28426 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 31, 1995 / Notices

Indian Housing Authorities as technical

assistance.

Form Number: None.

Respondents: Individual or

Households and Businesses or Other

For-Profit.

Reporting Burden:

Number of respondents × Frequency of

response × Hours perresponse = Burdenhours

Questionnaire ..................................................................................... 500 1 .16 80

Total Estimated Burden Hours: 80.

Status: New.

Contact: Joan Ladesh, HUD (202) 755–

0066; Joseph F. Lackey, Jr., OMB, (202)

395–7316.

Dated: May 16, 1995.

[FR Doc. 95–13187 Filed 5–30–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4210–01–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs—Proposed

Finding For Federal Acknowledgment

of Huron Potawatomi, Inc.

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice of proposed finding.

SUMMARY: Pursuant to 25 CFR 83.10(h),

notice is hereby given that the Assistant

Secretary—Indian Affairs (Assistant

Secretary) proposes to acknowledge that

Huron Potawatomi, Inc., 2221 1 1⁄2 Mile

Road, Fulton, Michigan 49052, exists as

an Indian tribe within the meaning of

Federal law. This notice is based on a

determination that the tribe satisfies all

of the criteria set forth in 25 CFR 83.7

as modified by 25 CFR 83.8, and,

therefore, meets the requirements for a

government-to-government relationship

with the United States.

DATES: As provided by 25 CFR 83.10(i),

any individual or organization wishing

to challenge the proposed finding may

submit arguments and evidence to

support or rebut the evidence relied

upon. This material must be submitted

within 180 calendar days from the date

of publication of this notice. As stated

in the regulations, 25 CFR 83.10(i),

interested and informed parties who

submit arguments and evidence to the

Assistant Secretary must also provide

copies of their submissions to the

petitioner.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed

finding and/or request for a copy of the

report of evidence should be addressed

to the Office of the Assistant Secretary,

1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC

20240, Attention: Branch of

Acknowledgment and Research.

Mailstop 2611–MIB.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Holly Reckord, Chief, Branch of

Acknowledgment and Research, (202)

208–3592.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This

notice is published in the exercise of

authority delegated by the Secretary of

the Interior to the Assistant Secretary by

209 DM 8.

The petitioner, also known as the

Nottawaseppi Huron Potawatomi Band,

consists of descendants of the historical

Potawatomi tribe of Michigan. Its

members are descendants specifically of

the Potawatomi of Huron, a band which

signed treaties with the Federal

Government from the Treaty of

Greenville in 1795 through the Articles

Supplementary to the Treaty of Chicago

in 1833. After the War of 1812, this

group moved from the Detroit area to

the Nottawaseppi Reserve, established

by the Federal treaty of 1821, in

southwestern Michigan. Because of

these treaties, the petitioner meets the

requirements of § 83.8 as having

unambiguous previous Federal

acknowledgment and has been

considered under the modifications of

§ 83.7 that are prescribed by § 83.8. The

date of the last treaty, 1833, has been

used as the date of latest Federal

acknowledgment for purposes of this

finding to enable the petitioner to

proceed under the provisions of § 83.8.

Because the petitioner had already

completed documentation of the

petition before the present regulations

became effective, it was not necessary to

determine if there was a later date of

unambiguous Federal acknowledgment.

Between 1833 and 1840, the

petitioner’s ancestors continued to

reside on the Nottawaseppi Reserve. In

1840, the ancestors of the petitioner

either avoided attempts of the Federal

Government to remove the Potawatomi

to Kansas or returned to Michigan

within a few years after removal. The

community was reestablished by 1842.

Huron Potawatomi, Inc. is centered at

the Pine Creek Indian Reservation in

Calhoun County, Michigan. This 120-

acre tract of land was purchased by the

founders of the community in 1845 with

Federal annuity monies and placed in

trust with the State of Michigan, in

which status it has remained until the

present day. During the second half of

the 19th century, the original

population was augmented by the

migration into the settlement of a few

additional Michigan Potawatomi

families, which was in accordance with

the traditionally permeable boundaries

of Potawatomi villages.

From the date of its reestablishment

(1842) until the present, the petitioner’s

community has consistently been

identified as a settlement of Michigan

Potawatomi in Federal, state, and local

documents, which include Federal

census records, Bureau of Indian Affairs

census records and annuity rolls, county

realty records and vital records,

Methodist Indian mission records, and

local histories. No ethnicity for the

community other than Potawatomi has

been suggested by any scholar or

observer. The identification is as the

same tribal entity that was previously

acknowledged or as a portion that has

evolved from that entity. Therefore, we

conclude that the petitioner meets

criterion 83.7(a) as modified by criterion

83.8(d).

The petitioner presented evidence

that it maintained usage of the

Potawatomi language and had a level of

in-group or culturally appropriate

patterned out-group marriages to other

Michigan Indians of over 50 percent of

total marriages from 1842 through 1960.

At least through 1934, the petitioner had

over 50 percent of the group’s

population resident at or near the Pine

Creek site, thus meeting the

requirements of criterion 83.7(b), for

community up to 1960 under the

provisions of § 83.7(b)(2).

Although since the Depression, to the

present, younger members of the group

have moved off the reservation site in

search of housing and employment,

there emerged a defined pattern of

migration to specific locations in

Michigan. Evidence indicates that the

emigrants not only maintain close social

and kinship ties with the central Pine

Creek settlement area, but also maintain

close social and kinship ties among the

five external settlement areas. Thus, we

conclude that the petitioner meets

criterion 83.7(b) as modified by section

83.8(d), which requires a showing that

the group constitutes a distinct,

cohesive community at present.

Because the Huron Potawatomi meet

the requirements of the community

criterion 83.7(b) between 1833 and 1934
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 104 / Wednesday, May 31, 1995 / Notices 28427

by showing a sufficient level of

evidence under 83.7(b)(2), pursuant to

83.7(c)(3) they also meet criterion

83.7(c) for that time period. Between

1833 and 1840 (the date the Federal

Government attempted to remove all

Potawatomi on the Nottawaseppi

Reserve to Kansas), anecdotes and

reminiscences of pioneer settlers

mention leaders and chiefs of the

Potawatomi of Huron on the

Nottawaseppi Reserve, and the

Potawatomi of Huron continued during

this period of time to collect Federal

annuities under the Treaty of 1807.

From 1842 through the present day, the

Pine Creek settlement, which is

incorporated as Huron Potawatomi, Inc.,

the petitioner, has had an unbroken

sequence of documented leadership.

After the reestablishment of the

community at Pine Creek in 1842, the

band continued to choose traditional

chiefs through 1934. From 1934 through

1970, the leadership was by a committee

closely associated with the Methodist

Indian mission on the Pine Creek

reservation. In 1970, the petitioner

incorporated and has since been

administered by an elected chairman

and council. These leaders regularly

represented the group in its interaction

with the Bureau of Indian Affairs and to

the public, as well as supervising

internal reservation activities.

Therefore, we conclude that the

petitioner meets criterion 83.7(c) as

modified by criterion 83.8(d).

The petitioning group has provided a

copy of its governing document, which

describes its membership criteria. Thus,

we conclude that the petitioner meets

criterion 83.7(d).

With the exception of one adopted

child, all of the 819 members on the

petitioner’s 1994 membership list have

been documented to descend from

persons listed on the 1904 Taggart Roll,

compiled by the Bureau of Indian

Affairs in connection with the issuance

of Potawatomi annuity payments under

Federal treaties. Thus we conclude that

the petitioner meets criterion 83.7(e).

A portion of the membership of

Huron Potawatomi, Inc. (171

individuals)—persons who had dual

ancestry from both the Huron

Potawatomi and the Pokagon

Potawatomi—was determined to be

dually enrolled with the Pokagon

Potawatomi Band (aka Potawatomi of

Michigan and Indiana, Inc.), which was

federally acknowledged through the

legislative process in 1994, while the

petition from Huron Potawatomi, Inc.,

was being evaluated through the

administrative process. At the time the

Huron Potawatomi, Inc. membership

roll was compiled and submitted, the

Pokagon Potawatomi were not federally

acknowledged. Neither the Huron nor

the Pokagon constitutions prohibit dual

enrollment with other unacknowledged

Indian groups. The proportion of

individuals enrolled in a recognized

tribe (21 percent in the Pokagon

Potawatomi and five percent in other

tribes) is small enough that the Huron

Potawatomi membership is not

principally composed of persons who

are members of an acknowledged North

American Indian tribe. Therefore, we

find that the petitioner meets criterion

83.7(f) within the purpose of the

regulation, which is designed to prevent

the splintering and break-up of federally

acknowledged tribes through the

Federal acknowledgment process.

No evidence was found that the

petitioner or its members are the subject

of congressional legislation which has

expressly terminated or forbidden the

Federal relationship. Therefore, we find

that the petitioner meets criterion

83.7(g).

In October 1994, 126 Taggart Roll

descendants who have dual ancestry in

both the Huron Potawatomi and in the

Potawatomi settlement centered around

Bradley and Salem in Allegan County,

Michigan, notified the Bureau of Indian

Affairs that they wish to have their

names removed from the Huron

Potawatomi, Inc. membership list in

order to be part of the petition for

Federal acknowledgment of the Matche-be-nash-she-wish Potawatomi Band

(#9A). Removal of these 126 individuals

from the petitioner’s membership does

not affect the ability of the petitioner to

meet the mandatory criteria of the

Federal acknowledgment regulations.

Based on this preliminary factual

determination, we conclude that the

Huron Potawatomi, Inc. should be

granted Federal acknowledgment under

25 CFR part 83.

As provided by 25 CFR 83.10(h) of the

revised regulations, a report

summarizing the evidence, reasoning,

and analyses that are the basis for the

proposed decision will be provided to

the petitioner and interested parties,

and is available to other parties upon

written request. Comments on the

proposed finding and/or requests for a

copy of the report of evidence should be

addressed to the Office of the Assistant

Secretary, Bureau of Indian Affairs,

1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC

20240, Attention; Branch of

Acknowledgment and Research,

Mailstop 2611—MIB. Third parties must

simultaneously supply copies of their

comments to the petitioner in order for

them to be considered by the

Department of the Interior.

During the response period, the

Assistant Secretary shall provide

technical advice concerning the

proposed finding and shall make

available to the petitioner in a timely

fashion any records used for the

proposed finding not already held by

the petitioner, to the extent allowable by

Federal law (83.10(j)(1)). In addition, the

Assistant Secretary shall, if requested by

the petitioner or any interested party,

hold a formal meeting for the purpose

of inquiring into the reasoning,

analyses, and factual bases for the

proposed finding. The proceedings of

this meeting shall be on the record. The

meeting record shall be available to any

participating party and become part of

the record considered by the Assistant

Secretary in reaching a final

determination (83.10(j)(2)).

If third party comments are received

during the regular response period, the

petitioner shall have a minimum of 60

days to respond to these comments.

This period may be extended at the

Assistant Secretary’s discretion if

warranted by the nature and extent of

the comments (83.10(k)).

At the end of the response periods the

Assistant Secretary shall consider the

written arguments and evidence

submitted during the response periods

and issue a final determination. The

Assistant Secretary shall consult with

the petitioner and interested parties to

determine an equitable timeframe for

preparation of the final determination

and notify the petitioner and interested

parties of the date such consideration

begins. The Assistant Secretary may

conduct any necessary additional

research and may request additional

information from the petitioner and

third parties. A summary of the final

determination will be published in the

Federal Register within 60 days from

the date on which the consideration of

the written arguments and evidence

rebutting or supporting the proposed

finding begins, as provided in 25 CFR

83.10(l)(2).

Ada E. Deer,

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.

[FR Doc. 95–13172 Filed 5–30–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–02–P

Bureau of Land Management

[WO–350–09–1430–00]

Information Collection Submitted to

the Office of Management and Budget

for Review Under the Paperwork

Reduction Act

The proposal for the collection of

information listed below has been