporting tower and a 44- by 42-foot equipment facility adjacent to the existing facility. Any interested party wishing to submit comments regarding the potential effects of the Lapoint telecommunications facility may have on any historic property may send comments to: Lapoint Telecommunications Facility c/o SWCA Environmental Consultants, 295 Interlocken Blvd. Suite 300, Broomfield, CC 80021, or via telephone at 303-487-1183.

Sincerely,

Sarah Baer SWCA Environmental Consultants [email protected] 303-487-1183 Sarah Baer

From: Cindy Kleinfelter Sent: Friday, July 24, 2015 10:19 AM To: Sarah Baer Subject: Re: Legal - Public notice for the Cedarview Cellular Telecommunications Tower

I forwarded it to her. It should run 8/4. The email for them is [email protected] . Have a good day. Cindy

On 7/23/2015 4:45 PM, Sarah Baer wrote:

Thank you for the quick response Cindy.

Do you have the email I can send the Legal notice to for the other tower for the Vernal Express?

Thanks,

Sarah Baer Project Manager / Archaeologist

SWCA Environmental Consultants 295 Interlocken Blvd., Suite 300 Broomfield, CO 80021 P 303.487.1183 | F 303.487.1245 | C 720.273.5250

Visit Our Website: http://www.swca.com http://on.fb.me/SWCA_Environmental_Consultants http://www.linkedin.com/company/swca-environmental-consultants

From: Cindy Kleinfelter [ mailto:[email protected] ] Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 4:44 PM

1 To: Sarah Baer Subject: Re: Legal - Public notice for the Cedarview Cellular Telecommunications Tower

This one will run July 28 in the Uintah Basin Standard. Thank you, Cindy

On 7/23/2015 4:25 PM, Sarah Baer wrote:

Dear Uintah Basin Standard,

Please post the attached public legal notice for the Cedarview Telecommunications Facility, Duchesne County, Utah. Please send an email acknowledgement of receipt and when it will be published. Billing can go to the following contact:

Allen Bennion

STRATA Networks

211 East 200 North

Roosevelt, Utah 84066

Let me know if there is any other information needed.

Thanks,

Sarah Baer Project Manager / Archaeologist

SWCA Environmental Consultants 295 Interlocken Blvd., Suite 300 Broomfield, CO 80021 P 303.487.1183 | F 303.487.1245 | C 720.273.5250

Visit Our Website: http://www.swca.com http://on.fb.me/SWCA_Environmental_Consultants http://www.linkedin.com/company/swca-environmental-consultants

3 Historic Properties Identified in the APE for Visual Effects: Based on the results of the UDSH file search, one previously recorded cultural resource is located within the 0.5-mile APE for visual effects. The previously recorded cultural resource within the APE for visual effects is 42UN002679, the historic Ouray Valley Canal, which is recommended eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Although the property is within the APE for visual effects, the visual integrity does not contribute to the eligibility of 42UN002679; the site has been recommended eligible for its association with the historic Uintah Basin irrigation development in the early twentieth century under Criterion A. The general historic viewshed of the area is currently impacted by other radio, overhead, and cellular towers on the butte. From the canal, modern commercial and residential buildings and overhead utilities are also visible. Although the proposed tower will be visible from the canal, the majority of the tower will be hidden by the ridge and the tower will not be sky-lined. The weak contrast of the tower will be similar to existing power lines visible along the canal. The APE for visual effects includes only a small portion of the overall canal and modern impacts also affect this property outside of the APE of visual effects, consequently the current project only contributes a minor effect on the property. Therefore, it is anticipated that the installation of the proposed tower will result in No Adverse Effects on Historic Properties in the APE for visual effects. Historic Properties in APE for Direct Effects: SWCA conducted a file search through the UDSH on July 10, 2015, to identify known cultural resources located within the APE for direct effects for this proposed facility. The file search results did not reveal any known archaeological sites located within the APE for direct effects. See attached cultural resource letter report for more details.

August 18, 2015

Allen Bennion STRATA Networks 211 East 200 North Roosevelt, Utah 84066

RE: Literature Review, Cultural Resource Inventory, and Visual Effects Analysis for the Lapoint Telecommunications Facility, Uintah County, Utah

Dear Mr. Bennion,

Sincerely,

Sarah Baer Michael Retter Cultural Resource Specialist Principal Investigator

Mr. Allen Bennion August 18, 2015 Page 4

Figure 1. Location of the project and the APE for visual effects.

Mr. Allen Bennion August 18, 2015 Page 5

Figure 2. Aerial map showing the APE for direct effects.

Figure #1 View from project area, facing Figure #2 View from project area, facing north. east.

Figure #3 View from project area, facing Figure #4 View from project area, facing south. west.

Figure #5 View toward project area, facing Figure #6 View toward project area, facing north. east.

Figure #7 View toward project area, facing Figure #8 View toward project area, facing west. south.

Figure #7 View from project area towards Figure #8 View from 42UN002679, historic 42UN002679, historic canal, facing canal, towards project area, facing northeast. southwest.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Tad Prizant, a paralegal in the law firm of Rimon, P.C., hereby certify that on the 27th day of March 2020, a copy of the foregoing "PETITION FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF AND

IN ALTERNATIVE INFORMAL REQUEST FOR COMMISSION ACTION" is being sent via U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, and electronic mail, to the following:

John A. Prendergast Richard D. Rubino Blooston, Mordkofsky, Dickens, Duffy & Prendergast, LLP 2120 L Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, DC 20037

/s/ Tad Prizant______Tad Prizant