Title Evidence for Trust Land Acquisitions, 30173-30178 [2016-11489]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
approval of an AMOC, provided the RC steps,
including substeps and identified figures, can
still be done as specified, and the airplane
can be put back in an airworthy condition.
This rule will be effective May
16, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Martha P. Rico, Secretary to
the Board, Railroad Retirement Board,
(j) Related Information
844 N. Rush Street, Chicago, Illinois
For more information about this AD,
60611–2092.
contact Roger Durbin, Aerospace Engineer,
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los
Marguerite P. Dadabo, Assistant General
Angeles ACO, 3960 Paramount Boulevard,
Lakewood, CA 90712–4137; phone: 562–627– Counsel, (312) 751–4945, TTD (312)
751–4701.
5233; fax: 562–627–5210; email:
roger.durbin@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Railroad Retirement Board (Board)
(k) Material Incorporated by Reference
amends part 367 of the Board’s
(1) The Director of the Federal Register
regulations, Recovery of Debts Owed to
approved the incorporation by reference
the United States Government by
(IBR) of the service information listed in this
Administrative Offset. Specifically, the
paragraph under 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR
part 51.
Board amends section 367.3(a), Board
(2) You must use this service information
Responsibilities. Section 367.3(a) states
as applicable to do the actions required by
that all nontax debts over 180 days
this AD, unless the AD specifies otherwise.
delinquent shall be referred to the
(i) Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757–
Department of the Treasury for
53A0099, dated September 18, 2014.
administrative offset through the
(ii) Reserved.
Treasury Offset Program as required by
(3) For Boeing service information
identified in this AD, contact Boeing
31 U.S.C. 3716. 31 U.S.C. 3716 was
Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data &
amended by the Digital Accountability
Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC
and Transparency Act (DATA Act),
2H–65, Seattle, WA 98124–2207; telephone
Public Law 113–101. The DATA Act
206–544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–
now requires agencies to refer to the
5680; Internet https://
Department of the Treasury valid,
www.myboeingfleet.com.
delinquent nontax debts for the purpose
(4) You may view this service information
of administrative offset at 120 days. The
at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For
amendment to section 367.3(a) of the
information on the availability of this
Board’s regulation changes from 180
material at the FAA, call 425–227–1221.
days to 120 days the debts referred to
(5) You may view this service information
the Department of the Treasury in
that is incorporated by reference at the
compliance with the DATA Act.
National Archives and Records
A proposed rule was published in the
Administration (NARA). For information on
the availability of this material at NARA, call Federal Register on January 21, 2015,
and comments were invited (80 FR
202–741–6030, or go to: https://
www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr2839). No comments were received. The
locations.html.
final rule makes no changes from the
proposed rule.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 4,
The Board, with the concurrence of
2016.
the Office of Management and Budget,
Michael Kaszycki,
has determined that this is not a
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane
significant regulatory action under
Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.
Executive Order 12866, as amended.
[FR Doc. 2016–11197 Filed 5–13–16; 8:45 am]
Therefore, no regulatory impact analysis
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
is required. There are no changes to the
information collections associated with
Part 367.
RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD
List of Subjects in 20 CFR Part 367
20 CFR Part 367
Debts, Railroad employees, Railroad
RIN 3220–AB66
retirement.
For the reasons set out in the
Recovery of Debts Owed to the United
preamble, the Railroad Retirement
States Government by Administrative
Board amends title 20, chapter II,
Offset
subchapter F, part 367 of the Code of
AGENCY: Railroad Retirement Board.
Federal Regulations as follows:
ACTION: Final rule.
PART 367—RECOVERY OF DEBTS
SUMMARY: The Railroad Retirement
OWED TO THE UNITED STATES
Board (Board) amends its regulations by GOVERNMENT BY ADMINISTRATIVE
changing from 180 days delinquent to
OFFSET
120 days delinquent debts that are
referred to Treasury in compliance with ■ 1. The authority citation for part 367
the DATA Act.
continues to read as follows:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:36 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
DATES:
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
30173
Authority: 45 U.S.C. 231f(b)(5); 31 U.S.C.
3716
§ 367.3
[Amended]
2. Amend § 367.3 by removing ‘‘180’’
and adding in its place ‘‘120’’ where it
appears in paragraph (a).
■
Dated: May 11, 2016.
By Authority of the Board.
Martha P. Rico,
Secretary to the Board.
[FR Doc. 2016–11445 Filed 5–13–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7905–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
25 CFR Part 151
[167A2100DD/AAKC001030/
A0A501010.999900 253G]
RIN 1076–AF28
Title Evidence for Trust Land
Acquisitions
Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This rule deletes the
requirement for fee-to-trust applicants to
furnish title evidence that meets the
‘‘Standards for the Preparation of Title
Evidence in Land Acquisitions by the
United States’’ issued by the U.S.
Department of Justice (DOJ), and
replaces the requirement with a more
targeted requirement for title evidence,
because adherence to the DOJ standards
is not required for acquisitions of land
in trust for individual Indians or Indian
tribes.
DATES: This rule becomes effective on
May 16, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Elizabeth Appel, Director, Office of
Regulatory Affairs and Collaborative
Action, Office of the Assistant
Secretary—Indian Affairs; telephone
(202) 273–4680, elizabeth.appel@
bia.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Overview of Rule
II. Background
III. Comments on the Interim Final Rule
A. ‘‘Written Evidence’’
B. Alternatives to a Title Insurance Policy
C. Previously Issued Title Insurance Policy
D. Abstract of Title
E. Marketability and Exceptions to the Title
Insurance Policy
F. Standards to be Used in Place of DOJ
Standards
G. Timing and Timelines
H. Other Comments
IV. Changes from Interim Final Rule to Final
Rule
E:\FR\FM\16MYR1.SGM
16MYR1
30174
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
V. Applicability of New Rule
VI. Procedural Requirements
A. Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O.
12866 and 13563)
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Takings (E.O. 12630)
F. Federalism (E.O. 13132)
G. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
H. Consultation with Indian Tribes (E.O.
13175)
I. Paperwork Reduction Act
J. National Environmental Policy Act
K. Information Quality Act
L. Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O.
13211)
M. Administrative Procedure Act
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
I. Overview of Rule
This rule replaces the ‘‘Standards for
the Preparation of Title Evidence in
Land Acquisitions by the United States’’
issued by DOJ (DOJ standards) with a
more targeted title evidence standard.
Under the new standard, applicants
must furnish a deed evidencing that the
applicant has ownership, or a written
sales contract or written statement from
the transferor that the applicant will
have ownership. Applicants must also
submit either (1) a current title
insurance commitment; or (2) the policy
of title insurance issued at the time of
the applicant’s or current owner’s
acquisition of the interest and an
abstract dating from the time the interest
was acquired. This rule does not
preclude applicants from having title
confirmed pursuant to all requirements
of DOJ standards (as those standards
apply in the land-into-trust context) if
the applicant so chooses.
The rule continues the current
requirement that title evidence must be
submitted and reviewed by the
Department of the Interior (Department)
before title is transferred. The rule
continues to provide that the Secretary
has discretion to require the elimination
of any liens, encumbrances, or
infirmities prior to acceptance in trust.
The rule also continues the practice of
requiring the elimination of any legal
claims, including but not limited to
liens, mortgages, and taxes, determined
by the Secretary to make title
unmarketable, prior to acceptance in
trust.
II. Background
Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization
Act (IRA) is the primary authority
providing the Secretary of the Interior
(Secretary) with discretion to acquire
land in trust for individual Indians or
Indian tribes. See 25 U.S.C. 465.
Congress has also enacted other statutes
that authorize the discretionary
acquisition of lands for specific tribes.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:36 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
The Department’s regulations at 25 CFR
part 151 establish the process for
discretionary trust acquisitions pursuant
to section 465 and other statutory
authority. Section 151.13 of the
regulations published in 1980 required
the applicant to furnish title evidence
meeting the DOJ standards if the
Secretary determines to approve a feeto-trust application.
On March 1, 2016, BIA published an
interim final rule deleting the
requirement for the applicant to furnish
title evidence meeting DOJ standards
because those standards are not required
for acquisitions of land in trust for
individual Indians or Indian tribes. See
81 FR 10477. On April 15, 2016, BIA
delayed the effective date of the rule to
May 16, 2016 to allow BIA time to
publish technical revisions. See 81 FR
22183. This rule provides those
technical revisions.
III. Comments on the Interim Final
Rule
The BIA received 13 comments in
response to the interim final rule, most
asking questions seeking clarification of
the regulatory text. Several commenters
supported the rule, but requested
clarification. Commenters who opposed
the rule stated that the current DOJ
standards are necessary to protect the
public, including adjoining landowners
and other third parties, and protect
against conflicts of interest, and that
DOJ standards are more reliable and less
costly.
After careful consideration of the
comments and applying its own
experience in reviewing fee-to-trust
applications and title evidence, BIA has
determined that the final rule provides
sufficient standards to protect the
United States. The purpose of title
evidence requirements is to ensure that
the Tribe has marketable title to convey
to the United States, thereby protecting
the United States. See Crest-DehesaGranite Hills-Harbison Canyon
Subregional Planning Group v. Acting
Pacific Regional Director, 61 IBIA 208,
216 (2015). The rule revisions allow for
a less costly alternative to providing a
title insurance policy under DOJ
standards, while still ensuring sufficient
evidence of good title. The following are
summaries of the substantive points
made in these comments, and the
Department’s responses.
A. ‘‘Written Evidence’’
Several commenters requested
clarification of what ‘‘written evidence’’
is required by paragraphs (a)(1) and
(a)(2) of the interim final rule. In
paragraph (a)(1), the interim final rule
required ‘‘written evidence of the
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
applicant’s title or that title will be
transferred to the United States on
behalf of the applicant to complete the
acquisition in trust.’’ In paragraph (a)(2),
the interim final rule required ‘‘written
evidence of how title was acquired by
the applicant or current owner.’’
Commenters stated that it appeared the
same evidence may satisfy both (a)(1)
and (a)(2), in the form of the applicant’s
deed. To clarify, the final rule specifies
that the written evidence must be a deed
or other conveyance instrument
providing evidence of the applicant’s
title. The final rule also specifies that if
the applicant does not yet have title, the
written evidence must be: (1) A deed or
other conveyance instrument providing
evidence of the transferor’s title; and (2)
a written agreement or affidavit from the
transferor demonstrating that title will
be transferred to the United States on
behalf of the applicant to complete the
acquisition in trust.
A few commenters also noted that
(a)(1) and (a)(2) appeared to impose
redundant requirements. The final rule
addresses this comment by deleting
(a)(2), because the specified written
evidence required by (a)(1) will
necessarily also serve as evidence of
how the applicant or current owner
acquired title.
B. Alternatives to a Title Insurance
Policy
A commenter requested clarification
of paragraph (b)’s requirement for a
‘‘current title insurance commitment’’ to
confirm that no title insurance policy
needs to be purchased in the name of
the U.S. in trust for the applicant. The
commenter is correct that no title
insurance policy needs to be purchased
if the applicant provides a current title
insurance commitment. Also, if the
applicant or current owner already
obtained a title insurance policy when
they acquired the land, the applicant
need not purchase a new title insurance
policy if they provide the previously
issued policy and an abstract of title
dating from the time the land was
acquired by the applicant or current
owner to the present. No clarification to
the rule was made in response to this
comment because the rule already states
the alternatives to purchasing a title
insurance policy.
Another commenter noted that,
because the rule requires only the
commitment to issue title insurance
rather than an actual title insurance
policy, that title companies may stop
issuing commitments without a final
title policy. For BIA’s purposes, the title
commitment is sufficient evidence and,
in recognition that there is an extra cost
imposed for obtaining the actual title
E:\FR\FM\16MYR1.SGM
16MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
insurance policy, the rule requires only
the title commitment. Currently, title
companies generally will issue a
commitment without requiring the
purchase of an actual policy; the
possibility that title companies may
require the purchase of an actual policy
in the future does not provide a basis for
BIA to require the policy. An insurance
policy is not required if the applicant is
proceeding with a title commitment, but
applicants may choose to purchase a
policy if they so desire; the rule does
not prevent them from doing so.
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
C. Previously Issued Title Insurance
Policy
A commenter requested clarification
of the requirement for ‘‘the policy of
title insurance issued at the time of the
applicant’s or current owner’s
acquisition of the land and an abstract
of title dating from the time the land
was acquired by the applicant or current
owner.’’ This commenter stated that an
existing title insurance policy may not
have been issued at the time of the
acquisition, and suggested revising the
provision to simply state ‘‘the policy of
title insurance issued to the applicant or
current owner.’’ The final rule
incorporates this suggestion and
clarifies that the abstract must address
the time period beginning when the
insurance policy was issued to the
applicant or current owner.
One commenter asked whether BIA,
and the Office of the Solicitor, will still
require a current title commitment, even
when the applicant provides the
previously issued policy and abstract.
Upon the effective date of the rule, the
BIA and Office of the Solicitor will
require only the title evidence listed in
the rule.
D. Abstract of Title
A commenter requested clarification
as to whether the requirement for an
abstract of title is intended to address
title going forward rather than
backward, and if so, that it would not
be a title abstract in the traditional sense
because the abstract would reflect only
the current owner. The final rule
clarifies that the requirement is
intended to address title going forward,
by adding ‘‘to the present.’’ The
commenter is correct that the abstract of
title will be straightforward, and may
only reflect the current owner, but the
abstract will serve the purpose of
confirming the current owner’s
ownership and showing whether any
liens, encumbrances, or infirmities have
been placed on title prior to acceptance
in trust, in lieu of requiring the
applicant to purchase a new title
commitment.
E. Marketability and Exceptions to the
Title Insurance Policy
A commenter requested clarification
on what ‘‘marketability’’ means. The
commenter also asked how BIA will
address reversionary clauses and
defeasible title issues and their effect on
marketability. The final rule makes no
substantive change to the provision
allowing BIA to require the elimination
of any such liens, encumbrances, or
infirmities if BIA determines they make
title to the land unmarketable. Likewise,
the final rule makes no substantive
change to the meaning of
‘‘unmarketable.’’
A commenter suggested the rule
explain that the deed will not be
recorded until exceptions to the title
insurance policy are satisfied. The final
rule does not include this explanation
because it is inaccurate. There is no
requirement that all exceptions be
eliminated. The Department reviews
and makes a determination on each
exception as to whether it must be
eliminated, and does not require the
elimination of exceptions that do not
affect the title to the land.
F. Standards To Be Used in Place of DOJ
Standards
A few commenters requested more
specifics as to what title standards the
Department will apply in lieu of the DOJ
standards. For example, one commenter
asked whether the Department will still
require applicants to use the American
Land Title Association (ALTA) U.S.
policy form in those cases in which the
applicant chooses to obtain title
insurance. The BIA has updated the feeto-trust handbook to ensure it is
consistent with this final rule. The
revised version of the fee-to-trust
handbook specifies that, if the applicant
chooses to submit title insurance, it
should use the most current version of
the ALTA U.S. policy form. A
commenter also asked how the
Department will determine who is
qualified to provide title evidence, in
lieu of the DOJ standards. The revised
fee-to-trust handbook specifies that the
Department will look to the appropriate
licensing authority for qualifications. A
commenter also asked what type of deed
will be required to convey title to the
U.S. on behalf of the applicant. The
Department will continue the approach
it has taken in the past (requiring a
warranty deed in nearly all instances),
specified in the revised fee-to-trust
handbook.
A commenter asked whether the
Department will look to State laws for
guidance. The Department relies on
national standards, as set out in the rule
and revised fee-to-trust handbook,
rather than State laws, with regard to
the Department’s decision whether to
approve title.
G. Timing and Timelines
One commenter requested stating that
the applicant need not provide title
evidence until after the Secretary makes
the decision to take the land into trust.
The final rule only addresses what title
evidence is required, it is not intended
to change the Department’s process or
timing.
One commenter suggested imposing
timelines on the Department’s issuance
of preliminary and final title opinions.
The final rule does not incorporate this
suggestion because there are too many
variables to establish a definitive
timeframe for preparation of these
documents.
H. Other Comments
A few commenters suggested edits
that were beyond the scope of the
interim final rule. One Tribal
commenter noted the difficulty in
obtaining title insurance policies in
California and suggested actions the
Department could take to educate title
insurance companies. Another
commenter suggested adding a
requirement to obtain State approval to
transfer jurisdiction of land being taken
into trust. These comments are outside
the scope of this rulemaking.
A commenter also stated that the
revision is not appropriate for an
interim final rule. The Department
disagrees because the rule is a targeted,
procedural improvement.
IV. Changes From Interim Final Rule to
Final Rule
As described above, the final rule
includes edits to the interim final rule
for clarification. The edits are
summarized in the table below:
New rule
(effective May 16, 2016)
Former rule
Interim final rule
The Secretary will require title evidence meeting the DOJ standards.
Requires the following in lieu of the DOJ
standards:.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:36 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
30175
Clarifies ‘‘written evidence’’ to be:
E:\FR\FM\16MYR1.SGM
16MYR1
30176
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Former rule
New rule
(effective May 16, 2016)
Interim final rule
(1) Written evidence of the applicant’s title or
that title will be transferred to the United
States on behalf of the applicant to complete the trust acquisition; and
(2) written evidence of how the applicant or
current owner acquired title; and
(3) either:
(i) A current title insurance commitment; or ....
(ii) a previously issued title insurance policy
and abstract dating from the time the land
was acquired to the present.
The Secretary will notify the applicant of any Adds that the Secretary may seek additional
liens, encumbrances, or infirmities which may
information from the applicant if needed to
exist.
address the issues.
The Secretary may require elimination of liens, No procedural change .....................................
encumbrances, infirmities prior to taking final
approval action on the acquisition.
The Secretary shall require elimination prior to No procedural change .....................................
such approval if the liens, encumbrances, or
infirmities make title to the land unmarketable.
V. Applicability of New Rule
As the preamble to the interim final
rule stated, this rule will apply to all
trust applications submitted after the
effective date. This rule will also apply
to trust applications that are pending
and for which the Preliminary Title
Opinion has not yet been prepared by
the Office of the Solicitor as of the
effective date. However, if applicants
have already submitted evidence
meeting the DOJ standards, they need
not re-submit evidence pursuant to this
rule. This rule will not apply to trust
applications that are pending and for
which the Preliminary Title Opinion
has already been prepared by the Office
of the Solicitor as of the effective date.
BIA has updated its fee-to-trust
handbook to incorporate changes
required by the new rule. The handbook
is available at: https://www.bia.gov/cs/
groups/xraca/documents/text/idc1024504.pdf.
VI. Procedural Requirements
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
A. Regulatory Planning and Review
(E.O. 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order 12866 provides that
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs in the Office of Management and
Budget will review all significant rules.
The Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs has determined that
this rule is not significant.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:36 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
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 regulations must be based
on the best available science and that
the rulemaking process must allow for
public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. We have developed
this rule in a manner consistent with
these requirements.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Department of the Interior
certifies that this document 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.). It does not change
current funding requirements or
regulate small entities.
C. Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act
This rule is not a major rule under 5
U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(1) Applicant’s deed; or
(2) If the applicant does not yet have title, the
transferor’s deed and a written statement
from the transferee that it will transfer title
to the United States on behalf of the applicant.
Deletes the requirement for written evidence
of how the applicant or current owner acquired title.
Clarifies that the abstract must cover the time
period beginning when the land was acquired by the applicant or current owner up
to the present.
Allows applicant to choose to provide evidence meeting the DOJ standards in lieu of
the current title commitment or policy and
abstract.
No change from interim final rule.
No change from interim final rule.
No change from interim final rule.
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. It
will not result in the expenditure by
State, local, or Tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of
$100 million or more in any one year.
The rule will not result in a major
increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries,
Federal, State, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions. Nor will
this rule have significant adverse effects
on competition, employment,
investment, productivity, innovation, or
the ability of the U.S.-based enterprises
to compete with foreign-based
enterprises. This rule removes the
requirement for title evidence to comply
with DOJ standards and replaces this
requirement with a more targeted
requirement for title evidence; it will
not result in additional expenditures by
any entity.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This 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
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.
E:\FR\FM\16MYR1.SGM
16MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
E. Takings (E.O. 12630)
Under the criteria in Executive Order
12630, this rule does not affect
individual property rights protected by
the Fifth Amendment nor does it
involve a compensable ‘‘taking.’’ A
takings implication assessment is not
required.
F. Federalism (E.O. 13132)
Under the criteria in Executive Order
13132, this rule has no 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. This rule
removes the requirement for title
evidence to comply with DOJ standards
and replaces this requirement with a
more targeted requirement for title
evidence; it does not affect States or the
relationship with States in any way.
G. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
This rule complies with the
requirements of Executive Order 12988.
Specifically, this rule has been reviewed
to eliminate errors and ambiguity and
written to minimize litigation; and is
written in clear language and contains
clear legal standards.
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
H. Consultation With Indian Tribes
(E.O. 13175)
In accordance with the President’s
memorandum of April 29, 1994,
‘‘Government-to-Government Relations
with Native American Tribal
Governments,’’ Executive Order 13175
(59 FR 22951, November 6, 2000), and
512 DM 2, we have evaluated the
potential effects on federally recognized
Indian Tribes and Indian trust assets
and have determined there is no
‘‘substantial direct effect’’ on Tribes, on
the relationship between the Federal
Government and Tribes, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes. The rule
will affect Tribes who apply to take land
into trust, in that the rule removes
unnecessary submissions of
documentation. However, the rule does
not have a substantial direct effect on
Tribes because Tribes can still submit
evidence meeting the DOJ title
standards should they so choose and
allowing the option of submitting a past
title insurance policy and an abstract of
title is intended to be less burdensome
than the existing rule. The Department
is committed to meaningful consultation
with Tribes on substantive matters that
have a substantial direct effect on
Tribes, in accordance with E.O. 13175
and the Department of the Interior
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:36 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
Policy on Consultation with Indian
Tribes.
I. Paperwork Reduction Act
This information collection for trust
land applications is authorized by OMB
Control Number 1076–0100, with an
expiration of 08/31/16. The elimination
of the requirement to comply with DOJ
standards is not expected to have a
quantifiable effect on the hour burden
estimate for the information collection,
but BIA will review whether its current
estimates are affected by this change at
the next renewal.
J. National Environmental Policy Act
This 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 of 1969
(NEPA) is not required because the rule
is covered by a categorical exclusion.
This rule is excluded from the
requirement to prepare a detailed
statement because it is a regulation of an
administrative nature. (For further
information, see 43 CFR 46.210(i).) 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.
K. Information Quality Act
In developing this rule we did not
conduct or use a study, experiment, or
survey requiring peer review under the
Information Quality Act (Pub. L. 106–
554).
L. Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O.
13211)
This rule is not a significant energy
action under the definition in Executive
Order 13211. A Statement of Energy
Effects is not required.
M. Administrative Procedure Act
We published an interim final rule
with a request for comment without
prior notice and comment, as allowed
under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B). Under section
553(b)(B), we find that prior notice and
comment are unnecessary because this
is a minor, technical action that
eliminates an unnecessary requirement.
This rule removes the unnecessary
requirement that the title evidence the
applicant submits must comply with
DOJ standards for title evidence. Delay
in publishing this rule would
unnecessarily continue imposing the
unnecessary requirement on applicants
and would therefore be contrary to the
public interest. We stated that we would
review comments and initiate a
proposed rulemaking, revise, or
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
30177
withdraw the rule. Because the
comments we received were primarily
seeking clarifications, we have chosen
to revise the rule with requested
clarifications.
List of Subjects in 25 CFR Part 151
Indians—lands, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons given in the preamble,
the interim rule amending 25 CFR part
151 which was published at 81 FR
10477 on March 1, 2016, is adopted as
a final rule with the following change:
PART 151—LAND ACQUISITIONS
1. The authority citation for part 151
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: R.S. 161: 5 U.S.C. 301. Interpret
or apply 46 Stat. 1106, as amended; 46
Stat.1471, as amended; 48 Stat. 985, as
amended; 49 Stat. 1967, as amended, 53 Stat.
1129; 63 Stat. 605; 69 Stat. 392, as amended;
70 Stat. 290, as amended; 70 Stat. 626; 75
Stat. 505; 77 Stat. 349; 78 Stat. 389; 78 Stat.
747; 82 Stat. 174, as amended, 82 Stat. 884;
84 Stat. 120; 84 Stat. 1874; 86 Stat. 216; 86
Stat. 530; 86 Stat. 744; 88 Stat. 78; 88 Stat.
81; 88 Stat. 1716; 88 Stat. 2203; 88 Stat. 2207;
25 U.S.C. 2, 9, 409a, 450h, 451, 464, 465, 487,
488, 489, 501, 502, 573, 574, 576, 608, 608a,
610, 610a, 622, 624, 640d–10, 1466, 1495,
and other authorizing acts.
■
2. Revise § 151.13 to read as follows:
§ 151.13
Title review.
(a) If the Secretary determines that she
will approve a request for the
acquisition of land from unrestricted fee
status to trust status, she shall require
the applicant to furnish title evidence as
follows:
(1) The deed or other conveyance
instrument providing evidence of the
applicant’s title or, if the applicant does
not yet have title, the deed providing
evidence of the transferor’s title and a
written agreement or affidavit from the
transferor, that title will be transferred
to the United States on behalf of the
applicant to complete the acquisition in
trust; and
(2) Either:
(i) A current title insurance
commitment; or
(ii) The policy of title insurance
issued to the applicant or current owner
and an abstract of title dating from the
time the policy of title insurance was
issued to the applicant or current owner
to the present.
(3) The applicant may choose to
provide title evidence meeting the title
standards issued by the U.S. Department
of Justice, in lieu of the evidence
required by paragraph (a)(2) of this
section.
(b) After reviewing submitted title
evidence, the Secretary shall notify the
E:\FR\FM\16MYR1.SGM
16MYR1
30178
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 94 / Monday, May 16, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
applicant of any liens, encumbrances, or
infirmities that the Secretary identified
and may seek additional information
from the applicant needed to address
such issues. The Secretary may require
the elimination of any such liens,
encumbrances, or infirmities prior to
taking final approval action on the
acquisition, and she shall require
elimination prior to such approval if she
determines that the liens, encumbrances
or infirmities make title to the land
unmarketable.
Dated: May 11, 2016.
Lawrence S. Roberts,
Acting Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2016–11489 Filed 5–13–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2016–0392]
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Lake Washington Ship Canal, Seattle,
WA
Coast Guard, DHS.
Notice of deviation from
drawbridge regulation.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Coast Guard has issued a
temporary deviation from the operating
schedule that governs the Montlake
Bridge across the Lake Washington Ship
Canal, mile 5.2, at Seattle, WA. The
deviation is necessary to accommodate
the University of Washington, and
University of Washington Bothell
commencement ceremony traffic. This
deviation allows the bridge to remain in
the closed-to-navigation position to
accommodate the timely movement of
vehicular traffic.
DATES: This deviation is effective from
9:30 a.m. on June 11, 2016 to 6:15 p.m.
on June 12, 2016.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this
deviation, [USCG–2016–0392] is
available at https://www.regulations.gov.
Type the docket number in the
‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’
Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this temporary
deviation, call or email Mr. Steven
Fischer, Bridge Administrator,
Thirteenth Coast Guard District;
telephone 206–220–7282, email d13-pfd13bridges@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
University of Washington, through the
Lhorne on DSK30JT082PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
14:36 May 13, 2016
Jkt 238001
Washington Department of
Transportation, has requested that the
Montlake Bridge bascule span remain in
the closed-to-navigation position, and
need not open to marine traffic to
facilitate timely movement of
commencement vehicular traffic.
The Montlake Bridge across the Lake
Washington Ship Canal, at mile 5.2, in
the closed position provides 30 feet of
vertical clearance throughout the
navigation channel, and 46 feet of
vertical clearance throughout the center
60-feet of the bridge; vertical clearance
references to the Mean Water Level of
Lake Washington. The normal operating
schedule for Montlake Bridge operates
in accordance with 33 CFR 117.1051(e).
The deviation period is from 9:30 a.m.
to 12:30 p.m. and from 4:30 p.m. to 6:30
p.m. on June 11, 2016; and from 11:45
a.m. to 1:45 p.m. and from 4:15 p.m. to
6:15 p.m. on June 12, 2016. The
deviation allows the bascule span of the
Montlake Bridge to remain in the
closed-to-navigation position for the
times and dates herein. Waterway usage
on the Lake Washington Ship Canal
ranges from commercial tug and barge to
small pleasure craft.
Vessels able to pass through the
bridge in the closed-to-navigation
position may do so at anytime. The
bridge will be able to open for
emergencies and there is no immediate
alternate route for marine vessels to
pass. The Coast Guard will also inform
the users of the waterways through our
Local and Broadcast Notices to Mariners
of the change in operating schedule for
the bridge so that vessels can arrange
their transits to minimize any impact
caused by the temporary deviation.
In accordance with 33 CFR 117.35(e),
the drawbridge must return to its regular
operating schedule immediately at the
end of the designated time period. This
deviation from the operating regulations
is authorized under 33 CFR 117.35.
Dated: May 10, 2016.
Steven M. Fischer,
Bridge Administrator, Thirteenth Coast Guard
District.
[FR Doc. 2016–11495 Filed 5–13–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Coast Guard
33 CFR Part 117
[Docket No. USCG–2016–0380]
Drawbridge Operation Regulation;
Willamette River, Portland, OR
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Coast Guard, DHS.
Frm 00022
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Notice of deviation from
drawbridge regulation.
ACTION:
The Coast Guard has issued a
temporary deviation from the operating
schedule that governs the upper deck of
the Steel Bridge, mile 12.1, and the
Burnside Bridge, mile 12.4, both
crossing the Willamette River, at
Portland, OR. The deviation is necessary
to accommodate the annual Rose
Festival Parade event, which crosses the
Steel Bridge and Burnside Bridge. This
deviation allows the upper deck of the
Steel Bridge and Burnside Bridge to
remain in the closed-to-navigation
position and need not open for marine
traffic to allow for the safe movement of
event participants.
DATES: This deviation is effective from
7 a.m. to 2 p.m. on June 11, 2016.
ADDRESSES: The docket for this
deviation, [USCG–2016–0380] is
available at https://www.regulations.gov.
Type the docket number in the
‘‘SEARCH’’ box and click ‘‘SEARCH.’’
Click on Open Docket Folder on the line
associated with this deviation.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If
you have questions on this temporary
deviation, call or email Mr. Steven
Fischer, Bridge Administrator,
Thirteenth Coast Guard District;
telephone 206–220–7282, email d13-pfd13bridges@uscg.mil.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TriMet
Public Transit and Multnomah County
have requested that the upper deck of
the Steel Bridge and the Burnside
Bridge remain in the closed-tonavigation position to accommodate the
annual Rose Festival Parade event. The
Steel Bridge, mile 12.1, and the
Burnside Bridge, mile 12.4, both cross
the Willamette River.
The Steel Bridge is a double-deck lift
bridge with a lower lift deck and an
upper lift deck which operate
independent of each other. When both
decks are in the down position the
bridge provides 26 feet of vertical
clearance. When the lower deck is in the
up position, the bridge provides 71 feet
of vertical clearance. This deviation
does not affect the operating schedule of
the lower deck which opens on signal.
The normal operating schedule for the
upper deck of the Steel Bridge operates
in accordance with 33 CFR
117.897(c)(3)(ii).
The Burnside Bridge provides a
vertical clearance of 64 feet in the
closed-to-navigation position. The
normal operating schedule for the
Burnside Bridge operates in accordance
with 33 CFR 117.897(c)(3)(iii). The Steel
Bridge and Burnside Bridge clearances
are above Columbia River Datum 0.0.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\16MYR1.SGM
16MYR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 94 (Monday, May 16, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 30173-30178]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-11489]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
25 CFR Part 151
[167A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900 253G]
RIN 1076-AF28
Title Evidence for Trust Land Acquisitions
AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This rule deletes the requirement for fee-to-trust applicants
to furnish title evidence that meets the ``Standards for the
Preparation of Title Evidence in Land Acquisitions by the United
States'' issued by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and replaces
the requirement with a more targeted requirement for title evidence,
because adherence to the DOJ standards is not required for acquisitions
of land in trust for individual Indians or Indian tribes.
DATES: This rule becomes effective on May 16, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Appel, Director, Office of
Regulatory Affairs and Collaborative Action, Office of the Assistant
Secretary--Indian Affairs; telephone (202) 273-4680,
elizabeth.appel@bia.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Overview of Rule
II. Background
III. Comments on the Interim Final Rule
A. ``Written Evidence''
B. Alternatives to a Title Insurance Policy
C. Previously Issued Title Insurance Policy
D. Abstract of Title
E. Marketability and Exceptions to the Title Insurance Policy
F. Standards to be Used in Place of DOJ Standards
G. Timing and Timelines
H. Other Comments
IV. Changes from Interim Final Rule to Final Rule
[[Page 30174]]
V. Applicability of New Rule
VI. Procedural Requirements
A. Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. 12866 and 13563)
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
E. Takings (E.O. 12630)
F. Federalism (E.O. 13132)
G. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
H. Consultation with Indian Tribes (E.O. 13175)
I. Paperwork Reduction Act
J. National Environmental Policy Act
K. Information Quality Act
L. Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. 13211)
M. Administrative Procedure Act
I. Overview of Rule
This rule replaces the ``Standards for the Preparation of Title
Evidence in Land Acquisitions by the United States'' issued by DOJ (DOJ
standards) with a more targeted title evidence standard. Under the new
standard, applicants must furnish a deed evidencing that the applicant
has ownership, or a written sales contract or written statement from
the transferor that the applicant will have ownership. Applicants must
also submit either (1) a current title insurance commitment; or (2) the
policy of title insurance issued at the time of the applicant's or
current owner's acquisition of the interest and an abstract dating from
the time the interest was acquired. This rule does not preclude
applicants from having title confirmed pursuant to all requirements of
DOJ standards (as those standards apply in the land-into-trust context)
if the applicant so chooses.
The rule continues the current requirement that title evidence must
be submitted and reviewed by the Department of the Interior
(Department) before title is transferred. The rule continues to provide
that the Secretary has discretion to require the elimination of any
liens, encumbrances, or infirmities prior to acceptance in trust. The
rule also continues the practice of requiring the elimination of any
legal claims, including but not limited to liens, mortgages, and taxes,
determined by the Secretary to make title unmarketable, prior to
acceptance in trust.
II. Background
Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) is the primary
authority providing the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) with
discretion to acquire land in trust for individual Indians or Indian
tribes. See 25 U.S.C. 465. Congress has also enacted other statutes
that authorize the discretionary acquisition of lands for specific
tribes. The Department's regulations at 25 CFR part 151 establish the
process for discretionary trust acquisitions pursuant to section 465
and other statutory authority. Section 151.13 of the regulations
published in 1980 required the applicant to furnish title evidence
meeting the DOJ standards if the Secretary determines to approve a fee-
to-trust application.
On March 1, 2016, BIA published an interim final rule deleting the
requirement for the applicant to furnish title evidence meeting DOJ
standards because those standards are not required for acquisitions of
land in trust for individual Indians or Indian tribes. See 81 FR 10477.
On April 15, 2016, BIA delayed the effective date of the rule to May
16, 2016 to allow BIA time to publish technical revisions. See 81 FR
22183. This rule provides those technical revisions.
III. Comments on the Interim Final Rule
The BIA received 13 comments in response to the interim final rule,
most asking questions seeking clarification of the regulatory text.
Several commenters supported the rule, but requested clarification.
Commenters who opposed the rule stated that the current DOJ standards
are necessary to protect the public, including adjoining landowners and
other third parties, and protect against conflicts of interest, and
that DOJ standards are more reliable and less costly.
After careful consideration of the comments and applying its own
experience in reviewing fee-to-trust applications and title evidence,
BIA has determined that the final rule provides sufficient standards to
protect the United States. The purpose of title evidence requirements
is to ensure that the Tribe has marketable title to convey to the
United States, thereby protecting the United States. See Crest-Dehesa-
Granite Hills-Harbison Canyon Subregional Planning Group v. Acting
Pacific Regional Director, 61 IBIA 208, 216 (2015). The rule revisions
allow for a less costly alternative to providing a title insurance
policy under DOJ standards, while still ensuring sufficient evidence of
good title. The following are summaries of the substantive points made
in these comments, and the Department's responses.
A. ``Written Evidence''
Several commenters requested clarification of what ``written
evidence'' is required by paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of the interim
final rule. In paragraph (a)(1), the interim final rule required
``written evidence of the applicant's title or that title will be
transferred to the United States on behalf of the applicant to complete
the acquisition in trust.'' In paragraph (a)(2), the interim final rule
required ``written evidence of how title was acquired by the applicant
or current owner.'' Commenters stated that it appeared the same
evidence may satisfy both (a)(1) and (a)(2), in the form of the
applicant's deed. To clarify, the final rule specifies that the written
evidence must be a deed or other conveyance instrument providing
evidence of the applicant's title. The final rule also specifies that
if the applicant does not yet have title, the written evidence must be:
(1) A deed or other conveyance instrument providing evidence of the
transferor's title; and (2) a written agreement or affidavit from the
transferor demonstrating that title will be transferred to the United
States on behalf of the applicant to complete the acquisition in trust.
A few commenters also noted that (a)(1) and (a)(2) appeared to
impose redundant requirements. The final rule addresses this comment by
deleting (a)(2), because the specified written evidence required by
(a)(1) will necessarily also serve as evidence of how the applicant or
current owner acquired title.
B. Alternatives to a Title Insurance Policy
A commenter requested clarification of paragraph (b)'s requirement
for a ``current title insurance commitment'' to confirm that no title
insurance policy needs to be purchased in the name of the U.S. in trust
for the applicant. The commenter is correct that no title insurance
policy needs to be purchased if the applicant provides a current title
insurance commitment. Also, if the applicant or current owner already
obtained a title insurance policy when they acquired the land, the
applicant need not purchase a new title insurance policy if they
provide the previously issued policy and an abstract of title dating
from the time the land was acquired by the applicant or current owner
to the present. No clarification to the rule was made in response to
this comment because the rule already states the alternatives to
purchasing a title insurance policy.
Another commenter noted that, because the rule requires only the
commitment to issue title insurance rather than an actual title
insurance policy, that title companies may stop issuing commitments
without a final title policy. For BIA's purposes, the title commitment
is sufficient evidence and, in recognition that there is an extra cost
imposed for obtaining the actual title
[[Page 30175]]
insurance policy, the rule requires only the title commitment.
Currently, title companies generally will issue a commitment without
requiring the purchase of an actual policy; the possibility that title
companies may require the purchase of an actual policy in the future
does not provide a basis for BIA to require the policy. An insurance
policy is not required if the applicant is proceeding with a title
commitment, but applicants may choose to purchase a policy if they so
desire; the rule does not prevent them from doing so.
C. Previously Issued Title Insurance Policy
A commenter requested clarification of the requirement for ``the
policy of title insurance issued at the time of the applicant's or
current owner's acquisition of the land and an abstract of title dating
from the time the land was acquired by the applicant or current
owner.'' This commenter stated that an existing title insurance policy
may not have been issued at the time of the acquisition, and suggested
revising the provision to simply state ``the policy of title insurance
issued to the applicant or current owner.'' The final rule incorporates
this suggestion and clarifies that the abstract must address the time
period beginning when the insurance policy was issued to the applicant
or current owner.
One commenter asked whether BIA, and the Office of the Solicitor,
will still require a current title commitment, even when the applicant
provides the previously issued policy and abstract. Upon the effective
date of the rule, the BIA and Office of the Solicitor will require only
the title evidence listed in the rule.
D. Abstract of Title
A commenter requested clarification as to whether the requirement
for an abstract of title is intended to address title going forward
rather than backward, and if so, that it would not be a title abstract
in the traditional sense because the abstract would reflect only the
current owner. The final rule clarifies that the requirement is
intended to address title going forward, by adding ``to the present.''
The commenter is correct that the abstract of title will be
straightforward, and may only reflect the current owner, but the
abstract will serve the purpose of confirming the current owner's
ownership and showing whether any liens, encumbrances, or infirmities
have been placed on title prior to acceptance in trust, in lieu of
requiring the applicant to purchase a new title commitment.
E. Marketability and Exceptions to the Title Insurance Policy
A commenter requested clarification on what ``marketability''
means. The commenter also asked how BIA will address reversionary
clauses and defeasible title issues and their effect on marketability.
The final rule makes no substantive change to the provision allowing
BIA to require the elimination of any such liens, encumbrances, or
infirmities if BIA determines they make title to the land unmarketable.
Likewise, the final rule makes no substantive change to the meaning of
``unmarketable.''
A commenter suggested the rule explain that the deed will not be
recorded until exceptions to the title insurance policy are satisfied.
The final rule does not include this explanation because it is
inaccurate. There is no requirement that all exceptions be eliminated.
The Department reviews and makes a determination on each exception as
to whether it must be eliminated, and does not require the elimination
of exceptions that do not affect the title to the land.
F. Standards To Be Used in Place of DOJ Standards
A few commenters requested more specifics as to what title
standards the Department will apply in lieu of the DOJ standards. For
example, one commenter asked whether the Department will still require
applicants to use the American Land Title Association (ALTA) U.S.
policy form in those cases in which the applicant chooses to obtain
title insurance. The BIA has updated the fee-to-trust handbook to
ensure it is consistent with this final rule. The revised version of
the fee-to-trust handbook specifies that, if the applicant chooses to
submit title insurance, it should use the most current version of the
ALTA U.S. policy form. A commenter also asked how the Department will
determine who is qualified to provide title evidence, in lieu of the
DOJ standards. The revised fee-to-trust handbook specifies that the
Department will look to the appropriate licensing authority for
qualifications. A commenter also asked what type of deed will be
required to convey title to the U.S. on behalf of the applicant. The
Department will continue the approach it has taken in the past
(requiring a warranty deed in nearly all instances), specified in the
revised fee-to-trust handbook.
A commenter asked whether the Department will look to State laws
for guidance. The Department relies on national standards, as set out
in the rule and revised fee-to-trust handbook, rather than State laws,
with regard to the Department's decision whether to approve title.
G. Timing and Timelines
One commenter requested stating that the applicant need not provide
title evidence until after the Secretary makes the decision to take the
land into trust. The final rule only addresses what title evidence is
required, it is not intended to change the Department's process or
timing.
One commenter suggested imposing timelines on the Department's
issuance of preliminary and final title opinions. The final rule does
not incorporate this suggestion because there are too many variables to
establish a definitive timeframe for preparation of these documents.
H. Other Comments
A few commenters suggested edits that were beyond the scope of the
interim final rule. One Tribal commenter noted the difficulty in
obtaining title insurance policies in California and suggested actions
the Department could take to educate title insurance companies. Another
commenter suggested adding a requirement to obtain State approval to
transfer jurisdiction of land being taken into trust. These comments
are outside the scope of this rulemaking.
A commenter also stated that the revision is not appropriate for an
interim final rule. The Department disagrees because the rule is a
targeted, procedural improvement.
IV. Changes From Interim Final Rule to Final Rule
As described above, the final rule includes edits to the interim
final rule for clarification. The edits are summarized in the table
below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
New rule (effective
Former rule Interim final rule May 16, 2016)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Secretary will require Requires the Clarifies ``written
title evidence meeting the following in lieu evidence'' to be:
DOJ standards. of the DOJ
standards:.
[[Page 30176]]
(1) Written evidence (1) Applicant's
of the applicant's deed; or
title or that title
will be transferred
to the United
States on behalf of
the applicant to
complete the trust
acquisition; and
(2) written evidence (2) If the applicant
of how the does not yet have
applicant or title, the
current owner transferor's deed
acquired title; and and a written
statement from the
transferee that it
will transfer title
to the United
States on behalf of
the applicant.
(3) either: Deletes the
requirement for
written evidence of
how the applicant
or current owner
acquired title.
(i) A current title Clarifies that the
insurance abstract must cover
commitment; or. the time period
beginning when the
land was acquired
by the applicant or
current owner up to
the present.
(ii) a previously Allows applicant to
issued title choose to provide
insurance policy evidence meeting
and abstract dating the DOJ standards
from the time the in lieu of the
land was acquired current title
to the present. commitment or
policy and
abstract.
The Secretary will notify Adds that the No change from
the applicant of any liens, Secretary may seek interim final rule.
encumbrances, or additional
infirmities which may exist. information from
the applicant if
needed to address
the issues.
The Secretary may require No procedural change No change from
elimination of liens, interim final rule.
encumbrances, infirmities
prior to taking final
approval action on the
acquisition.
The Secretary shall require No procedural change No change from
elimination prior to such interim final rule.
approval if the liens,
encumbrances, or
infirmities make title to
the land unmarketable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Applicability of New Rule
As the preamble to the interim final rule stated, this rule will
apply to all trust applications submitted after the effective date.
This rule will also apply to trust applications that are pending and
for which the Preliminary Title Opinion has not yet been prepared by
the Office of the Solicitor as of the effective date. However, if
applicants have already submitted evidence meeting the DOJ standards,
they need not re-submit evidence pursuant to this rule. This rule will
not apply to trust applications that are pending and for which the
Preliminary Title Opinion has already been prepared by the Office of
the Solicitor as of the effective date.
BIA has updated its fee-to-trust handbook to incorporate changes
required by the new rule. The handbook is available at: https://www.bia.gov/cs/groups/xraca/documents/text/idc1-024504.pdf.
VI. Procedural Requirements
A. Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs in the Office of Management and Budget will review
all significant rules. The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
has 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 regulations must be based on the best available science and that
the rulemaking process must allow for public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. We have developed this rule in a manner consistent
with these requirements.
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Department of the Interior certifies that this document 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.).
It does not change current funding requirements or regulate small
entities.
C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
This rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. It will not result in the
expenditure by State, local, or Tribal governments, in the aggregate,
or by the private sector of $100 million or more in any one year. The
rule will not result in a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions. Nor will this rule have significant
adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity,
innovation, or the ability of the U.S.-based enterprises to compete
with foreign-based enterprises. This rule removes the requirement for
title evidence to comply with DOJ standards and replaces this
requirement with a more targeted requirement for title evidence; it
will not result in additional expenditures by any entity.
D. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
This 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 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.
[[Page 30177]]
E. Takings (E.O. 12630)
Under the criteria in Executive Order 12630, this rule does not
affect individual property rights protected by the Fifth Amendment nor
does it involve a compensable ``taking.'' A takings implication
assessment is not required.
F. Federalism (E.O. 13132)
Under the criteria in Executive Order 13132, this rule has no
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. This rule
removes the requirement for title evidence to comply with DOJ standards
and replaces this requirement with a more targeted requirement for
title evidence; it does not affect States or the relationship with
States in any way.
G. Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
This rule complies with the requirements of Executive Order 12988.
Specifically, this rule has been reviewed to eliminate errors and
ambiguity and written to minimize litigation; and is written in clear
language and contains clear legal standards.
H. Consultation With Indian Tribes (E.O. 13175)
In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994,
``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments,'' Executive Order 13175 (59 FR 22951, November 6, 2000),
and 512 DM 2, we have evaluated the potential effects on federally
recognized Indian Tribes and Indian trust assets and have determined
there is no ``substantial direct effect'' on Tribes, on the
relationship between the Federal Government and Tribes, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes. The rule will affect Tribes who apply to
take land into trust, in that the rule removes unnecessary submissions
of documentation. However, the rule does not have a substantial direct
effect on Tribes because Tribes can still submit evidence meeting the
DOJ title standards should they so choose and allowing the option of
submitting a past title insurance policy and an abstract of title is
intended to be less burdensome than the existing rule. The Department
is committed to meaningful consultation with Tribes on substantive
matters that have a substantial direct effect on Tribes, in accordance
with E.O. 13175 and the Department of the Interior Policy on
Consultation with Indian Tribes.
I. Paperwork Reduction Act
This information collection for trust land applications is
authorized by OMB Control Number 1076-0100, with an expiration of 08/
31/16. The elimination of the requirement to comply with DOJ standards
is not expected to have a quantifiable effect on the hour burden
estimate for the information collection, but BIA will review whether
its current estimates are affected by this change at the next renewal.
J. National Environmental Policy Act
This 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 of 1969 (NEPA) is not
required because the rule is covered by a categorical exclusion. This
rule is excluded from the requirement to prepare a detailed statement
because it is a regulation of an administrative nature. (For further
information, see 43 CFR 46.210(i).) 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.
K. Information Quality Act
In developing this rule we did not conduct or use a study,
experiment, or survey requiring peer review under the Information
Quality Act (Pub. L. 106-554).
L. Effects on the Energy Supply (E.O. 13211)
This rule is not a significant energy action under the definition
in Executive Order 13211. A Statement of Energy Effects is not
required.
M. Administrative Procedure Act
We published an interim final rule with a request for comment
without prior notice and comment, as allowed under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).
Under section 553(b)(B), we find that prior notice and comment are
unnecessary because this is a minor, technical action that eliminates
an unnecessary requirement. This rule removes the unnecessary
requirement that the title evidence the applicant submits must comply
with DOJ standards for title evidence. Delay in publishing this rule
would unnecessarily continue imposing the unnecessary requirement on
applicants and would therefore be contrary to the public interest. We
stated that we would review comments and initiate a proposed
rulemaking, revise, or withdraw the rule. Because the comments we
received were primarily seeking clarifications, we have chosen to
revise the rule with requested clarifications.
List of Subjects in 25 CFR Part 151
Indians--lands, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
For the reasons given in the preamble, the interim rule amending 25
CFR part 151 which was published at 81 FR 10477 on March 1, 2016, is
adopted as a final rule with the following change:
PART 151--LAND ACQUISITIONS
0
1. The authority citation for part 151 continues to read as follows:
Authority: R.S. 161: 5 U.S.C. 301. Interpret or apply 46 Stat.
1106, as amended; 46 Stat.1471, as amended; 48 Stat. 985, as
amended; 49 Stat. 1967, as amended, 53 Stat. 1129; 63 Stat. 605; 69
Stat. 392, as amended; 70 Stat. 290, as amended; 70 Stat. 626; 75
Stat. 505; 77 Stat. 349; 78 Stat. 389; 78 Stat. 747; 82 Stat. 174,
as amended, 82 Stat. 884; 84 Stat. 120; 84 Stat. 1874; 86 Stat. 216;
86 Stat. 530; 86 Stat. 744; 88 Stat. 78; 88 Stat. 81; 88 Stat. 1716;
88 Stat. 2203; 88 Stat. 2207; 25 U.S.C. 2, 9, 409a, 450h, 451, 464,
465, 487, 488, 489, 501, 502, 573, 574, 576, 608, 608a, 610, 610a,
622, 624, 640d-10, 1466, 1495, and other authorizing acts.
0
2. Revise Sec. 151.13 to read as follows:
Sec. 151.13 Title review.
(a) If the Secretary determines that she will approve a request for
the acquisition of land from unrestricted fee status to trust status,
she shall require the applicant to furnish title evidence as follows:
(1) The deed or other conveyance instrument providing evidence of
the applicant's title or, if the applicant does not yet have title, the
deed providing evidence of the transferor's title and a written
agreement or affidavit from the transferor, that title will be
transferred to the United States on behalf of the applicant to complete
the acquisition in trust; and
(2) Either:
(i) A current title insurance commitment; or
(ii) The policy of title insurance issued to the applicant or
current owner and an abstract of title dating from the time the policy
of title insurance was issued to the applicant or current owner to the
present.
(3) The applicant may choose to provide title evidence meeting the
title standards issued by the U.S. Department of Justice, in lieu of
the evidence required by paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(b) After reviewing submitted title evidence, the Secretary shall
notify the
[[Page 30178]]
applicant of any liens, encumbrances, or infirmities that the Secretary
identified and may seek additional information from the applicant
needed to address such issues. The Secretary may require the
elimination of any such liens, encumbrances, or infirmities prior to
taking final approval action on the acquisition, and she shall require
elimination prior to such approval if she determines that the liens,
encumbrances or infirmities make title to the land unmarketable.
Dated: May 11, 2016.
Lawrence S. Roberts,
Acting Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2016-11489 Filed 5-13-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337-15-P