39420 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 123 / Monday, June 26, 2000 / Notices

arise. Additional members or

replacements for any individual

selected to serve on the Commission,

may only be made by HUD after a

review by HUD of the qualifications of

the individuals.

Dated: June 21, 2000.

Susan Wachter,

Assistant Secretary for Policy Development

and Research.

[FR Doc. 00–16164 Filed 6–22–00; 12:57 pm]

BILLING CODE 4210–62–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of the Secretary

Review of Interior Board of Indian

Appeals Decisions

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary,

Department of the Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The Secretary of the Interior

has decided to review Hopi Indian Tribe

v. Director, Office of Trust and

Economic Development, Bureau of

Indian Affairs, 22 IBIA 10 (1992), and

Hopi Tribe v. Director, Office of Trust

Responsibilities, Bureau of Indian

Affairs, 24 IBIA 65 (1993). These

decisions concern the method for

reimbursing Indian Tribes for legal fees

from the United States Treasury. To

allow for full airing of all issues in this

review, we are inviting interested

parties in addition to the three Tribes

most directly affected by these decisions

to submit briefs on the issues set forth

in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

section according to the schedule and

instructions in that section of this

Notice.

DATES: See the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section for the brief

submission schedule.

ADDRESSES: Three copies of all briefs

and motions should be sent to the Office

of the Solicitor, U. S. Department of the

Interior, Attn: Stephen Simpson, 1849 C

Street, NW, MS 6352–MIB, Washington,

DC 20240. You should also provide

copies of all documents filed in this

case to the participants listed in the

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Stephen Simpson, 202–219–1659.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Secretary of the Interior has decided to

review two decisions of the Interior

Board of Indian Appeals (IBIA), Hopi

Indian Tribe v. Director, Office of Trust

and Economic Development, Bureau of

Indian Affairs, 22 IBIA 10 (1992) (Hopi

I), and Hopi Tribe v. Director, Office of

Trust Responsibilities, Bureau of Indian

Affairs, 24 IBIA 65 (1993) (Hopi II). Both

Hopi I and Hopi II concern the payment

of Tribal legal fees for litigation under

the Navajo-Hopi Settlement Act from

the United States Treasury. Under the

Settlement Act (25 U.S.C. 640d–7(e)),

the Secretary ‘‘is authorized to pay any

or all appropriate legal fees, court costs,

and other related expenses arising out

of, or in connection with, the

commencing of, or defending against,

any action brought by the Navajo, San

Juan Southern Paiute, or Hopi Tribe’’

concerning boundaries of a reservation

established under the Settlement Act.

In 1989, the Hopi Tribe submitted a

request to the Bureau of Indian Affairs

for reimbursement of legal fees under

this provision. The Director of the

Bureau’s Office of Trust and Economic

Development requested that the Tribe

submit further information under 25

CFR 89.40–89.43, the general

regulations for reimbursement of legal

fees. He noted that any requests for legal

fees by the Tribe, unless mandated by

Congress, should be applied for using

the same process as other Tribes. He

stated that 25 U.S.C. 640d–7(e) is

discretionary and puts the Hopi Tribe in

the same position as other Indian Tribes

competing for reimbursement from the

legal fees account in the Treasury. In

Hopi I, the IBIA vacated the Director’s

decision and remanded it for further

consideration because he had not

explained how he reached that

conclusion, or why the prior

administrative practice of not requiring

such applications was incorrect. On

remand, the Director of the Office of

Trust Responsibilities (the same office

with a different name) ruled again that

the Hopi Tribe had to file an application

under 25 CFR 89.40–89.43 to provide a

rational basis for the exercise of the

BIA’s discretion under 25 U.S.C. 640d–

7(e). The Tribe again appealed, and, in

Hopi II, the IBIA found that 25 CFR

89.40–89.43 applies when a Tribe

determines to undertake litigation to

protect its rights. The IBIA found, that

in the case of the Hopi Tribe, the

determination that the reservation

litigation was necessary was made by

Congress, not the Tribe. The IBIA

therefore ruled that the BIA was

required to reimburse all appropriate

legal fees for the three Tribes and could

not subject them to the same process

and competition for funds as other

Tribes.

Recognizing the importance of the

IBIA decisions to the disbursement of

federal funds for Tribal legal fees, the

Secretary has decided to review the

IBIA decisions in Hopi I and Hopi II

under regulations which provide that:

The authority reserved to the

Secretary includes, but is not limited to:

* * * * *

(2) The authority to review any

decision of any employee or employees

of the Department, including any

administrative law judge or board of the

Office [of Hearings and Appeals], or to

direct any such employee or employees

to reconsider a decision. 43 CFR 4.5

(Bracketed material added.)

To assist him in rendering a decision

on this matter, the Secretary will accept

briefs from the BIA, the three Tribes

named in the Settlement Act (the Navajo

Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San

Juan Southern Paiute Tribe), and other

interested parties. Briefs should only

address the Department’s interpretation

of 25 U.S.C. 640d–7(e) as evidenced in

the IBIA decisions. The Secretary will

not re-adjudicate the Hopi Tribe’s

appeal of the decisions. Further, the

Secretary’s review will not affect the

pending settlement between the Hopi

Tribe and the BIA of 1990 fees at issue

in the decisions. Briefs must be

submitted according to the following

schedule:

1. Briefs opposed to the Board’s

decisions must be received by July 14,

2000;

2. Response briefs supporting the

Board’s decisions must be received by

August 18, 2000; and

3. Reply briefs opposing the Board’s

decisions must be received by

September 8, 2000.

Briefs are not to exceed fifty pages

(except the reply briefs, which are not

to exceed twenty-five pages), double

spaced, with all margins not less than

one inch. No oral argument will be

heard on these issues.

Three copies of all motions and briefs

being submitted are to be sent to the

following address: Office of the

Solicitor, U. S. Department of the

Interior, Attn: Stephen Simpson, 1849 C

Street, N.W., MS 6352–MIB,

Washington, D. C. 20240.

Please also provide copies of all

documents filed in this case to the

participants listed below.

The Honorable Wayne Taylor, Jr.,

Chairman, Hopi Tribal Council, P.O.

Box 123, Kykotsmovi, AZ 86039

Terrance Virden, Director, Office of

Trust Responsibility, Bureau of Indian

Affairs, 1849 C Street, N.W., MS 4513,

Washington, DC 20240.

The Honorable Kelsey A. Begaye,

President, Navajo Nation, P.O. Box

9000, Window Rock, AZ 86515.

The Honorable Johnny Lehi, President,

San Juan Southern Paiute Council,

P.O. Box 2656, Tuba City, AZ 86045

BIA, as a party in this matter, will be

represented by the Division of Indian

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 123 / Monday, June 26, 2000 / Notices 39421

Affairs of the Office of the Solicitor. The

Immediate Office of the Solicitor will

provide legal advice to the Secretary.

Therefore, ex parte communication on

this matter with the Office of the

Secretary or the Immediate Office of the

Solicitor is prohibited. Any

communication with the Office of the

Secretary or the attorneys in the

Immediate Office of the Solicitor

regarding this review must be in writing

and a copy of the communication must

be served on all participants in the

review as noted above.

Dated: June 19, 2000.

John D. Leshy,

Solicitor.

[FR Doc. 00–16093 Filed 6–23–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–10–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

Endangered Species Permit

Applications

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of receipt of permit

applications.

SUMMARY: The following applicants have

applied for a scientific research permit

to conduct certain activities with

endangered species pursuant to section

10 (a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species

Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531

et seq.).

Permit No. TE–028876

Applicant: The Nature Conservancy,

Portland, Oregon.

The applicant requests a permit to

take (capture, handle, and release) the

Lost River sucker (Deltistes luxatus) and

shortnose sucker (Chasmistes

brevirostris) in conjunction with

restoration actions in the Williamson

River and Agency Lake, Oregon, for the

purpose of enhancing their survival.

Permit No. TE–026227

Applicant: Joseph Silveira, Willows,

California.

The applicant requests a permit to

take (harass by survey, collect and

sacrifice) the Conservancy fairy shrimp

(Branchinecta conservatio), longhorn

fairy shrimp (Branchinecta

longiantenna), vernal pool tadpole

shrimp (Lepidurus packardi), San Diego

fairy shrimp (Brachinecta

sandiegonensis), and the Riverside fairy

shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni), and

remove and reduce to possession

specimens of Cordylanthus palmatus,

Cordylanthus mollis ssp. mollis,

Orcuttia californica, Orcuttia pilosa,

Orcuttia viscida, Tuctoria greenei, and

Tuctoria mucronata in conjunction with

surveys and the collection of voucher

specimens throughout each species’

range in California for the purpose of

enhancing their survival.

Permit No. TE–002716

Applicant: Kenneth J. Halama,

Riverside, California.

The applicant requests a permit to

take (capture and handle) the arroyo

southwestern toad (Bufo microscaphus

californicus) in conjunction with

conducting natural history research

throughout the species’ range for the

purpose of enhancing its survival.

Permit No. TE–839213

Applicant: David Philip Muth, Jr.,

Martinez, California.

The permittee requests an amendment

to take (harass by survey, collect and

sacrifice) the San Diego fairy shrimp

(Brachinecta sandiegonensis) and the

Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus

woottoni) in conjunction with surveys

throughout each species’ range in

California for the purpose of enhancing

their survival.

Permit No. TE–839480

Applicant: Richard Zembal, Laguna

Hills, California.

The applicant requests a permit to

take (harass by survey, locate and

monitor nests) the southwestern willow

flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus)

and take (monitor nests, capture, mark,

band, and release) the least Bell’s vireo

(Vireo bellii pusillus) in conjunction

with scientific research throughout each

species range in California for the

purpose of enhancing their survival.

Permit No. TE–028810

Applicant: Althouse and Meade, Inc.,

Paso Robles, California.

The applicant requests a permit to

take (capture and handle) the California

tiger salamander (Ambystoma

californiense) in conjunction with

presence or absence surveys in Santa

Barbara County, California for the

purpose of enhancing its survival.

DATES: Written comments on these

permit applications must be received on

or before July 26, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Written data or comments

should be submitted to the Chief—

Endangered Species, Ecological

Services, Fish and Wildlife Service, 911

NE. 11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon

97232–4181; Fax: (503) 231–6243.

Please refer to the respective permit

number for each application when

submitting comments. All comments

received, including names and

addresses, will become part of the

official administrative record and may

be made available to the public.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Documents and other information

submitted with these applications are

available for review, subject to the

requirements of the Privacy Act and

Freedom of Information Act, by any

party who submits a written request for

a copy of such documents within 20

days of the date of publication of this

notice to the address above; telephone:

(503) 231–2063. Please refer to the

respective permit number for each

application when requesting copies of

documents.

Dated: June 19, 2000.

Don Weathers,

Acting Regional Director, Region 1, Portland,

Oregon.

[FR Doc. 00–16033 Filed 6–23–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

Notice of Availability of a ‘‘Lost Pines’’

Environmental Assessment/Habitat

Conservation Plan for Assigned Permit

Number TE–025997–0. For Issuance of

an Endangered Species Act Section

10(a)(1)(B) Permit for the Incidental

Take of the Endangered Houston Toad

(Bufo houstonensis). During the

Construction and Occupation of Single

Family Residences (each on homesites of 0.5 acres or less) in 45

subdivisions in Bastrop County, TX

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service Office has prepared an

Environmental Assessment/Habitat

Conservation Plan for assigned permit

number TE–025997–0 for issuance of an

Endangered Species Act Section

10(a)(1)(B) permit for the incidental take

of the Endangered Houston Toad. The

Service proposes issuing endangered

species permits to individual lot owners

under an EA/HCP, where each permit

would authorize the incidental take of

the endangered Houston toad, directly

or indirectly, from the construction and

occupation of a single-family residence

on an undeveloped lot in the 45

subdivisions covered under this EA/

HCP. This alternative was selected as

the Preferred Alternative as it will allow

for responsible development of the lots

while minimizing and offsetting impacts

to the Houston toad by providing for onsite and off-site conservation measures

that will be used to promote the longterm survival of the species. It is also

considered to provide the most

simplified, expeditious, and effective