[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 247 (Wednesday, December 24, 1997)] [Notices] [Pages 67398-67400] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 97-33532] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs Final Determination Against Federal Acknowledgment of the Mobile- Washington County Band of Choctaw Indians of South Alabama (MOWA) AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior. ACTION: Notice of Final Determination. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: This notice is published in accordance with authority delegated by the Secretary of the Interior to the Assistant Secretary-- Indian Affairs (Assistant Secretary) by 209 DM 8. Notice is hereby given that the Assistant Secretary declines to acknowledge that the Mobile--Washington County Band of Choctaw Indians of South Alabama (MOWA), 1080 West Red Fox Road, Mt. Vernon, Alabama 36560, exists as an Indian tribe within the meaning of Federal law. This notice is based on the determination that the group does not satisfy one of the mandatory criteria set forth in 25 CFR [[Page 67399]] 83.7, namely criterion 83.7 (e). Therefore, the MOWA do not meet the requirements necessary for a government-to-government relationship with the United States, 25 CFR 83.10 (m). DATES: This determination is final and is effective 90 days after publication in the Federal Register, unless a request for reconsideration is filed with the Interior Board of Indian Appeals (IBIA) by the petitioner or any interested party no later than 90 days after publication, 25 CFR 83.11. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Holly Reckord, Chief, Branch of Acknowledgment and Research, (202) 208-3592. A request for a copy of the report which summarizes the evidence and analyses that are the basis for this Final Determination should be addressed to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Branch of Acknowledgment and Research, 1849 C Street NW, Mailstop 4603-MIB, Washington, D.C. 20240, or is available at www.doi.gov/bia/ack__res.html. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The MOWA submitted a documented petition on April 28, 1988, and received an ``obvious deficiency review'' (OD) from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) dated February 15, 1990. On November 8, 1991, the MOWA responded to the OD review and on November 19, 1991, the petition was placed on the ``ready'' list of petitioners waiting to be placed on active consideration. The AS-IA's investigation of the petition and response to the OD review found little or no evidence that the petitioner can meet criterion (e) of 83.7, descent from a historical tribe or from historical tribes which combined and functioned as a single autonomous political entity. Under 25 CFR 83.10 (e) of the Federal acknowledgment regulations, an expedited Proposed Finding may be issued by the Assistant Secretary when there is little or no evidence that the petitioner can meet one of the mandatory criteria (e), (f), or (g) of 83.7. Expedited findings may only be done after the petition is complete and before the petition has been placed on active consideration. A notice of the expedited Proposed Finding to decline to acknowledge the MOWA was published in the Federal Register on January 5, 1995 (60 FR 1874). The Proposed Finding found that the petitioner clearly did not meet the requirements of criterion 83.7 (e), descent from a historical tribe. To make a Proposed Finding under 83.10 (e), the burden of proof is on the Government to show that the petitioner clearly does not meet the criterion. The Proposed Finding demonstrated that the MOWA clearly did not meet criterion 83.7 (e), thus meeting the burden of proof required of the Government for making a Proposed Finding under 83.10 (e). Once the Proposed Finding has been issued, however, the burden of proof shifts to the petitioner for rebuttal. The standard of proof which must be met in the petitioner's response to the Proposed Finding is a lesser one, the ``reasonable likelihood of the validity of the facts'' standard described in 25 CFR 83.6, the same standard used for all acknowledgment determinations. If, in its response to the Proposed Finding, the petitioner can show that it meets the ``reasonable likelihood of the validity of the facts'' standard, and thus demonstrates descent from a historical tribe, or historical tribes which amalgamated, then the BIA will undertake a full review of the petition under all seven of the mandatory criteria. However, the MOWA's response to the Proposed Finding did not establish under the ``reasonable likelihood of the validity of the facts'' standard that the MOWA met criterion 83.7 (e). No new evidence was submitted or found which rebutted the conclusions of the Proposed Finding. Therefore, the MOWA response did not trigger a BIA evaluation of the MOWA petition under all seven mandatory criteria. The Final Determination is based upon a new analysis of all the information in the record. This includes the information available for the Proposed Finding, the information submitted by the petitioner in its response to the Proposed Finding, and new evidence collected by the BIA researchers for evaluation purposes. Interested and informed parties did not submit evidence during the comment period. Two individuals submitted comments after the close of the response period, which were not considered in the preparation of the final determination in accord with 25 CFR 83.10 (l) (l). Also, numerous form letters were received out of time and all were transmitted to the Solicitor's office for retention for transmittal to the IBIA or the AS-IA in the event of a remand. None of the evidence submitted by the petitioner or located by the BIA during the evaluation process demonstrates that the core ancestors of the MOWA were Choctaw or of other Indian ancestry. Initially the petitioner claimed descent from six historical Indian tribes: Apache, Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek, and Houma. In its Response to the Proposed Finding, the petitioner continued to claim ancestry only from the historical Choctaw, Cherokee, and Creek tribes and narrowed its core ancestors from 30 to 5 individuals. The petitioner submitted additional evidence on four of the five of these ancestors from whom it claimed descent. The BIA searched for evidence, but could not locate any evidence connecting these four claimed core ancestors to the Choctaw or to any other historical tribe. Neither the petitioner nor the BIA found documentation acceptable to the Secretary that the core ancestors claimed to be Indian by the MOWA, were descendants of the historical Choctaw tribe or any other Native American tribe. The BIA found that all the MOWA members descend from two core families that resided in southwestern Alabama by about 1830. Neither these two families nor their ancestors were found to be members of a historical tribe of American Indians, or of tribes which had combined and functioned as a single American Indian entity. The extensive evidence on these two families either does not support, or in part disproves, Indian ancestry. Only one percent of the petitioner's membership could document any American Indian ancestry through the fifth core ancestor (see above) whose lines married into the families in the late 1880's and early 1900's. Except for this one percent, Indian records for Alabama do not include the known ancestors of the petitioner. There was no evidence in the substantial body of documentation submitted by the petitioner, or in the independent research by the BIA, to demonstrate Choctaw ancestry or any other Indian ancestry for 99% of the petitioner's membership. Thus, the petitioner fails to meet criterion (e), descent from a historical tribe. The Proposed Finding concluded that the petitioner's claim that its members descended from ``full and mixed blood Choctaws, Creeks, Cherokees, and Chickasaws who avoided removal West during the Indian removal in the 1830's'' is not valid. The AS-IA found that: (1) The petitioner's core ancestral families did not have documented American Indian ancestry; (2) The actual MOWA progenitors from the 1880's were not documented as descendants of the known, removal-era, Indians claimed by the petitioner; and (3) Many of the persons in the early 19th century ``founding Indian community'' claimed by the petitioner were not demonstrated to be Choctaw, or even American Indian. [[Page 67400]] (4) Only one percent of the petitioner's membership can document American Indian ancestry. In its response to the Proposed Finding, the petitioner submitted evidence including letters, photographs, interviews, school/church records, published secondary sources, newspaper/journal articles, court documents, Federal documents, land records, maps, and time lines. Every piece of evidence submitted was reviewed and it is concluded that: (1) Some of the evidence was either irrelevant to criterion 83.7(e) because it did not demonstrate genealogical descent from four claimed ancestors or descent from any historical tribe; (2) Much of the evidence was oral history and was unreliable when tested. Much of the evidence was found to be unsubstantiated by primary documentation; and (3) The evidence did not connect known MOWA ancestors to the individuals whom the MOWA claimed were Native American or to a historical Indian tribe. (4) The evidence disproved Indian ancestry to some of the MOWA ancestors. The BIA searched for evidence on the local, state, and national levels. The core ancestors of the petitioning group are known. None of the primary records demonstrated that these documented, known core ancestors were American Indian, or were descendants of a historical tribe. The BIA also searched the records of the historical tribes which the petitioner claimed and found no connection between the MOWA core ancestors and these historical tribes. The MOWA response to the Proposed Finding offered no basis for reversing the conclusions of the Proposed Finding against Federal acknowledgment of the MOWA. The evidence in the record does not support the petitioner's claim that it descends from a historical tribe. The record does not provide substantive evidence or any reason to believe that additional research might uncover such evidence. The MOWA petitioner has not demonstrated by a ``reasonable likelihood of the validity of the facts'' standard that it meets the requirements of criterion 83.7(e). There is thus no need to complete a full evaluation of the documented petition under all seven of the mandatory criteria. The petitioner fails to meet the requirements for Federal acknowledgment as an Indian Tribe. The Proposed Finding which declined to acknowledge that the petitioner is an Indian tribe is affirmed. This determination is final and will become effective 90 days from the date of publication unless the petitioner or any interested party files a request for reconsideration of this determination with the Interior Board of Indian Appeals (83.11(a)(1)). The petitioner's or interested party's request must be received no later than 90 days after the publication of the Assistant Secretary's determination in the Federal Register (83.11(a)(2)). Dated: December 17, 1997. Kevin Gover, Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs. [FR Doc. 97-33532 Filed 12-23-97; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310-02-P