Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Notices 15335 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brandi Sweet (202) 208–5504. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Abstract 

The IDEIA, 20 U.S.C. 1411(h)(4)(c) 

and 1443(b)(3), requires Tribes and 

Tribal organizations to submit certain 

information to the Secretary of the 

Interior. Under the IDEIA, the U.S. 

Department of Education provides 

funding to the Secretary of the Interior 

for the coordination of assistance for 

special education and related services 

for Indian children 0 to 5 years of age 

with disabilities on reservations served 

by Bureau-funded schools. The 

Secretary of the Interior, through the 

BIE, then allocates this funding to 

Tribes and Tribal organizations based 

on the number of such children served. 

In order to allow the Secretary of the 

Interior to determine what amounts to 

allocate to whom, the IDEIA requires 

Tribes and Tribal organizations to 

submit information to Interior. The BIE 

collects this information on two forms, 

one for Indian children 3 to 5 years of 

age covered by IDEIA Part B, and one for 

Indian children 0 to 2 years of age 

covered by IDEIA Part C. 

In IDEIA Part B—Assistance for 

Education of All Children with 

Disabilities, 20 U.S.C. 1411(h)(4)(D) 

requires Tribes and Tribal organizations 

to use the funds to assist in child find, 

screening, and other procedures for the 

early identification of Indian children 3 

through 5 years of age, parent training, 

and the provision of direct services. In 

IDEIA Part C—Infants and Toddlers 

with Disabilities, 20 U.S.C. 1443(b)(4) 

likewise requires Tribes and Tribal 

organizations to use the funds to assist 

in child find, screening, and other 

procedures for early identification of 

Indian children under 3 years of age and 

for parent training and early 

intervention services. 

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

provides an opportunity for interested 

parties to comment on proposed 

information collection requests. The BIE 

is proceeding with this public comment 

period to obtain an information 

collection clearance from the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). 

II. Request for Comments 

The BIE requests your comments on 

this collection concerning: (a) The 

necessity of this information collection 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the agency, including 

whether the information will have 

practical utility; (b) The accuracy of the 

agency’s estimate of the burden (hours 

and cost) of the collection of 

information, including the validity of 

the methodology and assumptions used; 

(c) Ways we could enhance the quality, 

utility and clarity of the information to 

be collected; and (d) Ways we could 

minimize the burden of the collection of 

the information on the respondents, 

such as through the use of automated 

collection techniques or other forms of 

information technology. 

Please note that an agency may not 

sponsor or request, and an individual 

need not respond to, a collection of 

information unless it has a valid OMB 

Control Number. 

It is our policy to make all comments 

available to the public for review at the 

location listed in the ADDRESSES section. 

Before including your address, phone 

number, e-mail address or other 

personally identifiable information, be 

advised that your entire comment— 

including your personally identifiable 

information—may be made public at 

any time. While you may request that 

we withhold your personally 

identifiable information, we cannot 

guarantee that we will be able to do so. 

III. Data 

OMB Control Number: 1076—0NEW. 

Type of Review: Existing collection in 

use without an OMB number. 

Title: IDEIA Part B and Part C Child 

Count. 

Brief Description of Collection: Indian 

Tribes and Tribal organizations served 

by elementary or secondary schools for 

Indian children operated or funded by 

the Department of the Interior that 

receive allocations of funding under the 

IDEIA for the coordination of assistance 

for Indian children 0 to 5 years of age 

with disabilities on reservations must 

submit information to the BIE. The 

information must be provided on two 

forms. The Part B form addresses Indian 

children 3 to 5 years of age on 

reservations served by Bureau-funded 

schools. The Part C form addresses 

Indian children up to 3 years of age on 

reservations served by Bureau-funded 

schools. The information required by 

the forms includes counts of children as 

of a certain date each year. Response is 

required to obtain a benefit. 

Respondents: Indian Tribes and Tribal 

organizations. 

Number of Respondents: 61 each year. 

Estimated Time per Response: 20 

hours per form. 

Frequency of Response: Twice (Once 

per year for each form). 

Total Annual Burden to Respondents: 

2,440 hours. 

Dated: March 14, 2011. 

Alvin Foster, 

Acting Chief Information Officer—Indian 

Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6577 Filed 3–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–4M–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Final Determination Against 

Acknowledgment of the Juanen ̃o Band 

of Mission Indians 

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of Final Determination. 

SUMMARY: The Department of the 

Interior (Department) gives notice that 

the Assistant Secretary–Indian Affairs 

(AS–IA) has determined the petitioner 

known as the Juanen ̃o Band of Mission 

Indians is not an Indian tribe within the 

meaning of Federal law. This notice is 

based on a determination that the 

petitioner does not satisfy all seven of 

the criteria set forth in 25 CFR 83.7, and 

therefore, does not meet the 

requirements for a government-togovernment relationship with the 

United States. 

DATES: This determination is final and 

will become effective 90 days from 

publication of this notice in the Federal 

Register on June 20, 2011, unless a 

request for reconsideration is filed 

before the Interior Board of Indian 

Appeals pursuant to 25 CFR 83.11. 

ADDRESSES: Requests for a copy of the 

final determination that includes the 

summary evaluation under the criteria 

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, and is available 

at http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/AS– 

IA/OFA/RecentCases/index.htm. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: R. 

Lee Fleming, Director, Office of Federal 

Acknowledgment, (202) 513–7650. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to 25 CFR 83.10(h), the Department 

publishes this notice that the Juanen ̃o 

Band of Mission Indians (JBB), 

Petitioner #84B, is not an Indian tribe 

within the meaning of Federal law. The 

Department issued a proposed finding 

(PF) to decline to acknowledge the 

petitioner on November 23, 2007, and 

published notice of that preliminary 

determination in the Federal Register 

on December 3, 2007. This final 

determination (FD) affirms the PF that 

the Juanen ̃ o Band of Mission Indians 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

15336 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Notices 

(JBB), c/o Joe Ocampo, 1108 E. Fourth 

Street, Santa Ana, California 92701 and 

Sonia Johnston, P.O. Box 25628, Santa 

Ana, California 92799, does not satisfy 

all seven of the criteria set forth in part 

83 of title 25 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (25 CFR part 83), 

specifically criteria at 83.7(a), 83.7(b), 

83.7(c), and 83.7(e), and therefore does 

not meet the requirements for a 

government-to-government relationship 

with the United States. 

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. The JBB petitioner does 

not satisfy criteria 83.7(a), 83.7(b), 

83.7(c), and 83.7(e). The JBB petitioner 

meets the requirements of criteria 

83.7(d), 83.7(f), and 83.7(g). 

Criterion 83.7(a) requires that external 

observers have identified the petitioner 

as an American Indian entity on a 

substantially continuous basis since 

1900. The evidence in the record does 

not demonstrate that external observers 

identified the petitioner, or a group from 

which the petitioner evolved, as an 

American Indian entity on a 

substantially continuous basis from 

1900 to 1997. There are identifications 

of the JBB petitioner as an American 

Indian entity between 1997 and 2005. 

Because the petitioner, or a group from 

which the petitioner has evolved, has 

not been identified as an American 

Indian entity on a substantially 

continuous basis since 1900, the 

petitioner does not meet the 

requirements of criterion 83.7(a). 

Criterion 83.7(b) requires that a 

predominant portion of the petitioning 

group has comprised a distinct 

community from historical times to the 

present. The evidence in the record 

demonstrates that the JBB petitioner did 

not evolve from the historical SJC 

Indian tribe as a distinct community. 

The FD concludes that evidence in the 

record indicates that a community of 

SJC Indians persisted around and at the 

former SJC Mission until 1862, when a 

smallpox epidemic killed almost half 

the estimated Indian population (88 of 

200) in a period of less than 3 months. 

No evidence in the record indicates that 

the community was able to recover from 

this event. The petitioner, as it is 

currently constituted, consists of 

members whose ancestors functioned as 

part of the general population of SJC 

residents since the mid-19th century. 

There is no evidence in the record that 

the petitioner’s SJC Indian ancestors 

were distinct within this community 

after 1862, or were part of an Indian 

entity that evolved from the SJC Indian 

tribe in 1834; rather they appear to have 

been Indian individuals who became 

absorbed into the general, ethnicallymixed population of Old Mexican/ 

Californio families, as well as with nonSJC Indians who moved to the town 

prior to 1900. The totality of the 

evidence does not demonstrate that the 

petitioner’s mid-19th century ancestors 

formed a distinct SJC Indian community 

within a larger Spanish-speaking, 

Catholic, Old Mexican/Californio 

community after 1862, nor does it 

demonstrate that the petitioner’s SJC 

Indian ancestors formed a distinct 

community from which the current JBB 

petitioner evolved since 1862. 

Therefore, the JBB petitioner does not 

meet the requirements of criterion 

83.7(b). 

Criterion 83.7(c) requires that the 

petitioning group has maintained 

political influence over its members as 

an autonomous entity from historical 

times to the present. The evidence 

submitted for the FD, in combination 

with the evidence already in the record 

for the PF, is insufficient to satisfy the 

requirements of criterion 83.7(c) for any 

time from 1835 to the present. The 

petitioner’s comments on the PF did not 

provide evidence sufficient to satisfy the 

requirements of criterion 83.7(c) and 

new documents related to Clarence 

Lobo’s leadership between the late 

1940s and 1965 provided little 

information on the political 

composition of the group or a bilateral 

relationship between leaders and 

members. Third party comments 

included in the record largely agree 

with the conclusions reached in the PF. 

After 1834, there is insufficient 

evidence that there were any internal 

processes or other mechanisms that the 

group used as a means of influencing or 

controlling the behavior of its members 

in significant respects, or made 

decisions for the group which 

substantially affected its members, or 

represented the group in dealing with 

outsiders in matters of consequence. 

Therefore, the petitioner does not meet 

the requirements of criterion 83.7(c). 

Criterion 83.7(d) requires that the 

petitioner provide a copy of its 

governing document including its 

membership criteria. The petitioner 

submitted a copy of its governing 

document which includes its 

membership criteria. Therefore, the JBB 

petitioner meets the requirements of 

criterion 83.7(d). 

Criterion 83.7(e) requires that the 

petitioner’s members descend from a 

historical Indian tribe or from historical 

Indian tribes which combined and 

functioned as a single autonomous 

political entity. The February 28, 2009, 

JBB membership list includes 455 living 

members, both adults and minors. The 

evidence in the record indicates that 85 

percent of the petitioner’s members 

claim descent from individuals who 

were members of the historical Indian 

tribe at SJC Mission as it existed 

between 1776 and 1834. However, the 

FD finds that only 53 percent (241 of 

455) of JBB members have demonstrated 

such descent. The petitioner has not 

demonstrated for this FD that its 

members descend from an historical 

Indian tribe. Therefore, the JBB 

petitioner does not meet the 

requirements of criterion 83.7(e). 

Criterion 83.7(f) requires that the 

petitioner’s membership be composed 

principally of persons who are not 

members of another federally 

recognized Indian tribe. A review of the 

membership rolls of those Indian tribes 

in California that would most likely 

include the JBB petitioner’s members 

revealed that the petitioner’s 

membership is composed principally of 

persons who are not members of any 

federally acknowledged North American 

Indian tribe. Therefore, the JBB 

petitioner meets the requirements of 

criterion 83.7(f). 

Criterion 83.7(g) requires that the 

petitioner not be subject to 

congressional legislation that has 

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. Therefore, the JBB 

petitioner meets the requirements of 

criterion 83.7(g). 

Based on this final determination, the 

Department determines not to extend 

Federal acknowledgment as an Indian 

tribe to the petitioner known as the 

Juanen ̃ o Band of Mission Indians (JBB). 

A copy of the FD that includes the 

summary evaluation under the criteria 

and summarizes the evidence, 

reasoning, and analyses that are the 

basis for the FD will be provided to the 

petitioner and interested parties, and is 

available to other parties upon written 

request. It will be posted on the Bureau 

of Indian Affairs Web site http:// 

www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/AS–IA/OFA/ 

RecentCases/index.htm. Requests for a 

copy of the FD should be addressed to 

the Federal Government as instructed in 

the ADDRESSES section of this notice. 

After the publication of notice of the 

FD in the Federal Register, 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. The 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 2011 / Notices 15337 

IBIA must receive this request no later 

than 90 days after the publication of the 

FD in the Federal Register. The FD will 

become effective as provided in the 

regulations 90 days from the Federal 

Register publication unless a request for 

reconsideration is received within that 

time. 

Dated: March 15, 2011. 

Larry Echo Hawk, 

Assistant Secretary–Indian Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 2011–6472 Filed 3–18–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–G1–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Final Determination Against 

Acknowledgment of the Juanen ̃o Band 

of Mission Indians, Acjachemen Nation 

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of Final Determination. 

SUMMARY: The Department of the 

Interior (Department) gives notice that 

the Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs 

(AS–IA) has determined the petitioner 

known as the Juanen ̃ o Band of Mission 

Indians, Acjachemen Nation, is not an 

Indian tribe within the meaning of 

Federal law. This notice is based on a 

determination that the petitioner does 

not satisfy all seven of the criteria set 

forth in the applicable regulations, and 

therefore, does not meet the 

requirements for a government-togovernment relationship with the 

United States. 

DATES: This determination is final and 

will become effective 90 days from 

publication of this notice in the Federal 

Register on June 20, 2011, unless the 

petitioner or an interested party files 

within 90 days a request for 

reconsideration before the Interior 

Board of Indian Appeals pursuant to 25 

CFR 83.11. 

ADDRESSES: Requests for a copy of the 

final determination that includes the 

summary evaluation under the criteria 

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, and is available 

at http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/ASIA/OFA/RecentCases/index.htm. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: R. 

Lee Fleming, Director, Office of Federal 

Acknowledgment, (202) 513–7650. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to 25 CFR 83.10(h), the Department 

publishes this notice that the Juanen ̃o 

Band of Mission Indians, Acjachemen 

Nation (JBA), Petitioner #84A, is not an 

Indian tribe within the meaning of 

Federal law. The Department issued a 

proposed finding (PF) to decline to 

acknowledge the petitioner on 

November 23, 2007, and published 

notice of that preliminary determination 

in the Federal Register on December 3, 

2007. This final determination (FD) 

affirms the PF that the Juanen ̃ o Band of 

Mission Indians, Acjachemen Nation 

(JBA), c/o Anthony Rivera, Jr., 31411–A 

La Matanza Street, San Juan Capistrano, 

California 92675–2674, does not satisfy 

all seven of the criteria set forth in part 

83 of title 25 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (25 CFR part 83), 

specifically criteria at 83.7(a), 83.7(b), 

83.7(c), and 83.7(e), and therefore does 

not meet the requirements for a 

government-to-government relationship 

with the United States. 

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. The JBA petitioner does 

not satisfy criteria 83.7(a), 83.7(b), 

83.7(c), and 83.7(e). The JBA petitioner 

meets the requirements of criteria 

83.7(d), 83.7(f), and 83.7(g). 

Criterion 83.7(a) requires that external 

observers have identified the petitioner 

as an American Indian entity on a 

substantially continuous basis since 

1900. The evidence in the record does 

not demonstrate that external observers 

identified the petitioner, or a group from 

which the petitioner evolved, as an 

American Indian entity on a 

substantially continuous basis from 

1900 to 1997. There are identifications 

of the JBA petitioner as an American 

Indian entity between 1997 and 2005. 

Because the petitioner, or a group from 

which the petitioner has evolved, has 

not been identified as an American 

Indian entity on a substantially 

continuous basis since 1900, the 

petitioner does not meet the 

requirements of criterion 83.7(a). 

Criterion 83.7(b) requires that a 

predominant portion of the petitioning 

group has comprised a distinct 

community from historical times to the 

present. The evidence in the record 

demonstrates that the JBA petitioner did 

not evolve from the historical SJC 

Indian tribe as a distinct community. 

The FD concludes that evidence in the 

record indicates that a community of 

SJC Indians persisted around and at the 

former SJC Mission until 1862, when a 

smallpox epidemic killed almost half 

the estimated Indian population (88 of 

200) in a period of less than 3 months. 

No evidence in the record indicates that 

the community was able to recover from 

this event. The petitioner, as it is 

currently constituted, consists of 

members whose ancestors functioned as 

part of the general population of SJC 

residents since the mid-19th century. 

There is no evidence in the record that 

the petitioner’s SJC Indian ancestors 

were distinct within this community 

after 1862, or were part of an Indian 

entity that evolved from the SJC Indian 

tribe in 1834; rather they appear to have 

been Indian individuals who became 

absorbed into the general, ethnicallymixed population of Old Mexican/ 

Californio families, as well as with nonSJC Indians who moved to the town 

prior to 1900. The totality of the 

evidence does not demonstrate that the 

petitioner’s mid-19th century ancestors 

formed a distinct SJC Indian community 

within a larger Spanish-speaking, 

Catholic, Old Mexican/Californio 

community after 1862, nor does it 

demonstrate that the petitioner’s SJC 

Indian ancestors formed a distinct 

community from which the current JBA 

petitioner evolved since 1862. 

Therefore, the JBA petitioner does not 

meet the requirements of criterion 

83.7(b). 

Criterion 83.7(c) requires that the 

petitioning group has maintained 

political influence over its members as 

an autonomous entity from historical 

times to the present. The evidence 

submitted for the FD, in combination 

with the evidence already in the record 

for the PF, is insufficient to satisfy the 

requirements of criterion 83.7(c) for any 

time from 1835 to the present. The 

petitioner’s comments on the PF did not 

provide evidence sufficient to satisfy the 

requirements of criterion 83.7(c) and 

new documents related to Clarence 

Lobo’s leadership between the late 

1940s and 1965 provided little 

information on the political 

composition of the group or a bilateral 

relationship between leaders and 

members. Third party comments 

included in the record largely agree 

with the conclusions reached in the PF, 

and the responses offered by the 

petitioner provide little new 

information regarding the political 

authority and influence in the group 

over time. After 1834, there is 

insufficient evidence that there were 

any internal processes or other 

mechanisms that the group used as a 

means of influencing or controlling the 

behavior of its members in significant 

respects, or made decisions for the 

group which substantially affected its 

members, or represented the group in 

dealing with outsiders in matters of 

consequence. Therefore, the petitioner 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES