Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 98 / Monday, May 21, 2001 / Proposed Rules 27915

addressed using the most recent fleet

data. Field experience shows that

leaking fuel nozzles, which can lead to

burn-through of the diffuser case, was a

significant flight safety concern

primarily at the number 7 location

because of the proximity of oil lines.

This is addressed by AD 95–02–16.

To date, there have not been any

incidents of diffuser case burn-through

due to fuel leakage across the fuel

nozzle secondary seal where the fuel

nozzle configuration is as prescribed by

AD 95–02–16. There has been one

incident where the fuel nozzle at the

number 7 position has leaked due to

loss of nut torque, ignited, and burned

through the diffuser case. However,

because the oil line fittings had been

replaced in accordance with AD 95–02–

16, there was no burn-through of the oil

fittings and no oil fire. The following

requirements of AD 95–02–16, are

sufficient to mitigate the safety concern:

• Initial and repetitive inspections of

the number 7 fuel nozzle and support

assembly, AND

• Replacement of the number 7 fuel

nozzle and support assembly with a

more leak resistant configuration, AND

• Replacement of aluminum oil

pressure and scavenge tube fittings with

steel fittings, AND

• Replacement of an aluminum oil

scavenge line bolt with a steel bolt.

Upon further consideration, the FAA

has determined that there is no longer

a likelihood that the unsafe condition

will exist or develop on other products

of the same type design, and as a result,

superseding the existing AD is no longer

required. Accordingly, the proposed

rule is hereby withdrawn.

Withdrawal of this notice of proposed

rulemaking constitutes only such action,

and does not preclude the agency from

issuing another notice in the future, nor

does it commit the agency to any course

of action in the future.

Since this action only withdraws a

notice of proposed rulemaking, it is

neither a proposed nor a final rule and

therefore, is not covered under

Executive Order 12866, the Regulatory

Flexibility Act, or DOT Regulatory

Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034,

February 26, 1979).

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation

safety, Safety.

The Withdrawal

Accordingly, the notice of proposed

rulemaking, Docket 97–ANE–59–AD,

published in the Federal Register on

May 1, 1998, (63 FR 24138), is

withdrawn.

Issued in Burlington, Massachusetts, on

May 10, 2001.

Francis A. Favara,

Acting Manager, Engine and Propeller

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service.

[FR Doc. 01–12674 Filed 5–18–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–13–U

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Indian Arts and Crafts Board

25 CFR Part 309

RIN 1076–AE16

Protection of Products of Indian Art

and Craftsmanship

AGENCY: Indian Arts and Crafts Board

(IACB), DOI.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking

(NPRM).

SUMMARY: This proposal establishes

regulations to provide guidance to

persons who produce, market, or

purchase arts and crafts marketed as

Indian products, as defined under the

Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990. The

proposed regulations further clarify the

definition of ‘‘Indian product’’ by

including specific examples of ‘‘Indian

product,’’ as well as examples of what

is not an ‘‘Indian product,’’ in the

regulations implementing the Indian

Arts and Crafts Enforcement Act of

2000, an amendment to the Indian Arts

and Crafts Act of 1990.

DATES: Written comments must be

received on or before August 20, 2001.

ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment on

the proposed rule for the Indian Arts

and Crafts Enforcement Act of 2000, you

may submit your comments by any one

of several methods. You may mail

comments to: Director, Indian Arts and

Crafts Board, Room 4004–MIB, 1849 C

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240.

You may also fax comments to 202–

208–5196 or comment via the Internet to

iacb@os.doi.gov. Please also include

‘‘Attn: RIN 1076–AE16 and your name

and return address in your mailed,

faxed, or Internet message. Please

submit Internet comments as an ASCII

file avoiding the use of special

characters and any form of encryption.

If you do not receive a confirmation

from the system that we received your

Internet message, contact us directly at

202–208–3773.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Meridith Z. Stanton, Director, Indian

Arts and Crafts Board, Room 4004–MIB,

1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC

20240, telephone 202–208–3773 (not a

toll-free call), fax 202–208–5196, or email iacb@os.doi.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Indian Arts and Crafts Board

(IACB) was created by Congress

pursuant to the Act of August 27, 1935

(49 Stat. 891; 25 U.S.C. 305 et seq.; 18

U.S.C. §§ 1158–59). The IACB is

responsible for implementing the Indian

Arts and Crafts Act of 1990, promoting

the development of American Indian

and Alaska Native arts and crafts,

improving the economic status of

members of federally recognized Tribes,

and helping to establish and expand

marketing opportunities for arts and

crafts produced by American Indians

and Alaska Natives.

The Indian Arts and Crafts Act of

1990, Public Law 101–644 (hereinafter

the ‘‘1990 Act’’), is essentially a truthin-marketing law designed to prevent

marketing of products misrepresented as

produced by Indians when the products

are not, in fact, made by an Indian as

defined by the 1990 Act. Under Section

104(a) of the 1990 Act (18 U.S.C.

1159(c)(2)), ‘‘the terms ‘Indian product’

and ‘product of a particular Indian Tribe

or Indian arts and crafts organization’

have the meaning given such term in

regulations which may be promulgated

by the Secretary of the Interior.’’

Under the 1990 Act’s current

implementing regulations, at 25 CFR

Part 309, prior to these amendments, the

term ‘‘Indian product’’ is defined as:

‘‘(1) In general. ‘‘Indian product’’

means any art or craft product made by

an Indian.

‘‘(2) Illustrations. The term Indian

product includes, but is not limited to:

(i) Art works that are in a traditional

or non-traditional Indian style or

medium;

(ii) Crafts that are in a traditional or

non-traditional Indian style or medium;

(iii) Handcrafts, i.e. objects created

with the help of only such devices as

allow the manual skill of the maker to

condition the shape and design of each

individual product.

‘‘(3) Exclusion for products made

before 1935. The provisions of this part

shall not apply to any art or craft

products made before 1935.’’

The above definition reflects the

IACB’s determination that ‘‘Indian

product’’ under the 1990 Act applies to

Indian arts and crafts, and not all

products generally. This determination

is consistent with the IACB organic

legislation, the IACB’s primary mission

as established by Congress, and the

Congressional intent of the 1990 Act.

The 1935 cut-off date for products

27916 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 98 / Monday, May 21, 2001 / Proposed Rules

regulated by the Act is in keeping with

the Congressional intent of the 1990 Act

and the legislated mission of the IACB—

economic growth through the

development and promotion of

contemporary Indian arts and crafts.

The ‘‘Indian product’’ definition

under the current regulations, at 25 CFR

Part 309, focused on the nature and

Indian origin of products covered by the

1990 Act, and did not provide specific

arts and crafts examples. This proposed

rule implements the Indian Arts and

Crafts Enforcement Act of 2000, Public

Law 106–497, (hereinafter the ‘‘2000

Act’’) by clarifying the definition of

‘‘Indian product.’’ It also provides

specific examples of items that may be

marketed as Indian products, thereby

informing the public as to when an

individual may be subject to civil or

criminal penalties for falsely marketing

a good as an ‘‘Indian product.’’

Section Analysis

Section 2 of the 2000 Act

The 2000 Act, an amendment to the

Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990,

Public Law 101–644, was enacted on

November 9, 2000. Under this

amendment, Congress sought to

improve the cause of action for

misrepresentation of Indian arts and

crafts. Section 2 of the 2000 Act, directs

the IACB to:

Not later than 180 days after the date of the

enactment of the Indian Arts and Crafts

Enforcement Act of 2000, the IACB shall

promulgate regulations to include in the

definition of the term ‘‘Indian product’’

specific examples of such product to provide

guidance to Indian artisans as well as to

purveyors and consumers of Indian arts and

crafts, as defined under this Act.

Tribal Consultation

Prior to drafting regulations for the

2000 Act, in early January 2001 the

IACB sent out individual letters to all

Tribal leaders of federally recognized

Tribes informing them of the 2000 Act

and providing them with copies of the

legislation. The letters also invited them

to designate a member of their staff or

Tribal member from their arts and crafts

community with whom the IACB could

discuss their Tribe’s interest in specific

language for consideration in the further

clarification of ‘‘Indian product.’’ This

Tribal involvement was intended to

ensure that the amended definition

properly encompasses Indian art and

craft products that should be protected

by the 1990 Act. Throughout March, the

IACB sent follow-up letters to the

designees confirming their participation

and providing them with additional

background information for the

teleconference. The following Tribes

participated in teleconferences with

IACB.

March 14, 2001

Representatives from the Rincon

Indian Reservation, Valley Center, CA;

Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Tribe of

Indians, Roseburg, OR; and Pyramid

Lake Pauite Tribe, Nixon, NV.

Representatives from The Cocopah

Indian Tribe, Somerton, AZ; Kaibab

Band of Paiute, Pine Spring, AZ;

Tohono O’odham Nation of Arizona,

Sells, AZ; and Pueblo of Acoma, Acoma,

NM.

March 15, 2001

Representatives from the Poarch Band

of Creek Indians, Atmore, AL;

Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation,

Mashantucket, CT; Nome Eskimo

Community, Nome, AK, and Catawba

Indian Nation, Rock Hill, SC.

March 16, 2001

Representatives from the Three

Affiliated Tribes, Fort Berthold, ND;

White Earth Nation, White Earth, MN;

Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior

Chippewa Indians, Lac du Flambeau,

WI; and Cayuga Nation, Versailles, NY.

March 21, 2001

Representative from the Pueblo of

Zuni, Zuni, NM.

March 22, 2001

Representatives from the Miami Tribe

of Oklahoma, Miami, OK; Cherokee

Nation, Tahlequah, OK; Seminole

Nation of Oklahoma, Wewoka, OK; The

Chickasaw Nation, Ada, OK; and

Southern Ute Indian Tribe, Ignacio, CO.

March 23, 2001

Representatives from the Jicarilla

Apache Nation, Dulce, NM, and Oneida

Indian Nation, Vernon, NY.

March 27, 2001

Representative from the

Passamaquoddy Tribe of Maine,

Princeton, ME.

Representatives from the Fallon

Paiute-Shoshone Tribe, Fallon, NV.

Representatives from the

Confederated Tribes and Bands of the

Yakama Nation, Toppenish, WA.

March 29, 2001

Representative from the Sheep Ranch

Rancheria of the Me-wuk Indians of

California, Tracy, CA.

March 30, 2001

Representatives from the

Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla

Indian Reservation, Pendleton, OR.

April 16, 2001

Representative from the Fort Mojave

Indian Tribe of Arizona, California, and

Nevada, Needles, CA.

April 17, 2001

Representatives from the Hopi Tribe

of Arizona, Kykotsmovi, AZ.

Public Comment Solicitation

If you wish to comment on the

proposed rule for the 2000 Act, you may

submit your comments by any one of

several methods. You may mail

comments to: Director, Indian Arts and

Crafts Board, Room 4004–MIB, 1849 C

Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240.

You may also fax comments to 202–

208–5196 or comment via the Internet to

iacb@os.doi.gov. Please also include

‘‘Attn: RIN 1076–AE16,’’ your name and

return address in your mailed, faxed, or

Internet message. Please submit Internet

comments as an ASCII file avoiding the

use of special characters and any form

of encryption. If you do not receive a

confirmation from the system that we

received your Internet message, contact

us directly at 202–208–3773.

Our practice is to make comments,

including names and home addresses of

respondents, available for public review

during regular business hours.

Individual respondents may request that

we withhold their home address from

the rulemaking record, which we will

honor to the extent allowable by law.

There also may be circumstances in

which we would withhold from the

rulemaking record a respondent’s

identity, as allowable by law. If you

wish us to withhold your name and/or

address, you must state this

prominently at the beginning of your

comment. However, we will not

consider anonymous comments. We

will make all submissions from

organizations or businesses, and from

individuals identifying themselves as

representatives or officials of

organizations or businesses, available

for public inspection in their entirety.

All communications received on or

before the closing date for comments

will be considered by the IACB before

taking action on the proposed rule. The

proposals contained in this document

may be changed in light of comments

received. All comments submitted will

be available for examination in the rule

docket after the closing date for

comments at Room 4004–MIB, 1849 C

Street, NW., Washington, DC, on

weekdays, except federal holidays,

between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 98 / Monday, May 21, 2001 / Proposed Rules 27917

Drafting Information

This proposed rule was prepared by

Meridith Z. Stanton (Director, Indian

Arts and Crafts Board).

Compliance With Other Laws

1. Regulatory Planning and Review

(Executive Order 12866)

This document is not a significant

rule and is not subject to review by the

Office of Management and Budget under

Executive Order 12866.

(1) This rule will not have an effect of

$100 million or more on the economy.

It will not adversely affect in a material

way the economy, productivity,

competition, jobs, the environment,

public health, or safety, or State, local,

or tribal governments or communities.

The rule is simply a Congressionally

mandated further clarification of an

existing regulatory definition of ‘‘Indian

product.’’

(2) This rule will not create a serious

inconsistency or otherwise interfere

with an action taken or planned by

another agency. The rule, the further

clarification of an existing regulatory

definition of ‘‘Indian product,’’ does not

involve another agency.

(3) This rule does not alter the

budgetary effects or entitlements, grants,

user fees, or loan programs or the rights

or obligations of their recipients. This

rule does not involve any budgetary or

entitlements issues.

(4) This rule does not raise novel legal

or policy issues. Again, it is simply the

further clarification of an existing

definition of ‘‘Indian product.’’

2. Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Department of the Interior

certifies that this document will not

have a significant economic effect on a

substantial number of small entities

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5

U.S.C. 601 et seq.) An unknown number

of individuals, small businesses, and

tribal governments may be affected in

some way, but they do not exceed

several thousand in aggregate.

3. Small Business Regulatory

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA)

This rule is not a major rule under 5

U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business

Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act.

This rule:

(a) Does not have an annual effect on

the economy of $100 million or more.

The annual effect is insignificant.

(b) Will not cause a major increase in

costs or prices for consumers,

individual industries, Federal, State, or

local government agencies, or

geographic regions. Clarification of the

term ‘‘Indian product’’ and guidance on

how to represent Indian products in the

marketplace will not cause any

significant increase in the costs or prices

for consumers, individual industries,

Federal, State, or local government

agencies, or geographic regions.

(c) Does not have significant adverse

effects on competition, employment,

investment, productivity, innovation, or

the ability of the U.S.-based enterprises

to compete with foreign-based

enterprises. Through the clarification of

the term ‘‘Indian product,’’ the ability of

U.S.-based enterprises to compete with

foreign-based enterprises will not be

significantly affected. In fact, it should

assist U.S. Indian arts and crafts

producers to compete with counterfeit

Indian arts and crafts produced

overseas.

4. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

This rule does not impose an

unfunded mandate on State, local, or

tribal governments or the private sector

of more than $100 million per year. The

rule does not have a significant or

unique effect on State, local, or tribal

governments or the private sector. It

simply clarifies an existing regulatory

definition of ‘‘Indian product.’’ A

statement containing the information

required by the Unfunded Mandates

Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not

required.

5. Takings (Executive Order 12630)

In accordance with Executive Order

12630, the rule does not have significant

takings implications. This rule does not

involve government action or

interference with Constitutionally

protected rights.

6. Federalism (Executive Order 12612)

In accordance with Executive Order

12612, the rule does not have sufficient

federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

This rule does not affect the relationship

between State and federal governments.

A Federalism Assessment is not

required.

7. Civil Justice Reform (Executive Order

12988)

In accordance with Executive Order

12988, the Office of the Solicitor had

determined that this rule does not

unduly burden the judicial system and

meets the requirements of sections 3(a)

and 3(b)(2) of the Order.

8. Paperwork Reduction Act

This regulation does not require an

information collection from 10 or more

parties and a submission under the

Paperwork Reduction Act is not

required. An OMB form 83–I is not

required.

9. National Environmental Policy Act

This rule does not constitute a major

Federal action significantly affecting the

quality of the human environment.

10. Clarity of this regulation

Executive Order 12866 requires each

agency to write regulations that are easy

to understand.

We invite your comments on how to

make this rule easier to understand,

including answers to questions such as

the following: (1) Are the requirements

in the rule clearly stated? (2) Does the

rule contain technical language or

jargon that interferes with its clarity? (3)

Does the format of the rule (grouping

and order of sections, use of headings,

paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its

clarity? (4) Is the description of the rule

in the ‘‘Supplementary Information’’

section of the preamble helpful in

understanding the proposed rule? What

else could we do to make the rule easier

to understand?

Send a copy of any comments that

concern how we could make this rule

easier to understand to: Office of

Regulatory Affairs, Department of the

Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C Street,

NW., Washington, DC 20240. You may

also e-mail the comments to this

address: exsec@ios.doi.gov.

List of Subjects in 25 CFR Part 309

Indians—arts and crafts, Penalties,

Trademarks.

For the reasons set out in the

preamble, part 309 of 25 CFR Chapter II

is proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 309—PROTECTION OF INDIAN

ARTS AND CRAFTS PRODUCTS

1. The authority citation for part 309

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 18 U.S.C. 1159, 25 U.S.C. 305 et

seq.

2. In § 309.2, paragraph (d) is revised

to read as follows:

§ 309.2 What are the key definitions for

purposes of the Act?

* * * * *

(d) Indian product means any art or

craft product made by an Indian. Indian

labor makes the Indian art or craft object

an Indian product.

(1) Illustrations. The term Indian

product includes, but is not limited to:

(i) Art works made by an Indian that

are in a traditional or non-traditional

style or medium;

(ii) Crafts made by an Indian that are

in a traditional or non-traditional style

or medium;

27918 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 98 / Monday, May 21, 2001 / Proposed Rules

(iii) Handcrafts made by an Indian,

i.e. objects created with the help of only

such devices as allow the manual skill

of the maker to condition the shape and

design of each individual product.

(2) Exclusions. An Indian product

under the Act is not any of the

following:

(i) An Indian style art or craft product

produced in a foreign country by nonIndian labor or craftsmanship using an

Indian design;

(ii) An Indian style art or craft product

produced in the United States by nonIndian labor or craftsmanship;

(iii) An Indian style art or craft

product that is designed by an Indian

but produced by non-Indian labor;

(iv) An Indian style art or craft

product assembled from a kit;

(v) An Indian style art or craft

product, originating from a commercial

product, without a substantial handcraft

element provided by Indian labor;

(vi) An industrial product, such as a

bicycle assembled by Indian labor; or

(vii) An Indian style art or craft

product produced in an assembly line or

related production line process using

multiple workers that is not all-Indian

labor. For example, an Indian style pipe

assembled by non-Indians with an

Indian(s) supplying a few beads for

accent is not an Indian product.

* * * * *

3. Sections 309.3 through 309.6 are

redesignated as §§ 309.24 through

309.27.

4. New §§ 309.6 through 309.23 are

added to read as follows:

§ 309.6 When does a commercial product

become an Indian product?

In addressing Indian embellishments

to originally commercial products, the

Indian labor expended to add art or

craftwork to those objects must be

sufficient to change the nature, quality,

and appearance of the original

commercial item. Through substantial

transformation due to Indian labor, a

product changes from a commercial

product to an Indian product. Examples

of formerly commercial products that

become Indian products include Indian

beaded tennis shoes and Indian ribbon

applique ́d denim jackets.

§ 309.7 How should a seller disclose the

nature and degree of Indian labor when

selling, offering, or displaying art and

craftwork for sale?

The Indian Arts and Crafts Act is a

truth-in-marketing law. Those who

produce and market art and craftwork

should honestly represent and clarify

the degree of Indian involvement in the

production of the art and craftwork

when it is sold, displayed or offered for

sale. The following guidelines illustrate

how to characterize art and craftwork:

If . . . then . . .

(a) An Indian conceives, designs, and makes the art or

craftwork

it is an ‘‘Indian product.’’

(b) An Indian produces a product that meets the definition

of ‘‘handcrafted,’’ in 309.2(d)(1)(iii)

it can be marketed as such and it meets the definition of

‘‘Indian product.’’

(c) An Indian makes an art or craftwork using some machine

made parts

it is ‘‘Indian made,’’ and meets the definition of ‘‘Indian

product.’’

(d) An Indian designs a product, such as a bracelet, which is

then produced by non-Indians

it should be marketed as ‘‘Indian designed.’’ It does not meet

the definition of ‘‘Indian product’’ under the Act.

(e) A product, such as jewelry, is assembled from a substantial amount of nonIndian made materialsit is not an ‘‘Indian product.’’ 1

(f) A product is assembled by a non-Indian from a kit it does not meet the definition of ‘‘Indian product.’’ To

avoid misleading the consumer, this product should be

marketed as ‘‘assembled by a non-Indian from a kit’’ on

the product label and packaging.

(g) A product is in the style of an Indian art or craft product,

but not made by an Indian

it should be marketed as ‘‘Indian style’’ or ‘‘Indian inspired.’’ It does not meet the definition of ‘‘Indian product’’ under the Act.

(h) An Indian non-Indian jointly undertake the art or

craftwork to produce an art or craft product, for example a

concho belt

only a percentage of the labor is Indian and it does not meet

the definition of ‘‘Indian product’’ under the Act. 2

1For example, a necklace strung with overseas manufactured fetishes or heshi does not meet the definition of ‘‘Indian

product’’ under the Act. If an Indian assembled the necklace, in keeping with the truth-in-marketing focus of the Act, it

should be marketed as ‘‘Indian assembled.’’ Similarly, if a product, such as a kachina, is assembled by an Indian from a kit,

it should be marketed as ‘‘Indian assembled’’ and does not meet the definition of ‘‘Indian product’’ under the Act. 2 In order to be an ‘‘Indian product,’’ the labor component of the product must be entirely Indian. In keeping with this

truth-in-marketing law, the collaborative work should be marketed as such. Therefore, it should be marketed as produced

by ‘‘X’’ (name of artist or artisan) of ‘‘Y’’ (enrolled Tribe) and ‘‘Z’’ (name of artist or artisan with no Tribe listed) to avoid

misleading the consumer.

Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 98 / Monday, May 21, 2001 / Proposed Rules 27919

§ 309.8 For marketing purposes, what is

the recommended method of identifying

authentic Indian products?

The recommended method of

marketing authentic Indian products is

to include the ‘‘name of the artist or

artisan’’ and the ‘‘name of the Tribe’’ in

which the artist or artisan is enrolled.

For example, the Indian product should

include a label, hangtag, provenance

card, or similar identification that

includes the name of the artist or artisan

and the name of the Tribe in which the

artisan is enrolled.

§ 309.9 Is it illegal for a non-Indian to make

and sell Indian style art or craft products?

A non-Indian can make and sell

Indian style art or craft products only if

the non-Indian or other seller does not

mislead the consumer to believe that the

products have been made by an Indian.

These products should be offered for

sale as ‘‘non-Indian made,’’ ‘‘Indian

inspired,’’ or ‘‘Indian style.’’

§ 309.10 What are some sample categories

and examples of Indian products?

What constitutes an Indian art or craft

product is potentially very broad.

However, to provide guidance to

persons who produce, market, or

purchase items marketed as Indian

products, §§ 309.11 through 309.22

contain a sample listing of ‘‘specific

examples’’ of objects that meet the

definition of Indian products. There is

some repetition, due to the interrelated

nature of many Indian products. The

listing in these sections contains

examples, and is not intended to be allinclusive. Additionally, although the

Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990 and

the Indian Arts and Crafts Enforcement

Act of 2000 do not address materials

used in Indian products, some materials

are included for their descriptive nature

only. This is not intended to restrict

materials used or to exclude materials

not listed.

§ 309.11 What are examples of jewelry that

are Indian products?

(a) Jewelry and related accessories

made by Indian labor using a wide

variety of media, including, but not

limited to, silver, gold, turquoise, coral,

lapis, jet, nickel silver, glass bead,

copper, wood, shell, walrus ivory,

whale baleen, bone, horn, horsehair,

quill, seed, and berry are Indian

products.

(b) Specific examples include, but are

not limited to: Ivory and baleen

scrimshaw bracelets, abalone shell

necklaces, nickel silver scissortail

pendants, silver sand cast bracelets,

silver overlay bolos, turquoise channel

inlay gold rings, cut glass bead rosette

earrings, wooden horse stick pins, and

medicine wheel quilled medallions.

§ 309.12 What are examples of basketry

that are Indian products?

(a) Basketry and related weavings

made by Indian labor using a wide

variety of media, including, but not

limited to, birchbark, black ash, brown

ash, cedar, willow, palmetto,

honeysuckle, river cane, oak, buck

brush, sumac, dogwood, cattail, reed,

raffia, horsehair, pine needle, spruce

root, rye grass, sweet grass, yucca, bear

grass, beach grass, rabbit brush, hemp,

maidenhair fern, whale baleen, seal gut,

feathers, shell, devil’s claw, and

porcupine quill are Indian products.

(b) Specific examples include, but are

not limited to: Double weave river cane

baskets, yucca winnowing trays, willow

burden baskets, honeysuckle sewing

baskets, black ash picnic baskets, pine

needle/raffia effigy baskets, oak splint

and braided sweet grass fancy baskets,

birchbark containers, baleen baskets, rye

grass dance fans, brown ash strawberry

baskets, sumac wedding baskets, cedar

hats, hemp basket hats, yucca wicker

basketry plaques, and spruce root

tobacco pouches.

§ 309.13 What are examples of other

weaving and textiles that are Indian

products?

(a) Weavings and textiles made by

Indian labor using a wide variety of

media, including, but not limited to,

cornhusk, raffia, tule, horsehair, cotton,

wool, hemp, linen, rabbit skin, feather,

bison fur, and qiviut (musk ox) wool are

Indian products.

(b) Specific examples include, but are

not limited to: Corn husk bags, twined

yarn bags, cotton mantas, willow cradle

boards, horsehair hatbands, Chiefs

Blankets, Two Grey Hills rugs, horse

blankets, finger woven sashes, brocade

table runners, star quilts, pictorial

applique ́ wall hangings, hemp woven

bags, embroidered dance shawls, rabbit

skin blankets, and feather blankets.

§ 309.14 What are examples of beadwork,

quillwork, and moose hair tufting that are

Indian products?

(a) Beadwork, quillwork, and moose

hair tufting made by Indian labor to

decorate a wide variety of materials,

including, but not limited to, bottles,

baskets, bags, pouches, and other

containers; belts, buckles, jewelry,

hatbands, hair clips, barrettes, bolos,

and other accessories; moccasins, vests,

jackets, and other articles of clothing;

and dolls and other toys and collectibles

are Indian products.

(b) Specific examples include, but are

not limited to: Quilled pipe stems, loom

beaded belts, pictorial bags adorned

with cut glass beads, deer skin

moccasins decorated with moose hair

tufting, beaded miniature dolls, and

quilled and beaded amulets.

§ 309.15 What are examples of apparel that

are Indian products?

(a) Apparel made or substantially

decorated by Indian labor including, but

not limited to, parkas, jackets, coats,

moccasins, boots, slippers, mukluks,

mittens, gloves, gauntlets, dresses, and

shirts are Indian products.

(b) Specific examples include, but are

not limited to: Seal skin parkas, ribbon

applique ́ dance shawls, smoked moose

hide slippers, deer skin boots,

patchwork jackets, calico ribbon shirts,

wing dresses, and buckskin shirts.

§ 309.16 What are examples of regalia that

are Indian products?

(a) Regalia are ceremonial clothing,

modern items with a traditional theme,

and accessories with historical

significance made or significantly

decorated by Indian labor, including,

but not limited to, that worn to perform

traditional dances, participate in

traditional socials, used for dance

competitions, and worn on special

occasions of tribal significance. If these

items are made or significantly

decorated by Indian labor, they are

Indian products.

(b) Specific examples include, but are

not limited to: Hide leggings, buckskin

dresses, breech cloths, dance shawls,

frontlets, shell dresses, button blankets,

feather bustles, porcupine roaches,

beaded pipe bags, nickel silver stamped

armbands, quilled breast plates, coup

sticks, horse sticks, shields,

headdresses, dance fans, and rattles.

§ 309.17 What are examples of woodwork

that are Indian products?

(a) Woodwork made from wood by

Indian labor, including, but not limited

to, sculpture, drums, furniture,

containers, hats, and masks are Indian

products.

(b) Specific examples include, but are

not limited to: Hand drums, totem

poles, animal figurines, folk carvings,

kachinas, long house posts, clan house

carved doors, chairs, relief panels,

bentwood boxes, snow goggles, hunting

hats, spirit masks, bows and arrows,

atlatls, redwood dug out canoes, war

clubs, flutes, dance sticks, talking sticks,

shaman staffs, cradles, decoys, spiral

pipe stems, violins, and Native

American Church boxes.

§ 309.18 What are examples of hide,

leatherwork, and fur that are Indian

products?

(a) Hide, leatherwork, and fur made or

significantly decorated by Indian labor,

27920 Federal Register / Vol. 66, No. 98 / Monday, May 21, 2001 / Proposed Rules

including, but not limited to, parfleches,

tipis, horse trappings and tack, pouches,

bags, and hide paintings are Indian

products.

(b) Specific examples include, but are

not limited to: Narrative painted hides,

martingales, saddles, bonnet cases,

drapes, quirts, forelocks, rosettes, horse

masks, bridles, head stalls, cinches,

saddle bags, side drops, harnesses, arm

bands, belts, and other hand crafted

items with studs and tooling.

§ 309.19 What are examples of pottery and

ceramics that are Indian products?

(a) Pottery, ceramics, and related arts

and crafts items made or significantly

decorated by Indian labor, including,

but not limited to, a broad spectrum of

clays and ceramic material are Indian

products.

(b) Specific examples include, but are

not limited to: Ollas, pitch vessels,

pipes, raku bowls, pitchers, canteens,

effigy pots, wedding vases, micaceous

bean pots, seed pots, masks, incised

bowls, blackware plates, redware bowls,

polychrome vases, and storytellers and

other figures.

§ 309.20 What are examples of sculpture,

carving, and pipes that are Indian

products?

(a) Sculpture, carving, and pipes

made by Indian labor including, but not

limited to, wood, soapstone, alabaster,

pipestone, argillite, turquoise, ivory,

baleen, bone, antler, and shell are

Indian products.

(b) Specific examples include, but are

not limited to: Fetishes, animal

figurines, pipestone pipes, moose antler

combs, argillite bowls, ivory cribbage

boards, whalebone masks, elk horn

purses, and clamshell gorgets.

§ 309.21 What are examples of dolls and

toys that are Indian products?

Dolls, toys, and related items made by

Indian labor, including, but not limited

to, no face dolls, corn husk dolls,

kachina dolls, patchwork and palmetto

dolls, reindeer horn dolls, lacrosse

sticks, stick game articles, gambling

sticks, gaming dice, miniature cradle

boards, and yo-yos are Indian products.

§ 309.22 What are examples of painting

and other fine art forms that are Indian

products?

Painting and other fine art forms

made by Indian labor, and include but

are not limited to, works on canvas,

photography, sand painting, mural,

computer generated art, graphic art,

video artwork, printmaking, drawing,

bronze casting, glasswork, and art forms

to be developed in the future are Indian

products.

§ 309.23 Does this part apply to products

made before 1935?

The provisions of this part do not

apply to any art or craft products made

before 1935.

Dated: May 14, 2001.

Robert Lamb,

Acting Assistant Secretary—Policy,

Management, and Budget.

[FR Doc. 01–12666 Filed 5–18–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–84–U

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 117

[CGD08–99–007]

RIN 2115–AE47

Drawbridge Operation Regulation;

Inner Harbor Navigation Canal, LA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Withdrawal of notice of

proposed rulemaking.

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is

withdrawing a notice of proposed

rulemaking for the regulation governing

the operation of the L & N Railroad/Old

Gentilly Road bascule span drawbridge

across the Inner Harbor Navigation

Canal, mile 2.9 at New Orleans, Orleans

Parish, Louisiana. This proposed rule

was published, with request for

comments, to allow the bridge to have

remained closed to navigation for

temporary periods of time, during the

months of May, June, July, and

September, 1999, for replacement of the

damaged fender system. A final rule was

not published for the proposed

rulemaking. The fender system has been

replaced and the temporary rule is no

longer necessary.

DATES: The notice of proposed

rulemaking is withdrawn effective May

21, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Unless otherwise indicated,

documents referred to in this notice are

available for inspection or copying at

the office of the Eighth Coast Guard

District, Bridge Administration Branch,

Hale Boggs Federal Building, room

1313, 501 Magazine Street, New

Orleans, Louisiana 70130–3396 between

7 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through

Friday, except Federal holidays. The

Bridge Administration Branch of the

Eighth Coast Guard District maintains

the public docket for this notice of

proposed rulemaking.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Phil

Johnson, Bridge Administration Branch,

at the address given above, telephone

(504) 589–2965.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Regulatory History

On March 15, 1999, the Coast Guard

published a notice of proposed

rulemaking in 64 FR 12795. The

proposed temporary rule would have

allowed the draw of the L & N bascule

span bridge to remain closed to

navigation daily from 8 a. m. until noon

and from 1 p.m. until 5 p.m. from May

17 through May 28, 1999, June 1

through July 2, 1999, July 6 through

September 3, 1999 and from September

7 through September 22, 1999. The

comment period was limited to 45 days

because the rule needed to be effective

by May 17, 1999. At the end of the

comment period, no comments had

been received. However, there was not

time to publish a final temporary rule

prior to May 17, 1999. On July 19, 1999,

the Coast Guard received notification

that the fender system had been

replaced ahead of schedule and the

temporary rule was no longer necessary.

The Coast Guard is withdrawing this

notice of temporary rulemaking from

drawbridge operating regulations

(CGD08–99–007).

Dated: May 10, 2001.

Roy J. Casto,

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,

Eighth Coast Guard District.

[FR Doc. 01–12721 Filed 5–18–01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910–15–U

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[AZ 094–0027b; FRL–6916–3]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Arizona State

Implementation Plan Revision,

Coconino County, Mohave County, and

Yuma County

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is proposing to approve

revisions to the Coconino County,

Mohave County, and Yuma County

portions of the Arizona State

Implementation Plan (SIP). These

revisions concern the recision of all of

the remaining defunct SIP rules from

these counties. We are approving the

recision of local rules that no longer

regulate permitting procedures and

various emission sources under the

Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA

or the Act).