Regulatory Reform

The Council of South Carolina Professional Archaeologists (COSCAPA) opposes the modification or repeal of existing regulations that protect federal land and historic and cultural resources. They argue that regulations implementing NHPA, NEPA, ARPA, and NAGPRA are necessary, effective, and should remain in place to uphold the Department of the Interior's trust obligations to Native Nations and the public.

The National Indian Child Welfare Association (NICWA) opposes any regulatory reforms that would weaken the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) regulations, BIA Social Services programs, or protections for Tribal lands and cultural heritage. They argue that these regulations are essential for upholding Tribal sovereignty, protecting Native children, and fulfilling federal trust obligations.

The Council for Museum Anthropology, Archaeology Division, and Council on Heritage and the Anthropology of Tourism, representing sections of the American Anthropological Association, support the current NAGPRA regulatory framework. They urge the Department of the Interior to preserve the 2024 updates and request increased funding and administrative support to help institutions comply with the new requirements.

The commenter argues that the NAGPRA regulations are essential for the respectful repatriation of Native American human remains and cultural objects. They emphasize that these regulations protect Tribal Sovereignty and facilitate necessary communication between tribes, museums, and the federal government.

The commenter argues that the Department of the Interior's (DOI) new regulations regarding NAGPRA impose an expensive and unfunded mandate on parks, universities, and museums. They request that the DOI align its regulations more closely with the original bipartisan law and improve public communication regarding the removal of items from state collections.

The Eastern Shoshone Business Council, representing the Eastern Shoshone Tribe, opposes the modification or repeal of existing regulations that protect federal lands, cultural heritage, and environmental resources. They argue that such protections are necessary for tribal sovereignty and environmental health, and they demand that any regulatory changes adhere to mandatory government-to-government consultation with Native Nations.

Rebecca Simon, an archaeologist and educator, opposes any modifications or repeals of existing regulations that would weaken protections for federal lands, specifically citing NAGPRA, NHPA, NEPA, ARPA, and the ESA. She argues that these regulations are necessary for environmental health, cultural heritage protection, and maintaining government-to-government relationships with Native Nations.

Mackenzie Johnson, an individual using a template from the Association on American Indian Affairs, opposes the modification or repeal of regulations that protect federal lands, cultural heritage, and environmental resources. The commenter argues that such regulations are necessary to uphold the Department of the Interior's trust obligations to Native Nations and calls for the completion of the STOP Act rulemaking.

The commenter argues that the current definition of "research" under NAGPRA is flawed because it may allow institutions to avoid performing necessary physical inventories of poorly documented collections. They advocate for physical inventories to be classified as a separate requirement rather than "research" to ensure accuracy and prevent the accidental misidentification of ancestral remains.

The South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology Office of the State Archaeologist (SCIAA OSA) opposes the modification or repeal of existing regulations that protect federal lands, cultural heritage, and environmental resources. They argue that these regulations are necessary to fulfill trust obligations to Native Nations and should not be weakened to lower costs for extractive industries.