Opinion ID: 185156
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Areas over which Tribes May Exercise Jurisdiction to Propose TIPs and Redesignations

Text: 62 The next issue that arises in this case is whether EPA defensibly interprets the extent of Native American authority to redesignate geographic areas and propose TIPs under the Act. Native American nations are authorized to redesignate [l]ands within the exterior boundaries of reservations of federally recognized Indian tribes. 42 U.S.C. S 7474(c).Similarly, Indian tribes may submit TIPs applicable to all areas ... located within the exterior boundaries of the reservation, notwithstanding the issuance of any patent and including rights-of-way running through the reservation. 42 U.S.C. S 7410(o). 63 EPA interpreted both of these provisions to authorize tribal redesignation and implementation of TIPs not just within the limits of reservations (including trust lands and Pueblos), but also within allotted lands and dependent Indian communities. No one argues that allotted lands and dependent Indian communities are within the compass of a reservation. Instead, EPA contends that so long as a tribe demonstrates inherent jurisdiction over non-reservation areas, it may issue redesignations and TIPs for those lands. In other words, although tribes do not have express delegated authority to issue redesignations and TIPs for nonreservation areas, neither does the Act bar tribes from acting on acase-by-case basis pursuant to demonstrated inherent sovereign power. 64 Petitioners contend that both S 7474(c) and 7410(o) operate as geographical limitations on the power of tribes to redesignate areas and issue TIPs. Petitioners' argument with respect to S 7474(c) falls flat. This provision says that [l]ands within the exterior boundaries of reservations of federally recognized Indian tribes may be redesignated only by the appropriate Indian governing body. 42 U.S.C. S 7474(c). Petitioners seek to twist this language into the following: Indian tribes may only redesignate lands within the exterior boundaries of reservations. All S 7474(c) establishes, however, is the exclusive power of Indian tribes to redesignate land within a reservation; it does not address the inherent power of tribes to redesignate land in nonreservation areas. 65 Nor do petitioners fare better with respect to S 7410(o), which states that EPA-approved TIPs shall become applicable to all areas (except as expressly provided otherwise in the plan) located within the exterior boundaries of the reservation, notwithstanding the issuance of any patent and including rights-of-way running through the reservation. 42 U.S.C. S 7410(o). Petitioners read this to mean that EPA may only approve a TIP if it applies within reservation areas. As EPA points out, petitioners' interpretation cannot stand for several reasons. First, S 7410(o) cross-references S 7601(d), which allows for tribes to exercise jurisdiction over reservation areas or other areas within the tribe's jurisdiction. 42 U.S.C. S 7601(d)(2)(B). Most importantly, S 7410(o) provides that TIPs apply to all areas within the borders of a reservation once the plan becomes effective in accordance with the regulations promulgated under section 7601(d) of this title.42 U.S.C. S 7410(o). Therefore, it is permissible for EPA to give § 7410(o) the reading it proffers: a reinforcement of tribes' jurisdiction to implement TIPs in reservation land. Petitioners would instead read the statute as an express limitation of tribal jurisdiction. Under step one of Chevron, we cannot say that congressional intent is free of ambiguity on this question. 66 Accordingly, we turn to whether EPA's interpretation is reasonable. We believe that it is undoubtedly so. To read the statute otherwise would result in several anomalies. First, EPA notes without dispute that petitioners' interpretation would allow a state's implementation plan to apply to non-reservation areas, even where a tribe has demonstrated inherent jurisdiction over those areas. Second, petitioners' reading would disable a tribe from comprehensively administering the Act. A tribe could implement, in non-reservation areas, new source performance standards under the Act, but not administer a TIP, even though the regulated activity threatens or has some direct effect on the ... health or welfare of the tribe. Montana, 450 U.S. at 566. EPA's reading of the statute to allow such regulation is a reasonable interpretation of SS 7410(o) and 7601(d). 67