Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 27 / Tuesday, February 10, 2004 / Notices 6321

The applicant requests a permit to 

take (collect) the American burying 

beetle (Nicrophorus americanus) in 

Missouri. The scientific research is 

aimed at enhancement of survival of the 

species in the wild.

Dated: January 28, 2004. 

Lynn M. Lewis, 

Acting Assistant Regional Director, Ecological 

Services, Region 3, Fort Snelling, Minnesota.

[FR Doc. 04–2780 Filed 2–9–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Internal Law Enforcement Services 

Policies

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: This notice publishes internal 

policies on Cross-Deputation 

Agreements, Memoranda of 

Understanding, Memoranda of 

Agreement, and Special Law 

Enforcement Commission Deputation 

Agreements. These policies apply to all 

Cross-Deputation Agreements, 

Memoranda of Understanding, 

Memoranda of Agreement, and Special 

Law Enforcement Commission 

Deputation Agreements.

DATES: These policies are effective 

February 10, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peter Maybee, Executive Officer, Bureau 

of Indian Affairs, Law Enforcement 

Services Washington, DC Liaison Office, 

1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 

20240; Telephone No. (202) 208–4844.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Introduction 

This notice is published in the 

exercise of authority under the Indian 

Law Enforcement Reform Act, 25 U.S.C. 

2801 et seq., 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 5 U.S.C. 

301, 25 U.S.C. 2 and 9, 43 U.S.C. 1457, 

and under the exercise of authority 

delegated by the Secretary of the Interior 

to the Assistant Secretary—Indian 

Affairs by 209 Departmental Manual 8. 

To clarify the existing policies of the 

Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Law 

Enforcement Services (OLES) regarding 

the authority and obligations of parties 

to Memoranda of Agreement (MOAs), 

Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs), 

Cross Deputation Agreements (CDAs), 

and in particular, Special Law 

Enforcement Commission (SLECs) 

Deputation Agreements, the Assistant 

Secretary—Indian Affairs (AS–IA) is 

publishing these policies. Questions 

regarding the current policies have been 

raised by Federal, tribal, and local law 

enforcement; therefore, the AS–IA is 

making these policies public so the 

public may have a clearer 

understanding of the policies which 

have governed all these types of 

agreements. 

An agency may clarify its policies, 

procedures, and implementation of its 

own regulations where these 

clarifications do not contradict or alter 

the regulations. These clarified policies 

do not change the law enforcement 

regulations. Rather, these clarifications 

restate to outside parties what has been 

and continues to be the practice and 

understanding of the BIA regarding such 

agreements. This Federal Register

notice is to advise all parties to Indian 

country law enforcement agreements, as 

well as all other interested persons and 

organizations, of the BIA’s policies, 

understandings, and expectations 

related to these agreements, though the 

issues raised here may not be 

exhaustive. 

The Federal Government has an 

interest in promoting strong tribal 

governments with the ability to protect 

the health and welfare of their members. 

Inherent in this relationship is strong 

and effective law enforcement in Indian 

country. Due to variations in state 

policies, paired with Indian country 

crime rates well above the national 

average, there is a public health and 

safety need in Indian country that must 

be addressed. Another issue over the 

years has been lack of jurisdictional 

clarity, making state and local officials 

reluctant to either arrest or prosecute in 

Indian country. This lack of prosecution 

in Indian country has compounded the 

problem. 

Under the Indian Law Enforcement 

Reform Act, 25 U.S.C. 2801–2809, and 

the corresponding regulations at 25 CFR 

part 12, the Secretary of the Interior, 

acting through BIA, is charged with 

providing, or assisting in the provision 

of, law enforcement in Indian country. 

This is true nationwide—throughout 

Indian country and in the areas near and 

adjacent to Indian country. To increase 

the effectiveness of law enforcement in 

Indian country, the authority and status 

of law enforcement officers, 

relationships among and between law 

enforcement departments, as well as 

potential liability and liability coverage, 

must be clear. Law enforcement officers 

are expected to appear a certain way, 

use certain equipment, and drive certain 

vehicles both for the safety of the 

officers and for the safety of the public. 

The BIA’s internal policies prescribe all 

of these standards and recognize that 

officers maintain their status when they 

are outside Indian country. The BIA’s 

policy makes clear that although officers 

will not as a rule conduct investigations 

or make arrests outside Indian country, 

they maintain their law enforcement 

officers’ responsibilities and certain 

authorities irrespective of whether they 

are located in Indian country. 

To assist the AS–IA in fulfilling the 

BIA’s duties to provide law enforcement 

in Indian country and to make clear 

important policies and working 

relationships, the BIA OLES enters into 

MOAs, MOUs, CDAs, and SLEC 

agreements (pursuant to which it grants 

special law enforcement commissions to 

tribal and local law enforcement 

officers). SLECs support the sovereignty 

of tribes by allowing tribal law 

enforcement officers to enforce Federal 

law, to investigate Federal crimes, and 

to protect the rights of people in Indian 

country, particularly against crimes 

perpetrated by non-Indians against 

tribal members. Without such 

commissions, tribal law enforcement in 

many jurisdictions is limited to 

restraining these perpetrators until a 

county, State, or Federal officer arrives. 

It is common for tribes to have difficulty 

getting local or State law enforcement to 

respond to crimes on the reservations. 

For example, it is difficult to get local 

law enforcement to respond to domestic 

violence calls and illegal disposal 

activities in Indian country. As a result, 

there is a critical void in law 

enforcement in Indian country that 

these SLECs fill. 

Due to the nature of law enforcement 

in Indian country, SLEC officers will 

often have to respond to calls where it 

is unclear initially whether they are 

responding in their Federal or tribal 

capacity. The Federal Government has 

an interest in ensuring that Federal and 

federally commissioned officers are able 

to respond to calls immediately and 

with all of the necessary and 

recommended law enforcement tools. 

The Federal Government and the 

Department also have an interest in 

promoting strong tribal governments 

capable of effectively carrying out law 

enforcement in Indian country. The 

Government further has an interest in 

ensuring the tribes’ sovereign rights to 

do so are respected and the boundaries 

of Indian country do not impede 

officers’ travel, use of marked vehicles, 

emergency response, and other 

incidental aspects of their Indian 

country policing authority.

To ensure the SLEC tribal officers are 

fully qualified to enforce Federal law 

and to perform functions which would 

otherwise be performed by BIA officers, 

the BIA has established certain 

minimum standards and certification 

6322 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 27 / Tuesday, February 10, 2004 / Notices 

requirements for potential officers. The 

BIA OLES conditions officer 

commissions on meeting these 

requirements. The Chief of Police of a 

tribe must perform an FBI criminal 

history check on each officer and certify 

the officers are both full-time employees 

with a law enforcement program and 

certified through either the State or the 

BIA. If an officer is not yet certified by 

one of the two entities, the BIA provides 

training before commissioning an 

officer. These officers must also meet 

other requirements such as firearms 

certification and maintaining a record 

free of any felonies. The SLECs expire 

after 3 years, when the Chief of Police 

must recertify the qualifications of the 

officers, and the officers must reapply 

for SLECs. 

For SLEC officers to be used 

effectively to fill this void, it is 

important that all parties involved in 

Indian country law enforcement have a 

clear understanding of each of their 

roles and expectations. The BIA expects 

that, first, liability coverage under the 

Federal Tort Claims Settlement Act 

(FTCA) may be available to officers 

carrying Federal SLECs, but the 

Department of Justice makes all 

determinations on FTCA coverage on a 

case-by-case, factual basis, and their 

decisions are final. Second, because 

coordination is the foundation on which 

effective Indian country law 

enforcement is based, the BIA 

encourages full and open coordination 

between and among relevant tribal, 

local, and Federal law enforcement, and 

any relevant task forces or other similar 

organizations. Whenever possible the 

BIA encourages the relevant parties to 

enter agreements governing these 

cooperative relationships. The BIA will 

work with any parties to help 

accomplish this goal. There must also be 

coordination and communication 

among law enforcement entities, 

including local United States Attorney’s 

offices, on Federal policing and 

prosecutorial practices and on particular 

cases and prosecutions where 

appropriate. Finally, the BIA expects 

that tribes and local law enforcement 

will maintain appropriate training and 

policies to ensure that their officers will 

be able to maintain the appropriate level 

of training and are otherwise prepared 

to perform their duties as SLEC officers. 

The BIA will also assist law 

enforcement organizations in 

developing these policies and training 

standards. 

By clarifying the BIA’s 

understandings and expectations of 

agencies participating in Indian country 

law enforcement, it is the AS-IA’s intent 

to provide a strong basis on which to 

build and strengthen these essential 

relationships. With strong relationships 

and communication, the BIA and tribal, 

local, and other Federal law 

enforcement can better meet the law 

enforcement, public health, and safety 

needs of people in Indian country.

Dated: January 22, 2004. 

Aurene M. Martin, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary—Indian 

Affairs.

[FR Doc. 04–2842 Filed 2–9–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–G6–J

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management 

[OR–090–5882–PH–EE01; HAG 04–0081] 

Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior.

ACTION: Meeting notice for the Engene 

District, Bureau of Land Management 

(BLM) Resources Advisory Committees 

under Section 205 of the Secure Rural 

Schools and Community Self 

Determination Act of 2000 (Pub. 106–

393). 

SUMMARY: This notice is published in 

accordance with Section 10(a)(2) of the 

Federal Advisory Committee Act. 

Meeting notice is hereby given for the 

Eugene District BLM Resources 

Advisory Committee pursuant to 

Section 205 of the Secure Rural Schools 

and Community Self Determination Act 

of 2000, Public Law 106–393 (the Act). 

Topics to be discussed by the BLM 

Resource Advisory Committee include 

selection of a chairperson, public forum 

and proposed projects for funding in 

‘‘Round 4, FY 05’’ under Title II of the 

Act.

DATES: The BLM Resource Advisory 

Committees will meet on the following 

dates: The Eugene Resource Advisory 

Committee will meet at the BLM Eugene 

District Office, 2890 Chad Drive, 

Eugene, Oregon 97440, 9 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m. on May 20, 2004 and 9 a.m. to 4:30 

p.m., on June 10, 2004. The public 

forum will be held from 12:30–1 pm on 

both days.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to the Act, five Resource Advisory 

Committees have been formed for 

western Oregon BLM districts that 

contain Oregon & California (U&C) 

Grant Lands and Coos Bay Wagon Road 

lands. The Act establishes a six year 

payment schedule to local counties in 

lieu of funds derived from the harvest 

of timber on Federal lands, which have 

dropped dramatically over the past 10 

years. 

The Act creates a new mechanism for 

local community collaboration with 

Federal land management activities in 

the selection of projects to be conducted 

on federal lands or that will benefit 

resources on federal lands using funds 

under Title II of the Act. The BLM 

Resource Advisory Committees consist 

of 15 local citizens (plus 6 alternates) 

representing a wide array of interests.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Additional information concerning the 

BLM Resource Advisory Committees 

may be obtained from Wayne Elliott, 

Designated Federal Official, Eugene 

District Office, P.O. Box 10226, Eugene, 

Oregon 97440, (541) 683–6600, or 

wayne_elliott@or.blm.gov.

Dated: February 3, 2004. 

Julia Dougan, 

Eugene District Manager.

[FR Doc. 04–2781 Filed 2–9–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–33–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management 

[AK–932–1410–ET; F–14838] 

Public Land Order No. 7595; 

Withdrawal of Public Lands for Bethel 

Village Selection; Alaska

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, 

Interior.

ACTION: Public land order.

SUMMARY: This order withdraws 

approximately 61,139 acres of public 

lands located within and outside of the 

Yukon Delta National Wildlife Refuge 

from all forms of appropriation under 

the public land laws, including the 

mining and mineral leasing laws, 

pursuant to section 22(j)(2) of the Alaska 

Native Claims Settlement Act. This 

action also reserves the lands for 

selection by the Bethel Native 

Corporation, the village corporation for 

Bethel. This withdrawal is for a period 

of 120 days; however, any lands 

selected shall remain withdrawn by the 

order until they are conveyed. Any 

lands described herein that are not 

selected by the corporation will remain 

withdrawn as part of the Yukon Delta 

National Wildlife Refuge, pursuant to 

the Alaska National Interest Lands 

Conservation Act, and will be subject to 

the terms and conditions of any other 

withdrawal or segregation of record.

EFFECTIVE DATE: February 10, 2004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robbie J. Havens, Bureau of Land 

Management, Alaska State Office, 222