1262, 1266 n. 7 (D.C.Cir.2008). Instead, "the canon of construction in favor of Indian tribes can trump the deference to agencies’ interpretations courts ordinarily give under Chevron and its progeny.” Maniilaq Ass'n, 72 F.Supp.3d at 232. There is good reason to believe that the canon trumps Auer deference as well. See Cobell v. Norton, 240 F.3d 1081, 1103 (D.C.Cir.2001) (" ‘Whenever doubt or ambiguity exists in federal statutes or regulations, such doubt is resolved in favor of the tribes.’ ” (emphasis added and brackets omitted) (quoting Jicarilla Apache Tribe v. Supron Energy Corp., 728 F.2d 1555, 1563 (10th Cir.1984) (Seymour, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part)); see also Navajo Health Found.— Sage Mem'l Hosp., Inc. v. Burwell, 100 F.Supp.3d 1122, 1175-76 (D.N.M.2015) (<HOLDING>). Indeed, such deference may be doubly
holding that an agencys interpretation of its own regulations is entitled to deference holding regulations entitled to chevron deference holding ceq regulations entitled to substantial deference holding that agency interpretation which is reasonable is entitled to deference holding that the secretary is not entitled to deference when construing the acts implementing regulations