Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Repatriation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
OHA supports NAGPRA claimants' reburial plans for Mokapu collection at MCBH Kaneohe
Summary
Trustees adopted a resolution supporting claimants' reburial plans for remains held at Marine Corps Base Hawai‘i (Mokapu collection), with one trustee recusing; claimants told the committee the military has approved designs and construction bids are expected in February.
The Office of Hawaiian Affairs' Beneficiary Advocacy & Empowerment committee voted to support Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) claimants’ reburial plans for the Mokapu collection at Marine Corps Base Hawai‘i, Kaneohe. The resolution passed with eight yes votes and one recusal.
OHA compliance archaeologist Kamakana Ferreira summarized the history: the Mokapu collection includes remains and funerary items displaced over decades by museum research and military construction; NAGPRA (federal law enacted in 1990) created a process for claimants to request the return and reburial of culturally affiliated human remains and funerary objects. Presenters said 23 claimant parties had previously attempted to reach consensus but the plans were not completed until recently.
Claimant representatives (Sai Kuoel Harris, Skye Razan Olds, Adrian Kiawokalole and others) described the current status: they reported more than 1,000 ancestral remains and hundreds of associated funerary objects in Marine Corps custody, storage conditions that include mold and inadequate bunkers, and an executed memorandum of agreement (MOA) draft with the military that would move remains into appropriate on‑base facilities for cultural preparation and reburial. Claimants said the MOA restricts use of burial sand removed from the peninsula and that construction bids for a memorial were expected to go out in February.
Claimants asked OHA to transition from being a formal signatory/claimant to a supportive advisory role so the hui can act more quickly; they emphasized the need for OHA's continued technical and convening support. Trustees asked whether the advisory role would expose OHA to liability; staff confirmed the matter was reviewed by counsel and explained the proposed advisory language was intended to preserve OHA’s obligations while enabling claimants to proceed.
The trustees voted to approve the resolution as amended; trustee Ahuna recused for a stated reason and the chair recorded the tally as eight yes votes and one recusal. Trustees and claimants agreed to continue coordination on moving remains to culturally appropriate custody and on sharing visual and documentary materials to support the reburial process.
The resolution endorses the claimants' reburial plans but does not itself execute reburial. Implementation depends on claimant‑military agreements, MOA signature by the Marine Corps, completion of design and contracting, and ongoing coordination among claimants, OHA and federal authorities.
