[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 38 (Monday, February 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12401-12403]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-03945]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs

[234A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.999900]


Proposed Finding Against Federal Acknowledgment of the Grand 
River Bands of Ottawa Indians

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of the Interior (Department) gives notice that 
the Office of the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs (AS-IA) proposes 
to determine that the petitioner, Grand River Bands of Ottawa Indians 
(Petitioner #146), is not an Indian Tribe within the meaning of Federal 
law. This notice is based on a determination that Petitioner #146 does 
not meet one of the seven mandatory criteria for a government-to-
government relationship with the United States. This proposed finding 
(PF) is based on only one criterion.

DATES: Comments on this PF are due on or before August 28, 2023. We 
must receive any request for a technical assistance meeting by April 
28, 2023.

ADDRESSES: Please address comments on the PF or requests for a paper 
copy of the report to the Department of the Interior, Office of the 
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs, Attn: Office of Federal 
Acknowledgment, 1849 C Street NW, MS-4071 MIB, Washington, DC 20240. 
Electronic copies of the PF, as well as other related documents, are 
available on OFA's website (www.bia.gov/as-ia/ofa). Parties who make 
comments on the PF must also provide a copy of their comments to the 
Petitioner.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: R. Lee Fleming, Director, Office of 
Federal Acknowledgment (OFA) at [email protected] or (202) 513-7650.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to 25 CFR 83.10(h) (1994),\1\ the 
Department gives notice that the AS-IA proposes to determine that the 
Grand River Bands of Ottawa Indians (Petitioner #146), c/o Mr. Ron Yob, 
P.O. Box 2937, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49501-2937, is not an Indian 
Tribe within the meaning of the Federal law. This notice is based on a 
preliminary finding that the petitioner fails to satisfy one of the 
seven mandatory criteria for acknowledgement set forth in 25 CFR 
83.7(a) through (g), and thus, does not meet the requirements for a 
government-to-government relationship with the United States. Please 
see the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this notice for more 
information about the public comment period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ All citations to 25 CFR part 83 in this notice are to the 
version of the Federal acknowledgment regulations as revised in 1994 
unless otherwise indicated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Petitioner

    The Department received a letter of intent from the Petitioner 
under the name ``Grand River Band Ottawa Council'' on November 16, 
1994, and designated it Petitioner #146. On November 14, 1997, the 
Petitioner submitted a ``Petitioner Update'' form indicating that 
Petitioner #146 was now known as the ``Grand River Bands of Ottawa 
Indians,'' with Ron Yob and Joseph Genia as Co-Chairs. The Petitioner 
submitted materials for its documented petition in December 2000, July 
2004, and November 2004. The Department conducted an initial review of 
these materials and provided Petitioner #146 with a technical 
assistance (TA) review letter on January 25, 2005. In June 2006 and 
March 2007, the Petitioner supplied materials in response to the TA 
review letter. The Department then placed Petitioner #146 on the 
``Ready, Waiting for Active Consideration'' list on March 28, 2007.
    The Department placed the Petitioner on active consideration on 
December 1, 2013. The Petitioner submitted no additional documents 
during the 60 days following, as allowed by the AS-IA's notice of 
``information and guidance'' of March 31, 2005 (70 FR 16514), and as 
advised by a Department letter of December 12, 2013. In a letter dated 
March 12, 2014, the Department exercised its option under the same 
guidance to ask for information the Petitioner had not submitted.
    In an August 27, 2014, the Petitioner furnished 569 membership 
files, a considerable increase from a membership list that the 
Petitioner had submitted in June 2014, which indicated the group had 
only 347 members. Additionally, thirty-six individuals on the June 2014 
membership list also did not have membership files in the August 2014 
submission. To ascertain the Petitioner's membership, the Department 
asked for an updated membership list and an explanation of which 
membership files were current. The Petitioner supplied this information 
on October 31, 2014. Petitioner #146 provided additional material on 
December 13, 2016, which the Department had requested in a 
teleconference with the group on November 3, 2016.
    Due to these submission delays and the Department's competing 
priorities, including the review of other pending petitions, the 
Department extended the deadline for the PF to September 30, 2015. In 
the interim, on July 1, 2015, the Department issued a final rule that 
revised the acknowledgment regulations effective July 31, 2015. In a 
letter dated August 28, 2015, the Department provided Petitioner #146 
an opportunity to choose, by September 29, 2015, whether to complete 
the evaluation process under the revised 2015 regulations or complete 
its evaluation under the 1994 version of the acknowledgment 
regulations. By letter dated September 14, 2015, the Petitioner's 
governing body informed the Department that it wished to have its 
petition evaluated under the 1994 regulations. On November 2, 2015, the 
Department acknowledged receipt of this letter and also extended the 
deadline for issuing the PF to March 28, 2016.

[[Page 12402]]

    From March 2016 to April 2020, the Department found good cause to 
provide additional extensions of the date for issuance of the PF for 
Petitioner #146, pursuant to 83.10(h) of the 1994 regulations. On April 
16, 2020, the Department conditionally suspended active consideration 
of the PF based on administrative problems caused by the COVID-19 
emergency. The Department lifted the suspension on April 15, 2022, 
based on local public health conditions (transmission levels trending 
to moderate and low) and the reopening of facilities on the local, 
state, tribal, and Federal levels that are important for accessing 
information and records related to the consideration of the petition. 
Upon ending the conditional suspension, the Department scheduled the 
issuance of the PF to occur on or before October 12, 2022.
    The Department held a teleconference with Petitioner #146 on June 
28, 2022, per the Petitioner's request. The teleconference was held to 
answer Petitioner questions regarding the preparation of a current 
membership list, submission of new member enrollment files, and 
certification of the current membership list. Petitioner #146 
subsequently submitted an updated current membership list and new 
member enrollment files, which were received by the Department on 
August 8, 2022. On October 4, 2022, the Department found good cause to 
issue a 120-day extension of the deadline for issuing the PF with an 
issuance date scheduled to occur on or before February 9, 2023. The 
Department subsequently issued a final, two-week extension, with an 
issuance date scheduled to occur on or before February 23, 2023.
    Criterion 83.7(b) requires that ``a predominant portion of the 
petitioning group comprises a distinct community and has existed as a 
community from historical times until the present.'' Section 83.1 
defines ``Community'' as ``any group of people which can demonstrate 
that consistent interactions and significant social relationships exist 
within its membership and that its members are differentiated from and 
identified as distinct from nonmembers. Community must be understood in 
the context of the history, geography, culture and social organization 
of the group.''
    Petitioner #146 claims descent from the historical Ottawa bands 
that originally lived in the area of Michigan surrounding the Grand 
River. With other Ottawa and Chippewa bands, these bands signed several 
treaties during the early- to mid-nineteenth century. Following the 
last of these treaties in 1855, the bands relocated to other parts of 
Michigan, with the largest groups of them moving to settlements in 
Oceana and Mason Counties and with smaller groups of them moving 
elsewhere.
    While the Petitioner's members appear to descend from these 
historic Grand River-area bands (a claim that would be evaluated under 
criterion 83.7(e) in an amended PF if the deficiencies in the PF are 
resolved), the Petitioner has not demonstrated that its members 
comprise a distinct community that has existed as a community through 
time. In furtherance of its claim, the Petitioner submitted evidence of 
groups of descendants occasionally joining together for various 
purposes, including making claims against the Federal government, in 
the name of the ``Grand River bands.''
    The Petitioner asserts that these activities support its claim of a 
continuously existing distinct community under criterion 83.7(b). 
However, the evidence relating to these periodic activities indicates 
otherwise. From one activity to another, the individuals purporting to 
act on behalf of the Grand River Bands changed significantly. Instead 
of reflecting the existence of a distinct community, these activities 
appear to have been performed by several different groups of 
descendants acting independently, in some cases, making different 
decisions on the same issues. Furthermore, the proportion of current 
members whose ancestors participated in any specific activity is low, 
relative to the total membership. In addition, those ancestors of 
members of Petitioner #146 who participated in the activities that the 
Petitioner claims demonstrate community represent only a small portion 
of each larger group of individuals who participated in the activities.
    Instead of showing that Petitioner #146 represents a continuously 
existing community, the evidence shows that Petitioner #146 was formed 
recently by the merging of several different groups of descendants of 
the historic Grand River-area bands. These different groups were based 
in different parts of Michigan and appear to have acted independently, 
each with its own separate leadership, membership, and activities. 
These groups came together during the mid- to late-1990s, following the 
congressional recognition of the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa 
Indians and the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians in 1994. The 
leadership of the different groups expressed that seeking Federal 
recognition was their main purpose for coming together, and the 
decision to join into a single organization occurred after one of the 
groups independently submitted its Letter of Intent to the Department. 
Additionally, the decision to join into a single organization was 
followed by a period of active recruitment of other individual 
descendants of the treaty-era bands who had not previously been members 
of any of the component organizations or otherwise been interacting 
with other descendants as part of the Petitioner's claimed community.
    In sum, although the claims of Petitioner #146 stem from descent 
from a group of historic bands, the Petitioner has not documented any 
activities since the treaty era that reflect a continuously existing 
distinct community. Rather, the evidence shows that the Petitioner came 
together beginning in 1995 from several independent groups. The absence 
of a distinct community among the Petitioner's ancestors in earlier 
evaluation periods is reflected in the continued lack of many 
characteristics of a distinct community among the current membership. 
Evidence since 1995 shows that there is a very small group of members, 
often those in leadership positions, who are active as members, but the 
overwhelming majority of members are not present and do not participate 
in Petitioner-sponsored events and activities.
    The evidence submitted by Petitioner #146, and evidence Department 
staff obtained through its verification and evaluation research, is 
insufficient to demonstrate, under the reasonable likelihood of the 
validity of the facts standard, that Petitioner #146 meets the 
mandatory criterion for Federal acknowledgment, 83.7(b), either as is 
or as modified by 83.8.
    In accordance with the regulations, the failure to meet any one of 
the seven criteria requires a determination that a petitioning group is 
not an Indian Tribe within the meaning of Federal law. See 25 CFR 
83.6(d) and 25 CFR 83.10(m). Therefore, the Department proposes to 
decline to acknowledge Petitioner #146 as an Indian Tribe.
    According to the AS-IA ``Office of Federal Acknowledgment; Guidance 
and Direction Regarding Internal Procedures'' of May 23, 2008:

    If during the evaluation of a petition on active consideration 
it becomes apparent that the petitioner fails on one criterion, or 
more, under the reasonable likelihood of the validity of the facts 
standard, OFA may prepare a proposed finding or final determination 
not to acknowledge the group on the failed criterion or criteria 
alone, setting forth the evidence, reasoning, and

[[Page 12403]]

analyses that form the basis for the proposed decision. See 73 FR 
30148.

    The burden of providing sufficient evidence under the criteria in 
the regulations rests with the petitioner. See 25 CFR 83.5(c). Because 
Petitioner #146 has not met criterion 83.7(b), it is not necessary for 
the Department to make conclusions regarding the other six mandatory 
criteria at this time.
    The PF is based on the evidence currently in the record. Additional 
evidence may be submitted during the comment period that follows 
publication of this finding. If new evidence provided during the 
comment period results in a reversal of this conclusion, the AS-IA will 
issue an amended PF evaluating all seven criteria. See 73 FR 30148.

Public Comment Period

    Publication of this notice of the PF in the Federal Register 
initiates a 180-day comment period during which the Petitioner and 
interested and informed parties may submit arguments and evidence to 
support or rebut the PF. Comments on the PF should be addressed to both 
the Petitioner and the Federal Government as required by 25 CFR 
83.10(i) and as instructed in the ADDRESSES section of this notice by 
the date listed in the DATES section of this notice. Parties who make 
comments on the PF must also provide a copy of their comments to the 
Petitioner, please see the Petitioner's address in the SUPPLEMENTARY 
INFORMATION section. The regulations, 25 CFR 83.10(k), provide the 
Petitioner a minimum of 60 days to respond to any submissions on the PF 
received from interested and informed parties during the comment 
period. After expiration of the comment and response periods described 
above, the Department will consult with the Petitioner and interested 
parties to determine an equitable timeframe for consideration of 
written arguments and evidence. The Department will notify the 
Petitioner and interested parties of the date such consideration 
begins. After consideration of the written arguments and evidence 
rebutting or supporting the PF and the Petitioner's response to the 
comments of interested and informed parties, the AS-IA will either 
issue an amended PF or make a final determination regarding the 
Petitioner's status. The Department will publish a summary of this 
determination in the Federal Register.
    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 information from 
public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.

Authority

    The Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs is recused from this 
matter, and the Principal Deputy AS-IA is issuing this Proposed Finding 
pursuant to the authority delegated. See 209 DM 8.4(A); 110 DM 8.2.

Wizipan Garriott,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs, Exercising by 
delegation the authority of the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2023-03945 Filed 2-24-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337-15-P