[Federal Register Volume 71, Number 190 (Monday, October 2, 2006)]
[Notices]
[Pages 57995-57996]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E6-16191]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs


Final Determination for the Burt Lake Band of Ottawa and Chippewa 
Indians, Inc.

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of final determination.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to 25 CFR 83.10(h), notice is hereby given that the 
Associate Deputy Secretary (ADS) has determined that the Burt Lake Band 
of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, Inc., c/o Mr. Curtis Chambers, does not 
satisfy all seven criteria for acknowledgment as an Indian tribe in 25 
CFR 83.7.

DATES: This determination is final and will become effective 90 days 
from publication of the Final Determination, pursuant to 25 CFR 
83.10(l)(4), unless a request for reconsideration is filed pursuant to 
25 CFR 83.11.

ADDRESSES: Requests for a copy of the summary evaluation of the 
evidence should be addressed to the Office of the Assistant Secretary--
Indian Affairs, Attention: Office of Federal Acknowledgment, 1951 
Constitution Avenue, NW., MS: 34B-SIB, Washington, DC 20240.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: R. Lee Fleming, Director, Office of 
Federal Acknowledgment, (202) 513-7650.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This notice is published in the exercise of 
authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior to the ADS by 
Secretarial Order 3259, of February 8, 2005, as amended on August 11, 
2005, and on March 31, 2006.
    This notice is based on a determination that the Burt Lake Band of 
Ottawa and Chippewa Indians, Inc. (BLB) does not satisfy all of the 
seven mandatory criteria for acknowledgment in 25 CFR 83.7, as modified 
by section 83.8. The acknowledgment process is based on the regulations 
at 25 CFR part 83. Under these regulations, the petitioner has the 
burden to present evidence that it meets the seven mandatory criteria 
in section 83.7.
    A notice of the Proposed Finding to decline to acknowledge the BLB 
was published in the Federal Register on April 15, 2004. The 
regulations provide a 180-day period for comment on the Proposed 
Finding and at the petitioner's request this comment period was 
extended three times to close on May 2, 2005. This determination is 
made following a review of the BLB's response to the Proposed Finding. 
No third parties submitted comments on the Proposed Finding.
    This Final Determination concludes that the petitioner is eligible 
to be evaluated under section 83.8 with a last date of acknowledgment 
as of 1917.
    Under 83.8(d)(5), the petitioner was evaluated under criterion 
83.7(a), which requires that the petitioner be identified as an 
American Indian entity on a substantially continuous basis, from the 
point of last Federal acknowledgment. The available evidence 
demonstrates that external observers have identified the petitioning 
group as an American Indian entity on a substantially continuous basis 
since 1917, the date of last Federal acknowledgment.
    Criterion 83.7(b), as modified by section 83.8(d)(2), requires that 
a predominant portion of the petitioning group comprise a distinct 
community and exist as a community at present. The BLB submitted 
evidence from ghost supper sign-in sheets, photographs, funeral 
records, and interviews submitted by the petitioner to supplement 
materials already in the record. The evidence demonstrates that the BLB 
as defined by its membership list is not a community. More than half of 
the petitioner's members only rarely if ever participate in activities 
with other BLB members. The evidence demonstrates further that the BLB 
petitioner's core social community is part of a greater Burt Lake 
community composed predominantly of members of a federally recognized 
tribe, the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians (LTBB), and 
members of the BLB petitioner. Neither the petitioner's core social 
community nor the petitioner itself is distinct from this greater Burt 
Lake community. Further, the peripheral members of BLB are more likely 
to interact socially with older parents or grandparents and other 
relatives enrolled in LTBB than with non-relatives in BLB. The BLB 
petitioner does not meet criterion 83.7(b) because it is not a distinct 
social community at present, as the regulations require.
    Criterion 83.7(c), as modified by section 83.8(d)(3), requires that 
the petitioner has maintained political influence or authority over its 
members as an autonomous entity from 1917 until the present. The BLB 
petitioner does not meet criterion 83.7(c), as modified by section 
83.8(d)(3), because it has not

[[Page 57996]]

provided sufficient evidence of identifications of leaders or of a 
governing body of the petitioning group by authoritative, knowledgeable 
external sources on a substantially continuous basis since 1917. The 
BLB petitioner does not meet criterion 83.7(c), under the provisions of 
section 83.8(d)(5), because it has not provided a combination of 
evidence sufficient to demonstrate that the petitioning group has 
maintained political influence or authority over its members from 1917 
to the present. From 1917 into the 1970's, the available evidence, with 
one exception, demonstrates political activity by Burt Lake band 
descendants within entities much larger than the petitioner. This 
historical pattern persists at present.
    The politically active members of the BLB are part of the greater 
Burt Lake community, composed predominantly of Indian individuals who 
are not members of BLB. Past members of BLB, who are now enrolled in a 
federally recognized tribe, influence the petitioner's members on 
significant issues. Authority flows from influential family members to 
their kin. Families, however, have members both in BLB and in federally 
recognized tribes, primarily LTBB, or not enrolled in any Indian tribe 
or petitioner. Younger, peripheral members of BLB consult with older 
relatives who belong to LTBB concerning BLB issues, and these older 
relatives, former BLB members, deal with leaders of the greater Burt 
Lake community who belong to both organizations. The evidence 
demonstrates the existence of influence within a group of Burt Lake 
band descendants larger than the current membership of the petitioner, 
rather than a bilateral relationship between leaders and members within 
the petitioning group.
    Criterion 83.7(d) requires that the petitioner provide a copy of 
the group's present governing document including its membership 
criteria. The BLB petitioner submitted a constitution, voted on by the 
members via absentee ballots in February 2005, and certified as the 
group's official governing document by a resolution dated April 9, 
2005. The BLB petitioner submitted a copy of its current governing 
document, which includes its membership criteria and the processes by 
which it governs itself. Therefore, the BLB petitioner meets criterion 
83.7(d).
    Criterion 83.7(e) requires that the petitioner's membership consist 
of individuals who descend from a historical Indian tribe or from 
historical Indian tribes which combined and functioned as a single 
autonomous political entity. The BLB submitted a membership list dated 
April 2005, identifying 320 members, and including all categories of 
information required by section 83.7(e)(2). This represents a removal 
of 624 of the 857 members who appeared on the group's December 2002 
membership list, and an addition of 87 new members.
    The FD found that 68 percent, or 218 of the 320 BLB members, could 
satisfactorily document descent from the historical band. The 102 
members who could not document descent from the historical tribe 
included 53 descendants of two non-Cheboygan women, Elizabeth Martell 
and Charlotte Boda, who arrived in the Burt Lake area after the October 
1900 burnout of the Indian village. These women had siblings who 
married into the group, but neither the women nor their descendants did 
so. The other 49 members could not document descent from the historical 
tribe due to missing or insufficient evidence of descent. Based on 
precedent, because only 68 percent of its members descend from the 
historical Cheboygan band, the BLB petitioner does not meet the 
requirements of criterion 83.7(e).
    Criterion 83.7(f) requires that the membership of the petitioning 
group be composed principally of persons who are not members of any 
acknowledged North American Indian tribe. A review of the available 
documentation revealed that the membership is composed principally of 
persons who are not members of any acknowledged North American Indian 
tribe. The BLB petitioner meets criterion 83.7(f).
    Criterion 83.7(g) requires that neither the petitioner nor its 
members be the subject of congressional legislation that has expressly 
terminated or forbidden the Federal relationship. A review of the 
available documentation showed no evidence that the petitioning group 
was the subject of congressional legislation to terminate or prohibit a 
Federal relationship as an Indian tribe. The BLB petitioner meets the 
requirements of criterion 83.7(g).
    As provided by 25 CFR 83.10(h), a report summarizing the evidence, 
reasoning, and analyses that are the basis for the final determination 
will be provided to the petitioner and interested parties, and is 
available to other parties upon written request.
    After the publication of notice of the final determination, the 
petitioner or any interested party may file a request for 
reconsideration with the Interior Board of Indian Appeals (IBIA) under 
the procedures set forth in section 83.11 of the regulations. This 
request must be received by the IBIA no later than 90 days after the 
publication of the final determination in the Federal Register. The 
final determination will become effective as provided in the 
regulations 90 days from the Federal Register publication unless a 
request for reconsideration is filed within that time period.

    Dated: September 21, 2006.
James E. Cason,
Associate Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E6-16191 Filed 9-29-06; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-G1-P