25 C.F.R. § 900.22

For what reasons can the Secretary decline a proposal?

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

The Secretary may only decline to approve a proposal for one of five specific reasons:

(a) The service to be rendered to the Indian beneficiaries of the particular program or function to be contracted will not be satisfactory;

(b) Adequate protection of trust resources is not assured;

(c) The proposed project or function to be contracted for cannot be properly completed or maintained by the proposed contract;

(d) The amount of funds proposed under the contract is in excess of the applicable funding level for the contract, as determined under section 106(a) of the Act; or

(e) The program, function, service, or activity (or a portion thereof) that is the subject of the proposal is beyond the scope of programs, functions, services, or activities covered under section 102(a)(1) of the Act because the proposal includes activities that cannot lawfully be carried out by the contractor.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 13 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2007–2024 · leading case: Navajo Nation v. DOI, 57 F.4th 285 (D.C. Cir. 2023).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Navajo Nation v. DOI, 57 F.4th 285 (D.C. Cir. 2023). · cites it 4× “See also 25 C.F.R. § 900.22 (repeating section 5321(a)(2)’s declination criteria).”

Navajo Health Found.-Sage Mem'l Hosp., Inc. v. Burwell, 100 F. Supp. 3d 1122 (D.N.M. 2015). · cites it 3× “§ 450f(a)(2))(internal quotation marks omitted). According to Sage Hospital, § 450f(a)(2) provides the only permissible grounds for the NAIHS to decline a tribal organization’s contract proposal.”

Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe v. Kempthorne, 496 F. Supp. 2d 1059 (D.S.D. 2007). · cites it 2× “§ 450f; 25 C.F.R. § 900.22 . Dr. Farlee’s letter failed *1065 to advise the Tribe of its appeal rights or to include a specific finding clearly demonstrating that one of the declination conditions exists.”

Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation v. United States, 637 F. Supp. 2d 25 (D.D.C. 2009). “§ 450f(a)(2), (4); see also 25 C.F.R. § 900.22 . The IH-CIA provides that the proposal at issue was part of Three Tribes’ self-determination contract.”

Navajo Health Found.-Sage Mem'l Hosp., Inc. v. Burwell, 220 F. Supp. 3d 1190 (D.N.M. 2016). “See 25 C.F.R. § 900.22 (setting forth the same declination criteria).”

Navajo Nation v. United States Dep't of the Interior (D.D.C. 2022). · cites it 6× “In response to each of those proposals, the BIA issued a timely declination letter pursuant to 25 C.F.R. § 900.22 , explaining that the amount sought by the Nation far exceeded the applicable funding level for the respective contract and, thus, the Secretarial amount.”

Aleutian Pribilof Islands Ass'n v. Kempthorne, 537 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2008). “§§ 450f(a)(1), (a)(2); see also 25 C.F.R. § 900.22 (“[t]he Secretary may only decline to approve a proposal for one of five specific reasons”).”

Aleutian Pribilof Islands Ass'n v. Kempthorne, 537 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2008). “§§ 450f(a)(1), (a)(2); see also 25 C.F.R. § 900.22 ("[t]he Secretary may only decline to approve a proposal for one of five specific reasons").”

Navajo Health Found.-Sage Mem'l Hosp., Inc. v. Burwell, 256 F. Supp. 3d 1186 (D.N.M. 2015). · cites it 2× “See 25 C.F.R. § 900.22 (setting forth the same declination criteria).”

Navajo Nation v. Dep't of the Interior (D.D.C. 2021). “§ 5321 (a)(2); see also 25 C.F.R. § 900.22 . These provisions further require that the Secretary’s factual findings must be “clearly demonstrate[d]” and his legal conclusions must be “supported by a controlling legal authority.”

United States v. Cleveland, 356 F. Supp. 3d 1215 (D.N.M. 2018). “See 25 C.F.R. § 900.22 (setting forth the same declination criteria).”

Show all 13 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.