Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review Committee Findings Related to the Identity and Return of Cultural Items in the Possession of the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, Philadelphia, PA, 74875-74876 [2012-30443]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 18, 2012 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[NPS–WASO–NAGPRA–11687; 2200–1100–
665]
Native American Graves Protection
and Repatriation Review Committee
Findings Related to the Identity and
Return of Cultural Items in the
Possession of the University of
Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology
and Anthropology, Philadelphia, PA
National Park Service, Interior.
Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Review
Committee: Findings.
AGENCY:
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with
ACTION:
This notice is published as part of the
National Park Service’s administrative
responsibilities pursuant to the Native
American Graves Protection and
Repatriation Act (25 U.S.C. 3006(g)).
The recommendations, findings and
actions of the Review Committee
associated with this dispute are
advisory only and not binding on any
person. These advisory findings and
recommendations do not necessarily
represent the views of the National Park
Service or Secretary of the Interior. The
National Park Service and the Secretary
of the Interior have not taken a position
on these matters.
SUMMARY: The Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Review
Committee (Review Committee) was
established by Section 8 of the Native
American Graves Protection and
Repatriation Act (NAGPRA; 25 U.S.C.
3006), and is an advisory body governed
by the Federal Advisory Committee Act
(5 App. U.S.C. 1–16). At its November
17–19, 2010 public meeting in
Washington, DC, and acting pursuant to
its statutory responsibility to convene
the parties to a dispute relating to the
identity and return of cultural items,
and to facilitate the resolution of such
a dispute, the Review Committee heard
a dispute between the Hoonah Indian
Association, joined by the Huna Totem
Corporation, and the University of
Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology
and Anthropology. The issues before the
Review Committee were (1) whether, in
their request for the repatriation of 38
catalogued objects deriving from the
Snail House and one catalogued object
deriving from the Eagle’s Nest House
that are in the possession of the
University of Pennsylvania Museum of
Archaeology and Anthropology, the
requestors proved that all the requested
objects are both ‘‘sacred objects’’ and
objects of ‘‘cultural patrimony,’’ as these
terms are defined in NAGPRA; and (2)
whether, in response to the request for
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:29 Dec 17, 2012
Jkt 229001
the repatriation of the 39 catalogued
objects, the University of Pennsylvania
Museum of Archaeology and
Anthropology presented evidence
proving that the Museum has a ‘‘right of
possession’’ to any of the objects, as this
term is defined in the NAGPRA
regulations. The Review Committee
found that all of the requested objects
are both sacred objects and objects of
cultural patrimony, and that the
University of Pennsylvania Museum of
Archaeology and Anthropology does not
have a right of possession to any of
those cultural items. The Review
Committee meeting transcript
containing the dispute proceedings and
Review Committee deliberation and
findings is available from the National
NAGPRA Program upon request
(NAGPRA_Info@nps.gov).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Since
1924, thirty-eight cataloged objects
´Ò
deriving from the Tax ´ Hit, or Snail
House (Snail House), of the
T’akdeintaan Clan of Tlingit Indians
Ò
from Hoonah, Alaska have been in the
possession of the University of
Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology
and Anthropology. The Snail House is
also known as Tsalxaan Hit, or the Mt.
Ò´
Fairweather House. In addition, since
´
1918, a Shakee.at, or Marmot Frontlet
(Frontlet) deriving from the Eagle’s Nest
House of the T’akdeintaan Clan of
Ò
Tlingit Indians also has been in the
possession of the University of
Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology
and Anthropology. Between 1995 and
2006, the Huna Totem Corporation and
(since 2000) Hoonah Indian Association,
an Alaska Native village, provided
information to the University of
Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology
and Anthropology that, taken together,
constituted a joint request for the
repatriation of the 39 cataloged objects
in question. The request identified each
of the objects in question as a ‘‘sacred
object’’ and an object of ‘‘cultural
patrimony,’’ as these terms are defined
in NAGPRA (25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(C) and
(D)). In its June 19, 2009 response to this
request, the University of Pennsylvania
Museum of Archaeology and
Anthropology acknowledged that one of
the objects is a sacred object and an
object of cultural patrimony; six of the
objects are sacred objects, but are not
objects of cultural patrimony; and one of
the objects is an object of cultural
patrimony, but is not a sacred object.
The University of Pennsylvania
Museum of Archaeology and
Anthropology also stated that, while it
had a ‘‘right of possession’’ to these
eight cultural items, as defined in the
NAGPRA regulations (43 CFR
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
74875
10.10(a)(2)), nonetheless, it would elect
not to assert its right of possession. The
June 19, 2009 response also stated that
the other 31 cataloged objects ‘‘do not
meet the specific NAGPRA definitions
for cultural patrimony or sacred objects’’
and, additionally, asserted the
University of Pennsylvania Museum of
Archaeology and Anthropology’s right
of possession to those 31 objects.
Disputing the University of
Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology
and Anthropology’s determination that
only one of the 39 catalogued objects
was both a sacred object and an object
of cultural patrimony, as well as the
Museum’s claim of right of possession
to the 39 cataloged objects and assertion
of that right with respect to 31 of the
objects, the Hoonah Indian Association
and the Huna Totem Corporation joined
in asking the Review Committee to
facilitate the resolution of the dispute
between themselves and the University
of Pennsylvania Museum of
Archaeology and Anthropology. The
Designated Federal Official for the
Review Committee agreed to the
request.
At its November 17–19, 2010 meeting,
the Review Committee considered the
dispute. The issues before the Review
Committee were (1) whether, in their
request for the repatriation of the 39
catalogued objects in question, the
requestors proved by a preponderance
of the evidence that all the objects are
‘‘sacred objects’’ and objects of ‘‘cultural
patrimony,’’ as these terms are defined
in NAGPRA; and (2) whether, in
response to the request for repatriation,
the University of Pennsylvania Museum
of Archaeology and Anthropology
presented evidence proving, by a
preponderance of the evidence, that the
Museum has a ‘‘right of possession’’ to
the objects. As defined in the NAGPRA
regulations, ‘‘ ‘right of possession’
means possession obtained with the
voluntary consent of an individual or
group that had authority of alienation.’’
Findings of Fact: Six Review
Committee members participated in the
fact finding. One member was selfrecused. By a vote of six to zero, the
Review Committee found that all 39 of
the requested cataloged objects are both
sacred objects and objects of cultural
patrimony, and that the University of
Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology
and Anthropology does not have a right
of possession to any of the requested
cultural items.
E:\FR\FM\18DEN1.SGM
18DEN1
74876
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 243 / Tuesday, December 18, 2012 / Notices
Dated: November 7, 2012.
Mervin Wright, Jr.,
Acting Chair, Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Review
Committee.
[FR Doc. 2012–30443 Filed 12–17–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
[OMB Number 1110–0026]
Agency Information Collection
Activities; Existing Collection,
Comments Requested; Federal
Firearms Licensee (FFL) Enrollment/
National Instant Criminal Background
Check System (NICS) E-Check
Enrollment Form, Federal Firearms
Licensee (FFL) Officer/Employee
Acknowledgment of Responsibilities
Under the NICS Form
emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with
ACTION:
30 Day notice.
The Department of Justice (DOJ),
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI),
Criminal Justice Information Services
(CJIS) Division’s National Instant
Criminal Background Check System
(NICS) Section will be submitting the
following information collection request
to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for review and approval in
accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995. The proposed
information collection is published to
obtain comments from the public and
affected agencies. This proposed
information collection was previously
published in the Federal Register
Volume 77, Number 199, page 62534, on
October 15, 2012, allowing for a 60-day
comment period.
The purpose of this notice is to allow
for an additional 30 days for public
comment until January 17, 2013. This
process is conducted in accordance with
Title 5, Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR), Section 1320.10.
Written comments and/or suggestions
regarding the items contained in this
notice, especially the estimated public
burden and associated response time,
should be directed to the Office of
Management and Budget, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Attention Department of Justice Desk
Officer, Washington, DC 20503.
Additionally, comments may be
submitted to the OMB via facsimile to
(202) 395–7285.
Written comments and suggestions
from the public and affected agencies
concerning the proposed collection of
information are encouraged. Your
comments should address one or more
of the following four points:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:29 Dec 17, 2012
Jkt 229001
(1) Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the agency/component,
including whether the information will
have practical utility;
(2) Evaluate the accuracy of the
agency’s/component’s estimate of the
burden of the proposed collection of the
information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
(3) Enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and
(4) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including the use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology, e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses.
Overview of this information:
(1) Type of Information Collection:
Approval of an Existing Collection
(2) Title of the Forms: Federal
Firearms Licensee (FFL) Enrollment/
National Instant Criminal Background
Check System (NICS) E-Check
Enrollment Form Federal Firearms
Licensee (FFL) Officer/Employee
Acknowledgment of Responsibilities
under the National Instant Criminal
Background Check System (NICS) Form.
(3) Agency Form Number, if any, and
the applicable component of the
department sponsoring the collection:
Form Number: 1110–0026. Sponsor:
Criminal Justice Information Services
(CJIS) Division of the Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI), Department of
Justice (DOJ).
(4) Affected public who will be asked
or required to respond, as well as a brief
abstract:
Primary: Any Federal Firearms
Licensee (FFL) or State Point of Contact
(POC) requesting access to conduct
National Instant Criminal Background
Check System (NICS) checks
telephonically or by the Internet
through the NICS E-Check.
Brief Abstract: The Brady Handgun
Violence Prevention Act of 1993
required the United States Attorney
General to establish a national instant
criminal background check system that
any FFL may contact, by telephone or
by other electronic means for
information to be supplied immediately,
on whether receipt of a firearm to a
prospective purchaser would violate
state or federal law. Information
pertaining to licensees who may contact
the NICS is being collected to manage
and control access to the NICS and to
the NICS E-Check, to ensure appropriate
resources are available to support the
NICS, and also to ensure the privacy
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 9990
and security of NICS information.
https://www.fbi.gov/programs/nics/
index.htm.
(5) An estimate of the total number of
respondents and the amount of time
estimated for an average respondent to
respond: It is estimated that 250 FFLs
enroll with the NICS per month for a
total of 3,000 enrollments per year. The
average response time for reading the
directions for the Federal Bureau of
Investigation National Instant Criminal
Background Check System (NICS)
Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL)
Enrollment/NICS E-Check Enrollment
Form is estimated to be two minutes;
time to complete the form is estimated
to be three minutes; and the time it
takes to assemble, mail, or fax the form
to the FBI is estimated to be three
minutes, for a total of eight minutes.
The average hour burden for this
specific form is 3,000 × 8 minutes/60 =
400 hours.
The Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL)
Officer/Employee Acknowledgment of
Responsibilities Under the National
Instant Criminal Background Check
System (NICS) Form takes
approximately three minutes to read the
responsibilities and two minutes to
complete the form, for a total of five
minutes. The average hour burden for
this specific form is 3,000 × 5 minutes/
60 = 250 hours.
The letter mailed to each new FFL
takes an additional two minutes to read
which would be 3,000 × 2 minutes/60
= 100 hours.
The entire process of reading the
letter and completing both forms would
take 15 minutes per respondent. The
average hour burden for completing
both forms and reading the
accompanying letter would be 3,000 ×
15/60 = 750 hours.
An estimate of the total public burden
(in hours) associated with the collection:
The entire process of reading the letter
and completing both forms would take
15 minutes per respondent. The average
hour burden for completing both forms
and reading the accompanying letter
would be 3,000 × 15/60 = 750 hours.
If additional information is required,
contact: Mrs. Lynn Murray, Department
Clearance Officer, United States
Department of Justice, Information
Management and Security Staff, Justice
Management Division, Suite 1600,
Patrick Henry Building, 601 D Street
NW., Washington, DC 20530.
Dated: December 13, 2012.
Jerri Murray,
Department Clearance Officer for PRA,
United States Department of Justice.
[FR Doc. 2012–30372 Filed 12–17–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–02–P
E:\FR\FM\18DEN1.SGM
18DEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 243 (Tuesday, December 18, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74875-74876]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30443]
[[Page 74875]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
[NPS-WASO-NAGPRA-11687; 2200-1100-665]
Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review
Committee Findings Related to the Identity and Return of Cultural Items
in the Possession of the University of Pennsylvania Museum of
Archaeology and Anthropology, Philadelphia, PA
AGENCY: National Park Service, Interior.
ACTION: Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review
Committee: Findings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This notice is published as part of the National Park Service's
administrative responsibilities pursuant to the Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act (25 U.S.C. 3006(g)). The
recommendations, findings and actions of the Review Committee
associated with this dispute are advisory only and not binding on any
person. These advisory findings and recommendations do not necessarily
represent the views of the National Park Service or Secretary of the
Interior. The National Park Service and the Secretary of the Interior
have not taken a position on these matters.
SUMMARY: The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review
Committee (Review Committee) was established by Section 8 of the Native
American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA; 25 U.S.C.
3006), and is an advisory body governed by the Federal Advisory
Committee Act (5 App. U.S.C. 1-16). At its November 17-19, 2010 public
meeting in Washington, DC, and acting pursuant to its statutory
responsibility to convene the parties to a dispute relating to the
identity and return of cultural items, and to facilitate the resolution
of such a dispute, the Review Committee heard a dispute between the
Hoonah Indian Association, joined by the Huna Totem Corporation, and
the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology.
The issues before the Review Committee were (1) whether, in their
request for the repatriation of 38 catalogued objects deriving from the
Snail House and one catalogued object deriving from the Eagle's Nest
House that are in the possession of the University of Pennsylvania
Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, the requestors proved that all
the requested objects are both ``sacred objects'' and objects of
``cultural patrimony,'' as these terms are defined in NAGPRA; and (2)
whether, in response to the request for the repatriation of the 39
catalogued objects, the University of Pennsylvania Museum of
Archaeology and Anthropology presented evidence proving that the Museum
has a ``right of possession'' to any of the objects, as this term is
defined in the NAGPRA regulations. The Review Committee found that all
of the requested objects are both sacred objects and objects of
cultural patrimony, and that the University of Pennsylvania Museum of
Archaeology and Anthropology does not have a right of possession to any
of those cultural items. The Review Committee meeting transcript
containing the dispute proceedings and Review Committee deliberation
and findings is available from the National NAGPRA Program upon request
(NAGPRA_Info@nps.gov).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Since 1924, thirty-eight cataloged objects
deriving from the T[aacute]x [acute] Hit, or Snail House (Snail House),
of the T'akdeintaan Clan of Tlingit Indians from Hoonah, Alaska have
been in the possession of the University of Pennsylvania Museum of
Archaeology and Anthropology. The Snail House is also known as
Tsalx[aacute]an Hit, or the Mt. Fairweather House. In addition, since
1918, a Shakee.[aacute]t, or Marmot Frontlet (Frontlet) deriving from
the Eagle's Nest House of the T'akdeintaan Clan of Tlingit Indians also
has been in the possession of the University of Pennsylvania Museum of
Archaeology and Anthropology. Between 1995 and 2006, the Huna Totem
Corporation and (since 2000) Hoonah Indian Association, an Alaska
Native village, provided information to the University of Pennsylvania
Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology that, taken together,
constituted a joint request for the repatriation of the 39 cataloged
objects in question. The request identified each of the objects in
question as a ``sacred object'' and an object of ``cultural
patrimony,'' as these terms are defined in NAGPRA (25 U.S.C. 3001(3)(C)
and (D)). In its June 19, 2009 response to this request, the University
of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology acknowledged
that one of the objects is a sacred object and an object of cultural
patrimony; six of the objects are sacred objects, but are not objects
of cultural patrimony; and one of the objects is an object of cultural
patrimony, but is not a sacred object. The University of Pennsylvania
Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology also stated that, while it had a
``right of possession'' to these eight cultural items, as defined in
the NAGPRA regulations (43 CFR 10.10(a)(2)), nonetheless, it would
elect not to assert its right of possession. The June 19, 2009 response
also stated that the other 31 cataloged objects ``do not meet the
specific NAGPRA definitions for cultural patrimony or sacred objects''
and, additionally, asserted the University of Pennsylvania Museum of
Archaeology and Anthropology's right of possession to those 31 objects.
Disputing the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthropology's determination that only one of the 39 catalogued objects
was both a sacred object and an object of cultural patrimony, as well
as the Museum's claim of right of possession to the 39 cataloged
objects and assertion of that right with respect to 31 of the objects,
the Hoonah Indian Association and the Huna Totem Corporation joined in
asking the Review Committee to facilitate the resolution of the dispute
between themselves and the University of Pennsylvania Museum of
Archaeology and Anthropology. The Designated Federal Official for the
Review Committee agreed to the request.
At its November 17-19, 2010 meeting, the Review Committee
considered the dispute. The issues before the Review Committee were (1)
whether, in their request for the repatriation of the 39 catalogued
objects in question, the requestors proved by a preponderance of the
evidence that all the objects are ``sacred objects'' and objects of
``cultural patrimony,'' as these terms are defined in NAGPRA; and (2)
whether, in response to the request for repatriation, the University of
Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology presented evidence
proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the Museum has a
``right of possession'' to the objects. As defined in the NAGPRA
regulations, `` `right of possession' means possession obtained with
the voluntary consent of an individual or group that had authority of
alienation.''
Findings of Fact: Six Review Committee members participated in the
fact finding. One member was self-recused. By a vote of six to zero,
the Review Committee found that all 39 of the requested cataloged
objects are both sacred objects and objects of cultural patrimony, and
that the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and
Anthropology does not have a right of possession to any of the
requested cultural items.
[[Page 74876]]
Dated: November 7, 2012.
Mervin Wright, Jr.,
Acting Chair, Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Review
Committee.
[FR Doc. 2012-30443 Filed 12-17-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312-50-P