HEARTH Act Approval of Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians Regulations, 14390-14391 [2019-07092]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
jbell on DSK30RV082PROD with NOTICES
14390
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 10, 2019 / Notices
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Abstract: The National Park Service
(NPS) Act of 1916, 38 Stat 535, 16
U.S.C. 1, et seq., requires that the NPS
preserve national parks for the use and
enjoyment of present and future
generations. This collection will provide
the Glen Canyon Dam Adaptive
Management Program (GCDAMP) with
information about tribal stakeholder’s
perspectives on the condition and
protection of natural and cultural
resources in Glen and Grand Canyons.
Identifying tribal preferences and values
for natural and cultural resources in
Glen and Grand Canyons is a high
priority for the GCDAMP. There are
substantial ongoing and prior studies
exploring the preferences and values
recreationists and the general public
hold for resources (for example,
whitewater rafting and hydropower) in
Glen and Grand Canyons. However,
there is almost a complete absence of
relevant prior tribal socioeconomic
studies exploring this information. This
collection will provide information
needed to inform decisions on
management actions and policies
related to operation of Glen Canyon
Dam. This notice will cover the
development and pretesting of the final
survey instrument.
Title of Collection: Tribal Perspectives
for and Values of Resources
Downstream of Glen Canyon Dam.
OMB Control Number: 1028–NEW.
Form Number: None.
Type of Review: New.
Respondents/Affected Public:
Individuals/households.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Respondents: 350.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 300.
Estimated Completion Time per
Response: 120 minutes.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Burden Hours: 700.
Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary.
Frequency of Collection: One time.
Total Estimated Annual Non-hour
Burden Cost: We have not identified any
‘‘non-hour cost’’ burdens associated
with this collection of information.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor and a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
The authorities for this action are the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501, et seq.).
David Lytle,
Director, Southwest Biological Science
Center.
[FR Doc. 2019–07119 Filed 4–9–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4338–11–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:36 Apr 09, 2019
Jkt 247001
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
[190A2100DD/AAKC001030/
A0A501010.999900]
HEARTH Act Approval of Mississippi
Band of Choctaw Indians Regulations
Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
On March 5, 2019, the Bureau
of Indian Affairs (BIA) approved the
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians
(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 agricultural, residential,
business, wind and solar, wind energy
evaluation, and other authorized
purposes, leases without further BIA
approval.
SUMMARY:
Ms.
Sharlene Round Face, Bureau of Indian
Affairs, Division of Real Estate Services,
1849 C Street NW, MS–4642–MIB,
Washington, DC 20240, telephone: (202)
208–3615.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
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
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the Tribal regulations for the
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians.
II. Federal Preemption of State and
Local Taxes
The Department’s 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 promoting economic development,
self-determination, and Tribal
sovereignty. 77 FR 72,440, 72,447–48
(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. 5108, 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 5108
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 State, Federal, and Tribal
interests. We hereby adopt the Bracker
analysis from the preamble to the
surface leasing regulations, 77 FR at
72,447–48, 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
E:\FR\FM\10APN1.SGM
10APN1
jbell on DSK30RV082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 69 / Wednesday, April 10, 2019 / Notices
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
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:36 Apr 09, 2019
Jkt 247001
monitor individual Indian land leases
and other types of leases not covered
under the Tribal regulations according
to the part 162 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
or part 162. Improvements, activities,
and leasehold or possessory interests
may be subject to taxation by the
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians.
Dated: March 5, 2019.
Tara Sweeney,
Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2019–07092 Filed 4–9–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
[192D0102DR/DS5A300000/
DR.5A311.IA000118]
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
for the Proposed Redding Rancheria
Fee-to-Trust and Casino Project,
Shasta County, California
Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
This notice advises the public
that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA),
as lead agency, intends to file a Draft
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS)
with the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) in connection with the
Redding Rancheria’s (Tribe) application
requesting that the United States acquire
approximately 232 acres of land in trust
in Shasta County, California, for the
construction and operation of a casino
resort.
DATES: Written comments on the DEIS
must arrive within 45 days after EPA
publishes its Notice of Availability in
the Federal Register. The date and
location of the public hearing on the
DEIS will be announced at least 15 days
in advance through a notice to be
published in local newspapers (Redding
Record Searchlight and Sacramento Bee)
and online at https://
www.reddingeis.com.
ADDRESSES: You may mail or handdeliver written comments to Amy
Dutschke, Regional Director, Bureau of
Indian Affairs, Pacific Region, 2800
Cottage Way, Sacramento, California
95825. Please include your name, return
address, and ‘‘DEIS Comments, Redding
Rancheria Project’’ on the first page of
your written comments. You may also
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
14391
submit comments through email to
Chad Broussard, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Bureau of Indian
Affairs, at chad.broussard@bia.gov. If
emailing comments, please use ‘‘DEIS
Comments, Redding Rancheria Project’’
as the subject of your email.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Chad Broussard, Environmental
Protection Specialist, Bureau of Indian
Affairs, Pacific Regional Office, 2800
Cottage Way, Room W–2820,
Sacramento, California 95825;
telephone: (916) 978–6165; email:
chad.broussard@bia.gov. Information is
also available online at https://
www.reddingeis.com.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Tribe
submitted an application to the
Department of the Interior (Department)
requesting the placement of
approximately 232 acres of fee land in
trust by the United States upon which
the Tribe would construct a casino
resort. The facility would include an
approximately 69,500 square foot
casino, an approximately 250-room
hotel, an event/convention center, an
outdoor amphitheatre, a retail center,
and associated parking and
infrastructure. The new facility would
replace the Tribe’s existing casino, and
the existing casino buildings would be
converted to a different Tribal use.
Accordingly, the proposed action for
the Department is the acquisition
requested by the Tribe. The proposed
fee-to-trust property is located in an
unincorporated part of Shasta County,
California, approximately 1.6 miles
northeast of the existing Redding
Rancheria, and about two miles
southeast of downtown Redding. The
proposed trust property includes seven
parcels, bound by Bechelli Lane on the
north, private properties to the south,
the Sacramento River on the west, and
Interstate 5 on the east. The Shasta
County Assessor’s parcel numbers
(APNs) for the property are 055–010–
011, 055–010–012, 055–010–014, 055–
010–015, 055–050–001, 055–020–004
and 055–020–005.
The following alternatives are
considered in the DEIS: (1) Proposed
Project; (2) Proposed Project with No
Retail Alternative; (3) Reduce Intensity
Alternative; (4) Non-Gaming
Alternative; (5) Anderson Site
Alternative; (6) Expansion of Existing
Casino Alternative; and (7) No Action
Alternative. Environmental issues
addressed in the EIS include land
resources; water resources; air quality;
noise; biological resources; cultural/
historical/archaeological resources;
resource use patterns; traffic and
transportation; public health and safety;
E:\FR\FM\10APN1.SGM
10APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 69 (Wednesday, April 10, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14390-14391]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-07092]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
[190A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900]
HEARTH Act Approval of Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians
Regulations
AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On March 5, 2019, the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) approved
the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians (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 agricultural, residential, business, wind and solar, wind
energy evaluation, and other authorized purposes, leases without
further BIA approval.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sharlene Round Face, Bureau of
Indian Affairs, Division of Real Estate Services, 1849 C Street NW, MS-
4642-MIB, Washington, DC 20240, telephone: (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 Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians.
II. Federal Preemption of State and Local Taxes
The Department's 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 promoting economic development, self-determination, and Tribal
sovereignty. 77 FR 72,440, 72,447-48 (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. 5108,
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 5108 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 State, Federal, and Tribal
interests. We hereby adopt the Bracker analysis from the preamble to
the surface leasing regulations, 77 FR at 72,447-48, 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
[[Page 14391]]
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 the part 162
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 or part 162. Improvements, activities,
and leasehold or possessory interests may be subject to taxation by the
Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians.
Dated: March 5, 2019.
Tara Sweeney,
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2019-07092 Filed 4-9-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
