Source: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2015/03/20/2015-06371/regulations-for-state-courts-and-agencies-in-indian-child-custody-proceedings
Timestamp: 2018-02-18 11:07:58
Document Index: 549954724

Matched Legal Cases: ['art 23', 'art 23', 'art 23', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923', '§\u200923']

Federal Register :: Regulations for State Courts and Agencies in Indian Child Custody Proceedings
A Proposed Rule by the Indian Affairs Bureau on 03/20/2015
Comments must be received on or before May 19, 2015. Comments on the information collections contained in this proposed regulation are separate from those on the substance of the proposed rule. Comments on the information collection burden should be received by April 20, 2015 to ensure consideration, but must be received no later than May 19, 2015. See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document for dates of public meetings and tribal consultation sessions.
14880-14894 (15 pages)
IV. Public Meetings & Tribal Consultation Sessions
B. Tribal Consultation Sessions
1. Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O. 12866 and 13563)
Subpart I—Indian Child Welfare Act Proceedings
Procedures for Making Requests for Transfer to Tribal Court
Adjudication of Involuntary Placements, Adoptions, or Terminations of Parental Rights
Post-Trial Rights & Recordkeeping
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2015-06371 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2015-06371
—Federal rulemaking portal: www.regulations.gov. The rule is listed under the agency name “Bureau of Indian Affairs” or “BIA.” The rule has been assigned Docket ID: BIA-2015-0001.
—Email: comments@bia.gov. Include “ICWA” in the subject line of the message.
—Mail or hand-delivery: Ms. Elizabeth Appel, Office of Regulatory Affairs & Collaborative Action—Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street NW., MS 3642, Washington, DC 20240, (202) 273-4680.
See the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of this document for locations of public meetings and tribal consultation sessions.
Ms. Elizabeth Appel, Office of Regulatory Affairs & Collaborative Action—Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street NW., MS 3642, Washington, DC 20240, (202) 273-4680; elizabeth.appel@bia.gov. You may review the information collection request online at http://www.reginfo.gov. Follow the instructions to review Department of the Interior collections under review by OMB.
Since ICWA was enacted by Congress in 1978, it has improved child welfare practices regarding Indian children. Commentators have asserted, however, that it has not reached its full potential due largely to ineffective or inconsistent implementation in some case. This proposed rule would establish a new subpart to regulations implementing ICWA at 25 CFR 23 to address Indian child welfare proceedings in State courts. This proposed rule is published in response to comments received during several listening sessions, written comments submitted throughout 2014, and recommendations that regulations are needed to fully implement ICWA. See, e.g., Attorney General's Advisory Committee on American Indian and Alaska Native Children Exposed to Violence: Ending Violence So Children Can Thrive (November 2014), p. 77. This proposed rule would also respond to significant developments in jurisprudence since Start Printed Page 14881the regulations were established in 1979 and last substantively updated in 1994.
This proposed rule would incorporate many of the changes made to the recently revised guidelines into regulations, establishing the Department's interpretation of ICWA as a binding interpretation to ensure consistency in implementation of ICWA across all States. This consistency is necessary to ensure that the goals of ICWA are carried out with each Indian child custody proceeding, regardless of the child welfare worker, judge, and State involved. The proposed rule would establish the following procedures to ensure compliance with ICWA: Determining whether ICWA applies to any child custody proceeding, providing notice to the parents or Indian custodian and Indian tribe(s), requesting and responding to requests to transfer proceedings to tribal court, adjudication of involuntary placements, adoptions, and terminations of parental rights, undertaking voluntary proceedings, identifying and applying placement preferences, and post-proceeding actions.
The Department requests comment on this proposed rule.
Congress enacted ICWA in 1978 to address the Federal, State, and private agency policies and practices that resulted in the “wholesale separation of Indian children from their families.” H. Rep. 95-1386 (July 24, 1978), at 9. Congress found “that an alarmingly high percentage of Indian families are broken up by the removal, often unwarranted, of their children from them by nontribal public and private agencies and that an alarmingly high percentage of such children are placed in non-Indian foster and adoptive homes and institutions . . . .” 25 U.S.C. 1901(4). Congress determined that cultural ignorance and biases within the child welfare system were significant causes of this problem and that state administrative and judicial bodies “have often failed to recognize the essential tribal relations of Indian people and the cultural and social standards prevailing in Indian communities and families.” 25 U.S.C. 1901(5); H. Rep. 95-1386, at 10. Congress enacted ICWA to “protect the best interests of Indian children and to promote the stability and security of Indian tribes and families by establishing minimum Federal standards for the removal of Indian children from their families and the placement of such children in foster or adoptive homes or institutions which will reflect the unique values of Indian culture.” H. Rep. 95-1386, at 8. The ICWA thus articulates a strong “federal policy that, where possible, an Indian child should remain in the Indian community.” Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield, 490 U.S. 30, 37 (1989) (citing H. Rep. 95-1386 at 24).
Following ICWA's enactment, in July 1979, the Department issued regulations addressing notice procedures for involuntary child custody proceedings involving Indian children, as well as governing the provision of funding for and administration of Indian child and family service programs as authorized by ICWA. See 25 CFR part 23. Those regulations did not address the specific requirements and standards that ICWA imposes upon State court child custody proceedings, beyond the requirements for contents of the notice. Also, in 1979, BIA published guidelines for State courts to use in interpreting many of ICWA's requirements in Indian child custody proceedings. 44 FR 67584 (Nov. 26, 1979).
In 2014, the Department invited comments to determine whether to update its guidelines and if so, what changes should be made. The Department held several listening sessions, including sessions with representatives of federally recognized Indian tribes, State court representatives (e.g., the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges and the National Center for State Courts' Conference of Chief Justices Tribal Relations Committee), the National Indian Child Welfare Association, and the National Congress of American Indians. The Department received comments from those at the listening sessions and also received written comments, including comments from individuals and additional organizations. An overwhelming proportion of the commenters requested not only that the Department update its ICWA guidelines but that the Department also issue regulations addressing the requirements and standards that ICWA imposes upon State court child custody proceedings. The Department reviewed and considered each comment in developing this proposed rule.
The Department has examined its authority to interpret and implement ICWA, including through a rulemaking, and has concluded that it possesses authority to implement the statute through rulemaking. ICWA instructs that “[w]ithin [180] days after November 8, 1978, the Secretary shall promulgate such rules and regulations as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter.” 25 U.S.C. 1952. This is a broad grant of authority to the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) to issue rules in order to ensure that the statute is fully and properly implemented. In addition to this express authority in ICWA, the Secretary is charged with “the management of all Indian affairs and of all matters arising out of Indian relations,” 25 U.S.C. 2, and may “prescribe such regulations as [s]he may think fit for carrying into effect the various provisions of any act relating to Indian affairs.” 25 U.S.C. 9. Finally, the United States has long been understood to have a special relationship with Indian nations, which includes the duty and power to protect them. Congress referred to this inherent authority in the opening language of ICWA, which explains that the “United States has a direct interest, as trustee, in protecting Indian children.” 25 U.S.C. 1901(3). These regulations, which are intended to improve the implementation of ICWA, uphold this Federal interest.
The Department has concluded that these regulations are now necessary to effectively carry out the provisions of ICWA. In issuing the guidelines in 1979, the Department found that primary responsibility for interpreting many of ICWA's provisions rests with the State courts that decide Indian child custody cases. See, e.g., 44 FR 67,584 (November 26, 1979). At the time, the Department opined that the promulgation of regulations was not necessary to carry out ICWA. Since that time, it has become clear that a uniform interpretation of key provisions is necessary to ensure compliance with ICWA. These regulations will provide a stronger measure of consistency in the implementation of ICWA, which has been interpreted in different, and sometimes conflicting, ways by various State courts and agencies and has resulted in different minimum standards being applied across the United States, contrary to Congress' intent. Moreover, conflicting interpretations can lead to arbitrary outcomes, and certain interpretations and applications threaten the rights that ICWA was intended to protect. See, e.g., Holyfield, 490 U.S. at 45-46 (describing the need for uniformity in defining “domicile” under ICWA).
This proposed rule addresses ICWA implementation by State courts and child welfare agencies, including updating definitions, and replacing current notice provisions at 25 CFR 23.11 with a proposed new subpart I to 25 CFR part 23. The proposed new subpart also addresses other aspects of ICWA compliance by State courts and child welfare agencies including, but Start Printed Page 14882not limited to, other pretrial requirements, procedures for requesting transfer of an Indian child custody proceeding to tribal court, adjudications of involuntary placements, adoptions, and termination of parental rights, voluntary proceedings, dispositions, and post-trial rights. For example, the proposed rule clarifies ICWA applicability and codifies that there is no “Existing Indian Family Exception (EIF)” to ICWA. Since first identification of the EIF in 1982, the majority of State appellate courts that have considered the EIF have rejected it as contrary to the plain language of ICWA. Some State legislatures have also explicitly rejected the EIF within their State ICWA statutes. When Congress enacted ICWA, it intended that an “Indian child” was the threshold for application of ICWA. The Department agrees with the States that have concluded that there is no existing Indian family exception to application of ICWA. The proposed rule also promotes the early identification of ICWA applicability. Such identifications will promote proper implementation of ICWA at an early stage, to prevent—as much as possible—delayed discoveries that ICWA applies.
We welcome comments on all aspects of this rule. We are particularly interested in the use of “should” versus “must.” The proposed rule makes several of the provisions issued in the recently published Guidelines for State Courts and Agencies in Indian Child Custody Proceedings, 80 FR 10146 (February 25, 2015), binding as regulation. These proposed mandatory provisions (indicating an action “must” be taken, for example) are authorized by ICWA. Some proposed provisions indicate that certain actions “should” be taken. We welcome comment on whether mandatory language is authorized by ICWA in those instances and any appropriate revisions to further promote compliance with ICWA.
The Department will host both public meetings and tribal consultation sessions on this proposed rule.
All are invited to the public meetings. Dates and locations for the public meetings are as follows:
Wednesday, April 22, 2015 9 a.m.-noon Local Time Portland, Oregon BIA Regional Office, 911 NE 11th Ave, Portland, OR 97232*.
Thursday, April 23, 2015 1-4 p.m. Local Time Rapid City, South Dakota Best Western Ramkota Hotel, 2111 N Lacrosse St., Rapid City, SD 57701.
Tuesday, May 5, 2015 1-4 p.m. Local Time Albuquerque, New Mexico National Indian Programs Training Center, 1011 Indian School Road NW., Suite 254 Albuquerque, NM 87104*.
Thursday, May 7, 2015 1-4 p.m. Local Time Prior Lake, Minnesota Mystic Lake Casino Hotel, 2400 Mystic Lake Blvd., Prior Lake, MN 55372.
Tuesday, May 12, 2015 1 p.m.-4 p.m. Eastern Time Via teleconference 888-730-9138, Passcode: INTERIOR.
Thursday, May 14, 2015 1-4 p.m. Local Time Tulsa, Oklahoma Tulsa Marriott Southern Hills, 1902 East 71st, Tulsa, OK 74136.
* Please RSVP for the Portland and Albuquerque meetings to consultation@bia.gov, bring photo identification, and arrive early to allow for time to get through security, as these are Federal buildings. No RSVP is necessary for the other locations.
Tribal consultation sessions are for representatives of currently federally recognized tribes only, to discuss the rule on a government-to-government basis with the Department. These sessions may be closed to the public. The dates and locations for the tribal consultations are as follows:
Monday, April 20, 2015 3:30 p.m.-5:30 p.m. Local Time Portland, Oregon Hilton Portland & Executive Towers, 921 SW. Sixth Avenue, Portland, OR 97204, (at the same location as NICWA conference).
Thursday, April 23, 2015 9 a.m.-12 p.m. Local Time Rapid City, South Dakota Best Western Ramkota Hotel, 2111 N Lacrosse St, Rapid City, SD 57701.
Tuesday, May 5, 2015 9 a.m.-12 p.m. Local Time Albuquerque, New Mexico National Indian Programs Training Center, 1011 Indian School Road, NW., Suite 254, Albuquerque, NM 87104*.
Thursday, May 7, 2015 9 a.m.-12 p.m. Local Time Prior Lake, Minnesota Mystic Lake Casino Hotel, 2400 Mystic Lake Blvd., Prior Lake, MN 55372.
Monday, May 11, 2015 1 p.m.-4 p.m. Eastern Time Via teleconference Call-in number: 888-730-9138 Passcode: INTERIOR =.
Start Printed Page 14883
Thursday, May 14, 2015 9 a.m.-12 p.m. Local Time Tulsa, Oklahoma Tulsa Marriott Southern Hills, 1902 East 71st, Tulsa, OK 74136.
The Department is issuing this proposed rule pursuant to ICWA, 25 U.S.C. 1901 et seq., and its authority over the management of all Indian affairs under 25 U.S.C. 2, 9.
Under the criteria in Executive Order 13132, this rule has no substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. The Department has determined that this rule complies with the fundamental Federalism principles and policymaking criteria established in EO 13132. Congress determined that the issue of Indian child welfare is sufficiently national in scope and significance to justify a statute that applies uniformly across States. This rule invokes the United States' special relationship with Indian tribes and children by establishing a regulatory baseline for implementation to further the goals of ICWA. Such goals include protecting the best interests of Indian children and promoting the stability and security of Indian tribes and families by establishing minimum Federal standards for the removal of Indian children from their families and the placement of such children in foster or adoptive homes that reflect the unique values of Indian culture. States are required to comply with ICWA even in the absence of this rule, and that requirement has existed since ICWA's passage in 1978. In the spirit of EO 13132, the Department specifically solicits comment on this proposed rule from State officials, including suggestions for how the rule could be made more flexible for State implementation.
In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, “Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal Governments,” Executive Order 13175 (59 FR 22951, November 6, 2000), and 512 DM 2, we have evaluated the potential effects on federally recognized Indian tribes and Indian trust assets. The Department hosted several listening sessions on the ICWA guidelines and notified each federally recognized tribal leader of the sessions. Several federally recognized Indian tribes submitted written comments and many suggested developing regulations. The Department considered each tribe's comments and concerns and have addressed them, where possible, in the proposed rule. The Department will be continuing to consult with tribes during the public comment period on this rule. The dates and locations of consultation sessions are listed in section IV, above.
OMB Control Number: 1076-NEW
Title: Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) Proceedings in State Court
Brief Description of Collection: This collection addresses the reporting, third-party disclosure, and recordkeeping requirements of ICWA, which requires State courts and agencies to provide notice to tribes and parents/custodians of any child custody proceeding that may involve an “Indian child,” and Start Printed Page 14884requires State courts and agencies to document certain actions and maintain certain records regarding the removal and placement of an “Indian child.”
Respondents: State governments and individuals.
Number of Respondents: 5,500 on average (each year).
Number of Responses: 116,100 on average (each year).*
Estimated Time per Response: Ranges from 15 minutes to 12 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Hour Burden: 277,276 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Non-Hour Cost: $868,400.**
23.107 Obtain information on whether child is “Indian child” 50 260 13,000 12 156,000
23.109(c)(3) Notify of tribal membership where more than 1 tribe 50 130 6,500 1 6,500
23.111, 23.113 Notify tribe, parents, Indian custodian of child custody proceeding 50 260 13,000 6 78,000
23.113 Document basis for emergency removal/placement 50 260 13,000 0.5 6,500
23.113 Maintain records detailing steps to provide notice 50 260 13,000 0.5 6,500
23.113 Petition for court order authorizing emergency removal/placement (with required contents) 50 260 13,000 0.5 6,500
23.118 Notify tribal court of transfer, provide records 50 5 250 0.25 63
23.120 Document “active efforts” 50 130 6,500 0.5 3,250
23.125 Parental consent to termination or adoption (with required contents) 5,000 1 5,000 0.5 2,500
23.126, 127 Notify placement of withdrawal of consent 50 2 100 0.25 25
23.128 Document each placement (including required documents) 50 130 6,500 0.5 3,250
23.128 Maintain records of placements 50 130 6,500 0.5 3,250
23.132 Notify of petition to vacate 50 5 250 0.25 63
23.135 Notify of change in status quo 50 130 6,500 0.25 1,625
23.136 Notify of final adoption decree/order 50 130 6,500 0.25 1,625
23.137 Maintain records in a single location and respond to inquiries 50 130 6,500 0.25 1,625
116,100 6.75 277,276
If you believe that we have not met these requirements, send us comments by one of the methods listed in the “COMMENTS” section. To better help revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For example, include the numbers of the sections or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long, the sections where lists or tables would be useful, etc.
Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying Start Printed Page 14885information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, proposes to amend part 23 in Title 25 of the Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
2. In § 23.2:
a. Add a definition for “active efforts”;
b. Revise the definition of “child custody proceeding”;
c. Add definitions for “continued custody”, “custody”, and “domicile”;
d. Revise the definition of “extended family member”;
e. Add a definition for “imminent physical danger or harm”;
f. Revise the definition of “Indian child's tribe”, “Indian custodian”, “parent”, “reservation”, and “Secretary”;
g. Add a definition for “status offenses”;
h. Revise the definition of “tribal court”; and
i. Add definitions for “upon demand” and “voluntary placement”.
Active efforts means actions intended primarily to maintain and reunite an Indian child with his or her family or tribal community and constitute more than reasonable efforts as required by Title IV-E of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 671(a)(15)). Active efforts include, for example:
(2) For an Indian child, the domicile of the Indian child's parents. In the case of an Indian child whose parents are not married to each other, the domicile of the Indian child's mother.
Imminent physical damage or harm means present or impending risk of serious bodily injury or death.
Indian child's tribe means:
(2) In the case of an Indian child who is a member of or eligible for membership in more than one tribe, the Indian tribe with which the Indian child has more significant contacts.Start Printed Page 14886
Indian custodian means any Indian person who has legal custody of an Indian child under tribal law or custom or under State law, or to whom temporary physical care, custody, and control has been transferred by the parent of such child. An Indian person may demonstrate that he or she is an Indian custodian by looking to tribal law or tribal custom or State law.
Parent means any biological parent or parents of an Indian child or any Indian person who has lawfully adopted an Indian child, including adoptions under tribal law or custom. It does not include an unwed father where paternity has not been acknowledged or established.
Reservation means Indian country as defined in 18 U.S.C. 1151, including any lands, title to which is held by the United States in trust for the benefit of any Indian tribe or individual or held by any Indian tribe or individual subject to a restriction by the United States against alienation.
3. In § 23.11, revise paragraph (d) and remove paragraphs (e), (f), and (g).
(d) Notice to the appropriate BIA Area Director pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section must be sent by registered mail with return receipt requested and must include the information required by § 23.111 of these regulations.
4. Add subpart I to read as follows:
How do I contact a tribe under the regulations in this subpart?
How does this subpart interact with State laws?
When does the requirement for active efforts begin?
What actions must an agency and State court undertake to determine whether a child is an Indian child?
Who makes the determination as to whether a child is a member of a tribe?
What is the procedure for determining an Indian child's tribe when the child is a member or eligible for membership in more than one tribe?
When must a State court dismiss an action?
What are the notice requirements for a child custody proceeding involving an Indian child?
What time limits and extensions apply?
What is the process for the emergency removal of an Indian child?
What are the procedures for determining improper removal?
How are petitions for transfer of proceeding made?
What are the criteria and procedures for ruling on transfer petitions?
How is a determination of “good cause” not to transfer made?
What happens when a petition for transfer is made?
Who has access to reports or records?
What steps must a party take to petition a State court for certain actions involving an Indian child?
What are the applicable standards of evidence?
Who may serve as a qualified expert witness?
What actions must an agency and State court undertake in voluntary proceedings?
What information should the consent document contain?
How is withdrawal of consent achieved in a voluntary foster care placement?
How is withdrawal of consent to a voluntary adoption achieved?
When do the placement preferences apply?
What placement preferences apply in adoptive placements?
What placement preferences apply in foster care or preadoptive placements?
How is a determination for “good cause” to depart from the placement preferences made?
What is the procedure for petitioning to vacate an adoption?
Who can make a petition to invalidate an action?
What are the rights of adult adoptees?
When must notice of a change in child's status be given?
How must the State maintain records?
How does the Paperwork Reduction Act affect this subpart?
§ 23.101
These regulations clarify the minimum Federal standards governing implementation of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) to ensure that ICWA is applied in all States consistent with the Act's express language, Congress' intent in enacting the statute, and the canon of construction that statutes enacted for the benefit of Indians are to be liberally construed to their benefit. In order to fully implement ICWA, these regulations apply in all proceedings and stages of a proceeding in which ICWA is or becomes applicable.
§ 23.102
The following terms and their definitions apply to this subpart. All other terms have the meanings assigned in § 23.2.
§ 23.103
(a) ICWA applies whenever an Indian child is the subject of a State child custody proceeding as defined by the Act. ICWA also applies to proceedings involving status offenses or juvenile delinquency proceedings if any part of Start Printed Page 14887those proceedings results in the need for placement of the child in a foster care, preadoptive or adoptive placement, or termination of parental rights.
(b) There is no exception to application of ICWA based on the so-called “existing Indian family doctrine” and, the following non-exhaustive list of factors that have been used by courts in applying the existing Indian family doctrine may not be considered in determining whether ICWA is applicable:
(1) The extent to which the parent or Indian child
(i) Participates in or observes tribal customs,
(ii) Votes in tribal elections or otherwise participates in tribal community affairs,
(iii) Contributes to tribal or Indian charities, subscribes to tribal newsletters or other periodicals of special interest in Indians,
(iv) Participates in Indian religious, social, cultural, or political events, or maintains social contacts with other members of the tribe;
(2) The relationship between the Indian child and his/her Indian parents;
(3) The extent of current ties either parent has to the tribe;
(4) Whether the Indian parent ever had custody of the child;
(5) The level of involvement of the tribe in the State court proceedings; and/or
(6) Blood quantum.
(c) Agencies and State courts, in every child custody proceeding, must ask whether the child is or could be an Indian child and conduct an investigation into whether the child is an Indian child.
(e) ICWA and these regulations or any associated Federal guidelines do not apply to:
(f) Voluntary placements that do not operate to prohibit the child's parent or Indian custodian from regaining custody of the child upon demand are not covered by ICWA. Such placements should be made pursuant to a written agreement, and the agreement should state explicitly the right of the parent or Indian custodian to regain custody of the child upon demand.
(g) Voluntary placements in which a parent consents to a foster care placement or seeks to permanently terminate his or her rights or to place the child in a preadoptive or adoptive placement are covered by ICWA.
§ 23.104
To contact a tribe to provide notice or obtain information or verification under these regulations, you should direct the notice or inquiry as follows:
(a) Many tribes designate an agent for receipt of ICWA notices. The BIA publishes a list of tribes' designated tribal agents for service of ICWA notice in the Federal Register each year and makes the list available on its Web site at www.bia.gov.
(b) For tribes without a designated tribal agent for service of ICWA notice, contact the tribe(s) to be directed to the appropriate individual or office.
(c) If you do not have accurate contact information for the tribe(s) or the tribe(s) contacted fail(s) to respond to written inquiries, you may seek assistance in contacting the Indian tribe(s) from the BIA Regional Office and/or Central Office in Washington, DC (see www.bia.gov).
§ 23.105
(a) These regulations provide minimum Federal standards to ensure compliance with ICWA and are applicable in all child custody proceedings in which ICWA applies.
§ 23.106
§ 23.107
What actions must an agency and State court undertake in order to determine whether a child is an Indian child?
(1) In requiring this certification, courts may wish to consider requiring the agency to provide:
(2) If there is reason to believe the child is an Indian child, the court must confirm that the agency used active efforts to work with all tribes of which the child may be a member to verify whether the child is in fact a member or eligible for membership in any tribe, under paragraph (a) of this section.
(3) The child who is the subject of the proceeding gives the agency or court Start Printed Page 14888reason to believe he or she is an Indian child;
(4) The domicile or residence of the child, parents, or the Indian custodian is known by the agency or court to be, or is shown to be, on an Indian reservation or in a predominantly Indian community; or
§ 23.108
(b) The determination by a tribe of whether a child is a member, is eligible for membership, or whether a biological parent is or is not a member, is solely within the jurisdiction and authority of the tribe.
§ 23.109
(a) Agencies must notify all tribes, of which the child may be a member or eligible for membership, that the child is involved in a child custody proceeding. The notice should specify the other tribe or tribes of which the child may be a member or eligible for membership.
(2) When an Indian child is already a member of a tribe, but is also eligible for membership in another tribe, deference should be given to the tribe in which the Indian child is a member, unless otherwise agreed to by the tribes. However, if the Indian child is not a member of any tribe, an opportunity should be provided to allow the tribes to determine which of them should be designated as the Indian child's tribe.
(4) A determination of the Indian child's tribe for purposes of ICWA and these regulations does not constitute a determination for any other purpose or situation.
(d) The tribe designated as the Indian child's tribe may authorize another tribe to act as a representative for the tribe in a child custody case.
§ 23.110
Subject to § 23.113 (emergency procedures), the following limitations on a State court's jurisdiction apply:
§ 23.111
(a) When an agency or court knows or has reason to believe that the subject of a voluntary or involuntary child custody proceeding is an Indian child, the agency or court must send notice of each such proceeding (including but not limited to a temporary custody proceeding, any removal or foster care placement, any adoptive placement, or any termination of parental or custodial rights) by registered mail with return receipt requested to:
(b) Notice may be sent via personal service or electronically in addition to the methods required by ICWA, but such alternative methods do not replace the requirement for notice to be sent by registered mail with return receipt requested.
(2) Name of each Indian tribe(s) in which the child is a member or may be eligible for membership;Start Printed Page 14889
(d) If the identity or location of the Indian parents, Indian custodians or tribes in which the Indian child is a member or eligible for membership cannot be ascertained, but there is reason to believe the child is an Indian child, notice of the child custody proceeding must be sent to the appropriate Bureau of Indian Affairs Regional Director (see www.bia.gov). To establish tribal identity, as much information as is known regarding the child's direct lineal ancestors should be provided (see § 23.111 of this subpart regarding notice requirements). The Bureau of Indian Affairs will not make a determination of tribal membership, but may, in some instances, be able to identify tribes to contact.
(e) The original or a copy of each notice sent under this section should be filed with the court together with any return receipts or other proof of service.
(f) If a parent or Indian custodian appears in court without an attorney, the court must inform him or her of the right to appointed counsel, the right to request that the proceeding be transferred to tribal court, the right to object to such transfer, the right to request additional time to prepare for the proceeding and the right (if the parent or Indian custodian is not already a party) to intervene in the proceedings.
(g) If the court or an agency has reason to believe that a parent or Indian custodian possesses limited English proficiency and is therefore not likely to understand the contents of the notice, the court or agency must, at no cost, provide a translated version of the notice or have the notice read and explained in a language that the parent or Indian custodian understands. To secure such translation or interpretation support, a court or agency should contact the Indian child's tribe or the local BIA agency for assistance in locating and obtaining the name of a qualified translator or interpreter.
(h) No substantive proceedings, rulings or decisions on the merits related to the involuntary placement of the child or termination of parental rights may occur until the notice and waiting periods in this section have elapsed.
(i) If the child is transferred interstate, regardless of whether the Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC) applies, both the originating State court and receiving State court must provide notice to the tribe(s) and seek to verify whether the child is an Indian child.
§ 23.112
(a) No proceedings regarding decisions for the foster care or termination of parental rights may begin until the waiting periods to which the parents or Indian custodians and to which the Indian child's tribe are entitled have passed. Additional extensions of time may also be granted beyond the minimum required by ICWA.
(2) 10 days after the Indian child's tribe (or the Secretary if the Indian child's tribe is unknown to the party seeking placement) has received notice in accordance with 25 U.S.C. 1912(a);
§ 23.113
(a) Any emergency removal or emergency placement of any Indian child under State law must be as short as possible. Each involved agency or court must:
(b) If the agency that conducts an emergency removal of a child whom the agency knows or has reason to believe is an Indian child, the agency must:
(5) Take all practical steps to notify the child's parents or Indian custodians and Indian tribe about any proceeding, or hearings within a proceeding, Start Printed Page 14890regarding the emergency removal or emergency placement of the child; and
(6) Maintain records that detail the steps taken to provide any required notifications under § 23.111.
(3) If such persons are unknown, a detailed explanation of what efforts have been made to locate them, including notice to the appropriate BIA Regional Director (see www.bia.gov);
(e) At any court hearing regarding the emergency removal or emergency placement of an Indian child, the court must determine whether the removal or placement is no longer necessary to prevent imminent physical damage or harm to the child.
(1) A hearing, noticed in accordance with these regulations, is held and results in a determination by the court, supported by clear and convincing evidence and the testimony of at least one qualified expert witness, that custody of the child by the parent or Indian custodian is likely to result in imminent physical damage or harm to the child; or
(3) Initiate a child custody proceeding subject to the provisions of ICWA and these regulations.
§ 23.114
(a) If, in the course of any Indian child custody proceeding, any party asserts or the court has reason to believe that the Indian child may have been improperly removed from the custody of his or her parent or Indian custodian, or that the Indian child has been improperly retained, such as after a visit or other temporary relinquishment of custody, the court must immediately stay the proceeding until a determination can be made on the question of improper removal or retention, and such determination must be conducted expeditiously.
§ 23.115
(b) The right to request a transfer occurs with each proceeding.
§ 23.116
(b) The court should expeditiously provide all records related to the proceeding to the tribal court.
§ 23.117
(c) In determining whether good cause exists, the court may not consider whether the case is at an advanced stage or whether transfer would result in a change in the placement of the child.
(2) Socio-economic conditions or any perceived inadequacy of tribal or BIA social services or judicial systems; or
§ 23.118
(a) Upon receipt of a transfer petition the State court must promptly notify the Start Printed Page 14891tribal court in writing of the transfer petition and request a response regarding whether the tribal court wishes to decline the transfer. The notice should specify how much time the tribal court has to make its decision; provided that the tribal court must be provided 20 days from the receipt of notice of a transfer petition to decide whether to accept or decline the transfer.
(b) If the tribal court accepts the transfer, the State court should promptly provide the tribal court with all court records.
§ 23.119
§ 23.120
§ 23.121
(a) The court may not issue an order effecting a foster care placement of an Indian child unless clear and convincing evidence is presented, including the testimony of one or more qualified expert witnesses, demonstrating that the child's continued custody with the child's parents or Indian custodian is likely to result in serious physical damage or harm to the child.
(b) The court may not order a termination of parental rights unless the court's order is supported by evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, supported by the testimony of one or more qualified expert witnesses, that continued custody of the child by the parent or Indian custodian is likely to result in serious physical damage or harm to the child.
(c) Clear and convincing evidence must show a causal relationship between the existence of particular conditions in the home that are likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage to the particular child who is the subject of the proceeding.
(d) Evidence that only shows the existence of community or family poverty, isolation, single parenthood, custodian age, crowded or inadequate housing, substance abuse, or nonconforming social behavior does not by itself constitute clear and convincing evidence that continued custody is likely to result in serious emotional or physical-damage to the child.
§ 23.122
(c) The court or any party may request the assistance of the Indian child's tribe or the BIA agency serving the Indian child's tribe in locating persons qualified to serve as expert witnesses.
§ 23.123
(a) Agencies and State courts must ask whether a child is an Indian child in any voluntary proceeding under § 23.107 of these regulations.
(b) Agencies and State courts must provide the Indian tribe with notice of the voluntary child custody proceedings, including applicable pleadings or executed consents, and their right to intervene under § 23.111 of this part.
§ 23.124
§ 23.125
What information should a consent document contain?
(b) A consent to foster care placement should contain, in addition to the information specified in paragraph (a) of this section, the name and address of the person or entity by or through whom the placement was arranged, if any, or the name and address of the prospective foster parents, if known at the time.
Start Printed Page 14892
§ 23.126
§ 23.127
§ 23.128
(a) In any preadoptive, adoptive or foster care placement of an Indian child, ICWA's placement preferences apply; except that, if the Indian child's tribe has established by resolution a different order of preference than that specified in ICWA, the agency or court effecting the placement must follow the tribe's placement preferences.
(b) The agency seeking a preadoptive, adoptive or foster care placement of an Indian child must always follow the placement preferences. If the agency determines that any of the preferences cannot be met, the agency must demonstrate through clear and convincing evidence that a diligent search has been conducted to seek out and identify placement options that would satisfy the placement preferences specified in §§ 23.129 and 23.130 of these regulations, and explain why the preferences could not be met. A search should include notification about the placement proceeding and an explanation of the actions that must be taken to propose an alternative placement to:
(c) Where there is a request for anonymity, the court should consider whether additional confidentiality protections are warranted, but a request for anonymity does not relieve the agency or the court of the obligation to comply with the placement preferences.
§ 23.129
§ 23.130
§ 23.131
(3) The extraordinary physical or emotional needs of the child, such as specialized treatment services that may be unavailable in the community where families who meet the criteria live, as established by testimony of a qualified expert witness; provided that extraordinary physical or emotional needs of the child does not include ordinary bonding or attachment that may have occurred as a result of a placement or the fact that the child has, for an extended amount of time, been in another placement that does not comply with ICWA.
(4) The unavailability of a placement after a showing by the applicable agency in accordance with § 23.128(b) of this subpart, and a determination by the Start Printed Page 14893court that active efforts have been made to find placements meeting the preference criteria, but none have been located. For purposes of this analysis, a placement may not be considered unavailable if the placement conforms to the prevailing social and cultural standards of the Indian community in which the Indian child's parent or extended family resides or with which the Indian child's parent or extended family members maintain social and cultural ties.
§ 23.132
§ 23.133
(a) Any of the following may petition any court of competent jurisdiction to invalidate an action for foster care placement or termination of parental rights where it is alleged that ICWA has been violated:
(c) There is no requirement that the particular party's rights under ICWA be violated to petition for invalidation; rather, any party may challenge the action based on violations in implementing ICWA during the course of the child custody proceeding.
§ 23.134
(b) Where State law prohibits revelation of the identity of the biological parent, assistance of the BIA should be sought to help an adoptee who is eligible for membership in a tribe to become a tribal member without breaching the Privacy Act or confidentiality of the record.
(c) In States where adoptions remain closed, the relevant agency should communicate directly with the tribe's enrollment office and provide the information necessary to facilitate the establishment of the adoptee's tribal membership.
(d) Agencies should work with the tribe to identify at least one tribal designee familiar with 25 U.S.C. 1917 to assist adult adoptees statewide with the process of reconnecting with their tribes and to provide information to State judges about this provision on an annual basis.
§ 23.135
§ 23.136
(6) Any information relating to tribal membership or eligibility for tribal membership of the adopted child.
§ 23.137
(b) The records must contain, at a minimum, the petition or complaint, all substantive orders entered in the proceeding, and the complete record of the placement determination (including, but not limited to the findings in the court record and social worker's statement).
§ 23.138
The collections of information contained in this part have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. and assigned OMB Control Number 1076-XXXX. Response is required to obtain a benefit. A Federal agency may not conduct or sponsor, and you are not required to respond to, a collection of information unless the form or regulation requesting the information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. Send comments regarding this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Information Collection Clearance Officer—Indian Affairs, 1849 C Street NW., Washington, DC 20240.
*. The following table shows estimates of the hour burden above what a State court or agency would do in a child custody proceeding that does not involve ICWA requirements:
**. In many cases, there are no start-up costs associated with these information collections because State courts are agencies are already implementing child custody actions. However, it is possible that some States may not yet have a single location, or electronic database accessible from anywhere, housing all placement records. For this reason, we are estimating a start-up cost of $487,500 (or just under $10,000 per state on average, with the understanding that there will be no start-up costs in some states and up to $20,000 or more in others). The annual cost burden to respondents associated with providing notice by registered mail is $11.95 and the cost of a return receipt green card is $2.70. For each Indian child custody proceeding, at least two notices must be sent—one to the parent and one to the tribe, totaling $29.30. At an annual estimated 13,000 child welfare proceedings that may involve an “Indian child,” this totals: $380,900. Together with the start-up cost, the total non-hour cost burden for all 50 States is $868,400.
[FR Doc. 2015-06371 Filed 3-18-15; 11:15 am]