25 C.F.R. § 170.2

What policies govern the TTP?

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The Secretaries' policy for the TTP is to:

(1) Provide a uniform and consistent set of rules;

(2) Foster knowledge of the programs by providing information about them and the opportunities that they create;

(3) Facilitate Tribal planning, conduct, and administration of the programs;

(4) Encourage inclusion of these programs under self-determination contracts, self-governance agreements, program agreements, and other appropriate agreements;

(5) Make available all contractible non-inherently Federal administrative functions under self-determination contracts, self-governance agreements, program agreements, and other appropriate agreements; and

(6) Carry out policies, procedures, and practices in consultation with Indian Tribes to ensure the letter, spirit, and goals of Federal transportation programs are fully implemented.

(b) Where this part differs from provisions in the ISDEAA, this part should advance the policy of increasing Tribal autonomy and discretion in program operation.

(c) This part is designed to enable Indian Tribes to participate in all contractible activities of the TTP. The Secretaries will afford Indian Tribes the flexibility, information, and discretion to design transportation programs under self-determination contracts, self-governance agreements, program agreements, and other appropriate agreements to meet the needs of their communities consistent with this part.

(d) Programs, functions, services, and activities, regardless of how they are administered, are an exercise of Indian Tribes' self-determination and self-governance.

(1) The Tribe is responsible for managing the day-to-day operation of its contracted Federal programs, functions, services, and activities.

(2) The Tribe accepts responsibility and accountability to the beneficiaries under self-determination contracts, self-governance agreements, program agreements, and other appropriate agreements for:

(i) Use of the funds; and

(ii) Satisfactory performance of all activities funded under the contract or agreement.

(3) The Secretary will continue to discharge the trust responsibilities to protect and conserve the trust resources of Tribes and the trust resources of individual Indians.

(e) The Secretary should interpret Federal laws and regulations to facilitate including programs covered by this part in the government-to-government agreements authorized under ISDEAA.

(f) The administrative functions referenced in paragraph (a)(5) of this section are contractible without regard to the organizational level within the DOI that carries out these functions. Including TTP administrative functions under self-determination contracts, self- governance agreements, program agreements or other appropriate agreements, does not limit or reduce the funding for any program or service serving any other Tribe.

(g) The Secretaries are not required to reduce funding for a Tribe under these programs to make funds available to another Tribe.

(h) This part must be liberally construed for the benefit of Tribes and to implement the Federal policy of self-determination and self-governance.

(i) Any ambiguities in this part must be construed in favor of the Tribes to facilitate and enable the transfer of programs authorized by 23 U.S.C. 201 and 202 and title 25 of the U.S.C.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2002–2023 · leading case: McDonald v. Means, 309 F.3d 530 (9th Cir. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

McDonald v. Means, 309 F.3d 530 (9th Cir. 2002). “25 C.F.R. § 170.2 (f). Moreover, the Route 5 grant preserves to the Tribe considerable rights and responsibility over traffic and maintenance on the right-of-way.”

McDonald v. Means, 300 F.3d 1037 (9th Cir. 2002). “25 C.F.R. § 170.2 (f). Moreover, the Route 5 grant preserves to the Tribe considerable rights and responsibility over traffic and maintenance on the right-of-way.”

Est. of Walters v. United States, 474 F.3d 1137 (8th Cir. 2007). · cites it 2× “" 25 C.F.R. § 170.2 (h) (2004). Walters reasons the "as-built condition" of BIA Route #3 did not include washboard, meaning the BIA did not maintain the road in compliance with the applicable standard, and thus this suit should be allowed for the same reason suit was allowed in…”

Pollard, Donald v. Johnson, Sr., John (W.D. Wis. 2023). “25 C.F.R. §§ 170.2 (h), 170.102. Nothing in the Act suggests that the program is intended to promote or protect access rights of the public or individual citizens who want to traverse Indian lands.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.