HEARTH Act Approval of Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians of California Regulations, 40717-40718 [2016-14796]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 22, 2016 / Notices
and explain the basis for your
comments. Include sufficient
information with your comments to
allow us to authenticate any scientific or
commercial data you include.
The comments and recommendations
that will be most useful and likely to
influence agency decisions are: (1)
Those supported by quantitative
information or studies; and (2) Those
that include citations to, and analyses
of, the applicable laws and regulations.
We will not consider or include in our
administrative record comments we
receive after the close of the comment
period (see DATES) or comments
delivered to an address other than those
listed above (see ADDRESSES).
B. May I review comments submitted by
others?
Comments, including names and
street addresses of respondents, will be
available for public review at the street
address listed under ADDRESSES. The
public may review documents and other
information applicants have sent in
support of the application unless our
allowing viewing would violate the
Privacy Act or Freedom of Information
Act. Before including your address,
phone number, email address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
II. Background
To help us carry out our conservation
responsibilities for affected species, and
in consideration of section 10(a)(1)(A) of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), along
with Executive Order 13576,
‘‘Delivering an Efficient, Effective, and
Accountable Government,’’ and the
President’s Memorandum for the Heads
of Executive Departments and Agencies
of January 21, 2009—Transparency and
Open Government (74 FR 4685; January
26, 2009), which call on all Federal
agencies to promote openness and
transparency in Government by
disclosing information to the public, we
invite public comment on these permit
applications before final action is taken.
III. Permit Applications
Endangered Species
Applicant: Fort Worth Zoo, Fort Worth,
TX; PRT–93340B
The applicant requests a permit to
import one female and one male
Sumatran orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus)
for the purpose of enhancement of the
survival of the species. This notification
covers activities to be conducted by the
applicant over a 1-year period.
Applicant: Saint Louis Zoo, St. Louis,
MO; PRT–79205B
The applicant requests a permit to
export one male and one female North
Sulawesi babirusa (Babyrousa
celebensis) for the purpose of
enhancement of the survival of the
species. This notification covers
activities to be conducted by the
applicant over a 1-year period.
Applicant: Xochitl De La Rosa Reyna,
College Station, TX; PRT–87845B
The applicant requests a permit to
import biological samples from wild
olive Ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys
olivacea) for the purpose of scientific
research. This notification covers
activities to be conducted by the
applicant over a 5-year period.
Applicant: Kevin Petersen, Hyrum, UT;
PRT–98525B
The applicant requests a permit to
import a sport-hunted trophy of one
male bontebok (Damaliscus pygargus
pygargus) culled from a captive herd
maintained under the management
program of the Republic of South Africa,
for the purpose of enhancement of the
survival of the species.
Brenda Tapia,
Program Analyst/Data Administrator, Branch
of Permits, Division of Management
Authority.
[FR Doc. 2016–14741 Filed 6–21–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
[167A2100DD/AAKC001030/
A0A501010.999900]
HEARTH Act Approval of Twenty-Nine
Palms Band of Mission Indians of
California Regulations
Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
On June 14, 2016, the Bureau
of Indian Affairs (BIA) approved the
Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:02 Jun 21, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
40717
Indians of California (Tribe) leasing
regulations under the Helping Expedite
and Advance Responsible Tribal
Homeownership Act of 2012 (HEARTH
Act). With this approval, the Tribe is
authorized to enter into business site
leases without BIA approval.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Sharlene Round Face, Bureau of Indian
Affairs, Division of Real Estate Services,
MS–4642–MIB, 1849 C Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20240, at (202) 208–
3615.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Summary of the HEARTH Act
The HEARTH Act makes a voluntary,
alternative land leasing process
available to Tribes, by amending the
Indian Long-Term Leasing Act of 1955,
25 U.S.C. 415. The HEARTH Act
authorizes tribes to negotiate and enter
into agricultural and business leases of
tribal trust lands with a primary term of
25 years, and up to two renewal terms
of 25 years each, without the approval
of the Secretary of the Interior
(Secretary). The HEARTH Act also
authorizes tribes to enter into leases for
residential, recreational, religious, or
educational purposes for a primary term
of up to 75 years without the approval
of the Secretary. Participating tribes
develop tribal leasing regulations,
including an environmental review
process, and then must obtain the
Secretary’s approval of those regulations
prior to entering into leases. The
HEARTH Act requires the Secretary to
approve tribal regulations if the tribal
regulations are consistent with the
Department of the Interior’s
(Department) leasing regulations at 25
CFR part 162 and provide for an
environmental review process that
meets requirements set forth in the
HEARTH Act. This notice announces
that the Secretary, through the Assistant
Secretary—Indian Affairs, has approved
the tribal regulations for the TwentyNine Palms Band of Mission Indians of
California.
II. Federal Preemption of State and
Local Taxes
The Department regulations governing
the surface leasing of trust and restricted
Indian lands specify that, subject to
applicable Federal law, permanent
improvements on leased land, leasehold
or possessory interests, and activities
under the lease are not subject to state
and local taxation and may be subject to
taxation by the Indian tribe with
jurisdiction. See 25 CFR 162.017. As
explained further in the preamble to the
final regulations, the Federal
Government has a strong interest in
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
40718
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 120 / Wednesday, June 22, 2016 / Notices
promoting economic development, selfdetermination, and tribal sovereignty.
77 FR 72440, 72447–48 (December 5,
2012). The principles supporting the
Federal preemption of state law in the
field of Indian leasing and the taxation
of lease-related interests and activities
applies with equal force to leases
entered into under tribal leasing
regulations approved by the Federal
Government pursuant to the HEARTH
Act.
Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization
Act, 25 U.S.C. 465, preempts state and
local taxation of permanent
improvements on trust land.
Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis
Reservation v. Thurston County, 724
F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 2013) (citing
Mescalero Apache Tribe v. Jones, 411
U.S. 145 (1973)). Similarly, Section 465
preempts state taxation of rent payments
by a lessee for leased trust lands,
because ‘‘tax on the payment of rent is
indistinguishable from an impermissible
tax on the land.’’ See Seminole Tribe of
Florida v. Stranburg, No. 14–14524,
*13–*17, n.8 (11th Cir. 2015). In
addition, as explained in the preamble
to the revised leasing regulations at 25
CFR part 162, Federal courts have
applied a balancing test to determine
whether state and local taxation of nonIndians on the reservation is preempted.
White Mountain Apache Tribe v.
Bracker, 448 U.S. 136, 143 (1980). The
Bracker balancing test, which is
conducted against a backdrop of
‘‘traditional notions of Indian selfgovernment,’’ requires a particularized
examination of the relevant Federal,
state, and tribal interests. We hereby
adopt the Bracker analysis from the
preamble to the surface leasing
regulations, 77 FR at 72447–48, as
supplemented by the analysis below.
The strong Federal and tribal interests
against state and local taxation of
improvements, leaseholds, and
activities on land leased under the
Department’s leasing regulations apply
equally to improvements, leaseholds,
and activities on land leased pursuant to
tribal leasing regulations approved
under the HEARTH Act. Congress’s
overarching intent was to ‘‘allow Tribes
to exercise greater control over their
own land, support self-determination,
and eliminate bureaucratic delays that
stand in the way of homeownership and
economic development in Tribal
communities.’’ 158 Cong. Rec. H. 2682
(May 15, 2012). The HEARTH Act was
intended to afford tribes ‘‘flexibility to
adapt lease terms to suit [their] business
and cultural needs’’ and to ‘‘enable
[Tribes] to approve leases quickly and
efficiently.’’ Id. at 5–6.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:02 Jun 21, 2016
Jkt 238001
Assessment of state and local taxes
would obstruct these express Federal
policies supporting tribal economic
development and self-determination,
and also threaten substantial tribal
interests in effective tribal government,
economic self-sufficiency, and territorial
autonomy. See Michigan v. Bay Mills
Indian Community, 134 S. Ct. 2024,
2043 (2014) (Sotomayor, J., concurring)
(determining that ‘‘[a] key goal of the
Federal Government is to render tribes
more self-sufficient, and better
positioned to fund their own sovereign
functions, rather than relying on Federal
funding’’). The additional costs of State
and local taxation have a chilling effect
on potential lessees, as well as on a tribe
that, as a result, might refrain from
exercising its own sovereign right to
impose a tribal tax to support its
infrastructure needs. See id. at 2043–44
(finding that state and local taxes greatly
discourage tribes from raising tax
revenue from the same sources because
the imposition of double taxation would
impede Tribal economic growth).
Similar to BIA’s surface leasing
regulations, tribal regulations under the
HEARTH Act pervasively cover all
aspects of leasing. See 25 U.S.C.
415(h)(3)(B)(i) (requiring tribal
regulations be consistent with BIA
surface leasing regulations).
Furthermore, the Federal Government
remains involved in the tribal land
leasing process by approving the tribal
leasing regulations in the first instance
and providing technical assistance,
upon request by a tribe, for the
development of an environmental
review process. The Secretary also
retains authority to take any necessary
actions to remedy violations of a lease
or of the tribal regulations, including
terminating the lease or rescinding
approval of the tribal regulations and
reassuming lease approval
responsibilities. Moreover, the Secretary
continues to review, approve, and
monitor individual Indian land leases
and other types of leases not covered
under the tribal regulations according to
part 162 of the regulations.
Accordingly, the Federal and tribal
interests weigh heavily in favor of
preemption of state and local taxes on
lease-related activities and interests,
regardless of whether the lease is
governed by tribal leasing regulations at
part 162. Improvements, activities, and
leasehold or possessory interests may be
subject to taxation by the Twenty-Nine
Palms Band of Mission Indians of
California.
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Dated: June 14, 2016.
Lawrence S. Roberts,
Acting Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2016–14796 Filed 6–21–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
[167A2100DD/AAKC001030/
A0A501010.999900]
HEARTH Act Approval of Oneida
Nation of New York Regulations
Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
On June 14, 2016, the Bureau
of Indian Affairs (BIA) approved the
Oneida Nation of New York (Tribe)
leasing regulations under the HEARTH
Act. With this approval, the Tribe is
authorized to enter into residential
leases without BIA approval.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Sharlene Round Face, Bureau of Indian
Affairs, Division of Real Estate Services,
MS–4642–MIB, 1849 C Street NW.,
Washington, DC 20240, telephone: (202)
208–3615.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
I. Summary of the HEARTH Act
The HEARTH (Helping Expedite and
Advance Responsible Tribal
Homeownership) Act of 2012 (Act)
makes a voluntary, alternative land
leasing process available to tribes, by
amending the Indian Long-Term Leasing
Act of 1955, 25 U.S.C. 415. The Act
authorizes tribes to negotiate and enter
into agricultural and business leases of
tribal trust lands with a primary term of
25 years, and up to two renewal terms
of 25 years each, without the approval
of the Secretary of the Interior (the
Secretary). The Act also authorizes
tribes to enter into leases for residential,
recreational, religious, or educational
purposes for a primary term of up to 75
years without the approval of the
Secretary. Participating tribes develop
tribal leasing regulations, including an
environmental review process, and then
must obtain the Secretary’s approval of
those regulations prior to entering into
leases. The Act requires the Secretary to
approve tribal regulations if the tribal
regulations are consistent with the
Department of the Interior’s
(Department) leasing regulations at 25
CFR part 162 and provide for an
environmental review process that
meets requirements set forth in the Act.
This notice announces that the
Secretary, through the Assistant
E:\FR\FM\22JNN1.SGM
22JNN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 22, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40717-40718]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-14796]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
[167A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900]
HEARTH Act Approval of Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians
of California Regulations
AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On June 14, 2016, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) approved
the Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians of California (Tribe)
leasing regulations under the Helping Expedite and Advance Responsible
Tribal Homeownership Act of 2012 (HEARTH Act). With this approval, the
Tribe is authorized to enter into business site leases without BIA
approval.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sharlene Round Face, Bureau of
Indian Affairs, Division of Real Estate Services, MS-4642-MIB, 1849 C
Street NW., Washington, DC 20240, at (202) 208-3615.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Summary of the HEARTH Act
The HEARTH Act makes a voluntary, alternative land leasing process
available to Tribes, by amending the Indian Long-Term Leasing Act of
1955, 25 U.S.C. 415. The HEARTH Act authorizes tribes to negotiate and
enter into agricultural and business leases of tribal trust lands with
a primary term of 25 years, and up to two renewal terms of 25 years
each, without the approval of the Secretary of the Interior
(Secretary). The HEARTH Act also authorizes tribes to enter into leases
for residential, recreational, religious, or educational purposes for a
primary term of up to 75 years without the approval of the Secretary.
Participating tribes develop tribal leasing regulations, including an
environmental review process, and then must obtain the Secretary's
approval of those regulations prior to entering into leases. The HEARTH
Act requires the Secretary to approve tribal regulations if the tribal
regulations are consistent with the Department of the Interior's
(Department) leasing regulations at 25 CFR part 162 and provide for an
environmental review process that meets requirements set forth in the
HEARTH Act. This notice announces that the Secretary, through the
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs, has approved the tribal
regulations for the Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians of
California.
II. Federal Preemption of State and Local Taxes
The Department regulations governing the surface leasing of trust
and restricted Indian lands specify that, subject to applicable Federal
law, permanent improvements on leased land, leasehold or possessory
interests, and activities under the lease are not subject to state and
local taxation and may be subject to taxation by the Indian tribe with
jurisdiction. See 25 CFR 162.017. As explained further in the preamble
to the final regulations, the Federal Government has a strong interest
in
[[Page 40718]]
promoting economic development, self-determination, and tribal
sovereignty. 77 FR 72440, 72447-48 (December 5, 2012). The principles
supporting the Federal preemption of state law in the field of Indian
leasing and the taxation of lease-related interests and activities
applies with equal force to leases entered into under tribal leasing
regulations approved by the Federal Government pursuant to the HEARTH
Act.
Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization Act, 25 U.S.C. 465, preempts
state and local taxation of permanent improvements on trust land.
Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation v. Thurston County, 724
F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 2013) (citing Mescalero Apache Tribe v.
Jones, 411 U.S. 145 (1973)). Similarly, Section 465 preempts state
taxation of rent payments by a lessee for leased trust lands, because
``tax on the payment of rent is indistinguishable from an impermissible
tax on the land.'' See Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Stranburg, No. 14-
14524, *13-*17, n.8 (11th Cir. 2015). In addition, as explained in the
preamble to the revised leasing regulations at 25 CFR part 162, Federal
courts have applied a balancing test to determine whether state and
local taxation of non-Indians on the reservation is preempted. White
Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136, 143 (1980). The Bracker
balancing test, which is conducted against a backdrop of ``traditional
notions of Indian self-government,'' requires a particularized
examination of the relevant Federal, state, and tribal interests. We
hereby adopt the Bracker analysis from the preamble to the surface
leasing regulations, 77 FR at 72447-48, as supplemented by the analysis
below.
The strong Federal and tribal interests against state and local
taxation of improvements, leaseholds, and activities on land leased
under the Department's leasing regulations apply equally to
improvements, leaseholds, and activities on land leased pursuant to
tribal leasing regulations approved under the HEARTH Act. Congress's
overarching intent was to ``allow Tribes to exercise greater control
over their own land, support self-determination, and eliminate
bureaucratic delays that stand in the way of homeownership and economic
development in Tribal communities.'' 158 Cong. Rec. H. 2682 (May 15,
2012). The HEARTH Act was intended to afford tribes ``flexibility to
adapt lease terms to suit [their] business and cultural needs'' and to
``enable [Tribes] to approve leases quickly and efficiently.'' Id. at
5-6.
Assessment of state and local taxes would obstruct these express
Federal policies supporting tribal economic development and self-
determination, and also threaten substantial tribal interests in
effective tribal government, economic self-sufficiency, and territorial
autonomy. See Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, 134 S. Ct. 2024,
2043 (2014) (Sotomayor, J., concurring) (determining that ``[a] key
goal of the Federal Government is to render tribes more self-
sufficient, and better positioned to fund their own sovereign
functions, rather than relying on Federal funding''). The additional
costs of State and local taxation have a chilling effect on potential
lessees, as well as on a tribe that, as a result, might refrain from
exercising its own sovereign right to impose a tribal tax to support
its infrastructure needs. See id. at 2043-44 (finding that state and
local taxes greatly discourage tribes from raising tax revenue from the
same sources because the imposition of double taxation would impede
Tribal economic growth).
Similar to BIA's surface leasing regulations, tribal regulations
under the HEARTH Act pervasively cover all aspects of leasing. See 25
U.S.C. 415(h)(3)(B)(i) (requiring tribal regulations be consistent with
BIA surface leasing regulations). Furthermore, the Federal Government
remains involved in the tribal land leasing process by approving the
tribal leasing regulations in the first instance and providing
technical assistance, upon request by a tribe, for the development of
an environmental review process. The Secretary also retains authority
to take any necessary actions to remedy violations of a lease or of the
tribal regulations, including terminating the lease or rescinding
approval of the tribal regulations and reassuming lease approval
responsibilities. Moreover, the Secretary continues to review, approve,
and monitor individual Indian land leases and other types of leases not
covered under the tribal regulations according to part 162 of the
regulations.
Accordingly, the Federal and tribal interests weigh heavily in
favor of preemption of state and local taxes on lease-related
activities and interests, regardless of whether the lease is governed
by tribal leasing regulations at part 162. Improvements, activities,
and leasehold or possessory interests may be subject to taxation by the
Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians of California.
Dated: June 14, 2016.
Lawrence S. Roberts,
Acting Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2016-14796 Filed 6-21-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
