Land Exchange Procedures and Procedures to Amend the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, 29776-29793 [2016-11146]
Download as PDF
29776
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
a substantial direct effect on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government. We have analyzed
this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the
fundamental federalism principles and
preemption requirements described in
E.O. 13132.
Also, this rule does not have tribal
implications under E.O. 13175,
Consultation and Coordination with
Indian Tribal Governments, because it
does not have a substantial direct effect
on one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes. If you
believe this rule has implications for
federalism or Indian tribes, please
contact the person listed in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
above.
discovery of a significant environmental
impact from this rule.
E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1231; 50 U.S.C. 191;
33 CFR 1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5;
Department of Homeland Security Delegation
No. 0170.1.
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires
Federal agencies to assess the effects of
their discretionary regulatory actions. In
particular, the Act addresses actions
that may result in the expenditure by a
State, local, or tribal government, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100,000,000 (adjusted for inflation) or
more in any one year. Though this rule
will not result in such an expenditure,
we do discuss the effects of this rule
elsewhere in this preamble.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
F. Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Department of Homeland Security
Management Directive 023–01 and
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD,
which guide the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have
determined that this action is one of a
category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves the
establishment of a safety zone and,
therefore it is categorically excluded
from further review under paragraph
34(g) of Figure 2–1 of the Commandant
Instruction. An environmental analysis
checklist supporting this determination
and a Categorical Exclusion
Determination are available in the
docket where indicated under
ADDRESSES. We seek any comments or
information that may lead to the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
G. Protest Activities
The Coast Guard respects the First
Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the
person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to
coordinate protest activities so that your
message can be received without
jeopardizing the safety or security of
people, places or vessels.
(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter
or operate within the safety zone must
contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo
or his on-scene representative to obtain
permission to do so. The Captain of the
Port Buffalo or his on-scene
representative may be contacted via
VHF Channel 16. Vessel operators given
permission to enter or operate in the
safety zone must comply with all
directions given to them by the Captain
of the Port Buffalo, or his on-scene
representative.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and record keeping
requirements, Security measures,
Waterways.
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
Dated: April 22, 2016.
B.W. Roche,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Buffalo.
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
[FR Doc. 2016–11363 Filed 5–12–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
Office of the Secretary
■
2. § 165.T09–0265 Safety Zone;
National Grid—Beck Lockport 104 &
Beck Harper 106 Removal Project;
Niagara River, Lewiston, NY.
(a) Location. This zone will
encompass all waters of the Niagara
River; Lewiston, NY starting at position
43° 8′44.8692″ N., and 079° 2′32.8842″
W. then extending approximately 3,300
feet north along the international
maritime border ending at position 43°
9′9.9648″ N., and 079° 2′39.681″ W.,
then south to the shoreline (NAD 83).
(b) Enforcement period. This
regulation will be enforced
intermittently while power line removal
operations are taking place from 7:45
a.m. on May 16, 2016 through 6:15 p.m.
on May 18, 2016.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with
the general regulations in § 165.23 of
this part, entry into, transiting, or
anchoring within this safety zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Buffalo or his
designated on-scene representative.
(2) This safety zone is closed to all
vessel traffic, except as may be
permitted by the Captain of the Port
Buffalo or his designated on-scene
representative.
(3) The ‘‘on-scene representative’’ of
the Captain of the Port Buffalo is any
Coast Guard commissioned, warrant or
petty officer who has been designated
by the Captain of the Port Buffalo to act
on his behalf.
43 CFR Parts 47 and 48
[167D0102DM; DLSN00000.000000;
DS61400000; DX61401]
RIN 1090–AA98
■
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Land Exchange Procedures and
Procedures to Amend the Hawaiian
Homes Commission Act, 1920
Office of the Secretary, Interior.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
This rule provides clarity in
how the Department of the Interior
administers certain provisions of the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act and
the Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery
Act. It facilitates the goal of the
rehabilitation of the Native Hawaiian
community, including the return of
native Hawaiians to the land, consistent
with the Hawaiian Homes Commission
Act, the State of Hawai1i Admission Act,
and the Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery
Act. The rule clarifies the land exchange
process for Hawaiian home lands, the
documents required for land exchanges,
and the respective responsibilities of the
Department of the Interior, the
Department of Hawaiian Home Lands,
the Hawaiian Homes Commission, and
other entities engaged in land exchanges
of Hawaiian home lands. It also
identifies the documentation
requirements and the responsibilities of
the Secretary of the Interior in the
approval process for State of Hawai1i
proposed amendments to the Hawaiian
Homes Commission Act, 1920.
DATES: This rule is effective July 12,
2016.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
The final rule is available
on the internet at: https://
www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ka‘i‘ini Kimo Kaloi, Director, Office of
Native Hawaiian Relations, telephone
(202) 208–7462.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
ADDRESSES:
I. Background
In 1921, Congress enacted the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920
(HHCA), 42 Stat. 108, to provide a
homesteading program for native
Hawaiians by placing approximately
200,000 acres of land (known as
Hawaiian home lands) into the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. The dayto-day administration of Hawaiian
Home Lands Trust is by the Department
of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL), an
agency of the State of Hawai1i, headed
by an executive board known as the
Hawaiian Homes Commission (HHC).
The HHCA provides the Chairman of
the HHC the authority to propose to the
Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) the
exchange of Hawaiian home lands for
land privately or publicly owned in
furtherance of the purposes of the
HHCA.
The HHCA also created a series of
funds (the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust
Funds, or ‘‘trust funds’’) See, HHCA
section 213 as amended. The purpose of
one of these trust funds is the
‘‘rehabilitation of native Hawaiians,
native Hawaiian families, and Hawaiian
homestead communities,’’ which shall
include ‘‘the educational, economic,
political, social, and cultural processes
by which the general welfare and
conditions of native Hawaiians are
thereby improved and perpetuated.’’ Id.
Another in this series of trust funds
seeks, for instance, to enhance
construction of replacement homes,
repairs or additions, and enhance
development of farms, ranches or
aquaculture, and to provide farm loans,
including for soil and water
conservation. Still another trust fund
provides money for construction,
reconstruction operations and
maintenance of revenue-producing
improvements intended to benefit
occupants of Hawaiian home lands; for
investments in water and other utilities,
supplies, equipment, and goods; and for
professional services needed to plan,
implement, develop or operate such
projects that will improve the value of
Hawaiian home lands for their current
and future occupants. Other money is
provided to establish and maintain an
account to serve as a reserve for loans
issued or backed by the Federal
Government, to further the purpose of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
the HHCA. The purposes and goals of
these funds reflect congressionally
identified purposes and goals of the
HHCA.
In 1959, Congress enacted the Hawai1i
Admission Act, 73 Stat. 4 (Admission
Act), to admit the Territory of Hawai1i
(Hawai1i or State) into the United States
as a state. In compliance with the
Admission Act, and as a compact
between the State and the United States
relating to the management and
disposition of the Hawaiian home lands,
the State adopted the HHCA, as
amended, as a law of the State through
Article XII of its Constitution.
In section 223 of the HHCA, Congress
reserved to itself the right to alter,
amend, or repeal the HHCA. Consistent
with this provision, section 4 of the
Admission Act provides limitations on
the State’s administration of the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust and the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust Funds
(hereafter referred to together as the
Trust) and also provides that the HHCA
is subject to amendment or repeal by the
State only with the consent of the
United States. Recognizing, however,
that it was vesting the State with dayto-day administrative authority,
Congress in section 4 of the Admission
Act also provided exceptions within
which the State could amend certain
administrative provisions of the HHCA
without the consent of the United
States. The HHCA is a cooperative
federalism statute, a compound of
interdependent Federal and State law
that establishes a Federal law
framework but also provides for
implementation through State law.
Consistent with the provisions of the
HHCA and the Admission Act, Congress
enacted the Hawaiian Home Lands
Recovery Act in 1995 (HHLRA), 109
Stat. 357, which provides that the
Secretary shall determine whether a
State-proposed amendment to the
HHCA requires the consent of the
United States under section 4 of the
Admission Act. It is appropriately the
function of the United States to ensure
conformance with the limitations in the
Admissions Act and protect the
integrity of this statutory framework.
The HHLRA also clarified the
Secretary’s role in the oversight of the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. Section
204(a)(3) of the HHCA, in conjunction
with Section 205 of the HHLRA,
requires the approval or disapproval of
the Secretary for the exchange of
Hawaiian home lands. The HHLRA
details the Secretary’s responsibilities to
ensure that Hawaiian home lands are
administered in a manner that advances
the interests of the beneficiaries.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29777
While the Secretary has broad
responsibilities under the HHCA and
the Admissions Act, the HHLRA
clarifies the scope of the continuing
responsibilities of the Federal
Government with regard to the HHCA.
Two of these responsibilities are
addressed in the final rule. First, it
clarifies the role of the Secretary in land
exchanges and, second, clarifies the
process for the Secretary’s review of
State-proposed amendments to the
HHCA. As to HHC Chairman-proposed
land exchanges, the HHLRA provides
that the HHC Chairman submit a report
to the Secretary, including identification
of the benefits to the parties of the
proposed exchange. The Secretary shall
approve or disapprove the proposed
exchange depending on whether it
advances the interests of the
beneficiaries. As to State-proposed
amendments to the HHCA, the HHLRA
requires the State to notify the Secretary
of any amendment it proposes to the
HHCA and then requires the Secretary
to determine whether it impacts Federal
responsibilities under the HHCA or
infringes on Federal interests or those of
the HHCA beneficiaries. If the Secretary
determines the State’s proposed
amendment of the HHCA impacts the
Federal responsibilities or infringes on
either the Federal or beneficiaries’
interests, the Secretary must submit the
amendment to Congress for approval.
Since Hawai1i’s admission to the
Union, both Secretarial reviews
occurred on an ad hoc basis using
procedures accepted by the State and
the Department. See, letter dated August
21, 1987 to Chairman Morris Udall of
the House Committee on Interior and
Insular Affairs. This rule establishes a
clear process for Secretarial review and
approval of land exchanges proposed by
the HHC Chairman under the HHCA
and HHLRA (Part 47), and of Stateproposed amendments to the HHCA
(Part 48).
II. Responses to Comments on the May
12, 2015 Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
On May 12, 2015, the Secretary issued
a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM), entitled ‘‘Land Exchange
Procedures and Procedures to Amend
the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.’’
80 FR 27134–27141 (May 12, 2015). The
NPRM sought input from leaders and
members of the Native Hawaiian
community, HHCA beneficiaries, and
the public about how the Secretary
reviews land exchanges involving
Hawaiian home lands proposed by the
HHC Chairman and State-proposed
amendments to the HHCA.
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
29778
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
The NPRM set an initial 60-day
comment period that ended on July 13,
2015. In response to requests from
commenters, including the HHC on
behalf of itself and HHCA beneficiaries,
the Secretary extended the comment
deadline another 30 days, ending on
August 12, 2015. 80 FR 39991 (July 13,
2015).
The Secretary received over 500
written comments by the August 12,
2015 deadline. All comments received
on the NPRM are available in the NPRM
docket at https://www.regulations.gov/
#!documentDetail;D=DOI-2015-00020001. Most of the comments revolved
around a limited number of issues. The
issues discussed below encompass the
range of substantive issues presented in
comments on the NPRM.
After careful review and analysis of
the comments on the NPRM, the
Department concludes that it is
appropriate to publish a final rule that
would set forth the administrative
procedures for the review of land
exchanges involving Hawaiian home
lands proposed by the HHC Chairman
and amendments to the HHCA proposed
by the State.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Overview of Comments
The Department received comments
from the Native Hawaiian community,
the State, HHCA beneficiaries, and
others. One fundamental question raised
in the comments was whether the rule
expands the Secretary’s authority
beyond the HHCA, Admission Act, and
HHLRA. We conclude that the rule is
within the Secretary’s authority and
consistent with long-standing practice
under the HHCA, Admission Act, and
HHLRA.
State-proposed amendments. On
August 21, 1987, the Secretary
forwarded to the House Committee on
Interior and Insular Affairs, a proposed
procedure, agreed upon by the State and
Secretary, for obtaining the consent of
the United States to State-proposed
amendments to the HHCA. That
procedure provided for the HHC
Chairman forwarding the proposed
amendment to the Secretary with an
opinion from an appropriate legal
officer of the State, followed by the
Secretary examining the material
transmitted and then submitting to
Congress a proposed report and bill. The
parties anticipated that most Stateproposed amendments would be free of
controversy and national implications
and would be submitted to Congress
once every one to two years. The
Department endeavored to follow these
procedures subsequently embodied in
the HHLRA and in this rule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
Land exchanges. In the late 1970’s,
the State and the DHHL were resolving
claims between themselves over lands
that the State had allegedly withdrawn
illegally from the Hawaiian Home Lands
Trust, while also addressing claims
against the United States for lands
allegedly withdrawn illegally from the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust or used by
the United States during the territorial
period. Congress considered addressing
these claims and implementing some
recommendations of the Federal-State
Task Force Report from 1983, such as
the existing informal process of
Secretarial review of land exchanges
proposed by the HHC Chairman.
Accordingly, Congress passed the
HHLRA which provides procedures for
settlement of federal claims (section
203); approval of amendments to the
HHCA (section 204); and approval of
exchanges involving Hawaiian home
lands (section 205). The HHLRA also
designated a federal official within the
Department ‘‘to administer the
responsibilities of the United States’’
under the HHCA and the HHLRA, and
to protect and advance HHCA
beneficiaries’ rights and interests,
including promoting homesteading
opportunities, economic selfsufficiency, and social well-being
(section 206). See, Hawaiian Home
Lands Recovery Act: Hearing before the
Senate Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources on S. 2174, 103d
Cong., 9–10, 19 (1994). See, response to
questions 3 and 40.
HHCA beneficiaries. The HHLRA
defines ‘‘beneficiary’’ in the same terms
as ‘‘native Hawaiian’’ is defined in the
HHCA, which was adopted as a
provision of the constitution of the State
as a compact with the United States. In
1959, when section 4 of the Admission
Act referred to amendments that
‘‘increase the benefits to lessees of
Hawaiian home lands,’’ all lessees met
the definition of ‘‘native Hawaiian’’ and
had a blood quantum of at least 50
percent. Beginning in 1986, however,
certain persons with a lesser blood
quantum could obtain lessees through
succession or transfer. See, 100 Stat.
3143 (1986). The HHLRA, nevertheless,
defined beneficiary in terms of the
HHCA definition, not in terms of
lessees. Therefore, the rule evaluates
and advances the interests of the
beneficiaries as distinguished from all
lessees.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Responses to Specific Issues Raised in
the NPRM Comments
1. How do claims concerning the United
States occupation of the Hawaiian
Islands impact the rule?
Issue: Multiple commenters who
objected to Federal rulemaking based
their objections on the assertion that the
United States violated and continues to
violate international law by illegally
occupying the Hawaiian Islands and
thus is without jurisdiction on the
Islands.
Response: The Department is an
agency of the United States. The
Secretary’s authority to issue this rule
derives from the United States
Constitution and from Acts of Congress,
and the Secretary’s authority is confined
within that structure. The Secretary is
bound by Congressional enactments
concerning the status of Hawai1i. Under
those enactments and under the United
States Constitution, Hawai1i is a State of
the United States of America.
In 1893, a United States officer, acting
without authorization of the U.S.
government, conspired with residents of
Hawai1i to overthrow the Kingdom of
Hawaii. In the years following the 1893
overthrow, Congress annexed the
Territory of Hawai1i and established a
government for the Territory of Hawai1i.
See, Joint Resolution to Provide for
Annexing the Hawaiian Islands to the
United States, 30 Stat. 750 (1898); Act
of Apr. 30, 1900, 31 Stat. 141. In 1959,
Congress admitted Hawai1i to the Union
as the 50th State. In 1993, Congress,
through a joint resolution, apologized to
Native Hawaiians for the overthrow and
the deprivation of the rights of Native
Hawaiians to self-determination, and
expressed its support for reconciliation
efforts with Native Hawaiians. Joint
Resolution of November 23, 1993, 107
Stat. 1510, 1513 (commonly known as
the ‘‘Apology Resolution’’).
The Apology Resolution, however,
did not effectuate any changes to
existing law. See, Hawai1i v. Office of
Hawaiian Affairs, 556 U.S. 163, 175
(2009). Thus, the Admission Act
established the current status of the
State of Hawai1i. The Admission Act
proclaimed in section 1 that ‘‘the State
of Hawai1i is hereby declared to be a
State of the United States of America,
[and] is declared admitted into the
Union on an equal footing with the
other States in all respects whatever.’’
The Admission Act was consented to by
the people of Hawai1i through an
election held on June 27, 1959. The
comments in response to the NPRM that
call into question the legitimacy of the
State of Hawai1i are inconsistent with
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
the express determination of Congress,
which is binding on the Department.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
2. Is the definition of a beneficiary of the
HHCA consistent with the requirements
of Federal law?
Issue: Commenters questioned the
Secretary’s constitutional authority to
promulgate rules for the Hawaiian
Home Lands Trust, arguing that
Congress’s definition of a Native
Hawaiian beneficiary is race-based
because its use of a ‘‘blood quantum’’
violates the Constitution’s guarantee of
equal protection.
Response: The Federal Government
has broad authority to regulate with
respect to Native American
communities. See, U.S. Const. art. I, sec.
8, cl. 3 (Commerce Clause); U.S. Const.
art. II, sec. 2, cl. 2 (Treaty Clause);
Morton v. Mancari, 417 U.S. at 551–52
(‘‘The plenary power of Congress to deal
with the special problems of Indians is
drawn both explicitly and implicitly
from the Constitution itself.’’). In the
case of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust,
Congress specifically chose to use a 50
percent blood quantum requirement for
all beneficiaries of the HHCA rather
than a 1/32 blood quantum in order to
make the bill more distinctly a
Hawaiian rehabilitation scheme.
Proposed Amendments to the Organic
Act of the Territory of Hawai1i: Hearings
on H.R. 7257 Before the House Comm.
On the Territories, 66th Cong. 15 (1921).
Acknowledging that the United States
implemented similar rehabilitation
programs for Indians because the
government took away their lands
without payment and violated treaties,
Congressman Charles Curry, Chairman
of the Committee on the Territories, said
that it should be constitutional to do the
same for the Hawaiians whose land had
been taken away from them and noted
that the Committee received opinions
supporting the constitutionality of the
proposed legislation from the Attorney
General of Hawai1i and the Solicitor of
the Department of the Interior. Id. at
141–142. Blood quantum reflects ties to
the Native Hawaiian political
community, as individuals marry within
it. Id. at 140. And, as Congress
explained, Congress ‘‘does not extend
services to Native Hawaiians because of
their race, but because of their unique
status as the indigenous peoples of a
once sovereign nation as to whom the
United States has established a trust
relationship.’’ 114 Stat. 2968 (2000)
(Hawaiian Homelands Homeownership
Act).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
3. Is the Hawaiian Homes Commission
Act still Federal Law?
Issue: Commenters questioned
whether the HHCA remains a Federal
law, presuming that the passage of the
Admission Act repealed it.
Response: Yes, the HHCA remains a
Federal law. As explained in more
detail above under ‘‘Background,’’, in
compliance with the Admission Act,
and as a compact between the State and
the United States relating to the
management and disposition of the
Hawaiian home lands, the State adopted
the HHCA, as amended, as a law of the
State through Article XII of its
Constitution as a condition of its
admission in 1959. The HHCA is a
cooperative federalism statute, a
compound of interdependent Federal
and State law that establishes a Federal
law framework but also provides for
implementation through State law.
Furthermore, consistent with the
provisions of the HHCA and the
Admission Act, the HHLRA provides
that the Secretary shall determine
whether a proposed amendment to the
HHCA requires the consent of the
United States under section 4 of the
Admission Act. It is appropriately the
function of the United States to ensure
conformance with the limitations in the
Admission Act and protect the integrity
of this statutory framework.
The HHLRA also clarified the role of
the Secretary in the oversight of the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. Section
204(a)(3) of the HHCA, in conjunction
with section 205 of the HHLRA, requires
the approval or disapproval of the
Secretary for the exchange of Hawaiian
home lands. The HHLRA details the
Secretary’s responsibilities to ensure
that the administration of Hawaiian
Home Lands Trust advances the
interests of the beneficiaries.
The HHLRA thus confirms the
continuing role of the Secretary in
implementing the HHCA and defines
the scope of the continuing
responsibilities of the Federal
Government related to approval of land
exchanges of Hawaiian home lands and
state-proposed amendments to the
HHCA.
4. Is the Secretary’s interpretation of the
term ‘‘rehabilitation’’ as including
political, cultural and social
reorganization correct?
Response: The meaning of the term
‘‘rehabilitation’’ under the HHCA was
provided for background purposes in
the proposed rule, and resulted in a
number of comments. We now clarify
the Department’s position.
The Secretary’s interpretation of the
term ‘‘rehabilitation’’ to include
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29779
political, cultural, and social
reorganization is consistent with both
the statutory text and legislative history
of HHCA. The term ‘‘rehabilitation’’ was
added to the HHCA through the 1978
amendments to the Hawaiian
Constitution. Section 213(i) of the
HHCA, as amended, creates a
‘‘rehabilitation fund’’ that can be used
for ‘‘the rehabilitation of native
Hawaiians’’ including ‘‘educational,
economic, political, social, and cultural
processes.’’ Congress consented to this
language through a joint resolution
approved October 27, 1986, thereby
amending the HHCA. 100 Stat. 3143.
The purposes and goals of the
rehabilitation fund are congressionally
identified as some of the purposes and
goals of the HHCA.
Furthermore, the legislative history of
the HHCA indicates that the bill’s
purpose was to protect the welfare of
the Native Hawaiian people. See, 67
Cong. Rec. 3263 (1921) (statement of
Rep. Almon). Methods to achieve that
purpose included revitalizing the ‘‘mode
of living’’ of Native Hawaiians from
prior generations. See, Rehabilitation
and Colonization of Hawaiians and
Other Proposed Amendments to the
Organic Act of the Territory of Hawai1i:
Before the House Comm. on the
Territories, 66th Cong 4 (1920) (quoting
Sen. John H. Wise’s testimony before the
Territorial Legislature that: ‘‘[t]he
Hawaiian people are a farming people
and fishermen, out-of-door people, and
[being] frozen out of their lands. . . . is
one of the reasons why the Hawaiian
people are dying. Now, the only way to
save them, I contend, is to take them
back to the lands and give them the
mode of living that their ancestors were
accustomed to and in that way
rehabilitate them.’’).
In 1982 the Secretary and the
Governor of Hawai1i created a task force
whose purpose was to consider how to
better effectuate the purposes of the
HHCA. Federal-State Task Force on the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act
Report to the Secretary of the Interior
and the Governor of the State of Hawai1i,
Honolulu, Hawai1i, August 1983, pp. 4,
8. That task force found that the term
‘‘rehabilitation’’ ‘‘implies that
traditional and cultural practices of
native beneficiaries, to the extent not
precluded by law, should be respected
and acknowledged by the DHHL in
order to enable native beneficiaries to
return to their lands and to provide for
their self-sufficiency and initiative and
for the preservation of their culture.’’ Id.
at 55. Thus, the term ‘‘rehabilitation’’
has been consistently interpreted in
ways that support the development of
the Hawaiian community itself. The
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
29780
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Secretary’s interpretation of the term
‘‘rehabilitation’’ to include political,
cultural, and social reorganization is
consistent with the statutory language,
congressional intent, and longstanding
interpretation of the HHCA.
The funds Congress provided for in
the HHCA represent factors that
Congress identified as some of the
purposes and goals of the HHCA. These
purposes and goals guide the Secretary’s
review in determining whether a
proposal advances the interests of the
beneficiaries. Section 48.25 has been
modified in response to these
comments.
5. Should leaseholds to beneficiaries be
converted to fee simple allocations of
land?
Issue: Commenters recommend a path
that would convert HHCA leaseholders
into the outright owners of their
leasehold property.
Response: Allowing for the
conversion of leaseholds into fee simple
ownership of Hawaiian home lands
properties, which resembles the
allotment process that was repudiated
by Congress in 1934, is prohibited by
current Federal law and is not within
the scope of the rule.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
6. Does the State of Hawai1i have the
ability to amend the HHCA?
Issue: Commenters allege that the
State has no ability to amend the HHCA
through the process outlined in the
Admission Act because it remains a
Federal law.
Response: The HHCA is a cooperative
federalism statute, a compound of
interdependent Federal and State law
that establishes a Federal law
framework but also provides for
implementation through State law. The
Admission Act provided that the State
could amend certain provisions of the
HHCA but expressly limited the State’s
authority. The HHLRA provides further
clarification, providing that the
Secretary shall determine whether a
State-proposed amendment to the
HHCA requires the consent or approval
of Congress under section 4 of the
Admission Act. If the State-proposed
amendment is found not to require the
approval of the United States, the rule
provides that the effective date of the
State-proposed amendment is the date
of the Secretary’s notification letter to
the Congressional Committee Chairmen
that Congressional approval was not
required. It is appropriately the function
of the United States to ensure
conformity with the limitations in the
Admission Act and protect the integrity
of this Federal statutory framework.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
7. Do parts 47 and 48 create an
administrative burden that would make
it more difficult for the State to move
forward with land exchanges or
amendments to the HHCA that would
benefit the Hawaiian home lands
program?
Issue: Commenters stated that while it
may be lawful for the Secretary to
engage in rulemaking, administrative
requirements and criteria may constrain
state officials and make it more difficult
for them to proceed with land
exchanges or amendments to the HHCA
that they consider beneficial to the
program.
Response: The three main Hawaiian
Home Lands Trust statutes (the HHCA,
the Admission Act, and the HHLRA)
establish a trust relationship and grant
the Secretary authority to protect and
advance the interests of the
beneficiaries. Section 206 of the HHLRA
charges the Secretary with advancing
the interests of the beneficiaries in
administering the HHCA. Parts 47 and
48 will assist the Secretary in carrying
out this responsibility and make the
Secretary’s actions more transparent to
the public. Similarly, the rule will assist
the State in understanding what
information the Secretary considers
necessary in order to evaluate the
proposed actions. As evidenced by the
fact that the HHLRA requires the
Secretary to approve or disapprove all
land exchanges involving Hawaiian
home lands and to review all proposed
amendments to the HHCA proposed by
the State, Congress not only recognized
the benefit of an independent Federal
determination that the proposal
advances the interests of the
beneficiaries, but also recognized that
the interests of the Hawaiian Home
Lands Trust and its beneficiaries may
not always coincide with the interests of
the State and their overall program.
Congress prioritized the interests of the
beneficiaries and in doing so
circumscribed the day-to-day
administration of the Trust by the State,
notwithstanding benefits to other State
goals.
8. Should a federalism assessment be
performed for this rule?
Issue: One commenter suggests that
the rule has sufficient federalism
implications to warrant the preparation
of a federalism assessment in
accordance with Executive Order 13132.
Response: No. While the HHCA, the
Admission Act, and the HHLRA, limit
what the State can do in administering
the Trust, 43 CFR parts 47 and 48
merely provide a path for administering
those Federal laws within the original
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
limited delegation to the State in the
Admission Act; thus, no federalism
assessment needs to be performed.
Recognizing the direct effect the three
statutes have on the State and the
benefits of working with the State to
protect the beneficiaries and the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust, the
Department held high level discussions
with State officials as early as 2011 that
resulted in this rulemaking to formalize
the process for review of land exchanges
and State proposed amendments to the
HHCA.
As discussed above, the statutory
framework of the HHCA, the Admission
Act, and the HHLRA result in a
compound of interdependent Federal
and State law. Those laws undoubtedly
have federalism implications. This rule,
however, does not. In accordance with
E.O. 13132, rules or policies have
federalism implications if they ‘‘have
substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’ Parts 47 and 48
have none of those effects. The rule
merely formalizes the process the
Secretary will use in reviewing and
approving land exchanges and in
reviewing proposed amendments to the
HHCA under existing law, and clarifies
the documentation that the HHC
Chairman, an officer of the State of
Hawai1i, must submit to implement
existing law. The relationship between
the State and the Secretary is unchanged
by this rule. We expect the HHC
Chairman will continue to submit
proposed land exchanges and proposed
amendments to the Secretary as it has
since passage of the HHRLA. The
distribution of power and
responsibilities remains unchanged; the
respective decision making authority of
the Secretary and State are limited by
section 4 of the Admission Act and
sections 205 and 206 of the HHLRA.
The only ‘‘direct effect’’ imposed on the
State by this rule is the requirement to
submit some additional documentation,
which, given the level of documentation
required and the frequency of
submissions, does not rise to a
‘‘substantial direct effect.’’ We therefore
conclude that no federalism analysis is
necessary.
9. Do parts 47 and 48 allow the
Secretary to amend the HHCA?
Issue: Commenters suggest that parts
47 and 48 amend or allow the Secretary
to amend the HHCA.
Response: The rule does not amend
the HHCA. Parts 47 and 48 merely assist
in the administration of the HHCA. One
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
of the purposes of part 48 is, however,
to provide clarity, consistent with
Federal law, on what subjects under the
HHCA the State may amend on its own
and which subjects Congress must
approve. Similarly, part 47 adds clarity
to Federal review of land exchanges.
This rulemaking process provided the
public and all interested parties an
opportunity to review and comment on
the Department’s existing process before
it is replaced with a formalized one
under this rule.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
10. Should the Secretary monitor State
legislation that poses a threat to the
HHCA?
Issue: Commenters recommend that
under part 48 the Secretary adequately
monitor any legislation that would pose
a threat to the HHCA.
Response: Section 204 of the HHLRA
requires that the Chairman of the HHC
submit for review by the Secretary and
if required, congressional approval, all
State enactments proposing to amend
the HHCA. Any proposed amendments
to any terms or provisions of the HHCA
by the State should also specify that the
proposed amendment seeks to amend
the HHCA, which puts all persons on
notice that the amendment needs review
by the Secretary. Consistent with the
Admission Act and HHCA, if Federal
review finds that any State enactment
impacts any of the factors in § 48.20 of
this rule, Congressional action is
required before it has any effect on the
provisions of the HHCA or
administration of the Trust. It is the
responsibility of the HHC Chairman to
monitor the State’s legislative activities
and to obtain the required review by the
Secretary if it is the State’s intent to
amend the HHCA.
Once the Department determines that
Congress must approve a proposed
amendment to the HHCA and the
Department transmits the proposed
amendment to Congress, there is no
requirement that the Administration
monitor or advocate its passage. The
Administration may oppose an
amendment that does not advance the
interests of the HHCA beneficiaries.
11. Do State-proposed amendments to
the HHCA require Congressional
approval or consent?
Issue: A commenter suggests that
Congressional consent and not approval
is required for certain proposed
amendments to the HHCA.
Response: Congress provided in
section 4 of the Admission Act that
certain amendments to the HHCA
would require the consent of the United
States. Congress also clarified in section
204 of the HHLRA that the consent of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
the United States is provided through
the approval by Congress. Thus,
approval is required.
Section 204(c)(1) also requires the
Secretary to submit to Congress a draft
joint resolution approving the proposed
amendment. Section 397, Joint
Resolutions, of Jefferson’s Manual of the
House of Representatives of the United
States Congress, provides, with the
exception of joint resolutions proposing
amendments to the Constitution, all
resolutions are sent to the President for
approval and have the full force of law.
12. Does § 47.50(a)(8)(i) authorize the
State of Hawai1i to evict tenants from
property being considered for a land
exchange?
Issue: Multiple commenters expressed
concern that § 47.50(a)(8)(i) authorizes
the State to evict tenants from property
being considered for a land exchange.
Response: Section 47.50(a)(8)(i) does
not authorize the State or any other
entity to evict tenants from property
being considered for a land exchange.
This provision asks that if a party to the
exchange will evict a tenant from land
being exchanged under separate legal
authority, the party should provide the
Secretary details of arrangements for the
relocation of the tenants. The provision
in § 47.50(a)(8)(i) does not expand or
grant such authority. The provision in
§ 47.50(a)(8)(i) is almost identical to
section 43 CFR 2201.1(c)(11) which
applies to other Federal land exchanges.
The purpose of both 43 CFR
2201.1(c)(11) and final rule 43 CFR
47.50(a)(8)(i) is to assist the Secretary in
identifying all costs, both economic and
social, to all persons directly affected by
an exchange.
13. Should the definition of
consultation in both parts 47 and 48 of
this rule require face-to-face meetings
with beneficiaries to be valid?
Issue: Commenters question whether
consultation with beneficiaries without
face-to-face meetings will allow for a
sufficient opportunity to engage in
dialogue with the beneficiaries, consider
their views, and, where feasible, seek
agreement with them.
Response: The definition of
consultation in this rule provides a
minimum requirement and is intended
to give the Secretary, the HHC
Chairman, as well as beneficiaries and
interested parties, flexibility in the
consultation process in order to
efficiently and effectively engage
beneficiaries and interested parties in
informed consideration of proposed
actions. Such actions may involve a
wide spectrum of issues ranging from
those that are singular, simple, and
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29781
straight forward to those that are multifaceted and complicated or complex.
Such actions may also vary from those
that are mandatory to others that allow
greater discretion. Face-to-face meetings
may be necessary under certain
circumstances while other means of
communications, including but not
limited to letters delivered by the postal
service, email, teleconferences, etc., may
be just as effective in other
circumstances.
One commenter suggested requiring
face-to-face consultations with
beneficiaries and lessees who live
within a 50-mile radius of the existing
Hawaiian home lands to be exchanged
or received into the Trust. While the
rationale for not requiring face-to-face
consultations presented in the previous
paragraph still holds true, the Secretary
encourages the State to engage in faceto-face consultations, at a minimum,
within a 50-mile radius. The
beneficiaries who live within a 50-mile
radius of a proposed exchange will
likely have a great deal of information
important in making a decision about an
exchange that would assist the
Department in its review.
The final rule modified the definition
of consultation in response to these
comments.
14. Does § 47.45(a) impede the State’s
ability to engage in land exchanges
involving Hawaiian home lands?
Issue: Commenters raised the question
whether § 47.45(a), which recommends
the HHC Chairman and the other party
seeking the exchange meet with the
Department prior to finalizing an
exchange, would hamper the progress of
land exchanges involving Hawaiian
home lands.
Response: Section 47.45(a) is a
suggested course of action and does not
require pre-land exchange meetings.
The Department finds, however, that
getting all parties who are interested in
a particular land exchange talking to
one another can be extremely useful and
time-saving. It is especially useful to
have this type of pre-meeting to avoid
the submission of a presumed final
document that cannot be approved by
the Department. The language of
§ 47.45(a) would leave it to the
discretion of the HHC Chairman as to
whether to engage in the pre-land
exchange meeting. The meeting may be
conducted via teleconferencing or webconferencing rather than in-person.
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
29782
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
15. Should § 47.65(b) clarify the
circumstances under which the
Secretary will consult with the
beneficiaries when making a
determination if a land exchange
advances the interests of the
beneficiaries?
Issue: Commenters suggest that it is
unclear when and under what
circumstances consultation might occur
by the Secretary when reviewing a HHC
Chairman-proposed land exchange.
Response: When reviewing a land
exchange proposal submitted by the
HHC Chairman, it is essential to the
Secretary’s decision-making process to
have input from the beneficiary
community about the effect the land
exchange may have on the beneficiaries
and the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust.
The reason for making consultation
under § 47.65(b) permissive is that if the
HHC Chairman has already consulted
with the beneficiaries on the land
exchange proposal that is before the
Secretary, and records of this
consultation provide the input that the
Secretary seeks, then no further
consultation by the Secretary may be
necessary. If the HHC Chairman forgoes
consultation on a land exchange or a
proposed amendment to the HHCA, the
Secretary may be required to consult
directly with the beneficiaries in order
to approve the exchange or to find that
an amendment does not require
Congressional approval.
Upon consideration of the comments,
language similar to that in § 47.65(b)
was inserted into § 48.20.
16. Should the term ‘‘consultation’’ be
better defined?
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Issue: Commenters suggested that
there be greater clarity and
formalization as to when the Secretary
would seek such consultation, what
such consultation would entail, and
how beneficiary input will be taken into
account in any decision making process.
Response: The Department agrees
with this point and modified the
definition of consultation in both parts
47 and 48 so that they are consistent
with the definition used by Federal
agencies when consulting with the
Native Hawaiian community under
section 106 of the National Historic
Preservation Act.
17. Are the standards for the review of
land exchanges sufficiently clear to
protect the interests of the beneficiaries?
Issue: Commenters suggest the
standards for review of land exchanges
is not sufficient to guarantee the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust will be
preserved.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
Response: The definition of land
exchanges in section 47.10 is based
upon section 204 of the HHCA and the
Secretary’s experience with reviewing
land exchanges involving Hawaiian
home lands and other properties
throughout the United States. Exchanges
can be a valuable tool for the HHCA
Chairman in managing the Hawaiian
Home Lands Trust and advancing the
interests of the beneficiaries. Part 47
seeks to clarify the section 205 of
HHLRA to ensure it is carried out in
compliance with section 206 of the
HHLRA that requires the Secretary, in
administering the HHCA, to advance the
interests of the beneficiaries. The
protections provided by the HHCA,
Admission Act, and HHLRA, along with
the details laid out in part 47, allow the
HHC Chairman to engage in land
exchanges involving Hawaiian home
lands without endangering the Trust.
18. Should the definition of ‘‘market
value’’ be amended to take into
consideration such things as utility and
cultural significance of the properties?
Issue: Commenters suggest that when
there are multiple reasons for a land
exchange to occur that the appraisals of
the properties should take those reasons
into account.
Response: The Secretary is authorized
to approve a land exchange under
section 204 of the HHCA if the property
to be added to the Hawaiian Home
Lands Trust is of ‘‘equal value’’ to the
property leaving the Hawaiian Home
Lands Trust. The Secretary interprets
this requirement to be referring to
market value, similarly to the BLM land
exchange regulations included in 43
CFR part 2200 that only consider the
economic uses of the subject property.
In order to approve the exchange,
however, the Secretary must determine
whether the proposed exchange
advances the interests of the
beneficiaries as required by section 206
of the HHLRA and as implemented in
section 47.20 of this rule. At that point,
the Secretary may take into account
things such as the utility and cultural
significance of the properties.
19. Should the Secretary ensure that the
appreciation rate of any new property
being proposed for inclusion in the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust be at least
equal to the rate of return for the
property proposed to leave the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust?
Issue: A commenter suggests that an
appreciation rate of any new property
being proposed for inclusion in the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust be at least
equal to the rate of return for the trust
property proposed to leave the
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. The
example given by the commenter is that
the return on the generation of
electricity on a current trust property
and the revenue it can potentially
generate is more important than its
present cash value of the property.
Response: The definition of market
value used in this rule requires that the
estimate of value be made in terms of
cash or its equivalent. The appreciation
rate and rate of return reflect future
income potential, of the properties being
considered in an exchange and will be
considered in the appraisal of a property
if the highest and best use of the
property is for generating income.
Properties considered for exchange will
be valued at their highest and best use
as required by UASFLA for market
value appraisals. The income
capitalization approach, which is
required to be completed on income
producing properties under UASFLA,
requires the appraiser to analyze a
property’s ability to generate future
benefits and capitalizes the income into
an indication of present cash value. The
result is that the market value of the
property as of the date of appraisal takes
into account future income and any
appreciation by converting future
benefits into a present cash value. If the
two exchange properties have similar
highest and best uses, similar
capitalization rates would likely be used
ensuring equal treatment of the
properties under appraisal.
20. Should only Federal employees
licensed in the State of Hawai1i be
allowed to conduct appraisals of
properties involved in an exchange
involving Hawaiian home lands?
Issue: A commenter suggests only
Federal employees licensed in the State
of Hawai1i be allowed to conduct
appraisals of properties involved in an
exchange of Hawaiian home lands.
Response: The vast majority of
Department’s appraisals are completed
by private contract appraisers under the
direction of the Department. The review
of those reports is done, however,
exclusively by Federal employees.
Requiring that appraisals be conducted
by only Federal employees would place
an unnecessary obstacle in the path of
completing these land exchanges.
21. Should the Secretary include in 43
CFR part 47 a process that addresses
section 205(c) of the HHLRA which
authorizes the Secretary to initiate a
land exchange involving Hawaiian
home lands?
Issue: Commenters suggest 43 CFR
part 47 include a process that addresses
section 205(c) of the HHLRA which
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
authorizes the Secretary to initiate a
land exchange involving Hawaiian
home lands.
Response: In this rule, the Department
did not include procedures governing
land exchanges involving Hawaiian
home lands initiated by the Secretary,
but chose to address the primary way in
which land exchanges are currently
initiated. The Department is unaware of
any land exchange involving Hawaiian
home lands being initiated or proposed
to be initiated by the Secretary. Thus,
the need to address such an exchange
through rulemaking is not necessary.
Should the Secretary decide to engage
in a land exchange involving Hawaiian
home lands under the authority of
section 205(c) and (d), we will consider
then what process is required and if a
rule is warranted.
22. Should the factors listed in section
47.20 include ‘‘reduce the diversion of
staff resources dedicated to deriving
revenues from land dispositions to fund
the DHHL’s administrative and
operating expenses’’?
Response: It is unnecessary to
specifically insert the suggested
language as it is encompassed within
section 47.20(i).
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
23. After approving or disapproving a
proposed amendment to the HHCA,
should the Secretary provide an email
notice to the Native Hawaiian
Organization List maintained by the
Secretary and post on the Department of
the Interior’s Web site?
Response: The Secretary does not
approve or disapprove proposed
amendments to the HHCA but merely
reviews proposed amendments to
determine if Congressional approval is
required. Following the required review,
the Secretary will post notice of the
determination on the Department of the
Interior Web site.
24. Should the Secretary review and
provide rulings to Congress and the
HHC Chairman on State-proposed
amendments to the HHCA that in
accordance with their own provisions
require Congressional approval to
become effective?
Issue: The State will sometimes pass
legislation that proposes to amend the
HHCA but is expressly contingent on
approval by Congress.
Response: When the State passes
legislation that proposes to amend the
HHCA but includes a provision that the
effectiveness of the proposed
amendment is contingent on approval
by Congress, no proposal to amend the
HHCA was made for purposes of section
206 of the HHLRA. In circumstances
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
such as these, the State is merely taking
on a general advisory role and providing
advice to Congress on what Federal laws
they should pass. Congress may
consider the proposed amendment
offered by the State of Hawai1i and this
does not require a review under section
206 of HHLRA.
25. Is it the responsibility of DHHL and
the HHC to determine whether proposed
land exchanges are appropriate for the
Hawaiian people?
Response: In accordance with section
205(b) of the HHLRA, ‘‘the Secretary
shall approve or disapprove the
proposed exchange’’ submitted by the
HHC Chairman. While the Chairman
may propose an exchange, the ultimate
responsibility for determining the
appropriateness of the proposed
exchange remains with the Secretary.
26. Are the factors the Secretary will
consider in analyzing a land exchange
listed in section 47.20 too restrictive to
allow for the proper use of the land
exchange tool by the HHC Chairman?
Issue: A commenter suggests that the
rule relies solely on the language listed
in section 204(3) of the HHCA, which
provides for an exchange of equal value
‘‘to consolidate its holdings or to better
effectuate the purposes of the HHCA.’’
Response: Section 206 of the HHLRA
requires that the Secretary ‘‘advance the
interest of the beneficiaries’’ in
administering the HHCA.
Implementation of this provision is
consistent with the purposes of section
204(a)(3) of the HHCA, which is to
advance the interest of its beneficiaries
when managing the Hawaiian Home
Lands Trust. Section 47.20 articulates
factors that are consistent with the
purposes of the HHCA and with
advancing the interest of the
beneficiaries to provide transparency in
the Secretary’s decision making process.
Section 47.20 of the rule implements
both statutes in a consistent manner and
utilizes the Secretary’s expertise in
reviewing land exchanges involving
trust lands held for other U.S.
indigenous communities.
27. Should the factors the Secretary will
consider in analyzing a land exchange
listed in section 47.20 be expanded to
include such things as the development
of Hawaiian home lands for mercantile
use and to protect ecological and
cultural resources?
Response: Section 47.20 specifies that
the main purpose of engaging in a land
exchange must be to advance the
interests of the beneficiaries as provided
in section 206 of the HHLRA.
Accordingly, it lists the factors the
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29783
Secretary will consider in analyzing a
land exchange. These factors themselves
are purposefully broad to allow
flexibility in the analysis.
Moreover, in order for the exchange to
be approved, the purpose of the land
exchange must be well documented and
demonstrate how the land exchange
advances the interests of the
beneficiaries. For instance, it would be
insufficient under the rule for the party
proposing the exchange to make only a
conclusory statement that the exchange
advances the interests of the
beneficiaries without further
explanation. Sections 47.20 and 47.30
provide the necessary information for
the Secretary to make a reasoned
decision to approve or disapprove a
proposed land exchange.
28. Should there be a requirement that
land exchanges not increase or decrease
the acreage in the Trust in order to keep
it whole?
Response: While acreage is an
important aspect of determining the
market value of properties involved in
a land exchange, it is not the exclusive
determining factor. For example, 50
acres of heavily sloped rocky land will
likely not be as valuable as a smaller
number of acres of usable farm land or
other more readily developable acres.
Therefore, the HHCA requires that the
exchange be of equal value, not that the
acreage be the same. The Secretary
needs to ensure the market value of the
property coming into the Hawaiian
Home Lands Trust is equal to or greater
than the property leaving the trust as
required by section 204(c) of the HHCA,
rather than rely on identical acreages.
29. Should the rule provide a more
defined role for the Hawaiian Homes
Commission in the review of land
exchanges and amendments to the
HHCA?
Issue: Commenters suggest that the
rule specifically recognize the role of
the HHC because of its fiduciary duty to
the beneficiaries of the HHCA.
Response: Section 202 of the HHCA
provides that the DHHL be headed by an
executive board known as the HHC. The
HHC and its Chairman are appointed by
the Governor of the State of Hawai1i. The
Chairman of the HHC is also the
Director of DHHL and an Officer of the
State of Hawaii. As officers of the State
who are placed in their positions as
Hawaiian Homes Commissioners to
oversee the day-to-day management of
the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust, the
Secretary values their input. In response
to comments, section 47.60(a)(1) now
requires a statement of approval for a
land exchange from the HHC, including
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
29784
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
the Commissioners’ recorded vote on
the exchange, and § 48.15(b)(2) requires
that all testimony and correspondence
from the HHC and its Commissioners
related to proposed amendments be
submitted to the Secretary in order to
better inform the Secretary’s review of
proposed amendments to the HHCA. In
addition, the rule now specifically
references the Chairman of the HHC as
submitting the State-proposed
amendments to the HHCA and
Chairman-proposed land exchanges to
the Secretary to conform to the language
in sections 204(a) and 205(a) of the
HHLRA.
30. In addition to requiring the
submission of homestead association
testimony and correspondence
regarding proposed amendments to the
HHCA, should § 48.15 also require the
same documents from beneficiary
associations whose membership is
composed of persons who have
submitted applications to the State for
homesteads but are currently awaiting
the assignment of a lot?
Response: The Department
appreciates the question. It is important
for the Secretary to obtain the input of
beneficiaries who are on the State’s
homestead waiting list as their priorities
may diverge from the priorities of those
beneficiaries who hold a homestead
lease. Therefore, new definitions of
HHCA Beneficiary Association and of
Homestead Association are included in
the rule and are referenced in
§ 48.15(b)(2), and beneficiaries are
added to § 48.15(b)(2).
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
31. Should the definition of
‘‘beneficiary’’ include those Native
Hawaiians with a blood quantum of
more than 25 percent but less than 50
percent who qualify to receive a
homestead through transfer or
succession?
Response: Section 202 of the HHLRA
states ‘‘the term ‘beneficiary’ has the
same meaning as given the term ‘native
Hawaiian’ under section 201(7) of the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.’’
Section 201(7) of the HHCA states,
‘‘Native Hawaiian means any
descendant of not less than one-half part
of the blood of the races inhabiting the
Hawaiian Islands previous to 1778.’’
Changing the definition of ‘‘beneficiary’’
to include those Native Hawaiians with
a blood quantum of at least 25 percent
but less than 50 percent who received
a homestead through transfer or
succession is not consistent with the
HHLRA and HHCA and would require
Congressional action.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
32. Will the rule assist in meeting the
Congressional deadlines for the review
of State- proposed amendments to the
HHCA and HHC Chairman-proposed
land exchanges involving Hawaiian
home lands?
Response: In order to provide a
rational basis for decisions regarding
land exchanges involving Hawaiian
home lands and proposed amendments
to the HHCA, the Secretary requires
sufficient information on which to base
those decisions. This rule details what
information the Department requires to
make an informed decision. The
intention of the rule is to reduce the
amount of time the Department takes to
make an informed decision by providing
clarity on the information necessary
from the State about proposed land
exchanges involving Hawaiian home
lands or proposed amendments to the
HHCA.
33. Should the purpose of the rule
regarding land exchange procedures be
for the benefit of the beneficiaries of the
HHCA?
Response: While each part in the rule
has a specific purpose, the overall
purpose of the Secretary’s oversight of
the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust is to
advance the interests of the beneficiaries
of the HHCA in accordance with section
206(b) of the HHLRA. Advancement of
these interests in both parts 47 and 48
must be specific to the interests of the
beneficiaries, not others, and
documented. For the purposes of an
HHCA review, the interests of parties
other than the beneficiaries are not
relevant to the Secretary’s decision
making process; rather, the Secretary’s
approval is contingent upon a
determination that the proposal does
not decrease benefits to the
beneficiaries. In response to comment,
§ 48.25 was modified to require that the
Secretary consider the goals and
purposes of the Trust when determining
whether a proposed amendment to the
HHCA decreases the benefits to the
HHCA beneficiaries.
It is important to note that there are
other factors the Secretary must find to
approve a proposed land exchange in
addition to finding that the proposed
exchange advances the interest of the
beneficiaries. See, HHCA Section
204(a)(3) and final rule § 47.35 requiring
the Department to ensure the market
value of the property coming into the
Trust is equal or greater than the
property departing the Trust. Similarly,
a finding that a proposed amendment to
the HHCA advances the interests of the
beneficiaries does not obviate the need
for Congressional approval. See,
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Admission Act Section 4 (detailing
circumstances in which Congress
reserved its own authority over the
Trust). Consideration of whether a land
exchange advances the interests of the
beneficiaries or a proposed amendment
decreases the benefits to beneficiaries
are separate steps in the Secretary’s
review processes in both parts 47 and
48.
34. Should the rule require public input
or a public vote when determining if a
State-proposed amendment to the
HHCA or HHC Chairman-proposed land
exchange involving Hawaiian home
lands is reviewed by the Secretary?
Response: When reviewing land
exchanges involving Hawaiian home
lands proposed by the Chairman of the
HHC or State-proposed amendments to
the HHCA, the Secretary will consider
all information provided by the State,
including any public input it received.
For purposes of land exchanges, it is the
Chairman’s decision as to whether to
include public input, including any vote
results from the public, in a land
exchange proposal submitted to the
Secretary. Section 47.60 sets forth the
documentation that the Chairman must
submit to the Secretary in a land
exchange packet, which, in response to
this comment, now includes the
recorded vote of the Commissioners.
The rule requires in § 48.15 that the
final vote totals for votes taken by the
HHC and the State of Hawai1i
Legislature on a proposed HHCA
amendment be forwarded to the
Secretary when it is submitted for
review. These vote totals help to
provide the Secretary with a full picture
of the State’s position on a proposed
amendment and whether that
amendment decreases the benefits to the
beneficiaries. This requirement is
retained in the final rule.
35. Should the rule require that the HHC
Chairman engage in consultation with
the beneficiaries before any land
exchange involving Hawaiian home
lands is approved or the Secretary
makes a final determination regarding a
proposed amendment to the HHCA?
Response: The HHCA, Admission Act,
and the HHLRA define the three parties
involved in reviewing land exchanges
involving Hawaiian home lands and
proposed amendments to the HHCA.
These parties are the State of Hawai1i
(represented by the DHHL and HHC),
the HHCA beneficiary community, and
the Federal Government (represented by
the Secretary of the Interior). The
beneficiary community obtains much of
this voice through consultation with
either the State or the Department.
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Thus, while the HHC Chairman is not
required to engage in consultation with
the beneficiary community, without it
the Department may not have sufficient
information to evaluate whether a
Chairman-proposed land exchange or a
State-proposed amendment advances
the interests of the HHCA beneficiaries.
36. Should the rule provide a definition
of a homestead association?
Response: The Department agrees that
the rule should provide a definition of
a homestead association to provide
clarity to the definition in the HHCA.
The Secretary added a definition of
homestead association in § 48.6 of this
rule based on the language provided in
sections 204(a)(2), 213, and 214(a) of the
HHCA. This definition is also based on
the definition of a Native Hawaiian
organization listed in the National
Historic Preservation Act and Native
American Graves Protection and
Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). The
Secretary will maintain a list of the
homestead associations that meet this
definition and file a statement, signed
by the association’s governing body, of
governing procedures and a description
of the territory it represents.
37. Should the purpose of consultation
be only to engage in good faith efforts
to educate the beneficiaries, discuss and
solicit their comments, and not to seek
agreement?
Response: As the National Historic
Preservation Act provides Federal
agencies with guidance on how to work
with the Native Hawaiian community,
the Department chose to use the Act’s
definition of consultation for working
with the Native Hawaiian beneficiary
community. The National Historic
Preservation Act defines consultation as
the process of seeking, discussing, and
considering the views of other
participants, and, where feasible,
seeking agreement.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
38. Do the rules already in place that
deal with the treatment of land
exchanges involving indigenous lands
held in trust for Federally recognized
tribes with whom the United States has
a formal government-to-government
relationship provide sufficient guidance
to the Secretary when reviewing land
exchanges involving Hawaiian home
lands?
Response: No. The rules related to
exchanges to lands held in trust are
located in 25 CFR part 151 that do not
apply to Hawaiian home lands.
Congress enacted the HHCA and
HHLRA to govern land exchanges
involving Hawaiian home lands.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
39. Is the rule necessary to provide
HHCA beneficiaries with options to
hold the DHHL and the State
accountable when proposing land
exchanges involving Hawaiian home
lands and amendments to the HHCA?
Issue: A commenter questions the
need for parts 47 and 48 and states
‘‘Beneficiaries have held DHHL as well
as the State accountable through the
judicial process, both federal and state;
special legislative hearings; legislative
audits; and media reports (including
traditional print and TV media as well
as social and internet based media
resources). Statutorily, beneficiaries can
pursue action for breaches of trust under
Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 673
(Native Hawaiian Trusts Judicial Relief
Act; aka Right to Sue).’’
Response: Parts 47 and 48 seek to
provide clarity and transparency in the
Federal administration of the Hawaiian
Home Lands Trust statutes. By
providing this clarity, the Secretary can
better implement section 206(b) of the
HHLRA that requires the Secretary to
administer these statutes in a way that
advances the interests of the
beneficiaries. This rule also seeks to
provide transparency about what
information is necessary to make
decisions regarding HHC Chairmanproposed land exchanges involving
Hawaiian home lands and Stateproposed amendments to the HHCA.
Such transparency should increase
confidence of the beneficiary
community in the decisions of the
Secretary and State, thus minimizing
any risk and need for litigation.
The rule incorporates consultation
with the HHCA beneficiaries and
consideration of the interests of the
HHCA beneficiaries as provided by
Congress in the HHLRA during the
proposal and review processes. Such
provisions address HHCA beneficiary
concerns that they are often the last to
be informed about proposed actions
affecting their interests and are often
informed after-the-fact when decisions
have already been made. Such
consultation should result in betterinformed decision-making and lessen
the need of beneficiaries to seek
recourse after decisions have already
been made.
40. Does the rule expand the Secretary’s
authority beyond the HHLRA?
Response: No. The rule simply
provides uniform processes for
implementing the authorities and
responsibilities Congress granted the
Secretary in the HHCA and HHLRA,
consistent with the standards and
requirements established by Congress in
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29785
these and other applicable Federal laws,
including those listed in § 47.15. It is
important to note that Congress did not
exempt the Secretary’s actions under the
HHLRA from other applicable Federal
laws, such as Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act that
directly apply to Hawaiian home lands.
The information delineated in this
rule provides clarity in the Department’s
decisions regarding land exchanges
involving Hawaiian home lands and
amendments to the HHCA proposed by
the State. While the Secretary will give
weight to the State in its findings and
analysis, the rule seeks to make certain
the information gathered is substantive
and reasonably verifiable in order to
ensure the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust
statutes are administered in a way that
advances the interests of the
beneficiaries as required by section 206
of the HHLRA.
41. Should the rule provide for recourse
if the Secretary fails to follow the rule
or act within specific timeframes?
Response: No. Congress provides for
uniform and consistent systems of
recourse and judicial review through
other statutes, such as the
Administrative Procedure Act, and has
not provided any other specific recourse
with regard to the Secretary’s
responsibilities under the HHCA or
HHLRA.
42. Should the rule provide for
automatic approval of a HHC Chairmanproposed land exchange or Stateproposed amendments to the HHCA if
the Secretary fails to follow the rule or
act within specific timeframes?
Response: Automatic approval of
HHC Chairman proposed land
exchanges or State-proposed
amendments to the HHCA is
inconsistent with sections 204 and 205
of the HHLRA, section 4 of the
Admission Act, and potentially section
206 of the HHLRA, which requires that
these Hawaiian Home Lands Trust
statutes be administered to advance the
interests of the beneficiaries. Moreover,
such automatic approvals would
deprive the beneficiary community of
the reasoned analysis and considered
judgment of the Department in its
exercise of these statutory
responsibilities.
43. Should part 47 include a fast-track
process for approval of land exchanges
involving emergency situations, smaller
acreages, less intense uses, or already
developed land where the use will
remain the same?
By following the provisions of
sections 47.50–47.60, the HHC
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
29786
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Chairman and DHHL can dramatically
reduce the amount of time necessary to
complete a land exchange and increase
the likelihood the exchange will be
acted on by the Secretary without the
delay necessitated by requests for
additional information. In cases where a
proposed land exchange is between the
DHHL and another agency of the State
or a Federal agency, where no change in
land use is planned, a categorical
exclusion under NEPA may be
applicable as listed under Chapter 7.5 of
the Department of the Interior
Departmental Manual, which reduces
the time required in preparation and
review.
If the HHC Chairman chooses not to
seek the assistance of the Secretary in
developing an exchange proposal, the
HHC Chairman may merely submit the
documentation listed in § 47.60. In
accordance with section 205 of the
HHLRA, the Secretary will approve or
disapprove the proposed exchange not
later than 120 days after receiving the
information required in § 47.60.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
44. Does an assessment of beneficiary
interests by the Secretary undermine the
State’s subject matter expertise and
usurp the executive power of the HHC
by re-evaluating the Commission’s
determination?
Response: No. While the Hawaiian
Home Lands Trust statutes provide the
State and its subdivisions, including the
HHC and its Chairman, certain
responsibilities, nowhere do they
relieve the Secretary of the requirement
in section 206(b) of the HHLRA to
administer the Hawaiian Home Lands
Trust statutes in a way that advances the
interests of the beneficiaries. For proper
care of the Trust to take place, all three
parties, the State, the Secretary, and the
beneficiary community, must work
together and fulfill their respective
duties assigned by Congress. It is
because the Federal government has an
independent interest in implementing
the Trust and because Congress
understood that the State and its
subdivisions might have interests that
conflict with the interests of the
beneficiaries, that Congress required
Secretarial approval or disapproval of
the HHC Chairman-proposed land
exchange or State proposed amendment
to the HHCA in section 205 of the
HHLRA and section 204 of the HHCA.
In addition, the Secretary has an interest
in enforcing Federal law within her
responsibility.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
45. Does the language ‘‘benefits to the
parties of the proposed exchange’’ in
section 205(a)(3) of the HHLRA require
the Secretary to look at the benefits to
the DHHL because the parties to an
exchange will always be DHHL and
another?
Response: No. Such language requires
the Secretary to look at the benefits to
the beneficiaries of the Hawaiian Home
Lands Trust. This provision must be
read to be consistent with section 206,
which requires the Secretary to advance
the interests of the beneficiaries. Such a
reading is also consistent with the
purposes of the HHCA. The Hawaiian
Home Lands Trust was established for
the benefit of the HHCA beneficiaries.
Section 206(b)(1) of the HHLRA
specifically directs the Department to
‘‘(1) advance the interests of the
beneficiaries.’’ To read the language in
section 205(a)(1) as suggested by the
commenter, gives no weight to this
provision of section 206 and ignores the
responsibilities of the State to the
beneficiaries. In response to this
comment, the language in § 47.30(a) was
edited to remove the reference of
‘‘administration.’’
46. Does the rule limit the amount of
consultation that the HHC Chairman or
the Secretary may engage in with
beneficiaries when reviewing Chairmanproposed land exchanges involving
Hawaiian home lands or State-proposed
amendments to the HHCA?
Response: The definition of
consultation provided in both parts 47
and 48 outline the minimum
requirements for consultation. If the
HHC Chairman chooses to engage in
additional consultation efforts or
decides to require a higher standard,
such as holding face-to-face
consultation with beneficiaries on all
proposed land exchanges and
amendments to the HHCA, the
Department supports such efforts as
beneficial to the beneficiaries, the
Chairman, and the Secretary.
47. If the factors from § 47.20 refer to the
non-Hawaiian home lands that would
be received, how are the benefits in
retaining Hawaiian home lands
determined in order to apply the
balancing test in § 47.30(b)?
Response: The factors listed in § 47.20
are utilized by the Secretary to review
both the non-Hawaiian home lands
proposed to be received into the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust and the
Hawaiian home lands the HHC
Chairman proposes to remove from the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. Section
47.30(b) provides explicit instruction on
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
how the § 47.20 factors are to be
weighed.
48. The Factors Listed in § 47.30(a) and
(c) Are Ambiguous
Response: The language in § 47.30(a)
is not ambiguous. It requires the
exercise of judgment when reviewing
land exchanges covering a wide range of
circumstances. Section 47.30(a)
emphasizes the need for the Secretary to
consider the long term effects a land
exchange will have on the lands in the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. These
trust lands are being held in order to
advance the interests of the HHCA
beneficiaries. Section 47.30(b) is
intended to ensure that beneficiaries
benefit from every exchange. Section
47.30(c) emphasizes the need for the
Secretary to consider whether a
proposed exchange will significantly
conflict with the beneficiaries’ interests
in adjacent Hawaiian home lands.
49. Is the analysis presented in §§ 47.20
and 47.30 highly discretionary and
provide for circumstances where the
various factors may conflict?
Response: Section 204(a)(3) of the
HHCA and section 205(b) of the HHLRA
make clear that a land exchange is not
valid until it has been approved by the
Secretary, but does not suggest that the
Secretary is required to approve every
proposed land exchange. Indeed,
Congress provided expressly in section
205(b) of the HHLRA that ‘‘the Secretary
shall approve or disapprove the
proposed exchange.’’ The Secretary
must also, at a minimum, be satisfied
that the purposes of the Hawaiian Home
Land Trust statutes are met. Each of
these factors requires the exercise of
judgment. Thus, the discharge of the
responsibility placed on the Secretary is
not ministerial. Nor is it ‘‘discretionary’’
as the factors to be considered are
enumerated. There is, nonetheless, some
subjectivity in the evaluation. Sections
47.20 and 47.30 provide factors to
clarify the weighing process the
Secretary must engage in when
determining if a land exchange
advances the interests of the
beneficiaries. The factors in § 47.20,
however, are not exhaustive.
It is possible certain proposed
exchanges will present situations where
certain factors listed in § 47.20 may
conflict with each other. In those
circumstances the Department will be
required to exercise expertise and
judgment within these limits in
weighing the factors in order to
determine whether a proposed land
exchange advances the interests of the
beneficiaries. If the factors listed in
§ 47.20 conflict with § 47.30 (a) and (c),
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
however, the Secretary will be required
to disapprove the proposed land
exchange.
III. Summary of Impacts
1. Regulatory Planning and Review
(Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order 12866 provides that
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs will review all significant rules.
The Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs determined that this
rule is not significant.
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the
principles of E.O. 12866 while calling
for improvements in the nation’s
regulatory system to promote
predictability, to reduce uncertainty,
and to use the best, most innovative,
and least burdensome tools for
achieving regulatory ends. The
executive order directs agencies to
consider regulatory approaches that
reduce burdens and maintain flexibility
and freedom of choice for the public
where these approaches are relevant,
feasible, and consistent with regulatory
objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes
further that rules must be based on the
best available science and that the
rulemaking process must allow for
public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. This final rule is
consistent with these requirements.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
2. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Department of the Interior
certifies that this final rule will not have
a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) as the final rule
merely describes agency procedures and
practices when reviewing HHC
Chairman-proposed land exchanges
involving Hawaiian home lands and
State-proposed amendments to the
HHCA. These procedures and practices
are not agency activities that will have
a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities.
This rule neither imposes burdens on
small entities nor requires actions by
them. As such, the Regulatory
Flexibility Act does not apply.
3. Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)
This is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C.
804(2), the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act. This final
rule:
(a) Does not have an annual effect on
the economy of $100 million or more.
(b) Will not cause a major increase in
costs or prices for consumers,
individual industries, Federal, State, or
local government agencies, or
geographic regions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
(c) Does not have significant adverse
effects on competition, employment,
investment, productivity, innovation, or
the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to
compete with foreign-based enterprises.
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This final rule does not impose an
unfunded mandate on State, local, or
tribal governments or the private sector
of more than $100 million per year. The
final rule does not have a significant or
unique effect on State, local or tribal
governments or the private sector. A
statement containing the information
required by the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not
required.
5. Takings (E.O. 12630)
This rule does not affect a taking of
private property or otherwise have
taking implications under Executive
Order 12630 as the taking of private
property is not a subject covered or even
contemplated under this rule. A takings
implication assessment is not required.
6. Federalism (E.O. 13132)
In accordance with Executive Order
13132, the final rule does not have
sufficient federalism implications to
warrant the preparation of a federalism
summary impact statement. Based on
research and the deliberations outlined
in the response to questions number 8,
the final rule does not substantially and
directly affect the relationship between
the Federal and state governments. The
Secretary of the Department of the
Interior has oversight to ensure that land
under the HHCA is administered in a
manner that advances the interests of
the beneficiaries. A federalism
assessment is not required.
7. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
This rule complies with the
requirements of Executive Order 12988.
Specifically, this rule:
(a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a)
requiring that all rules be reviewed to
eliminate errors and ambiguity and be
written to minimize litigation; and
(b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2)
requiring that all rules be written in
clear language and contain clear legal
standards.
8. Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O.
13175)
The Department of the Interior strives
to strengthen its government-togovernment relationship with Indian
tribes through a commitment to
consultation with Indian tribes and
recognition of their right to selfgovernance and tribal sovereignty. We
evaluated this rule under the Secretary’s
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29787
consultation policy and under the
criteria in Executive Order 13175 and
determined that it has no substantial
direct effects on federally recognized
Indian tribes and that consultation
under the Secretary’s tribal consultation
policy is not required.
9. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain
information collection requirements
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act
and therefore a submission to the Office
of Management and Budget under the
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.) is not required. We may
not conduct or sponsor, and you are not
required to respond to a collection of
information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
10. National Environmental Policy Act
This final rule does not constitute a
major Federal action significantly
affecting the quality of the human
environment. A detailed statement
under the National Environmental
Policy Act, 1969 (NEPA) is not required.
Under Departmental Manual 516 DM
2.3A(2), Section 1.10 of 516 DM 2,
Appendix 1 excludes from
documentation in an environmental
assessment or impact statement
‘‘policies, directives, regulations and
guidelines of an administrative,
financial, legal, technical or procedural
nature; or the environmental effects of
which are too broad, speculative or
conjectural to lend themselves to
meaningful analysis and will be subject
later to the NEPA process, either
collectively or case-by-case.’’ We have
also determined that the rule does not
involve any of the extraordinary
circumstances listed in 43 CFR 46.215
that would require further analysis
under NEPA.
11. Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O.
13211)
This final rule is not a significant
energy action under the definition in
Executive Order 13211. A Statement of
Energy Effects is not required.
12. Clarity of This Regulation
The Secretary is required by
Executive Orders 12866 (section
1(b)(12)), 12988 (section 3(b)(1)(B)), and
13563 (section 1(a)), and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This rule meets the
requirements that each rule the
Secretary publishes must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
29788
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(c) Use clear language rather than
jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
List of Subjects in 43 CFR Parts 47 and
48
Hawaii, Intergovernmental Programs,
Land, State-Federal Relations.
Kristen J. Sarri,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Policy, Management and Budget.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Department of the Interior
amends title 43 of the Code of Federal
Regulations by adding new parts 47 and
48 as set forth below:
PART 47—LAND EXCHANGE
PROCEDURES
Sec.
47.5 What is the purpose of this part?
47.10 What definitions apply to terms used
in this part?
47.15 What laws apply to exchanges made
under this part?
Subpart A—The Exchange Process
47.20 What factors will the Secretary
consider in analyzing a land exchange?
47.30 When does a land exchange advance
the interests of the beneficiaries?
47.35 Must lands exchanged be of equal
value?
47.40 How must properties be described?
47.45 How does the exchange process
work?
47.50 What should the Chairman include in
a land exchange proposal for the
Secretary?
47.55 What are the minimum requirements
for appraisals used in a land exchange?
47.60 What documentation must the
Chairman submit to the Secretary in the
land exchange packet?
Subpart B—Approval and Finalization
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
47.65 When will the Secretary approve or
disapprove the land exchange?
47.70 How does the Chairman complete the
exchange?
Authority: State of Hawai1i Admission
Act, 73 Stat. 4, approved March 18, 1959;
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, as
amended, Act of July 9, 1921, 42 Stat. 108;
Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act, 1995,
109 Stat. 537, 5 U.S.C. 301; 25 U.S.C. 2 and
9; 43 U.S.C. 1457; 112 Departmental Manual
28.
§ 47.5
What is the purpose of this part?
This part sets forth the procedures for
conducting land exchanges of Hawaiian
home lands authorized by the Hawaiian
Homes Commission Act, 1920 (HHCA).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 47.10 What definitions apply to terms
used in this part?
As used in this part, the following
terms have the meanings given in this
section.
Appraisal or Appraisal report means
a written statement independently and
impartially prepared by a qualified
appraiser setting forth an opinion as to
the market value of the lands or
interests in lands to be exchanged as of
a specific date(s), supported by the
presentation and analysis of relevant
market information.
Beneficiary or beneficiaries means
‘‘native Hawaiian(s)’’ as that term is
defined under section 201(a) of the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.
Chairman means the Chairman of the
Hawaiian Homes Commission
designated under section 202 of the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.
Commission means the Hawaiian
Homes Commission established by
section 202 of the Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act, which serves as the
executive board of the Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands.
Consultation or consult means
representatives of the government
engaging in an open discussion process
that allows interested parties to address
potential issues, changes, or actions.
Consultation does not necessarily
require formal face-to-face meetings.
The complexity of the matter along with
the potential effects that the matter may
have on the Trust or beneficiaries will
dictate the appropriate process for
consultation. Consultation requires
dialogue (oral, electronic, or printed) or
a good faith, dialogue or documented
effort to engage with the beneficiaries,
consideration of their views, and, where
feasible, seek agreement with the
beneficiaries when engaged in the land
exchange process.
DHHL or Department of Hawaiian
Home Lands means the department
established by the State of Hawai1i
under sections 26–4 and 26–17 of the
Hawai1i Revised Statutes to exercise the
authorities and responsibilities of the
Hawaiian Homes Commission under the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust means
all trust lands given the status of
Hawaiian home lands under section 204
of the Hawaiian Homes Commission
Act, and those lands obtained through
approval under this part, and as
directed by Congress.
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust Funds
means the funds established in the
HHCA section 213.
Hazardous substances means those
substances designated under
Environmental Protection Agency
regulations at 40 CFR part 302.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
HHCA or Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act means the Hawaiian
Homes Commission Act, 1920, 42 Stat.
108, as amended.
HHCA Beneficiary Association means
an organization controlled by
beneficiaries who submitted
applications to the DHHL for
homesteads and are awaiting the
assignment of a homestead; represents
and serves the interests of those
beneficiaries; has as a stated primary
purpose the representation of, and
provision of services to, those
beneficiaries; and filed with the
Secretary a statement, signed by the
governing body, of governing
procedures and a description of the
beneficiaries it represents.
HHLRA or Hawaiian Home Lands
Recovery Act means the Hawaiian Home
Lands Recovery Act, 1995, 109 Stat.
357.
Homestead Association means a
beneficiary controlled organization that
represents and serves the interests of its
homestead community; has as a stated
primary purpose the representation of,
and provision of services to, its
homestead community; and filed with
the Secretary a statement, signed by the
governing body, of governing
procedures and a description of the
territory it represents.
Land exchange is any transaction,
other than a sale, that transfers
Hawaiian home lands from the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust to another
entity and in which the Hawaiian Home
Lands Trust receives the entity’s land as
Hawaiian home lands. A land exchange
can involve trading Hawaiian home
lands for private land, but it can also
involve trading land between the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust and State
or Federal agencies.
Market value means the most
probable price in cash, or terms
equivalent to cash, that lands or
interests in lands should bring in a
competitive and open market under all
conditions requisite to a fair sale, where
the buyer and seller each acts prudently
and knowledgeably, and the price is not
affected by undue influence.
Native Hawaiian or native Hawaiian
has the same meaning as that term
defined under section 201(a) of the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.
Office of Valuation Services (OVS)
means the Office with real estate
appraisal functions within the Office of
the Assistant Secretary—Policy,
Management, and Budget of the
Department of the Interior.
Outstanding interests means rights or
interests in property involved in a land
exchange held by an entity other than a
party to the exchange.
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
29789
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
§ 47.15 What laws apply to exchanges
made under this part?
Secretary means the Secretary of the
Interior or the individual to whom the
authority and responsibilities of the
Secretary have been delegated.
Trust means the Hawaiian Home
Lands Trust and the Hawaiian Home
Lands Trust Funds.
regulations constitute a partial list of
applicable laws and regulations:
(a) The Chairman may only exchange
land under the authority of the HHCA
in conformity with the HHLRA.
(b) When the Chairman makes any
land exchange, the following laws and
Legislation or regulation
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
Citation
The National Historic Preservation Act, 1966 ...........................................................................................................
Implementing regulations for the National Historic Preservation Act .......................................................................
Section 3 of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) ..........................................
Implementing regulations for the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act ..................................
The National Environmental Policy Act, 1969 (NEPA) .............................................................................................
Implementing regulations for NEPA ..........................................................................................................................
(7) The State of Hawai1i Admission Act .........................................................................................................................
(8) Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, as amended ...........................................................................................
(9) Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act, 1995 .............................................................................................................
(10) Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) ......................................
(11) Implementing regulations for CERCLA ...................................................................................................................
No new legal rights or obligations are
created through listing applicable laws
and regulatory provisions in this
section.
Subpart A—The Exchange Process
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 47.20 What factors will the Secretary
consider in analyzing a land exchange?
The Secretary may approve an
exchange only after making a
determination that the exchange will
advance the interests of the
beneficiaries. In considering whether a
land exchange will advance the interests
of the beneficiaries, the Secretary will
evaluate the extent to which it will:
(a) Achieve better management of
Hawaiian home lands;
(b) Meet the needs of HHCA
beneficiaries and their economic
circumstances by promoting:
(1) Homesteading opportunities,
(2) economic self-sufficiency, and,
(3) social well-being;
(c) Promote development of Hawaiian
home lands for residential, agricultural,
and pastoral use;
(d) Protect cultural resources and
watersheds;
(e) Consolidate lands or interests in
lands, such as agricultural and timber
interests, for more logical and efficient
management and development;
(f) Expand homestead communities;
(g) Accommodate land use
authorizations;
(h) Address HHCA beneficiary needs;
and
(i) Advance other identifiable
interests of the beneficiaries consistent
with the HHCA.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 47.30 When does a land exchange
advance the interests of the beneficiaries?
A determination that an exchange
advances the interests of the
beneficiaries must find that:
(a) The exchange supports
perpetuation of the Hawaiian Home
Lands Trust;
(b) The interests of the beneficiaries in
obtaining non-Hawaiian home lands
exceeds the interests of the beneficiaries
in retaining the Hawaiian home lands
proposed for the exchange, based on an
evaluation of the factors in § 47.20; and
(c) The intended use of the conveyed
Hawaiian home lands will not
significantly conflict with the
beneficiaries’ interests in adjacent
Hawaiian home lands.
§ 47.35
value?
Must lands exchanged be of equal
Hawaiian home lands to be exchanged
must be of equal or lesser value than the
lands to be received in the exchange, as
determined by the appraisal. Once the
market value is established by an
approved appraisal, an administrative
determination as to the equity of the
exchange can be made based on the
market value reflected in the approved
appraisal.
§ 47.40 How must properties be
described?
The description of properties
involved in a land exchange must be
either:
(a) Based upon a survey completed in
accordance with the Public Land Survey
System laws and standards of the
United States; or
(b) If Public Land Survey System laws
and standards cannot be applied, based
upon a survey that both:
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.
36 CFR part 800.
25 U.S.C. 3002.
43 CFR part 10.
42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.
40 CFR parts 1500–1508;
43 CFR part 46.
73 Stat. 4.
42 Stat. 108.
109 Stat. 537.
42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.
40 CFR part 312.
(1) Uses other means prescribed or
allowed by applicable law; and
(2) Clearly describes the property and
allows it to be easily located.
§ 47.45
work?
How does the exchange process
(a) The Secretary recommends the
parties prepare a land exchange
proposal in accordance with § 47.50.
The Secretary also recommends the
Chairman and the non-Chairman party
in the exchange meet with the Secretary
before finalizing a land exchange
proposal and signing an agreement to
initiate the land exchange to informally
discuss:
(1) The review and processing
procedures for Hawaiian home lands
exchanges;
(2) Potential issues involved that may
require more consideration; or
(3) Any other matter that may make
the proposal more complete before
submission.
(b) Whether or not a land exchange
proposal is completed, the Chairman
initiates the exchange by preparing the
documentation, conducting appropriate
studies, and submitting them to the
Secretary in accordance with § 47.60.
(c) Upon completing the review of the
final land exchange packet under
§ 47.60, the Secretary will issue a Notice
of Decision announcing the approval or
disapproval of the exchange.
(d) If the Secretary approves an
exchange, title will transfer in
accordance with State law.
§ 47.50 What should the Chairman include
in a land exchange proposal for the
Secretary?
(a) A land exchange proposal should
include the following documentation:
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
29790
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
The proposal should include . . .
that should contain . . .
(1) Identifying information ............
(i) The identity of the parties involved in the proposed exchange; and
(ii) The status of their ownership of the properties in the exchange, or their ability to provide title to the properties.
A legal description of:
(i) The land considered for the exchange; and
(ii) The appurtenant rights proposed to be exchanged or reserved.
(i) Any authorized uses including grants, permits, easements, or leases; and
(ii) Any known unauthorized uses, outstanding interests, exceptions, adverse claims, covenants, restrictions,
title defects or encumbrances.
Expected dates of significant transactions or milestones.
(2) Descriptive information ..........
(3) Authorized use information ....
(4) A time schedule for completing the exchange.
(5) Assignment of responsibilities
(6) Hazardous substance information.
(7) Grants of permission by each
party to the other.
(8) Three statements ...................
Responsibilities for:
(i) Performance of required actions; and
(ii) Costs associated with the proposed exchange.
Notice of:
(i) Any known release, storage, or disposal of hazardous substances on non-Hawaiian Home Land Trust
properties in the exchange;
(ii) Any commitments regarding responsibility for removal or remedial actions concerning hazardous substances on non-Hawaiian Home Land Trust properties; and
(iii) All terms and conditions regarding hazardous substances on non-Hawaiian Home Land Trust properties.
Permission to enter the properties for the purpose of conducting physical examination and studies in preparation for the exchange. Written permission to appraise the properties should also be included.
Details of:
(i) Arrangements for relocating tenants, if there are tenants, occupying the Hawaiian Home Land Trust
and non-Hawaiian Home Land Trust properties involved in the exchange;
(ii) How the land exchange proposal complies with the HHCA and HHLRA; and
(iii) How the documents of conveyance will be exchanged once the Secretary has approved the exchange.
(b) When the parties to the exchange
agree to proceed with the land exchange
proposal, they may sign an agreement
that the Chairman will initiate the
exchange.
§ 47.55 What are the minimum
requirements for appraisals used in a land
exchange?
(a) The following table shows the
steps in the appraisal process.
Appraisal process step
Requirements
(1) The parties to the exchange
must arrange for appraisals.
(i) The parties must arrange for appraisals within 90 days after executing the agreement to initiate the land
exchange, unless the parties agree to another schedule.
(ii) The parties must give the appraiser the land exchange proposal, if any, and the agreement to initiate the
land exchange, and any attachments and amendments.
(iii) The Chairman may request assistance from the Office of Valuation Services (OVS). OVS can provide
valuation services to the Chairman, including appraisal, appraisal review, and appraisal advice on a reimbursable basis. OVS is also available for post-facto program review to ensure that appraisals conducted by
the State are in conformance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice and the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions as appropriate.
The appraiser must:
(i) Meet the qualification requirements in paragraph (b) of this section;
(ii) Produce a report that meets the qualifications in paragraph (c) of this section; and
(iii) Complete the appraisal under the timeframe and terms negotiated with the parties in the exchange.
The Secretary will evaluate the reports using:
(i) The Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice; and
(ii) The Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisitions.
(2) The qualified appraiser must
provide an appraisal report.
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
(3) The Secretary will review appraisal reports.
(b) To be qualified to appraise land for
exchange under paragraph (a)(2) of this
section, an appraiser must:
(1) Be competent, reputable,
impartial, and experienced in
appraising property similar to the
properties involved in the appraisal
assignment; and
(2) Be approved by the OVS, if
required by the Department of the
Interior’s Office of Native Hawaiian
Relations.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
(3) Be licensed to perform appraisals
in the State of Hawai1i unless a Federal
employee whose position requires the
performance of appraisal duties. Federal
employees only need to be licensed in
one State or territory to perform real
estate appraisal duties as Federal
employees in all States and territories.
(c) Appraisal reports for the exchange
must:
(1) Be completed in accordance with
the current edition of the Uniform
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Standards of Professional Appraisal
Practice (USPAP) and the Uniform
Appraisal Standards for Federal Land
Acquisition (UASFLA); and
(2) Include the estimated market value
of Hawaiian home lands and nonHawaiian home lands properties
involved in the exchange.
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
29791
§ 47.60 What documentation must the
Chairman submit to the Secretary in the
land exchange packet?
The documents in the exchange
packet submitted to us for approval
must include the following:
The packet must contain . . .
that must include . . .
(a) Required statements ..............
(1) A statement of approval for the exchange from the Commission that includes the recorded vote of the
Commission;
(2) A statement of compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act and, as appropriate, a cultural and
historic property review;
(3) An explanation of how the exchange will advance the interests of the beneficiaries;
(4) A summary of all consultations with beneficiaries, HHCA homestead associations, or HHCA beneficiary
associations; and
(5) A statement of compliance with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.
(1) Environmental analyses and records sufficient to meet CERCLA, NEPA, and all other pertinent Federal
environmental requirements;
(2) Land appraisal reports and statements of qualification of the appraisers in accordance with § 47.55; and
(3) If property conveyed is adjacent to Hawaiian home lands:
(i) An analysis of intended use of the Hawaiian home lands conveyed;
(ii) A finding that the intended use will not conflict with established management objectives on the adjacent
Hawaiian home lands; and
(4) A copy of the land exchange proposal, if any.
(1) Any land exchange agreements entered into regarding the subject properties between Chairman and the
non-Chairman party;
(2) Evidence of title; and
(3) Deeds signed by the parties, with a signature block for the Secretary of the Interior or our authorized representative to approve the transaction.
(b) Required analyses and reports.
(c) Relevant legal documents .....
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 47.65 When will the Secretary approve or
disapprove the land exchange?
On receipt of the complete land
exchange packet from the Commission,
the Secretary will approve or
disapprove the exchange within 120
calendar days.
(a) Before approving or disapproving
the exchange, the Secretary will review
all environmental analyses, appraisals,
and all other supporting studies and
requirements to determine whether the
proposed exchange complies with
applicable law and advances the
interests of the beneficiaries.
(b) The Secretary may consult with
the beneficiaries when making a
determination if a land exchange
advances the interests of the
beneficiaries.
(c) After approving or disapproving an
exchange, the Secretary will notify
DHHL, the Commission, and other
officials as required by section 205(b)(2)
of the HHLRA. The Secretary will post
notice of the determination on the DOI
Web site and give email notice of the
posting to all those on the notification
list maintained by the Office of Native
Hawaiian Relations requesting notice of
actions by the Secretary.
§ 47.70 How does the Chairman complete
the exchange once approved?
(a) The Chairman completes the
exchange in accordance with the
requirements of State law.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
(b) The Chairman shall provide a title
report to the Secretary as evidence of
the completed exchange.
301; 25 U.S.C. 2 and 9; 43 U.S.C. 1457; 112
Departmental Manual 28.
PART 48—AMENDMENTS TO THE
HAWAIIAN HOMES COMMISSION ACT
(a) This part sets forth the policies
and procedures for:
(1) Review by the Secretary of
amendments to the Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act proposed by the State
of Hawai1i; and
(2) Determination by the Secretary
whether the proposed amendment
requires congressional approval.
(b) This part implements
requirements of the Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act, the State of Hawai1i
Admission Act, 1959, and the Hawaiian
Home Lands Recovery Act, 1995.
Sec.
48.5
48.6
What is the purpose of this part?
What definitions apply to terms used
in this part?
48.10 What is the Secretary’s role in
reviewing proposed amendments to the
HHCA?
48.15 What are the Chairman’s
responsibilities in submitting proposed
amendments to the Secretary?
48.20 How does the Secretary determine if
the State is seeking to amend Federal
law?
48.25 How does the Secretary determine if
the proposed amendment decreases the
benefits to beneficiaries of Hawaiian
home lands?
48.30 How does the Secretary determine if
Congressional approval is unnecessary?
48.35 When must the Secretary determine if
the proposed amendment requires
Congressional approval?
48.40 What notification will the Secretary
provide?
48.45 When is a proposed amendment
deemed effective?
48.50 Can the State of Hawai1i amend the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act
without Secretarial review?
Authority: State of Hawai1i Admission Act,
73 Stat. 4, approved March 18, 1959;
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, 42
Stat. 108 et seq., Hawaiian Home Lands
Recovery Act, 1995, 109 Stat. 537; 5 U.S.C.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
§ 48.5
What is the purpose of this part?
§ 48.6 What definitions apply to terms
used in this part?
As used in this part, the following
terms have the meanings given in this
section.
Beneficiary or beneficiaries means
‘‘native Hawaiian(s)’’ as that term is
defined under section 201(a) of the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.
Chairman means the Chairman of the
Hawaiian Homes Commission
designated under section 202 of the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.
Commission means the Hawaiian
Homes Commission, established by
section 202 of the Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act, which serves as the
executive board of the Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands.
Consultation or consult means
representatives of the government
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
29792
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
engaging in an open discussion process
that allows interested parties to address
potential issues, changes, or actions.
Consultation does not necessarily
require formal face-to-face meetings.
The complexity of the matter along with
the potential effects that the matter may
have on the Trust or beneficiaries will
dictate the appropriate process for
consultation. Consultation requires
dialogue (oral, electronic, or printed) or
a good faith, dialogue or documented
effort to engage with the beneficiaries,
consideration of their views, and, where
feasible, seek agreement with the
beneficiaries when engaged in the land
exchange process.
DHHL or Department of Hawaiian
Home Lands means the department
established by the State of Hawai1i
under sections 26–4 and 26–17 of the
Hawai1i Revised Statutes to exercise the
authorities and responsibilities of the
Hawaiian Homes Commission under the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust means
all trust lands given the status of
Hawaiian home lands under section 204
of the Hawaiian Homes Commission
Act, and those lands obtained through
approval under part 47, and as directed
by Congress.
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust Funds
means the funds established in the
HHCA section 213.
HHCA or Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act means the Hawaiian
Homes Commission Act, 1920, 42 Stat.
108 et seq., as amended.
HHCA Beneficiary Association means
an organization controlled by
beneficiaries who submitted
applications to the DHHL for
homesteads and are awaiting the
assignment of a homestead; represents
and serves the interests of those
beneficiaries; has as a stated primary
purpose the representation of, and
provision of services to, those
beneficiaries; and filed with the
Secretary a statement, signed by the
governing body, of governing
procedures and a description of the
beneficiaries it represents.
HHLRA or Hawaiian Home Lands
Recovery Act means the Hawaiian Home
Lands Recovery Act, 1995, 109 Stat.
537.
Lessee means either a:
(1) Beneficiary who has been awarded
a lease under section 207(a) of the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act;
(2) Person to whom land has been
transferred under section 208(5) of the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act; or
(3) Successor lessee under section 209
of the Hawaiian Homes Commission
Act.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
Homestead Association means a
beneficiary controlled organization that
represents and serves the interests of its
homestead community; has as a stated
primary purpose the representation of,
and provision of services to, its
homestead community; and filed with
the Secretary a statement, signed by the
governing body, of governing
procedures and a description of the
territory it represents.
Secretary means the Secretary of the
Interior or the individual to whom the
authority and responsibilities of the
Secretary have been delegated.
Trust means the Hawaiian Home
Lands Trust and the Hawaiian Home
Lands Trust Funds.
§ 48.10 What is the Secretary’s role in
reviewing proposed amendments to the
HHCA?
(a) The Secretary must review
proposed amendments to the Hawaiian
Homes Commission Act (HHCA) by the
State of Hawai1i to determine whether
the proposed amendment requires
approval of Congress.
(b) The Secretary will notify the
Chairman and Congress of this
determination, and if approval is
required, submit to Congress the
documents required by § 48.35(b).
§ 48.15 What are the Chairman’s
responsibilities in submitting proposed
amendments to the Secretary?
(a) Not later than 120 days after the
State approves a proposed amendment
to the HHCA, the Chairman must submit
to the Secretary a clear and complete:
(1) Copy of the proposed amendment;
(2) Description of the nature of the
change proposed by the proposed
amendment; and,
(3) Opinion explaining whether the
proposed amendment requires the
approval of Congress.
(b) The following information must
also be submitted:
(1) A description of the proposed
amendment, including how the
proposed amendment advances the
interests of the beneficiaries;
(2) All testimony and correspondence
from the Director of the Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands, Hawaiian
Homes Commissioners, Homestead
Associations, HHCA Beneficiary
Associations, and beneficiaries
providing views on the proposed
amendment;
(3) An analysis of the law and policy
of the proposed amendment by the
Department of Hawaiian Home Lands
and the Hawaiian Homes Commission;
(4) Documentation of the dates and
number of hearings held on the
measure, and a copy of all testimony
provided or submitted at each hearing;
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(5) Copies of all committee reports
and other legislative history, including
prior versions of the proposed
amendment;
(6) Final vote totals by the
Commission and the legislature on the
proposed amendment;
(7) Summaries of all consultations
conducted with the beneficiaries
regarding the proposed amendment; and
(8) Other additional information that
the State believes may assist in the
review of the proposed amendment.
§ 48.20 How does the Secretary determine
if the State is seeking to amend Federal
law?
(a) The Secretary will determine that
Congressional approval is required if the
proposed amendment, or any other
legislative action that directly or
indirectly has the effect of:
(1) Decreasing the benefits to the
beneficiaries of the Trust;
(2) Reducing or impairing the
Hawaiian Home Land Trust Funds;
(3) Allowing for additional
encumbrances to be placed on Hawaiian
home lands by officers other than those
charged with the administration of the
HHCA;
(4) Changing the qualifications of who
may be a lessee;
(5) Allowing the use of proceeds and
income from the Hawaiian home lands
for purposes other than carrying out the
provisions of the HHCA; or
(6) Amending a section other than
sections 202, 213, 219, 220, 222, 224, or
225, or other provisions relating to
administration, or paragraph (2) of
section 204, section 206, or 212 or other
provisions relating to the powers and
duties of officers other than those
charged with the administration of the
HHCA.
(b) The Secretary may consult with
the beneficiaries when making a
determination.
§ 48.25 How does the Secretary determine
if the proposed amendment decreases the
benefits to beneficiaries of Hawaiian home
lands?
(a) In determining benefits to the
beneficiaries, the Secretary will
consider the goals and purposes of the
Trust, including, but not limited to, the
following:
(1) The provision of homesteads to
beneficiaries;
(2) The rehabilitation of beneficiaries
and their families and Hawaiian
homestead communities;
(3) The educational, economic,
political, social, and cultural processes
by which the general welfare and
conditions of beneficiaries are improved
and perpetuated;
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 93 / Friday, May 13, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
ehiers on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with RULES
(4) The construction of replacement
homes, repairs or additions;
(5) The development of farm, ranch or
aquaculture, including soil and water
conservation;
(6) The enhanced construction,
reconstruction, operation and
maintenance of revenue-producing
improvements intended to benefit
occupants of Hawaiian home lands;
(7) The making of investments in
water and other utilities, supplies,
equipment, and goods, as well as
professional services needed to plan,
implement, develop or operate such
projects that will improve the value of
Hawaiian home lands for their current
and future occupants; and,
(8) The establishment and
maintenance of an account to serve as
a reserve for loans issued or backed by
the Federal Government.
(b) The Secretary will determine if the
proposed amendment or any other
legislative action decreases the abovedescribed or similar benefits to the
beneficiaries, now or in the future, by
weighing the answers to the following
questions:
(1) How would the proposed
amendment impact the benefits to
current lessees of Hawaiian home lands?
(2) How would the proposed
amendment impact the benefits to
beneficiaries currently on a waiting list
for a Hawaiian home lands lease?
(3) How would the proposed
amendment impact the benefits to
beneficiaries who have not yet applied
for a Hawaiian home lands lease?
(4) If the interests of the beneficiaries
who have not been awarded a Hawaiian
home lands lease and the lessees differ,
how does the proposed amendment
weigh the interests of beneficiaries who
have not been awarded a Hawaiian
home lands lease with the interests of
Hawaiian home lands lessees?
(5) If the interests of the beneficiaries
who have not been awarded a Hawaiian
home lands lease and the lessees differ,
do the benefits to the lessees outweigh
any detriment to the beneficiaries who
have not been awarded a Hawaiian
home lands lease?
(6) If the interests of the beneficiaries
differ from the interests of the lessees,
do the benefits to the beneficiaries
outweigh any detriment to the lessees?
§ 48.30 How does the Secretary determine
if Congressional approval is unnecessary?
The Secretary will determine that
Congressional approval is unnecessary
if the proposed amendment meets none
of the criteria in § 48.20.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:42 May 12, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 48.35 When must the Secretary
determine if the proposed amendment
requires Congressional approval?
The Secretary will review the
documents submitted by the Chairman,
and if they meet the requirements of
§ 48.15, the Secretary will determine
within 60 days after receiving them if
the proposed amendment requires
Congressional approval.
§ 48.40 What notification will the Secretary
provide?
(a) If the Secretary determines that
Congressional approval of the proposed
amendment is unnecessary, the
Secretary will:
(1) Notify the Chairmen of the Senate
Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources and of the House Committee
on Natural Resources, the Governor,
Speaker of the House of Representatives
and President of the Senate of the State
of Hawai1i, and the Chairman of the
Hawaiian Homes Commission; and
(2) Include, if appropriate, an opinion
on whether the proposed amendment
advances the interests of the
beneficiaries.
(b) If the Secretary determines that
Congressional approval of the proposed
amendment is required, the Secretary
will notify the Chairmen of the Senate
Committee on Energy and Natural
Resources and of the House Committee
on Natural Resources, the Governor,
Speaker of the House of Representatives
and President of the Senate of the State
of Hawai1i, and the Chairman of the
Hawaiian Homes Commission. The
Secretary will also submit to the
Committees the following:
(1) A draft joint resolution approving
the proposed amendment;
(2) A description of the change made
by the proposed amendment and an
explanation of how the proposed
amendment advances the interests of
the beneficiaries;
(3) A comparison of the existing law
with the proposed amendment;
(4) A recommendation on the
advisability of approving the proposed
amendment;
(5) All documentation concerning the
proposed amendment received from the
Chairman; and
(6) All documentation concerning the
proposed amendment received from the
beneficiaries.
(c) The Secretary will post notice of
the determination on the Department of
the Interior’s Web site.
§ 48.45 When is a proposed amendment
deemed effective?
(a) If the Secretary determines that a
proposed amendment meets none of the
criteria in § 48.20, the effective date of
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
29793
the proposed amendment is the date of
the notification letter to the
Congressional Committee Chairmen.
(b) If the Secretary determines that the
proposed amendment requires
congressional approval then the
effective date of the proposed
amendment is the date that Congress’s
approval becomes law.
§ 48.50 Can the State of Hawai1i amend the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act without
Secretarial review?
The Secretary must review all
proposed amendments to the Hawaiian
Homes Commission Act. Any proposed
amendments to any terms or provisions
of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act
by the State must also specifically state
that the proposed amendment proposes
to amend the Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act. Any state enactment
that impacts any of the criteria in
§ 48.20 shall have no effect on the
provisions of the HHCA or
administration of the Trust, except
pursuant to this part.
[FR Doc. 2016–11146 Filed 5–11–16; 12:00 pm]
BILLING CODE 4334–63–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
48 CFR Parts 1519 and 1552
[EPA–HQ–OARM–2015–0550; FRL 9945–69–
OARM]
Environmental Protection Agency
Acquisition Regulation; Small
Business Programs, Solicitation
Provisions and Contract Clauses
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) is issuing a final rule to
remove outdated information and make
administrative changes to the
Environmental Protection Agency
Acquisition Regulation (EPAAR). EPA
does not anticipate any adverse
comments.
SUMMARY:
This rule is effective on July 12,
2016 without further action, unless EPA
receives adverse comment by June 13,
2016. If EPA receives adverse comment,
a timely withdrawal will be published
in the Federal Register informing the
public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments,
identified by Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OARM–2015–0550, at https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Once submitted, comments cannot be
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\13MYR1.SGM
13MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 93 (Friday, May 13, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 29776-29793]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11146]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Office of the Secretary
43 CFR Parts 47 and 48
[167D0102DM; DLSN00000.000000; DS61400000; DX61401]
RIN 1090-AA98
Land Exchange Procedures and Procedures to Amend the Hawaiian
Homes Commission Act, 1920
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule provides clarity in how the Department of the
Interior administers certain provisions of the Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act and the Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act. It facilitates
the goal of the rehabilitation of the Native Hawaiian community,
including the return of native Hawaiians to the land, consistent with
the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, the State of Hawai[revaps]i
Admission Act, and the Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act. The rule
clarifies the land exchange process for Hawaiian home lands, the
documents required for land exchanges, and the respective
responsibilities of the Department of the Interior, the Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands, the Hawaiian Homes Commission, and other entities
engaged in land exchanges of Hawaiian home lands. It also identifies
the documentation requirements and the responsibilities of the
Secretary of the Interior in the approval process for State of
Hawai[revaps]i proposed amendments to the Hawaiian Homes Commission
Act, 1920.
DATES: This rule is effective July 12, 2016.
[[Page 29777]]
ADDRESSES: The final rule is available on the internet at: https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ka`i`ini Kimo Kaloi, Director, Office
of Native Hawaiian Relations, telephone (202) 208-7462.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
In 1921, Congress enacted the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920
(HHCA), 42 Stat. 108, to provide a homesteading program for native
Hawaiians by placing approximately 200,000 acres of land (known as
Hawaiian home lands) into the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. The day-to-day
administration of Hawaiian Home Lands Trust is by the Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL), an agency of the State of Hawai[revaps]i,
headed by an executive board known as the Hawaiian Homes Commission
(HHC). The HHCA provides the Chairman of the HHC the authority to
propose to the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) the exchange of
Hawaiian home lands for land privately or publicly owned in furtherance
of the purposes of the HHCA.
The HHCA also created a series of funds (the Hawaiian Home Lands
Trust Funds, or ``trust funds'') See, HHCA section 213 as amended. The
purpose of one of these trust funds is the ``rehabilitation of native
Hawaiians, native Hawaiian families, and Hawaiian homestead
communities,'' which shall include ``the educational, economic,
political, social, and cultural processes by which the general welfare
and conditions of native Hawaiians are thereby improved and
perpetuated.'' Id. Another in this series of trust funds seeks, for
instance, to enhance construction of replacement homes, repairs or
additions, and enhance development of farms, ranches or aquaculture,
and to provide farm loans, including for soil and water conservation.
Still another trust fund provides money for construction,
reconstruction operations and maintenance of revenue-producing
improvements intended to benefit occupants of Hawaiian home lands; for
investments in water and other utilities, supplies, equipment, and
goods; and for professional services needed to plan, implement, develop
or operate such projects that will improve the value of Hawaiian home
lands for their current and future occupants. Other money is provided
to establish and maintain an account to serve as a reserve for loans
issued or backed by the Federal Government, to further the purpose of
the HHCA. The purposes and goals of these funds reflect congressionally
identified purposes and goals of the HHCA.
In 1959, Congress enacted the Hawai[revaps]i Admission Act, 73
Stat. 4 (Admission Act), to admit the Territory of Hawai[revaps]i
(Hawai[revaps]i or State) into the United States as a state. In
compliance with the Admission Act, and as a compact between the State
and the United States relating to the management and disposition of the
Hawaiian home lands, the State adopted the HHCA, as amended, as a law
of the State through Article XII of its Constitution.
In section 223 of the HHCA, Congress reserved to itself the right
to alter, amend, or repeal the HHCA. Consistent with this provision,
section 4 of the Admission Act provides limitations on the State's
administration of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust and the Hawaiian Home
Lands Trust Funds (hereafter referred to together as the Trust) and
also provides that the HHCA is subject to amendment or repeal by the
State only with the consent of the United States. Recognizing, however,
that it was vesting the State with day-to-day administrative authority,
Congress in section 4 of the Admission Act also provided exceptions
within which the State could amend certain administrative provisions of
the HHCA without the consent of the United States. The HHCA is a
cooperative federalism statute, a compound of interdependent Federal
and State law that establishes a Federal law framework but also
provides for implementation through State law.
Consistent with the provisions of the HHCA and the Admission Act,
Congress enacted the Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act in 1995 (HHLRA),
109 Stat. 357, which provides that the Secretary shall determine
whether a State-proposed amendment to the HHCA requires the consent of
the United States under section 4 of the Admission Act. It is
appropriately the function of the United States to ensure conformance
with the limitations in the Admissions Act and protect the integrity of
this statutory framework.
The HHLRA also clarified the Secretary's role in the oversight of
the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. Section 204(a)(3) of the HHCA, in
conjunction with Section 205 of the HHLRA, requires the approval or
disapproval of the Secretary for the exchange of Hawaiian home lands.
The HHLRA details the Secretary's responsibilities to ensure that
Hawaiian home lands are administered in a manner that advances the
interests of the beneficiaries.
While the Secretary has broad responsibilities under the HHCA and
the Admissions Act, the HHLRA clarifies the scope of the continuing
responsibilities of the Federal Government with regard to the HHCA. Two
of these responsibilities are addressed in the final rule. First, it
clarifies the role of the Secretary in land exchanges and, second,
clarifies the process for the Secretary's review of State-proposed
amendments to the HHCA. As to HHC Chairman-proposed land exchanges, the
HHLRA provides that the HHC Chairman submit a report to the Secretary,
including identification of the benefits to the parties of the proposed
exchange. The Secretary shall approve or disapprove the proposed
exchange depending on whether it advances the interests of the
beneficiaries. As to State-proposed amendments to the HHCA, the HHLRA
requires the State to notify the Secretary of any amendment it proposes
to the HHCA and then requires the Secretary to determine whether it
impacts Federal responsibilities under the HHCA or infringes on Federal
interests or those of the HHCA beneficiaries. If the Secretary
determines the State's proposed amendment of the HHCA impacts the
Federal responsibilities or infringes on either the Federal or
beneficiaries' interests, the Secretary must submit the amendment to
Congress for approval.
Since Hawai[revaps]i's admission to the Union, both Secretarial
reviews occurred on an ad hoc basis using procedures accepted by the
State and the Department. See, letter dated August 21, 1987 to Chairman
Morris Udall of the House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.
This rule establishes a clear process for Secretarial review and
approval of land exchanges proposed by the HHC Chairman under the HHCA
and HHLRA (Part 47), and of State-proposed amendments to the HHCA (Part
48).
II. Responses to Comments on the May 12, 2015 Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking
On May 12, 2015, the Secretary issued a Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM), entitled ``Land Exchange Procedures and Procedures
to Amend the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.'' 80 FR 27134-27141 (May
12, 2015). The NPRM sought input from leaders and members of the Native
Hawaiian community, HHCA beneficiaries, and the public about how the
Secretary reviews land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands proposed
by the HHC Chairman and State-proposed amendments to the HHCA.
[[Page 29778]]
The NPRM set an initial 60-day comment period that ended on July
13, 2015. In response to requests from commenters, including the HHC on
behalf of itself and HHCA beneficiaries, the Secretary extended the
comment deadline another 30 days, ending on August 12, 2015. 80 FR
39991 (July 13, 2015).
The Secretary received over 500 written comments by the August 12,
2015 deadline. All comments received on the NPRM are available in the
NPRM docket at https://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=DOI-2015-
0002-0001. Most of the comments revolved around a limited number of
issues. The issues discussed below encompass the range of substantive
issues presented in comments on the NPRM.
After careful review and analysis of the comments on the NPRM, the
Department concludes that it is appropriate to publish a final rule
that would set forth the administrative procedures for the review of
land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands proposed by the HHC
Chairman and amendments to the HHCA proposed by the State.
Overview of Comments
The Department received comments from the Native Hawaiian
community, the State, HHCA beneficiaries, and others. One fundamental
question raised in the comments was whether the rule expands the
Secretary's authority beyond the HHCA, Admission Act, and HHLRA. We
conclude that the rule is within the Secretary's authority and
consistent with long-standing practice under the HHCA, Admission Act,
and HHLRA.
State-proposed amendments. On August 21, 1987, the Secretary
forwarded to the House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, a
proposed procedure, agreed upon by the State and Secretary, for
obtaining the consent of the United States to State-proposed amendments
to the HHCA. That procedure provided for the HHC Chairman forwarding
the proposed amendment to the Secretary with an opinion from an
appropriate legal officer of the State, followed by the Secretary
examining the material transmitted and then submitting to Congress a
proposed report and bill. The parties anticipated that most State-
proposed amendments would be free of controversy and national
implications and would be submitted to Congress once every one to two
years. The Department endeavored to follow these procedures
subsequently embodied in the HHLRA and in this rule.
Land exchanges. In the late 1970's, the State and the DHHL were
resolving claims between themselves over lands that the State had
allegedly withdrawn illegally from the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust, while
also addressing claims against the United States for lands allegedly
withdrawn illegally from the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust or used by the
United States during the territorial period. Congress considered
addressing these claims and implementing some recommendations of the
Federal-State Task Force Report from 1983, such as the existing
informal process of Secretarial review of land exchanges proposed by
the HHC Chairman. Accordingly, Congress passed the HHLRA which provides
procedures for settlement of federal claims (section 203); approval of
amendments to the HHCA (section 204); and approval of exchanges
involving Hawaiian home lands (section 205). The HHLRA also designated
a federal official within the Department ``to administer the
responsibilities of the United States'' under the HHCA and the HHLRA,
and to protect and advance HHCA beneficiaries' rights and interests,
including promoting homesteading opportunities, economic self-
sufficiency, and social well-being (section 206). See, Hawaiian Home
Lands Recovery Act: Hearing before the Senate Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources on S. 2174, 103d Cong., 9-10, 19 (1994). See,
response to questions 3 and 40.
HHCA beneficiaries. The HHLRA defines ``beneficiary'' in the same
terms as ``native Hawaiian'' is defined in the HHCA, which was adopted
as a provision of the constitution of the State as a compact with the
United States. In 1959, when section 4 of the Admission Act referred to
amendments that ``increase the benefits to lessees of Hawaiian home
lands,'' all lessees met the definition of ``native Hawaiian'' and had
a blood quantum of at least 50 percent. Beginning in 1986, however,
certain persons with a lesser blood quantum could obtain lessees
through succession or transfer. See, 100 Stat. 3143 (1986). The HHLRA,
nevertheless, defined beneficiary in terms of the HHCA definition, not
in terms of lessees. Therefore, the rule evaluates and advances the
interests of the beneficiaries as distinguished from all lessees.
Responses to Specific Issues Raised in the NPRM Comments
1. How do claims concerning the United States occupation of the
Hawaiian Islands impact the rule?
Issue: Multiple commenters who objected to Federal rulemaking based
their objections on the assertion that the United States violated and
continues to violate international law by illegally occupying the
Hawaiian Islands and thus is without jurisdiction on the Islands.
Response: The Department is an agency of the United States. The
Secretary's authority to issue this rule derives from the United States
Constitution and from Acts of Congress, and the Secretary's authority
is confined within that structure. The Secretary is bound by
Congressional enactments concerning the status of Hawai[revaps]i. Under
those enactments and under the United States Constitution,
Hawai[revaps]i is a State of the United States of America.
In 1893, a United States officer, acting without authorization of
the U.S. government, conspired with residents of Hawai[revaps]i to
overthrow the Kingdom of Hawaii. In the years following the 1893
overthrow, Congress annexed the Territory of Hawai[revaps]i and
established a government for the Territory of Hawai[revaps]i. See,
Joint Resolution to Provide for Annexing the Hawaiian Islands to the
United States, 30 Stat. 750 (1898); Act of Apr. 30, 1900, 31 Stat. 141.
In 1959, Congress admitted Hawai[revaps]i to the Union as the 50th
State. In 1993, Congress, through a joint resolution, apologized to
Native Hawaiians for the overthrow and the deprivation of the rights of
Native Hawaiians to self-determination, and expressed its support for
reconciliation efforts with Native Hawaiians. Joint Resolution of
November 23, 1993, 107 Stat. 1510, 1513 (commonly known as the
``Apology Resolution'').
The Apology Resolution, however, did not effectuate any changes to
existing law. See, Hawai[revaps]i v. Office of Hawaiian Affairs, 556
U.S. 163, 175 (2009). Thus, the Admission Act established the current
status of the State of Hawai[revaps]i. The Admission Act proclaimed in
section 1 that ``the State of Hawai[revaps]i is hereby declared to be a
State of the United States of America, [and] is declared admitted into
the Union on an equal footing with the other States in all respects
whatever.'' The Admission Act was consented to by the people of
Hawai[revaps]i through an election held on June 27, 1959. The comments
in response to the NPRM that call into question the legitimacy of the
State of Hawai[revaps]i are inconsistent with
[[Page 29779]]
the express determination of Congress, which is binding on the
Department.
2. Is the definition of a beneficiary of the HHCA consistent with the
requirements of Federal law?
Issue: Commenters questioned the Secretary's constitutional
authority to promulgate rules for the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust,
arguing that Congress's definition of a Native Hawaiian beneficiary is
race-based because its use of a ``blood quantum'' violates the
Constitution's guarantee of equal protection.
Response: The Federal Government has broad authority to regulate
with respect to Native American communities. See, U.S. Const. art. I,
sec. 8, cl. 3 (Commerce Clause); U.S. Const. art. II, sec. 2, cl. 2
(Treaty Clause); Morton v. Mancari, 417 U.S. at 551-52 (``The plenary
power of Congress to deal with the special problems of Indians is drawn
both explicitly and implicitly from the Constitution itself.''). In the
case of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust, Congress specifically chose to
use a 50 percent blood quantum requirement for all beneficiaries of the
HHCA rather than a 1/32 blood quantum in order to make the bill more
distinctly a Hawaiian rehabilitation scheme. Proposed Amendments to the
Organic Act of the Territory of Hawai[revaps]i: Hearings on H.R. 7257
Before the House Comm. On the Territories, 66th Cong. 15 (1921).
Acknowledging that the United States implemented similar rehabilitation
programs for Indians because the government took away their lands
without payment and violated treaties, Congressman Charles Curry,
Chairman of the Committee on the Territories, said that it should be
constitutional to do the same for the Hawaiians whose land had been
taken away from them and noted that the Committee received opinions
supporting the constitutionality of the proposed legislation from the
Attorney General of Hawai[revaps]i and the Solicitor of the Department
of the Interior. Id. at 141-142. Blood quantum reflects ties to the
Native Hawaiian political community, as individuals marry within it.
Id. at 140. And, as Congress explained, Congress ``does not extend
services to Native Hawaiians because of their race, but because of
their unique status as the indigenous peoples of a once sovereign
nation as to whom the United States has established a trust
relationship.'' 114 Stat. 2968 (2000) (Hawaiian Homelands Homeownership
Act).
3. Is the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act still Federal Law?
Issue: Commenters questioned whether the HHCA remains a Federal
law, presuming that the passage of the Admission Act repealed it.
Response: Yes, the HHCA remains a Federal law. As explained in more
detail above under ``Background,'', in compliance with the Admission
Act, and as a compact between the State and the United States relating
to the management and disposition of the Hawaiian home lands, the State
adopted the HHCA, as amended, as a law of the State through Article XII
of its Constitution as a condition of its admission in 1959. The HHCA
is a cooperative federalism statute, a compound of interdependent
Federal and State law that establishes a Federal law framework but also
provides for implementation through State law.
Furthermore, consistent with the provisions of the HHCA and the
Admission Act, the HHLRA provides that the Secretary shall determine
whether a proposed amendment to the HHCA requires the consent of the
United States under section 4 of the Admission Act. It is appropriately
the function of the United States to ensure conformance with the
limitations in the Admission Act and protect the integrity of this
statutory framework.
The HHLRA also clarified the role of the Secretary in the oversight
of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. Section 204(a)(3) of the HHCA, in
conjunction with section 205 of the HHLRA, requires the approval or
disapproval of the Secretary for the exchange of Hawaiian home lands.
The HHLRA details the Secretary's responsibilities to ensure that the
administration of Hawaiian Home Lands Trust advances the interests of
the beneficiaries.
The HHLRA thus confirms the continuing role of the Secretary in
implementing the HHCA and defines the scope of the continuing
responsibilities of the Federal Government related to approval of land
exchanges of Hawaiian home lands and state-proposed amendments to the
HHCA.
4. Is the Secretary's interpretation of the term ``rehabilitation'' as
including political, cultural and social reorganization correct?
Response: The meaning of the term ``rehabilitation'' under the HHCA
was provided for background purposes in the proposed rule, and resulted
in a number of comments. We now clarify the Department's position.
The Secretary's interpretation of the term ``rehabilitation'' to
include political, cultural, and social reorganization is consistent
with both the statutory text and legislative history of HHCA. The term
``rehabilitation'' was added to the HHCA through the 1978 amendments to
the Hawaiian Constitution. Section 213(i) of the HHCA, as amended,
creates a ``rehabilitation fund'' that can be used for ``the
rehabilitation of native Hawaiians'' including ``educational, economic,
political, social, and cultural processes.'' Congress consented to this
language through a joint resolution approved October 27, 1986, thereby
amending the HHCA. 100 Stat. 3143. The purposes and goals of the
rehabilitation fund are congressionally identified as some of the
purposes and goals of the HHCA.
Furthermore, the legislative history of the HHCA indicates that the
bill's purpose was to protect the welfare of the Native Hawaiian
people. See, 67 Cong. Rec. 3263 (1921) (statement of Rep. Almon).
Methods to achieve that purpose included revitalizing the ``mode of
living'' of Native Hawaiians from prior generations. See,
Rehabilitation and Colonization of Hawaiians and Other Proposed
Amendments to the Organic Act of the Territory of Hawai[revaps]i:
Before the House Comm. on the Territories, 66th Cong 4 (1920) (quoting
Sen. John H. Wise's testimony before the Territorial Legislature that:
``[t]he Hawaiian people are a farming people and fishermen, out-of-door
people, and [being] frozen out of their lands. . . . is one of the
reasons why the Hawaiian people are dying. Now, the only way to save
them, I contend, is to take them back to the lands and give them the
mode of living that their ancestors were accustomed to and in that way
rehabilitate them.'').
In 1982 the Secretary and the Governor of Hawai[revaps]i created a
task force whose purpose was to consider how to better effectuate the
purposes of the HHCA. Federal-State Task Force on the Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act Report to the Secretary of the Interior and the Governor
of the State of Hawai[revaps]i, Honolulu, Hawai[revaps]i, August 1983,
pp. 4, 8. That task force found that the term ``rehabilitation''
``implies that traditional and cultural practices of native
beneficiaries, to the extent not precluded by law, should be respected
and acknowledged by the DHHL in order to enable native beneficiaries to
return to their lands and to provide for their self-sufficiency and
initiative and for the preservation of their culture.'' Id. at 55.
Thus, the term ``rehabilitation'' has been consistently interpreted in
ways that support the development of the Hawaiian community itself. The
[[Page 29780]]
Secretary's interpretation of the term ``rehabilitation'' to include
political, cultural, and social reorganization is consistent with the
statutory language, congressional intent, and longstanding
interpretation of the HHCA.
The funds Congress provided for in the HHCA represent factors that
Congress identified as some of the purposes and goals of the HHCA.
These purposes and goals guide the Secretary's review in determining
whether a proposal advances the interests of the beneficiaries. Section
48.25 has been modified in response to these comments.
5. Should leaseholds to beneficiaries be converted to fee simple
allocations of land?
Issue: Commenters recommend a path that would convert HHCA
leaseholders into the outright owners of their leasehold property.
Response: Allowing for the conversion of leaseholds into fee simple
ownership of Hawaiian home lands properties, which resembles the
allotment process that was repudiated by Congress in 1934, is
prohibited by current Federal law and is not within the scope of the
rule.
6. Does the State of Hawai[revaps]i have the ability to amend the HHCA?
Issue: Commenters allege that the State has no ability to amend the
HHCA through the process outlined in the Admission Act because it
remains a Federal law.
Response: The HHCA is a cooperative federalism statute, a compound
of interdependent Federal and State law that establishes a Federal law
framework but also provides for implementation through State law. The
Admission Act provided that the State could amend certain provisions of
the HHCA but expressly limited the State's authority. The HHLRA
provides further clarification, providing that the Secretary shall
determine whether a State-proposed amendment to the HHCA requires the
consent or approval of Congress under section 4 of the Admission Act.
If the State-proposed amendment is found not to require the approval of
the United States, the rule provides that the effective date of the
State-proposed amendment is the date of the Secretary's notification
letter to the Congressional Committee Chairmen that Congressional
approval was not required. It is appropriately the function of the
United States to ensure conformity with the limitations in the
Admission Act and protect the integrity of this Federal statutory
framework.
7. Do parts 47 and 48 create an administrative burden that would make
it more difficult for the State to move forward with land exchanges or
amendments to the HHCA that would benefit the Hawaiian home lands
program?
Issue: Commenters stated that while it may be lawful for the
Secretary to engage in rulemaking, administrative requirements and
criteria may constrain state officials and make it more difficult for
them to proceed with land exchanges or amendments to the HHCA that they
consider beneficial to the program.
Response: The three main Hawaiian Home Lands Trust statutes (the
HHCA, the Admission Act, and the HHLRA) establish a trust relationship
and grant the Secretary authority to protect and advance the interests
of the beneficiaries. Section 206 of the HHLRA charges the Secretary
with advancing the interests of the beneficiaries in administering the
HHCA. Parts 47 and 48 will assist the Secretary in carrying out this
responsibility and make the Secretary's actions more transparent to the
public. Similarly, the rule will assist the State in understanding what
information the Secretary considers necessary in order to evaluate the
proposed actions. As evidenced by the fact that the HHLRA requires the
Secretary to approve or disapprove all land exchanges involving
Hawaiian home lands and to review all proposed amendments to the HHCA
proposed by the State, Congress not only recognized the benefit of an
independent Federal determination that the proposal advances the
interests of the beneficiaries, but also recognized that the interests
of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust and its beneficiaries may not always
coincide with the interests of the State and their overall program.
Congress prioritized the interests of the beneficiaries and in doing so
circumscribed the day-to-day administration of the Trust by the State,
notwithstanding benefits to other State goals.
8. Should a federalism assessment be performed for this rule?
Issue: One commenter suggests that the rule has sufficient
federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a federalism
assessment in accordance with Executive Order 13132.
Response: No. While the HHCA, the Admission Act, and the HHLRA,
limit what the State can do in administering the Trust, 43 CFR parts 47
and 48 merely provide a path for administering those Federal laws
within the original limited delegation to the State in the Admission
Act; thus, no federalism assessment needs to be performed. Recognizing
the direct effect the three statutes have on the State and the benefits
of working with the State to protect the beneficiaries and the Hawaiian
Home Lands Trust, the Department held high level discussions with State
officials as early as 2011 that resulted in this rulemaking to
formalize the process for review of land exchanges and State proposed
amendments to the HHCA.
As discussed above, the statutory framework of the HHCA, the
Admission Act, and the HHLRA result in a compound of interdependent
Federal and State law. Those laws undoubtedly have federalism
implications. This rule, however, does not. In accordance with E.O.
13132, rules or policies have federalism implications if they ``have
substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between
the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government.'' Parts 47
and 48 have none of those effects. The rule merely formalizes the
process the Secretary will use in reviewing and approving land
exchanges and in reviewing proposed amendments to the HHCA under
existing law, and clarifies the documentation that the HHC Chairman, an
officer of the State of Hawai[revaps]i, must submit to implement
existing law. The relationship between the State and the Secretary is
unchanged by this rule. We expect the HHC Chairman will continue to
submit proposed land exchanges and proposed amendments to the Secretary
as it has since passage of the HHRLA. The distribution of power and
responsibilities remains unchanged; the respective decision making
authority of the Secretary and State are limited by section 4 of the
Admission Act and sections 205 and 206 of the HHLRA. The only ``direct
effect'' imposed on the State by this rule is the requirement to submit
some additional documentation, which, given the level of documentation
required and the frequency of submissions, does not rise to a
``substantial direct effect.'' We therefore conclude that no federalism
analysis is necessary.
9. Do parts 47 and 48 allow the Secretary to amend the HHCA?
Issue: Commenters suggest that parts 47 and 48 amend or allow the
Secretary to amend the HHCA.
Response: The rule does not amend the HHCA. Parts 47 and 48 merely
assist in the administration of the HHCA. One
[[Page 29781]]
of the purposes of part 48 is, however, to provide clarity, consistent
with Federal law, on what subjects under the HHCA the State may amend
on its own and which subjects Congress must approve. Similarly, part 47
adds clarity to Federal review of land exchanges. This rulemaking
process provided the public and all interested parties an opportunity
to review and comment on the Department's existing process before it is
replaced with a formalized one under this rule.
10. Should the Secretary monitor State legislation that poses a threat
to the HHCA?
Issue: Commenters recommend that under part 48 the Secretary
adequately monitor any legislation that would pose a threat to the
HHCA.
Response: Section 204 of the HHLRA requires that the Chairman of
the HHC submit for review by the Secretary and if required,
congressional approval, all State enactments proposing to amend the
HHCA. Any proposed amendments to any terms or provisions of the HHCA by
the State should also specify that the proposed amendment seeks to
amend the HHCA, which puts all persons on notice that the amendment
needs review by the Secretary. Consistent with the Admission Act and
HHCA, if Federal review finds that any State enactment impacts any of
the factors in Sec. 48.20 of this rule, Congressional action is
required before it has any effect on the provisions of the HHCA or
administration of the Trust. It is the responsibility of the HHC
Chairman to monitor the State's legislative activities and to obtain
the required review by the Secretary if it is the State's intent to
amend the HHCA.
Once the Department determines that Congress must approve a
proposed amendment to the HHCA and the Department transmits the
proposed amendment to Congress, there is no requirement that the
Administration monitor or advocate its passage. The Administration may
oppose an amendment that does not advance the interests of the HHCA
beneficiaries.
11. Do State-proposed amendments to the HHCA require Congressional
approval or consent?
Issue: A commenter suggests that Congressional consent and not
approval is required for certain proposed amendments to the HHCA.
Response: Congress provided in section 4 of the Admission Act that
certain amendments to the HHCA would require the consent of the United
States. Congress also clarified in section 204 of the HHLRA that the
consent of the United States is provided through the approval by
Congress. Thus, approval is required.
Section 204(c)(1) also requires the Secretary to submit to Congress
a draft joint resolution approving the proposed amendment. Section 397,
Joint Resolutions, of Jefferson's Manual of the House of
Representatives of the United States Congress, provides, with the
exception of joint resolutions proposing amendments to the
Constitution, all resolutions are sent to the President for approval
and have the full force of law.
12. Does Sec. 47.50(a)(8)(i) authorize the State of Hawai[revaps]i to
evict tenants from property being considered for a land exchange?
Issue: Multiple commenters expressed concern that Sec.
47.50(a)(8)(i) authorizes the State to evict tenants from property
being considered for a land exchange.
Response: Section 47.50(a)(8)(i) does not authorize the State or
any other entity to evict tenants from property being considered for a
land exchange. This provision asks that if a party to the exchange will
evict a tenant from land being exchanged under separate legal
authority, the party should provide the Secretary details of
arrangements for the relocation of the tenants. The provision in Sec.
47.50(a)(8)(i) does not expand or grant such authority. The provision
in Sec. 47.50(a)(8)(i) is almost identical to section 43 CFR
2201.1(c)(11) which applies to other Federal land exchanges. The
purpose of both 43 CFR 2201.1(c)(11) and final rule 43 CFR
47.50(a)(8)(i) is to assist the Secretary in identifying all costs,
both economic and social, to all persons directly affected by an
exchange.
13. Should the definition of consultation in both parts 47 and 48 of
this rule require face-to-face meetings with beneficiaries to be valid?
Issue: Commenters question whether consultation with beneficiaries
without face-to-face meetings will allow for a sufficient opportunity
to engage in dialogue with the beneficiaries, consider their views,
and, where feasible, seek agreement with them.
Response: The definition of consultation in this rule provides a
minimum requirement and is intended to give the Secretary, the HHC
Chairman, as well as beneficiaries and interested parties, flexibility
in the consultation process in order to efficiently and effectively
engage beneficiaries and interested parties in informed consideration
of proposed actions. Such actions may involve a wide spectrum of issues
ranging from those that are singular, simple, and straight forward to
those that are multi-faceted and complicated or complex. Such actions
may also vary from those that are mandatory to others that allow
greater discretion. Face-to-face meetings may be necessary under
certain circumstances while other means of communications, including
but not limited to letters delivered by the postal service, email,
teleconferences, etc., may be just as effective in other circumstances.
One commenter suggested requiring face-to-face consultations with
beneficiaries and lessees who live within a 50-mile radius of the
existing Hawaiian home lands to be exchanged or received into the
Trust. While the rationale for not requiring face-to-face consultations
presented in the previous paragraph still holds true, the Secretary
encourages the State to engage in face-to-face consultations, at a
minimum, within a 50-mile radius. The beneficiaries who live within a
50-mile radius of a proposed exchange will likely have a great deal of
information important in making a decision about an exchange that would
assist the Department in its review.
The final rule modified the definition of consultation in response
to these comments.
14. Does Sec. 47.45(a) impede the State's ability to engage in land
exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands?
Issue: Commenters raised the question whether Sec. 47.45(a), which
recommends the HHC Chairman and the other party seeking the exchange
meet with the Department prior to finalizing an exchange, would hamper
the progress of land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands.
Response: Section 47.45(a) is a suggested course of action and does
not require pre-land exchange meetings. The Department finds, however,
that getting all parties who are interested in a particular land
exchange talking to one another can be extremely useful and time-
saving. It is especially useful to have this type of pre-meeting to
avoid the submission of a presumed final document that cannot be
approved by the Department. The language of Sec. 47.45(a) would leave
it to the discretion of the HHC Chairman as to whether to engage in the
pre-land exchange meeting. The meeting may be conducted via
teleconferencing or web-conferencing rather than in-person.
[[Page 29782]]
15. Should Sec. 47.65(b) clarify the circumstances under which the
Secretary will consult with the beneficiaries when making a
determination if a land exchange advances the interests of the
beneficiaries?
Issue: Commenters suggest that it is unclear when and under what
circumstances consultation might occur by the Secretary when reviewing
a HHC Chairman-proposed land exchange.
Response: When reviewing a land exchange proposal submitted by the
HHC Chairman, it is essential to the Secretary's decision-making
process to have input from the beneficiary community about the effect
the land exchange may have on the beneficiaries and the Hawaiian Home
Lands Trust. The reason for making consultation under Sec. 47.65(b)
permissive is that if the HHC Chairman has already consulted with the
beneficiaries on the land exchange proposal that is before the
Secretary, and records of this consultation provide the input that the
Secretary seeks, then no further consultation by the Secretary may be
necessary. If the HHC Chairman forgoes consultation on a land exchange
or a proposed amendment to the HHCA, the Secretary may be required to
consult directly with the beneficiaries in order to approve the
exchange or to find that an amendment does not require Congressional
approval.
Upon consideration of the comments, language similar to that in
Sec. 47.65(b) was inserted into Sec. 48.20.
16. Should the term ``consultation'' be better defined?
Issue: Commenters suggested that there be greater clarity and
formalization as to when the Secretary would seek such consultation,
what such consultation would entail, and how beneficiary input will be
taken into account in any decision making process.
Response: The Department agrees with this point and modified the
definition of consultation in both parts 47 and 48 so that they are
consistent with the definition used by Federal agencies when consulting
with the Native Hawaiian community under section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act.
17. Are the standards for the review of land exchanges sufficiently
clear to protect the interests of the beneficiaries?
Issue: Commenters suggest the standards for review of land
exchanges is not sufficient to guarantee the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust
will be preserved.
Response: The definition of land exchanges in section 47.10 is
based upon section 204 of the HHCA and the Secretary's experience with
reviewing land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands and other
properties throughout the United States. Exchanges can be a valuable
tool for the HHCA Chairman in managing the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust
and advancing the interests of the beneficiaries. Part 47 seeks to
clarify the section 205 of HHLRA to ensure it is carried out in
compliance with section 206 of the HHLRA that requires the Secretary,
in administering the HHCA, to advance the interests of the
beneficiaries. The protections provided by the HHCA, Admission Act, and
HHLRA, along with the details laid out in part 47, allow the HHC
Chairman to engage in land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands
without endangering the Trust.
18. Should the definition of ``market value'' be amended to take into
consideration such things as utility and cultural significance of the
properties?
Issue: Commenters suggest that when there are multiple reasons for
a land exchange to occur that the appraisals of the properties should
take those reasons into account.
Response: The Secretary is authorized to approve a land exchange
under section 204 of the HHCA if the property to be added to the
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust is of ``equal value'' to the property leaving
the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. The Secretary interprets this
requirement to be referring to market value, similarly to the BLM land
exchange regulations included in 43 CFR part 2200 that only consider
the economic uses of the subject property. In order to approve the
exchange, however, the Secretary must determine whether the proposed
exchange advances the interests of the beneficiaries as required by
section 206 of the HHLRA and as implemented in section 47.20 of this
rule. At that point, the Secretary may take into account things such as
the utility and cultural significance of the properties.
19. Should the Secretary ensure that the appreciation rate of any new
property being proposed for inclusion in the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust
be at least equal to the rate of return for the property proposed to
leave the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust?
Issue: A commenter suggests that an appreciation rate of any new
property being proposed for inclusion in the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust
be at least equal to the rate of return for the trust property proposed
to leave the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. The example given by the
commenter is that the return on the generation of electricity on a
current trust property and the revenue it can potentially generate is
more important than its present cash value of the property.
Response: The definition of market value used in this rule requires
that the estimate of value be made in terms of cash or its equivalent.
The appreciation rate and rate of return reflect future income
potential, of the properties being considered in an exchange and will
be considered in the appraisal of a property if the highest and best
use of the property is for generating income. Properties considered for
exchange will be valued at their highest and best use as required by
UASFLA for market value appraisals. The income capitalization approach,
which is required to be completed on income producing properties under
UASFLA, requires the appraiser to analyze a property's ability to
generate future benefits and capitalizes the income into an indication
of present cash value. The result is that the market value of the
property as of the date of appraisal takes into account future income
and any appreciation by converting future benefits into a present cash
value. If the two exchange properties have similar highest and best
uses, similar capitalization rates would likely be used ensuring equal
treatment of the properties under appraisal.
20. Should only Federal employees licensed in the State of
Hawai[revaps]i be allowed to conduct appraisals of properties involved
in an exchange involving Hawaiian home lands?
Issue: A commenter suggests only Federal employees licensed in the
State of Hawai[revaps]i be allowed to conduct appraisals of properties
involved in an exchange of Hawaiian home lands.
Response: The vast majority of Department's appraisals are
completed by private contract appraisers under the direction of the
Department. The review of those reports is done, however, exclusively
by Federal employees. Requiring that appraisals be conducted by only
Federal employees would place an unnecessary obstacle in the path of
completing these land exchanges.
21. Should the Secretary include in 43 CFR part 47 a process that
addresses section 205(c) of the HHLRA which authorizes the Secretary to
initiate a land exchange involving Hawaiian home lands?
Issue: Commenters suggest 43 CFR part 47 include a process that
addresses section 205(c) of the HHLRA which
[[Page 29783]]
authorizes the Secretary to initiate a land exchange involving Hawaiian
home lands.
Response: In this rule, the Department did not include procedures
governing land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands initiated by the
Secretary, but chose to address the primary way in which land exchanges
are currently initiated. The Department is unaware of any land exchange
involving Hawaiian home lands being initiated or proposed to be
initiated by the Secretary. Thus, the need to address such an exchange
through rulemaking is not necessary. Should the Secretary decide to
engage in a land exchange involving Hawaiian home lands under the
authority of section 205(c) and (d), we will consider then what process
is required and if a rule is warranted.
22. Should the factors listed in section 47.20 include ``reduce the
diversion of staff resources dedicated to deriving revenues from land
dispositions to fund the DHHL's administrative and operating
expenses''?
Response: It is unnecessary to specifically insert the suggested
language as it is encompassed within section 47.20(i).
23. After approving or disapproving a proposed amendment to the HHCA,
should the Secretary provide an email notice to the Native Hawaiian
Organization List maintained by the Secretary and post on the
Department of the Interior's Web site?
Response: The Secretary does not approve or disapprove proposed
amendments to the HHCA but merely reviews proposed amendments to
determine if Congressional approval is required. Following the required
review, the Secretary will post notice of the determination on the
Department of the Interior Web site.
24. Should the Secretary review and provide rulings to Congress and the
HHC Chairman on State-proposed amendments to the HHCA that in
accordance with their own provisions require Congressional approval to
become effective?
Issue: The State will sometimes pass legislation that proposes to
amend the HHCA but is expressly contingent on approval by Congress.
Response: When the State passes legislation that proposes to amend
the HHCA but includes a provision that the effectiveness of the
proposed amendment is contingent on approval by Congress, no proposal
to amend the HHCA was made for purposes of section 206 of the HHLRA. In
circumstances such as these, the State is merely taking on a general
advisory role and providing advice to Congress on what Federal laws
they should pass. Congress may consider the proposed amendment offered
by the State of Hawai[revaps]i and this does not require a review under
section 206 of HHLRA.
25. Is it the responsibility of DHHL and the HHC to determine whether
proposed land exchanges are appropriate for the Hawaiian people?
Response: In accordance with section 205(b) of the HHLRA, ``the
Secretary shall approve or disapprove the proposed exchange'' submitted
by the HHC Chairman. While the Chairman may propose an exchange, the
ultimate responsibility for determining the appropriateness of the
proposed exchange remains with the Secretary.
26. Are the factors the Secretary will consider in analyzing a land
exchange listed in section 47.20 too restrictive to allow for the
proper use of the land exchange tool by the HHC Chairman?
Issue: A commenter suggests that the rule relies solely on the
language listed in section 204(3) of the HHCA, which provides for an
exchange of equal value ``to consolidate its holdings or to better
effectuate the purposes of the HHCA.''
Response: Section 206 of the HHLRA requires that the Secretary
``advance the interest of the beneficiaries'' in administering the
HHCA. Implementation of this provision is consistent with the purposes
of section 204(a)(3) of the HHCA, which is to advance the interest of
its beneficiaries when managing the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. Section
47.20 articulates factors that are consistent with the purposes of the
HHCA and with advancing the interest of the beneficiaries to provide
transparency in the Secretary's decision making process. Section 47.20
of the rule implements both statutes in a consistent manner and
utilizes the Secretary's expertise in reviewing land exchanges
involving trust lands held for other U.S. indigenous communities.
27. Should the factors the Secretary will consider in analyzing a land
exchange listed in section 47.20 be expanded to include such things as
the development of Hawaiian home lands for mercantile use and to
protect ecological and cultural resources?
Response: Section 47.20 specifies that the main purpose of engaging
in a land exchange must be to advance the interests of the
beneficiaries as provided in section 206 of the HHLRA. Accordingly, it
lists the factors the Secretary will consider in analyzing a land
exchange. These factors themselves are purposefully broad to allow
flexibility in the analysis.
Moreover, in order for the exchange to be approved, the purpose of
the land exchange must be well documented and demonstrate how the land
exchange advances the interests of the beneficiaries. For instance, it
would be insufficient under the rule for the party proposing the
exchange to make only a conclusory statement that the exchange advances
the interests of the beneficiaries without further explanation.
Sections 47.20 and 47.30 provide the necessary information for the
Secretary to make a reasoned decision to approve or disapprove a
proposed land exchange.
28. Should there be a requirement that land exchanges not increase or
decrease the acreage in the Trust in order to keep it whole?
Response: While acreage is an important aspect of determining the
market value of properties involved in a land exchange, it is not the
exclusive determining factor. For example, 50 acres of heavily sloped
rocky land will likely not be as valuable as a smaller number of acres
of usable farm land or other more readily developable acres. Therefore,
the HHCA requires that the exchange be of equal value, not that the
acreage be the same. The Secretary needs to ensure the market value of
the property coming into the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust is equal to or
greater than the property leaving the trust as required by section
204(c) of the HHCA, rather than rely on identical acreages.
29. Should the rule provide a more defined role for the Hawaiian Homes
Commission in the review of land exchanges and amendments to the HHCA?
Issue: Commenters suggest that the rule specifically recognize the
role of the HHC because of its fiduciary duty to the beneficiaries of
the HHCA.
Response: Section 202 of the HHCA provides that the DHHL be headed
by an executive board known as the HHC. The HHC and its Chairman are
appointed by the Governor of the State of Hawai[revaps]i. The Chairman
of the HHC is also the Director of DHHL and an Officer of the State of
Hawaii. As officers of the State who are placed in their positions as
Hawaiian Homes Commissioners to oversee the day-to-day management of
the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust, the Secretary values their input. In
response to comments, section 47.60(a)(1) now requires a statement of
approval for a land exchange from the HHC, including
[[Page 29784]]
the Commissioners' recorded vote on the exchange, and Sec. 48.15(b)(2)
requires that all testimony and correspondence from the HHC and its
Commissioners related to proposed amendments be submitted to the
Secretary in order to better inform the Secretary's review of proposed
amendments to the HHCA. In addition, the rule now specifically
references the Chairman of the HHC as submitting the State-proposed
amendments to the HHCA and Chairman-proposed land exchanges to the
Secretary to conform to the language in sections 204(a) and 205(a) of
the HHLRA.
30. In addition to requiring the submission of homestead association
testimony and correspondence regarding proposed amendments to the HHCA,
should Sec. 48.15 also require the same documents from beneficiary
associations whose membership is composed of persons who have submitted
applications to the State for homesteads but are currently awaiting the
assignment of a lot?
Response: The Department appreciates the question. It is important
for the Secretary to obtain the input of beneficiaries who are on the
State's homestead waiting list as their priorities may diverge from the
priorities of those beneficiaries who hold a homestead lease.
Therefore, new definitions of HHCA Beneficiary Association and of
Homestead Association are included in the rule and are referenced in
Sec. 48.15(b)(2), and beneficiaries are added to Sec. 48.15(b)(2).
31. Should the definition of ``beneficiary'' include those Native
Hawaiians with a blood quantum of more than 25 percent but less than 50
percent who qualify to receive a homestead through transfer or
succession?
Response: Section 202 of the HHLRA states ``the term `beneficiary'
has the same meaning as given the term `native Hawaiian' under section
201(7) of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.'' Section 201(7) of the
HHCA states, ``Native Hawaiian means any descendant of not less than
one-half part of the blood of the races inhabiting the Hawaiian Islands
previous to 1778.'' Changing the definition of ``beneficiary'' to
include those Native Hawaiians with a blood quantum of at least 25
percent but less than 50 percent who received a homestead through
transfer or succession is not consistent with the HHLRA and HHCA and
would require Congressional action.
32. Will the rule assist in meeting the Congressional deadlines for the
review of State- proposed amendments to the HHCA and HHC Chairman-
proposed land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands?
Response: In order to provide a rational basis for decisions
regarding land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands and proposed
amendments to the HHCA, the Secretary requires sufficient information
on which to base those decisions. This rule details what information
the Department requires to make an informed decision. The intention of
the rule is to reduce the amount of time the Department takes to make
an informed decision by providing clarity on the information necessary
from the State about proposed land exchanges involving Hawaiian home
lands or proposed amendments to the HHCA.
33. Should the purpose of the rule regarding land exchange procedures
be for the benefit of the beneficiaries of the HHCA?
Response: While each part in the rule has a specific purpose, the
overall purpose of the Secretary's oversight of the Hawaiian Home Lands
Trust is to advance the interests of the beneficiaries of the HHCA in
accordance with section 206(b) of the HHLRA. Advancement of these
interests in both parts 47 and 48 must be specific to the interests of
the beneficiaries, not others, and documented. For the purposes of an
HHCA review, the interests of parties other than the beneficiaries are
not relevant to the Secretary's decision making process; rather, the
Secretary's approval is contingent upon a determination that the
proposal does not decrease benefits to the beneficiaries. In response
to comment, Sec. 48.25 was modified to require that the Secretary
consider the goals and purposes of the Trust when determining whether a
proposed amendment to the HHCA decreases the benefits to the HHCA
beneficiaries.
It is important to note that there are other factors the Secretary
must find to approve a proposed land exchange in addition to finding
that the proposed exchange advances the interest of the beneficiaries.
See, HHCA Section 204(a)(3) and final rule Sec. 47.35 requiring the
Department to ensure the market value of the property coming into the
Trust is equal or greater than the property departing the Trust.
Similarly, a finding that a proposed amendment to the HHCA advances the
interests of the beneficiaries does not obviate the need for
Congressional approval. See, Admission Act Section 4 (detailing
circumstances in which Congress reserved its own authority over the
Trust). Consideration of whether a land exchange advances the interests
of the beneficiaries or a proposed amendment decreases the benefits to
beneficiaries are separate steps in the Secretary's review processes in
both parts 47 and 48.
34. Should the rule require public input or a public vote when
determining if a State-proposed amendment to the HHCA or HHC Chairman-
proposed land exchange involving Hawaiian home lands is reviewed by the
Secretary?
Response: When reviewing land exchanges involving Hawaiian home
lands proposed by the Chairman of the HHC or State-proposed amendments
to the HHCA, the Secretary will consider all information provided by
the State, including any public input it received. For purposes of land
exchanges, it is the Chairman's decision as to whether to include
public input, including any vote results from the public, in a land
exchange proposal submitted to the Secretary. Section 47.60 sets forth
the documentation that the Chairman must submit to the Secretary in a
land exchange packet, which, in response to this comment, now includes
the recorded vote of the Commissioners. The rule requires in Sec.
48.15 that the final vote totals for votes taken by the HHC and the
State of Hawai[revaps]i Legislature on a proposed HHCA amendment be
forwarded to the Secretary when it is submitted for review. These vote
totals help to provide the Secretary with a full picture of the State's
position on a proposed amendment and whether that amendment decreases
the benefits to the beneficiaries. This requirement is retained in the
final rule.
35. Should the rule require that the HHC Chairman engage in
consultation with the beneficiaries before any land exchange involving
Hawaiian home lands is approved or the Secretary makes a final
determination regarding a proposed amendment to the HHCA?
Response: The HHCA, Admission Act, and the HHLRA define the three
parties involved in reviewing land exchanges involving Hawaiian home
lands and proposed amendments to the HHCA. These parties are the State
of Hawai[revaps]i (represented by the DHHL and HHC), the HHCA
beneficiary community, and the Federal Government (represented by the
Secretary of the Interior). The beneficiary community obtains much of
this voice through consultation with either the State or the
Department.
[[Page 29785]]
Thus, while the HHC Chairman is not required to engage in consultation
with the beneficiary community, without it the Department may not have
sufficient information to evaluate whether a Chairman-proposed land
exchange or a State-proposed amendment advances the interests of the
HHCA beneficiaries.
36. Should the rule provide a definition of a homestead association?
Response: The Department agrees that the rule should provide a
definition of a homestead association to provide clarity to the
definition in the HHCA. The Secretary added a definition of homestead
association in Sec. 48.6 of this rule based on the language provided
in sections 204(a)(2), 213, and 214(a) of the HHCA. This definition is
also based on the definition of a Native Hawaiian organization listed
in the National Historic Preservation Act and Native American Graves
Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA). The Secretary will maintain a
list of the homestead associations that meet this definition and file a
statement, signed by the association's governing body, of governing
procedures and a description of the territory it represents.
37. Should the purpose of consultation be only to engage in good faith
efforts to educate the beneficiaries, discuss and solicit their
comments, and not to seek agreement?
Response: As the National Historic Preservation Act provides
Federal agencies with guidance on how to work with the Native Hawaiian
community, the Department chose to use the Act's definition of
consultation for working with the Native Hawaiian beneficiary
community. The National Historic Preservation Act defines consultation
as the process of seeking, discussing, and considering the views of
other participants, and, where feasible, seeking agreement.
38. Do the rules already in place that deal with the treatment of land
exchanges involving indigenous lands held in trust for Federally
recognized tribes with whom the United States has a formal government-
to-government relationship provide sufficient guidance to the Secretary
when reviewing land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands?
Response: No. The rules related to exchanges to lands held in trust
are located in 25 CFR part 151 that do not apply to Hawaiian home
lands. Congress enacted the HHCA and HHLRA to govern land exchanges
involving Hawaiian home lands.
39. Is the rule necessary to provide HHCA beneficiaries with options to
hold the DHHL and the State accountable when proposing land exchanges
involving Hawaiian home lands and amendments to the HHCA?
Issue: A commenter questions the need for parts 47 and 48 and
states ``Beneficiaries have held DHHL as well as the State accountable
through the judicial process, both federal and state; special
legislative hearings; legislative audits; and media reports (including
traditional print and TV media as well as social and internet based
media resources). Statutorily, beneficiaries can pursue action for
breaches of trust under Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 673 (Native
Hawaiian Trusts Judicial Relief Act; aka Right to Sue).''
Response: Parts 47 and 48 seek to provide clarity and transparency
in the Federal administration of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust
statutes. By providing this clarity, the Secretary can better implement
section 206(b) of the HHLRA that requires the Secretary to administer
these statutes in a way that advances the interests of the
beneficiaries. This rule also seeks to provide transparency about what
information is necessary to make decisions regarding HHC Chairman-
proposed land exchanges involving Hawaiian home lands and State-
proposed amendments to the HHCA. Such transparency should increase
confidence of the beneficiary community in the decisions of the
Secretary and State, thus minimizing any risk and need for litigation.
The rule incorporates consultation with the HHCA beneficiaries and
consideration of the interests of the HHCA beneficiaries as provided by
Congress in the HHLRA during the proposal and review processes. Such
provisions address HHCA beneficiary concerns that they are often the
last to be informed about proposed actions affecting their interests
and are often informed after-the-fact when decisions have already been
made. Such consultation should result in better-informed decision-
making and lessen the need of beneficiaries to seek recourse after
decisions have already been made.
40. Does the rule expand the Secretary's authority beyond the HHLRA?
Response: No. The rule simply provides uniform processes for
implementing the authorities and responsibilities Congress granted the
Secretary in the HHCA and HHLRA, consistent with the standards and
requirements established by Congress in these and other applicable
Federal laws, including those listed in Sec. 47.15. It is important to
note that Congress did not exempt the Secretary's actions under the
HHLRA from other applicable Federal laws, such as Native American
Graves Protection and Repatriation Act that directly apply to Hawaiian
home lands.
The information delineated in this rule provides clarity in the
Department's decisions regarding land exchanges involving Hawaiian home
lands and amendments to the HHCA proposed by the State. While the
Secretary will give weight to the State in its findings and analysis,
the rule seeks to make certain the information gathered is substantive
and reasonably verifiable in order to ensure the Hawaiian Home Lands
Trust statutes are administered in a way that advances the interests of
the beneficiaries as required by section 206 of the HHLRA.
41. Should the rule provide for recourse if the Secretary fails to
follow the rule or act within specific timeframes?
Response: No. Congress provides for uniform and consistent systems
of recourse and judicial review through other statutes, such as the
Administrative Procedure Act, and has not provided any other specific
recourse with regard to the Secretary's responsibilities under the HHCA
or HHLRA.
42. Should the rule provide for automatic approval of a HHC Chairman-
proposed land exchange or State-proposed amendments to the HHCA if the
Secretary fails to follow the rule or act within specific timeframes?
Response: Automatic approval of HHC Chairman proposed land
exchanges or State-proposed amendments to the HHCA is inconsistent with
sections 204 and 205 of the HHLRA, section 4 of the Admission Act, and
potentially section 206 of the HHLRA, which requires that these
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust statutes be administered to advance the
interests of the beneficiaries. Moreover, such automatic approvals
would deprive the beneficiary community of the reasoned analysis and
considered judgment of the Department in its exercise of these
statutory responsibilities.
43. Should part 47 include a fast-track process for approval of land
exchanges involving emergency situations, smaller acreages, less
intense uses, or already developed land where the use will remain the
same?
By following the provisions of sections 47.50-47.60, the HHC
[[Page 29786]]
Chairman and DHHL can dramatically reduce the amount of time necessary
to complete a land exchange and increase the likelihood the exchange
will be acted on by the Secretary without the delay necessitated by
requests for additional information. In cases where a proposed land
exchange is between the DHHL and another agency of the State or a
Federal agency, where no change in land use is planned, a categorical
exclusion under NEPA may be applicable as listed under Chapter 7.5 of
the Department of the Interior Departmental Manual, which reduces the
time required in preparation and review.
If the HHC Chairman chooses not to seek the assistance of the
Secretary in developing an exchange proposal, the HHC Chairman may
merely submit the documentation listed in Sec. 47.60. In accordance
with section 205 of the HHLRA, the Secretary will approve or disapprove
the proposed exchange not later than 120 days after receiving the
information required in Sec. 47.60.
44. Does an assessment of beneficiary interests by the Secretary
undermine the State's subject matter expertise and usurp the executive
power of the HHC by re-evaluating the Commission's determination?
Response: No. While the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust statutes provide
the State and its subdivisions, including the HHC and its Chairman,
certain responsibilities, nowhere do they relieve the Secretary of the
requirement in section 206(b) of the HHLRA to administer the Hawaiian
Home Lands Trust statutes in a way that advances the interests of the
beneficiaries. For proper care of the Trust to take place, all three
parties, the State, the Secretary, and the beneficiary community, must
work together and fulfill their respective duties assigned by Congress.
It is because the Federal government has an independent interest in
implementing the Trust and because Congress understood that the State
and its subdivisions might have interests that conflict with the
interests of the beneficiaries, that Congress required Secretarial
approval or disapproval of the HHC Chairman-proposed land exchange or
State proposed amendment to the HHCA in section 205 of the HHLRA and
section 204 of the HHCA. In addition, the Secretary has an interest in
enforcing Federal law within her responsibility.
45. Does the language ``benefits to the parties of the proposed
exchange'' in section 205(a)(3) of the HHLRA require the Secretary to
look at the benefits to the DHHL because the parties to an exchange
will always be DHHL and another?
Response: No. Such language requires the Secretary to look at the
benefits to the beneficiaries of the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. This
provision must be read to be consistent with section 206, which
requires the Secretary to advance the interests of the beneficiaries.
Such a reading is also consistent with the purposes of the HHCA. The
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust was established for the benefit of the HHCA
beneficiaries. Section 206(b)(1) of the HHLRA specifically directs the
Department to ``(1) advance the interests of the beneficiaries.'' To
read the language in section 205(a)(1) as suggested by the commenter,
gives no weight to this provision of section 206 and ignores the
responsibilities of the State to the beneficiaries. In response to this
comment, the language in Sec. 47.30(a) was edited to remove the
reference of ``administration.''
46. Does the rule limit the amount of consultation that the HHC
Chairman or the Secretary may engage in with beneficiaries when
reviewing Chairman-proposed land exchanges involving Hawaiian home
lands or State-proposed amendments to the HHCA?
Response: The definition of consultation provided in both parts 47
and 48 outline the minimum requirements for consultation. If the HHC
Chairman chooses to engage in additional consultation efforts or
decides to require a higher standard, such as holding face-to-face
consultation with beneficiaries on all proposed land exchanges and
amendments to the HHCA, the Department supports such efforts as
beneficial to the beneficiaries, the Chairman, and the Secretary.
47. If the factors from Sec. 47.20 refer to the non-Hawaiian home
lands that would be received, how are the benefits in retaining
Hawaiian home lands determined in order to apply the balancing test in
Sec. 47.30(b)?
Response: The factors listed in Sec. 47.20 are utilized by the
Secretary to review both the non-Hawaiian home lands proposed to be
received into the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust and the Hawaiian home lands
the HHC Chairman proposes to remove from the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust.
Section 47.30(b) provides explicit instruction on how the Sec. 47.20
factors are to be weighed.
48. The Factors Listed in Sec. 47.30(a) and (c) Are Ambiguous
Response: The language in Sec. 47.30(a) is not ambiguous. It
requires the exercise of judgment when reviewing land exchanges
covering a wide range of circumstances. Section 47.30(a) emphasizes the
need for the Secretary to consider the long term effects a land
exchange will have on the lands in the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust. These
trust lands are being held in order to advance the interests of the
HHCA beneficiaries. Section 47.30(b) is intended to ensure that
beneficiaries benefit from every exchange. Section 47.30(c) emphasizes
the need for the Secretary to consider whether a proposed exchange will
significantly conflict with the beneficiaries' interests in adjacent
Hawaiian home lands.
49. Is the analysis presented in Sec. Sec. 47.20 and 47.30 highly
discretionary and provide for circumstances where the various factors
may conflict?
Response: Section 204(a)(3) of the HHCA and section 205(b) of the
HHLRA make clear that a land exchange is not valid until it has been
approved by the Secretary, but does not suggest that the Secretary is
required to approve every proposed land exchange. Indeed, Congress
provided expressly in section 205(b) of the HHLRA that ``the Secretary
shall approve or disapprove the proposed exchange.'' The Secretary must
also, at a minimum, be satisfied that the purposes of the Hawaiian Home
Land Trust statutes are met. Each of these factors requires the
exercise of judgment. Thus, the discharge of the responsibility placed
on the Secretary is not ministerial. Nor is it ``discretionary'' as the
factors to be considered are enumerated. There is, nonetheless, some
subjectivity in the evaluation. Sections 47.20 and 47.30 provide
factors to clarify the weighing process the Secretary must engage in
when determining if a land exchange advances the interests of the
beneficiaries. The factors in Sec. 47.20, however, are not exhaustive.
It is possible certain proposed exchanges will present situations
where certain factors listed in Sec. 47.20 may conflict with each
other. In those circumstances the Department will be required to
exercise expertise and judgment within these limits in weighing the
factors in order to determine whether a proposed land exchange advances
the interests of the beneficiaries. If the factors listed in Sec.
47.20 conflict with Sec. 47.30 (a) and (c),
[[Page 29787]]
however, the Secretary will be required to disapprove the proposed land
exchange.
III. Summary of Impacts
1. Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs will review all significant rules. The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs determined that this rule is not
significant.
Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 while
calling for improvements in the nation's regulatory system to promote
predictability, to reduce uncertainty, and to use the best, most
innovative, and least burdensome tools for achieving regulatory ends.
The executive order directs agencies to consider regulatory approaches
that reduce burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice for
the public where these approaches are relevant, feasible, and
consistent with regulatory objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further
that rules must be based on the best available science and that the
rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. This final rule is consistent with these
requirements.
2. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Department of the Interior certifies that this final rule will
not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small
entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) as
the final rule merely describes agency procedures and practices when
reviewing HHC Chairman-proposed land exchanges involving Hawaiian home
lands and State-proposed amendments to the HHCA. These procedures and
practices are not agency activities that will have a significant
economic effect on a substantial number of small entities. This rule
neither imposes burdens on small entities nor requires actions by them.
As such, the Regulatory Flexibility Act does not apply.
3. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)
This is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. This final rule:
(a) Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million
or more.
(b) Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions.
(c) Does not have significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This final rule does not impose an unfunded mandate on State,
local, or tribal governments or the private sector of more than $100
million per year. The final rule does not have a significant or unique
effect on State, local or tribal governments or the private sector. A
statement containing the information required by the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required.
5. Takings (E.O. 12630)
This rule does not affect a taking of private property or otherwise
have taking implications under Executive Order 12630 as the taking of
private property is not a subject covered or even contemplated under
this rule. A takings implication assessment is not required.
6. Federalism (E.O. 13132)
In accordance with Executive Order 13132, the final rule does not
have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
federalism summary impact statement. Based on research and the
deliberations outlined in the response to questions number 8, the final
rule does not substantially and directly affect the relationship
between the Federal and state governments. The Secretary of the
Department of the Interior has oversight to ensure that land under the
HHCA is administered in a manner that advances the interests of the
beneficiaries. A federalism assessment is not required.
7. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
This rule complies with the requirements of Executive Order 12988.
Specifically, this rule:
(a) Meets the criteria of section 3(a) requiring that all rules be
reviewed to eliminate errors and ambiguity and be written to minimize
litigation; and
(b) Meets the criteria of section 3(b)(2) requiring that all rules
be written in clear language and contain clear legal standards.
8. Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O. 13175)
The Department of the Interior strives to strengthen its
government-to-government relationship with Indian tribes through a
commitment to consultation with Indian tribes and recognition of their
right to self-governance and tribal sovereignty. We evaluated this rule
under the Secretary's consultation policy and under the criteria in
Executive Order 13175 and determined that it has no substantial direct
effects on federally recognized Indian tribes and that consultation
under the Secretary's tribal consultation policy is not required.
9. Paperwork Reduction Act
This rule does not contain information collection requirements
subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act and therefore a submission to
the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork Reduction Act
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) is not required. We may not conduct or
sponsor, and you are not required to respond to a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
10. National Environmental Policy Act
This final rule does not constitute a major Federal action
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. A
detailed statement under the National Environmental Policy Act, 1969
(NEPA) is not required. Under Departmental Manual 516 DM 2.3A(2),
Section 1.10 of 516 DM 2, Appendix 1 excludes from documentation in an
environmental assessment or impact statement ``policies, directives,
regulations and guidelines of an administrative, financial, legal,
technical or procedural nature; or the environmental effects of which
are too broad, speculative or conjectural to lend themselves to
meaningful analysis and will be subject later to the NEPA process,
either collectively or case-by-case.'' We have also determined that the
rule does not involve any of the extraordinary circumstances listed in
43 CFR 46.215 that would require further analysis under NEPA.
11. Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. 13211)
This final rule is not a significant energy action under the
definition in Executive Order 13211. A Statement of Energy Effects is
not required.
12. Clarity of This Regulation
The Secretary is required by Executive Orders 12866 (section
1(b)(12)), 12988 (section 3(b)(1)(B)), and 13563 (section 1(a)), and by
the Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in
plain language. This rule meets the requirements that each rule the
Secretary publishes must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
[[Page 29788]]
(c) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
List of Subjects in 43 CFR Parts 47 and 48
Hawaii, Intergovernmental Programs, Land, State-Federal Relations.
Kristen J. Sarri,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of the
Interior amends title 43 of the Code of Federal Regulations by adding
new parts 47 and 48 as set forth below:
PART 47--LAND EXCHANGE PROCEDURES
Sec.
47.5 What is the purpose of this part?
47.10 What definitions apply to terms used in this part?
47.15 What laws apply to exchanges made under this part?
Subpart A--The Exchange Process
47.20 What factors will the Secretary consider in analyzing a land
exchange?
47.30 When does a land exchange advance the interests of the
beneficiaries?
47.35 Must lands exchanged be of equal value?
47.40 How must properties be described?
47.45 How does the exchange process work?
47.50 What should the Chairman include in a land exchange proposal
for the Secretary?
47.55 What are the minimum requirements for appraisals used in a
land exchange?
47.60 What documentation must the Chairman submit to the Secretary
in the land exchange packet?
Subpart B--Approval and Finalization
47.65 When will the Secretary approve or disapprove the land
exchange?
47.70 How does the Chairman complete the exchange?
Authority: State of Hawai[revaps]i Admission Act, 73 Stat. 4,
approved March 18, 1959; Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, as
amended, Act of July 9, 1921, 42 Stat. 108; Hawaiian Home Lands
Recovery Act, 1995, 109 Stat. 537, 5 U.S.C. 301; 25 U.S.C. 2 and 9;
43 U.S.C. 1457; 112 Departmental Manual 28.
Sec. 47.5 What is the purpose of this part?
This part sets forth the procedures for conducting land exchanges
of Hawaiian home lands authorized by the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act,
1920 (HHCA).
Sec. 47.10 What definitions apply to terms used in this part?
As used in this part, the following terms have the meanings given
in this section.
Appraisal or Appraisal report means a written statement
independently and impartially prepared by a qualified appraiser setting
forth an opinion as to the market value of the lands or interests in
lands to be exchanged as of a specific date(s), supported by the
presentation and analysis of relevant market information.
Beneficiary or beneficiaries means ``native Hawaiian(s)'' as that
term is defined under section 201(a) of the Hawaiian Homes Commission
Act.
Chairman means the Chairman of the Hawaiian Homes Commission
designated under section 202 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.
Commission means the Hawaiian Homes Commission established by
section 202 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, which serves as the
executive board of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands.
Consultation or consult means representatives of the government
engaging in an open discussion process that allows interested parties
to address potential issues, changes, or actions. Consultation does not
necessarily require formal face-to-face meetings. The complexity of the
matter along with the potential effects that the matter may have on the
Trust or beneficiaries will dictate the appropriate process for
consultation. Consultation requires dialogue (oral, electronic, or
printed) or a good faith, dialogue or documented effort to engage with
the beneficiaries, consideration of their views, and, where feasible,
seek agreement with the beneficiaries when engaged in the land exchange
process.
DHHL or Department of Hawaiian Home Lands means the department
established by the State of Hawai[revaps]i under sections 26-4 and 26-
17 of the Hawai[revaps]i Revised Statutes to exercise the authorities
and responsibilities of the Hawaiian Homes Commission under the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust means all trust lands given the status of
Hawaiian home lands under section 204 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission
Act, and those lands obtained through approval under this part, and as
directed by Congress.
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust Funds means the funds established in the
HHCA section 213.
Hazardous substances means those substances designated under
Environmental Protection Agency regulations at 40 CFR part 302.
HHCA or Hawaiian Homes Commission Act means the Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act, 1920, 42 Stat. 108, as amended.
HHCA Beneficiary Association means an organization controlled by
beneficiaries who submitted applications to the DHHL for homesteads and
are awaiting the assignment of a homestead; represents and serves the
interests of those beneficiaries; has as a stated primary purpose the
representation of, and provision of services to, those beneficiaries;
and filed with the Secretary a statement, signed by the governing body,
of governing procedures and a description of the beneficiaries it
represents.
HHLRA or Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act means the Hawaiian Home
Lands Recovery Act, 1995, 109 Stat. 357.
Homestead Association means a beneficiary controlled organization
that represents and serves the interests of its homestead community;
has as a stated primary purpose the representation of, and provision of
services to, its homestead community; and filed with the Secretary a
statement, signed by the governing body, of governing procedures and a
description of the territory it represents.
Land exchange is any transaction, other than a sale, that transfers
Hawaiian home lands from the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust to another
entity and in which the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust receives the entity's
land as Hawaiian home lands. A land exchange can involve trading
Hawaiian home lands for private land, but it can also involve trading
land between the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust and State or Federal
agencies.
Market value means the most probable price in cash, or terms
equivalent to cash, that lands or interests in lands should bring in a
competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair
sale, where the buyer and seller each acts prudently and knowledgeably,
and the price is not affected by undue influence.
Native Hawaiian or native Hawaiian has the same meaning as that
term defined under section 201(a) of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.
Office of Valuation Services (OVS) means the Office with real
estate appraisal functions within the Office of the Assistant
Secretary--Policy, Management, and Budget of the Department of the
Interior.
Outstanding interests means rights or interests in property
involved in a land exchange held by an entity other than a party to the
exchange.
[[Page 29789]]
Secretary means the Secretary of the Interior or the individual to
whom the authority and responsibilities of the Secretary have been
delegated.
Trust means the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust and the Hawaiian Home
Lands Trust Funds.
Sec. 47.15 What laws apply to exchanges made under this part?
(a) The Chairman may only exchange land under the authority of the
HHCA in conformity with the HHLRA.
(b) When the Chairman makes any land exchange, the following laws
and regulations constitute a partial list of applicable laws and
regulations:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Legislation or regulation Citation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) The National Historic Preservation Act, 1966........... 16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.
(2) Implementing regulations for the National Historic 36 CFR part 800.
Preservation Act.
(3) Section 3 of the Native American Graves Protection and 25 U.S.C. 3002.
Repatriation Act (NAGPRA).
(4) Implementing regulations for the Native American Graves 43 CFR part 10.
Protection and Repatriation Act.
(5) The National Environmental Policy Act, 1969 (NEPA)..... 42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.
(6) Implementing regulations for NEPA...................... 40 CFR parts 1500-1508; 43 CFR part 46.
(7) The State of Hawai[revaps]i Admission Act.............. 73 Stat. 4.
(8) Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, as amended........ 42 Stat. 108.
(9) Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act, 1995................. 109 Stat. 537.
(10) Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.
and Liability Act (CERCLA).
(11) Implementing regulations for CERCLA................... 40 CFR part 312.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No new legal rights or obligations are created through listing
applicable laws and regulatory provisions in this section.
Subpart A--The Exchange Process
Sec. 47.20 What factors will the Secretary consider in analyzing a
land exchange?
The Secretary may approve an exchange only after making a
determination that the exchange will advance the interests of the
beneficiaries. In considering whether a land exchange will advance the
interests of the beneficiaries, the Secretary will evaluate the extent
to which it will:
(a) Achieve better management of Hawaiian home lands;
(b) Meet the needs of HHCA beneficiaries and their economic
circumstances by promoting:
(1) Homesteading opportunities,
(2) economic self-sufficiency, and,
(3) social well-being;
(c) Promote development of Hawaiian home lands for residential,
agricultural, and pastoral use;
(d) Protect cultural resources and watersheds;
(e) Consolidate lands or interests in lands, such as agricultural
and timber interests, for more logical and efficient management and
development;
(f) Expand homestead communities;
(g) Accommodate land use authorizations;
(h) Address HHCA beneficiary needs; and
(i) Advance other identifiable interests of the beneficiaries
consistent with the HHCA.
Sec. 47.30 When does a land exchange advance the interests of the
beneficiaries?
A determination that an exchange advances the interests of the
beneficiaries must find that:
(a) The exchange supports perpetuation of the Hawaiian Home Lands
Trust;
(b) The interests of the beneficiaries in obtaining non-Hawaiian
home lands exceeds the interests of the beneficiaries in retaining the
Hawaiian home lands proposed for the exchange, based on an evaluation
of the factors in Sec. 47.20; and
(c) The intended use of the conveyed Hawaiian home lands will not
significantly conflict with the beneficiaries' interests in adjacent
Hawaiian home lands.
Sec. 47.35 Must lands exchanged be of equal value?
Hawaiian home lands to be exchanged must be of equal or lesser
value than the lands to be received in the exchange, as determined by
the appraisal. Once the market value is established by an approved
appraisal, an administrative determination as to the equity of the
exchange can be made based on the market value reflected in the
approved appraisal.
Sec. 47.40 How must properties be described?
The description of properties involved in a land exchange must be
either:
(a) Based upon a survey completed in accordance with the Public
Land Survey System laws and standards of the United States; or
(b) If Public Land Survey System laws and standards cannot be
applied, based upon a survey that both:
(1) Uses other means prescribed or allowed by applicable law; and
(2) Clearly describes the property and allows it to be easily
located.
Sec. 47.45 How does the exchange process work?
(a) The Secretary recommends the parties prepare a land exchange
proposal in accordance with Sec. 47.50. The Secretary also recommends
the Chairman and the non-Chairman party in the exchange meet with the
Secretary before finalizing a land exchange proposal and signing an
agreement to initiate the land exchange to informally discuss:
(1) The review and processing procedures for Hawaiian home lands
exchanges;
(2) Potential issues involved that may require more consideration;
or
(3) Any other matter that may make the proposal more complete
before submission.
(b) Whether or not a land exchange proposal is completed, the
Chairman initiates the exchange by preparing the documentation,
conducting appropriate studies, and submitting them to the Secretary in
accordance with Sec. 47.60.
(c) Upon completing the review of the final land exchange packet
under Sec. 47.60, the Secretary will issue a Notice of Decision
announcing the approval or disapproval of the exchange.
(d) If the Secretary approves an exchange, title will transfer in
accordance with State law.
Sec. 47.50 What should the Chairman include in a land exchange
proposal for the Secretary?
(a) A land exchange proposal should include the following
documentation:
[[Page 29790]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposal should include . . . that should contain . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Identifying information............................ (i) The identity of the parties involved in the
proposed exchange; and
(ii) The status of their ownership of the properties in
the exchange, or their ability to provide title to the
properties.
(2) Descriptive information............................ A legal description of:
(i) The land considered for the exchange; and
(ii) The appurtenant rights proposed to be exchanged
or reserved.
(3) Authorized use information......................... (i) Any authorized uses including grants, permits,
easements, or leases; and
(ii) Any known unauthorized uses, outstanding
interests, exceptions, adverse claims, covenants,
restrictions, title defects or encumbrances.
(4) A time schedule for completing the exchange........ Expected dates of significant transactions or
milestones.
(5) Assignment of responsibilities..................... Responsibilities for:
(i) Performance of required actions; and
(ii) Costs associated with the proposed exchange.
(6) Hazardous substance information.................... Notice of:
(i) Any known release, storage, or disposal of
hazardous substances on non-Hawaiian Home Land Trust
properties in the exchange;
(ii) Any commitments regarding responsibility for
removal or remedial actions concerning hazardous
substances on non-Hawaiian Home Land Trust
properties; and
(iii) All terms and conditions regarding hazardous
substances on non-Hawaiian Home Land Trust
properties.
(7) Grants of permission by each party to the other.... Permission to enter the properties for the purpose of
conducting physical examination and studies in
preparation for the exchange. Written permission to
appraise the properties should also be included.
(8) Three statements................................... Details of:
(i) Arrangements for relocating tenants, if there
are tenants, occupying the Hawaiian Home Land Trust
and non-Hawaiian Home Land Trust properties
involved in the exchange;
(ii) How the land exchange proposal complies with
the HHCA and HHLRA; and
(iii) How the documents of conveyance will be
exchanged once the Secretary has approved the
exchange.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) When the parties to the exchange agree to proceed with the land
exchange proposal, they may sign an agreement that the Chairman will
initiate the exchange.
Sec. 47.55 What are the minimum requirements for appraisals used in a
land exchange?
(a) The following table shows the steps in the appraisal process.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appraisal process step Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) The parties to the exchange must arrange for (i) The parties must arrange for appraisals within 90
appraisals. days after executing the agreement to initiate the
land exchange, unless the parties agree to another
schedule.
(ii) The parties must give the appraiser the land
exchange proposal, if any, and the agreement to
initiate the land exchange, and any attachments and
amendments.
(iii) The Chairman may request assistance from the
Office of Valuation Services (OVS). OVS can provide
valuation services to the Chairman, including
appraisal, appraisal review, and appraisal advice on a
reimbursable basis. OVS is also available for post-
facto program review to ensure that appraisals
conducted by the State are in conformance with the
Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice
and the Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land
Acquisitions as appropriate.
(2) The qualified appraiser must provide an appraisal The appraiser must:
report. (i) Meet the qualification requirements in paragraph
(b) of this section;
(ii) Produce a report that meets the qualifications
in paragraph (c) of this section; and
(iii) Complete the appraisal under the timeframe and
terms negotiated with the parties in the exchange.
(3) The Secretary will review appraisal reports........ The Secretary will evaluate the reports using:
(i) The Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal
Practice; and
(ii) The Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land
Acquisitions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) To be qualified to appraise land for exchange under paragraph
(a)(2) of this section, an appraiser must:
(1) Be competent, reputable, impartial, and experienced in
appraising property similar to the properties involved in the appraisal
assignment; and
(2) Be approved by the OVS, if required by the Department of the
Interior's Office of Native Hawaiian Relations.
(3) Be licensed to perform appraisals in the State of
Hawai[revaps]i unless a Federal employee whose position requires the
performance of appraisal duties. Federal employees only need to be
licensed in one State or territory to perform real estate appraisal
duties as Federal employees in all States and territories.
(c) Appraisal reports for the exchange must:
(1) Be completed in accordance with the current edition of the
Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) and the
Uniform Appraisal Standards for Federal Land Acquisition (UASFLA); and
(2) Include the estimated market value of Hawaiian home lands and
non-Hawaiian home lands properties involved in the exchange.
[[Page 29791]]
Sec. 47.60 What documentation must the Chairman submit to the
Secretary in the land exchange packet?
The documents in the exchange packet submitted to us for approval
must include the following:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The packet must contain . . . that must include . . .
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(a) Required statements................................ (1) A statement of approval for the exchange from the
Commission that includes the recorded vote of the
Commission;
(2) A statement of compliance with the National
Historic Preservation Act and, as appropriate, a
cultural and historic property review;
(3) An explanation of how the exchange will advance the
interests of the beneficiaries;
(4) A summary of all consultations with beneficiaries,
HHCA homestead associations, or HHCA beneficiary
associations; and
(5) A statement of compliance with the Native American
Graves Protection and Repatriation Act.
(b) Required analyses and reports...................... (1) Environmental analyses and records sufficient to
meet CERCLA, NEPA, and all other pertinent Federal
environmental requirements;
(2) Land appraisal reports and statements of
qualification of the appraisers in accordance with
Sec. 47.55; and
(3) If property conveyed is adjacent to Hawaiian home
lands:
(i) An analysis of intended use of the Hawaiian home
lands conveyed;
(ii) A finding that the intended use will not conflict
with established management objectives on the adjacent
Hawaiian home lands; and
(4) A copy of the land exchange proposal, if any.
(c) Relevant legal documents........................... (1) Any land exchange agreements entered into regarding
the subject properties between Chairman and the non-
Chairman party;
(2) Evidence of title; and
(3) Deeds signed by the parties, with a signature block
for the Secretary of the Interior or our authorized
representative to approve the transaction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 47.65 When will the Secretary approve or disapprove the land
exchange?
On receipt of the complete land exchange packet from the
Commission, the Secretary will approve or disapprove the exchange
within 120 calendar days.
(a) Before approving or disapproving the exchange, the Secretary
will review all environmental analyses, appraisals, and all other
supporting studies and requirements to determine whether the proposed
exchange complies with applicable law and advances the interests of the
beneficiaries.
(b) The Secretary may consult with the beneficiaries when making a
determination if a land exchange advances the interests of the
beneficiaries.
(c) After approving or disapproving an exchange, the Secretary will
notify DHHL, the Commission, and other officials as required by section
205(b)(2) of the HHLRA. The Secretary will post notice of the
determination on the DOI Web site and give email notice of the posting
to all those on the notification list maintained by the Office of
Native Hawaiian Relations requesting notice of actions by the
Secretary.
Sec. 47.70 How does the Chairman complete the exchange once approved?
(a) The Chairman completes the exchange in accordance with the
requirements of State law.
(b) The Chairman shall provide a title report to the Secretary as
evidence of the completed exchange.
PART 48--AMENDMENTS TO THE HAWAIIAN HOMES COMMISSION ACT
Sec.
48.5 What is the purpose of this part?
48.6 What definitions apply to terms used in this part?
48.10 What is the Secretary's role in reviewing proposed amendments
to the HHCA?
48.15 What are the Chairman's responsibilities in submitting
proposed amendments to the Secretary?
48.20 How does the Secretary determine if the State is seeking to
amend Federal law?
48.25 How does the Secretary determine if the proposed amendment
decreases the benefits to beneficiaries of Hawaiian home lands?
48.30 How does the Secretary determine if Congressional approval is
unnecessary?
48.35 When must the Secretary determine if the proposed amendment
requires Congressional approval?
48.40 What notification will the Secretary provide?
48.45 When is a proposed amendment deemed effective?
48.50 Can the State of Hawai[revaps]i amend the Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act without Secretarial review?
Authority: State of Hawai[revaps]i Admission Act, 73 Stat. 4,
approved March 18, 1959; Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, 42
Stat. 108 et seq., Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act, 1995, 109 Stat.
537; 5 U.S.C. 301; 25 U.S.C. 2 and 9; 43 U.S.C. 1457; 112
Departmental Manual 28.
Sec. 48.5 What is the purpose of this part?
(a) This part sets forth the policies and procedures for:
(1) Review by the Secretary of amendments to the Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act proposed by the State of Hawai[revaps]i; and
(2) Determination by the Secretary whether the proposed amendment
requires congressional approval.
(b) This part implements requirements of the Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act, the State of Hawai[revaps]i Admission Act, 1959, and
the Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act, 1995.
Sec. 48.6 What definitions apply to terms used in this part?
As used in this part, the following terms have the meanings given
in this section.
Beneficiary or beneficiaries means ``native Hawaiian(s)'' as that
term is defined under section 201(a) of the Hawaiian Homes Commission
Act.
Chairman means the Chairman of the Hawaiian Homes Commission
designated under section 202 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.
Commission means the Hawaiian Homes Commission, established by
section 202 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, which serves as the
executive board of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands.
Consultation or consult means representatives of the government
[[Page 29792]]
engaging in an open discussion process that allows interested parties
to address potential issues, changes, or actions. Consultation does not
necessarily require formal face-to-face meetings. The complexity of the
matter along with the potential effects that the matter may have on the
Trust or beneficiaries will dictate the appropriate process for
consultation. Consultation requires dialogue (oral, electronic, or
printed) or a good faith, dialogue or documented effort to engage with
the beneficiaries, consideration of their views, and, where feasible,
seek agreement with the beneficiaries when engaged in the land exchange
process.
DHHL or Department of Hawaiian Home Lands means the department
established by the State of Hawai[revaps]i under sections 26-4 and 26-
17 of the Hawai[revaps]i Revised Statutes to exercise the authorities
and responsibilities of the Hawaiian Homes Commission under the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust means all trust lands given the status of
Hawaiian home lands under section 204 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission
Act, and those lands obtained through approval under part 47, and as
directed by Congress.
Hawaiian Home Lands Trust Funds means the funds established in the
HHCA section 213.
HHCA or Hawaiian Homes Commission Act means the Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act, 1920, 42 Stat. 108 et seq., as amended.
HHCA Beneficiary Association means an organization controlled by
beneficiaries who submitted applications to the DHHL for homesteads and
are awaiting the assignment of a homestead; represents and serves the
interests of those beneficiaries; has as a stated primary purpose the
representation of, and provision of services to, those beneficiaries;
and filed with the Secretary a statement, signed by the governing body,
of governing procedures and a description of the beneficiaries it
represents.
HHLRA or Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act means the Hawaiian Home
Lands Recovery Act, 1995, 109 Stat. 537.
Lessee means either a:
(1) Beneficiary who has been awarded a lease under section 207(a)
of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act;
(2) Person to whom land has been transferred under section 208(5)
of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act; or
(3) Successor lessee under section 209 of the Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act.
Homestead Association means a beneficiary controlled organization
that represents and serves the interests of its homestead community;
has as a stated primary purpose the representation of, and provision of
services to, its homestead community; and filed with the Secretary a
statement, signed by the governing body, of governing procedures and a
description of the territory it represents.
Secretary means the Secretary of the Interior or the individual to
whom the authority and responsibilities of the Secretary have been
delegated.
Trust means the Hawaiian Home Lands Trust and the Hawaiian Home
Lands Trust Funds.
Sec. 48.10 What is the Secretary's role in reviewing proposed
amendments to the HHCA?
(a) The Secretary must review proposed amendments to the Hawaiian
Homes Commission Act (HHCA) by the State of Hawai[revaps]i to determine
whether the proposed amendment requires approval of Congress.
(b) The Secretary will notify the Chairman and Congress of this
determination, and if approval is required, submit to Congress the
documents required by Sec. 48.35(b).
Sec. 48.15 What are the Chairman's responsibilities in submitting
proposed amendments to the Secretary?
(a) Not later than 120 days after the State approves a proposed
amendment to the HHCA, the Chairman must submit to the Secretary a
clear and complete:
(1) Copy of the proposed amendment;
(2) Description of the nature of the change proposed by the
proposed amendment; and,
(3) Opinion explaining whether the proposed amendment requires the
approval of Congress.
(b) The following information must also be submitted:
(1) A description of the proposed amendment, including how the
proposed amendment advances the interests of the beneficiaries;
(2) All testimony and correspondence from the Director of the
Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, Hawaiian Homes Commissioners,
Homestead Associations, HHCA Beneficiary Associations, and
beneficiaries providing views on the proposed amendment;
(3) An analysis of the law and policy of the proposed amendment by
the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and the Hawaiian Homes
Commission;
(4) Documentation of the dates and number of hearings held on the
measure, and a copy of all testimony provided or submitted at each
hearing;
(5) Copies of all committee reports and other legislative history,
including prior versions of the proposed amendment;
(6) Final vote totals by the Commission and the legislature on the
proposed amendment;
(7) Summaries of all consultations conducted with the beneficiaries
regarding the proposed amendment; and
(8) Other additional information that the State believes may assist
in the review of the proposed amendment.
Sec. 48.20 How does the Secretary determine if the State is seeking
to amend Federal law?
(a) The Secretary will determine that Congressional approval is
required if the proposed amendment, or any other legislative action
that directly or indirectly has the effect of:
(1) Decreasing the benefits to the beneficiaries of the Trust;
(2) Reducing or impairing the Hawaiian Home Land Trust Funds;
(3) Allowing for additional encumbrances to be placed on Hawaiian
home lands by officers other than those charged with the administration
of the HHCA;
(4) Changing the qualifications of who may be a lessee;
(5) Allowing the use of proceeds and income from the Hawaiian home
lands for purposes other than carrying out the provisions of the HHCA;
or
(6) Amending a section other than sections 202, 213, 219, 220, 222,
224, or 225, or other provisions relating to administration, or
paragraph (2) of section 204, section 206, or 212 or other provisions
relating to the powers and duties of officers other than those charged
with the administration of the HHCA.
(b) The Secretary may consult with the beneficiaries when making a
determination.
Sec. 48.25 How does the Secretary determine if the proposed amendment
decreases the benefits to beneficiaries of Hawaiian home lands?
(a) In determining benefits to the beneficiaries, the Secretary
will consider the goals and purposes of the Trust, including, but not
limited to, the following:
(1) The provision of homesteads to beneficiaries;
(2) The rehabilitation of beneficiaries and their families and
Hawaiian homestead communities;
(3) The educational, economic, political, social, and cultural
processes by which the general welfare and conditions of beneficiaries
are improved and perpetuated;
[[Page 29793]]
(4) The construction of replacement homes, repairs or additions;
(5) The development of farm, ranch or aquaculture, including soil
and water conservation;
(6) The enhanced construction, reconstruction, operation and
maintenance of revenue-producing improvements intended to benefit
occupants of Hawaiian home lands;
(7) The making of investments in water and other utilities,
supplies, equipment, and goods, as well as professional services needed
to plan, implement, develop or operate such projects that will improve
the value of Hawaiian home lands for their current and future
occupants; and,
(8) The establishment and maintenance of an account to serve as a
reserve for loans issued or backed by the Federal Government.
(b) The Secretary will determine if the proposed amendment or any
other legislative action decreases the above-described or similar
benefits to the beneficiaries, now or in the future, by weighing the
answers to the following questions:
(1) How would the proposed amendment impact the benefits to current
lessees of Hawaiian home lands?
(2) How would the proposed amendment impact the benefits to
beneficiaries currently on a waiting list for a Hawaiian home lands
lease?
(3) How would the proposed amendment impact the benefits to
beneficiaries who have not yet applied for a Hawaiian home lands lease?
(4) If the interests of the beneficiaries who have not been awarded
a Hawaiian home lands lease and the lessees differ, how does the
proposed amendment weigh the interests of beneficiaries who have not
been awarded a Hawaiian home lands lease with the interests of Hawaiian
home lands lessees?
(5) If the interests of the beneficiaries who have not been awarded
a Hawaiian home lands lease and the lessees differ, do the benefits to
the lessees outweigh any detriment to the beneficiaries who have not
been awarded a Hawaiian home lands lease?
(6) If the interests of the beneficiaries differ from the interests
of the lessees, do the benefits to the beneficiaries outweigh any
detriment to the lessees?
Sec. 48.30 How does the Secretary determine if Congressional approval
is unnecessary?
The Secretary will determine that Congressional approval is
unnecessary if the proposed amendment meets none of the criteria in
Sec. 48.20.
Sec. 48.35 When must the Secretary determine if the proposed
amendment requires Congressional approval?
The Secretary will review the documents submitted by the Chairman,
and if they meet the requirements of Sec. 48.15, the Secretary will
determine within 60 days after receiving them if the proposed amendment
requires Congressional approval.
Sec. 48.40 What notification will the Secretary provide?
(a) If the Secretary determines that Congressional approval of the
proposed amendment is unnecessary, the Secretary will:
(1) Notify the Chairmen of the Senate Committee on Energy and
Natural Resources and of the House Committee on Natural Resources, the
Governor, Speaker of the House of Representatives and President of the
Senate of the State of Hawai[revaps]i, and the Chairman of the Hawaiian
Homes Commission; and
(2) Include, if appropriate, an opinion on whether the proposed
amendment advances the interests of the beneficiaries.
(b) If the Secretary determines that Congressional approval of the
proposed amendment is required, the Secretary will notify the Chairmen
of the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and of the
House Committee on Natural Resources, the Governor, Speaker of the
House of Representatives and President of the Senate of the State of
Hawai[revaps]i, and the Chairman of the Hawaiian Homes Commission. The
Secretary will also submit to the Committees the following:
(1) A draft joint resolution approving the proposed amendment;
(2) A description of the change made by the proposed amendment and
an explanation of how the proposed amendment advances the interests of
the beneficiaries;
(3) A comparison of the existing law with the proposed amendment;
(4) A recommendation on the advisability of approving the proposed
amendment;
(5) All documentation concerning the proposed amendment received
from the Chairman; and
(6) All documentation concerning the proposed amendment received
from the beneficiaries.
(c) The Secretary will post notice of the determination on the
Department of the Interior's Web site.
Sec. 48.45 When is a proposed amendment deemed effective?
(a) If the Secretary determines that a proposed amendment meets
none of the criteria in Sec. 48.20, the effective date of the proposed
amendment is the date of the notification letter to the Congressional
Committee Chairmen.
(b) If the Secretary determines that the proposed amendment
requires congressional approval then the effective date of the proposed
amendment is the date that Congress's approval becomes law.
Sec. 48.50 Can the State of Hawai[revaps]i amend the Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act without Secretarial review?
The Secretary must review all proposed amendments to the Hawaiian
Homes Commission Act. Any proposed amendments to any terms or
provisions of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act by the State must also
specifically state that the proposed amendment proposes to amend the
Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. Any state enactment that impacts any of
the criteria in Sec. 48.20 shall have no effect on the provisions of
the HHCA or administration of the Trust, except pursuant to this part.
[FR Doc. 2016-11146 Filed 5-11-16; 12:00 pm]
BILLING CODE 4334-63-P