Published 60 Day Notice

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 173 / Thursday, September 8, 2022 / Notices
covers activities to be conducted by the
applicant over a 5-year period.

ACTION:

Applicant: Harvard University Museum
of Comparative Zoology, Cambridge,
MA; Permit No. PER0050974

SUMMARY:

The applicant requests the renewal of
their permit to export and re-import
non-living museum specimens of
endangered and threatened species
previously legally accessioned into the
permittee’s collection for scientific
research. This notification covers
activities to be conducted by the
applicant over a 5-year period.
Trophy Applicant
Applicant: Michael Stein, Francisco, IN;
Permit No. 97800C
The following applicant requests a
permit to import a sport-hunted trophy
of 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 enhancing the
propagation or survival of the species.
IV. Next Steps
After the comment period closes, we
will make decisions regarding permit
issuance. If we issue permits to any of
the applicants listed in this notice, we
will publish a notice in the Federal
Register. You may locate the notice
announcing the permit issuance by
searching https://www.regulations.gov
for the permit number listed above in
this document. For example, to find
information about the potential issuance
of Permit No. 12345A, you would go to
regulations.gov and search for
‘‘12345A’’.
V. Authority
We issue this notice under the
authority of the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.), and its implementing regulations.
Brenda Tapia,
Supervisory Program Analyst/Data
Administrator, Branch of Permits, Division
of Management Authority.
[FR Doc. 2022–19362 Filed 9–7–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Geological Survey
[GX22LR000F60100; OMB Control Number
1028–0070/Renewal]

Agency Information Collection
Activities; Consolidated Consumers’
Report
AGENCY:

Geological Survey, Interior.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:19 Sep 07, 2022

Jkt 256001

Notice of Information
Collection; request for comment.

In accordance with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), the U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS) is proposing to renew an
Information Collection.
DATES: Interested persons are invited to
submit comments on or before
November 7, 2022.
ADDRESSES: Send your comments on
this Information Collection Request
(ICR) by mail to U.S. Geological Survey,
Information Collections Officer, 12201
Sunrise Valley Drive MS 159, Reston,
VA 20192; or by email to gs-info_
[email protected]. Please reference
OMB Control Number 1028–0070 in the
subject line of your comments.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To
request additional information about
this ICR, contact Elizabeth S. Sangine by
email at [email protected], or by
telephone at 703–648–7720. Individuals
in the United States who are deaf,
deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a
speech disability may dial 711 (TTY,
TDD, or TeleBraille) to access
telecommunications relay services.
Individuals outside the United States
should use the relay services offered
within their country to make
international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States. You may
also view the ICR at https://
www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In
accordance with the PRA, we provide
the general public and other Federal
agencies with an opportunity to
comment on new, proposed, revised,
and continuing collections of
information. This helps us assess the
impact of our information collection
requirements and minimize the public’s
reporting burden. It also helps the
public understand our information
collection requirements and provide the
requested data in the desired format.
We are soliciting comments on the
proposed ICR that is described below.
We are especially interested in public
comments addressing the following
issues: (1) is the collection necessary to
the proper functions of the USGS
minerals information mission; (2) will
this information be processed and used
in a timely manner; (3) is the estimate
of burden accurate; (4) how might the
USGS enhance the quality, utility, and
clarity of the information to be
collected; and (5) how might the USGS
minimize the burden of this collection
on the respondents, including through
the use of information technology.
Comments that you submit in
response to this notice are a matter of

PO 00000

Frm 00080

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

55033

public record. We will include or
summarize each comment in our request
to OMB to approve this ICR. Before
including your address, phone number,
email address, or other personally
identifying information (PII) in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
PII—may be made publicly available at
any time. While you can ask us in your
comment to withhold your PII from
public review, we cannot guarantee that
we will be able to do so.
Abstract: Respondents to this form
supply the USGS with domestic
consumption data for 12 metals and
ferroalloys, some of which are
considered strategic and critical, to
assist in determining Defense National
Stockpile Center goals. These data and
derived information will be published
as chapters in Minerals Yearbooks,
monthly Mineral Industry Surveys,
annual Mineral Commodity Summaries,
and special publications for use by
Government agencies, industry
education programs, and the general
public.
Title of Collection: Consolidated
Consumers’ Report.
OMB Control Number: 1028–0070.
Form Number: USGS Form 9–4117–
MA.
Type of Review: Extension of a
currently approved collection.
Respondents/Affected Public:
Business or Other For-Profit
Institutions: U.S. nonfuel minerals
consumers.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Respondents: 259.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Responses: 1,425.
Estimated Completion Time per
Response: 45 minutes.
Total Estimated Number of Annual
Burden Hours: 1,069.
Respondent’s Obligation: Voluntary.
Frequency of Collection: Annually.
Total Estimated Annual Non-hour
Burden Cost: There are no ‘‘non-hour
cost’’ burdens associated with this ICR.
An agency may not conduct or
sponsor, nor is a person required to
respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.
The authorities for this action are the
PRA of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the
National Materials and Minerals Policy,
Research and Development Act of 1980
(30 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), the National
Mining and Minerals Policy Act of 1970
(30 U.S.C. 21(a)), and the Strategic and

E:\FR\FM\08SEN1.SGM

08SEN1

55034

Federal Register / Vol. 87, No. 173 / Thursday, September 8, 2022 / Notices
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 Nisqually
Indian Tribe.

Critical Materials Stock Piling Act (50
U.S.C. 98 et seq.).
Steven Fortier,
Director, National Minerals Information
Center, U.S. Geological Survey.
[FR Doc. 2022–19371 Filed 9–7–22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4338–11–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Indian Affairs
[223A2100DD/AAKC001030/
A0A501010.999900]

HEARTH Act Approval of Nisqually
Indian Tribe Leasing Ordinance
Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:

The Bureau of Indian Affairs
(BIA) approved the Nisqually Indian
Tribe Leasing Ordinance 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, religious,
educational, recreational, cultural, and
public purpose leases without further
BIA approval.
DATES: BIA issued the approval on
August 30, 2022.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Carla Clark, Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Division of Real Estate Services, 1001
Indian School Road NW, Albuquerque,
NM 87104, [email protected], (702)
484–3233.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES

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 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

VerDate Sep<11>2014

18:19 Sep 07, 2022

Jkt 256001

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 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. 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,
799 F.3d 1324, 1331, 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

PO 00000

Frm 00081

Fmt 4703

Sfmt 4703

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.’’ H. Rep. 112–427 at 6
(2012).
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, 572 U.S. 782, 810
(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 810–11
(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

E:\FR\FM\08SEN1.SGM

08SEN1