[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 165 (Monday, August 26, 2002)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54733-54735]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-21692]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs

25 CFR Parts 112, 116, 121, 123, 125, 154, 156, 178, and 243

RIN 1076-AE20


Trust Management Reform: Repeal of Outdated Rules

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule; removal of rules.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) 
is removing nine outdated parts of Title 25 CFR. This action is meant 
to further fulfill the Secretary's responsibility to federally-
recognized tribes and individual Indians by ensuring that regulations, 
policies, and procedures are up-to-date. The parts being removed 
include regulations relating to distribution of tribal funds among 
tribal members, establishment of private trusts for the Five Civilized 
Tribes, distribution of Osage Judgment Funds, assignment of future 
income from the Alaska Native Fund, payment of Sioux benefits, 
preparation of a competency roll of Osage Indians, reallotment of lands 
to Indian children, resale of lands within the Badlands Air Force 
Range, and registration of reindeer ownership in Alaska. In the 
interests of economy of administration, and because all of the 
regulations proposed to be removed are outdated, they are included in 
one rulemaking vehicle.

EFFECTIVE DATE: October 25, 2002.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda L. Richardson, Trust Policies 
and Procedures Subproject, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 1849 C Street, 
NW., MS-4070-MIB, Washington, DC 20240, telephone 202-208-6411.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background
II. Response to Comments
III. Procedural Requirements
    A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and 
Review)
    B. Review Under Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)
    C. Review Under Executive Order 12291 and the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act
    D. Review Under Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness 
Act of 1996
    E. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
    F. Review Under Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)
    G. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
    H. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
    I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 (Takings Implication 
Assessment)
    J. Review Under Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)

I. Background

    Proper management of Indian trust assets has been hampered by a 
lack of comprehensive, consistent, up-to-date regulations, policies, 
and procedures covering the entire trust cycle. The BIA began revising 
its trust management regulations by issuing proposed revisions to 
regulations governing probate, trust funds, leasing, and grazing. 
Updated regulations affecting

[[Page 54734]]

these functions became effective on March 23, 2001.
    In April 2001, BIA submitted a report to senior Departmental 
officials that provided a comprehensive review of regulations, manuals 
and handbooks that guide trust operations. The report included 
recommended actions to bring all policies and procedures current and 
outlined a multi-year schedule to accomplish this goal. The review 
identified a number of regulations still on the books that are no 
longer operative, either because all actions required by law have been 
fully implemented or because the regulation no longer comports with 
Federal Indian policy. On February 21, 2002 (67 FR 7985), BIA published 
a proposed rule with a request for comments to remove 25 CFR parts 112, 
116, 121, 123, 125, 154, 156, 178, and 243.

II. Response to Comments

    The BIA received comments from three Indian tribes, none of whom 
objected to the proposed removal of the nine parts; therefore, no 
changes have been made.

III. Procedural Requirements

A. Review Under Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review)

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), the BIA 
must determine whether the regulatory action is ``significant'' and 
therefore subject to OMB review and the requirements of the Executive 
Order. The Order defines a ``significant regulatory action'' as one 
that is likely to result in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect 
on the economy of $100 million or more or adversely affect in a 
material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, 
competition, jobs, the environment, public health or safety, or State, 
local, or tribal governments or communities; (2) create a serious 
inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by 
another agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of 
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and 
obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy 
issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or 
the principles set forth in the Executive Order.
    The rule would remove a number of outdated regulations. As such, it 
does not impose a compliance burden on the economy generally or on any 
person or entity. Accordingly, this rule is not a ``significant 
regulatory action'' from an economic standpoint, and it does not 
otherwise create any inconsistencies or budgetary impacts to any other 
agency or Federal program.

B. Review Under Executive Order 12988 (Civil Justice Reform)

    With respect to the review of existing regulations and the 
promulgation of new regulations, subsection 3(a) of Executive Order 
12988, ``Civil Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996), imposes 
on Executive agencies the general duty to adhere to the following 
requirements: (1) Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write 
regulations to minimize litigation; and (3) provide a clear legal 
standard for affected conduct rather than a general standard and 
promote simplification and burden reduction.
    With regard to the review of proposed regulations, subsection 3(b) 
of Executive Order 12988 specifically requires that Executive agencies 
make every reasonable effort to ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly 
specifies the preemptive effect, if any; (2) clearly specifies any 
effect on existing Federal law or regulation; (3) provides a clear 
legal standard for affected conduct while promoting simplification and 
burden reduction; (4) specifies the retroactive effect, if any; (5) 
adequately defines key terms; and (6) addresses other important issues 
affecting clarity and general draftsmanship under any guidelines issued 
by the Attorney General.
    Subsection 3(c) of Executive Order 12988 requires agencies to 
review proposed regulations in light of applicable standards in section 
3(a) and section 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is 
unreasonable to meet one or more of them. The BIA has determined that 
the removal of outdated parts meets the relevant standards of Executive 
Order 12988.

C. Review Under Executive Order 12291 and the Regulatory Flexibility 
Act

    Because this rule would remove outdated regulations, the BIA has 
determined that this rule is not a significant rule under Executive 
Order 12866. This rule was also reviewed under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., which requires preparation of a 
regulatory flexibility analysis for any rule which is likely to have 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
    This rule updates the Department's policies and procedures that 
apply to certain Indian trust resources by eliminating unneeded 
regulatory requirements. Accordingly, the BIA has determined that this 
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial 
number of small entities, and, therefore, no regulatory flexibility 
analysis has been prepared.

D. Review Under the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
of 1996

    This rule is not a major rule as defined by section 804 of the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996. This 
proposed rule will not result in an annual effect on the economy of 
$100,000,000 or more. The effect of this rulemaking will be to 
streamline and modernize policies, procedures and management operations 
of the BIA by eliminating unnecessary regulations. No increases in 
costs for administration will be realized, and no prices would be 
affected through these revisions as, in practice, the regulations being 
removed are already inoperative.
    This rulemaking will not result in any significant adverse effects 
on competition, employment, investment, productivity, or innovation, 
nor on the ability of United States-based companies to compete with 
foreign-based companies in domestic and export markets. These 
administrative revisions to BIA policy and procedure will not have an 
impact on any small business businesses or enterprises.

E. Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

    This rule is exempt from the requirements of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act, since it repeals existing regulations. An OMB form 83-1 
is not required.

F. Review Under Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

    This rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States, 
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various 
levels of government. There is no Federalism impact on the trust 
relationship or balance of power between the United States government 
and the various tribal governments affected by this rulemaking. 
Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132, it is determined 
that this rule will not have sufficient federalism implications to 
warrant the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

G. Review Under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969

    This rule does not constitute a major Federal action significantly 
affecting the quality of the human environment. Therefore, neither an 
Environmental Assessment nor an Environmental

[[Page 54735]]

Impact Statement is necessary for this proposed rule.

H. Review Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

    Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, Public Law 
104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the 
effects of their regulatory actions on state, local, and tribal 
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the Act, the 
BIA generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost-
benefit analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal 
mandates'' that may result in expenditures to state, local, and tribal 
governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, of $100 
million or more in any one year. This rule will not result in the 
expenditure by state, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, 
or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year.

I. Review Under Executive Order 12630 (Takings Implication Assessment)

    In accordance with Executive Order 12630, this rule does not have 
significant takings implications. This rule does not involve the 
``taking'' of private property interests.

J. Review under Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)

    The BIA determined that, because the removal of current regulations 
has tribal implications, it was an appropriate topic for consultation 
with tribal governments. This consultation is in keeping with Executive 
Order 13175, ``Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal 
Governments.'' In April 2001, BIA sent all tribal leaders a report that 
documents the results of a BIA review of existing regulations, 
policies, and procedures that affect delivery of trust services to 
tribal governments and individual Indians. Included in the report was a 
multi-year schedule for bringing all trust regulations, policies and 
procedures up-to-date. In May 2001, the BIA sent all tribal leaders a 
letter describing and identifying ten parts of Title 25 CFR that we 
were considering for removal. Regional directors followed up to 
determine if there were tribal concerns with any aspects of the 
proposal.
    Following publication of the proposed rule, BIA again notified 
tribal governments of the substance of this rulemaking through a direct 
mailing. This enabled tribal officials and the affected tribal 
constituency throughout Indian Country to have meaningful and timely 
input in the development of the final rule.

List of Subjects

25 CFR Part 112

    Indians--business and finance.

25 CFR Part 116

    Estates, Indians--business and finance, Trusts and trustees.

25 CFR Part 121

    Indians--claims, Indians--judgment funds.

25 CFR Part 123

    Alaska, Indian--claims.

25 CFR Part 125

    Indians--claims, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

25 CFR Part 154

    Indians--lands.

25 CFR Part 156

    Indians--lands.

25 CFR Part 178

    Indians--lands.

25 CFR Part 243

    Alaska, Indians--business and finance, Reindeer.

    Accordingly, under the authority in 25 U.S.C. 9, 25 CFR chapter 1 
is amended by removing parts 112, 116, 121, 123, 125, 154, 156, 178, 
and 243.

    Dated: August 12, 2002.
Neal A. McCaleb,
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 02-21692 Filed 8-23-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-02-P