[Senate Hearing 118-551]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 118-551
S. 4444, S. 4633, S. 4643, S. 4705, S. 4998
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
SEPTEMBER 25, 2024
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
58-426 PDF WASHINGTON : 2025
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii, Chairman
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska, Vice Chairman
MARIA CANTWELL, Washington JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota
JON TESTER, Montana STEVE DAINES, Montana
CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
TINA SMITH, Minnesota MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota
BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico
Jennifer Romero, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Amber Ebarb, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on September 25, 2024............................... 1
Statement of Senator Cortez Masto................................ 6
Statement of Senator Daines...................................... 3
Statement of Senator Heinrich.................................... 4
Statement of Senator Kelly....................................... 6
Statement of Senator Lujan....................................... 3
Statement of Senator Murkowski................................... 2
Statement of Senator Schatz...................................... 1
Statement of Senator Tester...................................... 5
Witnesses
Kucate, Hon. Arden, Governor, Zuni Tribe......................... 46
Prepared statement........................................... 48
Lehi, Jr., Hon. Johnny, Vice President, San Juan Southern Paiute
Tribe.......................................................... 44
Prepared statement........................................... 45
Lewis, Hon. Tanya, Chairwoman, Yavapai Apache Nation............. 50
Prepared statement........................................... 52
Newland, Hon. Bryan, Assistant Secretary, Indian Affairs, U.S.
Department of the Interior..................................... 8
Prepared statement........................................... 9
Nuvangyaoma, Hon. Timothy L., Chairman, Hopi Tribe............... 34
Prepared statement........................................... 36
Nygren, Hon. Buu, President, Navajo Nation....................... 25
Prepared statement........................................... 27
White Clay, Hon. Frank, Chairman, Crow Nation.................... 22
Prepared statement........................................... 24
Appendix
Anderson, Elizabeth K., P.E., New Mexico State Engineer, prepared
statement...................................................... 71
Burman, Brenda, General Manager, Central Arizona Water
Conservation District, prepared statement...................... 73
Buschatzke, Thomas, Director, Arizona Department of Water
Resources, prepared statement.................................. 74
Daggett, Hon. Becky, Mayor, City of Flagstaff, prepared statement 81
Letters, submitted for the record............................... 95-166
Meyers, Leslie A., Associate General Manager/Chief Water
Resources and Services Executive, Salt River Valley Water
Users' Association/Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement
and Power
District, prepared statement................................... 84
Mitchell, Becky, Governor's Representative; Commissioner, Upper
Colorado River Commission, prepared statement.................. 94
Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Mark Kelly to
Hon. Bryan Newland............................................. 184
Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Ben Ray Lujan to:
Hon. Bryan Newland........................................... 182
Hon. Buu Nygren.............................................. 183
Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to:
Hon. Johnny Lehi, Jr......................................... 166
Hon. Tanya Lewis............................................. 170
Hon. Bryan Newland........................................... 177
Hon. Timothy L. Nuvangyaoma.................................. 176
Hon. Buu Nygren.............................................. 181
Hon. Frank White Clay........................................ 183
San Juan Water Commission, prepared statement.................... 89
S. 4444, S. 4633, S. 4643, S. 4705, S. 4998
----------
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2024
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Indian Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:49 p.m. in room
628, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Brian Schatz,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN SCHATZ,
U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII
The Chairman. Good afternoon. During today's legislative
hearing, we will consider five bills: S. 4444, Crow Revenue
Act; S. 4633, Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Act of 2024; S. 4643, Zuni Indian Tribe Water Rights
Settlement Act of 2024; S. 4705, Yavapai Apache Nation Water
Rights Settlement Act; and S. 4998, the Navajo Nation Rio San
Jose Stream System Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024.
S. 4444 was introduced by Senator Daines. This bill would
transfer subsurface mineral interests located within the Crow
Tribe's reservation and currently held by a private owner, the
Hope Family Trust, to the Crow Tribe, and transfer the Hope
Family Trust Federal surface land and subsurface mineral rights
on BLM lands in the Bull Mountains located outside of the Crow
Tribe's reservation.
S. 4633 was introduced by Senators Kelly and Sinema. This
bill would resolve the water rights claims of the Navajo
Nation, Hopi Tribe and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe in the
Colorado River Basin in Arizona, authorize $5 billion in
mandatory funding to implement the settlement and create a
5,400-acre reservation for the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe
in Arizona.
S. 4643 was introduced by Senators Heinrich and Lujan. The
bill would resolve the Zuni Tribe's water rights claims in the
Zuni River Basin in New Mexico, authorize $685 million in
mandatory funding for its implementation, and provide for the
protection of Zuni Salt Lake, a place with great spiritual and
cultural significance to the tribe by placing approximately
4,800 acres of land surrounding the lake into trust and
withdrawing additional Federal lands from future development.
S. 4705 was introduced by Senators Kelly and Sinema. The
bill would resolve the Yavapai Apache Nation Water Rights
Claims in the Verde River watershed in Arizona, which is part
of the lower basin of the Colorado River, authorize $1 billion
in mandatory funding to implement the agreement, and authorize
a land exchange in Arizona between the Yavapai Apache and the
U.S. Forest Service.
Lastly, S. 4998, Senator Heinrich and Senator Lujan's bill,
would resolve the Navajo Nation's water claims in the Rio San
Jose Basin in New Mexico, authorize nearly $224 million in
mandatory funding to implement the settlement, and authorize
the expansion of the Navajo-Gallup Water Supply Project to
serve Navajo communities in the Rio San Jose Basin that are
outside of its current service area.
Before I turn to Vice Chair Murkowski for her opening
statement, I would like to extend a welcome and thank our
witnesses for joining us today. I look forward to your
testimony and to our discussion.
Vice Chair Murkowski?
STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate
the hearing on these important bills. I am going to be brief
again.
Each of these bills would address longstanding water and
lands issues while also promoting tribal self-determination in
water resources, housing, and tribal energy sovereignty. I want
to commend and thank the parties; I know you have put a lot of
work behind each of these respective matters and I appreciate
the work and the effort that has gone into that.
Starting first with S. 4633, this settlement bill would
resolve decades of litigation that has locked up the water
rights of the Navajo Nation, the Hope Tribe and the Southern
San Juan Paiute Tribe to the Colorado River. If enacted, this
bill would authorize the construction of a drinking water
delivery system to provide piped water to hundreds of Native
homes for the first time ever. This is significant.
I must say that I am concerned about a big price tag, over
$5 billion. But I look forward to hearing more about the
settlement and how that money will be spent at the hearing.
Finally, I want to mention S. 4444, the Crow Revenue Act.
This bill is modeled on the Northern Cheyenne Lands Act from
2014 that we enacted into law from this Committee. It would
authorize the transfer of Federal coal in the Bull Mountains
Mine to the Hope Family and in exchange, require the Hope
Family to transfer their coal rights within the boundaries of
the Crow Reservation to the Crow Tribe. This exchange is
predicated on the Hope Family entering into a revenue sharing
agreement with the Crow Tribe. These revenues would help the
tribe offset the loss of royalties that have been caused by the
closure of the mine.
The Crow Tribe is located in the Power Basin, the largest
coal-producing region in the Country. It has long depended on
coal-mining royalties and tax revenue to fund essential tribal
government services for its neighbors, including care for the
elders.
I know that there are some who are concerned that this
would continue coal production. But we are talking about the
Crow Tribe, which has a sovereign right to develop its economic
assets. So I am looking forward to hearing the views of our
panelists today on this issue and these water settlement bills
that are before us.
Again, I really want to recognize the longstanding efforts
of so many who have gone into it. I know it is not easy, and I
commend you.
The Chairman. We have a number of opening statements and
members wishing to introduce the testifiers, just so you know
the run of show according to my script. We will start with
Senator Lujan, then Daines, then Heinrich, then Kelly, then
Cortez Masto. I am not sure exactly why, Catherine, you are the
last, but it will be all right.
Senator Lujan?
STATEMENT OF HON. BEN RAY LUJAN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Lujan. Thank you, Chair Schatz, and Vice Chair
Murkowski, for holding this important legislative hearing
today, especially given the unprecedented efforts by tribes to
have Congress ratify their Indian water rights settlements
after years, sometimes many decades, prayers, and negotiations.
I have the honor today of introducing Governor Kucate, of
the Zuni Pueblo. Governor, thank you for all of your leadership
in helping to advance the Zuni Indian Tribal Water Rights
Settlement Act of 2024 this Congress. The Governor has served
in this position since 2023, and he is also the Secretary of
the All Pueblo Council of Governors, which represents the 20
Pueblo Nations of New Mexico and Texas.
The Governor was previously a member of the tribal council
for over 18 years and served two terms as the chairman of the
advisory council and historic preservation. Prior, the Governor
served in different roles, including working with the Zuni
radio station, its housing authority and dedicated himself to
Zuni language revitalization efforts.
The Governor has dedicated his career to protecting the
Zuni way of life, its people and I am glad that he is here
today to testify on behalf of this historic bill that I co-lead
with Senator Heinrich, which will protect Zuni's water rights
in the Zuni River and its sacred Salt Lake.
Governor, I welcome you and I thank you for your steadfast
leadership on this effort and so many others.
Mr. Chairman, thank you, and I yield.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Senator Daines?
STATEMENT OF HON. STEVE DAINES,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA
Senator Daines. Chairman Schatz, thank you, and Vice Chair
Murkowski.
I am proud to be able to introduce Chairman Frank White
Clay of the Crow Nation. I have memories going back to grade
school, Longfellow in Bozeman, when the Old Coyotes lived about
three doors down. And Barney, Rachel's dad, was a Crow code
talker. I had no idea that we would be sitting here someday, me
as a Senator, you as the chairman, having this conversation
about Indian Country and the Crow Tribe, but it is an honor to
have you here, sir. Thank you.
The chairman has been a fierce proponent of tribal
sovereignty and self-determination. This year alone, the
chairman and I have worked extensively to craft and push
forward the Crow Tribe Water Rights Settlement Amendments Act,
which passed the Committee just last week, then the Crow
Revenue Act, which we will be hearing more about today.
Chairman Schatz, thank you for your help in getting this
hearing set up for today.
As I am sure the chairman will tell us all shortly, the
Crow Revenue Act is critical for the Crow Tribe. This bill
couldn't come really at a more important time. With the recent
closure of the Aps alooke mine, the Crow Tribe will be able to
supplement the loss of that revenue with the new revenues in
this bill. This is a win for the Crow Tribe, it is a win for
our local communities, and it is also a win for the State.
Which is why I am proud to say that we have tremendous
local support. Statewide, elected officials as well as the
affected counties, and as the chairman of the Crow Tribe will
say it soon, I will not speak for you, you speak very well for
yourself, Mr. Chairman, I think you are going to hear that from
the Crow Tribe as well.
I am excited to hear more from Chairman White Clay. Thanks
for making the long journey back to D.C. to represent your
people here in Washington.
The Chairman. Senator Heinrich?
STATEMENT OF HON. MARTIN HEINRICH,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Heinrich. Thank you, Chairman Schatz and Vice Chair
Murkowski. I want to start by thank you both for considering
the Indian Bufalo Management Act a few minutes ago. That
legislation will further support growth of tribal bison herds.
I am very grateful for the Committee's support.
Turning to the hearing agenda, I want to thank you for
holding this hearing on the Zuni Indian Tribe Water Rights
Settlement Act, and the Navajo Nation Rio San Jose Stream
System Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024. That is a mouthful.
But two incredibly important bills to the future of water for
New Mexico's tribes.
I am pleased to welcome the Governor of Zuni Pueblo, Arden
Kucate, who is here today to provide testimony on the Zuni
Water Rights Settlement Act. The Zuni people have been stewards
of the Zuni River Basin for millennia. Their traditional
agricultural practices and careful stewardship of water
sustained the tribe over thousands of years.
Unfortunately, the United States has failed to protect
Zuni's water rights, and has allowed their water to be diverted
to other purposes. Overuse of water in the Zuni Basin has
caused the Zuni people to suffer from a lack of water for their
community, their businesses, and their traditional agricultural
practices. This injustice continues today.
Without reliable access to clean water, it is difficult for
Zuni to attract new businesses that create jobs and revenues
for the tribe. This legislation would not only fully settle
Zuni's water rights claims in the Zuni River Basin. It would
also provide funding for several key water infrastructure
projects.
It is an opportunity for the United States to make the Zuni
Tribe whole for the water that they have always been entitled
to. It will support Zuni's traditional irrigation practice,
their people and their future business development in a manner
that builds resilience in the face of a drying climate.
This piece of legislation would also protect the Zuni Salt
Lake, a sacred place of great cultural significance to the Zuni
Tribe and others in the region.
I am also very happy to welcome the President of the Navajo
Nation, Dr. Buu Nygren, who is here to provide testimony for
the Navajo Nation Rio San Jose Stream System Water Rights
Settlement Act. This legislation would settle the water rights
of the Navajo Nation in the Rio San Jose Basin. It is the final
step in an adjudication process that began more than 40 years
ago. In that time, we have seen aridification of the Southwest
further strain water resources for tribes, including the Navajo
Nation, that don't have the resources to fully use their water
rights.
This settlement is an important step toward giving the
Navajo Nation an equal voice amongst water users in the
southwest. Today, there are more than 200 Navajo households
within the Rio San Jose and Rio Puerco Basins without access to
running water. These households instead have to rely on hauling
water.
The lack of reliable drinking water systems in these
communities contributed to the widespread health impacts of the
Covid-19 pandemic on the Navajo Nation, which took the lives of
far too many. I am committed to working with the Navajo Nation
to build a future where they have full access to their water
rights and this access to water will facilitate the
preservation of Navajo culture and tradition.
Both of these pieces of legislation would implement
settlement agreements that have been carefully negotiated
between the tribes, the State of New Mexico, neighboring water
users, and the United States. I want to thank all of the
parties for their tireless work in reaching settlements for
these basins, and of course, my colleague, Senator Lujan, who
is co-sponsoring these settlements along with me.
The failure of the United States to work with tribal
governments to ensure that they could use the water that they
have always owned, as reverberated through generations. And it
has a direct impact on the well-being of tribal members
today.It is time we make this right for Zuni and for the Navajo
Nation. I want to say thank you to the entire Committee for
your consideration today.
I yield back my time.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Senator Tester?
STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA
Senator Tester. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to take
this opportunity to welcome Frank White Clay. Frank, we
appreciate your being here again. He is back fighting for the
Crow people.
I want to point something out. We all on this Committee
work with Native American tribes all the time. The Crows have
had their challenges with past administrations. But Frank has
stepped up in a big, big way, cleaned up what I think was an
incredible mess, and has the tribe going in the right
direction. Frank, we appreciate your leadership.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Tester.
Senator Cortez Masto?
STATEMENT OF HON. CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Chairman Schatz and Vice
Chair Murkowski, for holding this hearing today on these
important bills before the Committee.
I do want to talk a little about S. 4633, the Northeastern
Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024. This is an
important bill. I support it. I agree that it is past time we
reach fair and equitable resolutions to some of the
longstanding water management issues in the southwest. It is
important we get the details right.
But I do believe we need to ensure there is collaboration
with stakeholders across the Colorado River Basin. I have a
letter for the record, Mr. Chairman, from the Southern Nevada
Water Authority in my State which also supports this
legislation. But because of the intricacies and nuances
resulting from the inter-basin and interstate nature of the
Colorado River with the tribal lands, it believes that
collaboration is key. That is all we are looking for, is to
avoid any unintended consequences and to remain consistent with
the compact in the Colorado River.
SNWA is respectfully proposing that Congress, the basin
State, and the tribes work together on technical modifications
to S. 4633. That is what I will be looking for. So I would like
to submit this letter for the record.
The Chairman. Without objection, so ordered.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you.
I am committed to working with everyone to get this done.
So I appreciate the tireless effort that has been put into it,
and I know what that is like. So please include us at the table
to make sure that this bill passes.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Senator Kelly?
STATEMENT OF HON. MARK KELLY,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA
Senator Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
thank you and the Vice Chair for including the Northeastern
Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act at the Yavapai
Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act in today's hearing.
It is my honor to introduce Navajo President Buu Nygren, Hopi
Chairman Timothy Nuvangyaoma, Yavapai Apache Nation Chairwoman
Tanya Lewis, and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe Vice President,
Johnny Lehi.
President Nygren was elected to serve as the tenth Navajo
Nation president in November of 2022. President Nygren has a
doctorate from the University of Southern California. He has
been involved closely with leading the Navajo Nation through
the negotiation of the Northeastern Arizona Water Rights
Settlement.
Chairman Nuvangyaoma has led the Hopi Council since his
election as chairman in 2018. He served as a tireless advocate
for the Hopi, and has been instrumental in negotiations that
enable the Northeastern Arizona Water Rights Settlement to come
together.
Chairwoman Lewis is an important voice in the Verde Valley.
Before her election as chairwoman, she served as Vice Chair and
has been on the council since 2010. She has been personally
involved in working with parties across the Verde Valey to come
to consensus and develop a settlement that is designed for the
future.
Vice President Lehi, Jr. currently serves as the Vice
President of the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe. He was first
elected to the council in May of 2022, and served as President
prior to his current role. Vice President Lehi is serving on
the council in the footsteps of his father, Johnny Lehi, Sr.,
who served on the tribal council when the council was
originally recognized in December of 1989.
President Nygren, Chairman Nuvangyaoma, and Vice President
Lehi, I want to commend you for your commitment to your
communities. The fact that you have all come together after
decades and multiple attempts at a settlement is truly
historic. You and your teams should be recognized for the
dedication to this large and complex settlement.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement act
will bring safe and reliable drinking water to your tribal
communities in Arizona, establishing a homeland for the San
Juan Southern Paiute Tribe. It is important to note than on the
Navajo Nation, approximately 30 percent of homes do not have
access to safe and reliable drinking water.
This settlement is an enormous step forward for securing
your tribe's water future and providing certainty for Arizona
and the entire Colorado River Basin. Without the settlement, a
cloud of uncertainty will remain over tribal water claims in
the Colorado River Basin, and tens of thousands of tribal
members will continue to struggle to meet their basic needs.
Chairwoman Lewis, I want to thank you and everyone who has
been a part of the Yavapai Apache Nation settlement process for
your dedication. The nation and the parties have worked hard
over 15 years to complete the settlement.
Working with the Bureau of Reclamation, the parties
evaluated numerous water sources and potential infrastructure
options to achieve a reliable and sustainable water supply to
meet the nation's current and future permanent tribal homeland
needs.
Ultimately, the deliberative C.C. Cragin water through the
Cragin Verde pipeline is the best option. The settlement
protects local groundwater aquifers from over-pumping and
thereby preserves these resources that are needed to meet the
nation's water demands under its settlement budget. By reducing
the capture of groundwater that feeds the Verde River, it also
protects base flow that supports the Verde River.
So this settlement helps to ensure Arizona's water future
both in the valley and downstream. I urge my colleagues to
support both of these important bills as they move through the
Committee process.
Again, Chairman Schatz and Vice Chair Murkowski, I want to
thank you for holding today's hearing on these two important
and historic bills.
The Chairman. Finally, we are pleased to welcome again to
the Committee probably the most frequent of frequent flyers,
the Assistant Secretary of the Interior, Bryan Newland.
Before we begin, I want to remind our witnesses that your
full written testimony will be made part of the official
hearing record. So we would just ask you to try to confine your
remarks to five minutes or fewer, so that we have time for
questions.
Assistant Secretary Newland, please proceed with your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF HON. BRYAN NEWLAND, ASSISTANT
SECRETARY, INDIAN AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR
Mr. Newland. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am trying to rack
up those miles.
Aanii boozhoo, good afternoon, Chairman Schatz, Vice Chair
Murkowski, members of the Committee. I am pleased to be here on
behalf of the Department of the Interior to present our
testimony on a number of Indian water rights settlement bills,
as well as the Crow Revenue Act today.
The United States has a trust obligation to protect the
continued existence of Idnian tribes. This means ensuring that
each tribe has a protected homeland where its citizens can
maintain their tribal existence and way of life. Water is
essential to meeting this obligation.
S. 4633, the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Act, will provide reliable and safe water for the
Navajo Nation, the Hope Tribe and the San Juan Southern Paiute
Tribe. The settlement authorizes $5 billion for essential water
development and delivery projects. It would establish a
homeland for the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe and it would
allow the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe to lease their
water.
Approval of this settlement would mark the resolution of
longstanding claims and conflicts over water in northeastern
Arizona. It would be an historic milestone in our Nation's
efforts to ensure access to water for Native people in their
homelands, and it would benefit so many others in this drought-
stricken region.
The department supports the goals and purposes of S. 4633.
Our written statement highlights some of the important issues
that still need to be addressed in the legislative language to
ensure this settlement can be successfully implemented. That
includes working with Congress to ensure there is enough
funding to support the projects in the settlement.
But I want to be clear on the bigger picture. We are closer
than we have ever been before in reaching a final settlement
here. We are prepared to work with the sponsors, with the
tribes and other parties to address those issues, so we can
fulfill our trust obligations to these tribes and have the
settlement enacted in this Congress.
The Yavapai Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act, S.
4705, authorizes more than $1 billion to build and maintain
essential water infrastructure for the tribe. The settlement
would provide the nation with confirmed rights of 4,600 acre-
feet per year of water, promote water conservation, and protect
the flow of the Verde River. S. 4705 also includes a land
exchange with the Forest Service to lands that are contiguous
with the Middle Verde Reservation.
The department supports the goals of this bill and we
recognize that further discussions need to be had regarding the
cost and size and scope of this project.
S. 4998, in combination with S. 595, would settle all
tribal rights in the Rio San Jose Basin, bringing stability to
the basin for all water users. S. 4998 would provide funding to
allow the Navajo Nation to plan water infrastructure for
current and long-term water needs of its people and the
department supports this bill.
The Department of the Interior is also pleased to support
S. 4643, the Zuni Indian Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act.
This bill follows decades of litigation and is the product of
more than a decade of good faith negotiations. S. 4643 is
designed to meet the Zuni Tribe's current and long-term needs
for water by providing trust funds to be used by the tribe
according to its own decision. Rather than committing the Zuni
Tribe or the United States to construct specific projects, the
bill would allow the tribe to make decisions regarding when,
where, and how to develop water infrastructure on its lands.
S. 4444 would convey approximately 4,600 acres of the Hope
Family Trust Mineral Estate located within the boundaries of
the Crow Reservation to the Crow Tribe. It would also convey
approximately 4,500 acres of mineral estate and approximately
940 acres of surface estate managed by the BLM to the Hope
Family Trust.
The bill requires that the Crow Tribe notify the Secretary
when the tribe and the Hope Family Trust have agreed on a
formula for revenue sharing from development of the minerals
conveyed to the tribe, should they be developed at a later
date. The department supports this bill's goals of
consolidating tribal ownership of resources on the reservation
and also providing an additional source of revenue for the Crow
Tribe.
We would like to work with the sponsor on some
modifications that we believe would improve this bill.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to
provide the department's views on these water bills and the
Crow Revenue Act. I look forward to answering any questions you
may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Newland follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Bryan Newland, Assistant Secretary, Indian
Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior
Chairman Schatz, Vice Chairman Murkowski, and members of the
Committee. My name is Bryan Newland, and I am the Assistant Secretary
for Indian Affairs at the Department of the Interior (Department).
Thank you for the opportunity to present testimony on the following
bills concerning Indian water rights settlements and S. 4444, the Crow
Revenue Act.
Indian Water Rights Settlements Bills
At the core of the United States' trust and treaty obligations is
our responsibility to ensure that Indian Tribes have the right to
continue to exist in their homelands. Everyone should understand that
water is essential to meet this obligation. Without access to water in
their homelands, Tribes cannot remain in their homelands, and we cannot
fulfill our most solemn obligation to American Indian and Alaska Native
people.
The Biden Administration recognizes that water is a sacred and
valuable resource for Tribal Nations and that long-standing water
crises continue to undermine public health and economic development in
Indian Country. This Administration strongly supports the resolution of
Indian water rights claims through negotiated settlements. Indian water
settlements help to ensure that Tribal Nations have safe, reliable
water supplies; improve environmental and health concerns on
reservations; enable economic growth; promote Tribal sovereignty and
self-sufficiency; and help advance the United States' trust
relationship with Tribes. At the same time, water rights settlements
have the potential to end decades of controversy and contention among
Tribal Nations and neighboring communities and promote cooperation in
the management of water resources.
Indian water rights settlements play a pivotal role in this
Administration's commitment to putting equity at the center of
everything we do to improve the lives of everyday people--including
Tribal Nations. We have a clear charge from President Biden and
Secretary Haaland to improve water access and water quality on Tribal
lands. Access to water is fundamental to human existence, economic
development, and the future of communities--especially Tribal
communities.
To that end, the Biden Administration's policy on negotiated Indian
water settlements continues to be based on the following principles:
the United States will participate in settlements consistent with its
legal and moral trust responsibilities to Tribal Nations; Tribes should
receive equivalent benefits for rights, which they, and the United
States as trustee, may release as part of the settlement; Tribes should
realize value from confirmed water rights resulting from a settlement;
and settlements should contain appropriate cost-sharing proportionate
to the benefits received by all parties benefiting from the settlement.
In addition, settlements should provide finality and certainty to all
parties involved.
Congressional enactment of these settlements should be considered
within the context of all Tribal priorities and the availability of all
resources. That is why the Administration encourages Congress to
consider mandatory funding for this and other pending Indian water
rights settlements, which was also requested in the 2025 President's
Budget, included in the enacted Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and
already proposed in some of the bills we are discussing today.
S. 4633, Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of
2024
S. 4633, the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement
Act of 2024, would, among other things, approve and provide
authorizations to carry out the settlement of water rights claims of
the Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe, and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe in
Arizona. The Department strongly supports the goals of S. 4633 and is
committed to working with the Tribes and the Committee to resolve
outstanding concerns discussed below.
I. Background
A. Historic Context
The Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe, and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe
have occupied lands in northeastern Arizona since time immemorial.
Today, the Navajo Reservation encompasses over 17 million acres in
northeastern Arizona, New Mexico, and southeastern Utah. Approximately
10 million acres of the Navajo Reservation are within the State of
Arizona. Of the Nation's more than 400,000 members, approximately
95,000 live on the Navajo Reservation in Arizona. There are over 540
allotments within the exterior boundaries of the Navajo Reservation in
Arizona. Approximately 470 of these allotments were created out of the
public domain and issued to individual Navajo Indians under section 4
of the General Allotment Act and similar authorities. The Reservation
was later expanded to surround these public domain allotments. The
remaining allotments within the exterior boundaries of the Navajo
Reservation were created out of Reservation lands pursuant to section 1
of the General Allotment Act. In addition, there are 51 public domain
allotments issued to individual Navajo Indians located outside the
exterior boundaries of the Navajo Reservation in Arizona.
The Hopi Reservation is made up of approximately 1.5 million acres
located in Arizona and entirely within the exterior boundaries of the
Navajo Reservation. There are approximately 15,000 members of the Hopi
Tribe, of whom approximately 9,000 live on the Hopi Reservation. There
are 11 public domain allotments on the Hopi Reservation at Moenkopi.
These allotments were issued to individual Hopi Indians under section 4
of the General Allotment Act before lands at Moenkopi were added to the
Hopi Reservation.
The San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe has occupied lands within the
Navajo Reservation in Arizona and Utah since time immemorial but does
not yet have a reservation for its exclusive use. In 1986, the San Juan
Southern Paiute petitioned the Department for recognition as a
Federally recognized Tribe through the Federal Acknowledgement Process.
In December 1989, the Department approved the petition and recognized
the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe as an Indian Tribe. It is the only
so-called ``landless'' Federally recognized Tribe in Arizona. In 2000,
the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe and the Navajo Nation entered into
an inter-Tribal treaty to resolve land disputes between the two Tribes
and finally establish a Reservation, consisting of a Northern Area in
Utah and a Southern Area in Arizona, for the exclusive use and benefit
of the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe. The inter-Tribal treaty requires
Congressional approval to become effective. S. 4633 would ratify and
confirm the treaty and thereby establish a 5,400-acre San Juan Southern
Paiute Reservation.
B. Water Resources of the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San
Juan Southern Paiute Tribe
The Navajo Reservation in Arizona encompasses lands within the
Colorado River Basin, including approximately 5.7 million acres within
the Little Colorado River drainage, approximately 3.2 million acres
within the San Juan River drainage, and approximately 1.1 million acres
within the Colorado River Mainstem drainage. The Hopi Reservation and
proposed San Juan Southern Paiute Southern Area are located entirely
within the Little Colorado River drainage in the Lower Colorado River
Basin.
All of the Tribes rely primarily on groundwater from the Navajo
(``N'') and Coconino (``C'') Aquifers to satisfy their water needs.
Surface water is primarily used for traditional farming practices and
stockwatering; it is too unreliable to satisfy domestic and municipal
needs. Lack of access to clean drinking water is pervasive on the
Reservations. According to some estimates, up to 30 percent of homes on
the Navajo Reservation in Arizona lack indoor plumbing. The situation
on the Hopi Reservation and San Juan Southern Paiute lands is similar
to that on the Navajo Reservation. Many Tribal members from all three
Tribes must haul potable water to their homes to satisfy basic needs
like drinking, cooking, bathing, and cleaning. Sometimes the distances
traveled to haul water are staggering.
C. Litigation and Settlement Negotiation
Since 1979, an adjudication has been ongoing to resolve water
rights claims in the Little Colorado River drainage. Over 13,000 claims
have been filed by over 5,000 claimants. In 1988, the LCR adjudication
judge appointed a ``settlement committee'' to resolve claims for all
Tribes within the adjudication boundaries. Thereafter, in 1991, the
Department of the Interior established an LCR Negotiation Team. Over
the decades, negotiations have progressed at varying levels of
intensity and with various levels of success. Meanwhile, litigation of
the Tribes' water rights in the LCR adjudication has continued and in
recent years has increased in intensity.
Recognizing that litigation would not address the needs on the
Tribes or the interests of the State parties, on October 23, 2023,
leadership from the Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe, Department of the
Interior, State of Arizona, and other settlement parties met in
Phoenix, Arizona and made commitments to work in good faith to reach a
negotiated water rights settlement of the Navajo Nation and Hopi
Tribe's claims to water in Arizona. By January 2024, the parties were
meeting at least once, and often multiple times, per week and were
making significant progress toward a negotiated settlement. In February
2024, the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe began participating in the
negotiations. By late-April 2024, the Tribes and local parties had
reached agreement. In May 2024, all three Tribes passed resolutions in
support of the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement
Agreement (``Settlement Agreement''). Thereafter, attorneys
representing 35 local parties, including the State of Arizona, the
Central Arizona Water Conservation District (``CAWCD''), the Salt River
Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District and the Salt River
Valley Water Users' Association (``SRP''), various Arizona cities and
towns, irrigation districts, and ranchers, delivered a letter in
support of the Settlement Agreement and proposed Federal legislation to
the Arizona Congressional Delegation. The Settlement Agreement has been
formally approved by the respective boards of SRP, CAWCD, Flagstaff
City Council, and the Arizona Game and Fish Commission.
II. Proposed Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement
S. 4633 would resolve all the water rights claims in Arizona of the
Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe;
ratify and confirm the Settlement Agreement among the Tribes, the State
of Arizona, and other local parties; establish a Reservation for the
San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe by ratifying and confirming the inter-
Tribal treaty between the Navajo Nation and the San Juan Southern
Paiute Tribe; authorize the Secretary of the Interior to sign the
Settlement Agreement; and authorize funds to implement the settlement,
including for the development of water infrastructure on the
Reservations.
S. 4633 would ratify and confirm the water rights of the Navajo
Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, as
defined in the Settlement Agreement. By ratifying the Settlement
Agreement, S. 4633 recognizes each Tribe's rights to all surface water
and groundwater on its respective Reservation in Arizona, subject to an
inter-Tribal agreement between the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe
concerning the N Aquifer, springs, and shared washes. In addition, S.
4633 would allocate Arizona Colorado River Water to the Navajo Nation
and the Hopi Tribe, including Lower Basin and Upper Basin water.
Consistent with the Settlement Agreement, S. 4633 would confirm the
Navajo Nation's right to 44,700 acre-feet per year (afy) of Arizona
Upper Basin Colorado River water and 3,600 afy of Arizona Fourth
Priority Lower Basin Colorado River water and the Hopi Tribe's right to
2,300 afy of Arizona Upper Basin Colorado River water and 4,178 afy of
Arizona Fourth Priority Lower Basin Colorado River water. The agreement
would allow the Navajo Nation and Hopi Tribe to use these allocations
of Colorado River water on their Reservations and lease the water in
both the Upper and Lower Basins in the State of Arizona. Finally, S.
4633 requires the Secretary to enter into water delivery contracts with
the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe for the delivery of these Arizona
Colorado River water allocations.
S. 4633 would also address water rights for allotments in various
ways. With respect to the 11 Hopi allotments at Moenkopi, S. 4633 would
ratify and confirm water rights consistent with the Special Master's
report in the Little Colorado River adjudication. The Special Master's
report largely approved the water rights claims made by the United
States on behalf of the public domain Hopi allottees at Moenkopi. The
Settlement Agreement requires the entry of a decree confirming those
rights.
S. 4633 would also resolve the water rights claims for allotments
of Reservation land within the exterior boundaries of the Navajo
Reservation by confirming the Navajo Section 1 Allottees' rights to a
just and equal distribution of water from the Navajo Nation's water
rights to fulfill the purposes for which the allotments were created.
S. 4633 would not, however, resolve the water rights claims of the more
than 520 allotments of the public domain made to Navajo Indians both
within and outside of the exterior boundaries of the Navajo
Reservation. While the Settlement Agreement makes certain limited
compromises on behalf of, and secures certain benefits to, the public
domain allotments, it does not fully resolve these rights. Instead,
Navajo public domain allotment water rights would be adjudicated later
in the Little Colorado River adjudication.
H.R 8940 would also resolve significant inter-Tribal issues such as
the management of water sources relied on by the Navajo Nation and the
Hopi Tribe and a land dispute between the Navajo Nation and the San
Juan Southern Paiute Tribe.
To address management of shared water sources, S. 4633 would
approve an agreement between the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe
regarding shared washes, springs, and the N-Aquifer. The inter-Tribal
agreement regarding the washes and springs would allow for certain
rehabilitation and betterment of historically irrigated acres and
improvement projects to restore washes and springs. With respect to the
N-Aquifer, the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe would agree to annual
pumping limits to protect the long-term viability of the N-Aquifer,
which is a vital source of water for both Tribes. S. 4633 would also
require the USGS to continue and expand its existing groundwater
monitoring program in the Black Mesa area. Monitoring by the USGS would
be used by the Tribes to inform future N-Aquifer management decisions.
To resolve the long-standing land dispute between the Navajo Nation
and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, S. 4633 would ratify an inter-
Tribal treaty which establishes a Reservation for the San Juan Southern
Paiute Tribe out of lands within the Navajo Reservation. This new San
Juan Southern Paiute Reservation would consist of 5,400 acres in
Arizona and Utah. In addition, the Navajo Nation, through the Navajo
Tribal Utility Authority, agrees to provide water service to San Juan
Southern Paiute Southern Area in Arizona.
S. 4633 would also protect the status quo for non-Indian water
users by ratifying an agreement by the Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe, San
Juan Southern Paiute Tribe not to object to, challenge, or assert
priority against certain off-Reservation water uses by non-Indians.
Importantly for the non-Indian parties involved, the Settlement
Agreement protects past, present, and future uses. The agreement not to
object to certain future water uses is uncommon in water rights
settlement. Here, however, the unique hydrology within the LCR drainage
minimizes on-Reservation and on-allotment impacts of off-Reservation
and off-Allotment surface water uses. With respect to off-Reservation
groundwater use, the Settlement recognizes two buffer zones within
which the Tribes and the United States, acting as trustee, retain their
right to object to, dispute, challenge, or assert priority against off-
Reservation groundwater uses if those groundwater uses do not satisfy
certain criteria. Groundwater uses that meet the specified criteria
within the buffer zones are protected from objection, dispute,
challenge, and assertions of priority by the Tribe and the United
States, as trustee. In exchange for this and other benefits, non-Indian
parties agree to some restrictions on the development of future off-
Reservation water uses and also agree not to object to certain elements
of the water rights claims to be filed on behalf of public domain
allotments outside the boundaries of the Navajo Reservation.
A centerpiece of S. 4633 is the iina ba-paa tuwaqat'si pipeline
(``Pipeline'') to be planned, designed, and constructed by the Bureau
of Reclamation (``Reclamation'') and substantially configured as
Alternative 5, Option B-100 of the Navajo-Hopi Value Planning Study--
Arizona (October 2020) (``Value Planning Study'' or ``Study''). S. 4633
provides that, upon completion, the Pipeline is to be owned, operated,
and maintained by the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe consistent with
an operation agreement to be negotiated by the two Tribes.
S. 4633 would authorize a Federal contribution of at least $5
billion dollars, to be indexed, toward settlement: $1.715 billion, plus
such sums as are necessary, for construction of the Pipeline and $3.285
billion for deposit in Trust Funds for the benefit of the Tribes.
As discussed in detail below, the Department expects completion of
the Pipeline to cost significantly more than $1.715 billion, thus
making the true Federal cost of S. 4633 currently uncertain given the
authorization for appropriation of ``such sums as are necessary.''
S. 4633 would establish three trust funds: Navajo Nation Trust
Fund, Hopi Tribe Trust Fund, and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe Trust
Fund. S. 4633 would establish a $2,746,700,000 trust fund for the
Navajo Nation. Of this amount, $2,369,200,000 is allocated to plan,
design, and construct water infrastructure projects; $229.5 million is
allocated to operate and maintain projects constructed using the trust
fund; $40 million is allocated to establish renewable energy projects
to support water infrastructure projects; $80 million is allocated to
modernize infrastructure on historically irrigated land and install
livestock wells; and $28 million is allocated to purchase land with
senior water rights in the Lower Basin in Arizona.
S. 4633 would establish a $508,500,000 trust fund for the Hopi
Tribe. Of this amount, $390 million is allocated to plan, design, and
construct groundwater infrastructure projects, including the expansion
of the Hopi Arsenic Mitigation Project; $87 million is allocated to
operate and maintain projects constructed using the trust fund; $30
million is allocated to modernize infrastructure on historically
irrigated land and install livestock wells; and $1.5 million is
allocated to purchase land with senior water rights in the Lower Basin
in Arizona.
S. 4633 would establish a $29,800,000 trust fund for the San Juan
Southern Paiute Tribe. Of this amount, $28 million is allocated to
plan, design, and construct groundwater infrastructure projects on the
San Juan Southern Paiute Southern Area; $1.5 million is allocated to
operate and maintain projects constructed using the trust fund and to
offset the imputed cost of delivery of water from the Pipeline to the
San Juan Southern Paiute Southern Area; and $300,000 is allocated to
modernize infrastructure on historically irrigated land and install
livestock wells on the San Juan Southern Paiute Southern Area.
III. Department of the Interior Position on S. 4633
The Department of the Interior commends the work of the Hopi Tribe,
Navajo Nation, San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, and the State of Arizona
to resolve longstanding water claims. The Department strongly supports
the goals of the legislation and is diligently working with the Tribes
and settlement parties to address outstanding issues in S. 4633 as
currently drafted. The Department, the Tribes and the settlement
parties have made progress on the Federal issues identified below and
are effectively working towards an amendment in the nature of a
substitute before markup on this bill. The parties have made
significant progress with S. 4633 and the Department believes this
settlement is on a trajectory to completion this term.
Federal Contribution
S. 4633 establishes an Implementation Fund to be used by the
Secretary, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, to plan, design,
and construct the Pipeline. S. 4633 provides $1.715 billion in
mandatory appropriations for this purpose. If the Pipeline cannot be
completed for $1.715 billion, S. 4633 authorizes the appropriation of
such funds as may be necessary to address the cost gap. This
authorization of such sums as are necessary raises significant concerns
for the Department. The amount of mandatory funding for the Pipeline
included in S. 4633 is based on a Value Planning Study completed by the
Department, with input from the Navajo Nation, and the Hopi Tribe.
Value planning studies are not intended to provide a true or accurate
estimate of the actual cost of project construction. Instead, Value
planning studies use preliminary-level cost estimates to compare the
relative costs of various infrastructure options. Value planning
studies provide useful information that allows options to be ranked
according to various measures, including from least to most expensive,
but should not be used as a basis for congressional authorization.
Moreover, the Department's experience with other infrastructure- based
settlements such as Aamodt, White Mountain Apache and Navajo-San Juan
have shown significant cost increases as planning and construction move
forward. With a substantial cost gap expected and a Pipeline completion
deadline of 2040, the Department has significant concerns about the
implications of covering the cost gap from its discretionary budget.
Further, the Department would highlight that completion of the pipeline
by the deadline of 2040 would prove challenging given the complexity of
the infrastructure and agreements, as well as the uncertainty in costs.
While S. 4633 allows the Tribes to use their trust funds to supplement
funding for the Pipeline, whether to do so is left to the Tribes'
discretion. Thus, as S. 4633 is currently drafted, whether the trust
funds would be used for this purpose is uncertain.
Operations Agreements
S. 4633 provides that ownership, operation, and maintenance of the
Pipeline will transfer to the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe upon
substantial completion. The bill further provides that the Tribes must
enter into an operations agreement, to be approved by the Secretary, as
a condition of substantial completion. The Department supports the
requirement that the Tribes enter into a Secretarially approved
operations agreement for operation of the Pipeline. However, as
drafted, S. 4633 would allow construction of the Pipeline to begin
before the execution of an operations agreement. The execution and
approval of such an operation agreement (or agreements) should be
required before the Department begins construction of the Pipeline as
postponing this agreement until after construction begins introduces
additional risk to the project and would reduce flexibility to make
modifications necessary to help reach agreement between the Tribes and
the Department.
Navajo Nation Tribal Water Code
Tribal management of water resources on Reservations is essential
to sovereignty. The Department supports and encourages this exercise of
sovereignty, including with respect to the rights of Reservation
allottees, provided that certain protections are guaranteed to the
allottees. Many enacted water rights settlements recognize the right of
allottees to a just and equal distribution of water to serve the
purposes of the allotment and require the Tribe to enact tribal water
code provisions that guarantee this right and provide a process by
which allottees may request a distribution of water. Water code
provisions enacted to satisfy these conditions become effective only
after Secretarial approval. In contrast, while recognizing the rights
of Reservation allottees to a just and equal distribution of water, H.R
8940 provides that ``if necessary,'' the Navajo Nation will amend its
water code to provide enumerated protections to Reservation allottees.
S. 4633 is ambiguous as to who determines whether it is ``necessary''
for the Navajo Nation to amend its code. The Department recommends that
S. 4633 be revised to require the Navajo Nation to amend its water code
to provide necessary protections to Allottees and that those water code
provisions not become effective unless approved by the Secretary.
Colorado River Operations
Consistent with the Settlement Agreement, S. 4633 provides for the
allocation of Arizona Colorado River Water to the Navajo Nation and the
Hopi Tribe. The agreement would allow the Navajo Nation and Hopi Tribe
to use these allocations on their Reservations and lease water in both
the Upper and Lower Colorado River Basins in the State of Arizona,
allowing for the storage of water within Arizona, the transportation of
water through the Central Arizona Project (CAP), as well as storage of
Navajo Nation water in Navajo Reservoir and Frank Chee Willeto, Sr
Reservoir, subject to certain conditions.
S. 4633 further authorizes the Secretary to enter into Colorado
River water delivery contracts with the Navajo Nation and the Hopi
Tribe subject to several requirements, limitations, and conditions, and
authorizes the Secretary to use the mainstream of the Colorado River
and the San Juan River to transport and deliver settlement water.
Subject to approval by the Secretary, and in accordance with all
applicable Federal and State laws, the Tribes would be authorized to
lease and exchange the Colorado River water allocations in the Upper
and Lower Basin, for use both on- and off-reservation, within the State
of Arizona.
HR 8940 provides for the Secretary to account for the water
deliveries as part of the settlement. The means by which the Secretary
would account for this water is novel and Reclamation will need time to
better understand the implementation of the accounting language as
written. The Department would like the opportunity to make technical
modifications to ensure consistency with Reclamation's accounting of
Colorado River water, including participation in water conservation
efforts, to ensure application would be in line with the parties'
intent.
As a general matter, the Department supports the key principles of
Tribal equity, Tribal sovereignty, and Tribal self-determination.
Clean, reliable drinking water is critical to upholding these
principles. We are committed to addressing the lack of clean, reliable
drinking water in Tribal communities. Additionally, we support the
opportunity for all Tribes to enjoy cultural, spiritual, and economic
benefits from their water rights. In keeping with these principles and
commitments, the Department supports the inclusion within the
settlement and allowance for the Tribes to use, store, and lease
Colorado River water as provided for in HR 8940. These rights and
provisions are similar in concept to the rights to lease CAP water in
Arizona granted to Tribes under various Indian water rights settlements
in Arizona and consistent with principles of self-determination and
Tribal sovereignty. We would like to work with the Sponsor and
Committee on technical amendments regarding Colorado River operations
and accounting.
Navajo-Gallup Amendments
S. 4633 provides authority to meet the purposes of the settlement
by diverting water through the Navajo-Gallup Water Supply Project,
including through the San Juan Lateral. These diversions through the
Pipeline and the Navajo-Gallup Water Supply Project facilities are
intended to address critical tribal and non-Indian Water supply needs
in areas that otherwise lack of other reasonable alternatives. The
Department supports the inclusion of these provisions, however the
Northwestern New Mexico Rural Water Projects Act, P.L. 111-11, limited
the size of the San Juan Lateral. In order to implement and meet the
additional purposes of S. 4633, the Department is working closely with
the Navajo Nation on technical modifications to provide authority to
increase the capacity of key components of the San Juan Lateral as well
as modifications to expanding the service area to allow for water
deliveries to additional areas in northeastern Arizona.
Energy Acquisition
Section 6(g) of S. 4633 provides that the amounts of energy needed
to deliver water to the Tribes shall be acquired by the Tribes. As
drafted, S. 4633 makes the Tribes responsible for acquiring energy
needed for the Secretary to construct the Pipeline. In the event the
Tribes are not able to acquire adequate energy for Pipeline
construction, the Secretary would be unable to fulfill her obligations
under the Settlement. The Department continues to work with the Tribes
to address this issue.
Limited Waiver of Sovereign Immunity
Section 18 of S. 4633 includes waivers of the sovereign immunity of
the United States that the Administration believes are overbroad and
could trigger unnecessary and expensive litigation. The settlement
agreement and S. 4633 provide enforceable assurances that both the
Tribes and the United States as trustee for the Tribes will comply with
the waivers that they are providing for off-Reservation water use by
non-Indians. The sovereign immunity waivers in Section 18 with respect
to non-parties to the settlement agreement would not further the
purposes of the settlement or contribute to its finality.
Miscellaneous
While this testimony highlights the most pressing of the
Department's concerns with S. 4633, it is important to note that
Departmental review of S. 4633 and the Settlement Agreement is ongoing.
Given the complexity of this Settlement, it is reasonable to expect
additional drafting concerns to be identified through this review
process.
* * *
In sum, the parties have worked together to resolve longstanding
claims in a way that would benefit all the people of Arizona, Navajo
Nation, Hopi Tribe, and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe. The Department
is committed to reaching a conclusion as proposed by S. 4633 and
supports nearly all of the key terms in this legislation. The
Department will continue to work with the sponsors and the parties to
resolve outstanding issues so that we can bring these claims to a
positive resolution and fulfill our trust responsibility by delivering
water to Tribal members in their homelands.
S. 4643, Zuni Indian Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024
S. 4643 would approve and provide authorizations to carry out the
settlement of certain water rights claims of the Zuni Tribe in the Zuni
River basin in New Mexico.
I. Background
A. Historical Context
Like other Pueblos in New Mexico, the Zuni Tribe were agricultural
people living in established villages when the Spanish explorers first
came to New Mexico. Before the Zuni Tribe's lands became part of the
United States, they fell under the jurisdiction first of Spain, and
later of Mexico, both of which recognized and protected the rights of
Pueblos to use water. When the United States asserted its sovereignty
over Pueblo lands in what is now the State of New Mexico, it did so
under the terms of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which protected
rights recognized by prior sovereigns, including Pueblo rights.
B. The Zuni Tribe and Zuni Basin Water Resources
The Zuni Tribe has approximately 448,000 acres in west-central New
Mexico, approximately 32 miles south of Gallup, New Mexico, and
approximately 15,000 acres in east-central Arizona. All of the Zuni
Tribe's main villages are in New Mexico and the Tribe has approximately
11,800 enrolled members, of which about 9,323 reside on the Tribe's
lands.
The Zuni River basin, located in west-central New Mexico, is a
tributary to the Little Colorado River. The river originates in the
western slopes of the Zuni Mountains in New Mexico and flows for about
90 miles in a southwesterly direction through the Zuni Reservation and
joins the Little Colorado River, a tributary to the Colorado River, in
Arizona.
The Zuni Tribe is located in an arid region of New Mexico, and
drought is a common occurrence that has impacted, and continues to
impact, the Tribe. Since time immemorial, the Zuni Tribe has made use
of the water in the Zuni River basin. However, the supply of water in
the Zuni River available to the Zuni Tribe has been reduced over time
from diversions by neighboring non-Indian water users, including Ramah
Dam on Cebolla Creek, which lies upstream of the Zuni Tribe. In
addition, irrigation infrastructure constructed by the Department of
the Interior many years ago needs to be rehabilitated and
reconstructed. While the Zuni Tribe has senior water rights in the
basin, it is facing water shortages that impact its ability to provide
sustainable water for its current and future water needs. Recent
effects of global warming and climate change are exacerbating these
effects and surface water supplies are dwindling. The Zuni Tribe seeks
funding as part of the proposed settlement to rehabilitate the
irrigation structures on its lands and to develop the Tribe's water
resources for various uses, including domestic and municipal purposes,
for current and future Tribal populations.
In 2001, after a failed adjudication in state court, the United
States filed suit in Federal court to adjudicate water rights in the
Zuni River basin in New Mexico. The adjudication will resolve the water
rights claims of non-Indians, the Zuni Tribe, the Navajo Nation, and
allottees.
Negotiations originally began in 1990 and were renewed in 2013,
when the United States revived its team to negotiate a comprehensive
settlement of the Tribal water rights in the Zuni River basin. The Zuni
Tribe has reached settlement of its claims in the basin, but the Navajo
Nation has not.
II. Proposed Zuni Tribe Settlement Legislation
The Zuni Tribe and the State of New Mexico executed a settlement
agreement in 2023, quantifying the rights of the Tribe and reaching
agreement on other key issues. The Ramah Land and Irrigation Company,
comprised of non-Indian water users upstream of the Zuni Tribe and the
owner and operator of Ramah Dam, signed a letter of support for the
settlement agreement in 2023, as well. The United States is not a
signatory to the 2023 settlement agreement.
S. 4643 would resolve all of the Zuni Tribe's water rights claims
in the Zuni River basin in New Mexico; ratify and confirm the water
rights settlement agreement among the Tribe and the State of New
Mexico; authorize the Secretary of the Interior to sign the settlement
agreement; and authorize funds to implement the settlement.
S. 4643 would ratify and confirm the Zuni Tribe's water rights to
approximately 24,809 acrefeet per year (AFY) from surface water and
groundwater sources on the Pueblo, as well as 22,453 acre-feet in
existing reservoir and stock pond storage. These amounts include 5,000
AFY of groundwater use for past, present, and future uses, including
economic development for the Zuni Tribe. In addition, pursuant to the
settlement agreement, the State closed both the Zuni River basin and
the Zuni Salt Lake and Sanctuary to any future appropriations of
groundwater and surface water in June and July 2023, (with the
exception of new livestock and domestic wells, which will be limited to
0.5 acre-feet per year).
S. 4643 would also protect non-Indian water users, as the Zuni
Tribe would agree to not make priority calls against non-Tribal
adjudicated water rights as long as the water rights holder does not
object to the Zuni's Tribe's settlement.
Finally, S. 4643 would establish a Trust Fund for the Zuni Tribe,
totaling $685 million, to be indexed: (1) $655.5 million in a Water
Rights Settlement Trust Account and (2) $29.5 million in a Operation,
Maintenance, & Replacement Trust Account. The Zuni Tribe could use
these Trust Funds to develop water infrastructure as it determines
necessary and on its own timeframe. Monies in the Water Rights
Settlement Trust Account could be used by the Zuni Tribe for:
1) Planning, permitting, designing, engineering, constructing,
reconstructing, replacing, rehabilitating, operating, or
repairing water production, treatment, or delivery
infrastructure, including for domestic and municipal supply, or
wastewater infrastructure;
2) Planning, permitting, designing, engineering, constructing,
reconstructing, replacing, rehabilitating, operating, or
repairing water production, treatment, or delivery
infrastructure, acquisition of water, or on-farm improvements
for irrigation, livestock, and support of agriculture;
3) Planning, permitting, designing, engineering, constructing,
reconstructing, replacing, rehabilitating, operating,
monitoring, or other measures for watershed and endangered
species habitat protection and enhancement, land and water
rights acquisition, waterrelated Tribal community welfare and
economic development, and costs relating to the implementation
of the settlement agreement;
4) Ensuring environmental compliance in the development and
construction of projects under the legislation; and
5) Tribal water rights management and administration.
The State of New Mexico would contribute $1.25 million to provide
for benefits of non-Indian water users. The State's commitment includes
$500,000 for a fund to mitigate impairment to non-Indian livestock and
domestic well rights resulting from new or changed water uses by the
Zuni Tribe and $750,000 to develop monitoring programs to assess
impacts to the Zuni Salt Lake, which has significant cultural
importance to the Zuni Tribe and other Tribes and Pueblos.
There are 15 allotments within or near Zuni lands that total
approximately 2,213 acres. The water rights of these allotments would
not be settled at this time but would be adjudicated later in the on-
going adjudication. S. 4643 would not in any way impose any conditions
on the use of water on these allotments or alter the ability of the
United States and allottees to make water rights claims for these lands
in the future.
Title II of S. 4643 would provide for protections for the Zuni Salt
Lake, a lake outside the Zuni basin that has great spiritual and
cultural meaning to the Zuni Tribe and other Pueblos and Tribes in New
Mexico. The legislation would transfer approximately 4,822 acres of
land surrounding the Lake and managed by the Bureau of Land Management
(BLM) into trust for the Zuni Tribe upon the enforceability date of the
settlement. In addition, the legislation would withdraw approximately
92,364 acres of BLM land near the Zuni Salt Lake and impose various
restrictions on the management of those lands to protect the Lake and
its cultural values. The withdrawal would include all BLM lands that
are within the closure order the State of New Mexico issued in July of
2023, closing the area around the Zuni Salt Lake and Sanctuary to any
new appropriations of groundwater or surface water (with the exception
of new livestock and domestic wells, which will be limited to 0.5 acre-
feet per year).
III. Department of the Interior Position on S. 4643
The Department of the Interior is pleased to support S. 4643. This
bill is the result of decades of litigation and over a decade of good-
faith negotiations. S. 4643 is designed to meet the Zuni Tribe's
current and long-term needs for water by providing Trust Funds to be
used by the Tribe according to its needs and its own determinations.
Rather than committing the Zuni Tribe or the United States to construct
specific water infrastructure projects, the bill would allow the Tribe
to make decisions regarding how, when, and where to develop water
infrastructure on Zuni lands. This approach to settlement is consistent
with Tribal sovereignty and self-determination, and with our trust
responsibilities, and will help to ensure that the Zuni Tribe can
maintain its way of life.
S. 4705, Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024
S. 4705, the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of
2024, among other things, would approve the settlement of the Yavapai-
Apache Nation and authorize construction of a water project relating to
the Nation's water rights claims. The Department supports the goals of
S. 4705 and is committed to working with the Nation and the Committee
to resolve the Department's concerns with S. 4705 as introduced.
I. Background
A. Historical Context
The ancestors of Yavapai-Apache Nation (``Nation'') have lived and
occupied lands in the Verde Valley in Arizona since time immemorial and
were well-established as a hunting, gathering, and agricultural people
before the United States secured the area from Mexico through the
Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848. Since 1848, pursuant to statute
and administrative action, the United States has taken into trust
approximately 1,850 acres as the Yavapai-Apache Reservation
(``Reservation''). The Reservation includes five non-contiguous
districts: the Clarkdale District, consisting of approximately 120
acres northwest of the Town of Clarkdale and the City of Cottonwood;
the Middle Verde District, consisting of approximately 1,600 acres
northwest of the Town of Camp Verde; the Rimrock District, consisting
of approximately 4 acres east of the Middle Verde District; the
Montezuma District, consisting of approximately 80 acres northeast of
the Town of Camp Verde and between the Middle Verde and Rimrock
Districts; and the Camp Verde District consisting of approximately 50
acres southeast of the Town of Camp Verde. Of the approximately 2,673
enrolled members of the Nation, nearly half live on the Reservation.
Current water needs on the Reservation are satisfied through surface
and groundwater. The Verde River--one of the few remining perennial
rivers in Arizona--flows through the Reservation.
B. Water Resources, Litigation, and Settlement Negotiation
The water rights of the Nation are the subject of ongoing
litigation in the Gila River general stream adjudication
(``Adjudication''). The United States claimed 4,922 acre-feet per year
(``AFY'') of surface and groundwater to satisfy the Nation's past,
present, and future needs.
Efforts to resolve the Nation's water rights through settlement
have been on-going since approximately 2008. As the Adjudication
continued, the urgency for a settlement increased. In August 2023, the
Department, Nation, and Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and
Power District and the Salt River Valley Water Users' Association, met
and committed to intensify negotiations with a goal of reaching
agreement expeditiously.
II. Proposed Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement
S. 4705 would resolve all the water rights claims in Arizona of the
Nation; ratify and confirm the Settlement Agreement among the Nation,
the State of Arizona, and other local parties; authorize the Secretary
of the Interior to sign the Settlement Agreement; and authorize funds
to implement the settlement.
S. 4705 would confirm the Nation's right to divert 6,888.50 acre-
feet per year (AFY). The 6,888.5 AFY diversionary right is made up of
the Nation's entitlement to 1,200 AFY of water from the Central Arizona
Project, 3,410.25 AFY of water from the C.C. Cragin Reservoir, 684.48
AFY of water pumped on the Nation's Reservation, and water rights
acquired when certain lands were added to the Reservation.
Section 103 of S. 4705 would require the Secretary to plan, design,
and construct the Tunliinichoh Water Infrastructure Project (Project),
consisting of the Cragin-Verde Pipeline Project (Pipeline) and the
Yavapai-Apache Nation Drinking Water System Project (Drinking Water
System). S. 4705 requires that the Pipeline be constructed to deliver
no less than 6,836.92 AFY of water from the C.C. Cragin Dam and
Reservoir for use by the Nation on its Reservation and up to an
additional 1,912.18 AFY for use by water users in Yavapai County if
they elect to contract for such water. The Pipeline would be owned by
the United States and become part of the Salt River Federal Reclamation
Project, and upon substantial completion, the Salt River Project
Agricultural Improvement and Power District and Salt River Valley Water
Users' Association (collectively, called SRP) would assume
responsibility for the care, operation, and maintenance of the
Pipeline. The cost of care, operation, and maintenance during
construction would be borne by the Secretary, and upon substantial
completion would be the responsibility of the Nation and any later to
be determined project beneficiaries. Lands within the United States
Forest Service needed for construction of the Pipeline would be
withdrawn for that purpose.
In addition to constructing the Pipeline, S. 4705 would require the
Secretary to plan, design, and construct the Drinking Water System,
including a water treatment plant capable of treating up to
approximately 2,250 AFY from the Pipeline, and distribution lines to
various delivery points on the Reservation and significantly expanded
land base to be added to the Reservation by S. 4705. In addition, the
bill would authorize the Secretary to increase the capacity of the
Drinking Water System to treat additional water for use by communities
in the Verde Valley, if those communities pay incremental construction
cost and OM&R. Upon substantial completion, title to, and
responsibility for operation and maintenance of the Drinking Water
System would transfer to the Nation. S. 4705 would allow for the Nation
to plan, design, and construct the drinking water system pursuant to
the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act.
S. 4705 establishes a non-trust interest-bearing Implementation
Fund for use by the Secretary to plan, design and construct the Project
and to reimburse SRP for the proportional capital and costs and OM&R of
the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir associated with the Cragin water
allocated to the Nation. H.R 8949 provides a combination of mandatory
and discretionary funding for construction of the Pipeline
($731,059,000 in mandatory funding) and the Drinking Water System
($152,490,000 in mandatory funding). In the event this mandatory
funding is insufficient to complete the Project, the bill authorizes
the appropriation of ``such sums as are necessary'' for completion. In
addition, S. 4705 authorizes the appropriation of such sums as
necessary for the OM&R of the Project until the date of substantial
completion.
S. 4705 establishes a trust fund of $156 million that the Nation
could use for: implementing the Settlement; expanding the drinking
water system; constructing water infrastructure, including additional
wells; planning, designing, and constructing wastewater treatment and
reuse facilities; paying OM&R; and participating in watershed
restoration activities in the Verde Valley watershed.
Under S. 4705, the United States Geological Service would be
required to continue to operate and maintain certain gaging stations on
the Verde River with an authorization for appropriations of ``such sums
as may be necessary'' for this purpose.
S. 4705 also clarifies which lands make up the Nation's existing
Reservation and identifies specific parcels to be taken into trust for
Nation and added to the Reservation.
Finally, S. 4705 would require the Secretary of Agriculture to
finalize a land exchange with the Nation and to ``work expeditiously''
to transfer 40 acres of Forest Service land to the Town of Camp Verde.
III. Department of the Interior Position on S. 4705
The Department supports the goals of S. 4705 and appreciates the
recent efforts of the settlement parties to reach a settlement within
an expedited timeframe. However, the Department has some concerns with,
and questions concerning, S. 4705. We are continuing to work with the
Nation and the settlement parties on issues of Federal concern. As
information is provided by the Nation and the settlement parties, the
Department is analyzing it and engaging in discussions with the Nation
and settlement parties.
In particular, the Department has concerns with S. 4705's mandate
to plan, design, and construct the Project. As an initial matter, the
bill would require the Secretary to construct the Pipeline and Drinking
Water System with capacities that greatly exceed the Nation's projected
domestic, commercial, municipal, and light industrial (DCMI) needs as
contained in claims filed in the Gila River Adjudication both by the
Nation and the United States as trustee.
Additionally, the Department has significant concerns with the
requirement that the Secretary ``upsize'' the Pipeline to transport
water to be used by Verde Valley communities that have not committed to
receiving such water or paying for their fair share of the capital
costs of the Pipeline. In prior Indian water rights settlements that
provided for infrastructure to serve both Tribal and non-Tribal
communities, the non-Tribal communities committed to use and pay for a
portion of the cost of such infrastructure.
Finally, with respect to the Drinking Water System, the Department
has not had sufficient time to review plans for that system, having
just received plans from the Nation on July 9, 2024.
In addition to concerns about the size and scope of the Project,
the Department has concerns about the Project costs. The Pipeline's
design and cost are based, in part, on a Value Planning Study
(``Study'') prepared by the Department, with input from the Nation and
SRP. The purpose of the Study was not to provide a reliable estimate of
the actual costs of a project, but instead to facilitate the comparison
of various alternatives. Value planning studies use preliminary-level
cost estimates to compare the relative costs of various infrastructure
options. Value planning studies provide useful information that allows
options to be ranked according to various measures, including from
least to most expensive, but should not be used as a basis for
congressional authorization. Moreover, the Department's experience with
other infrastructurebased settlements such as Aamodt, White Mountain
Apache and Navajo-San Juan have shown significant cost increases as
planning and construction move forward. Accordingly, the Department
expects the mandatory funding provided for the Pipeline will be
insufficient and we would like work with the Nation to identify cost-
savings and alternatives to address the cost gap. With respect to the
drinking water system, the Department must evaluate the recently
received cost basis submitted by the Tribe. The authorization for
``such sums as are necessary'' raises concerns for the Department. The
Department lacks information on other aspects of the proposed
settlement and costs, along with some significant legal questions with
some provisions in the bill. For instance, the Department is concerned
that S. 4705 includes overbroad sovereign immunity waivers that could
trigger unnecessary and expensive litigation. The waivers of sovereign
immunity with respect to non-parties to the settlement agreement would
not further the purposes of the settlement or contribute to its
finality. We look forward to continuing to work with the sponsors and
Tribe to resolve those issues.
In addition to the specific concerns discussed above, the
Department notes S. 4705 requires other technical changes.
* * *
In sum, the Department supports the goals of S. 4705 and commends
the Yavapai-Apache Nation and the State parties for the significant
progress made on this settlement in recent months. The Department is
committed to continuing to work with the Nation and the bill sponsors
to address the Department's concerns.
S. 4998, Navajo Nation Rio San Jose Stream System Water Rights
Settlement Act of 2024
S. 4998, the Navajo Nation Rio San Jose' Stream System Water Rights
Settlement Act of 2024, would approve and provide authorizations to
carry out the settlement of water rights claims of the Navajo Nation in
the Rio San Jose River basin in New Mexico.
I. The Navajo Nation and Rio San Jose Basin Water Resources
The Navajo Nation has more than 400,000 enrolled members, of which
about 122,000 live in New Mexico. The Navajo Nation consists of five
agencies, further subdivided into 110 chapters. The Eastern Navajo
Agency, headquartered in Crownpoint, encompasses 31 chapters within
Western New Mexico as well as the satellite reservation areas of
To'hajiillee and Alamo. Four of the chapters, with a total estimated
population of 3,810 Tribal members, are within the Rio San Jose Basin.
These are the chapters of Smith Lake, Casamero Lake, Thoreau and Baca/
Prewitt. In addition, the satellite reservation of To'hajiilee, within
the Rio Puerco basin, has an estimated 1,424 tribal members.
The Navajo Nation is located in an arid region of New Mexico and
the chapters in the Rio San Jose Basin are primarily reliant on
intermittent surface flows and groundwater supplies. Drought is a
common occurrence that has impacted, and continues to impact, the
Tribe. The supply of water available to the Navajo Nation has been
reduced over time from extensive groundwater demands by non-Indian
water users. An estimated 30 percent of residences do not have running
water. While the Navajo Nation has water rights senior to the majority
of non- Indian users in the basin, it is facing water shortages that
impact its ability to provide sustainable water for its current and
future water needs. Recent effects of global warming and climate change
are exacerbating these effects and surface water supplies are
dwindling. The Navajo Nation seeks funding as part of the proposed
settlement to develop its water resources for various uses, including
domestic and municipal purposes for current and future Tribal
populations.
II. Proposed Navajo Rio San Jose Settlement Legislation
The Settlement would resolve all outstanding water claims in the
Rio San Jose basin in New Mexico that could be brought by the Navajo
Nation or by the United States, in its capacity as trustee for the
Nation, and would achieve finality with respect to all those claims.
Legislation (S. 595) is currently pending to resolve the water rights
claims of Acoma and Laguna in the Rio San Jose basin. If both S. 595
and S. 4998 are enacted, all Tribal water rights claims in the Rio San
Jose basin would be resolved. S. 4998 would also approve a conditional
settlement of Navajo Nation claims in the Rio Puerco basin.
S. 4998 would ratify and confirm the Navajo Nation's water rights
to approximately 2,355 acrefeet per year (AFY) from surface water and
groundwater sources in the Rio San Jose basin. These amounts include
638 AFY of groundwater for past and present uses, and 1300 AFY of
groundwater for future uses. Conditionally settled claims in the Rio
Puerco basin would be 506 AFY.
S. 4998 would also protect non-Indian water users, as the Navajo
Nation would agree to not make priority calls against certain non-
Indian water rights.
While the Navajo Nation Rio San Jose settlement would be fund-
based, the proposed Federal contribution is largely based on the
expansion of the existing Navajo-Gallup Water Supply Project and the
creation of a regional water transmission system and community
connections to bring imported water into the Rio San Jose basin. The
trust fund to be established by S. 4998 totals $223.271 million, to be
indexed. Of that amount, $200.271 million could be used for:
1. Acquiring water rights or water supply;
2. Planning, permitting, designing, engineering, constructing,
reconstructing, replacing, rehabilitating, operating, or
repairing water production, treatment, or delivery
infrastructure, including for domestic and municipal use, on-
farm improvements, or wastewater infrastructure;
3. Navajo Nations' water rights management and administration;
4. Watershed protection and enhancement, support of
agriculture, water-related Navajo community welfare and
economic development, and costs relating to implementation of
the settlement agreement; and
5. Environmental compliance associated with project developed
with trust funds.
The remaining trust fund money ($23 million) could only be used for
OM&R. The State of New Mexico would contribute $3 million for the
benefit of non-Indian acequia projects.
There are over 300 ``Navajo'' allotments in the basin. While the
Department believes that most of these are allotments that were issued
to individual Indians out of the Public Domain under section four of
the General Allotment Act, final historic studies have not been
completed and water rights claims have not been developed. Therefore,
it has not been possible to include these allotments in the settlement.
The water rights of these allotments would be adjudicated at a later
date in the on-going adjudication of the Rio San Jose basin. S. 4998
would not in any way impose any conditions on the use of water on these
allotments or alter the ability of the United States and allottees to
make water rights claims for these lands in the future.
The Department of the Interior is pleased to support S. 4998. This
bill in combination with S. 595 would settle all Tribal rights in the
Rio San Jose Basin, bringing stability to the basin for all water
users. S. 4998 would provide funding to allow the Navajo Nation to plan
water infrastructure for the current and long-term water needs of its
people. This approach to settlement is consistent with Tribal
sovereignty and self-determination, and with our trust
responsibilities, and will help to ensure that Navajo Nation can
maintain itself in a viable homeland.
S. 4444, Crow Revenue Act
S. 4444 involves the conveyance of surface and mineral estate in
Montana involving the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the Crow Tribe
of Montana, and a private party. The bill requires, within 60 days of
enactment, the relinquishment of the Federal coal lease associated with
Signal Peak Energy's Bull Mountains Mine near Roundup, Montana; the
conveyance by the Joe and Barbara Hope Mineral Trust (Hope Family
Trust) of approximately 4,660 acres of private mineral estate located
within the boundaries of the Crow Indian Reservation in Bighorn County,
Montana, to the Crow Tribe of Montana; and the conveyance of
approximately 4,530 acres of mineral estate and approximately 940 acres
of surface estate managed by the BLM in Musselshell County, Montana
(the Bull Mountains Tracts), to the Hope Family Trust.
In addition, the bill states that the mineral estate conveyed by
the Hope Family Trust to the Crow Tribe shall not be subject to state
or local taxation and shall be held in trust by the United States for
the benefit of the Tribe, upon the Tribe's request. Finally, S. 4444
requires that the Crow Tribe notify the Secretary of the Interior when
the Tribe and the Hope Family Trust have agreed on a formula for
revenue sharing from development of the minerals conveyed to the Tribe,
should they be developed at a later date.
Analysis
Under President Biden's and Secretary Haaland's leadership, the
Department is committed to strengthening the government-to-government
relationship with Tribal Nations. We believe that Tribal sovereignty
and self-governance, as well as honoring the Federal trust and treaty
responsibility to Tribal Nations, must be the cornerstones of Federal
Indian policy. In addition, the Department is committed to managing
public lands and minerals to protect the treaty, trust, religious,
subsistence, and cultural interests of Federally recognized Tribes,
consistent with our mission and applicable Federal law. By placing
lands into trust status through the Department, Tribes are able to
reacquire lands within or near their reservations, establish a land
base, and clarify jurisdiction over their territories and lands
including mineral estates.
The Department supports the bill's goals of addressing inholdings
within the boundaries of the Crow Indian Reservation and providing an
additional source of revenue for the Crow Tribe. We would like to work
with the Sponsor on several modifications to improve the bill. First,
we recommend that the conveyances be subject to valid existing rights,
as is standard, to ensure that they do not inadvertently result in
Federal takings issues under the Fifth Amendment. In addition, we
suggest that language be added to the bill that expressly states that
the parcels to be conveyed are withdrawn from location, entry, and
patent under the U.S. mining laws as of the date of enactment.
Including a withdrawal provision for parcels will ensure that no new
mining claims are located between enactment and finalization of the
conveyances.
The Department also notes that it is unclear whether the Sponsor
intends for the required Federal coal lease relinquishment to be
consistent with the BLM's coal leasing regulations. For example, under
the lease provision referenced in section 3(a)(1) of the bill, the
lease relinquishment would be required to follow all applicable
regulations. This means that, if enacted, a lease relinquishment cannot
occur until the lessee has met all financial obligations associated
with the lease, all profitable portions of the leased coal deposit have
been mined, and all required reclamation has been completed
successfully, as determined by the BLM and the Montana Department of
Environmental Quality. As currently drafted, the BLM would be unable to
relinquish the lease as directed within the timeframe provided by the
bill.
We would like to work with the Sponsor to ensure that the parcels
to be conveyed under the bill are of equal value; to provide sufficient
time to comply with any applicable laws; and to ensure that public
access to nearby BLM-managed public lands is maintained after the
conveyance.
The Department would also like to work with the Sponsor to clarify
the provision regarding revenue sharing between the Tribe and the Hope
Family Trust. As currently drafted, the bill does not appear to
specifically require that a revenue sharing agreement be developed. In
addition, based on local media coverage associated with the bill, it
appears that the Sponsor may have intended for the revenue sharing
agreement to cover the mineral estate conveyed to the Hope Family
Trust, not the mineral estate conveyed to the Crow Tribe. The
Department recommends that the Sponsor amend the bill to address these
issues to provide certainty to the Crow Tribe.
We also recommend technical amendments to clarify various terms and
exempt the United States from any responsibility for future reclamation
efforts associated with the Bull Mountain Tracts, as they would be
conveyed into private ownership. The Department looks forward to
working with the Sponsor on such modifications as the bill moves
forward through Congress.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
Chairman White Clay, welcome. Please proceed with your
testimony.
STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK WHITE CLAY, CHAIRMAN, CROW NATION
Mr. White Clay. Thank you, honorable Chairman and honorable
members of the Committee. Thank you for having us.
I am Frank White Clay. I am the Chairman of the Crow
Nation. I am here today to express our full support for S.
4444, the Crow Revenue Act. The legislation addresses crucial
land management issues, generates opportunities for economic
growth, and reaffirms the sovereignty of the Crow Tribe by
consolidating our ownership of ancestral lands. This bill
provides an equitable resolution to longstanding land and
resource management challenges on the Crow Reservation and
strengthens our future as a Tribe.
The Crow Revenue Act would transfer approximately 4,660
acres of private subsurface inholdings, known as the Hope
Family Tracts, on the Crow Reservation to the Crow Tribe. In
exchange, the tribe would transfer 4,530 acres of Federal
subsurface and 940 acres of Federal surface interests in
Musselshell County, referred to as the Bull Mountains Tracts.
A key provision of the bill requires that the Crow Tribe
and the Hope Family enter into a revenue sharing agreement for
any development of the Bull Mountains Tracts. This would
provide a crucial revenue stream for the Crow Tribe as we seek
to revitalize our economy.
This bill mirrors the bipartisan Northern Cheyenne Lands
Act of 2014, which successfully addressed similar issues for
the Northern Cheyenne Tribe. S. 4444 offers the same pragmatic
solution: it resolves private inholdings on our reservation
while creating much-needed economic opportunities for the Tribe
and ensuring certainty for development in Musselshell County.
The legislation mandates a three-party land exchange
involving the Crow Tribe, the Hope Family Trust, and the United
States government. The Secretary of the Interior is required to
convey approximately 4,530 acres of Federal subsurface and 940
acres of Federal surface interests at Bull Mountains to the
Hope Family Trust. In exchange, the Hope Family Trust will
convey 4,660 acres of subsurface within the boundaries of the
Crow Reservation to the Crow Tribe.
Upon request by the tribe, the Secretary is directed to
take these lands into trust for the benefit of the Crow Tribe.
The land exchange will allow the Tribe to consolidate our
ownership and control of lands within the reservation, a
crucial step in managing and developing our natural resources.
The legislation provides the potential for a critical
revenue stream for the Crow Tribe if the Bull Mountains Tracts
are developed. With the expedited closure of the Aps alooke
Mine on the Crow Reservation, which provided substantial
royalties to the tribe, these revenues would help mitigate the
economic impact and support the tribe's financial stability.
The Crow Tribe has always depended on our lands and natural
resources for survival. Over centuries, the tribe has made
supreme sacrifices to reclaim and maintain our homeland. Since
the Treaty of 1851 and 1886, the tribe's land base has been
continuously reduced, from over 38 million acres spanning
Montana and Wyoming to just 2.3 million acres today.
This bill addresses a central element of our struggle:
consolidating our land base and securing our right to manage
and benefit from our resources. As a result of these land
losses, the tribe faces significant economic challenges,
including limited access to employment and development
opportunities on the reservation.
The transfer of 4,660 acres of subsurface on the Crow
Reservation to the tribe is critical to allowing us to exercise
full control over future development.
The tribe has also been denied access to Federal grants and
incentives due to invalid debts being referred to the Treasury
Offset Program, also known as the ``Do Not Pay'' list. This
prevented the Crow Tribe from benefiting from many new programs
created and funded during the Covid-19 pandemic which it was
otherwise eligible for. Fortunately, our administration was
able to clear this issue with the help of our Montana
delegates, however, we will not be able to retroactively
receive these awards.
Restoring our economic independence through land and
resource management will help mitigate these lost funds and
strengthen the tribe's future by providing much needed
resources to help develop an economy.
The Crow Revenue Act is not just a land exchange; it is an
investment in the future of the Crow Tribe. I urge the
Committee and the Senate to support this critical legislation,
which will help the Crow Tribe overcome longstanding challenges
and build a brighter future for my people.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. White Clay follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Frank White Clay, Chairman, Crow Nation
Introduction
Chairman and members of the Committee, I am Frank White Clay,
Chairman of the Crow Nation. I am here today to express our full
support for S. 4444, the Crow Revenue Act. This legislation addresses
crucial land management issues, generates opportunities for economic
growth, and reaffirms the sovereignty of the Crow Tribe by
consolidating our ownership of ancestral lands. This bill provides an
equitable resolution to long-standing land and resource management
challenges on the Crow Reservation and strengthens our future as a
Tribe.
Background on the Crow Revenue Act
The Crow Revenue Act would transfer approximately 4,660 acres of
private subsurface inholdings, known as the Hope Family Tracts, on the
Crow Reservation to the Crow Tribe of Montana. In exchange, the Tribe
would transfer 4,530 acres of federal subsurface and 940 acres of
federal surface interests in Musselshell County, Montana--referred to
as the Bull Mountains Tracts. A key provision of the bill requires that
the Crow Tribe and the Hope Family enter into a Revenue Sharing
Agreement for any development of the Bull Mountains Tracts. This would
provide a crucial revenue stream for the Crow Tribe as we seek to
revitalize our economy.
This bill mirrors the bipartisan Northern Cheyenne Lands Act of
2014, which successfully addressed similar issues for the Northern
Cheyenne Tribe. S. 4444 offers the same pragmatic solution: it resolves
private inholdings on our Reservation while creating much-needed
economic opportunities for the Tribe and ensuring certainty for
development in Musselshell County.
Three-Party Land Exchange
The legislation mandates a three-party land exchange involving the
Crow Tribe, the Hope Family Trust, and the United States government:
The Secretary of the Interior is required to convey
approximately 4,530 acres of federal subsurface and 940 acres
of federal surface interests at Bull Mountains to the Hope
Family Trust.
In exchange, the Hope Family Trust will convey 4,660 acres
of subsurface within the boundaries of the Crow Reservation to
the Crow Tribe. Upon request by the Tribe, the Secretary is
directed to take these lands into trust for the benefit of the
Crow Tribe.
This land exchange will allow the Tribe to consolidate our
ownership and control of lands within the Reservation, a
crucial step in managing and developing our natural resources.
Economic and Cultural Significance
This legislation provides the potential for a critical revenue
stream for the Crow Tribe if the Bull Mountains Tracts are developed.
With the expedited closure of the Apsaalooke Mine on the Crow
Reservation, which provided substantial royalties to the Tribe, these
revenues would help mitigate the economic impact and support the
Tribe's financial stability.
The Crow Tribe has always depended on our lands and natural
resources for survival. Over the centuries, the Tribe has made supreme
sacrifices to reclaim and maintain our homeland. Since the Treaty of
1851and 1886, the Tribe's land base has been continuously reduced--from
over 38 million acres spanning Montana and Wyoming to just 2.3 million
acres today.
This bill addresses a central element of our struggle:
consolidating our land base and securing our right to manage and
benefit from our resources.
As a result of these land losses, the Tribe currently faces
significant economic challenges, including limited access to employment
and development opportunities on the Reservation. Non-tribal owners
control large portions of surface and subsurface holdings within the
Reservation, which further limits the Tribe's ability to manage and
benefit from our natural resources.
The transfer of 4,660 acres of subsurface on the Crow Reservation
to the Tribe is critical to allowing us to exercise full control over
future development. This consolidation of ownership, combined with the
ability to generate revenues from the Bull Mountains Tracts, represents
an opportunity for the Tribe to address our severe economic and social
challenges.
The Tribe has also been denied access to federal grants and
incentives due to invalid debts being referred to the Treasury Offset
Program, also known as the ``Do Not Pay'' list. This prevented the Crow
Tribe from benefiting from many new programs created and funded during
the COVID-19 pandemic which it was otherwise eligible for. Fortunately,
my Administration was able to clear this issue up, however we will not
be able to retroactively receive these awards.
Restoring our economic independence through land and resource
management will help mitigate these lost funds and strengthen the
Tribe's future by providing much needed resources to help develop an
economy.
Conclusion
The Crow Revenue Act is not just a land exchange; it is an
investment in the future of the Crow Tribe. It enables us to
consolidate our ownership of our ancestral lands, secure much-needed
revenue, and regain a measure of economic independence. I urge the
Committee and the Senate to support this critical legislation, which
will help the Crow Tribe overcome long-standing challenges and build a
brighter future for our people.
Thank you for your consideration of this important legislation.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Chairman White Clay.
President Nygren, nice to see you again. Please proceed
with your testimony.
STATEMENT OF HON. BUU NYGREN, PRESIDENT, NAVAJO NATION
Dr. Nygren. Ya'at'eeh, Chairman Schatz, Vice Chairwoman
Murkowski, and members of the Committee. I am Dr. Buu Nygren,
Navajo Nation President. I am joined today by Navajo Nation
Council Speaker Crystalyne Curley, Chairman Timothy Nuvangyaoma
of the Hopi Tribe and Vice President Johnny Lehi, as well as
the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of S.
4633, S. 4998. Thank you to Senators Kelly and Sinema who were
here earlier for sponsoring S. 4633, Senators Heinrich and
Lujan, who were here earlier as well, for sponsoring S. 4998.
Your collective leadership in securing a safe, certain and
stable water supply for the nation will be felt for
generations.
The Navajo Nation is the largest indigenous nation in the
Country. We provide critical governmental services to over
400,000 tribal members. Half of these members reside on our
sovereign territory, which is roughly the size of West
Virginia, spans Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. Roughly one-
third of Navajo Nation households lack running water, and that
is how I grew up, without running water.
Thousands of our people continue to haul water over 30
miles round trip on unpaved dirt roads, washboard roads, to
meet the daily water demands. Hauling water is incredibly
expensive. Families that haul water on the Navajo reservation
spend the equivalent of $43,000 per acre foot compared with
$600 per acre foot for a typical suburban water user in the
region.
This water is among the most expensive in the Country for a
population that is among the poorest. Congress must act to end
the water crisis on the Navajo Nation.
First, I will speak on S. 4633, which will ratify a
historic water rights settlement among the Navajo Nation, the
38 other parties, including the Hopi Tribe and the San Juan
Southern Paiute Tribe, the United States, and the State of
Arizona. It will put to rest decades of expensive litigation
and will bring certainty to users throughout the Colorado River
Basin.
Once confirmed by Congress, the settlement agreement will
ratify and confirm the tribe's respective water rights,
including our rights to the Arizona Upper Basin and Lower Basin
Colorado River. It will also invest in needed water
infrastructure that will deliver safe and reliable drinking
water to the three settling tribes. Because of the unique
geography and hydrology of the Navajo Nation, our reservation
spans the Upper Basin and the Lower Basin of the Colorado
River.
In order to effectively provide the water to the Navajo
communities, the nation needs the ability to move our Colorado
River water between the basins. This legislation authorizes the
movement of the water as Congress has done before.
I understand that certain Upper Basin States have concerns
with where Navajo can use its water. Navajo is cooperatively
working with the States to find a path forward.
Navajo is also working with the U.S. to address issues
raised in its testimony. We have made great progress.
Next, I would like to turn to S. 4998, which authorizes a
settlement that resolves the nation's water rights it claims in
the Rio San Jose Basin and addresses our claims in the Rio
Puerco Basin. This agreement ends four decades of litigation
and will bring needed water to some of the driest basins in New
Mexico.
This bill complements the Acoma and the Laguna Settlement
for the Rio San Jose that is authorized in S. 595. These water
rights settlement agreements provide a comprehensive settlement
of tribal claims in the Rio San Jose Basin. The Navajo Nation
will use settlement funding to import water to the Rio San Jose
and Rio Puerco Basin. These water imports will help water users
to manage depleted surface and groundwater.
Passage of this settlement will make a real difference in
the lives of many people in our Eastern Navajo communities. It
will provide a path forward toward water security for the
people living in these basins, including the Pueblo Laguna and
Acoma.
These settlements are an important priority for my
administration. I understand the challenges associated with
hauling water because I did it until I was 19 years old. It is
expensive, physically demanding and incredibly time-consuming
to haul water. It is absolutely unacceptable in 2024 that more
than one-third of our people, including our children and our
elders do not have running water.
Therefore, I respectfully urge the Committee to swiftly
pass these bills to ensure that our children will have access
to what the rest of this Country takes for granted, a safe and
reliable water supply. These settlements represent a hope for a
better and brighter future for my people.
Thank you, and I welcome your questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Nygren follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Buu Nygren, President, Navajo Nation
Ya'at'eeh, Chairman Schatz, Vice Chairwoman Murkowski, and members
of the Committee. My name is Dr. Buu Nygren and I am the President of
the Navajo Nation (the ``Nation''). Thank you for the opportunity to
testify in support of the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Act, S. 4633, which will secure a sustainable water supply
for the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan Southern Paiute
Tribe (collectively, the ``Tribes''). This settlement will resolve the
most significant outstanding water claims in the State of Arizona.
Thank you also to Senators Kelly and Sinema for sponsoring this
historic legislation. And thank you to the Governor of the State of
Arizona, Katie Hobbs, for her and her staff's work and to the many
federal and non-federal parties that have worked so hard to make this
settlement a reality.
The Navajo Nation is the largest federally recognized Indigenous
nation in the country. We provide critical governmental services to
more than 400,000 tribal members, approximately half of whom reside on
the Navajo Nation. Our Nation encompasses more than 27,000 square miles
and is approximately the size of West Virginia. Our sovereign territory
spans the states of Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. There is an urgent
need for access to safe, clean drinking water remains largely unmet for
the Navajo people. Approximately one-third of Navajo families still
lack piped water in their homes. Many of our people must instead rely
on hauling water to meet their daily household needs. As discussed in
more detail below, S. 4633 addresses these needs by investing
significantly in desperately needed water delivery infrastructure
projects on the Navajo Nation that will bring safe and reliable clean
drinking water to Navajo communities in Arizona. This will make
possible the connection of tens of thousands of Navajo people in
Arizona to piped water for the first time ever.
The lack of access to clean drinking water results in a high cost
to human life. At the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, we lost an
average of 10 Navajo people a day to the virus. Whereas the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention reports that COVID-19-associated deaths
among non-Hispanic Whites were 30.3 per 100,000, our preliminary data
from the Navajo Nation Epidemiology Center shows that the COVID-19-
associated death rate among our people was over 800 per 100,000. Our
people were disproportionately impacted by the COVID pandemic and
continue to experience high rates of morbidity and mortality from
infectious diseases. This is in part due to the lack of access to clean
water on the Nation. It's difficult to wash your hands without running
water, and a recent Navajo Nation Health Survey confirmed that the lack
of piped water in homes is a key factor contributing to poor health
across the Nation. This settlement offers a path forward in closing the
severe water access gap that exists on the Nation and offers the
promise of a more healthy and vibrant future for our people.
I. The Drinking Water Crisis within the Navajo Nation
Over 30 percent of Navajo households lack running water and must
rely on hauling it, which significantly affects both the quantity and
quality of water available to these households. Families that haul
water sometimes must rely on non-potable water sources such as
livestock wells to meet their daily household water needs, including
drinking water. A recent study of livestock wells on Western Navajo
found that 11 percent of livestock wells exceed the maximum contaminant
levels set by the EPA for uranium. Seventeen percent contain high
levels of arsenic. \1\ Unfortunately, as our Department of Water
Resources staff sometimes remind us, ``When you're thirsty, you're
thirsty,'' and for some Navajo families that means drinking from the
closest available water source even if it is unsafe. A large proportion
of those who do have piped water to their homes depend on public water
supply systems that have exceeded the maximum sustainable withdrawal
capacity of their source aquifers, have poor water quality, and are
susceptible to drought. \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Dissolved Uranium and Arsenic in Unregulated Groundwater
Sources--Western Navajo Nation--Jones--2020--Journal of Contemporary
Water Research & Education--Wiley Online Library.
\2\ See Water Resources Management Strategy for the Navajo Nation
prepared by the Navajo Nation Department of Water Resources, p. IX,
available at Strategy Document (frontiernet.net).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The lack of a reliable and affordable potable water supply
suppresses economic growth throughout the Navajo Nation and contributes
to a high incidence of disease and infection attributable to the lack
of access to clean drinking water. These conditions place significant
financial burdens on Navajo and federal programs that treat diseases
and illnesses that could be prevented if adequate safe water supplies
were available. \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The lack of a safe and reliable water supply also places a
tremendous economic burden on the Navajo people. According to the
Navajo Department of Water Resources, families that haul water for
domestic purposes ``spend the equivalent of $43,000 per acre-foot of
water compared with $600 per acre-foot for typical suburban water users
in the region. The Navajo water hauling cost is $133 per thousand
gallons. This water is among the most expensive in the United States
for a sector of the population that is among the poorest.'' \4\
Although S. 4633 will not eliminate water hauling altogether, it will
deliver a source of potable water that is of higher quality, more
reliable, and closer to homes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Id. There are 325,851 gallons in an acre foot.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the past decade, the Navajo Nation has invested $800 million in
water and wastewater infrastructure from a combination of its own
investments and a mix of other federal resources. Notwithstanding the
commitment of the Navajo Nation, there remains a significant funding
gap to meet the basic needs of our people. S. 4633 will largely address
these funding deficiencies.
II. Key Components of the Settlement
S. 4633 authorizes, ratifies, and confirms a historic water rights
settlement (``Settlement Agreement'') between the Navajo Nation and 38
other parties, including the Hopi Tribe, the San Juan Southern Paiute
Tribe, the United States, the State of Arizona, the Arizona State Land
Department, Salt River Project, Arizona Public Service, Central Arizona
Water Conservation District, Bar T Bar Ranch, local irrigation
districts and ranchers located within the Little Colorado River
watershed, and the Cities of Winslow, Flagstaff, Holbrook, Taylor,
Snowflake, Show Low, Eagar, Springerville, and St. Johns. The
Settlement Agreement reflects decades of settlement negotiations among
these parties. The 25th Navajo Nation Council unanimously approved the
Settlement Agreement on May 23, 2024. That same week it was unanimously
approved by the councils for the Hopi Tribe and the San Juan Southern
Paiute Tribe. The legislation, once enacted by Congress, will settle
the Navajo Nation's claims to the Little Colorado River, the Gila
River, and the Upper and Lower Basins of the Colorado River. It will
also address the Nation's claims to washes, tributaries, springs, and
underground water flowing on and underlying the Navajo Nation. Upon
approval by Congress, the Nation will be able to focus efforts on
developing our water resources and building an economy. Thereby we hope
to improve our people's health and living standards, and ensure that
our homeland and our people thrive now and into the future.
A. Water Claims Resolved
The Settlement Agreement, once confirmed by Congress through
enactment of S. 4633 and House companion bill H.R. 8940, will provide a
comprehensive settlement of the Nation's water rights in Arizona. Under
the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the Navajo Nation will have the
right to 44,700 acre-feet per year (AFY) of Colorado River water from
the State of Arizona's Upper Colorado River Basin allocation and 3,600
AFY of Fourth Priority Lower Basin Colorado River water.
The Nation will be entitled to divert and deplete all surface water
that is tributary to the Little Colorado River that reaches the Navajo
Reservation, provided that such diversions and depletions shall not
interfere with or diminish existing surface water uses. The Nation will
have the right to divert and deplete any surface water of the mainstem
of the Little Colorado River that reaches the Navajo Reservation. The
Nation will also have the right to divert and deplete up to 40,780 AFY
of surface water from the Little Colorado River for specific historic
irrigation projects in specified quantities and with identified
priority dates. The Nation will have the right to all the groundwater
that underlies the Navajo Reservation including the Navajo aquifer (the
``N-Aquifer'') and the Coconino aquifer. Resources shared by the Navajo
Nation and the Hopi Tribe, including the N-Aquifer and certain washes,
are subject to an intertribal use and management agreement that
includes a limit on annual pumping from the confined portion of the N-
Aquifer and the Shonto recharge area to 8,400 AFY.
B. The iina ba--paa tuwaqat'si pipeline and the Implementation Fund
The iina ba--paa tuwaqat'si pipeline is a key component of the
Settlement Agreement. The pipeline will deliver a portion of the
Nation's Upper Basin Colorado River allocation and a portion of the
Nation's Lower Basin Colorado River allocation from Lake Powell to the
Navajo Chapters of Cameron, Bodaway/Gap, Tuba City, Coppermine, Bitter
Springs, Cedar Ridge, Coal Mine Mesa, Grey Mountain, and Lechee and to
the San Juan Southern Paiute Reservation. It will also deliver water
from Lake Powell to Hopi Villages at Moenkopi, First Mesa, Second Mesa,
Third Mesa, Howell Mesa, and Keams Canyon. The cost of constructing the
pipeline is estimated to be $1.715 billion based on the Bureau of
Reclamation's Navajo-Hopi Value Planning Study--Arizona dated October
2020, updated in 2023. The sizing of the pipeline project is based on
an annual population growth rate of 1.8 percent and a municipal per
capita water demand of 130 gallons per capita per day. S. 4633 provides
a mandatory appropriation of $1.715 billion to fund the iina ba--paa
tuwaqat'si pipeline Implementation Fund to be used by the Bureau of
Reclamation to plan, design, and construct the pipeline.
C. Navajo Nation Water Settlement Trust Fund
In addition to the iina ba--paa tuwaqat'si pipeline Implementation
Fund, S. 4633 establishes and funds a water settlement trust fund for
each of the three tribes, also funded by mandatory appropriations: the
Navajo Nation Water Settlement Trust Fund--$2.7467 billion, the Hopi
Tribe Water Settlement Trust Fund--$508.5 million, and the San Juan
Southern Paiute Tribe Water Settlement Trust Fund--$29.8 million.
There are five separate accounts in the Navajo Nation Water
Settlement Trust Fund. The largest account is the Navajo Nation Water
Projects Trust Fund, which will receive $2.3692 billion and will be
used to plan, design, construct, operate, and maintain water supply
infrastructure including wells, water treatment facilities, pipelines,
storage tanks, pumping stations, electrical transmission equipment,
wastewater treatment facilities, and renewable energy facilities to
serve Navajo communities. The proposed projects include:
The iina ba--paa tuwaqat'si pipeline lateral that will
provide potable water to serve the communities of LeChee and
Antelope Point.
The Southwest Navajo Regional Groundwater Project that will
extend the Leupp-Dilkon Project to deliver potable water to
Leupp, Birdsprings, Tolani Lake, Teesto, Dilkon, and Indian
Wells.
The Ganado Regional Groundwater Project that will develop
and expand public water systems to deliver potable water to
Kinlichee, Ganado, Cornfields, Lower Greasewood, Jeddito, and
Steamboat.
The Black Mesa Project that will develop and expand public
water systems to deliver potable water to Black Mesa, Forest
Lake, Pinon, and Shonto.
The Four-Corners Project that will develop and expand public
water systems to deliver potable water to Chinle, Many Farms,
Rock Point, Round Rock, Sweetwater, Teec Nos Pos, and Tsaile/
Wheatfields/Blackrock.
The Kayenta Area Project that will develop and expand public
water systems to deliver potable water to Chilchinbeto,
Kayenta, Dennehotso, Mexican Water, and Oljato.
The Lupton Area Project that will develop and expand public
water systems to deliver potable water to Houck, Lupton, and
Nahata'Dziil.
The Code Talker Lateral that will extend the Code Talker
Lateral waterline and expand public water systems to deliver
potable water to Fort Defiance, Red Lake, and Saint Michaels,
with an intertie to the Ganado Area Project.
The Local Upper Basin Water Projects, small local projects
in the Upper Basin, that will develop and expand public water
systems to deliver additional water to local communities.
In addition to the Navajo Nation Water Projects Trust Fund Account,
S. 4633 confirms the establishment of four other accounts and
appropriates mandatory funding for these accounts:
The Navajo Nation Renewable Energy Project Fund Account: $40
million to support Navajo water development projects with
renewable energy;
The Navajo Nation Agricultural Conservation Fund Account:
$80 million to support historically irrigated acreage by
implementing modernized irrigation infrastructure, including
replacement and development of livestock wells and
impoundments;
The Navajo Nation Operation, Maintenance & Replacement Fund
Account: $229.5 million to support operation, maintenance, and
replacement costs of the water projects; and
The Navajo Nation Lower Basin Colorado River Water
Acquisition Fund Account: $28 million to purchase land in
Arizona with senior water rights with the intention to sever
and transfer such water rights for reallocation to the Navajo
Nation.
D. Waivers
In return for resolution of the Nation's water rights claims, the
federal funding to develop the water infrastructure, and such other
benefits as provided in the Settlement Agreement, the Navajo Nation
will waive claims against the State, the Hopi Tribe, the Hopi
Allottees, the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe and any other individual,
entity, corporation, or municipal corporation under federal, state or
other law including past, present and future claims for water rights
arising from time immemorial and thereafter forever; past, present and
future claims for water rights arising from time immemorial and
thereafter forever based on aboriginal occupancy of the land; past and
present claims for injury to water rights from time immemorial through
the enforceability date; past, present, and future claims for injury to
water from time immemorial and thereafter forever; past, present and
future claims for injury to water rights arising from time immemorial
and thereafter forever based on aboriginal occupancy of the land;
claims for injury to water rights arising after the enforceability date
in a manner not in violation of the Settlement Agreement or State law;
and past, present and future claims arising out of or relating to the
negotiation, execution or adoption of the Settlement Agreement, any
judgment or decree approving or incorporating the Settlement Agreement,
or the legislation. The Navajo Nation will also waive its claims
against the United States for all water rights settled under the
Settlement Agreement, including all past, present, and future claims
for such water; claims of past or present injury to such water rights;
past, present, and future claims arising out of monitoring activities
by the United States; past and present claims related to foregone
benefits from non-Navajo use of water; past and present claims based on
damage, loss, or injury to land or natural resources due to loss of
water or water rights related to hunting, fishing, gathering, or
cultural rights; past and present claims related to failure to
establish or provide water delivery systems; past and present claims
relating to irrigation projects; and past and present claims based on
failures to provide dam safety improvements.
E. Limited Waiver of Sovereign Immunity
Pursuant to Navajo Nation Resolution CMY-26-24 unanimously
approving the Settlement Agreement, the Navajo Nation will consent to a
limited waiver of sovereign immunity in the circumstance that a party
to the Settlement Agreement brings an action to interpret or enforce
the Settlement Agreement or the legislation or a landowner or water
user in the Little Colorado River Watershed or the Gila River Watershed
brings an action to interpret or enforce the waivers or the decrees and
so long as the action does not include request for an award of money
damages, court costs, or attorneys' fees.
F. Right to Use and Lease Colorado River Water
The Navajo Nation is uniquely located in both the Upper Basin and
the Lower Basin of the Colorado River. In order to efficiently provide
water to Navajo communities it must move Colorado River water allocated
to the Navajo Nation from the Upper Basin to the Lower Basin and from
the Lower Basin to the Upper Basin. The Navajo Nation's ability to move
water depends on Congressional action and S. 4633 authorizes such
movement of water. The Nation's right to move its water anywhere within
the State is consistent with the intent of the settling parties and
Congress to address critical water needs on the Navajo Reservation
irrespective of which Basin a particular Navajo community is located
within. The iina ba--paa tuwaqat'si pipeline commences in the Upper
Basin and crosses into the Lower Basin, delivering Colorado River water
from Lake Powell to both Upper Basin and Lower Basin communities. Some
of the Lower Basin communities it will serve include Bitter Springs,
Bodaway/Gap, and Coalmine and high population/high growth communities
like Cameron and Tuba City. There is a lack of viable options for the
development of a firm, sustainable supply of water for the Navajo
Nation in Arizona without the iina ba--paa tuwaqat'si pipeline
delivering surface water to these communities. Therefore, it is
absolutely essential that the Nation be able to effectively move its
water supply within the Navajo Reservation. It would make no sense,
neither economically nor from an engineering perspective, to preclude
the efficient movement of water simply because the Navajo Reservation
happens to be in both Basins.
Like many other congressionally approved Indian water settlements,
the Settlement Agreement provides for the Nation to lease its Colorado
River water to users anywhere within the State and S. 4633 confirms
that right. The revenue generated by leasing its Colorado River water
to off-reservation Arizona communities will allow the Navajo Nation to
further develop and/or defray the cost of water infrastructure for its
communities and is an appropriate use of the Nation's Colorado River
water until such time as its population grows into its entitlement. The
Navajo Nation should not be precluded from leasing Upper Basin Colorado
River water to Lower Basin users. Doing so would severely hinder the
Navajo Nation from being able to obtain the full value of the water
that it negotiated.
The Upper Colorado River Basin states have raised certain questions
regarding these provisions. The Navajo Nation, the United States, and
the Basin states are having productive conversations and are working
diligently to resolve any outstanding issues. I believe all Basin
states are committed to the goal of addressing critical water needs on
the Navajo Reservation irrespective of which basin a particular Navajo
community is located in. As a result, the Navajo Nation is optimistic
that we can resolve these issues.
III. Value of the Settlement
This historic settlement is a critical investment for the United
States for several reasons. First, the Navajo Nation will forgo seeking
legal confirmation through litigation for a larger amount of water even
though we believe we are entitled to additional water rights under
well-established legal principles. To reach a settlement, the Nation
has agreed to reduce the scope of its water rights to account for the
ongoing drought and to stay within Arizona's Upper Basin Colorado River
apportionment. Ratification of the Settlement Agreement will avoid
protracted and costly litigation. Indeed, by the Tribes settling their
claims to the Colorado River, they have agreed to avoid complex legal
questions regarding the applicability of interstate compact obligations
to senior Indian water rights, which could destabilize the delicate
balance that exists among the Colorado River Basin states and water
users under the Law of the River. The Settlement Agreement enables the
many people who depend on the Colorado River to move forward together,
rather than fighting over this limited and critical water resource.
Additionally, S. 4633 will fund important unfunded federal
programmatic responsibilities by using S. 4633 infrastructure
development monies to fund federal programmatic responsibilities. It
will also secure and deliver a clean water supply to the Navajo Nation
that will save the federal government money that would otherwise be
spent treating infectious diseases on the Navajo Reservation. For
example, the Indian Health Service (IHS) estimates each dollar invested
in water and sewer infrastructure could yield savings of $1.18 in
avoided direct healthcare costs for these diseases. \5\ The projects
contemplated in the Settlement Agreement and funded in S. 4633 will
provide the necessary clean and reliable water supply to serve these
communities. Although IHS's numbers are not dispositive for the
entirety of the funds authorized in the settlement, they are
instructive as they show the value of providing these communities with
a secure and safe water supply. \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See Indian Health Service Announces Allocation Decisions for
$702.6 Million in Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Funding 2023 Press
Releases (ihs.gov). https://www.ihs.gov/newsroom/pressreleases/2023-
press-releases/indian-health-service-announces-allocation-decisions-
for-702-6-million-in-bipartisan-infrastructure-law-funding/
\6\ Settlement trust funds are available to supplement IHS
sanitation deficiencies if needed, or to provide programmatic support
if the future waste-water infrastructure demands fall outside of the
IHS authorities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Conclusion
S. 4633 is historic legislation. When history is written, the
passage of the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act
will be described as providing an opportunity for members of the Navajo
Nation and those of the Hopi Tribe and the San Juan Southern Paiute
Tribe to enjoy the same health and prosperity as other citizens of the
State of Arizona and the United States. It provides us with certainty
that the Navajo Nation will flourish as a permanent homeland for
generations to come. Enactment of this legislation and ultimate
implementation of the Settlement Agreement as conformed to be
consistent with this legislation will encourage stronger cooperation,
collaboration, and coordination between the settling parties--both
tribal and non-tribal. On behalf of the Navajo Nation, I respectfully
request that this Congress pass the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water
Rights Settlement Act as soon as possible.
Thank you. Ahehee'.
ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY
S. 4998--A bill to approve the settlement of water rights claims of
the Navajo Nation in the Rio San Jose Stream System in the State of New
Mexico, and for other purposes.
I appreciate this opportunity to share with you the Nation's strong
support for S. 4998, which would approve a settlement of the water
rights of the Nation in the Rio San Jose Stream System. I also wish to
convey the gratitude of the Nation to Senators Heinrich and Luja for
their commitment to improving the lives of the Navajo People and for
their leadership in sponsoring this important legislation.
S. 4998 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to execute,
on behalf of the United States, a settlement agreement to quantify the
Nation's water rights in the Rio San Jose Basin, ending four decades of
litigation over that basin, and recognize water rights in the Rio
Puerco Basin as well. The Navajo Nation Council unanimously approved
the Navajo Nation Rio San Jose Settlement Agreement (the ``Navajo
Nation Settlement Agreement'') on May 23, 2024. The Rio San Jose Basin
is one of the driest basins in New Mexico, and the last 150 years have
seen significant non-Indian development result in depletion of surface
and groundwater. Without congressional action to authorize this
settlement, and the legal protections and infrastructure development
that it promises, including water imports, the water supply situation
will become significantly more dire. The Navajo Nation Settlement
Agreement provides a path forward that will protect the flow that
remains in the Rio San Jose and provide the Navajo Nation with funding
that would enable us to import water to serve Navajo Chapters in the
Rio San Jose and Rio Puerco Basins.
The Navajo Nation settlement authorized by S. 4998 is a counterpart
to the Pueblos' Local Settlement Agreement addressing the water rights
claims of the Pueblos of Acoma and Laguna in the same geographic area,
which has authorizing legislation pending in S. 595. The Navajo Nation
Settlement Agreement is written as an addendum to the Pueblos' Local
Settlement Agreement. If implemented, these fully compatible water
rights settlement agreements provide a comprehensive settlement of
tribal claims in the Rio San Jose Stream System.
I. Geography and History of the Negotiations Leading to Settlement
The area covered by the settlement is in the Eastern part of the
Navajo Nation, within the Rio Grande Basin. To cents Ba'aadii (Female
River--the Rio Grande), born from one of our sacred mountains, is one
of the four sacred rivers that sets the boundaries for Dinetah
(Navajoland) and is a protector for the Navajo People. The Rio Grande
is a binational stream system, with its headwaters in Colorado. It
flows southward through New Mexico, Texas, and five states in Mexico,
all within a 335,000 square mile watershed. The Rio San Jose, located
in west-central New Mexico and west of Albuquerque, is a tributary of
the Rio Puerco, which flows into the Rio Grande. Nine chapter
communities are located in the Rio San Jose Basin (Baca/Prewitt,
Casamero Lake, Crownpoint, Littlewater, Mariano Lake, Ramah, Smith
Lake, Thoreau, Tohajiilee) and seven chapter communities are located in
the Rio Puerco Basin (Tohajiilee, Torreon, Ojo Encino, Pueblo Pintado,
Whitehorse Lake, Counselor, and Littlewater). Approximately 7,500
Navajo Nation citizens live in these two basins. Two Pueblos, Acoma and
Laguna, are also located in this area.
The Navajo Nation Settlement Agreement is the product of
approximately 40 years of litigation and decades of negotiations. The
Rio San Jose general stream adjudication, known as New Mexico ex rel.
Martinez v. Kerr-McGee Corp., still pending in the Thirteenth Judicial
District Court for the State of New Mexico, was initiated in 1983. The
Navajo statement of claims was filed in 1987. Negotiations regarding a
potential settlement of the claims of the Navajo Nation and Pueblos in
the Rio San Jose Basin were kickstarted in 1993 when the United States
established teams to negotiate comprehensive settlements of the tribal
claims. More intense settlement discussions were held starting in 2014.
The Pueblos of Acoma and Laguna, the State of New Mexico, and non-
Indian water users signed what they titled the Local Settlement
Agreement in 2022, setting out the water rights to be quantified for
the two Pueblos in the Rio San Jose Basin and reaching an agreement on
other key issues. The Navajo Nation's rights remained to be negotiated.
In the spring of 2024, after working together for over a year, an
agreement on the Navajo Nation's rights was reached. The parties to the
Navajo Nation agreement include the same parties to the Local
Settlement Agreement: the Pueblos of Acoma and Laguna, the State of New
Mexico, the City of Grants, the City of Milan, the Association of
Community Ditches of the Rio San Jose, and member acequias. This
agreement on the Navajo Nation's water rights in the Rio San Jose
Stream System is written as an addendum to the Local Settlement
Agreement, to which the Navajo Nation is now a party.
II. Key Provisions of the Settlement
This Act fairly and finally settles the claims of the Navajo
Nation, and the United States acting as the trustee for the Navajo
Nation, in the general stream adjudication of the Rio San Jose Stream
System entitled State of New Mexico, ex rel. State Engineer v. Kerr-
McGee, et al. The Act further recognizes the water rights of the Navajo
Nation in the Rio Puerco Basin and limits future claims for the
Nation's water rights in that basin. The settlement does not quantify
or affect any water right, or any claim or entitlement to water, of
Allottees in the Rio San Jose Stream System or the Rio Puerco Basin.
Water rights for allotments will be separately adjudicated from the
Navajo Nation's water rights.
As in the Pueblos' settlement, in exchange for significant funding
for needed water infrastructure, the Navajo Nation agrees to make no
priority calls against non-Indian uses under existing water rights. The
Nation further agrees to not impair other users in the development and
use of groundwater on Navajo lands.
The legislation establishes a trust fund for the Navajo Nation
consisting of $200,271,000 for the Navajo Nation Rio San Jose
Settlement Trust Fund to be used for water infrastructure development,
acquiring water supplies, Navajo Nation's Water Rights management and
administration, watershed protection and enhancement, support of
agriculture, water-related Nation community welfare and economic
development, and settlement implementation costs. $15,000,000 of this
amount is to be made available upon appropriation for feasibility
studies, planning, engineering, and design and related regulatory and
pre-construction compliance work for water infrastructure, as well as
for installing groundwater wells on Nation lands to meet immediate
domestic, commercial, municipal, and industrial needs. The legislation
also establishes a trust fund in the amount of $23,000,000 for the
Navajo Nation Operations and Maintenance Account, to be used for
operation, maintenance, and replacement of the Nation's water
infrastructure.
Under the Navajo Nation Settlement Agreement, the Nation's water
rights will be administered on Nation lands under the Navajo Nation
Water Code. The Navajo Nation permit processes will include protections
for protestants, including the opportunity to appeal Navajo permitting
decisions to state court. The Navajo Nation Settlement Agreement
further provides that the acequias will receive an additional
$3,000,000 from the State of New Mexico for specified water
infrastructure improvements and water acquisition and management-
related costs above the amount provided under the Pueblos' Local
Settlement Agreement, with a provision allowing the acequias to seek
additional state funding if necessary. The concept is that the
hydrologic benefits of improvements made by the acequias should
mitigate impacts of Navajo and Pueblo water development.
III. Planned Water Imports and Value of the Settlement
An important aspect of this settlement is that the Navajo Nation
intends to use part of the funding that would be provided in its trust
fund for costs related to two separate projects that will import water
to help address the water shortfalls in the basins. First, the Rio San
Jose Regional Water Supply Project will import water from the San Juan
River through the Navajo Gallup Water Supply Project. S. 4998 includes
authorization language to enable the Navajo Gallup Water Supply Project
to service the Rio San Jose Basin and to provide for coordination with
the Bureau of Reclamation in the design of the connector. The main
water transmission line from Crownpoint is proposed to be along Highway
371 to Thoreau, with connections from the main water transmission line
to the water supply points of the local Navajo Tribal Utility Authority
(NTUA) public water systems. Value Planning is ongoing to determine if
an alternative NGWSP alignment through the City of Gallup and Iyanbito
is more cost-effective. The most cost-effective route will be adopted.
Second, the Nation intends to use trust fund expenditures to import
water from the Middle Rio Grande Basin to the Rio Puerco Basin. The
Tohajiilee Waterline Phase 1 is under construction but lacks a
permanent water supply. Securing a permanent water supply to use in
this waterline is the highest Rio Puerco Basin settlement priority. The
waterline alignment begins at the westernmost tank operated by the
Albuquerque Bernalillo County Water Authority, and it ends at the
systems supply point at Tohajiilee Well #2. Togetheer, the Tohajiilee
Waterline Phase 1 and the Rio San Jose Regional Water Supply Project
will bring a much-needed, dependable, and high-quality water supply to
Navajo chapters in the Rio Puerco and Rio San Jose Basins.
An additional benefit of the water imports will be to take pressure
off of groundwater and surface water supplies of the Rio San Jose and
Rio Puerco Basins. The Settlement Agreement authorizes these imports
into these basins and calls on the Navajo Nation to make them a
priority in order to conserve the scarce water resources of these
basins. Water imports are one of the most effective ways to mitigate
the impacts of groundwater pumping. The imported water will help to
enable more sustainable management of the supplies in these basins, to
the benefit not only of the Navajo Nation but also the other water
users in the basins struggling with water shortages.
At a total cost to the United States of $223,271,000, this
settlement is set up to provide excellent value by building off of the
investments already made in the Navajo Gallup Water Supply Project and
Tohajiilee Waterline Phase 1. The Navajo Nation, and the United States
as trustee for the Nation, is waiving all claims to water rights within
the Rio San Jose Stream System that the Navajo Nation or the United
States acting as trustee for the Nation could assert in any proceeding
beyond the rights that are recognized in the Navajo Nation Settlement
Agreement, and the Nation waives other claims against the United States
and other parties to the settlement, as set forth in the Navajo Nation
Settlement Agreement and this legislation. The settlement funding will
also cover federal programmatic responsibilities for health care and
water infrastructure. Obtaining access to safe and adequate water
supplies will further save the federal government money that would
otherwise go towards treating diseases, some of which are a direct
result of not having access to clean and safe drinking water. Overall,
this agreement saves significant resources for the United States and
all the parties to the settlement that would otherwise go into costly
and divisive litigation. Instead of fighting over this scarce resource,
the Navajo Nation will obtain funding to use for infrastructure to
ameliorate water supply and management challenges.
IV. Conclusion
In conclusion, I want to say a few words about the importance of
water to my people. Since Navajo creation, water has served as a
fundamental element of Navajo life. To cents ei iina ate, (with water,
there is life), and it is elemental to Hozhoogo Oodaal (the Navajo Way
of Life). We pray and make offerings for rain to fill our rivers so our
animals, crops, land, and people can grow and thrive. In the Hozhooji
(Blessingway Ceremony), we cleanse our bodies with water and wash our
hair to restore harmony to our lives. Many Navajo People are connected
to water through our clan names. The spiritual aspect of water is
intertwined with the economic and social value of water as a basic need
for any community. This settlement of additional aspects of the Navajo
Nation's water rights claims in New Mexico will ensure that a
meaningful water source will be available and accessible to the Navajo
People living in the Rio San Jose and Rio Puerco Basins in the near
term and for generations to come. This settlement represents a win-win
outcome for all parties, including the Navajo Nation, the non-Navajo
water users, the State of New Mexico, and the United States. I
therefore respectfully urge the Committee to support the swift passage
of this legislation.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
We will now welcome virtually the Honorable Timothy
Nuvangyaoma, the Chairman of the Hope Tribe in Arizona.
Mr. Chairman?
STATEMENT OF HON. TIMOTHY L. NUVANGYAOMA, CHAIRMAN, HOPI TRIBE
Mr. Nuvangyaoma. Chairman Schatz, Vice Chair Murkowski and
members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to
testify and privilege to testify today in support of S. 4633,
the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act.
My name is Timothy Nuvangyaoma and I have the honor of
serving as the chairman of the Hopi Tribe. I want to apologize
to the Committee for not being there today in person with you
all, but I am recovering from surgery and unable to travel at
the moment. I thank the Committee for allowing me to
participate virtually.
I am Tobacco Clan, from the Village of Musungnuvi. I do not
carry today's message alone, so I do want to recognize Vice
Chairman Craig Andrews and the members of the Hopi Tribal
Council who are strong advocates for our Hopi people.
I also want to thank Senator Kelly, Senator Sinema, and the
entire Arizona delegation for their work on this important
legislation. This settlement stems from 50 years of
negotiations. For years, many thought it would be impossible
for all the parties to come together and find compromise.
However, here we are today.
It is no secret that Arizona and much of the west is in a
water crisis. I am proud that the parties were able to come
together in the midst of this crisis to produce a settlement
that will benefit all of our communities and offer all of our
future generations water security.
Hisatsinom, our ancestors, have resided in northeastern
Arizona since time immemorial. Upon emergence into this world,
our people encountered the deity who I will refer to in English
as the Original Caretaker, who gave us blessings to live on the
land. The Caretaker required our ancestors to follow in his
path as humble farmers and to respect the land.
Since our ancient time, we have remained in Hopitutskwa,
our traditional homeland, where we still reside today. Untold
generations of [phrase in Native tongue] have lived on this
land, preserving and conserving our water. When the United
States created the Hopi Reservation, they cut us off from much
of our Hopitutskwa. The United States landlocked and
waterlocked us completely, surrounded us with the Navajo
Reservation.
The Hopi Reservation stands separated from many of our
traditional water resources. The current water supplies on the
reservation cannot sustain our population or growth into the
future. Unlike others, Hopi cannot simply move away to where
there is more water. We have a sacred covenant with the
Original Caretaker to be stewards of this land. Our culture,
tradition, and religion are tied to this place. We cannot and
will not leave.
Fortunately, this settlement act will ensure that my people
have water for current and future needs. The settlement act
will accomplish several things. It will allow Hopi to continue
to fulfill our covenant with the Original Caretaker to act as
stewards for Hopitutskwa.
It will provide the Hopi Tribe, Navajo Nation, and San Juan
Southern Paiute with reliable water. It will construct the iina
ba--paa tuwaqat'si pipeline to serve the tribes. It will
provide us with reliable Upper Basin water. It will ensure that
groundwater is managed appropriately. It will create multiple
trust funds for the tribe to plan, construct, and operate water
supply infrastructure. And it will create certainty for non-
Indian communities.
I understand and appreciate the cost of this settlement
act. This settlement covers more Native Americans than any
other in U.S. history. It addresses the severe infrastructure
challenges caused by decades of Federal neglect. On our
reservation, approximately 30 percent of Hopis lack running
water. Settling our water claims means nothing if water doesn't
reach our homeland. The infrastructure to accomplish this is
expensive but necessary.
This isn't just a statistic. It is Hopi's reality. My good
friend and Hopi tribal Vice Chairman Andrews hauls his own
water today to provide for his home. This settlement will fix
that for his family and the many others living without running
water.
[Phrase in Native tongue], water is sacred. [Phrase in
Native tongue], water is our life.
I appreciate the opportunity to be here today virtually,
and I do welcome any questions that you may have. Thank you for
giving me this time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Nuvangyaoma follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Timothy L. Nuvangyaoma, Chairman, Hopi Tribe
Chairman Schatz, Vice Chairman Murkowski, and members of the Senate
Committee on Indian Affairs, my name is Timothy Nuvangyaoma and I serve
as Chairman of the Hopi Tribe. Thank you for the opportunity to testify
on behalf of the Hopi Tribe and its members in support of S. 4633, the
``Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024.'' I
also want to thank our Arizona Senators Kelly and Sinema, who jointly
introduced this bill in the Senate, as well as Representative Ciscomani
for introducing this historic bipartisan bill in the House, and
Representatives Stanton, Crane, Schweikert, Grijalva, and Gallego for
joining as cosponsors.
Hopi are northeastern Arizona's most ancient inhabitants.
Archaeological records show that our ancestors in the region date back
to prehistoric times. Our oral histories go even further back.
According to Hopi oral history, upon emergence into this world, our
people encountered the deity who I will refer to in English as the
Original Caretaker, who gave them his blessing to live on the land. The
Original Caretaker required that the Hopi follow in his path as humble
farmers and respect the land through religion and guidelines that he
passed on to them. A covenant was thus established between Hopi and the
Original Caretaker in which land was set aside for the Hopi to live as
stewards.
The Hopi Reservation was created to be a permanent homeland for the
Hopi people. However, when it divided up tribal lands in northeastern
Arizona, the United States government landlocked the Hopi Reservation
within the Navajo Reservation. As a result, we were cut off from direct
access to many of the water resources that sustained our ancestors for
thousands of years. The water resources we are left with on the Hopi
Reservation are severely limited and inhibit our ability to experience
the true tribal sovereignty and economic self-sufficiency which is our
right under the law of the United States of America.
Despite the dry, arid conditions of our Reservation, Hopi have
pushed the bounds of human ingenuity, finding ways to sustainably use
every available water resource to the maximum extent possible to uphold
our covenant with the Original Caretaker and ensure these lands remain
our home. But even as experts in desert survival since time immemorial,
Hopi cannot alone keep pace with the severe water scarcity and
uncertainty of today and tomorrow.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement
has shown the Hopi People that we are not alone. Through the
collaborative efforts of a historic coalition of tribal and non-tribal
parties--representing approximately one-third of Arizona's geographical
extent--Hopi can finally envision a future with a reliable supply of
safe, clean drinking water and essential water infrastructure. Among
other things, the agreement makes available to the Hopi Tribe diverse
water sources to meet future water needs on the Hopi Reservation,
including reliable mainstem Colorado River water. It also includes
inter-tribal agreements between the Hopi Tribe and the Navajo Nation to
manage and protect groundwater resources shared by the tribes,
highlighting principles of sustainability and cooperation.
For the Hopi Tribe, passage of the Northeastern Arizona Indian
Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 is not just a legal milestone, it
is a path forward. This Act will provide the Hopi Tribe with access to
reliable water and water infrastructure necessary to ensure the health,
well-being, and economic prosperity of the Hopi People for generations
to come. Of paramount importance to Hopi, this settlement and the
infrastructure made possible by this Act provide a way for Hopi to
fulfill its covenant with the Original Caretaker: to continue to live
as stewards of Hopitutskwa.
I. A Brief History of the Hopi People and Hopi Lands
The Hopi Tribe is a tribe of Hopi Indians organized under Section
16 of the Indian Reorganization Act of June 18, 1934 (25 U.S.C. 476),
and duly recognized by the Secretary of the United States Department of
the Interior (89 Fed. Reg. 944, 945 (Jan. 8, 2024)).
We are an ancient, agrarian people with one of the oldest cultures
in North America. Archaeological evidence indicates that present day
Hopi are a Puebloan people descended from the ancient Basketmaker
culture that existed in the Four Corners area from prehistoric times.
The archaeological record confirms centuries of continuous,
uninterrupted occupation of the Hopi ancestral territory culminating in
the lifeway of our contemporary Hopi people. Indeed, after extensive
fact-finding, the court in Healing v. Jones concluded that ``[n]o
Indians in this country have a longer authenticated history than the
Hopis.'' Healing v. Jones (``Healing II''), 210 F. Supp. 125, 134 (D.
Ariz. 1962), aff'd, 373 U.S. 758 (1963) (per curiam).
For thousands of years my people have lived and farmed the valley
floors, terraces, and tops of three mesas on the Colorado Plateau,
using a variety of specialized farming techniques adapted to the arid
region. Hopi field types included flood-water fields, akchin fields at
the mouths of arroyos, sand dune seepage fields, irrigated terraces fed
by springs, and irrigated fields fed by canals and reservoirs. Each of
these field types took advantage of the scarce water available in the
region. Hopi also hunted game, had poultry flocks, and gathered native
seeds and plants to supplement their agrarian lifestyle. Following the
introduction of livestock by the Spanish, we also mastered the art of
animal husbandry, making cattle herding and livestock a mainstay of
Hopi culture and development.
We continue to maintain many of the practices of our ancestors--
speaking our ancient Hopi language, practicing our ancient religions,
upholding ancient forms of village governance, and farming the fields
around our villages. In particular, agriculture is still inextricably
tied to our identity and culture as Hopi people. Our religious cycles
are structured around agriculture, with ceremonies marking the cycles
of the harvest season. Seeds are blessed with water and prayer for them
to grow strong. To live as a farmer is part of the Hopi covenant. The
Original Caretaker presented the ancient Hopi with three gifts that
symbolized their life principles: corn seeds, a gourd filled with
water, and a planting stick. Corn was to be the soul of the Hopi
people. The planting stick provided a simple and dependable farming
tool. The water gourd represented the Original Caretaker's blessings
and the relationship with the natural environment.
Water has particular religious significance to my people, beyond
agriculture. We pray for rain and snow and hold religious ceremonies at
springs. During the trial to quantity the Hopi Tribe's water rights, a
Hopi witness, Mr. Leonard Selestewa, eloquently testified: ``Water to
the Hopi people is very sacred. Water is alive. It is a spirit with
life.''
Hopi Ancestral Lands. The Hopi Tribe's ancestral territory
(Hopitutskwa) far exceeds the lands recognized as the Hopi Reservation
today. Hopitutskwa encompasses the entire Little Colorado River
watershed from its confluence with the Rio Puerco River west to its
confluence with the Colorado River. My people and our ancestors have
used or occupied the Little Colorado River Basin in Arizona for many
centuries. Hopi have inhabited the area between Navajo Mountain in the
north to the Little Colorado River in the south and between the San
Francisco Mountains and the Luckchukas since before A.D. 1300. See Hopi
Tribe v. United States, 23 Ind. Cl. Comm'n. 277, 292-93 (1973).
The Hopi Reservation. The Hopi Reservation covers approximately
3,000 square miles (roughly 1.66 million acres) in northeastern Arizona
and is bordered on all sides by the Navajo Reservation. It is comprised
of two non-contiguous geographic areas known as the 1882 Executive
Order Reservation \1\ (``1882 Reservation'') and Moenkopi. \2\ Unlike
many Indian reservations, the Hopi Reservation is comprised entirely of
trust lands held by the United States on behalf of the Hopi Tribe.
There are no inholdings of fee land owned by non-members because the
1882 Reservation was never allotted. Within the exterior boundaries of
the Hopi Reservation, in the lands around the Village of Moenkopi, are
eleven (11) allotments, which have never left trust ownership. The Hopi
Tribe has acquired a beneficial interest in most of the allotments as
individual Hopi allottees' interests have fractionalized over time. See
25 U.S.C. 2206, 25 U.S.C. 373a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Executive Order of December 16, 1882, set aside a
reservation of some 2.5 million acres for use by the Hopi Indians ``and
such other Indians as the Secretary [of the Interior] may see fit to
settle thereon.'' See also Sekaquaptewa v. MacDonald, Case No. CIV-579-
PCT-JAW (D. Ariz.), aff'd, 626 F.2d 113 (9th Cir. 1980). Litigation
followed to resolve conflicting land claims by the Hopi Tribe and
Navajo Nation to portions of the 1882 Reservation. See Healing II, 210
F. Supp. at 134. The Hopi Tribe was granted exclusive title to ``Land
Management District 6,'' (District 6) and the balance of the 1882
Reservation was found to be a ``Joint Use Area'' in which the Hopi
Tribe and the Navajo Nation shared the surface and subsurface rights.
Id. The Joint Use Area was later formally partitioned into the ``Hopi
Partitioned Lands'' and ``Navajo Partitioned Lands'' in accordance with
the Act of December 22, 1974 (Public Law 93-531; 88 Stat. 1712;
codified as amended at 25 U.S.C. 640d--640d-24).
\2\ By the Act of June 14, 1934 (48 Stat. 960; codified at 25
U.S.C. 640d-7), Congress set aside for the Navajo ``and such other
Indians as were already `located' thereon'' an additional area of land
outside the boundaries of the 1882 Reservation. Pursuant to that Act,
the Hopi Tribe brought an action in the federal district court to
establish the Hopi Tribe's right to the 1934 Reservation. The court
declared that portions of the 1934 Reservation belong to the Hopi
Tribe, including the Villages of Upper Moenkopi and Lower Moencopi and
surrounding areas (collectively, ``Moenkopi''). See Masayesva v. Zah,
65 F.3d 1445 (9th Cir. 1995); see also Honyoama v. Shirley, Jr., Case
No. CIV 74-842- PHX-EHC (D. Ariz. 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are no perennial streams located on the Hopi Reservation.
Before creating the 1882 Reservation, the United States was aware there
was no perennial water source on the Reservation and government
officials expressed concerns that the lack of perennial water sources
represented a major challenge to the Tribe's economic advancement.
Nevertheless, the Hopi Reservation lines were drawn, landlocked and
waterlocked, with Navajo lands on all sides.
The United States established the Hopi Reservation to protect Hopi
lands from incursions by our tribal neighbors and non-tribal settlors
so that Hopi could continue our agrarian lifestyle and support
ourselves rather than depend on the government for support. Because the
Hopi Reservation today is landlocked and isolated from water sources,
however, we are deprived of the fundamental prerequisites for modern
self-sufficiency: access to adequate and reliable sources of water.
This Settlement Act will remedy that.
Hopi Off-Reservation Lands. Under the Navajo-Hopi Land Dispute
Settlement Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-301; 110 Stat. 3649) (``1996
Settlement Act''), the Hopi Tribe acquired off-Reservation property to
settle claims stemming from the loss of Hopi Reservation lands due to
Navajo families settling on them. Lands acquired under the 1996
Settlement Act have express federal statutory water rights to both
surface water and groundwater. See id. 12.
The Hopi off-Reservation ranches include the 26 Bar Ranch, the
DoBell Ranch, the Aja Ranch, the Hart Ranch, the Clear Creek Ranch, and
the Drye Ranch. They are generally comprised of a mix of fee land, land
held in trust by the United States for the benefit of the Hopi Tribe,
and Arizona State trust land leased by the Hopi Tribe. The Hopi Tribe
also has separate fee lands (at and around the site of the ancestral
Hopi village of Homolovi) and trust lands (Twin Arrows and Hopi
Industrial Park).
II. Elements of the Settlement for the Hopi Tribe
Let me now summarize the principal elements of the comprehensive
water rights settlement ratified by S. 4633 specific to the Hopi Tribe:
The Act ratifies the comprehensive settlement of all the
Hopi Tribe's federally reserved and other water right claims,
including the Tribe's right to water from the Colorado River,
for the Tribe's Reservation and off-Reservation trust lands,
and for the Tribe's fee lands.
The Act recognizes the Hopi Tribe's exclusive rights to all
groundwater on the Hopi Reservation, subject to an agreement
between the Hopi Tribe and the Navajo Nation that limits:
the Hopi Tribe's pumping from the confined portion of the N
Aquifer to 5,600 acrefeet of water per year (``AFY'') (2,000
AFY of which may be used for industrial purposes); and
the Navajo Nation's pumping from the confined portion of
the N Aquifer and the Shonto recharge area of the Little
Colorado River Basin to 8,400 AFY (2,000 AFY of which may be
used for industrial purposes).
The Act protects the Hopi Tribe's on-Reservation groundwater
by ratifying agreements between the Hopi Tribe and the Navajo
Nation concerning the N-Aquifer (including the pumping limits
described immediately above). The N Aquifer is the primary
source of groundwater for the Hopi Reservation.
The Act recognizes the Hopi Tribe's exclusive rights to all
surface water on the Hopi Reservation, subject to an agreement
between the Hopi Tribe and the Navajo Nation as to the five
major washes (the ``Northern Washes'') shared by the Tribes to:
(1) grandfather existing water uses; (2) limit new uses
upstream of the southern boundary of the Hopi Reservation; (3)
provide for the rehabilitation of historic irrigation uses; and
(4) permit traditional agriculture and wash restoration.
The Hopi Tribe receives an allocation of 2,300 AFY of
Arizona's Upper Basin Colorado River water entitlement, some of
the most reliable Colorado River water in the system, which
will provide a vital and reliable supplement to the
insufficient water resources on the Hopi Reservation.
The Act affords the Hopi Tribe the option to use all or a
portion of 4,178 AFY of the Tribe's existing fourth priority
Lower Basin Colorado River water (along with the Tribe's
existing contract rights to 750 AFY of fifth priority Lower
Basin Colorado River water, and 1,000 AFY of sixth priority
Lower Basin Colorado River water) on the Hopi Reservation.
With respect to the Hopi Tribe's Colorado River water rights
(in both the Upper and Lower Basins), the Act authorizes
leasing, exchanges, long-term storage credits accrued as a
result of storage, storage on the Hopi Reservation for aquifer
recovery, and inter-basin transfer of Colorado River water
rights in Arizona.
The Act ratifies agreements among the Hopi Tribe, the Navajo
Nation, and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe to grant each
other and the United States rights-of-way for water projects
without objection or cost to ensure the efficient and cost-
effective execution of the infrastructure projects contemplated
in the Act.
The Act authorizes and approves an agreement among the
United States, the Hopi Tribe, the Navajo Nation, the Arizona
State Land Department, and the Bar T Bar Ranch to facilitate
cooperative and sustainable use of shared water resources, by
(among other things):
setting certain limitations on the Hopi Tribe's pumping on
its off-Reservation trust lands within six miles south and west
of the Navajo Reservation; o limiting aggregate Hopi Tribe
pumping to 6,570 AFY within certain areas of the Hart Ranch
proximate to the Navajo Reservation; and
establishing a protective buffer zone around the Hopi
Tribe's Bluebird Well near the Twin Arrows and Interstate
Highway 40 interchange.
The Act authorizes and funds the iina ba--paa tuwaqat'si
pipeline, \3\ to transport Colorado River water from Lake
Powell to the reservations for municipal, domestic, commercial,
and industrial water uses:
\3\ iina ba are Navajo words that we understand to mean ``for
life.'' paa tuwaqat'si are Hopi words that translate as ``water is
life.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
to serve Hopi communities with up to 3,076 AFY;
to serve Navajo communities with up to 7,100 AFY; and
to serve the San Juan Southern Paiute Southern Area with up
to 350 AFY.
The Act authorizes and funds multiple trust funds for the
Hopi Tribe for essential water infrastructure on the Hopi
Reservation and other purposes:
$390 million to plan, design, construct, operate, and
maintain water supply infrastructure, including wells, water
treatment facilities, pipelines, storage tanks, pumping
stations, electrical transmission equipment, wastewater
treatment facilities, and renewable energy facilities to serve
Hopi Reservation communities. The groundwater projects
currently contemplated include:
--The Side Rock-Moenkopi Groundwater Project, which is
intended to provide potable water to communities at Moenkopi
and unserved locations on the 1882 Reservation; and
--The Expanded Hopi Arsenic Mitigation Project (HAMP),
which is intended to provide potable water to communities at
First Mesa, Second Mesa, Third Mesa and Keams Canyon.
$87 million to support the operation, maintenance, and
replacement of the iina ba--paa tuwaqat'si pipeline and Hopi
groundwater projects.
$30 million to reduce water shortages on irrigated and
grazing land within the Hopi Reservation by funding the
implementation or repair of sprinklers, drip or other types of
irrigation systems, land leveling, stream bank stabilization
and restoration, pasture seeding, pasture management, fencing,
wind breaks, stockponds, windmills and wells, spring
restoration, repair, replacement, and relocation of low
technology structures to support akchin farming, flood-water
farming and other traditional farming practices, among other
actions; and
$1.5 million for the purchase of land and associated Lower
Basin Colorado River water rights within Arizona.
The Act's authorized and appropriated amounts for the iina
ba--paa tuwaqat'si pipeline and the Expanded HAMP are based on
updated estimates from the Bureau of Reclamation's ``Navajo-
Hopi Value Planning Study--Arizona'' (October 2020, updated
February 2024).
The groundwater projects will address immediate needs on the
Hopi Reservation, and later be operated in conjunction with the
iina ba--paa tuwaqat'si pipeline to satisfy the water needs of
the Hopi Reservation.
III. The Dire Need for Water and Water Infrastructure on the Hopi
Reservation
A. Inadequate Surface and Groundwater Resources
Surface Water. Surface water on the Hopi Reservation is
insufficient for a permanent homeland. The five Northern Washes are the
Reservation's only significant potential sources of surface water.
Perennial flow occurs in limited portions of three of the five washes,
but these flows are too small to provide a meaningful source of water
to meet future Hopi needs. The majority of the flow that occurs in the
washes, estimated to be between 29,941 AFY and 31,480 AFY, is from high
intensity, short duration monsoon storm flow events that are highly
variable and produce flows that have excessive amounts of sediment.
This excessive sedimentation inhibits storage and has historically been
a problem for reservoirs and canals in the region.
Further, the Northern Washes are listed as impaired under the Hopi
Tribe's Clean Water Action Plan Unified Watershed Assessment, due to
the high sediment load, chemical contamination, and presence of
coliform bacteria. As a result, surface water on the Hopi Reservation
would require considerable, likely cost-prohibitive, treatment to serve
as a source of drinking water.
As a result, alternative water resources, such as groundwater and
off-Reservation Colorado River water, are vital to ensuring the Hopi
Reservation is a permanent and sustainable homeland for the Hopi.
Groundwater. There are several groundwater aquifers beneath the
Hopi Reservation, including the alluvial aquifers, the Bidahochi (B)
Aquifer, the Toreva (T) Aquifer, the Dakota (D) Aquifer, the Navajo (N)
Aquifer, and the Coconino (C) Aquifer. Most of these aquifers cannot
provide adequate, reliable water. There is very limited potential for
the development of additional water supplies from the alluvium, and the
B, T, and D Aquifers. The alluvial, B and T Aquifers are limited in
extent and only produce small quantities of water to wells. The D
Aquifer also is known for wells with limited yield and the water would
need to be treated prior to use. The C Aquifer is present throughout
the Hopi Reservation, but occurs at great depth, making it difficult
and expensive to access. Moreover, water in the C Aquifer beneath the
Hopi Reservation has a high salt content, and C Aquifer water would
need to undergo expensive treatment in order to be used as a drinking
water source. The Hopi Tribe already attempted to use the C Aquifer at
one of its villages where the N Aquifer is depleted, and shut down the
project after several years because the water treatment costs were
prohibitive.
The N Aquifer has historically been the source of water for
industrial and municipal uses in the area. In Arizona, the N Aquifer
occurs only beneath portions of the Hopi and Navajo Reservations. The N
Aquifer is named for the Navajo Sandstone, and known to Hopi as Pukya.
The N Aquifer units beneath Black Mesa dip into a structural basin to
more than 1,500 feet below ground surface, and in these areas, where
the aquifer units are deeply buried beneath Black Mesa, the aquifer is
confined (the water occurs under pressure). The N Aquifer is confined
under the majority of the 1882 Reservation, including the Hopi Mesas.
It is unconfined under the southern and western portions of the 1882
Reservation and Moenkopi.
The N Aquifer is primarily recharged by rainfall or snowmelt. Most
of the groundwater stored in the N Aquifer was recharged during the
late Pleistocene period when the temperature was cooler and
precipitation was higher. N Aquifer groundwater is more than 30,000
years old in the vicinity of the Hopi villages on the 1882 Reservation.
The confined portion of the aquifer is recharged near the Shonto area
on the Navajo Reservation, and from there the groundwater moves to the
southeast, south and southwest beneath Black Mesa. A natural
groundwater divide existed under predevelopment conditions at about the
northeastern tip of the Hopi 1882 Reservation. North and east of the
divide, the groundwater flowed to the northeast on the Navajo
Reservation. South and west of the divide, groundwater flowed to the
southwest beneath the Hopi 1882 Reservation. In 1983, the U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS) estimated annual recharge near Shonto to be
4,830 acre-feet. More recently, the confined N Aquifer annual recharge
rate has been estimated between 2,500 and 3,500 acre-feet.
N Aquifer well yield on the 1882 Reservation in the vicinity of the
Hopi Mesas is about 100 gallons per minute (gpm). The N Aquifer is
thicker in the northern portion of the 1882 Reservation, where N
Aquifer well yield is about 350 gpm. In the far northeastern corner of
the 1882 Reservation, the well yield can reach about 500 gpm. N Aquifer
well yield in the unconfined portion of the aquifer under Moenkopi is
about 25-30 gpm. Significant quantities of groundwater (i.e., more than
about 40 gpm) cannot be obtained from N Aquifer wells anywhere on
Moenkopi. Although N Aquifer water quality is generally very good, it
exceeds the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Maximum Contaminant
Level for arsenic at First and Second Mesas.
For decades, the N Aquifer's ancient, pristine and irreplaceable
water was mined to slurry coal via a pipeline to the Mohave Generating
Station near Laughlin, Nevada. My people have always viewed, and
continue to view, the mining of this water as a desecration. Indeed,
serious questions about the circumstances and validity of Hopi
``consent'' to this arrangement have never been answered.
Due to concerns of the Hopi Tribe and Navajo Nation regarding the
long-term effects of withdrawals from the N Aquifer, the USGS
established a monitoring program for water resources in the Black Mesa
area in 1971. The program monitors N Aquifer water levels and water
quality, compiles information on water used by Peabody Western Coal
Company (PWCC) and tribal communities, maintains several stream-gaging
stations, measures discharge at selected springs, conducts studies, and
reports findings. The USGS has prepared progress reports on the
monitoring program since 1978.
According to published USGS monitoring reports, N Aquifer
groundwater withdrawals for mining and municipal uses began around
1965. Groundwater withdrawals from the N Aquifer reached a peak of
8,000 acre-feet in 2002. The average annual withdrawal between 1965 and
2016 was 5,063 acre-feet. This includes all withdrawals from the N
Aquifer by PWCC, the Hopi Tribe, and the Navajo Nation. No other entity
uses the N Aquifer.
PWCC has been the largest user of groundwater on Black Mesa since
the late 1960s. PWCC began pumping in 1968 and averaged about 4,000 AFY
from 1972 through 2005. From 2006 through 2021, PWCC pumping averaged
1,105 AFY. As a result of PWCC's reduced pumping beginning in 2006 due
to cessation of water mining for the coal slurry, some water levels in
the confined portion of the N Aquifer have started to recover. Annual N
Aquifer withdrawals by the Hopi Tribe between 2000 and 2016 averaged
498.2 acre-feet. Hopi Tribe N aquifer withdrawals were just under 440
acre-feet for 2020 and 2021. The maximum amount of water withdrawn in
the past from the N Aquifer by the Hopi Tribe was 562.1 acre-feet in
2007.
Groundwater pumping has caused N Aquifer water-level declines. From
the prestress period (before 1965) to 2021, the USGS reports that
groundwater levels declined in 18 of 25 wells with measured water
levels. Water levels in the unconfined area had a median change of -0.4
feet, with 7 of the 13 wells monitored indicating a water-level
decline. Water levels in the confined area of the N Aquifer had a
median change of -25.9 feet, and the changes ranged from -133.7 feet to
+17.3 feet. Of the 12 wells monitored in 2021, 11 showed a water level
decline.
Water level declines in the N Aquifer have led to reduced flow at
springs and streams. The USGS reports downward trends in flow at
Moenkopi School Spring, Pasture Canyon springs, and Moenkopi Wash. Many
of these springs are vital to Hopi religious ceremonies and cultural
practices.
B. The Impacts of Aging and Inadequate Water Infrastructure
Current infrastructure on the Hopi Reservation is a patchwork of
aging and inadequate systems, which has long jeopardized the well-being
of our people and forced many to leave their ancestral lands. Without
adequate infrastructure, the Hopi Tribe lacks the foundation upon which
to build a well-functioning economy in the modern era.
Current Water Infrastructure. There are sixteen public water
systems on the Hopi Reservation, all of which are supplied by
groundwater, mostly through wells. Most of the systems were constructed
between the 1950s and the 1990s with federal funds and assistance from
the Indian Health Service. The systems have expanded incrementally over
time as the village populations increased; as a result, much of the
piping and storage volumes are undersized and are incapable of
providing typical water demands and adequate fire protection. Our pipes
are smaller than what is ordinarily used in typical cities and towns
and the distances between fire hydrants within villages exceed that
typically required by national standards. Other deficiencies include
water towers and storage tanks in need of maintenance and pump houses
and controls in need of refurbishment and replacement. Some supply
wells are over fifty years old and approaching the end of their useful
life, and some exceed EPA drinking water standards for arsenic.
In 2005-2006, Dr. W. Michael Hanemann and Dr. Dale Whittington,
both economists with expertise in water resource management in
developing countries, conducted a household survey of 737 households in
the twelve main Hopi villages on the Hopi Reservation to determine
detailed household water use behavior. According to the survey, 18
percent of the people who lived in homes in villages were not connected
to a public water supply. Of those people, 84 percent accessed water
through public taps or neighbors with connections to the public system
with the remaining 16 percent obtaining water from windmills and
springs.
Today, the enrolled membership of the Hopi Tribe stands at 14,768,
approximately 9,000 of whom are residents of the Hopi Reservation. The
Hopi Tribe estimates that at least 2,700 enrolled members on the
Reservation live without running water. I live in one of the oldest
continuously inhabited communities in the United States, the Village of
Mishongnovi. Many homes in Mishongnovi do not have running water. These
circumstances are inexcusable in the United States of America.
Socio-Economic Conditions. Lack of reliable water resources and
water infrastructure on the Hopi Reservation has been detrimental to
the health, safety, and prosperity of all residents of the Hopi
Reservation. It has artificially restrained economic development and
population growth. The Hopi Tribe has consequently suffered poor socio-
economic conditions, resulting in extremely low household incomes and
increased reliance on public assistance. These challenges are
compounded by the lack of housing and basic modern amenities like
running water.
The socio-economic conditions on the Hopi Reservation reflect the
need for economic development to improve the lives of the Hopi people.
The Hopi Tribal Council, as a sovereign government, is keenly aware of
these socio-economic indicators as it leads efforts to develop economic
strategies on the Reservation and drive initiatives to promote federal
policies of tribal self-determination and economic self-sufficiency.
The Tribe has worked tirelessly to generate economic development while
continuing to protect its lands and cultural resources. The Hopi Tribe
continues to explore and secure funding for economic development
projects to capitalize on its natural resources, including exploration
of coal gasification, solar/wind generation, and other alternative
energy strategies. In addition to these energy development projects,
future potential business ventures on Hopi lands include RV parks,
hotel/motels, restaurants, campgrounds, convenience stores with
gasoline stations, small tourism galleries or museums, billboards, and
small travel centers and shopping centers. The Tribe and its affiliates
also continue to be leaders in the cattle industry. Ranching is an
integral part of Hopi life, and it is the most extensive land use
activity on the Hopi Reservation today.
However, without reliable water and the infrastructure to deliver
the water to where it is needed, the Hopi Tribe's strategies and
efforts to improve economic conditions on the Reservation are doomed to
failure. The Settlement Act is the first and most important step
towards solving these problems.
Population. Hopi is one of the few tribes whose reservation is
located on a portion of its ancestral homeland. A pillar of Hopi
community is the call to return home that is inherent in all of us.
However, the socio-economic conditions described above, in addition to
historic federal assimilation policies, have forced many Hopi people to
leave the Reservation. This, among other factors such as scattered
housing and language barriers, makes it difficult to get a true count
of the Hopi population.
Experts estimate the Hopi population in its ancestral territory
exceeded 29,000 in the early 16th century but dropped dramatically to
between 8,000 and 10,000 due to smallpox and other disease epidemics
brought by the Spanish after their arrival in 1540.
During the Hopi Tribe's water adjudication, the Hopi Tribe retained
expert witness, Dr. David Swanson, a renowned a demographer who holds a
doctorate in sociology/population studies. \4\ Using a complex
autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) method, Dr. Swanson
forecasted that by 2100 the total population on the Hopi Reservation
would be 20,142 (19,084 tribal members and 1,058 non-Hopi) and the
total off-Reservation Hopi member population would be 23,338.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Curriculum Vitae available at https://profiles.ucr.edu/api/
CvAttachment/7034812.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, Dr. Swanson explained the limitations of the ARIMA
method--namely that it relies on historical data to forecast the future
and therefore assumes the same policies, economic conditions, and other
factors that were in effect during the period of the beginning
population data will continue unchanged into the future. Past federal
laws and policies, such as the Indian Relocation Act of 1956 (Public
Law 959; 70 Stat. 986), encouraged--if not outright forced--Native
Americans to leave their reservations and traditional homelands and
assimilate into the general population. See Cohen's Handbook of Federal
Indian Law 1.04; see also, e.g., Lorie M. Graham, ``The Past Never
Vanishes'': A Contextual Critique of the Existing Indian Family
Doctrine, 23 Am. Indian L. Rev. 1, 15 (1998); Ryan Seelau, Regaining
Control over the Children: Reversing the Legacy of Assimilative
Policies in Education, Child Welfare, and Juvenile Justice That
Targeted Native American Youth, 37 Am. Indian L. Rev. 63, 84 (2013).
Less overt federal policies also affected migration. The child welfare
system had a rippling effect on the separation of Native families.
Graham, at 23-25, 53-54. Criminal legislation swept Native offenders
into the federal criminal justice system, incarcerating and relocating
Native people to off-reservation prisons and treatment facilities.
Seelau, at 92-95. Many Native American men enrolled in the military
during WWI and WWII and were often relocated off-reservation when they
returned home from war through the federal government's relocation
policies.
These historic federal policies have had lasting effects on
reservation populations, even though federal policy has shifted away
from assimilation, relocation, and termination and towards tribal self-
sufficiency and sovereignty. E.g., the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968,
(Public Law 90-284; 25 U.S.C. 1301 et seq.); the Indian Education
Act of 1972 (Public Law 92-318); the Indian Self-Determination and
Education Assistance Act of 1975 (Public Law 93-638); the Tribally
Controlled Schools Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-297); the Indian
Education Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-427).
The Hopi population has been deeply affected by these policies.
Although Hopi resisted efforts to send our children to off-Reservation
boarding schools at the turn of the 20th century, many Hopi children
attended boarding schools and other off-Reservation schools through
1985 when the first high school opened on the Hopi Reservation. Many
Hopis enroll in the military. Many have left in search of economic
opportunities. Dr. Swanson's ARIMA method could not account for how
policy changes will impact future demographic patterns.
The United States' population expert during the Hopi Tribe's water
adjudication was Dr. Gretchen Greene, a Ph.D. economist with an
expertise in economic development on Indian reservations. Using a
Cohort Component Method (CCM), Dr. Greene forecasted that by 2110 the
total population on the Hopi Reservation would be 49,301 and would
reach a stable population at 52,016 sometime thereafter. Unlike Dr.
Swanson's ARIMA projection, Dr. Greene's CCM allowed her to model the
``components of change'' in a population (i.e., births, deaths, and
migration) rather than rely only on historical population or enrollment
data.
Based on all of the best available data and projection methods
provided by the United States and Hopi Tribe experts, the Hopi Tribe
predicts a future on-Reservation population of 52,016. The Hopi
Reservation cannot serve as a permanent homeland for the Hopi people
without sufficient reliable water to meet the needs of the entire
population, and infrastructure to get that water to where it is needed.
IV. Conclusion
In the closing lines of the Arizona Supreme Court's seminal opinion
on the water adjudications in Arizona, the Court expressed its sincere
``hope that interested parties will work together in a spirit of
cooperation, not antagonism'' in resolving Native American tribes'
claims to federal reserved water rights for their reservations. In re
Gen. Adjudication of All Rights to Use Water in Gila River Sys. &
Source (``Gila V''), 35 P.3d 68, 81 (Ariz. 2001). The Court aptly
observed that ``the welfare and progress of our indigenous population
is inextricably tied to and inseparable from the welfare and progress
of the entire state.'' Id. Twenty years later, the Hopi Tribe seeks
nothing more than a fair allocation of water and adequate
infrastructure to make the Hopi Reservation an abiding and livable
homeland for present and future generations of Hopi. Despite the
practical difficulties of surviving in such an arid, and often hostile,
environment, the Hopi Tribe has a well-documented history of thriving
in northeastern Arizona for a thousand years.
In a spirit of cooperation, the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water
Settlement identifies the water quantities, water resources, and
critical infrastructure needed to deliver safe, reliable water that
will allow the Hopi Tribe to prosper and continue to preserve its
history, culture, and religious traditions on its aboriginal homeland
for another thousand years.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Now we are happy to welcome and introduce the Honorable
Johnny Lehi, Jr., Vice President of the San Juan Southern
Paiute Tribe in Arizona. Welcome.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOHNNY LEHI, JR., VICE PRESIDENT, SAN JUAN
SOUTHERN PAIUTE TRIBE
Mr. Lehi. [Greeting in Native tongue.] I want to thank
Chairman Schatz and Vice Chair Murkowski for allowing us to
testify today about Senate Bill 4633. I would also like to
thank Senator Kelly and Senator Sinema for their unwavering
support in moving this bill forward.
My name is Johhny Lehi Jr., and I am the Vice President of
the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe. For the Paiute Tribe, this
bill is about so much more than just water. Not only does this
historic bill resolve water rights for three tribes and
represent the efforts of 39 parties, for the Paiutes, it is the
resolution to several decades of living as strangers in our own
homeland. It provides our members with water, and it ratifies a
24-year-old treaty to establish and recognize the San Juan
Southern Paiute Tribe Reservation.
I have lived in Hidden Springs my entire life. It is a
small community of San Jan Southern Paiute tribal members
located near Tuba City, Arizona. Importantly, Hidden Springs
sits within the boundaries of the Navajo Reservation.
My family has been in this area for generations. Growing
up, it was always difficult to understand why the Paiutes have
been living in the same area for so long, and yet don't have an
exclusive reservation and are considered outsiders in our own
homeland. We are hopeful that Senate Bill 4633 will rectify
this unfortunate reality.
The San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe is a small tribe located
in Northern Arizona and Southern Utah, within the boundaries of
the Navajo Reservation. Most people don't know that a large
part of the Navajo Reservation was actually set aside by
Congress for the Navajo, Hopi, and the San Juan Southern Paiute
Tribes in 1934.
While the Paiute Tribe has shared this territory with the
Navajo Nation for more than 160 years, our tribe was in this
area long before the relocation of, or encroachment from other
tribes.
As the only federally recognized tribe in Arizona without
an exclusive reservation, we are unable to take advantage of
basic services like funding opportunities that would provide
our tribal members with livable homes, running water and
electricity, all because we are a tribe without a homeland.
Generations of San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe have come and
gone without ever seeing the creation of our exclusive
homeland. The mental and emotional impact of being a landless,
homeless tribe is something I wouldn't wish upon anyone.
Senate Bill 4633 will absolutely change things for my
tribe. You have heard about the water rights included in the
legislation, and you will hear more about the pipeline project
and the ability to provide people with safe, reliable drinking
water. The water rights and the pipeline are crucial to all
three tribes.
For my tribe, S. 4633 will ratify a treaty between the San
Juan Southern Paiute Tribe and the Navajo Nation that our tribe
has waited more than 24 years to see become a reality. This
treaty will create the San Juan Southern Paiute Reservation,
made up of 5,100 acre in a southern area near Tuba City,
Arizona, and an additional 300 acres in southern Utah. All of
this land is currently located within the Navajo Reservation.
Senate Bill 4633 not only ratifies the treaty that creates
our reservation, but it also provides for the water we need to
make our reservation a true homeland for our people. The
funding provided by S. 4633 will help create the infrastructure
necessary to serve our tribal members.
A tribe without land is a tribe without a future. Land is
what allows tribes to develop economic opportunities, generate
revenue, and continue to pass down our way of life to our
children and our children's children.
My kids are starting to ask me the same questions I
struggled with when I was young: why don't we have a
reservation? Why can't our people get running water or graze
animals? Now, thanks to S. 4633, I have positive and hopeful
answers for them that include the real possibility of someday
soon providing my people, including my children, with the
opportunity to build a future on the reservation.
With your help, this treaty, this promise, that the Navajo
Nation and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe made to each
other 24 years ago, can finally be ratified. Please support
Senate Bill 4633 and help my people claim our small place in
this world.
Thank you, Senator.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lehi follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Johnny Lehi, Jr., Vice President, San Juan
Southern Paiute Tribe
Hello in Paiute
I want to thank Chairman Schatz and Ranking Member Murkowski for
allowing us to come and testify today about Senate Bill 4633. I would
also like to thank Senator Kelly and Senator Sinema for their
unwavering support in moving this bill forward.
My name is Johhny Lehi Jr, and I am the Vice President of the San
Juan Southern Paiute Tribe. For the Paiute Tribe, this bill is about so
much more than water. Not only does this historic bill resolve the
water rights of three tribes and represent the efforts of 39 parties--
for the Paiutes, it is the resolution to several decades of living as
strangers in our own lands. It provides our members with water, and it
ratifies a 24-year-old treaty to establish and recognize the San Juan
Southern Paiute Reservation.
I have lived in Hidden Springs my entire life. It is a small
community of San Jan Southern Paiute Tribal Members located near Tuba
City, Arizona. Importantly, Hidden Springs sits within the boundaries
of the Navajo Reservation. My family has been in this area for
generations. Growing up it was always difficult to understand why the
Paiutes have been living in the same area for so long, and yet don't
have an exclusive reservation and are considered outsiders in our own
homeland. We are hopeful that Senate Bill 4633 will rectify this
unfortunate reality.
The San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe is a small tribe located in
Northern Arizona and Southern Utah, within the boundaries of the Navajo
Reservation. Most people don't know that a large part of the ``Navajo
Reservation,'' was actually set aside by Congress for the Navajo, Hopi,
and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribes in 1934. While the Paiute Tribe
has shared this territory with the Navajo Nation for more than 160
years, our Tribe was in this area long before the relocation of, or
encroachment from other tribes.
As the only federally recognized tribe in Arizona without an
exclusive reservation, we are unable to take advantage of basic
services like funding opportunities that would provide our Tribal
Members with livable homes, running water and electricity. All because
we are a Tribe without a land base.
Generations of San Juan Southern Paiute have come and gone without
ever seeing the creation of our exclusive homeland. The mental and
emotional impact of being a landless, homeless Tribe is something I
wouldn't wish on anyone.
Senate Bill 4633 will absolutely change things for my Tribe. You've
heard about the water rights included in this legislation, and you'll
hear more about the pipeline project and the ability to provide people
with safe reliable drinking water. The water rights and the pipeline
are crucial to all three tribes. For my Tribe, S. 4633 will ratify a
treaty between the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe and the Navajo Nation
that our Tribe has waited more than 24 years to see become a reality.
This treaty will create the San Juan Southern Paiute Reservation, made
up of a 5,100-acre Southern area near Tuba City, Arizona, and an
additional 300-acre Northern Area near Navajo Mountain in Utah. All of
this land is currently located within the Navajo Reservation.
Senate Bill 4633 not only ratifies the treaty and creates our
reservation, but it also provides for the water we need to make our
reservation a true homeland for our people. The funding provided by S.
4633 will help create the infrastructure necessary to serve our Tribal
Members. We will be able to provide permanent housing, sanitation,
water and electricity. These are necessities that most living off-
reservation take for granted, but that my people have learned to live
without, and we have lived harder lives because of it.
A tribe without land is a tribe without a future. Land is what
allows tribes to develop economic opportunities, generate revenue, and
continue to pass down our way of life to our children and our
children's children.
My kids are starting to ask me the same questions I struggled with
when I was young. Why don't we have a reservation? Why can't our people
get running water or graze animals or have a homesite lease? Now,
thanks to S. 4633, I have positive and hopeful answers for them that
include the real possibility of someday soon providing my people,
including my children, with the opportunity to build a future on the
reservation.
With your help, this Treaty--this promise--that the Navajo Nation
and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe made to each other 24 years ago,
can finally be ratified. Please support Senate Bill 4633 and help my
people claim our small place in this world.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Vice President.
Now we are pleased to introduce and welcome the Honorable
Arden Kucate, the Governor of the Zuni Tribe in Zuni, New
Mexico.
STATEMENT OF HON. ARDEN KUCATE, GOVERNOR, ZUNI TRIBE
Mr. Kucate. Good afternoon. My sincere thanks to you,
Chairman Schatz, and Ranking Member Murkowski, for holding this
hearing and giving me the opportunity to testify. I also want
to thank Senators Heinrich and Lujan for their co-sponsorship
of our water settlement bill.
Zuni's reservation is the largest of New Mexico's 19
pueblos, containing almost half a million acres within the Zuni
River Basin in New Mexico. Carved out from our ancestral
homelands, it is located in a very rural area of western New
Mexico, and is home to close to 10,000 members.
Long before the coming of the Spanish conquistadors, we
grew corn, squash, beans, and other food crops in our main
village along the Zuni River, and in surrounding satellite
communities along tributary streams and springs, often
utilizing an irrigation technique that we are famous for,
waffle gardens.
Our adaptive irrigation techniques and careful stewardship
of our water and lands allowed us to irrigate thousands of
acres of land. Not surprisingly, our prayers and traditions
focus on the importance of water and agriculture to our
existence.
Our water supply was relatively stable until the late 19th
century, when the settlers upstream of our reservation began
diverting and storing virtually the entire flow the Zuni
River's primary tributary. Clear cutting of the forests in the
Zuni Mountains compounded our water supply woes, causing severe
erosion and clogging our waterways with silt. Consequently, the
Zuni River, once a perennial stream running through the heart
of our village is now a mere trickle.
Unfortunately, instead of taking action to stop these
upstream diversions by newcomers to the valley, the Federal
Government encouraged settlement by non-Indians through a
poorly conceived attempt to centralize Zuni farming away from
lands near our eastern and northern borders.
Disregarding our traditional farming practices, the
government constructed a series of dams and reservoirs within
our reservation. The construction of the first and largest dam
at what is called Black Rock buried Zuni our sacred spring,
desecrating the original home of our Salt Mother. The dam
failed in its first year.
Other dams and reservoirs that followed in the wake of
Black Rock's failure were also poorly engineered and not
maintained, and they effectively ended our traditional farming
practices, practices that had been successful for generations.
Today, our five irrigation units are largely useless and
need to be re-engineered and rebuilt. The pending settlement
will allow us to rehabilitate our five irrigation units in a
manner suited to climatic conditions as well as our traditional
irrigation practices. It will provide us with funds to replace
our aged municipal water system, including the water treatment
facility capable of addressing the high levels of contaminants
occurring in our groundwater, and construct a modern wastewater
treatment facility that will allow us to reuse our water
instead of allowing it to evaporate in outdated sewage lagoons.
For Zuni to sustain and grow, we must have modern safe and
reliable drinking water and wastewater services. The settlement
will provide funds for livestock watering facilities and
community water hauling stations. It will also provide funds to
restore the Zuni Rio River and Rio Nutria channels to support
water flows, including for ecological and traditional purposes.
The Rio Nutria is the last place on the planet where the
endangered bluehead sucker can be found.
In addition to resolving the tribe's water rights in the
Zuni River Basin, the settlement legislation will ensure the
continuation of protections for the sacred Zuni Salt Lake and
the surrounding sanctuary, and provide for transfers to the
tribe, in trust, of approximately nine sections of BLM land
surrounding the lake.
The Zuni Lake is located approximately 60 miles south of
Zuni in a remote area that is primarily used for grazing and
hunting. The lake and sanctuary are sacred to our tribe and
other tribes and pueblos in New Mexico and Arizona. For
centuries, our people have conducted pilgrimages to the lake to
pray and gather salt for ceremonial and domestic uses. The lake
and surrounding caldera are the defining geographic feature in
this otherwise desolate part of New Mexico.
Ratification of our settlement by Congress is of enormous
importance to my community and its future. It will usher in
what I sincerely believe will be the new chapter for our tribe,
allowing us to protect and sustainably develop our community's
limited water resources, to restore traditional agriculture, to
facilitate much-needed economic development, and to protect
cultural resources that are integral to our beliefs and
traditions. It will also allow us to adapt to the growing
impacts of climate change.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kucate follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Arden Kucate, Governor, Zuni Tribe
Good afternoon Chairman Schatz, Vice Chair Murkowski, and Honorable
Members of the Committee. On behalf of the Tribe, I want to extend my
sincere thanks to you for scheduling this hearing. And I want to
express my gratitude to Senators Lujan and Heinrich for their support
and leadership in introducing S. 4643.
Zuni's history is a story of resilience and persistence in the face
of federal neglect and mismanagement. Our reservation contains almost a
half million acres within the Zuni River basin, carved out from our
vast ancestral lands. It is located in a very rural area approximately
125 miles west of Albuquerque, extending to the Arizona border (See
Attachment 1 * for location map), and is currently home to some 10,000
members and their families.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Attachments 1-12 have been retained in the Committee files.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Centuries before the coming of the Spanish conquistadors, we grew
corn, squash, beans, and other food crops in our main village along the
Zuni River, and in surrounding satellite communities along tributary
streams and arroyos, often utilizing an irrigation technique that we
are famous for--waffle gardens (See Attachments 2 & 3 for pictures of
these gardens). Our storied irrigation techniques and careful
stewardship of our water and lands allowed us to irrigate over 15,000
acres of land, and provided our people with surplus supplies of corn
and other subsistence crops that could carry us through winter months
and other challenging periods. Known as the ``Father of Pueblos,'' our
agricultural practices were so successful that we had reserves to sell
to the US army and others.
We developed improvements and clever techniques to control and
divert water onto our lands, utilizing natural features and topography,
and adapting our techniques to changing conditions. Despite the
region's semi-arid environment and highly variable precipitation, our
water supply was relatively stable until the late 19th Century when
settlers located upstream of our reservation established the town of
Ramah and began diverting and storing virtually the entire flow of the
Zuni River's primary tributary. Clear cutting of the forests and
overgrazing in the Zuni Mountains compounded our water supply woes,
causing severe erosion and clogging our waterways with silt. The final
dagger was the construction by the BIA of Black Rock Dam in 1908,
immediately upstream of our village, which I describe below. As a
consequence, the Zuni River, once a perennial stream running through
the heart of our main village area (See Attachments 4 & 5), is now a
mere trickle for most of the year. Nevertheless, it remains enormously
important to our culture and traditions.
Unfortunately, instead of taking action to stop or limit these
junior diversions by newcomers to the Zuni River valley and taking
action to protect the watershed, the federal government, over our
objections, undertook ill-fated efforts to free up some of our
traditional agricultural areas for settlement by non-Indians--
constructing a series of dams and storage reservoirs in a poorly
conceived and executed attempt to centralize farming by our members.
Those efforts included the construction of a large dam and reservoir
just above our main village at what is known as Black Rock. The
construction buried our sacred spring, Malokyatsiki, the original home
of our Salt Mother (See Attachment 6) and ended river flows within our
village--flows that our ancestors depended upon for activities of daily
life, including the growing of crops, and remain central to our
religious practices. Black Rock Dam failed in its first year, leaving a
path of devastation downstream. (See Attachments 7 & 8). Although it
was rebuilt, it began silting in immediately, and within 20 years the
reservoir had filled with sediment, losing nearly all of its storage
capacity. Today it only serves to provide limited flood protection.
In the wake of Black Rock's failure, the federal government
effectively reversed course and constructed a series of other smaller
dams and reservoirs near our traditional farming communities, but these
were also poorly engineered and not maintained. In addition, while the
government encouraged a return to decentralized farming, federal
construction of these dams and reservoirs destroyed Zuni's ability to
use traditional farming methods that had been successful for
generations. Today, our five irrigation units, and the diversion
structures and reservoirs serving them, are sediment-laden and largely
useless, and need to be re-engineered and rebuilt. Zuni currently has
48 miles of open ditches and 20 miles of buried pipeline that
previously served our irrigation units. The Bureau of Reclamation, in a
study completed in December 2022, found that all 68 miles of
conveyances, valves, turnouts and other related infrastructure were in
poor condition. (See Attachments 9 & 10 showing an example of the
exposed and cracked concrete pipeline conveyance system).
Upstream, off-reservation groundwater pumping has also caused
significant declines in stream flows and spring levels on our
Reservation, and though these will be challenging to reverse, we are
determined to stop further declines. As part of the settlement, while
our neighbors will be permitted to drill new wells for domestic and
stock purposes, the State of New Mexico has instituted measures
prohibiting new large groundwater withdrawals near our Reservation, and
the parties have agreed to undertake a monitoring program to assist
these efforts.
In addition to our irrigation infrastructure needing to be
overhauled, our domestic water system is in dire need of
rehabilitation. We are dependent on two wells located over 10 miles
from our village, both of which have poor water quality. The EPA has
notified Zuni that contaminate levels in these wells exceed safe
drinking water standards. And our continued reliance on them
jeopardizes several sacred springs in the area that have experienced
major drawdowns in recent years.
While we are proudly a very traditional tribe, and our geographic
isolation has helped us to remain that way, we are also a poor tribe,
and high unemployment is a challenging problem. Our community needs new
economic opportunities, and we believe that outside businesses,
including manufacturing businesses, can be attracted to our reservation
because our people are renowned for their skilled work in producing
world famous jewelry and pottery. But we must be able to offer new
businesses safe and reliable water supply and wastewater services. \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We recently worked with our local rural electric cooperative to
provide highspeed Internet throughout all of the populated areas of the
reservation, and to upgrade and improve the reliability of electric
service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The settlement will comprehensively resolve all of Zuni's water
rights claims in the Zuni River basin, both surface and ground water.
The Settlement Agreement provides Zuni surface water rights sufficient
for irrigation and livestock, including the filling of reservoirs and
impoundments, and groundwater rights sufficient for current and future
domestic, commercial, and municipal needs. The Agreement also
recognizes Zuni's right to continue its traditional irrigation
practices.
The settlement will provide the Tribe with critically-needed
funding for various water-related projects including: (1) a much needed
replacement of the Tribes aged municipal water system which has
significant levels of contaminates (including radionuclides and
arsenic); (2) a modern wastewater treatment facility that will allow
the re-use of wastewater, replacing our outdated sewage lagoons; (3)
redesign and rehabilitation of our 5 irrigation units and associated
reservoirs in a manner that is suited to climatic conditions, as well
as to Zuni's traditional irrigation practices; (4) restoration of the
channels of the Zuni River and the Rio Nutria, a tributary of the Zuni
River, for traditional and cultural purposes, and to support habitat
for several endangered species, including the critically endangered
Zuni bluehead sucker; (5) repairing and upgrading livestock watering
facilities, to allow for more efficient and even use of our range lands
by tribal ranchers; and (6) rehabilitating and developing additional
wells and community water hauling stations in areas outside of our main
village area.
In addition to resolving the Tribe's water rights in the Zuni River
basin, S. 4643 will ensure the continuation of protections for the
sacred Zuni Salt Lake and Sanctuary, and provide for the transfer to
the Tribe, in trust, of approximately 4,756 acres of BLM land
surrounding the Lake, subject to valid existing rights. The Zuni Salt
Lake is located in a remote part of western New Mexico, approximately
60 miles south of our main village, in an area that is primarily used
for grazing and hunting (Attachment 1 shows the location of the Lake.).
The Lake and Sanctuary area are sacred to our Tribe, and a number of
other southwestern tribes and pueblos, including the Pueblos of Laguna
and Acoma, as well as the Navajo, Hopi and Apache tribes.
The Lake itself is a unique, naturally occurring saline lake,
maintained by a delicate balance of surface water and groundwater (See
Attachments 11 & 12 for pictures of it and the surrounding caldera).
For centuries Zuni and other tribes and pueblos have made pilgrimages
to the Lake, the home of Zuni's Salt Mother, for spiritual guidance and
to collect the salts for ceremonial and domestic use. The surrounding
land, with pilgrimage trails and other cultural resources, has
similarly been respected by tribes and pueblos as a sanctuary where no
hunting is allowed, and conflicts are set aside, in reverence for the
sanctity of the area. The Sanctuary contains numerous sacred places,
religious shrines, and ancestral archaeological sites, which S.4643
will protect. These protections reflect those already included in the
BLM management plan for the area, but the legislation will make them
more permanent.
In addition, the approximately 4,756 acres of BLM land to be
transferred into trust is important for the protection of the Lake as
it encircles the geographic features surrounding the Salt Lake maar to
create a stronger natural physical buffer. This transfer is subject to
all existing grazing and other rights. There are also several hundred
acres of private land within the acquisition area, and we have been in
communication with the land owner with the mutual goal of working out a
land exchange with the BLM that will help preserve the Salt Lake, and
provide the land owner with title to certain other BLM lands on which
the land owner has corrals and other improvements.
The adjudication to determine the Tribe's water rights in the Zuni
River basin has been ongoing for over 25 years, clouding the rights and
interests of basin residents and straining relationships. Needless to
say, the ratification of the Settlement Agreement by Congress is of
enormous importance to my community and its future. While protecting
all existing water uses by our non-Zuni neighbors, the settlement will
usher in what I sincerely believe will be a new chapter for our Tribe,
allowing us to protect and sustainably develop our community's limited
water resources, to restore traditional agriculture, and to facilitate
much needed economic development. It will also allow us to address and
adapt to the growing impacts of climate change, which has resulted in
diminished snowpacks in most years, along with more intense monsoonal
storm events.
The Tribe is not aware of any opposition to the settlement, and it
is supported by the only irrigation company in the basin, the Ramah
Valley Land and Irrigation Company, and by the State of New Mexico. As
an integral part of the settlement, the State of New Mexico worked
closely with us to establish measures to help protect our Reservation
springs and streams, as well as our sacred Salt Lake and Sanctuary. I
want to recognize New Mexico State Engineer's office for its work on
this settlement, and for the open and cooperative manner in which its
technical and legal staff negotiated and worked with us. We ask the
United States to join us in this effort, on behalf of my community and
the generations to come.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. I will
be pleased to answer any questions you may have, and respectfully urge
members of the Committee to support Senate passage of this legislation,
which is critical to our future.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
We are pleased to also welcome the Honorable Tanya Lewis,
the Chairwoman of the Yavapai Apache Nation in Camp Verde,
Arizona. Welcome.
STATEMENT OF HON. TANYA LEWIS, CHAIRWOMAN, YAVAPAI APACHE
NATION
Ms. Lewis. Thank you. [Greeting in Native tongue.] My name
is Tanya Lewis. I am the Chairwoman for the Yavapai Apache
Nation. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.
I would also like to express my gratitude to Senator Kelly
and also Senator Sinema for introducing and co-sponsoring S.
4705, and for their steadfast advocacy for our tribe and our
water settlement.
As I speak to you today, I stand on the shoulders of my
ancestors and Tu nliinichoh, the Verde River, a living being in
the center of our cultural and religious way of life. The
passage of this legislation is vital for us to secure a future
of clean water and permanent homeland for the Yavepe and
Dilzhe'e people.
My people have called the Verde Valley home since the
beginning of time. And it is time for us to access the water
guaranteed in our treaty with the United Staes. S. 4705
fulfills this long overdue promise by providing a secure water
supply for our reservation, and preserving our groundwater
resources.
The settlement will also help protect the Verde River,
ensuring that Arizona's last free-flowing river continues to
thrive for future generations. In the face of Arizona's ongoing
drought, we must take concrete and generational actions to meet
our community's long-term needs. Like our counterparts in metro
Phoenix who benefit from historic Federal reclamation
investments, we too must have access to modern water
infrastructure, to use and protect our reserved water rights
under this settlement.
To grasp the importance of this settlement, one must
understand my nation's history and our deep-rooted relationship
with the Verde River and the Verde Valley. Our ancestral
homelands cover over 16,000 square miles across central
Arizona. When gold was discovered in the 1800s, a rush of
settlers claimed our land, used our water, and decimated the
wildlife we relied on. It ultimately escalated into a larger
conflict known as the Apache wars.
Intent on ending the conflict, President Grant established
the Camp Verde Indian Reservation in 1871. It was to be our new
permanent homeland, where we were told we would remain
undisturbed by non-Indian settlers. We became productive and
profitable farmers. In fact, an irrigation ditch we hand-dug in
1874 is still in operation today as the Cottonwood Ditch.
However, our prosperity was short-lived. Due to pressure
from settlers to open the Camp Verde Reservation, on February
27, 1875, 1,476 of our people, young and old, pregnant and
infirm, were force-marched 180 miles through the Mazatzal
Mountains in the dead of winter to the San Carlos Reservation,
where efforts were made to try and persuade the Federal agent
in charge to take a route around the mountains using wagons and
horses. He responded, ``They are Indians, let the beggars
walk.'' More than 100 of our people died on that treacherous
journey.
Shortly after, President Grant terminated the Camp Verde
Reservation, allowing non-Indians to build their lives and
communities using the land, water, and other resources that
were once guaranteed to my people. President Grant did not
terminate our water rights to the Verde River. However, the
United States permitted others to use our water and in doing
so, the State of Arizona prospered while my people suffered.
By 1890, with the end of the Apache Wars, my ancestors
began their return home to the Verde Valley, mostly on foot.
However, upon returning, we found no established reservation or
land base of any kind. In 1909, with the assistance of our
Indian agent, we purchased back just over 18 acres along the
Verde River.
Since then, we have acquired more land for our reservation,
but we still lack sufficient lands to meet the housing needs of
our membership. Many of our tribal members live off the
reservation and are scattered throughout the Verde Valley. We
hope to add 3,206 acres to our reservation through an
administrative land exchange with the Forest Service, which we
have worked on for many years. This expansion is essential for
providing housing for our growing membership and fostering
economic development.
Without a new water resources, we cannot meet our
community's current or future needs, as our local groundwater
supplies are diminishing in both quantity and quality. This
poses a serious threat to my people's health. Like all
communities, we must secure the water necessary for our growth
and prosperity. This legislation will finally grant us what the
United States promised us in the 1852 Apache Treaty.
On behalf of the Yavapai Apache Nation and our ancestors,
[phrase in Native tongue] for this opportunity.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Lewis follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Tanya Lewis, Chairwoman, Yavapai Apache
Nation
Good afternoon, my name is Tanya Lewis, I am the Chairwoman of the
Yavapai-Apache Nation. I want to thank the Committee for the
opportunity to testify and thank my fellow Tribal leaders who are here
today and wish them well as they work to resolve their critical water
issues. The Yavapai-Apache Nation strongly supports S.4705, the
Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 (Settlement)
and the Tu nliinichoh Water Infrastructure Project that will be
developed as part of this Settlement. I include with this written
testimony a number of letters of support from State stakeholders and
environmental organizations that we request be included in the record
of this hearing.
Our Reservation, known as the ``Yavapai-Apache Reservation''
(Reservation), is located in central Arizona's Verde Valley. Because of
the failed Indian policies of the United States during the mid to late
1800's and other historic disparities, our Reservation lands are
noncontiguous and comprised of five different ``Districts'' (the Middle
Verde District, the Camp Verde District, the Clarkdale District, the
Rimrock District, and the Montezuma District).
The Verde River, which is one of the last remaining perennial
rivers in Arizona, runs through the heart of the Middle Verde and Camp
Verde Districts of our Reservation. The Settlement has taken many years
to accomplish, and each generation of leadership for the Yavapai-Apache
Nation (Nation) has played a role in the Nation finally reaching a
comprehensive settlement to confirm our water rights and help protect
the health and vitality of the Verde River and our local aquifers.
To the Yavepe (Yavapai) the Verde River is known as Hatayakehela
(``big river''), and to the Dilzhe'e (Apache--being one of the numerous
subgroups or bands comprising the ``Western Apache'') the Verde River
is known as Tu nliinichoh (``big water flowing''). The Verde River and
its sources are within the aboriginal homeland of the Yavepe and
Dilzhe'e people, which, as discussed in greater detail below, spans
more than 16,000 square miles across what is now central and western
Arizona.
The Verde River and its associated groundwater resources are the
primary sources of water used by the Nation for all municipal,
commercial, industrial, agricultural, and recreational uses. We also
have significant cultural and religious interests in the Verde River
Watershed and in the many springs and other water sources that supply
the Verde River and its tributaries. These water sources support the
Bald Eagle and other wildlife that are important to the culture and
lifeways of the Nation. The Verde River's water sources, and the trees
and plants that are nurtured by the river, all play an essential role
in the cultural and religious practices of the Yavapai and Apache
People--practices that help preserve the identity and health of the
Nation to this day.
It is also important to note that the Verde River and its perennial
tributaries, like Oak Creek, Wet Beaver Creek, and West Clear Creek,
provide diverse public recreational opportunities, including boating,
kayaking, hunting, fishing, birding, hiking, picnicking, and
photography. Because of this, the Verde River is a major economic
driver for the rural communities located throughout the watershed,
including the Yavapai-Apache Nation and our neighboring communities in
and around the Verde Valley, including the City of Sedona, the City of
Cottonwood, the Town of Camp Verde, and the Town of Clarkdale. In
short, the continued reliable flow and health of the Verde River and
its tributaries (and the groundwater sources that sustain these
systems) is crucial to the Nation's present and future livelihood in
its permanent Tribal homeland under Winters v. United States, 207 U.S.
564, 565, 28 S. Ct. 207, 208 (1908).
The Nation's Settlement Agreement will finally and fully resolve a
host of critical water issues for the Nation by, among other things,
providing water certainty for the Nation and our neighbors in the
watershed and avoiding further costly litigation in Arizona's Gila
River Adjudication Proceedings over the Nation's water rights and those
of the United States on our behalf. It will also support the capture,
treatment, and reuse of effluent for use on the Nation's farming
operation in lieu of groundwater pumping and provide for the
importation of a renewable water supply from the C.C. Cragin Dam and
Reservoir that will further limit groundwater pumping that threatens
the longevity of local aquifers and a healthy flowing Verde River.
To understand the importance of the Settlement, it is important to
understand the Nation's history and the longstanding relationship that
the Yavepe and Dilzhe'e people have to the Verde River and the Verde
Valley. I will briefly review our history next in my testimony. I will
also discuss the importance of this settlement as a means to finally
fulfill the United States' obligation to secure the permanent homeland
for my people, including a reliable and permanent source of water that
all people need to have secure economic future. After this, I will
provide a summary of the Settlement Agreement and S. 4705.
History of the Yavapai-Apache Nation
The Yavapai-Apache Nation of the Camp Verde Indian Reservation is a
federally recognized Indian Tribe pursuant to the Apache Treaty of
1852, 10 Stat. 979 and Section 16 of the Indian Reorganization Act of
1934, P.L. 73-383, 48 Stat. 984 et seq. Our first constitution was
approved in 1937 and was most recently amended in April 1992. The
Nation is comprised of two distinct cultures, the Yavepe people and the
Dilzhe'e people.
Our aboriginal homeland spans more than 16,000 square miles across
central Arizona. A map of our territory is attached to this testimony,
and we ask that it be included in the record. Following the 1848 Treaty
of Guadalupe Hidalgo, in which Mexico ceded the lands that comprise
most of the Southwestern United States, our territory became part of
the United States. Notwithstanding this, our lifeways and culture were
left largely unaffected by the westward expansion of the United States
until 1863, when gold was discovered in our homeland. This discovery
led to a rush of people claiming our land, using our water, and killing
the game our people needed to survive. The armed conflict between our
people and the occupiers became part of a much larger conflict referred
to by historians as the ``Apache Wars'' which lasted until 1890.
Intent on bringing an end to the conflict, the United States
established a series of military camps across Arizona as well as
reservations where a federal policy of concentrating and confining our
people within a defined territory was imposed. President Grant
established the Camp Verde Indian Reservation in 1871 along with the
army fort known as Camp Verde. Our people were told then that our
homeland would be reduced to the boundaries of the new reservation.
Because the Verde River has always been necessary to sustain our
people, the 1871 Camp Verde Reservation was purposefully established to
encompass forty-five miles up and down the Verde River and ten miles on
each side of the Verde River, totaling 900 square miles. This left our
people with 6 percent of what had been our aboriginal territory since
the beginning of time. Yet, this 900 square mile Reservation was to be
our new permanent homeland, where, we were told, we would remain
undisturbed by non-Indian settlers. On this supposed ``permanent''
homeland, we took advantage of its proximity to the Verde River to
become productive and profitable farmers. In fact, an irrigation ditch
we hand dug in 1874 is still in operation today as the Cottonwood
Ditch.
Unfortunately, as was all too often the case throughout Indian
Country in 19th century America, our Nation's prosperity would not be
allowed to continue. Due to pressure to open the Camp Verde Reservation
to settlement by non-Indian farmers, ranchers, and miners, and from
profiteers who wanted to quash the competition from our successful
farms and ranches, the United States was convinced to open up our
remaining lands to non-Indian settlement by forcibly removing our
people from the Camp Verde Reservation and imprisoning us on the San
Carlos Apache Reservation--approximately 180 miles away in southeastern
Arizona.
Beginning on February 27, 1875, without consent or consideration,
1,476 of our people, young and old, pregnant, and infirm, were force
marched by federal troops as prisoners of war 180 miles over the
Mazatzal Mountains, including several stream crossings at high water in
the dead of winter. When efforts were made to try and persuade the
Special Commissioner of Indian Affairs in charge of our removal to take
a less treacherous route around the mountains by means of wagons and
horses, he responded by saying ``They are Indians, let the beggars
walk.'' Corbusier, William T, Verde to San Carlos, p. 267 (1971). More
than 100 of our people died enroute to San Carlos due to exposure,
trauma, childbirth, and drowning. Today, we solemnly commemorate this
date every year as Exodus Day, in honor of our ancestors and as a
reminder of the suffering they endured on that two-month march. On
April 23, 1875, President Grant terminated the Camp Verde Reservation
and returned it to the public domain. This allowed non- Indians to
build their lives and communities using the land, water, and other
resources that were once guaranteed to my people by the United States.
After the surrender of Geronimo's band of Chiricahua Apache in
1886, the Army began issuing permits allowing our people to work off
the San Carlos Reservation and gather traditional foods in our original
territory. By 1890, the Army stopped issuing permits and my people
started to migrate back to our original homelands. Once given this
opportunity, the Yavepe and Dilzhe'e returned home to the Verde Valley
on foot. In many cases it took us years to make our way home. Along the
way, many of my ancestors worked on the Federal dams, like Bartlett Dam
and Roosevelt Dam, which were constructed on the Verde and Salt Rivers
to supply water to what is now metropolitan Phoenix. These dams are
owned by the United States and operated today by the Salt River
Project, a settling party in our Settlement.
Once we returned home, we worked as cowboys, construction workers,
day laborers, and domestic workers. Our people returned to no
established reservation or land base of any kind. All of our lands had
been taken as a result of our 1871 forced removal to San Carlos by the
United States. But our ancestors still found a way to survive in the
communities that had sprung up in the Verde Valley on our former
Reservation. With the assistance and advocacy of our Indian Agent, Dr.
Taylor Gabbard, we were eventually able to secure appropriations from
Congress in 1909 to purchase back 18.25 acres of land along the Verde
River.
Since that time, we have been able to restore additional lands to
our Reservation and today, our Reservation totals 1,810 acres--just 0.3
percent of our former 1871 Camp Verde Reservation and 0.0017 percent of
our original territory. Because of the United States' forced removal of
our people from the Verde Valley and the termination of the 1871 Camp
Verde Reservation, we do not have the benefit of living on a unified
and large reservation. Instead, our Tribal members live throughout the
Verde Valley, both on and off our current Reservation lands. And
despite all the hardship and adversity, today, the Yavapai-Apache
Nation is one of the largest employers in the Verde Valley and we are a
young and growing population.
The United States' Obligation to Secure Sufficient Water for a
Permanent Homeland for the Yavapai-Apache Nation
We who today put forward this Settlement Agreement for approval by
the United States stand on the shoulders of our forebears who endured
so much just so that we could return to the homeland on which our
Creator placed us. More than 36 percent of the Nation's Tribal members
are under the age of 18. Our waiting list for Tribal housing, now at
more than 170 families, only continues to grow, but we have run out of
land to construct tribal housing or other tribal governmental
facilities. As a result, it is critical that the Nation secure the
necessary land and water resources we need to continue our cultural and
religious practices and provide the jobs, housing, social services, and
sustained local economy that are necessary attributes of a permanent
tribal homeland.
The Nation has a right to have the water it needs to secure a
permanent homeland for our people, including water for economic
development, housing, cultural uses, and other purposes. See In re
General Adjudication of all Rights to use Water in the Gila River
System and Source, 35 P. 3rd 68 (AZ. 2001) (setting forth the factors
for quantifying federal reserved water rights for Arizona Indian tribes
under Winters). Based on this standard, the Tribe filed water rights
claims in Arizona's general stream adjudication to the Verde River and
its systems and sources totaling 11,628 acre-feet per year (AFY) (in
addition to a claim for a non-consumptive instream flow right in the
Verde River).
In 2011, the Nation and the settling parties agreed to a water
budget for the Nation of 6,888.50 AFY, which is included in the
Settlement Agreement. In addition, in the Settlement Agreement, the
parties agreed to protect the instream flow of the Verde River, which
is necessary to protect the Tribe's cultural and religious uses of the
Verde River and to protect other key downstream Federal and other
interest in the Verde River that rely on a healthy flowing Verde River,
including (1) the National Wild and Scenic River (NWSR) segment of the
Verde River that was designated by Congress due to its outstanding
scenery and remarkable values under the Arizona Wilderness Act of 1984
(P.L. 98-406); (2) the Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation and the Salt River
Pima Maricopa Indian Community who divert and use Verde River water
sources as part of their Congressionally approved water rights
settlements; and (3) the Salt River Project and metropolitan Phoenix
that rely on surface water sources from the Verde River to meet a
significant portion of their water supply needs.
The Yavapai-Apache Nation has a right to prosper and thrive in our
restored homeland. We also have the right to self-determination and
self-sufficiency. To be sure, our ancestors recognized the abundance
and opportunity that the Verde Valley could provide when they returned
home with nothing and, through sheer persistence, began the process of
restoring our lands and rebuilding our community. But our community is
growing, and the Tribe needs to grow with it. This is why we have
invested our own dollars to complete an administrative land exchange
with the U.S. Forest Service. Once complete, the land exchange will add
an additional 3,088 acres of land to our Reservation--land that was
shamefully, if not unlawfully, taken from us in the first place. The
land exchange lands, coupled with 209 acres of Nation owned fee lands,
will be added to the Reservation as part of the Settlement Act. These
lands will serve as an anchor for our economic and community
development well into the future, ensuring that my people will always
have the economic revenue and housing we need to grow and thrive in our
homeland. To do this, however, we must have the water to which we are
entitled under the Winters doctrine, the Apache Treaty of 1852, and the
United States' trust responsibility to the Nation.
The Settlement achieves this goal by, among other things, importing
a renewable water supply from the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir to the
Reservation to offset groundwater pumping from the local aquifer, and
by supporting the Nation's ability to capture wastewater and treat it
to a high level for use on the Nation's farming operations in lieu of
the farm's sole option of pumping raw groundwater. The Settlement is
therefore critical to finally achieve a sustainable water future for
the Nation. Currently, the sole source of potable water in the Verde
Valley is local groundwater. However, groundwater pumping throughout
the Verde River Watershed has increased exponentially over the last 75
years, particularly in the Verde Valley, which is home to multiple
communities, including the Nation, the Town of Camp Verde, the Town of
Clarkdale, the City of Cottonwood, and multiple unincorporated
communities like Cornville and Rimrock.
As pressure on local aquifers has increased over the last decades,
the availability and quality of local groundwater resources has
diminished, in some cases frighteningly so. For example, increased
pumping on and around the Nation's Middle Verde District of the
Reservation has mobilized arsenic and other heavy metals that are
naturally present in the local aquifer. As a result, the Nation and our
neighboring communities have had to install expensive arsenic treatment
systems to ensure that the water we pump is safe to drink. In some
cases, arsenic concentrations are so high that treatment will not work.
In fact, our utility department has had no choice but to shut down an
existing well serving our Tunlii housing development due to untreatable
levels of arsenic contamination. This places the Nation in a difficult
and costly position, because the more we pump local groundwater
supplies the greater the chance we will encounter high levels of
arsenic and other heavy metals that will render our wells unusable as a
source of potable water for our people. The same is true for our local
neighboring communities.
In addition to arsenic and other heavy metals, our local water
sources have also been contaminated by bacteria and other organic
contaminants due to failing septic systems. Stomach cancer is one of
the primary cancer types in our community, and sadly Yavapai County has
one of the highest rates of cancer mortality in the State of Arizona.
It has long been proven that access to safe and clean drinking water
improves overall health and life expectancies--in short water is life.
Thus, the Nation's access to the delivery of up to 4,610 AFY of C.C.
Cragin water under the Settlement is critical if we are to improve the
health status of our people. Our people should not have to die younger
and at higher rates simply because we do not have access to safe water
supplies.
This is another reason why this Settlement is so vitally important
to the Nation. It will secure a renewable imported supply of water for
our Nation, which is necessary for our families and our businesses to
thrive, while also ensuring that the water we drink does not threaten
our life expectancy. Moreover, with this renewable water supply, we can
limit future groundwater pumping that depletes flows in the Verde River
which is a key source of our cultural health and spiritual wellness.
For our Nation to thrive, we must have a livable tribal homeland
for our community, and for that to happen, we need to have necessary
water supplies to meet our current and future needs. In short, this
Settlement Agreement and the legislation confirming it will finally
secure for our people the permanent home and prosperity that the United
States once promised us under the 1852 Apache Treaty.
History of Settlement Negotiations
The journey to reach today's hearing has been long and arduous for
our Nation. I want to acknowledge all the Nation's leaders, many of
whom have now passed on, who worked so hard and with such unwavering
commitment over the years on this Settlement, all so that I could be
here testifying before you today. Over forty years ago, the Nation, and
the United States on the Nation's behalf, filed our original claims for
federal reserved and other water rights under the Winters Doctrine to
the Verde River and its systems and sources in Arizona's General Stream
Adjudication, known as the ``Gila River Adjudication.'' Since this
time, the Nation has been an active litigant in the Gila River
Adjudication, though the Adjudication has yet to quantify our water
rights. While the Gila River Adjudication has dragged on, upstream
development and water diversions have depleted the water sources that
support the Verde River, threatening the Nation's water rights and the
natural and cultural resources the Nation relies upon in the Verde
River. As a result, the Nation has made securing our water rights and
protecting flows in the Verde River in cooperation with our neighboring
communities a top priority.
In 2008, the Secretary of the Interior's Indian Water Rights Office
(SIWRO) appointed a Water Rights Assessment Team to the Nation. In
2011, the SIWRO appointed a Federal Indian Water Rights Negotiation
Team. Since this time, we have been engaged in water negotiations with
the federal government, our local communities, the Salt River Project,
Central Arizona Project, the State of Arizona, and other key
stakeholders.
In July 2023, after several years of intense analysis conducted
with the assistance of the Bureau of Reclamation's Value Engineering
Study Team, the Nation and our settling partners agreed that the best
(and only) way to both secure a renewable water supply for the current
and future needs of our people and protect the Verde River was to
develop a water delivery project that will import a renewable water
supply from outside the watershed. As developed by the Bureau of
Reclamation, this project would deliver surface water from the existing
C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir that is owned by the Bureau of
Reclamation and operated by Salt River Project to the Yavapai-Apache
Reservation.
To this end, the Nation, our Federal Team, the State of Arizona,
Salt River Project, Central Arizona Project, and our neighboring
communities (the City of Cottonwood, Town of Clarkdale, and Town of
Camp Verde) have worked tirelessly to finalize the Settlement
Agreement. This work culminated in the Nation's Tribal Council formally
approving the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Agreement
on June 26, 2024.
Elements of the Settlement
Let me now summarize the principal elements of the comprehensive
water rights Settlement Agreement ratified by S. 4705:
The Settlement Agreement is a comprehensive settlement of
all outstanding claims for water rights for the Yavapai-Apache
Nation and the United States on our behalf. Importantly, as
part of the Settlement Agreement and the legislation, the
Nation will waive its outstanding claims for water rights and
damages associated with water rights in the Gila River
Adjudication against the United States and all State parties,
bringing finality and certainty to all the water users in the
Verde River Watershed.
Under the Settlement Agreement, the three Verde Valley
communities located on the Verde River (the City of Cottonwood,
the Town of Camp Verde, and the Town of Clarkdale) have agreed
to limit their groundwater pumping and to no longer develop
wells in close proximity to the Verde River, thereby protecting
the Verde River from depletions caused by these wells.
Under the Settlement Agreement, the Nation will have
confirmed and decreed water rights to:
--The delivery of 3,410 AFY of surface water from the C.C.
Cragin Dam and Reservoir through the Cragin-Verde Pipeline;
--The delivery, by exchange, of the Nation's 1,200 AFA of high
priority Central Arizona Project or ``CAP'' water from the C.C.
Cragin Dam and Reservoir through the Cragin-Verde Pipeline;
--The diversion of 1,593 AFY of historic Verde River water
rights for irrigation uses by the Nation on its farm;
--The diversion of 684 AFY of groundwater to meet certain
existing water needs on the Reservation and rights to
additional pumping (away from the Verde River) if needed as a
``back up'' supply in years when C.C. Cragin Reservoir water is
not fully available; and
--The right to capture, treat, and reuse all effluent produced
by the Nation, which will be treated in a new modern wastewater
reclamation facility and integrated into the Nation's farming
operation to further reduce diversions from the Verde River.
S. 4705 would authorize and fund construction of the Cragin-
Verde Pipeline and other infrastructure to deliver surface
water from the C.C. Cragin Reservoir Dam and Reservoir located
on the Mogollon Rim, to the Yavapai-Apache Nation for treatment
in a modern surface water drinking plant and distribution
throughout the Reservation. The project is called the ``Tu
nliinichoh Water Infrastructure Project.''
The Settlement Agreement and S. 4705 provides a pathway for
local Verde Valley communities to also secure a renewable water
supply from C.C. Cragin for their citizens, including for many
of our Tribal members who live in these communities. This will
be accomplished by allowing the Tu nliinichoh Water
Infrastructure Project to be sized to include delivery of C.C.
Cragin water to these local communities. This is a critical
component of the legislation, as this would offset current and
future groundwater pumping in the Verde Valley by these
communities. By reducing groundwater pumping, the Nation's
instream flow right in the Verde River, which is a trust
resource under the Settlement Agreement and the Act, will be
protected. Moreover, because several of these local communities
also provide drinking water to our Reservation lands (at the
Camp Verde, Middle Verde, and Clarkdale Districts), providing
these communities with access to a renewable water supply from
the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir under the Settlement will
help secure a renewable water supply for the Nation.
As part of the Settlement Agreement and with the funds
received under S. 4705, the Nation will replace its long-
outdated wastewater treatment system of facultative sewer
lagoons with a modern wastewater reclamation facility that will
allow the Nation to reclaim its wastewater for use in its
farming operation. This reclaimed water will allow the Nation
to offset current groundwater pumping from wells near the Verde
River and support future irrigation with renewable water
supplies in lieu of new groundwater pumping.
S. 4705 would authorize the completion of a land exchange
between the Forest Service and the Nation. This land exchange
is currently underway between the Nation and the Forest Service
under the normal administrative process administered by the
Forest Service, and it is expected to be completed in the fall
of 2024. However, because the exchanged lands are integral to
the Settlement Agreement, we have included authorization for
the land exchange in this legislation. If the Nation and Forest
Service complete the land exchange (as expected) this fall, as
we expect to do, we will not need Congress to authorize the
exchange.
S. 4705 directs the Secretary of the Interior to take
certain lands into trust that the Nation currently holds in
fee, including the soon to be exchanged land exchange lands
(which are subject to a pending lands to trust application
filed with the Bureau of Indian Affairs). All of these land
will be made part of the Nation's Reservation under the Act.
Finally, the legislation directs the Forest Service to use
existing authorities to undertake a land transfer to the Town
of Camp Verde for public safety purposes--including the
development of public safety facility to meet the needs of the
Town, the Nation, and those traveling along Interstate 17 in
the Verde Valley.
Conclusion
The passage of S. 4705 to ratify the Yavapai-Apache Nation's Water
Rights Settlement Agreement is essential if our Nation is to finally
attain a secure water future and a permanent tribal homeland for the
Yavepe and Dilzhe'e people. In this time of persistent drought and
aridification in Arizona, we must take concrete and generational action
to secure the long-term needs of our communities. And, like our
counterparts in metropolitan Phoenix who have long had the benefit of a
diverse water supply due to historic investments by the United States
in federal reclamation projects like Bartlett Dam on the Verde River,
for the Nation to meet the future water needs of our people, we must
also have access to renewable water resources and modern water
infrastructure.
The Yavepe and Dilzhe'e people have lived in the Verde Valley since
the beginning of time, and it is now time for the Nation, with the
assistance of our trustee the United States, to build the water
infrastructure needed to ensure that the Nation can continue to live
and thrive in the Verde Valley as was guaranteed to us in our Treaty
with the United States.
On behalf of the Yavapai-Apache Nation, thank you for the
opportunity to testify before you today. I will be pleased to answer
any questions you may have, and our Nation will help in any way it can
to secure enactment of this critical legislation.
Additional testimony
These additional comments are provided to respectfully clarify
ce1tain statements in the written testimony provided by the Honorable
Bryan Newland, Assistant Secreta1y for Indian Affairs, regarding the
Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of2024 (S. 4705).
1. The Nation's Settlement is Not a Last-Minute Settlement and Has Been
Carefully Negotiated with Highlv Skilled Negotiating Parties
Including the Salt River Project and the Appointed Federal
Negotiation Team
Settlement negotiations among the Nation and the Salt River Project
(SRP) began in 2009. ln 2011, a Federal Negotiation Team was appointed
for the Nation, and in that same year, the Nation, SRP, and the State
of Arizona agreed (with the participation of the Federal Negotiation
Team) to a water budget of 5,991 acre-feet per year (AFY) in depletion
(which equals 6,888 AFY in diversion) for the Nation's Settlement.
In early 2021 and throughout 2022, the Nation, SRP, and the Federal
Negotiation Team engaged in monthly negotiation meetings to identify
and resolve outstanding issues. Notably, the water budget for the
Settlement that was agreed upon by the Settling Parties in 2011 did not
change and was never an issue.
In 2022, the Bureau of Reclamation commissioned and funded a Value
Planning Study (VPS) to determine the best alternative for securing the
water sources necessary to satisfy the Nation's water budget. The VPS
Study was completed in July 2023.
Immediately after the completion of the VPS in July 2023, the
Settling Parties and the Bureau of Reclamation Value Planning Team held
multiple meetings and agreed that the Cragin-Verde Pipeline Project was
the best alternative to provide the necessary water supply to complete
the Settlement. The Bureau of Reclamation's Value Planning Team
subsequently undertook additional work to prepare a cost estimate for
the Cragin-Verde Pipeline Project which was provided to the Settling
Parties in January 2024.
In November 2023, before providing the cost-estimate for the
Project, the Value Planning Team, along with representatives of the
Salt River Project and the Nation, visually inspected the location of
the C.C. Cragin Reservoir outlet works for the pipeline and traveled
the entire 60-mile length of the pipeline route to determine if any
additional factors would require consideration for the cost estimate.
The Nation also commissioned a review of the Value Planning Team's
cost estimate by RMCI, a nationwide contractor with experience in
constructing large infrastructure projects and pipelines of this type.
RMCI concluded that the Value Planning Team's cost estimates were
reasonable and properly estimated. RMCI's review was provided to the
Federal Team in support of the reasonableness of the Value Planning
Team's cost estimate in July 2024.
2. The 3,297 acres of Land to be Added to the Existing Reservation is
Being Completed as Part of an Administrative Land Exchange and
Fee to Trust Process
The Nation's efforts to restore its Reservation began decades
before the Settlement was negotiated and the restoration of the 3,297
acres of land to the Reservation is not dependent on the Settlement.
For several years, the Nation has been engaged in an administrative
land exchange with the USDA Forest Service which is expected to
conclude in the next 60 days with the conveyance of Forest Service
lands that are contiguous to the Reservation, to the Nation, in
exchange for the conveyance of fee lands owned by the Nation to the
Forest Service. This exchange is a priority for the Forest Service at
the national level. Shortly after completing the land exchange, the
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is expected to take the exchanged lands
into trust (3,088 acres) and add them to the Reservation. An
Environmental Assessment for the land exchange and lands into trust
process has been completed and the issuance of a final record of
decision is pending.
In addition, the Nation is currently scheduled to file a separate
land into trust application with the BIA for the remainder of the land
that it owns in fee (209 acres) that is, or will become, contiguous to
the Reservation after the land exchange is completed. The total of all
lands (Exchange Lands and Lands to Trust) that will soon be added to
the Reservation is 3,297 acres.
In an abundance of caution, however, because the addition of the
3,297 acres is tied to the rights and obligations of the Parties in the
Settlement Agreement, and because the addition of this land to the
Reservation is critical to meet the permanent tribal homeland needs of
the Nation, the Settlement Act serves as a ``backstop'' to ensure that
the 3,297 acres of lands will ultimately be added to the Reservation.
In this way, the Parties can ensure that (a) the Nation's water
settlement budget will be available for use on all of the Nation's
Reservation lands as intended by the Settling Parties; and (b) the
Nation's waiver of rights and damages under the Settlement will also
extend to these lands, once added to the Reservation.
3. The Nation's Water Settlement Budget is Reasonable
The Nation's total Water Budget for Settlement, which is 5,991 AFY
in depletion and 6,888 AFY in diversion, will be met from multiple
water sources:
865 AFY ( depletion) and 1,594 AFY ( diversion) from
historic ditch and irrigation water rights to the Verde River;
516 AFY (depletion) and 684 AFY (diversion) from well
pumping; and
4,610 AFY (depletion) and 4610 AFY (diversion) from water
that will be delivered from C.C. Cragin Reservoir, of which
1,200 AFY is the Nation's Central Arizona Project (CAP)
allocation delivered by exchange through C.C. Cragin Reservoir.
As discussed at length in previous reports, the actions of the
United States in the 1870's to forcibly remove the Yavapai-Apache
Nation from the Verde Valley and terminate the original 1871
Reservation decimated the Nation and its People. While the Nation was
able to return to the Verde Valley in the 20th Century and restore some
of its Reservation lands within its homeland, the Nation is still in a
recovery process for its lands and economy. This is why the addition of
the 3,297 acres to the Nation's existing 1,809 acre Reservation is long
overdue and critically needed.
When the Nation filed its amended water rights claim in the Gila
River Adjudication in January 2023, it could only legally claim water
for its existing 1,809 acre Reservation, although the Nation was aware
that once its Reservation was increased in size to 5,106 acres, as
discussed above, the Nation would amend its claim to assert additional
federal reserved water rights for these new Reservation lands. \1\
Importantly, the Nation's January 2023 claim had to prioritize uses
across its very small land base because the current 1,809 acre
Reservation cannot accommodate the Nation's growing population and
economic development needs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Settlement Agreement expressly acknowledges that the Nation
may amend its water rights claim in the Adjudication. See Settlement
Agreement at Subparagraph 14.6.3 (``Nothing in this Subparagraph shall
prohibit the YAN or the United States acting as trustee for the YAN
from filing or amending claims in the Gila River Adjudication
Proceedings, consistent with this Agreement.'')
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Nation's claim of 11,629 AFY for its existing 1,809 acre
Reservation was heavily constrained with regard to its domestic,
commercial, municipal and light industrial (DCMI) uses (which claimed
920 AFY) because the existing Reservation lands could not accommodate
all of the Nation's required permanent tribal homeland uses
simultaneously--which is precisely why the addition of the 3,297 acres
to the Reservation is so important.
Agriculture also plays an important role in the identity and
sustainability of the Nation. While the Nation could have claimed DCMI
uses for its existing agricultural lands, this was inconsistent with
the Nation's prioritization of agricultural uses for its homeland, and
the Nation simply could not sacrifice its agricultural lands to claim
additional DCMI uses over irrigation uses. As a result, the Nation's
claim for its existing 1,809 acre Reservation includes 10,183 AFY for
irrigation uses.
However, as part of a comprise in this Settlement, the Nation has
agreed to settle for far less water (6,888 AFY) than its current claim
in the Gila River Adjudication (11,629 AFY). The delivery of water from
C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir to the Nation for use on a 5,106 acre
Reservation, coupled with increasing access to Class A+ effluent
produced from these new uses of C.C. Cragin water, will enable the
Nation to support new housing, economic development, and other DCMI
uses, while simultaneously reducing our water budget for irrigation,
since effluent will be used to support the Nation's farming operations.
At the same time, the expanded Reservation will finally provide room
for the Nation's young and growing population and for critically needed
economic development that is required to ensure tribal self-sufficiency
and self-determination. At full build out in our permanent tribal
homeland, our DCMI uses for the entire Reservation are expected to be
4,610 AFY.
The Settling Parties have agreed with the uses of C.C. Cragin water
discussed above. They also agree the Nation must have the right to use
its Settlement water on the newly expanded 5,106 acre Reservation ( as
well as on any future lands that may be added into trust for the Nation
in the future). This is consistent with the United States' trust
responsibility to the Nation, and it represents a giant step forward
for the Nation on our long road to recovery from the historic genocidal
actions of the United States.
4. The Upsizing of the Cragin-Verde Pipeline Proiect for 1,639 AFY for
Verde Valley Communities is Authorized by the Act, but the
Proiect Would Not be Upsized if the Communities Did Not
Contract for the Water by December 31, 2029
With rapid growth in the Verde Valley, the opportunity to contract
for additional water to be delivered from C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir
represents an opportunity for Verde Valley communities to reduce
pressure on the Verde River and local groundwater aquifers that will
protect federal resources, including the Nation's water rights, the
downstream wild & scenic Verde River designations, federal instream
flow rights, and the federal reclamation projects that provide water
for two downstream federally recognized Indian tribes and millions of
water users in the Phoenix metropolitan area.
Offering the Verde Valley communities an opportunity to contract
for water from C.C. Cragin Dam & Reservoir is not a new approach. In
the Arizona Water Settlements Act (AWSA), \2\ northern Gila County
communities were provided the opportunity to contract for C.C. Cragin
water and were not required to make a commitment for that water in
advance of that settlement. In this Settlement, the CraginVerde
Pipeline will only be built once, meaning that choices about this
generational investment in our regional water supply must be forward
thinking. The Settlement Act provides a deadline to the Verde Valley
Communities of December 31, 2029, to formally commit to a share of C.C.
Cragin Reservoir water. \3\ The Settlement Act would not require the
upsizing of the pipeline if the communities do not contract for the
delivery of this water.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See P.L. 108-451, Section 213(f)(3)(B).
\3\ See S. 4705, Section 114(a).
The Chairman. Thank you very much for your powerful
testimony. It is a reminder of the dark history of the Federal
Government's policy of extermination and then assimilation.
Before my time, with my two predecessors, Dan Inouye and
Dan Akaka, Congress passed and the President signed the Apology
Resolution, which apologized officially for the illegal
overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy. I know what I say doesn't
have the same weight as a bill passing Congress and being
ratified and signed by the President, but the Vice Chair and I
were talking about what the Navy did in southeast Alaska and
elsewhere.
So for whatever it is worth, I apologize on behalf of the
Federal Government. Now, the work in front of us is to improve
the material condition of Native communities across the
Country, and we will endeavor to do that. But I didn't want to
let this moment pass without acknowledging the deep, deep
immoral injustice imposed by the Federal Government. Thank you
for that.
My first question is for Chairman White Clay. You testified
that this bill is important to your tribe's economic
development plans. I very much want to respect that. My
question is just how the profit will be seen.
As written, the bill mentions a revenue sharing agreement,
but does not actually require one. In the legislative business,
we are very careful to notice the difference between may versus
shall. Is that satisfactory to the tribe?
Mr. White Clay. Yes, just to end here on the bigger
picture, we have seen a 95 percent reduction in revenue from
the Aps alooke Mine to today. So yes, the question there is, we
do have an agreement, a material agreement with the Hope on
revenue sharing through Signal Peaks, through the three-part
agreement on there.
The Chairman. Okay. And the revenue sharing agreement is
between the tribe and the Hope family for the Hope Family Trust
Tracts, but not the Bull Mountains tracts. It is my
understanding that the Hope Family Tracts are unlikely to be
mined. If the bill is changed to the Bull Mountains Tracts, do
you know how much revenue the tribe can expect?
Mr. White Clay. Current projections, the tribe is expected
to receive at a minimum $100 million with the agreement being
$10 million a year for 10 years.
The Chairman. This is the same profit that you would get
from the Hope Tracts?
Mr. White Clay. This is, yes, this is what is in the same
profit. The Hope Tracts will more than likely not be developed
on the reservation because all mining in Montana, like we are
seeing currently with the Columbus Mine and other mines that
are being shut down throughout, that no new development on the
reservation will be taking place. But under the Bull Mountains
Mine export of the coal tonnage, that is where the Crow Tribe
would benefit.
The Chairman. Okay.
Secretary Newland, as the trustee here, or the
representative for the trustee, can you talk to me about this
revenue sharing provision as it is currently written and
whether you have any recommendations here?
Mr. Newland. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As it is currently
drafted in the bill, it speaks to the Hope Family Tract within
the reservation. So the language as currently drafted
contemplates an agreement for revenue sharing for resources
that would be held in trust for the Crow Tribe. So as trustee,
my question is why there would be an agreement with a third
party for the development of resources that belong to the tribe
within the reservation.
The Chairman. Thank you.
My final question on this one is, according to the Montana
Department of State Lands, the Bull Mountains Tract contains
tribal cultural resources, including vision quest sites, rock
art sites, and burial and traditional use areas for multiple
tribes. Is that your understanding of the site?
Mr. White Clay. Yes, currently with our personal tipple,
with the Crow Tribe's tipple program, we are being very much
involved on these sites. Previously, what happens on the Crow
Reservation, what happens with other mining agreements is that
they give a third-party contractor as their cultural person on
deck.
Right now, our tribe is in in the current process of
reburying a buffalo site that was upended by Westmoreland. It
was approved by a third-party non-tribal cultural reservation
officer, the company.
So with this current site, it will be a Crow tribal
preservation officer from the Crow Tribe to be able to sign off
on these cultural sites.
The Chairman. Okay, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for being here.
Secretary Newland, are DOI's 1990 criteria and procedures
for the Indian Water Rights Settlement still relevant? Let me
just put that another way. Are they still useful to evaluate
whether DOI should support the settlements being contemplated
today?
Mr. Newland. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Most tribes that we
have heard from would say no. Those criteria and procedures are
rooted in a notion of protecting the department from liability.
And that is from tribes, and that is not where our policy is
now. Our policy is more toward not viewing tribes as legal
adversaries, but as our partners and as trustee.
The Chairman. So in my final time, what do we need to do to
fix that?
Mr. Newland. I think the way to approach the settlements is
to view it as, what is our obligation to make sure that Indian
people can live in their homelands.
The Chairman. That is the principle, but how do we do it?
Is it a rule change? Is it a process? Is it circular, like a
memorandum? Do you need a law? How do we do this?
Mr. Newland. The criteria and procedures are a policy of
the department that was published. So that exists right now,
those standards, within the department.
The Chairman. But it would be within the department's power
to change that?
Mr. Newland. Yes.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Vice Chair Murkowski?
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman White Clay, thank you for your testimony; thank
you all for your testimony today. Let me start with you. This
follows on the Chairman's question here about the intent to
require a revenue sharing agreement between the tribe and the
private landowner not being entirely specific here. Would you
be open to making amendments to the bill to make that intent
clear in terms of the revenue sharing agreement?
Mr. White Clay. Yes, of course. I would be open to making
any amendments on these bills, to make it more solidifying to
where the tribe would benefit, also to make it more clear to
the Committee as we move forward to try to get this passed
through.
Senator Daines. Mr. Chairman, could I ask to just make a
point here to clear this up?
The Chairman. Sure.
Senator Daines. It is germane to this discussion. There was
a draft here, in the bill. It referenced the wrong subsection
in the revenue sharing agreement. I have an amendment drafted
to correct that error.
The intent and purpose of the bill is to facilitate a
revenue sharing agreement between the tribe and the Hope Family
for the minerals developed at the mine. We will work to get
this sorted. It was a drafting error. It gets corrected; we
have the amendment on it. I just want to kind of put that to
rest now, because I know there are some questions on it.
Senator Murkowski. I appreciate the response to that. Thank
you, and thank you, Chairman.
Secretary Newland, let me ask you about S. 4633 and S.
4705, the settlement acts. Again, I really appreciate the
efforts that so many have gone to to get to this place. But the
Committee did receive a letter from the water commissioners
from the State of Wyoming and the State of Utah opposing the
bill. I am going to add that letter to the record and would ask
for a UC on that.
I recognize that the concerns may be technical and the
department is very familiar with them. We had an opportunity to
speak to President Nygren earlier today about this, and there
are ongoing efforts to address some of the concerns.
What is the department's interpretation of the objections
that are raised by the water commissioners from Wyoming and
Utah? And just as I heard from the president here about their
efforts to continue these discussions, are you also working
with the tribes and the bill sponsors and the water
commissioners to try to find a path forward on this?
If you can just address where we are with that.
Mr. Newland. Sure, thank you, Madam Vice Chair.
I am aware that the tribes have been working with their
counterparts from some of the Upper Basin States, and the
department has been supportive of those conversations. We
continue to advocate for a consensus based approach across the
basin, given the enormous challenges that folks face all across
the Upper and Lower Basins.
So this negotiation is ongoing, as laid out in the
department's testimony. There are some things that we still
have to address yet, and I think we are working toward that. We
have made progress, even since the last time these bills came
up on the House side. So we are going to continue to work with
everybody who is interested to make sure there is a consensus
based approach to resolving the Colorado River Upper and Lower
Basin issues.
Senator Murkowski. I am one who believes when we have
everybody here, you have good faith efforts that have been
underway to try to advance them, we want to encourage you to
find those solutions. Because as smart as we are on all of
these issues, it is your lands, it is your people, it is the
water that we are talking about. I think the better solution is
going to be that negotiated solution, that you can come to us
for that final adoption. So I would just encourage you in that.
I would also like to ask about the concerns that the
department raised about the budgets in these settlement acts.
In the written testimony, you note that both bills may not
properly provide appropriations for covering potential cost
overruns for these projects.
Can you describe for us the concerns that you might have,
what you think the cost estimates might actually be for both of
these projects, if you know it? And again, are you working with
the tribes and the bills' sponsors to address these?
Mr. Newland. I am sorry, Vice Chair, this is the
Northeastern Arizona and what was the second bill?
Senator Murkowski. Northeastern and the Yavapai Apache.
Mr. Newland. I don't want to misspeak by giving you a wrong
number. So I would be happy to follow up on those.
But again, we are working in both cases with all of the
tribes. These are very challenging areas geographically to
build some of this infrastructure, and we recognize that. So we
are doing our best to address them. I can follow up and get you
the numbers you are looking for.
Senator Murkowski. And again, just encouragement with
working with the tribes and the bills' sponsors and the
Committee to address some of the concerns that you have
outlined in your testimony there. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Tester?
Senator Tester. I want to start by thanking you, Chairman
Schatz, and Vice Chair Murkowski for having the hearing today.
Thank you all for your testimony. A special thank you to
Chairman White Clay from the Crow Reservation in Montana.
Chairman White Clay has displayed tremendous leadership on
issues that are important to his tribe over the years. He has
worked to build up the tribe's youth program and had incredible
results in a short period of time. He is to be congratulated on
that. He is also a champion for clean drinking water.
And if there is one message that is here by all the people,
it is that water is life. There is no doubt about that. Just
last week, we were able to pass our bipartisan Crow Water
Settlement Amendments Act in the Committee, which is a huge
deal for the Crow Tribe, because it wants to deliver clean
water to its communities.
And I appreciate that Chairman White Clay has been clear
that this water bill is a priority, and I look forward to
getting it passed before the end of the year. You can remind me
of that.
Today, the Committee is learning about a revenue shortage
that is facing the Crow Tribe. I want to be clear from the get-
go; I am committed to helping the tribe address this revenue
challenge. One approach that is being developed as a potential
solution is this Crow Revenue Act that we are taking up today.
I want to make sure, though, that the Crow Tribe doesn't
end up on the short end of the stick. The Crow Revenue Act
could potentially provide the tribe with additional revenue,
badly needed additional revenue, over the next few years by
transferring land and mineral rights between a private entity
and the Federal Government.
I am a strong defender of public lands, and I have always
said that the best land management comes from the folks when
they work together and they collaborate and come up with ideas
and solutions on the ground. That is why I am glad to see so
many Montanans submitted comments for the record today and I
look forward to reviewing them in the coming weeks.
I am also glad we have an opportunity to ask some
questions, because this is a complex bill that affects revenue
for a number of entities and it affects our public lands. So
for you, Chairman, I appreciate your comments in your opening
statement. One issue that keeps coming up is a concern about
the revenue sharing component of this legislation. It is
something that Chairman Schatz talked about.
And maybe your amendment takes care of it, Steve, I don't
know. But I know your intent for supporting this legislation is
to help the tribe bridge the gap and the shortfalls that you
have been facing.
However, I am hearing concerns that the bill as written
doesn't have strong enough guarantees that the tribe will
benefit financially. I am sure that you have heard from folks
as well. I heard it from one of the folks sitting behind you
this morning.
Could you address those concerns?
Mr. White Clay. Thank you, Senator Tester, for that, and
also for helping us with our water amendments.
Senator Tester. You bet.
Mr. White Clay. That has been another thing that I have
been cleaning up. We have had that since 2010, and I am happy
to be able to pick up the ball and finish that project out.
With this bill coming out, that helps with our revenue
sharing, we talked about it earlier, we heard about the missing
and murdered. My reservation is ground zero for the missing and
murdered, you see all the documentaries.
That is why I have been pushing so hard to be able to get a
revenue replacement from the Aps alooke Mine, because like I
said before in my testimony here, we weren't a part of any of
the Federal funding that came down on invalid debts that were
given to the Crow Tribe, based on the Do Not Pay list.
It was very hurtful for the tribe during that time to be
able to receive those grants, because all these services, all
the funds, all the search and rescues and everything that comes
out, we had 68 this year, comes on the back of our general
fund, which is now super in danger of being completely depleted
from our revenue from the closure of our mine.
So finding a replacement to do all these services was very
much on my agenda. Because we are going to hit a cliff right
now, we are going to fall off a cliff. The Crow Tribe is going
to fall off a cliff, where we previously had $12 million coming
in with only $1 million for projected revenues for the next
year, which means the next year we are going to have to find
out how I am going to pay for elders, search and rescue, clean
water, getting all these other services out to the tribes.
But as we all know, the devil is in the details on these
things where the tribe can benefit. I have a lot of folks that
are working on this bill to tighten it up and get in amendments
between the three different parties, and also with Senator
Daines' amendment to tighten up all the finances, to make sure
the tribe benefits from them.
But like we said before, time is of the essence on this,
because the projected revenue is the next couple of weeks.
Thank you.
Senator Tester. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Senator Daines.
Senator Daines. Thank you. By the way, kudos to my
colleagues and the staff for catching this error. Without
having that fixed in Section 3, from (a)(2) to (a)(3), there is
a disconnect in revenue. It is a technical error that addresses
the whole revenue share piece. We will get that fixed with this
technical change.
Look, this is a crucial piece of legislation, as the
chairman just alluded to. Talk about falling off a cliff from a
revenue point; as I have been battling with the Crows and for
the Crow Tribe for many, many years, making sure you all can
develop your resources. This is about sovereignty and self-
determination for your land.
This is widely supported by the local communities and
Montana officials. As you can see behind me, the Crow Revenue
Act is supported by the Crow Tribe, that is the most important
support we have, the Crow Tribe. The city of Roundup, Montana,
Musselshell County, Yellowstone County, Big Horn County, the
Montana Association of Oil, Gas, and Coal Counties, six local
and State law makers, Governor Gianforte, Congressman Zinke,
Congressman Rosendale, the Montana Superintendent of
Construction, Elsie Arntzen, and many more.
Chairman Schatz, I ask unanimous consent to add to the
record all the letters of support we have received.
The Chairman. Without objection, so ordered.
Senator Daines. Thank you. This bill is a win-win for
Montana, for the communities, and most importantly, for the
Crow Tribe and the Crow people. It is simple. The Crow Revenue
Act is going to swap private inholdings on the Crow Reservation
for Federal minerals near Roundup, Montana. In exchange, the
Crow Tribe would receive a share of the revenues from these
minerals developed near Roundup.
Montana can't afford to lose the jobs at the Bull Mountains
Mine. Let me be clear. Without the passage of the Crow Revenue
Act, the Bull Mountains Mine near Roundup will begin to close
down at the beginning of 2025. Let that sink in for a moment.
Hundreds of jobs are on the line if this Committee and this
Congress does not pass this bill.
After the recent announcement of 700 mine jobs lost there
to Stillwater Mine, that is just south of Big Timber in
Columbus, Montana, we can't afford another mass layoff of
Montana miners. That is palladium. There are just a few places
in the world that produce palladium, and one of them is Russia.
It is Russian dumping of imports, cheap imports, that are
causing the huge problems we are seeing right now at this
Montana mine.
Unfortunately, we are in this position because this
Administration has refused to complete the Bull Mountains Mine
permit, pure and simple. Had the Administration done their job
and completed the needed permits in July like they were
supposed to, we wouldn't be here talking about needing to do
this bill. But they have purposely dragged their feet so this
mine will close.
We are not going to let that happen. I urge my colleagues
to join me in ensuring that these jobs and the revenue for the
communities, for the Crow Tribe, can continue on.
Chairman White Clay, could you explain to the Committee how
this bill benefits the Crow Tribe and why it is needed and why
it is needed now?
Mr. White Clay. Thank you, Senator Daines. We have 952
elders that depend on our revenue from our Aps alooke Mine.
That is 952, 67 and older. We also have all of our social
service programs. Altogether, just in the Crow Tribe, 421 jobs.
Senator Daines. Say that again? How many jobs?
Mr. White Clay. Four hundred and twenty-one jobs.
Senator Daines. How do these jobs compare in terms of pay
and benefits to other jobs?
Mr. White Clay. They are at a higher rate for pay within
the area of Montana. But that also, to my local community,
Arden, that also kind of supplements to that community, which
the dollar turns over in there. Also, the Crow tribal
government, those are the Crow tribal government jobs. And so
altogether, in the whole area, it is going to affect close to
600 jobs. It is going to affect 952 elders, 67 and older, which
we provide an elder benefit every year.
Senator Tester alluded to where I have cleaned up a lot of
issues from my predecessor. I have cleaned up so much and spent
so many resources on cleaning up all the previous mistakes. We
have done five years' worth of audits in my four years from
previous years. We have done single audits, we have got off the
Do Not Pay list, where 137 tribes are on that Do Not Pay list.
One tribe got out without paying a penny, which we have
spent resources to get out of that and to be able to receive
Federal grants on that, which also includes foster care, social
services, health care, tribal benefits, diabetes programs, all
of the encompassing social programs of the reservation are
contingent upon this. It wouldn't have been a problem if we had
a long-term plan on the closure of our one customer in
Minnesota, Xcel Energy. They expedited the closure of that
mine, which gave us the cliff that we are falling off today.
Senator Daines. Could you dispel some of the rumors that
this bill does not support the tribe or this exchange will hurt
the tribe? We have the chairman of the Crow Tribe. There are
rumors swirling about this. I want you to set the record
straight.
Mr. White Clay. Yes. As we are in national politics, we are
also in tribal politics. This is my election year. As bad as
national politics get, Crow Tribe politics are cutthroat.
[Laughter.]
Mr. White Clay. The rumors that some of the candidates,
they are puppets, they are pawns, everybody else through social
media and everything else says that the Crow Tribe will not
benefit from this and that it is basically a scheme, that the
Crow Tribe is doing this to benefit the Signal Peak, which some
of them, and I am saying the ones that do know, that we have
rejection from Signal Peak on the funding that will come to the
tribe, a revenue agreement.
We have been meeting regularly for the past year with Hope
Family, we have been meeting with all the parties involved and
also with our current mine partner that is closing now,
Westmoreland. We have their projections.
But all in all, to me it is a win. We are receiving
historic lands. Our lands are very much, we have a high number
of non-tribal ownership. It has been my administrator's duty to
try to consolidate these tribal lands and to bring those lands
back into tribal inventory and ownership. This will start that.
But also, it gives us a 10-year plan to keep our head above
water and to create and to diversify our economy.
This isn't just the only thing that Crow Tribe is doing. We
also, with that amendment that is coming through, we are
building a hydro dam project to bring renewable energy to the
reservation. We are bringing out solar projects, we are
bringing out wind projects, all these other things that are
being and diversifying that.
But we need to use this project to get out of the business
of coal. We are working on that.
Senator Daines. Chairman, thanks for that very strong
answer. I have a quick question for Secretary Newland, and it
is simply this. In your testimony, you said you ``support the
bill's goals of addressing inholdings within the boundaries of
the Crow Indian Reservation and providing an additional source
of revenue for the Crow Tribe.''
My question for you, Secretary Newland, will you commit to
working with myself and Chairman White Clay to strengthen the
bill and get it to the President's desk?
The Chairman. And Chairman Schatz.
Senator Daines. And especially Chairman Schatz.
Mr. Newland. Thank you, Senator. We have outlined the
department's concerns in the bill and the nature, I think
highlighting a path forward to addressing those concerns. We
would be happy to work with the Committee and the tribe as we
have on the Do Not Pay list and other things to talk through
those changes that need to be made.
Senator Daines. I want to thank you; I know that put a
smile on Chairman White Clay's face. I can see it. Thank you.
The Chairman. Senator Lujan.
Senator Lujan. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
President Nygren, the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water
Rights Settlement Act of 2024 amends the Navajo San Juan
Settlement by allowing the new pipeline in Arizona to connect
into the Navajo Gallup water supply projects, San Juan lateral,
which is within the boundaries of the State of New Mexico, once
it is completed.
Approximately how many acre-feet per year do you anticipate
will be diverted through Navajo-Gallup infrastructure?
Dr. Nygren. Thank you, Senator. Approximately 18,411 will
be diverted across to Arizona.
Senator Lujan. Testimony submitted by the State of New
Mexico voices support for S. 4633's goals, but also highlights
the challenges of leveraging infrastructure in New Mexico to
complete the water settlement in Arizona.
President Nygren, I know that you and your staff have been
working closely with the State of New Mexico to find
legislative language that will work for all parties. Will you
continue to work with the Navajo-Gallup parties, including the
State of New Mexico, to ensure that the proposed storage in S.
4633 will not adversely impact New Mexico water users, which
includes water users within the Northern Agency in the State's
boundaries, the Eastern Agency, and the Fort Defiance Agency
within the State of New Mexico's boundaries?
Dr. Nygren. Thank you, Senator. We are going to continue to
have those good discussions that we have been having at the
State of New Mexico, so that those concerns are addressed and
those dialogues have been going well for us. So thank you,
Senator.
Senator Lujan. Mr. Chair, Mr. President, can I interpret
that as a resounding yes?
Dr. Nygren. Yes.
Senator Lujan. I appreciate that.
Assistant Secretary Newland, as we are considering this new
infrastructure project in Arizona, we are at the same time
trying to finish its companion which is in New Mexico, a piece
of legislation I was proud to carry back in 2009. What concerns
does Interior have, if any, about the connection of the Arizona
and New Mexico infrastructure projects and resources available
to complete them?
Mr. Newland. Thank you, Senator. I think just speaking more
broadly, we are focused on ensuring that while we are enacting
water settlements and authorizing appropriations that we are
meeting our commitment to work with Congress to secure those
appropriations to fund these projects.
Senator Lujan. I appreciate that very much. That is going
to be so important to them as we move through this process as
well. I appreciate that.
Governor Kucate, can you share with us how this legislation
will improve the tribe's water security for tribal water users?
Will this be primarily for agricultural, domestic, or municipal
use?
Mr. Kucate. To underscore your question, this settlement
will really help the people of Zuni to replace our aged
municipal water system and also looking at water treatment
facility that is capable of addressing the high levels of
contaminants that we are currently going to in terms of making
sure that we have upgraded water supply. Then also to be able
to construct a modern wastewater treatment facility that will
allow us to re-use our water instead of allowing it to
evaporate it into outdated sewage lagoons.
So basically, this is something that is really very
significant in terms of the settlement itself, and likewise in
terms of the protection for the Zuni Salt Lake area. This is a
very unique, sacred area, like nowhere else, where our sacred
Salt Mother's home is. So those are the critical areas that we
are really looking at to make sure we are going to focus our
interests in those areas of development.
And also to make sure that we have the ability to
rehabilitate our five irrigation units in a manner that is
suited to climate conditions that are very, very detrimental to
our traditional irrigation practices. When I was a child, I
grew up along the Zuni River and the Rio Nutria, which was very
abundant with families growing agriculture. I think my people
really deserve to have that brought back to their way of life
in terms of our traditional ways of survival.
Senator Lujan. I appreciate that, Governor.
Assistant Secretary Newland, S. 4998 complements S. 595 by
ratifying an addendum to the Rio San Jose Settlement Agreement.
If both are enacted, all tribal water rights in the Rio San
Jose Basin would be resolved.
What would resolving the water rights mean for the three
tribes and for the United States as the trustee if we can get
this done?
Mr. Newland. It would bring water to people who need it.
And it would reduce or eliminate a lot of the contentious
claims and disputes that have existed over that water in the
first place. So I think it is a net benefit for everybody who
has an interest.
Senator Lujan. I appreciate that, Mr. Chairman, Vice Chair.
Thank you so much for this important hearing.
This is just another reminder of water that was stolen and
diverted and taken. It takes money, but I certainly hope that
with all of these we can find a path forward to find the
language necessary to correct them and get these all done. I
just appreciate your attention with water settlements as well
and look forward to doing everything I can to work with you and
your teams to find resolution to these by the end of the year.
Thank you both. I yield.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Senator Lujan. We
appreciate your leadership on water settlements and all of
these issues for Indian Country across the Country, but also
obviously in your home State of New Mexico.
If there are no more questions for our witnesses, members
may also submit follow-up written questions for the record. The
hearing record will be open for four weeks. I want to thank all
of the witnesses for their time and their testimony today.
This hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:19 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Prepared Statement of Elizabeth K. Anderson, P.E., New Mexico State
Engineer
Mr. Chairman Schatz, Vice Chair Murkowski, Congressman Lujan, and
members of the Committee, I am Elizabeth K. Anderson, P.E., New Mexico
State Engineer. The Office of the State Engineer is responsible for the
administration of water rights in New Mexico. The State Engineer has
authority over the supervision, measurement, appropriation, and
distribution of all surface and groundwater in New Mexico, including
all interstate streams and rivers. I appreciate the opportunity to
submit this testimony to you today and provide comments on behalf of
the State of New Mexico regarding S. 4633, the Northeastern Arizona
Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024.
The State of New Mexico supports the resolution of Indian Water
Rights claims through negotiated settlements, including the claims of
the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe and the San Juan Southern Paiute
Tribe in Arizona referenced in S. 4633. New Mexico has participated in
recent discussions with the Navajo Nation and other parties regarding
amendments to S. 4633 that will be necessary to ensure New Mexico's
interests can be protected. Details related to New Mexico's position
regarding S. 4633 are stated below.
A. Implications for New Mexico's 1948 Compact Apportionment
Pursuant to the 1948 Upper Colorado River Basin Compact, New Mexico
is entitled to a total quantity of consumptive use per annum of 11.25
percent of the water apportioned to the States of the Upper Division by
the 1922 Colorado River Compact. Most of New Mexico's Upper Basin
apportionment in the San Juan River Basin is dedicated towards for
tribal water development that has been authorized by Congress pursuant
to the Indian water rights settlements between the State and the
Jicarilla Apache Nation and the State and the Navajo Nation. New Mexico
is proposing amendments to S. 4633 to eliminate the possibility that
the Arizona settlement could negatively affect New Mexico's ability to
implement the previously approved settlements and otherwise utilize and
protect New Mexico's Colorado River Basin apportionment.
B. Implications for ESA Compliance in New Mexico
The San Juan River is designated as critical habitat for the
Colorado pikeminnow and the razorback sucker from Farmington, New
Mexico to Lake Powell. The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation releases water
from Navajo Reservoir as needed throughout the year to ensure that
certain target flows beneficial to the endangered fish are met daily.
Since 1992, the releases have occurred in coordination with the San
Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program. Under the Endangered
Species Act, these environmental flows provide ESA coverage for all
existing diversions below Navajo Reservoir, including all diversions in
New Mexico. New Mexico is proposing to amend S. 4633 to ensure that the
ESA releases, in conjunction with diversions of water to support the
settlement, do not have a negative effect on the amount of water
available for New Mexico to use from its Colorado River Basin
apportionment.
C. Implications for Water Use and Storage in New Mexico
Amendments will be required to protect storage rights for New
Mexico parties in Navajo Reservoir and Frank Chee Willetto, Sr.
Reservoir. S. 4633 calls for storing the Navajo Nation's water in those
two reservoirs in New Mexico and New Mexico is proposing amendments to
avoid adverse impacts to existing New Mexico water users who benefit
from storage in those reservoirs. New Mexico is also proposing
amendments to ensure that any evaporation or transit losses associated
with diversion and storage of water in New Mexico for use by the Navajo
Nation in Arizona would be accounted for against Arizona's
apportionment.
D. Examples of Areas of Proposed Amendments from New Mexico
Adding language addressing conditions for storage and
diversion of water in New Mexico.
Ensuring that the State of New Mexico, acting through the
New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission and/or the State
Engineer will be able to issue permits and approve agreements
for storage, diversion, delivery and operations that could
affect New Mexico water uses.
Adding language to protect New Mexico's Compact
apportionment and ensure further development of that
apportionment is not adversely affected by implementation of
the Arizona and Utah settlements.
Adding language regarding accounting for water that is
diverted from sources in New Mexico for use in Utah and/or
Arizona including coverage of losses.
Ensuring consistency with applicable provisions in P.L. 111-
11.
Limiting the use, leasing or transfer of water apportioned
to the State of New Mexico without agreement of the State of
New Mexico and issuance of appropriate permits.
Conclusion
The State of New Mexico supports S. 4633 with the inclusion of the
amendments as referenced in this testimony and as may be further
developed in coordination with the Navajo Nation, the United States,
the other Colorado River Basin States and other parties to the Arizona
settlement. New Mexico appreciates the opportunity to provide this
testimony and coordinate with the Committee on this bill as it moves
forward.
Additional statement
Mr. Chairman Schatz, Vice Chair Murkowski, Congressman Lujan, and
members of the Committee, I am Elizabeth K. Anderson, P.E., New Mexico
State Engineer. My agency, the Office of the State Engineer, is
responsible for the administration of water rights in New Mexico. The
State Engineer has authority over the supervision, measurement,
appropriation, and distribution of all surface and groundwater in New
Mexico, including all interstate streams and rivers. I appreciate the
opportunity to submit this testimony to you today and provide comments
on behalf of the State of New Mexico in support of Senate Bill 4998,
the Navajo Nation Rio San Jose Stream System Water Rights Settlement
Act of 2024.
The Settlement Act we ask you to support today is the Navajo Nation
companion to S. 595, the Rio San Jose and Rio Jemez Water Settlements
Act of 2023, and involves those same parties: the State of New Mexico,
Navajo Nation, the Pueblos of Acoma and Laguna, the United States as
trustee, the City of Grants, the Village of Milan, and the Association
of Community Ditches of the Rio San Jose and its nine area acequias and
community ditches. This settlement resolves the water rights claims of
Navajo Nation within the region and provides funding for much needed
infrastructure and creates administrative safeguards to protect for
non-Tribal water users.
These claims arise from the adjudication suit filed by the State in
1983 (New Mexico ex rel. Martinez v. Kerr-McGee Corp., Nos. D-1333-CV-
1983-00190 and D-1333-CV-1983-00220 (consolidated) (N.M. 13 Jud. Dist.
Ct)). The settlement represents end of forty years of litigation and
negotiation and offers the desired opportunity to resolve long-standing
concerns over the use of scarce water supplies in the Rio San Jose
Stream System.
The agreement confirmed by S. 4998 is written as an Addendum to the
Local Settlement Agreement resolving the Pueblo of Acoma and Laguna's
water rights claims in the Rio San Jose Stream System. These fully
compatible water rights settlement agreements, when approved by
Congress, will provide a comprehensive settlement of tribal claims in
the Rio San Jose Stream System and ensure water sources for many Navajo
communities that rely on hauling to meet household needs.
Authorizing the settlement will avoid the uncertainty and expense
of protracted litigation regarding Navajo Nation's water rights claims.
If the rights of the Nation were litigated to their conclusion, the
only way to increase the flows of the Rio San Jose for the benefit of
the Nation would be to shut off junior users in the Steam System.
Instead of seeking to curtail other water users, the settlement
contemplates the need to find alternative sources of supply for Navajo
Nation and communities in desperate need. Federal funding would be used
for construction of a regional water supply to Navajo Nation
communities, including wastewater development, chlorination stations,
hauling stations and other water infrastructure projects. This influx
of federal money and projects in turn boosts the New Mexico economy and
provides stability for all communities in the area. The legislation
offers a historic opportunity to authorize funding to secure and
develop groundwater sufficient to support the needs of nine Navajo
Chapters in the Rio San Jose Basin (Baca/Prewitt, Casamero Lake,
Crownpoint, Littlewater, Mariano Lake, Ramah, Smith Lake, Thoreau,
Tohajiilee), and the seven chapter communities in the Rio Puerco Basin
(Tohajiilee, Torreon, Ojo Encino, Pueblo Pintado, Whitehorse Lake,
Counselor, Littlewater).
The Rio San Jose Stream System is located in western New Mexico and
is one of the most water-scarce stream systems in the State. Today,
Navajo Nation, the Pueblos of Acoma and Laguna, the City of Grants, the
Village of Milan, various Acequias and farmers, and industrial users
continue to rely on water from the Rio San Jose Stream System,
including groundwater from the Bluewater and Rio Grande Basins. Climate
change has compounded the lack of water, and, like other western
states, New Mexico is experiencing extended periods of drought,
furthering the strain on surface water supply.
Recognizing the need for cooperation among the water users in the
Stream System and the limited water resources available, the settlement
agreement is structured to allow the Nation to develop alternative
sources of water based on availability, hydrologic assessment, and
community need. Additionally, the Nation has agreed to give up its
right to make a priority call on junior non-Tribal water rights,
providing security to all water rights holders in the region. The
settlement also provides for the establishment of district-specific
management tools to monitor and protect water resources and existing
valid water uses in the entire Rio San Jose Stream System, putting this
region at the front of efforts to create resiliency in water use not
only in the present, but also into the future.
New Mexico's water issues are dire, and they will only get worse
with climate change. The State of New Mexico enthusiastically supports
this legislation and believes S. 4998 is crucial to addressing critical
water needs in some of the most water-stressed communities in the
state. As a fund-based settlement, the Nation is seeking federal
funding in the amount of $223,271,000. The Acequias will receive $3
million from the State to protect against future impairment and improve
the efficiency of their ditches and conservation in the overall stream
system. This approach also prioritizes Tribal sovereignty and self-
determination by ensuring that the Nation is able to make decisions
based on the current and future interests of their communities, while
also considering water use in the neighboring non-Tribal communities.
Mr. Chairman Schatz, Vice Chair Murkowski, and members of the
Committee, the State of New Mexico asks you to support S. 4998. If
approved, this legislation will create a mechanism for cooperation and
coordination among Navajo Nation and the State regarding water rights
administration, thereby avoiding jurisdictional conflicts and allowing
for comprehensive administration across the stream system. The funding
authorized by the Settlement Act will contribute to Navajo water
security and provide significant economic benefits and employment
opportunities to Navajo Nation and surrounding communities in both
stream systems. There will also be broader statewide economic benefits
because the scope of these projects will create demand for additional
labor, construction, and technical expertise from elsewhere in the
State. Importantly, authorizing this fund-based settlement provides the
Navajo Nation flexibility to determine the scope and design of future
projects and infrastructure.
I thank you for your consideration of this issue and stand ready to
provide any support necessary to encourage the passage of this critical
legislation.
______
Prepared Statement of Brenda Burman, General Manager, Central Arizona
Water Conservation District
Chairman Schatz, Vice Chairman Murkowski, and members of the
Committee, I am Brenda Burman, General Manager of the Central Arizona
Water Conservation District (CAWCD). Thank you for the opportunity to
provide the views of the CAWCD on S. 4633 ``Northeastern Arizona Indian
Water Rights Settlement of 2024'' through this statement for the
record. For the reasons I will discuss below, CAWCD supports S. 4633.
Role of CAWCD in Arizona
CAWCD manages the Central Arizona Project (CAP), a 336-mile canal
system that delivers Colorado River water into central and southern
Arizona. CAWCD's service area includes more than 80 percent of
Arizona's population. The largest supplier of renewable water in
Arizona, CAWCD has a right to divert over 1.5 million acre-feet of
Arizona's 2.8 million acre-foot Colorado River entitlement each year
through the CAP to deliver water to municipal and industrial users,
agricultural irrigation districts, and Indian communities. Our goal at
CAWCD is to provide our customers with an affordable, reliable, and
sustainable supply of Colorado River water.
Background
For many decades, Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe, San Juan Southern
Paiute Tribe (collectively the ``Tribes''), the United States, the
State of Arizona, CAWCD, and dozens of other state parties have been
involved in either litigation of, or negotiations to resolve, the
Tribes' water right claims. Those unresolved claims cast significant
water rights uncertainty across the State and left many tribal
communities without reliable access to clean drinking water. The
Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement of 2024, if
approved by Congress, would eliminate that uncertainty and provide
funding for the infrastructure necessary to deliver clean drinking
water supplies across each of the Tribes' reservations.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement of 2024 is
a comprehensive settlement agreement fully and finally resolving all
the Tribes' claims to the Colorado River (including all Upper and Lower
Colorado River Basin claims in Arizona), the Little Colorado River
watershed (including all tributary watersheds and groundwater basins),
and for land owned by the Navajo Nation in Arizona, and all associated
Navajo water right claims in the Gila River watershed.
Among other things, the Settlement would allocate to the Navajo
Nation 44,700 acre-feet per year (afy) of Upper Basin Colorado River
water, 3,600 afy of Fourth Priority Mainstem Lower Colorado River
Water, and allocate to the Hopi Tribe 2,300 afy of Upper Basin Colorado
River water. The Settlement would grant the Navajo Nation and the Hopi
Tribe flexibility in utilizing and managing its Colorado River supplies
including the authority to use, lease or exchange, within the State of
Arizona, the allocated Upper Basin Colorado River water in the Lower
Colorado River Basin and Lower Colorado River water in the Upper
Colorado River Basin. That flexibility is essential for ensuring clean
drinking water deliveries throughout the Reservations. It also
maximizes economic opportunities for the Tribes and provides potential
state-wide benefits.
The Settlement also allocates Little Colorado River watershed
supplies including tributary and groundwater resources to the Tribes,
providing greater certainty to Northeastern Arizona non-tribal
communities regarding the right to access, use and develop those
supplies.
These agreed upon allocations provide greater certainty for CAWCD
water users and all the parties as they plan for future water needs;
planning that is vital when faced with on-going drought and potential
reductions in available water supplies.
The water supply allocations mean little without the funding needed
for infrastructure to divert, treat and deliver these water supplies to
the reservations. According to Navajo Safe Water, a water access
coalition group comprised of Navajo agencies, federal agencies, public
health researchers and nongovernmental organizations, approximately 30
percent of Navajo Nation homes currently lack access to piped water
service and rely on hauled water as their primary source of water. The
requested federal funding in this settlement will provide the
infrastructure required to deliver drinking water to homes, thereby
eliminating the need to haul water for basic needs.
Conclusion
For the reasons noted, the CAWCD Board of Directors voted
unanimously to support the settlement and S. 4633. CAWCD urges Congress
to approve S. 4633 this session to end decades of litigation, provide
certainty to tribal and non-tribal water users throughout Arizona, and
provide reliable drinking water supplies across the Tribes'
reservations. Thank you for your consideration.
______
Prepared Statement of Thomas Buschatzke, Director, Arizona Department
of Water Resources
Chairman Schatz, Vice Chairman Murkowski, and Committee Members:
I. Introduction
My name is Thomas Buschatzke. I am the Director of the Arizona
Department of Water Resources. Thank you for the opportunity to provide
written testimony on behalf of the State of Arizona on the Northeastern
Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 (Act). The State of
Arizona strongly supports this important legislation, which approves
and authorizes a settlement of the water rights claims of the Navajo
Nation, Hopi Tribe, and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe in Arizona,
ending decades of litigation and bringing much needed safe and reliable
water supplies to all three Tribes.
II. Importance of settling Indian water rights claims in Arizona
There are 22 federally recognized Indian Tribes within Arizona. The
total area of all tribal land in Arizona is approximately 20 million
acres, which is second only to tribal landholdings in Alaska. Over one
fourth of Arizona is tribal land. Indian tribes have some of the oldest
and largest claims to water in the State based on the federal reserved
rights doctrine articulated in Winters v. United States.
Eleven \1\ of the 22 federally recognized Indian Tribes in Arizona
still have unresolved water rights claims, including the claims of the
Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe, and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, which we
are seeking to settle through the Act. Resolving tribal water rights
claims through settlement is a priority for the State. Settlement
avoids the cost and uncertainty of litigation and provides certainty to
both tribal and non-tribal communities in the State regarding available
water supplies. In many cases, including here in the Act, settlement
also provides critical funding for the water treatment and delivery
infrastructure necessary to bring water to tribal nations and their
members. Such infrastructure development often also enables much needed
economic development projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This number includes the Hualapai Tribe whose settlement was
approved by Congress in 2022. The post-legislation amended and
conformed Hualapai Tribe Settlement Agreement is anticipated to be
executed by all parties later this year. This number also includes the
San Carlos Apache Tribe and the Tohono O'odham Nation, whose claims
have been partially settled. The other federally recognized Tribes with
outstanding claims in Arizona are the Havasupai Tribe, Kaibab Band of
Paiute Indians, Pascua Yaqui Tribe, Tonto Apache Tribe, and Yavapai
Apache Nation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
III. In General: Navajo Nation's, Hopi Tribe's and San Juan Southern
Paiute Tribe's water rights claims
The Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe, and San Juan Southern Paiute lands
cover approximately 18,088 square miles in Arizona. All three Tribes
have asserted claims to in-state surface water and groundwater for
their lands. The Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe have also asserted
claims to water from the Colorado River in both the Lower and Upper
Basins. These water rights claims are some of the largest outstanding
tribal water rights claims in Arizona.
The State of Arizona and key stakeholders \2\ in the State have
been involved in discussions with the Navajo Nation and Hopi Tribe to
settle their water rights claims since the 1980s. Federal legislation
authorizing a settlement of both Tribes' claims to the Little Colorado
River in Arizona was introduced in Congress in 2012. However, that
legislation was never enacted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Arizona State Land Department, Arizona Game and Fish
Commission, Arizona Department of Transportation, Cities of Flagstaff,
Winslow and Holbrook, Towns of Taylor, Snowflake, Show Low, Eagar,
Springerville, and St. Johns, Salt River Project, Central Arizona Water
Conservation District, Arizona Public Service Corporation, Atkinson
Trading Company, Inc., U.S. Department of the Interior (will sign after
being directed to by the Act) and numerous water districts, water
companies and landowners in the Little Colorado River Basin.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Negotiations actively resumed in late 2023, with the San Juan
Southern Paiute Tribe joining the negotiations earlier this year.
After tireless efforts by representatives of the three Tribes, the
State, municipalities and numerous other non-tribal water users, a
comprehensive settlement of all the water rights claims of the three
tribes in Arizona has been reached in the Northeastern Arizona Indian
Water Rights Settlement Agreement (Settlement Agreement).
Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the Tribes will
receive the right to use all surface water from the Little Colorado
River and its tributaries flowing on their Reservations and all
Underground Water beneath their Reservations, with certain limitations
described below. ``Underground Water'' is defined in the Settlement
Agreement and Act as all water beneath the surface of the Earth, within
the State, other than Effluent and Colorado River Water.
The Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe will receive a total of 47,000
acre-feet of the State's annual 50,000 acre-foot apportionment of Upper
Basin Colorado River water. Arizona's Upper Basin Colorado River water
is the highest priority Colorado River water in the Upper Basin. The
Navajo Nation will also receive Fourth Priority Lower Basin Colorado
River water, and a portion of the Hopi Tribe's existing entitlement to
Fourth Priority Lower Basin Colorado River water associated with land
owned by the Hopi Tribe in La Paz County, Arizona.
The Act authorizes the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe to divert
their Upper Basin and Lower Basin Colorado River water supplies
anywhere in the Upper or Lower Basin in Arizona, including Lake Powell,
and use the water on or off their Reservations anywhere in the Upper or
Lower Basins in the State. The Navajo Nation will also have the right
to divert its Upper Basin and Lower Basin Colorado River water supplies
in New Mexico and Utah via the San Juan River for use in Arizona.
The Act authorizes the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe to use,
lease, exchange and store their Upper and Lower Basin Colorado River
supplies on or off their Reservations in both the Upper and Lower
Basins of the State. The Act also authorizes the Navajo Nation to store
its Upper and Lower Basin Colorado River supplies in the Navajo
Reservoir and Frank Chee Willeto, Sr. Reservoir in New Mexico for use
in Arizona.
The three Tribes, and the United States as trustee for the Tribes,
Navajo Allottees and Hopi Allottees, will waive claims for: (1)
additional water rights for existing lands; (2) injury to water based
on changes in or degradation of the salinity or concentration of
naturally occurring chemical constituents contained in water; and (3)
injury to their water rights with certain exceptions. Those exceptions
include retention of the right to make claims for injury caused by: (A)
certain new surface water uses by means of direct diversion; (B) new
reservoirs and reservoir enlargement in the Little Colorado River
Watershed (with limited exceptions); and (C) withdrawals of groundwater
from certain wells within Buffer Zones adjacent to the southern and
western boundaries of the Navajo Reservation (described below).
The Act provides for a limited waiver of sovereign immunity
allowing: (1) the Tribes and the United States acting as trustee for
the Tribes, the Navajo Allottees and the Hopi Allottees to be joined in
actions involving the interpretation or enforcement of the Settlement
Agreement and Act brought by the parties to the Settlement Agreement
and landowners and water users in the Little Colorado River Watershed;
and (2) the Navajo Nation and the United States acting as trustee for
the Navajo Nation to be joined in actions involving the interpretation
or enforcement of the Settlement Agreement and the Act brought by
landowners and water users in the Gila River Watershed.
The Act approves, ratifies and confirms a treaty entered into by
the Navajo Nation and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe in 2000 to
settle land claims and other disputes between the Tribes, and an
addendum to the treaty entered into by the Tribes in 2004.
Additionally, the Act creates a reservation for the San Juan Southern
Paiute Tribe, consisting of two non-contiguous areas in Arizona and
Utah, within the boundaries of the Navajo Reservation. The Act and the
Settlement Agreement resolve water rights claims only for the portion
of the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe Reservation in Arizona, known as
the ``Southern Area.''
The Act provides $5 billion in federal funding primarily for the
construction, operation, maintenance and replacement of various water
projects on the three Reservations, including the iina ba-paa
tuwaqat'si pipeline to bring the Colorado River water from Lake Powell
to the Navajo Reservation and the Hopi Reservation. The funding also
includes money for the Navajo Nation and Hopi Tribe to use to purchase
land within the State and associated Lower Basin Colorado River Water
Rights.
A. Settlement Provisions Concerning the Navajo Nation
(1) The Navajo Nation will have unlimited rights to withdraw
Underground Water within the boundaries of its Reservation. However,
the Navajo Nation and Hopi Tribe have entered into an Inter-Tribal
Agreement (the terms of which are included in the Settlement
Agreement), which limits withdrawals of Underground Water from the N-
aquifer, one of two aquifers beneath the Reservations, to protect
aquifer storage and certain washes and springs on the Reservations.
Two buffer zones are established along the southern and western
boundaries of the Navajo Nation Reservation. Buffer Zone 1 extends two
sections from the Navajo Reservation's boundary and Buffer Zone 2
extends an additional four sections from the southern and western
boundaries of the Reservation. In Buffer Zone 1, the Nation retains the
right to challenge new wells with a pump capacity greater than 35
gallons-per-minute (gpm) that causes injury to its groundwater rights.
In Buffer Zone 2, the Nation retains the right to challenge new wells
with a pump capacity greater than 500 gpm that causes injury to its
groundwater rights.
(2) The Navajo Nation will have the right to divert and deplete any
surface water from the mainstem of the Little Colorado River and its
tributaries that reaches its Reservation, including quantified amounts
and priority dates for specific historic Navajo irrigation projects
totaling 40,780 acre-feet per year (afy).
(3) The Navajo Nation will have the right to use water on lands
held in fee by the Nation in accordance with State law, and the right
to use water on lands held in trust for the Nation as permitted by
applicable law.
(4) The Navajo Nation will receive an allocation of 44,700 afy of
the State of Arizona's annual 50,000 acre-foot apportionment of Upper
Basin Colorado River water, which is the highest priority Colorado
River water in the Upper Basin. This water may be used on and off the
Navajo Nation Reservation anywhere in the Upper and Lower Basin in
Arizona. The Navajo Nation will have the right to use the Colorado
River and the San Juan River in the Upper Basin to convey its Upper
Basin Colorado River water from the Upper Basin for use in the Lower
Basin of the State.
(5) The Navajo Nation will receive an allocation of 3,500 afy of
previously unallocated Fourth Priority Lower Basin water from the State
of Arizona's annual Lower Basin entitlement. This water may be used
anywhere in the Upper and Lower Basins in the State.
(6) The Navajo Nation will also receive an allocation of 100 afy
from the Hopi Tribe's existing contract for Fourth Priority Lower Basin
water currently being used for agricultural purposes along the mainstem
of the Lower Basin Colorado River. This water may be used anywhere in
the Upper and Lower Basins in the State.
(7) The Navajo Nation will be authorized to divert its Upper Basin
and Lower Basin Colorado River water supplies anywhere in the Upper or
Lower Basins in Arizona, including Lake Powell. The Navajo Nation will
also have the right to divert its Upper Basin and Lower Basin Colorado
River water supplies in New Mexico and Utah for use in Arizona.
(8) The Navajo Nation will be authorized to lease, exchange and
store its Upper Basin and Lower Basin Colorado River water anywhere
within the Upper and Lower Basins in the State. The Nation will also be
authorized to store the water in the Navajo Reservoir and Frank Chee
Willeto, Sr. Reservoir in New Mexico for use in Arizona.
(9) The Navajo Nation will have the right to use all effluent
produced on the Navajo Reservation, off-reservation lands held in trust
for the benefit of the Navajo Nation, and lands owned in fee by the
Navajo Nation.
B. Settlement Provisions Concerning the Hopi Tribe
(1) The Hopi Tribe will have unlimited rights to withdraw
Underground Water within the boundaries of its Reservation. Withdrawal
of Underground Water from the N-aquifer, however, is limited in certain
parts of the Reservation pursuant to the Inter-Tribal Agreement between
the Navajo Nation and Hopi Tribe referenced above.
(2) Off-reservation groundwater pumping is subject to restrictions
in Buffer Zones 1 and 2 and subject to a separate agreement with the
Navajo Nation and other parties. \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ The separate agreement is titled ``Certain Agreements Among The
United States, The Hopi Tribe, The Navajo Nation, Bar T Bar, And The
Arizona State Land Department Concerning Underground Water And Related
Rights And Obligations In The Navajo Hopi C-Aquifer Pumping Restriction
Area And Bar T Bar Ranch'' and included as Exhibit 9.10 to the
Settlement Agreement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) The Hopi Tribe is entitled to divert and deplete all surface
water that reaches or flows within its Reservation.
(4) The Hopi Tribe will have the right to use water on lands
currently held in fee by the Tribe and off-reservation lands currently
held in trust for the Tribe as described in Exhibits to the Settlement
Agreement. The Tribe will have the right to use water on new fee lands
as permitted by State law and new trust lands as permitted by
applicable law.
(5) The Hopi Tribe will receive an allocation of 2,300 acre-feet
per year of the State of Arizona's annual 50,000 acre-foot entitlement
to Upper Basin Colorado River water, which is the highest priority
Colorado River water in the Upper Basin. This water may be used on and
off the Hopi Tribe's Reservation and trust lands in the Upper and Lower
Basins in Arizona.
(6) The Hopi Tribe currently holds a contract for a total of 5,928
afy of Lower Basin Colorado River water that is used to irrigate land
owned by the Tribe along the Colorado River mainstem in the Cibola
Valley Irrigation Drainage District located in the Lower Basin in
Arizona (Cibola Water). This contract includes 4,278 afy of Fourth
Priority water. Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the Tribe
will transfer 100 acre-feet of this Fourth Priority contract to the
Navajo Nation. The retained Hopi Tribe Cibola Water may be used by the
Hopi Tribe anywhere within Arizona and pursuant to its delivery
contract with the United States.
(7) The Hopi Tribe will be authorized to divert its Upper Basin and
Lower Basin Colorado River water supplies anywhere in the Upper or
Lower Basin in Arizona, including from Lake Powell.
(8) The Hopi Tribe will be authorized to lease, exchange and store
its Upper Basin and Lower Basin Colorado River water anywhere in the
Upper or Lower Basins in the State.
(9) The Hopi Tribe will have the right to use all effluent produced
on the Hopi Reservation, off-reservation lands held in trust for the
benefit of the Hopi Tribe, and lands owned in fee by the Hopi Tribe.
C. Settlement Provisions for the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe
(1) The Act creates a reservation for the San Juan Southern Paiute
Tribe consisting of two non-contiguous areas in Arizona and Utah, each
within the boundaries of the Navajo Reservation. The settlement
provisions apply exclusively to the portion of the Reservation located
in Arizona, referred to as the ``Southern Area.''
(2) The San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe will have unlimited rights
to withdraw Underground Water within the boundaries of its ``Southern
Area'' Reservation.
(3) The San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe will have the right to
divert and deplete all surface water that reaches or flows across its
``Southern Area'' Reservation.
(4) The San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe will have the right to use
water on lands held in fee by the Tribe as permitted by State law, and
the right to use water on lands held in trust for the Tribe as
permitted by applicable law.
(5) The San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe will have the right to
receive up to 350 afy of water delivered from the Navajo Tribal Utility
Authority in Arizona.
(6) The San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe will have the right to all
effluent developed on the Southern Area of the Reservation, off-
reservation lands held in trust by the United States for the benefit of
the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, and lands owned in fee by the San
Juan Southern Paiute Tribe.
IV. Congressional Funding for the Northern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement
The Act provides $5 billion in Congressional funding for the
settlement. The majority of the funding will be deposited into accounts
to be used for the construction of various water infrastructure
projects on the three Reservations, and for the operation, maintenance
and replacement costs associated with the infrastructure.
A list of projects to be funded by the Act is provided below: \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ A complete list of all projects and fund accounts may be found
in Section 13 of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) The iina ba-paa tuwaqat'si pipeline is estimated to cost $1.7
billion and will be designed and constructed to bring Colorado River
water from Lake Powell to the Navajo Reservation, the Hopi Reservation,
and the San Juan Southern Paiute Southern Area.
(2) Several Navajo Nation-specific water projects have been
included in the Settlement Agreement and Act totaling approximately
$2.4 billion for the delivery of Colorado River water, Little Colorado
River water and groundwater to communities on the Navajo Nation
Reservation.
(3) $390 million is allocated for the Hopi Arsenic Mitigation
Project and Hopi Slide Rock Project.
(4) $28 million is allocated to the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe
for groundwater development, treatment, and delivery projects.
(5) Lower Basin Colorado River water acquisition funds of $28
million and $1.5 million for the Navajo Nation and Hopi Tribe,
respectively, are provided to the two Tribes for the purchase land and
associated Lower Basin Colorado River rights within the State.
(6) Agricultural conservation funds of $80 million, $30 million,
and $300,000 for the Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe, and San Juan Southern
Paiute Tribe, respectively, are allocated for agricultural efficiency
improvement projects and well replacement.
V. Transbasin Use, Lease, Exchange and Storage of Colorado River
Supplies
As mentioned above, the legislation authorizes the Navajo Nation
and Hopi Tribe to use, lease, exchange and store their Upper and Lower
Colorado River water supplies in both the Upper Basin and Lower Basin
in Arizona. The ability of the Hopi Tribe and Navajo Nation to utilize
these supplies in both the Upper and Lower Basins is of critical
importance to the settlement. The Navajo Nation Reservation is located
in both the Upper and Lower Basin in Arizona and the Nation must have
the ability and flexibility to utilize water supplies as it determines
necessary and practical throughout its Reservation. The Hopi Tribe
Reservation is located entirely in the Lower Basin and must have the
ability to utilize its Upper Basin and Cibola water supplies on its
Reservation.
Authorization of transbasin use and leasing of Colorado River water
supplies is a critical component of the legislation that supports the
continued sovereignty and self-determination of the Navajo Nation and
Hopi Tribe by affirming their autonomy over resource management.
Further, the ability of the Tribes to lease Colorado River water
supplies for use in either the Lower or Upper Basins in Arizona will
maximize economic opportunities for the Tribes and provide water
management benefits for both Tribes and the State.
Arizona's experience with tribal water leasing for more than four
decades has demonstrated that it provides substantial benefits to the
tribes that lease their Colorado River water as well as the lessees.
Multiple Arizona Indian tribes with Congressionally approved water
rights settlements are currently leasing some of their Colorado River
supplies delivered through the Central Arizona Project (CAP) to water
users within the Lower Basin of the State pursuant to express
Congressional authority. Leasing this water has provided significant
economic benefits to the tribes. It also has provided an important
water supply to the non-tribal entities leasing the water, including
major municipalities and industries within central Arizona.
Allowing the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe to lease their
Colorado River water in both the Lower and Upper Basins of the State
will provide similar benefits to the two Tribes as well as the State.
This is especially true with respect to the Navajo and Hopi Tribes'
ability to lease their high priority Upper Basin water in the State's
Lower Basin due to the significant need for additional water supplies
in central Arizona and the limited leasing opportunities to communities
and industry in the Upper Basin area of the State. Revenues from these
leases will enable economic development on the Tribes' Reservations and
strengthen the Tribes' financial security--long-standing goals of all
Indian water rights settlements. The leases will also provide an
important source of revenue for the development of additional water
infrastructure on the Tribes' Reservations.
The Act contains accounting provisions to ensure that the Navajo
Nation's and Hopi Tribe's Upper Basin water supplies are accounted for
as Arizona's Upper Basin water regardless of the place of diversion,
use or lease of the water. Similar accounting provisions are contained
in the Act for the Tribes' Lower Basin water to ensure that those water
supplies are accounted for consistent with the Law of the River and as
Arizona's Lower Basin Colorado River water regardless of their place of
diversion, use or lease.
VI. Water Delivery Contracts
During the settlement negotiations, the United States Bureau of
Reclamation informed the State and other settlement parties that water
delivery contracts for the Colorado River supplies included in the
Settlement Agreement could not be drafted prior to the settlement
completion date contemplated by the Tribes. Typically, these delivery
contracts are completed and attached to a Settlement Agreement prior to
its execution and introduction of authorizing legislation in Congress.
Because the Settlement Agreement will be executed in advance of the
completion of the water delivery contracts, several express limitations
on these contracts were included in the Settlement Agreement and the
Act. These limitations include, but are not limited to: (1) prohibiting
any alteration or reduction of the State's annual Lower Basin
apportionment; (2) prohibiting any alteration or impairment of the
State's rights, authorities, and interests under the Boulder Canyon
Project Act of 1928 or the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact of 1948;
(3) prohibiting any limitation on the State's ability to seek or
advocate changes in the Colorado River system's operating rules,
criteria, or guidelines for the State's Upper and Lower Basin
apportionments; (4) such contracts may not prejudice the interests of
the State or serve as precedent against the State in litigation; and
(5) such contracts must also provide that any Lower Basin water must be
curtailed to the same extent as other Lower Basin delivery contracts
for the same type and priority water regardless of whether used in the
Upper or Lower Basin of the State.
These water delivery contracts will be unprecedented because they
will permit the transbasin use of Arizona's Upper and Lower Basin
Colorado River entitlement by the Tribes and the lease, exchange and
storage of the water by third parties and the Tribes anywhere in
Arizona. These tools will give the Navajo Nation and Hopi Tribe access
to new markets resulting in significant economic benefits.
VII. Enforceability Date
The settlement will become enforceable, and the waivers and
releases executed by the Parties will become effective, when certain
conditions are met following enactment of the Act. Those conditions
include: (1) the entry of a Judgment and Decree by the Little Colorado
River Adjudication Court and Gila River Adjudication Court approving
the portions of the settlement applicable to those adjudications; (2)
the appropriation by Congress of $5 billion and the deposit of that
money in the designated accounts for the Tribes pursuant to section 13
of the Act; (3) amendment of the Settlement Agreement to both conform
to the Act and add as Exhibits the required water delivery contracts
between the Secretary of the Interior and the Navajo Nation and the
Hopi Tribe; and (4) execution of the amended Settlement Agreement by
the Secretary of the Interior, the Tribes, the State and certain other
parties.
If all the conditions of enforceability are not met by June 30,
2035, or such alternative later date as may be agreed upon by the
Tribes, the Secretary, and the State, the Act will be repealed and the
Settlement Agreement will be void, except that the San Juan Southern
Paiute Tribe Reservation will remain in existence.
VIII. Non-Federal Contribution
The Settlement Agreement provides 47,000 afy of the State's 50,000
afy apportionment of Upper Basin Colorado River Water to the Navajo
Nation and Hopi Tribe and 3,500 afy of unallocated Lower Basin Colorado
River water to the Navajo Nation. Arizona's Upper Basin Colorado River
water is an extremely valuable water supply because of its high
priority. The ability of the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe to lease
these supplies in either the Lower or Upper Basins of the State will
provide a significant economic benefit to the two Tribes.
The settlement will also provide the Tribes with a renewable water
supply from in-state surface water as well as unlimited use of
groundwater beneath each of the Reservations, subject to certain
limitations agreed to between the Tribes. The Settlement Agreement's
restrictions on groundwater withdrawals in Buffer Zones 1 and 2
adjacent to the exterior boundary of the Navajo Nation Reservation will
help protect finite groundwater supplies for communities on the Navajo
Nation, Hopi Tribe and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe Reservations.
In addition, the State legislature has established three funds that
provide for the development and implementation of projects designed to
improve, protect and augment water supplies in the State, they include
the Arizona Water Protection Fund, the Long-term Water Augmentation
Fund, and the Water Supply Development Revolving Fund. State monies in
these funds are available to any tribe with qualifying projects in
Arizona. Both the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribes are recipients of
grant monies from the Arizona Water Protection Fund.
IX. Importance of the Legislation to the Parties and the Entire State
Enactment of the legislation is of critical importance to all the
parties to the settlement, as well as to the entire State. Settlement
of the Tribes' water rights claims will put an end to decades of
conflict and litigation over the Tribes' claims and will provide other
important benefits to the Tribes and non-tribal water users throughout
the State.
For all three Tribes, the settlement will provide reliable and
sustainable water supplies for their lands. In particular, it will
provide access to safe running water to many households on the three
Reservations that are without that basic water service. For the Navajo
Nation and Hopi Tribe, the settlement will also open the door to
significant economic opportunities by allowing the Tribes to lease
their Colorado River water supplies within the State. The settlement
will provide a unique benefit to the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe by
creating a long-awaited Reservation for the Tribe from lands within the
Navajo Reservation in Arizona and Utah.
For other water users in the State, the settlement will provide
water stability and security, ending decades of litigation and
uncertainty. Further, the ability of the Navajo Nation and Hopi Tribe
to lease their Colorado River water supplies across basin boundaries
within the State is of great importance to the future of the State
because it will facilitate the temporary use of water in water-
challenged areas of the State.
X. Conclusion
The State of Arizona strongly supports S. 4633, the Northeastern
Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024. The Act authorizes
a comprehensive settlement of the water rights claims of the Navajo
Nation, Hopi Tribe and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe in Arizona,
including claims to the Colorado River. Settlement of the Tribes' water
rights claims is an important step in achieving the State's goal of
settling all outstanding Indian water rights claims and ensuring all
Arizona residents have access to clean, reliable, running water.
Settlement of the claims will end decades of litigation, provide
certainty to tribal and non-tribal water users throughout the State,
and at long last provide the Tribes with reliable, sustainable and safe
water supplies.
______
Prepared Statement of Hon. Becky Daggett, Mayor, City of Flagstaff
Chairman Schatz, Vice Chairwoman Murkowski, Members of the
Committee and distinguished guests, thank you for the opportunity to
provide testimony supporting S. 4633, the Northeastern Arizona Indian
Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 (NAIWRSA) for the settlement of
water rights claims of the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San
Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, and for other purposes. The City of
Flagstaff (``Flagstaff'') is honored and excited to support S. 4633,
especially because NAIWRSA is a long-overdue achievement for our Tribal
neighbors and because the City is home to many Tribal members.
Flagstaff and various other parties are actively engaged in
multiple court cases styled, In Re: The General Adjudication of All
Rights to Use Water in the Little Colorado River General Adjudication,
CV 6417 (``Adjudication''); and In re: Hopi Reservation HSR, Contested
Case No. CV 6417-203; and In re: Navajo Nation, Contested Case No. CV
6417-300. Through S. 4633, this historic settlement agreement would
resolve protracted and expensive litigation over the Tribes' water
rights claims among the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, the San Juan
Southern Paiute Tribe, the United States acting as trustee for the
Tribes, Flagstaff, Salt River Project, as well as other towns and
communities and private parties in the Little Colorado River
Adjudication. Likewise, S. 4633 would confirm certain surface water
rights and groundwater rights for the Tribes and for non-federal
parties, including Flagstaff. Significantly, the NAIWRSA settlement
agreement references Flagstaff's Regional Water Supply Project at Red
Gap Ranch (``Regional Water Supply Project'') which will provide
additional benefits to regional stakeholders, and in particular, the
Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the Arizona State Land Department.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement
(the ``Agreement'') dated as of May 9th, 2024, was unanimously approved
by the Hopi Tribe on May 20, 2024, and the Navajo Nation and the San
Juan Southern Paiute each unanimously approved the Agreement on May 23,
2024. Flagstaff determined it is in the best interests to enter into
the Agreement to end protracted and costly litigation related to these
water rights claims and unanimously approved the Agreement on July 2,
2024.
If approved by Congress, S. 4633 will provide funding for long-
overdue water supply projects for the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe,
and the San Juan Southern Paiute. Flagstaff knows all too well that
access to potable water in the region is very costly because of
distance, challenging geology and depth to water, and naturally
occurring poor water quality. Federal funding for water supply projects
is fundamental to ensuring the stability of our Tribal communities and
the region. Flagstaff fully supports federal funding for the Tribal
water supply projects. Hauling water is not a viable option for anyone,
and inadequate infrastructure among our Tribal Partners must change for
the better. Flagstaff supports S. 4633 because it will ensure the
success of the needed water supply projects identified by our Tribal
Partners for their respective reservations, and end litigation.
When settlement negotiations first began in the mid-1990s,
Flagstaff's population was less than 50,000. As the largest community
in Northern Arizona, Flagstaff's population is approaching 80,000
residents and hosts more than six million visitors each year. Flagstaff
provides core services to its citizens, and water is among them. Over
the past 100 years, Flagstaff has actively engaged in providing
reliable and sustainable water supplies to meet current and future
demands. While growing, Flagstaff has reduced its water usage rate from
186 gallons per person to day to less than 90 gallons per person, per
day. Flagstaff consistently receives awards for its laudable water
management and reuse efforts, including EPA WaterSense awards, the
Wyland Foundation National Mayor's Challenge for Water Conservation,
and Gold status from the Alliance for Water Efficiency Utility
Leadership Board.
Flagstaff engages in water conservation practices and commits to
continue to do so for the benefit our Tribal Partners and other
stakeholders. Conservation and reuse of water, while commendable and
necessary, cannot reasonably meet Flagstaff's core services of
providing reliable and sustainable supplies for future demands. Every
year Flagstaff continues to improve its water efficiency and continues
to implement and explore water reuse alternatives. Through water reuse
alone, Flagstaff was able to cut its potable water use by 20 percent.
The City remains an advocate for expanding reuse opportunities through
potable reuse alternatives as demonstrated through its Council-adopted
policy on reuse, community engagement, and participation in state-wide
initiatives. While the Arizona regulatory rules that prescribe how
potable reuse options are being developed, water reuse for Flagstaff
does not resolve the shorjall that will occur in the future. Water
efficiency prolongs water sources but does not create new water on
which Flagstaff or our Tribal Partners can continue to rely on for
future growth.
Additional water supplies are critically needed by both Flagstaff
and our Tribal Partners for water resiliency and water security
purposes due to climate variables and wildfires in the region. The
extended drought and local wildfires have severely impacted our Tribal
neighbors and Flagstaff's ability to rely on local surface water
supplies to meet existing demands. Currently, 76 percent of Flagstaff's
water supply is located outside Flagstaff's service area on heavily
forested USFS lands that are at high risk to wildfires and watershed
erosion. In 2022 this became a reality for Flagstaff when a fire
damaged a portion of Flagstaff's water infrastructure, rendering nearly
20 percent of the available water supply inaccessible until the
waterline could be repaired. The City's infrastructure remains at
critical risk to these frequent wildfires, and watershed erosion
following a fire further degrades the water quality in the Lake Mary
Reservoirs.
Significantly, the Agreement recognizes Flagstaff's Regional Water
Supply Project at Red Gap Ranch (``Regional Water Supply Project''),
its existing wells, and provides for points of access to the Regional
Water Supply Project. Flagstaff purchased Red Gap Ranch in 2005 to
secure a longerterm water future aler drought triggered a city-wide
water emergency the previous year. Drought also heavily impacts our
Tribal Partners. The Regional Water Supply Project would provide
additional water and water redundancy to the southwestern Navajo Nation
reservation, Hopi Tribal lands along the Interstate 40 corridor,
Arizona State Lands, and secure Flagstaff's water supplies. The
Regional Water Supply Project would serve to further mitigate the risk
of drought, wildfire, and watershed degradation in the region for our
Tribal neighbors, the City and other stakeholders. The versatility of
the Regional Water Supply Project will bring opportunities along the
Interstate 40 corridor among lands within the Navajo Nation, and also
lands owned by the Hopi Tribe and Arizona State Land Department. The
regional nature of the project would afford long-term water security
for our Tribal Partners and the greater Flagstaff area in the decades
to come.
Flagstaff signed the Agreement with the understanding that
Paragraph 9.0 of the Agreement establishes two Buffer Zones; of which
the vast majority of Red Gap Ranch is located, and only one parcel of
Red Gap Ranch fee land is located outside of these Buffer Zones.
Paragraph 9.0 of the Agreement further provides for the right to use
groundwater from Existing Wells in the two Buffer Zones. Existing wells
located in Buffer Zone 1 and 2 as of the Effective Date will be
catalogued by the Arizona Department of Water Resources based on the
capacity of the well or well casing sizes provided in Table 1 of
subparagraph 9.4.1. In Buffer Zone 1 on Red Gap Ranch the City owns
eleven (11) Existing Wells with a total pumping capacity of 2,912 acre-
feet per year and in Buffer Zone 2 Flagstaff owns sixteen (16) Existing
Wells with the total pumping capacity of up to 19,003 acre-feet per
year or more. Paragraph 9.0 of the Agreement also allows for the
replacement of Existing Wells and for the drilling of New Wells,
subject to certain requirements. These municipal wells were drilled to
provide water to the City and other stakeholders from the Regional
Water Supply Project. To date, the City has invested over $15,000,000
in drilling municipal water supply wells, developing the Project design
and acquiring rights-of-way and entitlements. As part of Paragraph 9.0
of the Agreement, the Arizona State Land Department agrees to
coordinate with Flagstaff regarding the drilling of wells on ASLD
parcels in and around Red Gap Ranch for the benefit of the Regional
Water Supply Project, our Tribal stakeholders and Arizona State lands.
It is important to understand that water quality is generally poor,
and water quality varies in each well throughout the regional aquifers,
including the City's wells at Red Gap Ranch. Thus, for Flagstaff and
for the feasibility of the Regional Water Supply Project, key waivers
were negotiated to limit future claims based on injury to water due to
the movement of salinity and naturallyoccurring contaminants in the
aquifers from groundwater pumping. Given the unique hydrologic
conditions of the regional aquifers, it is vital to the City that the
waivers for injury to water due to the movement of salinity be
maintained, especially as it relates to the operation of wells to
provide better quality water to stakeholders from the Regional Water
Supply Project.
The 35-mile alignment of the Regional Water Supply Project from Red
Gap Ranch will follow Interstate 40 within the ADOT Right-of-Way, and
then continue along county and Forest Service roads to reach Flagstaff.
The Project can deliver 16,000 acre-feet of water. Paragraph 12.0 of
the Agreement allows the Navajo Nation to have access to better quality
water from the Regional Water Supply Project by entering into Water
Supply Contracts with Flagstaff as described in the Agreement. Nothing
in the Agreement prohibits Flagstaff from entering into Water Supply
Contracts with the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, Arizona State Land
Department, Arizona Department of Transportation or others wanting
access to the Regional Water Supply Project. Flagstaff is also
exploring an integrated approach to the Regional Water Supply Project,
including the installation of solar power generators to help achieve
Flagstaff's carbon neutrality vision. Through S. 4633, the Navajo
Nation and Hopi Tribe would have access to these critical water and
energy resources.
When Flagstaff acquired Red Gap Ranch for the purpose of developing
its future municipal water supply and to provide water resiliency and
water security for its residents, it did so with 71 percent (71
percent) voter approval. Since then, Flagstaff has invested over
$15,000,000 in furthering the Regional Water Supply Project and
continues to invest in its development by conducting engineering
feasibility studies, design plans, alignment modifications, cultural
and archaeological review, hydrology studies, including the drilling of
no less than 10 wells at Red Gap Ranch for municipal use that are
recognized as Existing Wells under S. 4633. A non-federal, Phase II
engineering feasibility study for the Regional Water Supply Project has
been released and was discussed at Flagstaff's Water Commission meeting
on July 18, 2024. Flagstaff continues to identify, in coordination with
the Arizona Department of Transportation, and with further anticipated
input from regional participants including the Navajo Nation, the Hopi
Tribe and the Arizona State Land Department, various Points of Access
to the Regional Water Supply Project at ADOT intersections along the
Interstate 40 corridor, or at other mutually beneficial locations.
The City is cognizant of the significant $5 Billion request to fund
the Tribal water supply projects in NAIWRSA and that the City's
additional request for funding the Regional Water Supply Project may
not be available through NAIWRSA at this time. The City strongly
supports the recognition and funding of our Tribal Partners' water
supply projects so that those long-overdue projects can be realized
through NAIWRSA. It is also necessary to further the development of the
Regional Water Supply Project, and Flagstaff is seeking authorization
of the Regional Water Supply Project, but without funding in NAIWRSA.
Therefore, the City requests an amendment to S. 4633 that reflects the
following:
(A) In accordance with the NAIWSA Agreement and the general
description of the Red Gap Ranch Regional Water Supply Project,
the Secretary is authorized to complete a feasibility study and
Record of Decision as scoped in a Bureau of Reclamation
appraisal study.
(B) The cost to complete (A) shall not be included in this Act.
(C) The feasibility study and record of decision shall be
completed within four (4) years of enactment of this
legislation.
(D) The feasibility study shall be conducted in accordance with
all applicable federal laws, directives and standards.
(E) The Red Gap Ranch Regional Water Supply Project is
authorized contingent on a determination of the feasibility
study and Record of Decision.
(F) The construction of (E) shall be in accordance with all
applicable federal laws, directives and standards, and subject
to cost sharing among the stakeholders as described in a
subsequent Act.
The Red Gap Ranch Regional Water Supply Project can supply precious
water to Tribal stakeholders and other key parties in this settlement.
Flagstaff's investment in the non-federal feasibility study and design
based on the Interstate 40 alignment has put the Regional Water Supply
Project substantially advanced in the design of other projects, and
immediately ready for a federal appraisal level and feasibility study
if authorized in NAIWRSA. This is important because the Regional Water
Supply Project from Red Gap Ranch will also provide for economic
development opportunities for the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe and the
State of Arizona (ASLD and ADOT) along the Interstate 40 Corridor.
Flagstaff has initiated outreach to the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
to engage the Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe, Arizona State Land Department
and other stakeholders in a development planning process for the
Regional Water Supply Project. Although the City is not seeking funding
through NAIWRSA, Flagstaff has committed to cost-share an allocation of
future federal funding which would eventually come from federal
legislation required to develop the Regional Water Supply Project.
Jacobs, the City's engineering firm, has already conducted significant
design work and estimated costs for the Regional Water Supply Project.
Jacobs estimates the cost for the Regional Water Supply Project with a
reverse osmosis treatment facility to be $575 million. Jacobs estimates
the cost for the utility-scale solar generation facility to power the
Regional Water Supply Project to be $33 million. The City notes that
the Bureau of Reclamation federal feasibility study will develop a
comprehensive project plan and cost estimate as required for federal
funding in a Record of Decision. The estimated cost for the Bureau of
Reclamation feasibility study is $30 million, of which $15 million
would need to be appropriated for a 50 percent/50 percent federal and
local cost-share.
In conclusion, we ask that the Committee add the critically
important authorization of the Red Gap Regional Water Supply Project to
S. 4633 during the mark-up of this legislation to initiate the
necessary steps needed to bring water to our Tribal Partners and other
stakeholders in the region. This request from the City should clarify
its intent not to burden the $5 Billion federal funding request
necessary to realize the Tribes' water supply projects. Flagstaff's
firm position is that the Tribes' water supply projects are needed and
long overdue. Additionally, the City's request to amend S. 4633 to
authorize feasibility and the Regional Water Supply Project in NAIWRSA
is imperative at this time, given the critical timing and need to
deliver real and supplemental water supplies for the City, our Tribal
Partners and other stakeholders in the region.
The City strongly supports our Tribal Partners and other parties in
a unified effort to move S. 4633 forward as it will finally resolve
long, drawn out and expensive litigation while providing important
solutions that will secure our Tribal Partners and cities in
Northeastern Arizona with indispensable future water supplies.
As Mayor of Flagstaff, I thank you for the opportunity to provide
this testimony in support of this legislation.
______
Prepared Statement of Leslie A. Meyers, Associate General Manager/Chief
Water Resources and Services Executive, Salt River Valley Water Users'
Association/Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power
District
Chairman Schatz, Vice Chairman Murkowski, and members of the
Committee, Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony in support
of S. 4633, the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act
of 2024. My name is Leslie A. Meyers. I am the Associate General
Manager and Chief Water Resources and Services Executive at Salt River
Project (SRP), a large multi-purpose federal reclamation project
serving the water and power needs of the Phoenix, Arizona metropolitan
area. The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement
(``Settlement Agreement'') is a monumental achievement and the product
of negotiations spanning over 30 years. The settlement provides the
Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe
with desperately needed water supplies and infrastructure to secure
their future. The settlement also brings certainty to water users
throughout northeastern Arizona and those along the Colorado River
regarding the allocation of a scarce resource.
About Salt River Project
Congress and the Secretary of the Interior (``Secretary'')
authorized the construction of the Salt River Federal Reclamation
Project as one of the first projects under the Reclamation Act of 1902.
The Salt River Valley Water Users' Association, an Arizona Territorial
corporation, was organized in 1903 by landowners in the Salt River
Valley to contract with the federal government for the construction of
Theodore Roosevelt Dam on the Salt River, located some 80 miles
northeast of Phoenix. In exchange for pledging their land as collateral
for the federal loans to construct Roosevelt Dam, which loans have long
since been fully repaid, landowners in the Salt River Valley received
the right to water stored behind the dam.
Today, SRP operates six dams and reservoirs on the Salt and Verde
Rivers in the Gila River Basin, one dam and reservoir on East Clear
Creek in the Little Colorado River Basin, and 1,300 miles of canals,
laterals, ditches and pipelines to deliver water to approximately 400
square miles of land in the greater Phoenix area. The dam and reservoir
system can store approximately 2.3 million acre-feet of water runoff
from the Salt and Verde River and East Clear creek systems, making SRP
the largest raw water provider in the Phoenix Metropolitan area.
C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir (``C.C. Cragin Reservoir''), located
on East Clear Creekin the Little Colorado River Basin, is an important
feature of the Salt River FederalReclamation Project. Located
approximately 25 miles north of the Town of Payson, C.C.Cragin
Reservoir stores water from a 71-square-mile watershed on East Clear
Creek, atributary to the Little Colorado River. SRP acquired C.C.
Cragin Reservoir in 2004 fromPhelps Dodge Corporation as part of the
Gila River Indian Community Water RightsSettlement. Title II of the
Arizona Water Settlement Act, P.L. 108-451, specifies that upto 3,500
acre-feet of the water stored in Cragin Reservoir will be made
available formunicipal and domestic uses in northern Gila County at no
cost to SRP or the Bureau ofReclamation. Water from C.C. Cragin
Reservoir is a crucial resource to meet themunicipal demands of the
Town of Payson and other nearby communities, who previouslyrelied
solely upon the area's meager groundwater resources.
In addition to water operations, SRP is also the third largest not-
for-profit community based public power utility in the country,
providing reliable, affordable, and sustainable electricity to nearly 3
million people in Arizona. SRP has a diverse energy portfolio that
includes nuclear, solar and wind, natural gas, battery storage, coal,
geothermal and hydropower. From 1969 until 2019, SRP was a part owner
and the operating agent of the Navajo Generating Station (NGS), a coal
fired power plant located on the Navajo Reservation in the Upper
Colorado River basin. Coal used for fuel at NGS was supplied by the
Kayenta Mine, located on land within both the Navajo and Hopi
Reservations. Members of the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe were
employed at both NGS and Kayenta Mine. Over its 50-year history, water
for the operation of NGS was supplied from Arizona's annual entitlement
to Upper Basin Colorado River water. SRP also owns and operates the
Coronado Generating Station located near St. Johns, Arizona and owns
Unit 4 at the Springerville Generating Station located near
Springerville, Arizona. Both of those power plants are located in the
Little Colorado River basin and rely on local groundwater resources for
operations.
The Water Needs of The Three Tribes
The Navajo Nation is the largest Native American tribe in the
country, with a membership of more than 400,000 tribal members. The
Navajo Reservation spans 17.3 million acres in the states of Arizona,
Utah, and New Mexico. About half of the Navajo Nation tribal members
reside on the reservation. The Little Colorado River in Arizona, a
tributary to the Colorado River, traverses the Arizona portion of the
Navajo Reservation. The Navajo (``N'') Aquifer and the deeper Coconino
(``C'') aquifer underlie the reservation. The lack of dedicated water
supplies and water infrastructure are urgent problems in the daily
lives of the Navajo. Approximately 30 percent of Navajo households lack
running water and must rely on hauling water to meet their daily needs.
The Hopi Tribe's ancestral territory encompassed the entire Little
Colorado River watershed from its confluence with the Rio Puerco River
west to its confluence with the Colorado River in Arizona for many
centuries. The present-day Hopi Reservation covers approximately 3,000
square miles in the eastern part of Coconino County and the northern
part of Navajo County in northeastern Arizona. The Hopi Reservation is
bordered on all sides by the Navajo Reservation. Current tribal
enrollment is close to 15,000 members, with approximately 9,000 living
on the reservation. Surface water on the Hopi Reservation is present in
seeps, springs, wetlands, and washes. These washes are tributaries to
the Little Colorado River and are primarily ephemeral with limited
perennial reaches supplied by springs. Groundwater is essential to
ensure that the Hopi Reservation serves as a permanent and sustainable
homeland for the Hopi. Groundwater project infrastructure and access to
perennial surface water supplies are pressing needs for the Hopi Tribe.
The San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe is a small tribe located in
Northern Arizona and Southern Utah, within the exterior boundaries of
the Navajo Reservation. The portion of Tribe's community located within
Arizona is in the Little Colorado River Basin. The San Juan Southern
Paiute Tribe is an ancient tribe but did not receive federal
recognition until 1989. In the context of litigation to determine the
rights of the Tribe to lands within the Navajo Reservation, the parties
negotiated a treaty to partition the land between the two tribes. The
Navajo Nation agreed to partition 5,400 acres as the San Juan Southern
Paiute Tribe's exclusive reservation. However, Congress has not yet
ratified the treaty. Further, the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe lacks
a dedicated source of water and the water delivery system needed to
serve the Tribe's members.
S. 4633 is Transformative for the Future of the Three Tribes and for
Northeastern Arizona Communities
SRP has long held that the resolution of tribal water rights claims
broadly benefits both the tribal communities receiving water and
funding, and water users throughout the basin. This is particularly
true in the context of the Settlement Agreement.
By providing water access and funding for water infrastructure to
the tribes, the Settlement Agreement and authorizing legislation will
support tribal economic growth, self-sufficiency, and sovereignty.
Resolving the water claims of the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and
the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe also addresses a major outstanding
item in Arizona's Little Colorado River Adjudication--a proceeding that
has been ongoing for nearly half a century. The settlement will result
in the entry of a judgment and decree adjudicating the three tribes'
claims to the Little Colorado River system and will place restrictions
on the tribes' participation in the litigation going forward.
Finally, of particular importance to SRP, the settlement confirms
SRP's right to store water in C.C. Cragin Reservoir on East Clear Creek
and deliver that water to communities in Gila County, Arizona, and
potentially the Yavapai-Apache Nation and neighboring municipalities in
Yavapai County, Arizona.
Noteworthy Benefits of the Settlement and S. 4633
Securing and Delivering Colorado River Water Supplies
The settlement is particularly timely in the context of ongoing
negotiations of post-2026 Colorado River operating guidelines, as the
Navajo Nation's claim to the Colorado River is among the largest
outstanding claims in that basin. Since the closure of NGS in 2019, SRP
has expressed its unwavering commitment to ensuring that the Navajo
Nation and the Hopi Tribe receive Upper Basin Colorado River water
supplies apportioned to the State of Arizona under Article III of the
Upper Colorado River Basin Compact of 1948. The Agreement and S. 4633
would bring this about by providing nearly 57,000 acre-feet of Colorado
River water to the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe, including 47,000
acre-feet of Arizona's 50,000 acre-feet Upper Basin apportionment.
These renewable supplies would be delivered through a pipeline funded
by S. 4633 to the Navajo and Hopi Reservations, providing potable
drinking water to areas of the reservations currently without water or
water infrastructure.
Additional Water Delivery Projects
S. 4633 also includes funding for at least ten other water delivery
projects for tribal communities. The funding would make possible the
construction of groundwater projects on the Navajo, Hopi, and San Juan
Southern Paiute Reservations that are desperately needed to deliver
water to currently unserved and underserved areas. These projects would
address both infrastructure and water quality needs existing on the
reservations. Construction of these projects, along with the Colorado
River pipeline project described above, would make it possible for
individual communities on all three reservations to thrive and grow.
San Juan Southern Paiute Reservation
S. 4633 ratifies and confirms the treaty between the Navajo Nation
and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe and permanently sets aside the
San Juan Southern Paiute Reservation. The creation of this reservation
is long overdue and will remain in effect whether or not other
components of the settlement are completed or made effective.
Agreement Between the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe Regarding the
Management and Use of the N-Aquifer, Springs, and Washes
The Settlement Agreement includes an agreement between the Navajo
Nation and the Hopi Tribe regarding the management and use of the N-
Aquifer, as well as springs and washes that occur on their
reservations. This intertribal agreement also makes room for potential
joint water projects that could benefit both tribes. The tribes'
agreement on these issues was essential to reaching the overall
settlement and is illustrative of their commitment to work together as
they manage their water resources going forward.
Resolution of the Three Tribes' Claims to Little Colorado River Water
and
Groundwater
All three tribes have asserted claims in the Little Colorado River
Adjudication. The Little Colorado River is a fully appropriated system,
and the claims of the tribes, which are based in part on future use
under the federal reserved rights doctrine, exceed the flow of the
river even before existing uses of water are considered. Under the
settlement, the tribes would receive surface water flows reaching their
respective reservations, as well as underlying groundwater. At the same
time, the Tribes would confirm and agree not to object to existing uses
of surface water and groundwater, as well as some future uses (within
certain parameters). These provisions bring clarity to neighboring
water users and avoids significant litigation costs, including for
SRP's water uses at its power generating plants in the basin.
Confirmation of SRP's Right to Store and Deliver Water in C.C. Cragin
Reservoir
Through the Settlement Agreement, the three tribes would confirm
and agree not to challenge or object to SRP's right to store water in
C.C. Cragin Reservoir on East Clear Creek and deliver that water to
communities in Gila County, Arizona. The three tribes' confirmation of
SRP's Cragin right also protects water deliveries from C.C. Cragin
Reservoir to the Yavapai-Apache Nation, and potentially other
communities in Yavapai County, Arizona, through the proposed Cragin-
Verde Pipeline Project from any challenge. This project, which would be
authorized by S. 4633, is the centerpiece of the water rights
settlement for the Yavapai-Apache Nation. The agreement by the Navajo
Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe not to
challenge or object to SRP's rights in C.C. Cragin Reservoir, which is
located in the Little Colorado River watershed, paves the way for
deliveries of Cragin water to Yavapai County.
Conclusion
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement
is critical to augmenting the water resources and infrastructure that
is so urgently needed by the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San
Juan Southern Paiute Tribe. The settlement provides a foundation for
the future of these tribes, making it possible for tribal members and
their families to live, work and thrive on their reservations. The
settlement also puts an end to longstanding litigation with the tribes'
neighbors and achieves greater certainty regarding allocation of
resources in the Colorado River Basin and the Little Colorado River
Basin. SRP urges the passage of S. 4633 to authorize and fund the
settlement.
Additional statement
Thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony in support of S.
4705, the Yavapai- Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024.
My name is Leslie A. Meyers. I am the Associate General Manager and
Chief Water Resources and Services Executive at Salt River Project
(SRP), the oldest multi-purpose federal reclamation project, serving
the Phoenix, Arizona metropolitan area.
The Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Agreement
provides for the importation of water from C.C. Cragin Dam and
Reservoir, a water pipeline and water treatment system, an in-stream
flow right for the Verde River and the confirmation of the Nation's
existing rights, local underground water, and an existing allocation
from the Central Arizona Project (CAP). S. 4705 would authorize the
settlement, provide funding for water infrastructure necessary to
implement the settlement, and set aside the water supplies for use by
the Nation and potentially other communities in Yavapai County.
SRP proudly supports the passage of S. 4705 to make the settlement
a reality.
History of Salt River Project
The Secretary of the Interior (``Secretary'') authorized the
construction of the Salt River Federal Reclamation Project as one of
the first projects under the Reclamation Act of 1902. The Salt River
Valley Water Users' Association, an Arizona Territorial corporation,
was organized in 1903 by landowners in the Salt River Valley to
contract with the federal government for the building of Theodore
Roosevelt Dam on the Salt River, located some 80 miles northeast of
Phoenix. In exchange for pledging their land as collateral for the
federal loans to construct Roosevelt Dam, which loans have long since
been fully repaid, landowners in the Salt River Valley received the
right to water stored behind the dam.
In 1905, in connection with the formation of the Association, a
lawsuit entitled Hurley v. Abbott, et al., was filed in the District
Court of the Territory of Arizona. The purpose of this lawsuit was to
determine the priority and ownership of water rights in the Salt River
Valley to the natural flow of the Salt and Verde rivers and to provide
for their orderly administration. The decree entered by Judge Edward
Kent in 1910 adjudicated those water rights, provided water supply
certainty to existing water users and, in addition, paved the way for
the construction of additional water storage reservoirs by SRP on the
Salt and Verde Rivers in Central Arizona.
Today, SRP operates six dams and reservoirs on the Salt and Verde
Rivers in the Gila River Basin, one dam and reservoir on East Clear
Creek in the Little Colorado River Basin, and 1,300 miles of canals,
laterals, ditches and pipelines to deliver water to approximately 400
square miles of land in the greater Phoenix area. The dam and reservoir
system can store approximately 2.3 million acre-feet of water runoff
from the Salt and Verde River and East Clear creek systems, making SRP
the largest raw water provider in the Phoenix Metropolitan area. SRP
holds the rights to water stored in these reservoirs, and for the
downstream uses they supply, pursuant to the state law doctrine of
prior appropriation, as well as federal law. SRP is also the third
largest notfor- profit community based public power utility in the
country, providing reliable, affordable, and sustainable electricity to
nearly 3 million people in Arizona. SRP has a diverse energy portfolio
that includes nuclear, solar and wind, natural gas, battery storage,
coal, geothermal and hydropower.
C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir (``C.C. Cragin Reservoir'') is an
important feature of the Salt River Federal Reclamation Project.
Located approximately 25 miles north of the Town of Payson, C.C. Cragin
Reservoir stores water from a 71-square-mile watershed on East Clear
Creek, a tributary to the Little Colorado River. SRP acquired C.C.
Cragin Reservoir from Phelps Dodge Corporation as part of the Gila
River Indian Community Water Rights Settlement. Title II of the Arizona
Water Settlements Act, P.L. 108-451, specifies that up to 3,500 acre-
feet of the water stored in Cragin Reservoir will be made available for
municipal and domestic uses in northern Gila County at no cost to SRP
or the Bureau of Reclamation. Water from C.C. Cragin Reservoir is
crucial to meet the municipal demands of the Town of Payson and other
nearby communities, who previously relied solely upon the area's meager
groundwater resources.
The Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Agreement Secures the
Nation's Future and Brings Renewable Water Resources to the
Verde Valley, Reducing Reliance Upon Groundwater
The Yavapai-Apache Nation is a federally recognized Native American
tribe consisting of two distinct tribal cultures, each with their own
traditions and languages: the Yavapai people and the Apache people.
Together, their aboriginal homeland spans more than 16,000 square miles
in the heart of central Arizona. The history of the Yavapai and Apache
peoples tragically resulted in their people being force-marched to the
San Carlos Apache Indian Reservation in 1875, where they were confined
for the next 25 years. After their imprisonment ended, the people who
called the Verde River their homeland returned to the Verde Valley and,
with the assistance of the United States, formed the foundations of the
Yavapai Apache Nation that remains today, demonstrating their
resilience and deep connection to their homeland and the Verde River.
The resolution of the Yavapai-Apache Nation's water rights claims
broadly benefits both the tribal communities receiving water and
funding, and water users throughout the Verde Valley. The Nation's
settlement will bring water certainty to their community and provide an
avenue for stable, renewable water supplies and strong, cooperative
water stewardship tools in the Verde Valley. The new supplies will also
reduce the dependency of the Nation and invested local communities on
groundwater--promoting aquifer health and reducing impacts on the flows
of the Verde River.
Resolving the Nation's claims also constitutes a monumental step
forward in providing certainty regarding available water supplies for
users in the Verde Valley, as well as downstream users of Verde River
water in the Phoenix metropolitan area. The Gila River Adjudication
includes over 7,000 water rights claimants within the Verde River
Watershed alone. The Nation's claims to Verde River water have been a
significant concern to municipalities and landowners in the Verde
Valley, where water resources are increasingly scarce. In securing this
settlement, the Nation agrees to waive its claims in the Adjudication,
and to participate in those proceedings narrowly. The settlement is the
culmination of decades of work to resolve the Nation's water rights and
is a win-win solution for the Nation, the other parties involved, and
the Verde River.
Settlement Details
Water Infrastructure
Legislation to enact the settlement will authorize and fund the
construction of a 60-mile pipeline from C.C. Cragin Reservoir to the
Verde Valley (``Pipeline Project''), delivering water to the Nation and
providing a pathway for local communities to secure a renewable water
supply for their water portfolios which would assist with sustaining
the Nation's instream flow rights and the Verde River. SRP would
operate the pipeline as part of the Salt River Federal Reclamation
Project. Neighboring communities participating in the Pipeline Project
would bear their proportionate share of the pipeline's operation and
maintenance expenses, thereby reducing the Nation's proportionate share
of these costs. The legislation also would facilitate the buildout of
the Nation's treatment and drinking water system, which could also be
utilized by entities receiving C.C. Cragin Reservoir water. The
infrastructure will unlock water resiliency opportunities for a diverse
range of stakeholders. The legislation also amends Title II of the
Arizona Water Settlements Act, P.L. 108-451, to make water from C.C.
Cragin Reservoir available for municipal and domestic use by
communities in Yavapai County to reduce reliance on groundwater, assist
in reducing the cost of water delivery to the YAN, and provide a
renewable water supply to the Verde Valley.
Nation's Water Sources
Water sources that make up the Nation's water budget, which are
defined in the settlement, encompass a diverse portfolio to meet the
Nation's present and future needs. Those sources include:
1. Water supplies from C.C. Cragin Reservoir delivered through
the to-beconstructed Pipeline Project;
2. The Nation's existing rights to Verde River water from the
OK Ditch, Verde Ditch, and pursuant to the Daley Decree for
irrigation and watering of livestock;
3. A right to instream flows of the Verde River on the
Reservation for religious and cultural uses;
4. Limited underground water for use by the Nation; and
5. Access to the Nation's existing allocation of CAP Indian
Priority Water.
Gila Adjudication Considerations
The Gila River General Stream Adjudication has now reached half a
century in duration; absent a settlement, a final resolution of the
Nation's water rights in the Adjudication proceedings would take many
years more, at great expense to the Nation and others in the Verde
Valley, prolong water supply uncertainty in the Verde Valley, and
hinder the long-term economic well-being of the Nation, the settlement
parties, local communities, and water users throughout the watershed.
As a mutually beneficial alternative, the Nation through this
settlement will waive its outstanding claims for water rights and
damages to water rights in the Gila River Adjudication when the
settlement becomes enforceable in exchange for the delivery of water
from C.C. Cragin Reservoir and other rights decreed in the settlement.
The Nation then only participates in the Adjudication proceedings
relating to injury to its water rights.
Thank you for your consideration of these views as we work to bring
this important settlement to pass.
______
Prepared Statement of the San Juan Water Commission
The San Juan Water Commission (``Commission''), represented by its
Chair, Steve Lanier, appreciates the opportunity to present this
testimony to the esteemed Committee concerning S. 4633/H.R. 8940
(hereafter, ``S. 4633'' or ``Legislation''), the Northeastern Arizona
Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 (``Arizona Settlement'').
The Commission held a special meeting on September 23, 2024, and voted
unanimously to file this testimony. The Commission fully supports
efforts to resolve the water rights claims of Native American Nations
and Tribes to waters of the Colorado River system. Such settlements,
including S. 4633, resolve significant uncertainty concerning water use
and development in the water-short Upper and Lower Colorado River
Basins. Settlements also help to prevent additional decades of costly
litigation. However, such Legislation must be carefully crafted to
ensure it does not overturn more than 100 years of the Law of the River
or interfere with a state's administration of its apportionment of
Colorado River water. For these reasons, the Commission proposes the
adoption of protective language in S. 4633 to comport with the Law of
the River and to protect New Mexico's allocation of its share of water
from the Upper Colorado River Basin. The Commission also supports the
amendments proposed by the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission.
Introduction to the San Juan Water Commission, New Mexico, and
Purposes of This Testimony
Created in 1986, the San Juan Water Commission supplies raw surface
water for municipal purposes to most of the residents of San Juan
County, which is located in the Four Comers region of New Mexico. The
surface water comes from the San Juan River, the Animas River, and
other Colorado River tributaries located in the San Juan River Basin in
New Mexico. San Juan County has approximately 125,000 residents,
including many members of Native American Nations and Tribes. The
Commission itself is comprised of five members representing the
communities in the County--the cities of Aztec, Bloomfield and
Farmington, a rural water users association comprised of eight rural
water suppliers, and the County of San Juan itself.
The Commission is a partner with the Navajo Nation, the Southern
Ute Indian Tribe, the Ute Mountain Ute Indian Tribe, and others in the
Animas-La Plata Project, which includes an offstream reservoir (Lake
Nighthorse) located outside of Durango, Colorado. The Commission joined
its partners to lobby Congress to pass the Colorado Ute Settlement Act
Amendments of 2000, P.L. 106-554, that authorized a downsized Animas-La
Plata Project to provide municipal water supplies in Colorado and New
Mexico and to settle the water rights claims of the Southern Ute Indian
Tribe and the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe in Colorado.
The Commission continues to strongly support the fair and equitable
settlement of Native American water claims. However, the Legislation
currently before this Committee must be amended to prevent serious harm
to the Commission's members and all states of the Upper Colorado River
Basin. Neither New Mexico nor the other Upper Colorado River Basin
states were involved in the Arizona Settlement, which, as written, will
adversely impact the Law of the River and the existing rights of the
four Upper Colorado River Basin states. To resolve the concerns
identified in this testimony, the Commission urges the Committee to
delay consideration of S. 4633 so the complicated issues addressed here
can be resolved through negotiations among the parties to the Arizona
Settlement, the Upper Colorado River Basin States, and Congress. In the
alternative, the Commission encourages the Committee to ensure the
following:
A. The Legislation does not authorize the diversion and storage
of water in New Mexico for use in another state without
approval from the New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission and
the issuance of permits by the New Mexico Office of the State
Engineer;
B. New Mexico maintains control over the administration of
water rights in New Mexico, including the diversion and storage
of water in the San Juan River Basin;
C. The Secretary of the Interior (``Secretary'') is required to
obtain permits from the New Mexico Office of the State Engineer
for the diversion and storage of water in the San Juan River
Basin in New Mexico and the delivery of such water to another
state;
D. No Upper Colorado River Basin water can be used in the Lower
Colorado River Basin without the approval of the Upper Colorado
River Commission; and
E. River flows for endangered species, including the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program, are protected.
The Commission also requests that the Committee amend the
Legislation as proposed in sections 2 through 4 of this testimony,
including the more specific proposals of the New Mexico Interstate
Stream Commission to add a new section 6(g) and to amend section 17 of
the Legislation concerning Colorado River accounting.
Specific Commission Concerns About S. 4633
1. Adverse Impacts on New Mexico/Upper Colorado River Basin
General Considerations
Under the Law of the River, the water of the Colorado River system
is apportioned between the Upper Colorado River Basin and the Lower
Colorado River Basin, between the United States and Mexico, and among
the Basin states. New Mexico is one of four Upper Colorado River Basin
states, and it currently uses only about half of its apportionment of
Upper Colorado River Basin water. Significantly, even if New Mexico had
the resources to further develop its apportionment, there is a lack of
wet water in the system to fully supply the state's apportionment. For
all practical purposes, the wet water available in the San Juan River
Basin already is allocated to supply current and existing demands:
state adjudicated water rights, the Animas-La Plata Project, water
storage and/or delivery contracts with the Bureau of Reclamation, and
flow requirements to protect endangered species. Further, water
availability is expected to decline in the future as a result of
ongoing climate change.
S. 4633 allocates most of Arizona's entitlement to Upper Colorado
River Basin water to the Navajo Nation. It also grants water storage
rights in New Mexico that fail to take into account the actual
hydrology of the river system and pre-existing demands on the system to
the detriment of water users in New Mexico, including the Commission.
In particular, the Commission is concerned that the Arizona Settlement
will allow the Secretary to preferentially store and then deliver water
to Arizona for use in the Upper and Lower Colorado River Basins at the
expense of several projects that supply water to Northwest New Mexico.
Specifically, the Commission is concerned about the water supply for
the Animas-La Plata Project, the Commission's and La Plata Conservancy
District's rights under New Mexico Office of the State Engineer (OSE)
File Nos. 2883-B, 2883-C, 2883-D, and 2883-E, all adjudicated water
rights in the San Juan River Basin in New Mexico, river flows for
endangered species, and even the Navajo Nation's rights under its San
Juan River Basin adjudication settlement with New Mexico.
The permits held by the Commission and the La Plata Conservancy
District are significant and represent the only water that is available
for future demands in San Juan County. Here are the amounts of
diversionary and consumptive use water in the permits in ``acre feet
per year'' (``AFY'') held by the Commission (``SJWC'' below) and the La
Plata Conservancy District (``LPCD''). One AFY will serve three to four
households for a year.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diversionary Consumptive Use
Entity Permit Amount Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SJWC 2883-B 20,S00AFY 10,400AFY
SJWC 2883-C 10,000AFY 6,300AFY
SJWC (from LPCD) 2883-E 330AFY 208AFY
LPCD 2883-D 1,560AFY 780AFY
LPCD 2883-E 110AFY 69AFY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL 32.800AFY 17,757 AFY
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the Navajo Nation's water rights settlement with the State of
New Mexico (and the resulting adjudication decrees), the Navajo Nation
received approximately 40 percent of the state's apportionment of Upper
Colorado River Basin water. If there is not enough wet water in the San
Juan River Basin to supply pre-existing projects and rights, support
New Mexico's full development of its apportionment, and fulfill the
Arizona Settlement, the water needed for the Navajo Nation under the
Arizona Settlement could only come from the Navajo Nation's
apportionment of Upper Colorado River Basin water under its settlement
with New Mexico. New Mexico was not invited to the Arizona Settlement
negotiations, and the Commission has two major questions: What legal
authority do the parties to the Arizona Settlement have to impose
adverse obligations on the State of New Mexico? What authority does
Congress have to do so in contravention of pre-existing federal
obligations to this state and the Upper Colorado River Commission?
In order to protect the interests of the Commission and other water
users in New Mexico, no Arizona Settlement water should be diverted and
stored in New Mexico for use in another state without approval from the
State of New Mexico, acting through its Interstate Stream Commission,
and the issuance of proper permits by the Office of the State Engineer.
New Mexico must maintain control over the administration of New Mexico
water rights without interference from the federal government. Further,
Congress should not authorize any use of Upper Colorado River Basin
water in the Lower Colorado River Basin without the approval of the
Upper Colorado River Commission.
Use of Upper Basin Water in the Lower Basin
The Arizona Settlement allocates 44,700 AFY of Arizona's Upper
Colorado River Basin water (''Upper Basin Water'') to the Navajo
Nation. [Sec. 6(a)(l)(A)(ii) (at 53:23-54:2)] It also allocates 2,300
AFY of Upper Basin Water to the Hopi Tribe. [Sec. 6(a)(2)(A)(ii) (at
55:11-14)] The water may be delivered to and used by the Nation, the
Tribe, or their lessees and exchange partners, anywhere in Arizona,
whether in the Upper Colorado River Basin or the Lower Colorado River
Basin. [Sec. 6(b)(l)(A) (at 56:1-6); Sec. 6(c)(l) (at 62:3-63:5); Sec.
6(c)(4) (at 65:23-66:16); Sec. 7(a)(l) (at 78:18-79:2); Sec. 7(a)(2)
(at 79:3-10); Sec. 7(b)(2)(A) (at 80:11- 21); Sec. 7(b)(2)(B) (at
80:22-81:6)] It also may be transported through the Central Arizona
Project system for storage or use. [Sec. 6(b)(l)(D) (at 57:23-58:11);
Sec. 7(f) (at 84:17-85:9)] Water leases may have terms lasting up to
100 years, and there is no limit on the length of the term for water
exchanges. [Sec. 7(b)(2)(C) (at 81:7-16)] All Upper Basin Water leased
by the Navajo Nation or the Hopi Tribe and diverted from the Upper
Basin shall be counted as Upper Basin water, even if it is used in the
Lower Basin. [Sec. 17(a)(5) (at 189:20-190:2)]
Under these provisions, Upper Colorado River Basin Water could
ultimately be leased to cities like Phoenix, allowing development of
Arizona's Upper Colorado River Basin Water through use in the Lower
Colorado River Basin, while development by other Upper Colorado River
Basin states lags--or effectively is extinguished--because of a lack of
wet water to support further development and because of legal
constraints in those states against delivery of Upper Basin water to
the Lower Basin. Arizona, through the Arizona Settlement, is unfairly
authorized to ``leapfrog'' over other Upper Colorado River Basin states
in the development of its allocation of water from the Upper Colorado
River Basin.
Arguably, the Arizona Settlement amends the Colorado River Compact
and the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact without appropriate approval
from the other signatories to those Compacts, whose interests may be
adversely impacted. If Congress or the Secretary overstep their
authority, decades of litigation could ensue. The concerns of New
Mexico and other Upper Colorado River Basin states must be addressed in
the Arizona Settlement to avoid such litigation.
Storage of Navajo Nation Water in New Mexico
The Arizona Settlement authorizes the diversion and storage in New
Mexico of the Navajo Nation's Upper Basin Water (44,700 AFY), Cibola
Water (up to 100 AFY), and Fourth Priority Water (3,500 AFY). The water
may be stored in New Mexico in Navajo Reservoir or the Frank Chee
Willetta, Sr. Reservoir and must be transported for use in Arizona.
[Sec. 6(b)(2)(A) (at 58:13-22); Sec. 6(b)(3)(A)(i-ii) (at 60:10-23);
Sec. 6(f)(l)(B) (at 72:22-73:3)]
All contracts to store water in the New Mexico reservoirs ``shall
identify--(i) the place of storage of the water; (ii) the mechanisms
for delivery of the water; and (iii) each point of diversion under the
applicable contract.'' [Sec. 6(b)(4)(A) (at 61:9-19)]. The Secretary
shall enter into water delivery contracts with the Navajo Nation for
the delivery of the Upper Basin Water, Cibola Water and Fourth Priority
Water that (i) identify the points of diversion in New Mexico and one
or more storage locations in New Mexico, (ii) authorize use at any
location within Arizona, and (iii) authorize delivery to the Navajo
Nation's lessees and exchange partners in both the Upper Basin and the
Lower Basin in Arizona. [Sec. 6(c)(l) (at 62:3-63:5); Sec. 6(c)(2) (at
63:24- 64:23); Sec. 6(c)(3) (at 65:1-22)]
The Secretary is not the water master in the Upper Colorado River
Basin, so consultation with and approval by the Upper Colorado River
Basin states should be required, through the Upper Colorado River
Commission. Further, the Secretary has no authority to administer water
in New Mexico, so the Secretary must acquire appropriate permits from
the Office of the State Engineer for the diversion and storage of
additional water in the two New Mexico reservoirs, Navajo and Frank
Chee Willetto, Sr. Historically, the Secretary has obtained such
permits from the state, which are necessary to ensure that any new
diversions and reservoir storage do not adversely impact the rights of
existing permittees. Provisions of an Indian water rights settlement in
Arizona must not give the Navajo Nation priority to divert, store, and
deliver water over existing rights in New Mexico. There is no language
in the Arizona Settlement prohibiting the Secretary from giving such
priority preference.
Neither the settling parties nor Congress have authority to give
such carte blanche to the Secretary. Storage of such significant
amounts of water in New Mexico reservoirs, along with the terms of the
delivery contracts (including authorization of the use of water in the
Lower Colorado River Basin) will disadvantage New Mexico and the other
Upper Colorado River Basin states and contravene not only state water
law, but also the Law of the River that has been negotiated among the
states and approved by Congress for more than 100 years. Water storage
in New Mexico, without the approval of the state and the issuance of
proper permits from the Office of the State Engineer, will interfere
with New Mexico's ability to administer its own water rights, prevent
the use of any available storage space in the reservoirs by New Mexico
water users, and impair the state's ability to put its own water to
beneficial use.
Further, adverse impacts on the San Juan River Basin Recovery
Implementation Program ( discussed in section 3 below) may harm the
interests of the Commission and the La Plata Conservancy District in
the Animas-La Plata Project and their water rights under OSE File Nos.
2883-B, 2883-C, 2883-D, and 2883-E. In particular, the Commission has
limited storage in Lake Nighthorse because storage modeling for the
Animas-La Plata Project was based on the availability of water for
direct river diversion in New Mexico. Additional water diversions for
storage in New Mexico reservoirs likely will restrict the Commission's
ability to access all of its Animas-La Plata Project water, as well as
its rights to water under OSE File Nos. 2883-C and 2883-E. The
Commission already has entered into contracts with third parties for
use of its water, which it might be unable to meet if the Arizona
Settlement is adopted by Congress in its current form. The Commission's
concern regarding whether the La Plata Conservancy District can use its
water in OSE File Nos. 2883-D and 2883-E comes from the fact that the
Commission advanced the capital costs for the La Plata Conservancy
District to pay for its portion of the Animas-La Plata Project, and the
only way the Commission will ever be repaid is through the La Plata
Conservancy District's leasing of its water in those files.
In addition, as already discussed, the Arizona Settlement
provisions requiring water storage and water delivery contracts to
authorize water delivery and use in the Lower Colorado River Basin
represent a misappropriation of Upper Colorado River Basin water. Such
use should not be authorized without consultation with, and approval
from, the Upper Colorado River Commission and each of the Upper Basin
states.
2. Secretarial Overreach
For the reasons already discussed concerning the use of Upper
Colorado River Basin water in the Lower Colorado River Basin and the
storage of Arizona water in New Mexico, the Arizona Settlement
improperly authorizes broad Secretarial overreach into water
administration in the San Juan River Basin. Administration of the Basin
must remain in the hands of the New Mexico Office of the State
Engineer. The San Juan River is adjudicated and heavily regulated, and
there is practically no wet water available for storage and delivery
for the uses contemplated by the Arizona Settlement. The Secretary has
no legal authority to authorize the diversion and storage of water in
New Mexico and its delivery to another state--only the New Mexico
Office of the State Engineer has such authority. The Committee should
remove all language purporting to give the Secretary authority over
water administration in New Mexico.
The Arizona Settlement provides protections to the State of Arizona
that must also be provided to the State of New Mexico. The following
language from the Arizona Settlement could be used as a template to add
protections for pre-existing projects in New Mexico by substituting a
list of those projects in lieu of the reference to ``the Central
Arizona Project'':
A. ``In the event that a water delivery contract will result in
the delivery of Upper Basin Colorado River Water to the Lower
Basin . . . the Secretary shall confer with the State prior to
executing that water delivery contract with respect to--(A) the
impact of the water deliveries on the availability of Upper
Basin . . . . Colorado River Water within the State; (B) the
annual accounting conducted by the Bureau for the water on the
Colorado River apportionments of the State in the Upper Basin .
. . ; and (C) as appropriate, the impact of the water
deliveries on the operations of the Central Arizona Project.''
[Sec. 6(d)(5) (at 69:1-16)]
B. ``A water delivery contract shall not prejudice the
interests of the State, or serve as precedent against the
State, in any litigation relating to the apportionment,
diversion, storage, or Use of water from the Colorado River
System.'' [Sec. 6(d)(7) (at 70:1-5)]
3. Endangered Species/Environmental Laws
San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program
The Arizona Settlement states: ``In implementing the Settlement
Agreement ... and this Act, the Secretary shall comply with all
applicable provisions of--(A) the Endangered Species Act of 1973; (B)
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, including the
implementing regulations of that Act; and (C) all other Federal
environmental laws and regulations.'' [Sec. 4(c)(l) (at 39:21-40:7)
(internal citations omitted)] There must be guarantees contained in the
language of S. 4633 that will protect flows for endangered species.
San Juan River flows essentially are regulated by the San Juan
River Basin Recovery Implementation Program (RIP) for two endangered
fish. The RIP was identified as a reasonable and prudent alternative in
the 1991 biological opinion for the Animas-La Plata Project and was
established in 1992 through a cooperative agreement. The Navajo Nation
and the Bureau of Reclamation are signatories.
The RIP protects the Commission's interests in the Animas-La Plata
Project, as well as those of the La Plata Conservancy District and the
Navajo Nation. In particular, as already noted, most of the
Commission's Project water will be provided through river diversions
rather than storage. The same is true for the Navajo Nation, which has
a relatively small amount of storage in Lake Nighthorse. Having river
flows for the endangered species protects the Commission's Animas-La
Plata storage and river diversion rights. So long as the RIP requires
endangered species flows to remain in the channel all the way to Lake
Powell, those flows cannot be used to supply water for the Arizona
Settlement.
National Environmental Policy Act
The Arizona Settlement states: ``The execution of the Settlement
Agreement by the Secretary . . . shall not constitute a major Federal
action for purposes of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 .
. . '' [Sec. 4(e) (at 41:1-5)] Because the Arizona Settlement
authorizes storage of Arizona water in New Mexico for delivery to
Arizona, which may have adverse consequences on existing reservoir
operations and the RIP, Section 4(e) should be removed and NEPA
compliance mandated. New Mexico may have more of an opportunity to
protect its interests via the NEPA process.
4. Support for New Mexico Interstate Stream Commission Amendments
The Commission supports the New Mexico Interstate Stream
Commission's proposed Section 6(g) and requests that specific reference
be made to protecting New Mexico State Engineer File Nos. 2883-B, 2883-
C, 2883-D and 2883-E. The Commission also supports the New Mexico
Interstate Stream Commission's proposed changes to section 17
concerning Colorado River accounting.
Concluding Remarks
The San Juan Water Commission has been--and continues to be--a
strong supporter of amicable settlement of the water rights claims of
the Navajo Nation in Arizona, as proposed by S. 4633. However, that
settlement must be modified to protect the Law of the River, to protect
New Mexico's legal right to administer water within the state, and to
protect the existing, established water rights of current and future
New Mexico citizens in San Juan County.
______
Prepared Statement of Becky Mitchell, Governor's Representative;
Commissioner, Upper Colorado River Commission
Colorado supports the efforts to achieve a fair, equitable, and
final settlement of all the claims to water in Arizona for the Navajo
Nation, Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan Paiute Tribe. However, Colorado
remains focused on the security and certainty of its interests in the
Colorado River and the protection of the management, administration,
and use of its share of the Colorado River as delineated in the
Colorado River Compact, (45 Stat. 1057) (1922 Compact) and the Upper
Colorado River Basin Compact, (63 Stat. 31) (1948 Compact). As detailed
below, there are a number of specific issues on which Colorado seeks to
resolve before supporting this legislation. Colorado is committed to
working collaboratively to address these issues.
Our testimony is directed specifically at Sections 6, 7, and 17, of
S. 4633, referred to as ``Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Act of 2024'' (``Legislation'').
Legislation impacts on 1922 and 1948 Compacts
Arizona receives most of its Colorado River water from the Lower
Basin's apportionment under the 1922 Compact. However, under the 1948
Compact, Arizona is also entitled to a fixed annual apportionment of
50,000 acre-feet for the portion of Arizona that is in the Upper Basin.
The Legislation calls for the allocation of 44,700-acre feet of this
water to be allocated to the Navajo Nation and 2,300 acre-feet
allocated to the Hopi Tribe to go towards the settlement of all the
Navajo Nation and Hopi Tribe water rights claims in Arizona.
6(a)(1)(A)(ii), (2)(A)(ii).
Colorado's overarching concern is based on language in the
Legislation, which allows for inter-basin transfers of water
apportioned to the Upper Basin for storage and uses off Navajo Nation
and Hopi Tribe Reservation lands in the Lower Basin and authorizes
exchanges of Lower Basin water for storage and use in the Upper Basin,
which conflicts with key elements of the Law of the Colorado River.
More specifically, the 1922 Compact divides the Colorado River
drainage area into two sub-basins: an Upper Basin (Colorado, New
Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming), and a Lower Basin (Arizona, California, and
Nevada) (Article II (f) and (g)). The apportionment under Article
III(a) of the 1922 Compact provides each sub-basin the right to 7.5-
million-acre feet per year for ``exclusive beneficial consumptive
use,'' and further requires in Article VIII that ``[a]ll other rights
to the beneficial use of the waters of the Colorado River System shall
be satisfied solely from the water apportioned to the Basin in which
they are situate.'' Article VII requires that nothing in the 1922
Compact shall be construed as affecting the obligations of the United
States of America to the Indian Tribes. Taken together, these Articles
establish limitations on inter-basin transfers between the Upper and
the Lower basins, and for the storage and use of that water off Tribal
Reservation lands.
The Legislation also raises concerns under the 1948 Compact. The
1948 Compact protects and apportions Upper Basin consumptives uses
among Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming of the Upper Basin's
Colorado River Compact apportionment of 7.5-million-acre feet. The
Legislation provides for storage of Navajo Nation Upper Basin water in
Navajo Reservoir. Navajo Reservoir is one of several reservoirs in the
Upper Basin authorized in the 1956 Colorado River Storage Project Act
as part of the system of reservoirs in the Upper Basin to allow the
Upper Basin to satisfy its rights and obligations under the 1922 and
1948 Compacts.
The Legislation is problematic as drafted because it requires that
water be credited against Upper Basin water in the year it is stored.
6(b)(2)(A), (B). This provision does not account for the 1948 Compact's
Article VI's definition of consumptive uses as ``man-made depletions of
the virgin flow at Lee Ferry.'' The water to be transferred under this
Legislation would pass Lee Ferry and no depletion would occur in the
Upper Basin. It is unclear how this water will be accounted for in
compliance with the 1948 Compact, the Boulder Canyon Project Act and
the decree in Arizona v. California, as the water is not able to be
credited as a depletion of the Upper Basin. Additional clarity from the
parties to the settlement on how this accounting would occur would be
valuable for the Committee to consider.
The Legislation also allows the Navajo Nation and Hopi Tribe Upper
Basin water to be leased, exchanged, or transferred, anywhere in the
State of Arizona. See e.g. 6(b)(3) and 7(a)(1)-(3). It also allows
this Upper Basin water to be transported through the Central Arizona
Project system for storage or use and off Navajo Nation or Hopi Tribe
Reservation lands. 6(b)(1)(D). The Legislation also allows for the
use of Upper Basin tributaries and infrastructure to store, transport,
and deliver Upper and Lower Basin water from the Upper Basin above Lake
Powell to the Lower Basin. 6(f)(3). There is no authorization for
these provisions in the 1922 Compact or the 1948 Compact.
Amendments Requested
Colorado fully supports the Tribes in their efforts to use or store
the water from the Upper Basin identified in the Legislation
exclusively on Navajo Nation and Hopi Tribe Reservation lands. Colorado
requests, however, that certain amendments be made to the Legislation
to comply with the Law of the River. Specifically, Colorado requests
amendments to the Legislation to limit the storage and/or use of
Arizona's Upper Basin water in the Lower Basin exclusively to Navajo
Nation and Hopi Tribe Reservation lands; that the provisions related to
credit account for limitations in the 1948 Compact; and that there be
no exchanges, credit, or accounting of Lower Basin water in or through
Upper Basin reservoirs or Upper Basin tributaries. The Upper and Lower
Basin States, including Colorado, are working with the settling parties
to collaboratively resolve these pending issues in the bill's language.
If these concerns are addressed, Colorado will support the
Legislation.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments on S. 4633.
______
Apsaalooke Allottees Alliance
July 11, 2024
RE: Letter of Opposition to Senate Bill 4444
Dear Senators Schatz and Murkowski:
The Apsaalooke Allottees Alliance is an Indigenous, non-profit
advocacy organization dedicated to helping and educating individual
Apsaalooke trust allotment landowners, including all aspects of
allotted land and water rights issues. We reside on the Crow
Reservation in southern Montana. We are no strangers to those who seek
to take advantage of our lands and waters, offering much in return and
delivering nothing. We fear that the ``Crow Revenue Act'' (S. 4444 from
Senator Steve Daines) is more of the same. According to our Crow
Constitution, our chairman, Frank White Clay, cannot act on his own. He
must take this major decision to the Crow General Council. Anything of
this magnitude must to go the Council where it would normally be
subject to a referendum vote.
Some Montana politicians are calling S. 4444 a ``commonsense
solution'' and claim it will bring new revenue to our people. This is
not the case. A close reading of the bill text reveals that the federal
government will give the Hope Family 4,530 acres of subsurface mineral
interests and 940 acres in surface interests next to a currently
operating and profitable coal mine in the Bull Mountains. In exchange,
the Hope Family will convey to the Tribe only its mineral interests
(4,660 acres of mineral rights) as to which there is no nearby coal
mining taking place and there is not likely to be any in the future. In
addition, if the Crow Nation were ever to pursue the development of the
Bighorn County tracts, we would have to enter into a revenue agreement
``if those mineral interests are developed at a later date.'' Senator
Daines' Fact Sheet describing the details of S. 4444 misstates this
provision of the bill. The statement in the Fact Sheet that Sec. 3 of
the bill ``requires the Hope Family and the Crow Tribe to enter into a
revenue sharing agreement[s] for the development of any mineral
interests in the Bull Mountain Tracts,'' is wrong. The relevant
provision in the bill states:
(d) REVENUE SHARING AGREEMENT.--The Tribe shall notify the
Secretary, in writing, that the Tribe and the Hope Family Trust
have agreed on a formula for sharing revenue from development
of the mineral interests described in subsection (a)(2) if
those mineral interests are developed at a later date.
Contrary to a statement in Senator Daines' Fact Sheet, Sec. 3(a)(2)
of the bill refers to the Hope Family Tracts, not the Bull Mountain
Tracts. The Bull Mountain Tracts are likely to be mined for coal, while
the Hope Family Tracts are not. Rather than requiring the Hope Family
Trust to share revenue with the Crow Tribe from the Bull Mountain
Tracts, the bill requires the Tribe to share revenue from the Hope
Family Tracts (in the unlikely event they were ever mined for coal)
with the Hope Family Trust, despite the fact that 100 percent of the
mineral rights beneath the Hope Family Tracts are to be held in trust
by the United States for the Crow Tribe. Thus, the Hope Family Trust
would receive 100 percent of the royalties from the Bull Mountain
Tracts, as well as an unspecified share of royalties from the 100
percent tribally owned Hope Family Tracts. Sec. 3(d) of the bill,
``Revenue Sharing Agreement,'' creates a burden on the mineral rights
the Tribe would receive in favor of the Hope Family Trust. The Tribe
would be required to negotiate with the Hope Family Trust to
gratuitously give it a share of the coal Apsaalooke Allottees Alliance
is incorporated in the State of Montana as a non-profit organization,
is IRS-approved exempt from federal income tax under Internal Revenue
Code (IRC) Section 501(c)(3). Donor contributions are tax-deductible
under IRC Section 170. AAA Tax ID: 93-3196068. royalties from the those
lands before those lands could be mined. There is no justification for
this, and it can only be characterized as outrageous.
It is also important to note that the Bull Mountain Tracts are
currently leased by the United States for coal mining, with royalties
payable to the United States. The net result of this legislation would
be to give valuable mineral rights and coal royalties otherwise payable
to the United States to the Hope Family Trust. There is no
justification for gratuitously enriching the Hope Family Trust at the
expense of the United States, in return for the Tribe receiving mineral
rights of little real value.
Our people have been promised more than is delivered time and time
again. The Crow do not need another beautifully wrapped birthday
present, only to open it and find it is empty inside. The Crow People
have great need for revenue, infrastructure, and investments on Tribal
and Allotted land. This bill provides none of these things.
We have worked hard to protect our culture, our land, our water,
and our people. S.4444 is an injustice reminiscent of so many in our
history and Native history in this country. It would be yet another
grave injustice to allow this bill to pass. Please vote no on this
bill.
Sincerely,
Michael Hill, President
______
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS--Big Horn County
May 28, 2024
Dear Senator Daines,
Regarding the Crow Revenue Act, we would like to offer our support
for this legislation. The transfer of the 4,660 acres of private
subsurface inho]ding on the Crow Reservation to the Crow Tribe of
Montana in exchange for 4,530 acres of federal subsurface and 940 acres
of federal surface interest in Musselshell County, MT along with the
Revenue Sharing Agreement in the Bull Mountains Tracts will ensure the
Tribe receives much needed revenue from mineral production that would
otherwise be lost. This will also ensure a sustainable economic benefit
to Big Horn County, MT.
We thank you for your leadership in addressing this matter and we
appreciate your commitment to economic growth in Big Horn County and
for all Montanans.
Sincerely,
Larry Vandersloot, Presiding Officer; George Real Bird III,
Member; Lawrence Big Hair, Member
______
Bull Mountain Land Alliance (BMLA), Northern Plains
Resource Council (NPRC), Western Organization of Resource
Councils (WORC)
September 20, 2024
Dear Senator Schatz,
On behalf of Bull Mountain Land Alliance (BMLA), Northern Plains
Resource Council (NPRC), Western Organization of Resource Councils
(WORC), and our thousands of members throughout Montana and the
Intermountain West, we write to express our strong opposition to S.
4444 (Crow Revenue Act) introduced by Senator Steve Daines.
S. 4444 seeks to benefit Signal Peak Energy, LLC, (SPE) a bad
corporate actor and bad neighbor in Montana, at the expense of impacted
local communities, ranchers, Montana taxpayers, and the environment.
This bill would seriously undermine or cancel an ongoing Office of
Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) environmental impact
study of the mine's local impacts. This review could result in
responsible safeguards that protect neighboring landowners, wildlife,
and water resources.
Our organizations are deeply concerned about impacts to the Crow
Tribe and Crow people from the potential closure of the Absaloka Mine
on the Crow Reservation. We strongly support the federal government
providing meaningful support to the Tribe to account for lost revenues,
lost jobs, and economic distress. But the anticipated benefits of S.
4444 to the Crow Tribe are speculative--Crow tribal members have gone
on record opposing the bill, contending that the revenue sharing claims
are deeply misleading and saying it would be a ``grave injustice to
allow this bill to pass.'' Meanwhile, S. 4444 purports to benefit one
community by posing unacceptable impacts to another community--the
people and ranchers in the Bull Mountains of Montana--by eliminating a
much-needed environmental review of the significant impacts of a
federal coal lease on local water resources, which serve as the
lifeblood of local residents and generational ranches.
For these reasons and others outlined below, we strongly urge the
Senate Indian Affairs Committee to oppose S. 4444:
1. Signal Peak, LLC Is a Bad Neighbor
Since the Bull Mountains Mine re-started and expanded mining
operations in 2009, Signal Peak Energy's actions have shown a disdain
for the law and a motivation to further its own interests at the
expense of the people who live and work in the Bull Mountains. Over the
years, Signal Peak has used callous tactics to directly and indirectly
force generational ranchers off their land. The Bull Mountains have
been a crucial summer range for cattle because of their proximity to
perched groundwater aquifers and springs. Unfortunately, since mining
began, ranchers and landowners have seen extensive subsidence which has
torn apart the landscape and impacted the hydrological system in the
region resulting in ranchers reconsidering or moving their ranching
operations to survive. Signal Peak has gone as far as to cancel the
grazing lease of a rancher on the corporation's land and has sued
people who ranch above the mine in multiple cases. Signal Peak's
motivation to push ranchers off the land seems very clear: the
corporation seeks to avoid assessing and addressing the harms it has
caused to springs, aquifers, and wells. S. 4444 effectively condones a
corporate actor that is known for violating the law and harming the
people who live in Musselshell County and Yellowstone County. S.4444
allows Signal Peak to bypass the only process that requires the federal
government to review the mine's impacts and provides an opportunity to
address those impacts.
Signal Peak is also currently on federal probation with the
Department of Justice after criminal convictions for willfully lying to
federal mine regulators about work-place injuries and for illegally
dumping toxic mine waste into an area that was intended to provide
replacement water to local people harmed by the mine. \1\ The company
has also violated the law by not complying with the obligation to
collect and analyze water sources weekly which has led to an
``irreversible loss of monitoring data.'' \2\ They have also incurred
over 1,700 violations, according to the Mine Safety and Health
Administration (MSHA). \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Judgment, United States v. Signal Peak Energy, LLC, No. 21-CR-
79 (Jan. 31, 2022); Offer of Proof, United States v. Signal Peak
Energy, LLC, No. 21-CR-79 (Oct. 5, 2021).
\2\ DEQ, Notice of Noncompliance (Aug. 22, 2019).
\3\ Mine Safety and Health Administration, Mine Data Retrieval
System, https://www.msha.gov/data-and-reports/mine-data-retrieval-
system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Signal Peak is also known for avoiding paying taxes that would
benefit the State of Montana and the local county. By avoiding millions
of dollars in tax obligations through exhaustive lobbying efforts at
the Montana legislature, Signal Peak has evaded its responsibility to
support the local community. \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Mike Dennison, Tax Break for Roundup-area Coal Mine Stuffed
into Bill in Final Days, Billings Gazette (Apr. 28, 2011), available at
https://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/montana/taxbreak-
forroundup-area-coal-mine-stuffed-into-bill-in-final-days/
article_995244c5-f6f7-5087-9d50-da3a5e057ebb.html; Mike Dennison, Tax
Break for Roundup-area Coal Mine Stuffed into Bill in Final Days,
Billings Gazette (Apr. 28, 2011), available at https://
billingsgazette.com/news/stateandregional/montana/musselshell-county-
turns-down-coal-minetaxbreak/article_52aa5180-1215-11e0-9c79-
001cc4c03286.html The bottom line is that S. 4444 is a raw deal for
ranchers, local landowners, the environment, taxpayers, and the rule of
law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Signal Peak's Operations at the Bull Mountains Mine Have Not Been
Subject to an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
If S. 4444 is enacted, the critical EIS that is being prepared for
the extensive AM3 expansion of the Bull Mountains Mine would be evaded,
because the minerals would become private rather than federal. For
decades, the landowners and ranchers in the Bull Mountains region have
been organizing and advocating for a full analysis, through an EIS, of
the impacts the mine has on the environment and the local community. If
Signal Peak continues expanding the mine, it should only be after a
proper and thorough analysis of the environmental impacts is completed.
Shifting these federally-owned minerals into the hands of a wealthy
private family (the Hope Family Trust) will sidestep federal oversight
of the mine, which appears to be the primary goal of S. 4444. Given
Signal Peak's repeated violations of environmental and safety laws,
federal oversight should be increased rather than sabotaged through
convoluted legislation.
Local communities do not know what information the EIS will
ultimately yield, but the future of the mine should be determined only
after considering all information possible. Local ranchers have
experienced dried-up springs and wells and cracks opening in their
pastures due to subsidence caused by undermining, and have sought for
years to have a thorough EIS completed in order to better understand
the impacts of expanded mining on their livelihoods.
SPE heavily lobbied the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) over a
decade ago to ensure that only an Environmental Assessment (EA) was
done on the mine's original lease, which limited the scope of analysis
and left the local community with more questions than answers. \5\ This
prevented regulators from taking a hard look at the environmental and
community harms that this mine has and will continue to perpetuate.
Subsequent expansions and permit amendments at the Bull Mountains Mine
have continuously recycled this same Environmental Assessment with only
minor updates, and a comprehensive and more substantive evaluation of
impacts has never been conducted. Since the mine opened, ranchers and
landowners have seen the consequences of this lack of analysis first
hand: water resources being devastated, rises in air pollution,
subsidence and surface cracks on critical ranching and grazing land. A
close look at the harm that will result from longwall mining of federal
coal is not only a federal requirement but is also crucial in
preserving the livelihoods of local communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ BLM Meeting Notes (Mar. 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Loss of Public Land and Access
The swap engineered by S. 4444 includes the transfer of nearly
1,000 acres of federal surface land to the Hope Family Trust. This
transfer would close off access to an important and beloved section of
public land in an area where public land and the access that comes with
it is in short supply. This particular property provides some of the
only access points in the area where Musselshell and Yellowstone County
residents can hunt turkey, deer, and elk--an important local pastime.
4. Financial Impacts of S. 4444 and Valuation of Bull Mountains Coal
S. 4444 fails to meet a basic and critical tenet of mineral swaps,
which is a value-for-value trade. The federal coal in the Bull
Mountains is of much higher value than the coal owned by the Hope
Family Trust, which is unlikely to be mined and of much lower value.
The bill and proposed swap also provide a significant potential
windfall for one private family, the Hope Family, who own the coal on
the Crow Reservation that would be swapped with the federal coal in the
Bull Mountains. Meanwhile, while the bill sponsor purports significant
financial benefit to the Crow Tribe and community, those financial
benefits have been called into question. On July 27, members of the
Crow Tribe's Apsaalooke Allottees Alliance wrote that while some
politicians claim S.444 ``will bring new revenue to our people,''
``this is not the case.'' Quoting:
Reading the bill reveals that the federal government will give
the Hope family 4,530 acres of mineral interests and 940 acres
in surface interests next to an operating and profitable coal
mine in the Bull Mountains.
In exchange, the Hope family will convey to the Tribe its 4,660
acres of mineral interests under productive ag land on the Crow
Reservation with little likelihood of future mines nearby. If
the Crow Nation were to pursue development of the Bighorn
County tracts, we would have to enter a revenue agreement ``if
those mineral interests are developed at a later date.''
The bill vaguely refers to a revenue sharing agreement but does not
require it. Meanwhile, the only guaranteed benefit to the Crow is the
acquisition of Hope Family Trust's minerals, which are unlikely to ever
be mined.
Montana taxpayers would also take a seven-figure hit annually. In
an analysis of S. 4444 prepared for this committee, the Montana
Department of Revenue estimates that ``the State will lose
approximately $1.2 million in revenue per year between 2024 and 2028''
or $6.2 million in total across those years due to lost mineral
royalties. The local counties that benefit most from receiving a
portion of these federal royalties, Musselshell and Yellowstone
Counties, would lose an estimated, combined $1.7 million in revenue
over the same time period. This means less money for local schools,
emergency services, and infrastructure.
5. Lack of Public Participation
Neither Senator Daines nor anyone from his office consulted with
landowners adjacent to or above the mine associated before introducing
these two bills. This is a grave oversight due to the direct impact
that these bills have on landowners who rely on the land and water
resources to ranch and maintain their livelihood. Senator Daines missed
a critical step during the formation and introduction of this
legislation by not consulting with impacted landowners who would be
directly affected by the bills.
Unfortunately, this has been a recurring issue over the 15 years of
Signal Peak's operation in the Bull Mountains-ranchers and landowners
have been left out of the decisionmaking process at almost every step
due to Signal Peak's abuse of the minor permit revision process.
Hundreds of minor permit revisions have been made to Signal Peak's
permit without any public participation process or opportunities for
public input. Permit revisions deemed ``minor'' do not require any
public notice--even to affected or surrounding landowners--and do not
involve opportunities to provide public comment or input through
another mechanism. Statute requires permit revisions impacting water
resources to be categorized as ``major''--which does mandate public
notice and participation. However, Signal Peak has repeatedly made
revisions to its permit that impact water resources or otherwise should
be deemed ``major'' through the flawed and less transparent minor
permit revision process. In one example, Signal Peak sought a minor
permit revision to remove a natural spring-fed well which was a source
of water that a local rancher relied on to water for over 200 cows. \6\
The Montana Department of Environmental Quality granted that permit
revision, and left local landowners scrambling for sustainable water
sources.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ https://dailymontanan.com/2022/09/04/charters-last-stand-
ranchers-signal-peak-may-prove-that-coal-andcows-cant-coexist/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The bottom line is that S. 4444 seeks to undermine a federal
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process that would allow for
transparency, a thorough study of the environmental impacts, and the
public to comment and have a voice in the process.
Our organizations and members appreciate your attention to these
bills and urge the Committee to prioritize communities and the
environment over the desires of a bad corporate actor by opposing this
legislation. We thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Tom Baratta, Chair, Bull Mountain Land Alliance
Edward Barta, Chair, Northern Plains Resource Council
Sarah Hunkins, DC Representative, Western Organization of
Resource Councils
______
Dear Senate Committee,
Please vote no on this bad bill supporting a bad company--Signal
Peak Mining. Do something to really support the Crow Tribe economic
situation, and not rely on dirty coal.
Thank you,
Carla Abrams, Missoula MT
______
It is truly disgusting that Senator Daines would betray his
constituents in order to favor so corrupt a corporation as Signal Peak.
Please reject bills, S. 4444, as I hope S. 4431, and S. 4432 will also
be rejected.
To allow this very bad actor of a corporation to continue to
exploit Montana's coal (which needs to stay in the ground), especially
now that solar and wind are cheaper than coal, is totally unacceptable.
It is grossly irresponsible to propose legislation to evade
environmental review of this effort, and it is contemptible to name it
as if it would actually benefit the Crow Nation. See: https://
dailymontanan.com/2024/08/05/daines-coal-bill-land-swap-is-misleading/
Sincerely,
C. M. Woodcock, Bozeman MT
______
Dear Senators:
I live in Montana and I urge you to act against S. 4444. This
misleadingly titled Act will NOT help the Crow individually or as a
Nation. That is CLEAR from the language of the Bill itself. It WILL
allow Signal Peak to expand the Bull Mountain Mine without completing
the Court ordered environmental review.
Signal Peak has been a ``Bad Actor'' in the past and should be held
accountable for damage it has done to Montana ranches and our Climate.
Signal Peak NEEDS to fix the mess it has already made at the mine
BEFORE it can continue its mining operations.
Respectfully Submitted,
Charles W. Kuether, Great Falls, Montana
______
I urge that S. 4444 be soundly defeated. It gives a private
corporation control over public land, a pure give-away, against the
benefit of the people of Montana. It claims to benefit the Crow, but
does not.
Please vote NO on this bill.
Cindy Williams, Proctor, MT
______
Dear Committee:
I urge you to strongly oppose S. 4444, which would allow a private
entity in Montana, Signal Peak Energy, to take ownership of public land
and publicly owned coal. Signal Peak Energy is a flagrant bad actor
with previous links to Vladimir Putin, as well as a history of bribery,
embezzlement, drug trafficking and worker injuries. The US Attorney's
office called the mine a ``den of thievery'' due to its rampant
disregard for laws. The mine's owners have paid over $1.1 billion in
penalties and fines in the last few years. This company has caused
severe damage to nearby ranches, including loss of water resources for
ranching operations and wildlife and large, dangerous cracks in the
landscape. Signal Peak received millions in tax abatements from local
governments even though it has made more than $1 billion over the last
several years. Signal Peak should provide some of this historic revenue
to local governments and the Crow Nation.
Claire Reichert Baiz c/o Greg Reichert, Great Falls MT
______
8/29/2024
RE: S. 4444--Crow Revenue Act
Dear Senator Daines,
We request you withdraw S. 4444, the Crow Revenue Act. This bill
has dangerous implications for Musselshell County's land, air, water,
and local revenue. Research from the Montana Department of Revenue
demonstrates this bill would result in an annual loss of $1.2 million
dollars, 25 percent of which goes directly to Musselshell County.
Because the land will be transferred from federal lands which pay
royalties, we will no longer see these dollars benefit our state and
Musselshell County to support our schools, roads, bridges, emergency
services, and more. Moreover, when dollars are transferred out of the
public, it's often the community members who live and work left to pay
the bill.
This bill is not the answer. Please withdraw your bill, S. 4444,
immediately.
Sincerely:
Dustin Ogdin, Billings, MT
David Lehnherr, Red Lodge, MT
Susan Thomas, Livingston, MT
Jonah Barta, Bozeman, MT
Susan Thomas, Livingston, MT
Stephanie C. Fox, Bloomfield, CT
Melanie Chischilly, Texarkana, TX
Chris Lane, Missoula, MT
Bart Hovis,Manchester, MO
Toni Patterson,Hamilton, MT
Blaise Brockman,Arcadia, CA
Judy Staigmiller,Bozeman, MT
Elyette Weinstein,Olympia, WA
April Martin, Busby, MT
Mildred Whalen, Great Falls, MT
Wanda Latendresse, Billings, MT
Mike Stevenson, Clancy, MT
Bob Antonick, Helena, MT
Barbara Aas, Bozeman, MT
Karen Brashears, Chicago, IL
Georgia Braithwaite, Cottonwood, AZ
Thom Lufkin, Olympia, WA
John Schaefers, Mars, PA
Lila Randolph-Poore, Red Lodge, MT
Dorie Green, Bozeman, MT
Rebecca Lande, Frenchtown, MT
Annick Smith, Bonner, MT
Kirk Panasuk, Bainville, MT
Sandra Subotnick, Billings, MT
Ron Matelich, Bozeman, MT
John Boschert, Billings, MT
Sydney Weydemeyer, Missoula, MT
Gregory Esteve, Lake Wales, FL
Jim Taylor, Missoula, MT
Kathie Daviau, Billings, MT
Jill Davies, Victor, MT
Roderick Maclean, Bozeman, MT
Jan Modjeski, Murrells Inlet, SC
Douglas Sedon, Jefferson, MD
John Dunkum, Missoula, MT
Toni Semple, Livingston, MT
Kelly Baraby, Jefferson City, MT
Rob Seltzer, Malibu, CA
Jonathan Kaufmann, Grass Range, MT
Jeremy Hehn, Billings, MT
Karen Morris, Miles City, MT
Paul Hawks, Melville, MT
Mark Blandford, Amarillo, TX
Norman Bishop, Bozeman, MT
Jl Angell, Rescue, CA
Steven Grout, Great Falls, MT
Bill Walker, Billings, MT
Kathy Grieves, Peoria, AZ
Eric Nelson, Missoula, MT
Cindy Newman, Great Falls, MT
Gordon Whirry, Great Falls, MT
Jeff Dibenedetto, Red Lodge, MT
Nancy Welch, Billings, MT
Richard Mousel, Great Falls, MT
Blaine Jensen, Missoula, MT
Gary Matson, Milltown, MT
Billy Angus, Hamilton, MT
Michael Carroll, Great Falls, MT
James Eller, Sun River, MT
Colleen Wulf, Billings, MT
Jacob Mortensen, Missoula, MT
Rick Kerr, Choteau, MT
Connie Loveland, Laguna Hills, CA
Susan Logan, Red Lodge, MT
Carol Weinstein, New York, NY
Alan Hilden, Billings, MT
Robert Freistadt, Helena, MT
Tim Bergstrom, Billings, MT
Gayle Joslin, Helena, MT
Roy O'connor, Missoula, MT
Brian Butler, Billings, MT
Jean Boone, Billings, MT
Colonel Meyer, North Port, FL
Diana Saxon, Salem, OR
Robert W. Skinner, Billings, MT
Colleen Hinds, Heron, MT
Mary Clark, Helena, MT
Sandra Paris, Arlee, MT
Jim Barngrover, Helena, MT
Randy Setter, Anaconda, MT
David Easterling, Missoula, MT
Gumus Ozkok, Crownsville, MD
Charles Arnold, Manchester, NH
Corine Lindhorst, Great Falls, MT
Bruce Bender, Missoula, MT
Susan Mcclure, Bozeman, MT
Mike Hamilton, Havre, MT
Glenda Bradshaw, Helena, MT
Jody Gibson, Des Moines, IA
Virginia Bratton, Bozeman, MT
Ralph Bocchetti, Fontana, CA
Wendy Kamm, Fort Benton, MT
Robert Mackin, Billings, MT
Terry Dokken, Missoula, MT
Mark Nicholson, Billings, MT
Carole Clark, Great Falls, MT
Priscilla Bell, Laurel, MT
Mary Sedwick, Ennis, MT
Jim Heckel, Great Falls, MT
Michelle Boydston-Mulholland, Billings, MT
Katherine Nilson, Billings, MT
John Taylor, Missoula, MT
Phyllis K Munson, Anaconda, MT
Henry Nilson, Billings, MT
Elizabeth Erpelding-Garratt, St Augustine, FL
Susan Delles, Rogue River, OR
Steven Gores, Helena, MT
Randall Greene, Shepherd, MT
Jon Drindak, Billings, MT
Jason Crawford, Lancaster, PA
Nancy Krekeler, Red Lodge, MT
Debbie Oliver, Billings, MT
Marilyn Hill, Big Sky, MT
Cathy Holmes, Lewistown, MT
Dana Bleckinger, Yachats, OR
Robertus Wortelboer, Emigrant, MT
Margie Nelson, Billings, MT
John Halverson, Billings, MT
Bo Baggs, Port Arthur, TX
Colleen Skinner, Billings, MT
Molly Pearson, Great Falls, MT
Barbara Gulick, Billings, MT
Janet Childress, Helena, MT
Susann Beug, Red Lodge, MT,
Steven Fain, Hamilton, MT
Nancy Kessler, Livingston, MT
Jani Sena, Helena, MT
Mary Moore, Great Falls, MT
Rachel Corley, Frenchtown, MT
Stanley Bruce, Billings, MT
Liz Fife, Washington, DC
Art Hanson, Lansing, MI
Mac Donofrio, Hamilton, MT
Dana Huschle, Bozeman, MT
Stan Bayley, Billings, MT
Amy Vanderbilt, Kalispell, MT
Mark Fix, Miles City, MT
Pam Kemmick, Billings, MT
Mike O'connell, Bozeman, MT
Katherine Ball, Bozeman, MT
Russ Bossard, Roundup, MT
Garold Lazarowski, Seeley Lake, MT
Heather Sheffield, Livingston, MT
Brenna Herron, Libby, MT
Michael Helling, Victor, MT
Rachel Stansberry, Lewistown, MT
Margaret Kingsland, Missoula, MT
Jenny Sowell, Bozeman, MT
Kenneth Younger, Bozeman, MT
Gail And John Richardson, Bozeman, MT
Janice Munzke-Deal, Bozeman, MT
Hal Schmid, Missoula, MT
Steve Mcarthur, Missoula, MT
Neil Harrington, Helena, MT
Marilyn Trenfield, St. Ignatius, MT
Dan Dinstel, Alzada, MT
Erik Brown, Helena, MT
Thomas Barrett, Bozeman, MT
Ruth Swenson, Helena, MT
Kristin Aus, Glendive, MT
Nancy Cobble, Montana City, MT
Mark Payne, Bozeman, MT
Michael Hathaway, Missoula, MT
Archie Thomas, Corvallis, MT
Addison Sessions, Billings, MT,
Angela James, Great Falls, MT
Tammy Dalling, Gardiner, MT
Jim Sennett, Lewistown, MT
Tracy Mikesell, Huson, MT
Karen Mclean, Helena, MT
Liz Stone, Three Forks, MT
Jamie Jackson, Three Forks, MT
Dan Smith, Billings, MT
Richard Clawson, Billings, MT
Joanne Gores, Helena, MT
Richard Spellman, Livingston, MT
Frances Goff, Pasadena, CA
Todd Cochran, Missoula, MT
Mary Dubois, Bozeman, MT
Janet Lyon, Missoula, MT
Teresa Beutel, Congers, NY
Lisa Ventura, Billings, MT
Mark Polakoff, Red Lodge, MT
Corey Schade, Loch Arbour, NJ
Debbie Endres, Livingston, MT
Katherine Heffernan, Missoula, MT
Julie Chapman, Huson, MT
Kathleen Gessaman, Great Falls, MT
Charles Kuether, Great Falls, MT
Philip Richmond, Roundup, MT
Bp Casbara, Hamilton, MT
Marsha Sillivan, Roundup, MT
Joane Bayer, Canyon Creek, MT
John Smillie, Billings, MT
John Obrien, Butte, MT
Stern David, Cody, WY
Joel Vignere, Lakeside, MT
Daniel Knapp, Clarkston, WA
Jeri Miller, Kalispell, MT
Bob Leppo, Shell Beach, CA
Kathleen Gould, Billings, MT
______
9/24/2024
I do not support this bill. It is terrible for the environment,
climate change impacts and will not do anything for the Crow people and
generating revenue for them.
Please do not support Senate bill 4444.
Montana needs to retain all environmental standards as fought for
and court ordered.
Regards,
Colleen Eldred
______
SUPPORT FOR S. 4444 the Crow Revenue Act
Local Counties and Cities
The City of Roundup
Musselshell County Commission
Yellowstone County Commission
Big Horn County Commission
Montana Association of Oil, Gas, & Coal Counties
Statewide Elected Officials
Governor Greg Gianforte
Congressman Ryan Zinke
Congressman Matt Rosendale
Superintendent Elsie Arntzen
Local Elected Officials
Senator Barry Usher (SD-20)
Senator Jason Small (SD-21)
Representative Gary Parry (HD-39)
Representative Greg Oblander (HD-40)
Representative Gayle Lammers (HD-41)
Representative Kerri Seekins-Crowe (HD-43)
City of Billings Mayor Bill Cole
Principle Stakeholders
The Crow Tribe of Indians
The Hope Family Mineral Trust
Signal Peak Energy, LLC
``The Crow Tribe of Indians proudly supports this legislation''--
Chairman Frank White Clay
``On behalf of the City of Roundup, we are in full support of Steve
Daines and his Crow Revenue Act''--Roundup Mayor Sandra Jones
______
Distinguished Committee Members,
I am a member of the Crow Tribe, and I am writing to express my
opposition to S. 4444, the so-called ``Crow Revenue Act.'' The Crow
People have been systematically left out of this process, and it
remains unclear how its passage would benefit the Tribe. We are facing
financial and economic hardships that require meaningful investment and
attention from our elected officials, but this bill does not prioritize
the wellbeing and economic resilience of our community.
Tribal Chairman Frank White Clay has endorsed this legislation
without consulting the CrowTribe Legislature. In doing so, he has
undermined the constitutional rights of our people and cut us out from
engaging with this legislative process. He has purported that the
passage of the Crow Revenue Act would yield $100 million in revenue for
the Tribe over the next ten years and return thousands of acres of land
to the Crow. A close read of the bill itself clarifies that the swap
would only trade subsurface mineral rights to the Tribe, and the only
revenue afforded to us would be in the form of an undetermined
``revenue sharing agreement'' with the Hope Family Trust. However, this
agreement would only be realized if the coal were developed at a later
date. These coal assets are located beneath productive agricultural
lands and nowhere near an operational mine--when would we ever see the
revenue that this coal is supposed to provide us?
Chairman White Clay has emphasized that our tribe needs economic
investment and revival, and that this should not be politicized--and I
agree. Our leaders should invest meaningfully in our communities, and
not use us as political pawns in a scheme that clearly seeks to benefit
corporate actors like Signal Peak Energy in their pursuit to expand
their Bull Mountains Mine. Even if the Crow Revenue Act did allocate
revenue for the tribe, our economic future should not be tied to an
industry that has been declining for decades. We cannot afford to kick
this can further down the road, and our leaders must meaningfully
prioritize the resilience of our economic future.
I urge that you not support the Crow Revenue Act.
David R Blaine, Hardin, MT
______
9/25/2024
My name is David Rockwell, and I live in Dixon, Montana. I am a
fourth-generation Montanan, my wife is a fifth-generation Montanan. We
are strongly opposed to Senator Daines' bill S. 4444, which would
benefit a corrupt company with a history of bribery, embezzlement, and
worker injuries. The company has paid over 1.1 billion in penalties and
fines, just in the last few years. The bill will not benefit the Crow
Tribe, which shows just how deceptive and cynical Senator Daines is
being with respect to this bill. Please kill this terrible piece of
legislation.
Thank you.
David Rockwell, Dixon, MT
______
9/24/2024
To Senate Committee on Indian Affairs:
I urge you to vote against Senate Bill 4444. We must stop propping
up corrupt business.
Signal Peak Energy is a flagrant bad actor with previous links to
Vladimir Putin, as well as a history of bribery, embezzlement, drug
trafficking and worker injuries. The US Attorney's office called the
mine a ``den of thievery'' due to its rampant disregard for laws. The
mine's owners have paid over $1.1 billion in penalties and fines in the
last few years. Our government should not be getting in bed with a
corporation that has committed these crimes, let alone the damage it's
caused to nearby ranches, including loss of water resources for
ranching operations and wildlife and large, dangerous damage to the
landscape.
Signal Peak has received millions of dollars in tax abatements from
local governments even though it has made more than $1 billion over the
last several years. The company should provide some of this historic
revenue to local governments and the Crow Nation that could assist with
building a local economy that doesn't rely solely on dirty and
dangerous coal mining.
The Aps alooke Allottees Alliance has publicly shared that
S. 4444 will not benefit the Crow due to the language of the
bill itself.
Signal Peak should be providing some of its revenue to
assist with building a local and Tribal economies that don't
rely solely on coal mining.
Signal Peak is a bad actor and should be held accountable
for the damage it's done to Montana ranches and the climate.
Signal Peak should have to complete the court-ordered
Environmental Impact Statement before any additional mining can
occur.
Signal Peak should have to follow the law, fix the mess it's
already made at the mine, and provide ranchers and wildlife
with lost water resources before it can continue its mining
operations.
As a 4th generation Montana resident, I implore you to act
responsibly. . . for the people, including our children and
grandchildren.
Sincerely,
Denise P. Tripp-Loran, Missoula, MT
______
Montana Wildlife Federation
September 17, 2024
Dear Chairman Sen. Schatz, Vice-Chairman Sen. Murkowski, and
distinguished members:
The Montana Wildlife Federation is Montana's oldest and largest
wildlife conservation organization. Our roots trace back to 1936 when
hunters, anglers, and other conservationists joined landowners to
address the loss of Montana's natural lands, healthy waters, and
abundant wildlife.
We are writing to express our opposition to S. 4431, S. 4432, and
S. 4444. We are deeply concerned about how these bills would impact
responsible protections for Montana's wildlife and the natural
resources they depend on. Currently, an Environmental Impact Study
(EIS) is underway for Signal Peak Energy's underground coal mine, Bull
Mountains Mine #1. This EIS would provide essential analysis of how
mining activity would impact habitat and water resources for game that
our members hunt including turkey, deer, and elk. The bills mentioned
above would either weaken or omit that EIS, leaving Montana hunters
without the information needed to ensure the health and vitality of
existing wildlife populations.
We are especially concerned that these protections and analysis
would be undermined given Signal Peak Energy's prior criminal
convictions for environmental degradation. If anything, this
corporation's actions demand greater scrutiny rather than weakened
oversight.
S. 4444 is of particular concern given it would transfer public
lands into the private hands of a single wealthy family. These public
lands provide some of the only access in the Bull Mountains where our
members and supporters hunt and recreate. S. 4444 would virtually
eliminate hunting and recreation access in one of the few areas close
to Montana's largest urban center, Billings.
Many of our members hunt on these public parcels. Loss of public
access to this area is not simply contrary to our mission and values,
it is personal.
Lastly, Montana's Department of Revenue has estimated that S. 4444
would cost Montana $1.2 million in revenue, per year, between 2024 and
2028 that would result from royalties. 25 percent of that revenue would
be lost in Musselshell County, a rural community that depends on these
funds to maintain the roads and infrastructure our members rely on for
hunting and outdoor recreation.
Simply put, these bills do not serve the interest of Montana's
hunters and public land users. If passed, these bills would undermine
the conservation values that the Montana Wildlife Federation was
founded on and continues to advance. In fact, these bills seem to only
advance the interests of a corporation with a history of criminal
activity and a single wealthy family. We urge all members to vote
against passage of S. 4431, S. 4432, and S. 4444.
Thank you for taking the time to consider our perspective.
Sincerely,
Chris Servheen, Ph.D., Board Chairman and President
Frank Szollosi, Executive Director
______
Center for Biological Diversity; Citizens Coal Council;
Earthjustice; Montana Chapter of the Sierra Club; Montana
Environmental Information Center; Montana Health
Professionals for a Healthy Climate; Park County
Environmental Council; Sierra Club; Western Environmental
Law Center; 350 Montana
July 25, 2024
Re: Letter of Opposition to Senate Bill 4444
Dear Senators:
On behalf of the undersigned organizations and our millions of
members, we write to express our strong opposition to S. 4444 (A bill
to take certain mineral interests into trust for the benefit of the
Crow Tribe in Montana, and for other purposes) introduced by Senator
Steve Daines. We ask you to oppose this bill for the reasons discussed
below.
Senate Bill 4444 seeks to benefit a single mining company with a
criminal reputation--Signal Peak Energy, LLC--at the expense of
ranchers, communities, the environment, the climate, the public, the
rule of law, and our national environmental policy--and it provides no
actual benefit to the Crow Tribe.
I. The Bill Provides No Revenue to the Crow Tribe
Despite claims that the purported ``Crow Revenue Act'' will provide
much-needed revenue to the Crow Tribe, the language of S. 4444 does no
such thing. The bill proposes to give a private family 4,530 acres of
valuable public subsurface minerals and 940 acres of critical public
lands, including a crucial public access point to these public lands.
The Joe and Barbara Hope Mineral Trust (Hope Family) would receive
these coveted public lands as well as lucrative publicly owned
minerals. In exchange, the Hope Family would give the Crow Tribe 4,660
acres of subsurface minerals on lands it holds within the boundary of
the Crow Reservation, but no surface rights. The minerals located on
the reservation are not adjacent to an existing mining operation and
will not be developed. In short, the public gives up 4,670 acres of
minerals and public lands and the Crow Tribe gets virtually nothing.
While proponents of the bill claim it would provide much-needed
revenue to the Crow Nation from the mineral rights at Signal Peak
Energy's Bull Mountain mine, a simple reading of 3 (d) Revenue
Sharing Agreement, shows there is no validity to this claim. First, the
bill gives the Crow Tribe the right to negotiate a revenue sharing
agreement with the Hope Family for revenue from the tracts described in
3 (a)(2). These are the tracts that the Crow would receive from the
Hope Family. The Hope Family's minerals are not located near any
existing mine or infrastructure; they are under highly productive
farmland. Due to its remote location and a declining coal market, these
minerals are extremely unlikely to ever be developed, and therefore it
is extremely unlikely that the Crow will ever receive any revenue from
these tracts. Furthermore, the Crow should not have to negotiate with
the Hope Family for revenue from the tracts the Hope Family is giving
to the Tribe, especially when the Hope Family would acquire minerals at
an already operating coal mine with existing infrastructure and will
immediately benefit from the exchange. The language in the bill as
written provides no revenue to the Tribe.
Second, even if S. 4444's ``Revenue Sharing Agreement'' in 3 (d)
of the bill were amended to provide for potential revenue sharing for
the Bull Mountains Tracts, the bill still provides no guaranteed
revenue to the Tribe. As written, the language in 3 (d) does not
condition or otherwise encumber the mineral transfer, but only provides
that the Tribe will notify the Secretary of Interior, after the bill is
passed, that a deal has been reached. The Tribe may, or may not, be
able to reach an agreement with the Hope Family on how the revenue from
the mineral estate will be shared. In fact, the bill does not require
the Hope Family to negotiate at all. It does not establish any
percentage of revenue that will be shared. It does not provide a
deadline by which the Hope Family must reach agreement with the Tribe.
In short, it provides the Tribe with an empty promise and no legal
guarantee that it would derive revenue from the agreement. Under this
bill, it is highly unlikely there will be any revenue for the Tribe
from either the Bull Mountains Tracts or the Hope Family Tracts.
If S. 4444 becomes law, the public will lose critical public land,
public access, and public minerals. The Tribe will gain nothing of
value. The Hope Family will make out like a bandit, and Signal Peak
Energy will-once again-avoid having to conduct a meaningful
environmental review for the Bull Mountain Mine.
II. Signal Peak's Operations at the Bull Mountains Mine Have Not Been
Subject to an Environmental Impact Statement
Senate Bill 4444 seeks to permit--without any environmental
scrutiny--large-scale and extremely destructive underground longwall
mining of federal coal at the Bull Mountains Mine by giving public
resources to a private family foundation. This mining of federal coal
was halted because the operation had not been subject to an
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) and because the mine's operations are destroying water
resources in the Bull Mountains that ranchers depend on for their
livelihoods.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the U.S. Office of
Surface Mining's determination that only insignificant impacts would
result from a 7,000-acre expansion of the Bull Mountains Mine,
containing 176 million tons of coal. 350 Montana v. Haaland, 50 F.4th
1254 (9th Cir. 2022). The Court explained that ``the coal from this
project is expected to generate more GHG emissions than the single
largest source of GHG emissions in the United States.'' Id. at 1259.
On remand from the Ninth Circuit, the District of Montana
determined that the mining plan allowing Signal Peak to mine federal
coal should be vacated because the environmental impacts of the mine
expansion have not been disclosed in an EIS. 350 Montana v. Haaland,
No. CV 19-12-M-DWM, 2023 WL 1927307, at *5 (D. Mont. Feb. 10, 2023).
The court noted how the mine has harmed local ranchers by damaging the
water they depend upon:
Signal Peak's subsistence mining has harmed local ranching
interests by creating fissures in the ranchland. Additionally,
Signal Peak's mining operation causes damage to local ranchers'
water resources, including in one instance, damaging working
water wells. Local ranchers fear that Signal Peak's longwalls
have already caused potentially irreversible damage to ranching
in the Bull Mountains.
Id.
Demonstrating the utter failure by regulators to take a hard look
at the environmental harm caused by the massive mine, multiple
tribunals--including federal and state adjudicators--have concluded
that environmental impacts of air pollution, greenhouse gas emissions,
and harm to water have not been lawfully studied and disclosed to the
public. Mont. Env't Info. Ctr. v. U.S. Office of Surface Mining, 274 F.
Supp. 3d 1074 (D. Mont. 2017) (climate impacts); In re Bull Mountains
Mine, No. BER 2013-07 SM (Mont. Bd. Env't Rev. Jan. 14, 2016)
(hydrology impacts). This ongoing failure--which S. 4444 would only
exacerbate--has resulted in real harm to landowners and the
environment. The Bull Mountains Mine is one of the largest underground
coal mines in the United States. It's one of the largest sources of
greenhouse gas emission in the United States. Its mining operations
have devastated water resources in the Bull Mountains, which have
severely harmed family ranches in the area. A close look at the harm
that will result from longwall mining of federal coal is precisely what
is needed, for ranchers, for communities, for the public, and for the
environment. The leap-without-looking approach of S. 4444 is a recipe
for unmitigated disaster.
Importantly, Signal Peak Energy is not blameless in the
inadequacies of the prior environmental reviews of its mine. On the
contrary, Signal Peak is largely responsible for the inadequate
environmental review of its mine. The company successfully lobbied the
U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to forego preparation of an EIS
for its federal coal lease for the mine in 2009. \1\ At the time, BLM
warned Signal Peak that if its environmental assessment (EA) proved
inadequate, it would just result in a delay in approval of the mine.
Signal Peak expressly told BLM that it recognized the risk and wanted
to move forward without an EIS. Since then, Signal Peak has
aggressively lobbied both federal and state regulators to curtail their
environmental reviews of its mine, which in turn resulted in multiple
decisions overturning those reviews. Mont. Env't Info. Ctr. v. U.S.
Office of Surface Mining, 274 F. Supp. 3d 1074 (D. Mont. 2017) (climate
impacts, air impacts, rail impacts); In re Bull Mountains Mine, No. BER
2013-07 SM (Mont. Bd. Env't Rev. Jan. 14, 2016) (hydrology impacts).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ BLM Meeting Notes (Mar. 2009).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ultimately, Signal Peak is the architect of its own predicament.
Having pressured regulators to curtail their environmental reviews of
its massive mine, Signal Peak should not be given a free pass to mine
without any environmental review. That is not good public policy, and
it is not just.
If S. 4444 is enacted, the critical EIS that is being prepared for
the massive AM3 expansion of the Bull Mountains Mine would become moot
and unnecessary. And sixteen years after large scale longwall mining
began in the Bull Mountains, the public would still be without an EIS
disclosing the impacts of the operation.
III. Signal Peak Is a Bad Neighbor and a Bad Corporate Actor
Senate Bill 4444 seeks to provide a special dispensation to a
corporate actor that is on criminal probation and that has been both a
bad neighbor to residents of the Bull Mountains and people of Montana.
Since the Bull Mountains Mine began operations in 2008, the company has
directly or indirectly forced multiple ranchers off the land and out of
the Bull Mountains. Ranchers have run sustainable cattle operations in
the Bull Mountains for generations. The Bulls provide important summer
range for cattle because of the relative abundance of water from
perched groundwater aquifers and springs in the range and the high-
quality forage in the mountain meadows and pastures. The Bull Mountains
Mine, however, has caused extensive subsidence in the Bull Mountains,
which has torn the landscape and, in numerous cases, dewatered springs
and wells. This damage to the land along with the strongarm tactics of
Signal Peak (SLAPP suits, bullying, and harassment) caused at least one
longtime ranch family to sell its operations. In another instance,
Signal Peak cancelled the lease of a rancher on Signal Peak's land,
forcing the rancher to end his ranching operations.
By forcing ranchers out of the Bull Mountains, Signal Peak has been
able to avoid assessing harm to springs and wells. This is certainly
due in part to the fact that state regulators, Montana DEQ, have not
required Signal Peak to reclaim damaged water resources if the waters
are not being used for ranching. Accordingly, recently Signal Peak
cancelled the grazing lease of another family ranch and has sought to
force the family from its own land for the express reason that Signal
Peak did not want to continue to reclaim damaged water supplies.
Signal Peak has sued multiple people who ranch above the mine and
is currently in active litigation with other ranch operations. The
company is simply a bad actor and a bad neighbor. The law should not
condone corporate actors who ignore the law and crush everyday
Americans who cross their paths.
Signal Peak has also aggressively avoided paying taxes that benefit
the State of Montana and local communities. The company has obtained
millions of dollars in tax breaks from the Montana legislature, despite
opposition from Musselshell County Commissioners who explained that
county services had already been ``cut to the bone.'' \2\ Just this
year, while earning windfall profits from record coal prices, Signal
Peak applied for and received an additional $2 million abatement from
local taxes. \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Mike Dennison, Tax Break for Roundup-area Coal Mine Stuffed
into Bill in Final Days, Billings Gazette (Apr. 28, 2011) available at
https://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/montana/taxbreak-
forroundup-area-coal-mine-stuffed-into-bill-in-final-days/
article_995244c5-f6f7-5087-9d50-da3a5e057ebb.html; Mike Dennison, Tax
Break for Roundup-area Coal Mine Stuffed into Bill in Final Days,
Billings Gazette (Apr. 28, 2011), available at https://
billingsgazette.com/news/stateandregional/montana/musselshell-county-
turns-down-coal-mine-taxbreak/article_52aa5180-1215-11e0-9c79-
001cc4c03286.html.
\3\ Amy Nile, Yellowstone County Oks Multi-million Dollar Tax Break
for Coal Mine Near Roundup, Billings Gazette (Apr. 2, 2024), https://
billingsgazette.com/news/local/business/roundup-coal-minegets-taxbreak/
article_11b70974-f137-11ee-88a9-6bb8058b0019.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Bill 4444 confuses the best interests of Signal Peak Energy
with the best interests of the public. Signal Peak's actions show a
company that acts aggressively to further its own interests, at the
expense of the people who live and work in the Bull Mountains, the
people who live in Musselshell County and Yellowstone County, and the
people of Montana and beyond who are impacted by the environmental
degradation and harm from its mine.
Notably, Signal Peak Energy does not need the federal coal that is
the subject of S. 4444 to operate. State regulators have approved an
expansion of the mine onto new state and private lands that will permit
the company to operate through 2024, and Signal Peak is pursuing
another expansion onto other non-federal lands that will further extend
operations well into 2025.
IV. Signal Peak Energy Is a Mining Company with a Criminal History
Signal Peak Energy-the company that is undermining the ranches and
communities of the Bull Mountains in central Montana and seeks to
benefit from S. 4444-is currently on federal criminal probation for
willfully lying to federal mine regulators about serious injuries to
workers and for willfully dumping toxic mine waste into an area
intended to supply replacement water for people harmed by the mine. \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Judgment, United States v. Signal Peak Energy, LLC, No. 21-CR-
79 (Jan. 31, 2022); Offer of Proof, United States v. Signal Peak
Energy, LLC, No. 21-CR-79 (Oct. 5, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to its current criminal probation, Signal Peak, its
former executives, and its owners have an arm-length rap sheet of
criminal activity and non-compliance with environmental and worker
safety laws. The company's lawlessness was chronicled in the New York
Times: A Faked Kidnapping and Cocaine: A Montana Mine's Descent Into
Chaos--The New York Times (nytimes.com). An assistant U.S. Attorney for
Montana has called the mine a ``den of thievery.'' \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Phoebe Tollefson, Ex-mine Exec Stole $20M from Signal Peak,
Former Mine CEO also Involved, Billings Gazette (June 23, 2020),
https://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/crime-and-courts/
ex-mine-execstole-20m-from-signal-peak-former-mine-ceo-also-involved/
article_1f3726cd-51f1-5a6c-ba53-4085cae364c2.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the past five years, Signal Peak, its executives, and employees
have been convicted or pled guilty to embezzlement, money laundering,
drug trafficking, and illegal gun possession. \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See, e.g., Amended Judgment, United States v. Price, No. CR 18-
85 (D. Mont. Dec. 23, 2020) (wire fraud, money laundering, false
statements); Judgment, United States v. Ruble, No. CR 19-60 (D. Mont.
Oct. 29, 2019) (wire fraud); Judgment, United States v. Musgrave, No.
CR 19-159 (D. Mont. June 22, 2022) (conspiracy to commit false
statements in mine records); Judgment, United States v. Luciano, No. CR
19-86 (D. Mont. Oct. 23, 2020) (possession with intent to distribute
cocaine); Judgment, United States v. Irwin, No. CR 19-47 (D. Mont. Feb.
10, 2020) (felon in possession of firearms). see also Charles Boothe,
Another Pleads Guilty in Larry Price Jr. Laundering Scheme, Bluefield
Daily Telegraph (July 5, 2020), available at https://www.bdtonline.com/
news/another-pleads-guilty-in-larry-price-jr-launderingscheme/
article_6b0d0268-be63-11ea-aab7-434ad1aa61d7.html (detailing scheme and
prosecutions); Von Saher v. Norton Simon Museum of Art at Pasadena, 592
F.3d 954, 960 (9th Cir. 2010) (court may take judicial notice of
newspaper articles as evidence of public discussion, without
definitively establishing truth of facts in articles).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Signal Peak's one-third owner, FirstEnergy Corp., is also currently
on federal criminal probation (pursuant to a deferred prosecution
agreement) for what the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Ohio
has called ``likely the largest bribery and money-laundering scheme
ever in the state of Ohio.'' \7\ In its deferred prosecution agreement,
FirstEnergy admitted spending over $60 million to bribe legislators and
energy regulators to roll back the state's clean energy law and
subsidize its power plants. \8\ Indicative of the magnitude of its
criminal conduct, FirstEnergy agreed to pay a fine of $230 million for
its actions. \9\ The indictments related to FirstEnergy and its
sprawling bribery scheme have continued unabated into 2024. \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Marty Schladen, Ohio House Speaker, Four Others Arrested Amid
Massive Dark-Money Pay-to-Play Allegations, Ohio Capital Journal (July
21, 2020), available at https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2020/07/21/ohio-
house-speaker-four-others-arrested-amid-massive-darkmoney-pay-to-play-
allegations/; see also Johnson, How a $60 Million Bribery Scandal
Helped Ohio Pass the `Worst Energy Policy in the Country,' Grist (Jan.
26, 2022), available at https://grist.org/politics/how-a-60-million-
bribery-scandal-helped-ohio-pass-the-worst-energy-policy-in-the-
country/.
\8\ Deferred Prosecution Agreement attach. A at 1-43, United States
v. FirstEnergy Corp., 21-CR-86 (S.D. Ohio July 22, 2021).
\9\ Id.
\10\ E.g., AP, Fired FirstEnergy Execs Indicted in $60M Ohio
Bribery Scheme, EnergyWire (Feb. 13, 2024), available at https://
subscriber.politicopro.com/article/eenews/2024/02/13/fired-firstenergy-
execs-indicted-in-60m-ohio-bribery-scheme-00140969.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Signal Peak's second one-third owner, Wayne M. Boich, was involved
in the FirstEnergy scandal, providing the seed funding for one of the
dark money organizations at the center of the Ohio scandal, though
Boich has not yet been indicted for his involvement. \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Deferred Prosecution Agreement attach. A at 25, 30, 39, 41,
United States v. FirstEnergy Corp., 21-CR-86 (S.D. Ohio July 22, 2021)
(detailing involvement of ``CEO of Company C'' in scheme, including as
source of seed money for ``Dark Money Group''). The press identified
Boich as the ``CEO of Company C.'' Randy Ludlow, Householder Case:
``Company C'' CEO Wayne Boich Gave Cash to HB 6 `Dark Money' Groups,
Columbus Dispatch (Aug. 5, 2020), available at https://
www.dispatch.com/story/news/politics/state/2020/08/05/householder-case-
lsquocompany-crsquo-ceo7wayne-boich-gave-cash-to-hb-6-lsquodark-
moneyrsquo-groups/112806486/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Signal Peak's final one-third owner, Gunvor Group Ltd., an
international commodities trader registered in Cyprus, pled guilty in
U.S. federal court in March 2024 to violating the Foreign Corrupt
Practices Act in a scheme to bribe officials in Ecuador to obtain oil
in that country. \12\ As part of its criminal sentence, the company was
ordered to pay a criminal penalty of approximately $661 million
dollars. \13\ One reason for the staggering fine was Gunvor's history
of criminal bribery of government officials to obtain fossil fuels. In
2019, Gunvor agreed to a fine of $95 million by Swiss prosecutors for
bribery and corruption to obtain access to petroleum reserves in Congo.
\14\ Equally troubling, the United States State Department and Treasury
have both previously stated that Gunvor has been connected to Vladimir
Putin. State Department cables ``relayed allegations that Gunvor `is
just a front for ``massive corruption.''' \15\ Energy expert Matthieu
Auzanneau has similarly written: ``If we are to believe an old rumor,
denied but nevertheless spread through the heart of American diplomacy
(and then via Wikileaks), . the Russian president [Putin] took a cut
from each barrel exported from Russia, through the Swiss trading
company Gunvor, which was once headed by a former KGB colleague.'' \16\
News reports suggest that Gunvor may be further helping Russian crude
oil reach world markets, despite U.S. sanctions over the Russian
invasion of Ukraine. \17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Judgment, United States v. Gunvor, No. 24-CR-85 (Apr. 3,
2024).
\13\ Id.
\14\ Julia Payne, Gunvor Must Pay $95 Million for Congo Oil
Corruption: Swiss Prosecutors, Reuters (Oct. 17, 2019), available at
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-gunvor-grp-congo-
corruptionidUSKBN1WW0Z9.
\15\ Christopher Matthews and Andrew Grossman, U.S. Money-
Laundering Probe Touches Putin's Inner Circle, Wall Street Journal
(Nov. 5, 2014).
\16\ Matthieu Auzanneau, Oil, Power, and War: A Dark History 527
(2018); see also Public Eye, Gunvor in Congo (2017) (detailing
connections between Gunvor and Putin and noting that, while Gunvor has
publicly ``kept denying having any connection with the Kremlin,''
Gunvor representatives were simultaneously ``using this very same
connection to persuade the Congolese authorities to engage in dealings
with them'').
\17\ Julia Simon, Despite U.S. Sanctions, Oil Traders Help Russian
Oil Reach Global Markets, NPR (Apr. 22, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Signal Peak has also repeatedly violated its environmental
obligations at the Bull Mountains Mine. Most notably, the company has
repeatedly violated those obligations that require it to collect or
analyze data required to show compliance with the law.
In August 2019, Montana DEQ issued a notice of non-compliance and
order of abatement to Signal Peak for ``willfully violat[ing] the law
by intentionally not complying with. . . weekly spring monitoring
requirements'' causing an ``irreversible loss of monitoring data.''
\18\ The Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) acknowledges
Signal Peak's ``history of monitoring violations in general.'' \19\
Signal Peak's failure to monitor has allowed the company to evade
reclamation of water resources potentially damaged by the mine.
Recently, consultants of Signal Peak admitted that they had never
complied with the mine's rigorous permit requirements for assessing
whether mining had impacted springs. \20\ In the past year, Signal Peak
has violated pollution limits under the federal Clean Water Act 156
times, including at least one instance of significant noncompliance.
\21\ DEQ has sent five violation letters to Signal Peak in the past
year alone. \22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ DEQ, Notice of Noncompliance (Aug. 22, 2019).
\19\ Id.
\20\ Transcript at 769, 786-87, 893, In re Bull Mountains Mine, No.
BER 2016-07 (Mont. Bd. of Env't Rev. August 21, 2020).
\21\ EPA, Enforcement and Compliance History Online, https://
echo.epa.gov/trends/loadingtool/reports/
effluentexceedances?permit_id=MT0028983.
\22\ EPA, Enforcement and Compliance History Online, https://
echo.epa.gov/detailed-facilityreport?fid=110017361335.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Signal Peak has an abysmal record of mine safety. In addition to
lying to mine safety regulators about work-place injuries, since the
mine opened in 2010, it has incurred at least 1700 violations,
according to the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA). \23\ Of
these violations, approximately 180 were considered significant and
substantial violations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ Mine Safety and Health Administration, Mine Data Retrieval
System, https://www.msha.gov/data-and-reports/minedata-retrieval-
system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In short, Signal Peak Energy, its executives, and its owners have
demonstrated an utter contempt for the law in their operations at the
Bull Mountains Mine and elsewhere. They have also demonstrated a
contempt for the environment and their workers. They should not be
rewarded by further exempting them from the law pursuant to the
provisions of S. 4444.
Senate Bill 4444 is a sweetheart deal for Signal Peak Energy and
its criminal owners. It is a sweetheart deal for the Hope Family. But
the bill is a raw deal for the ranchers, communities, the environment,
the climate, the public, and the rule of law and it would provide no
benefit to the Crow Tribe. While it elevates Signal Peak to act above
the law, it undermines the national environmental policy of NEPA and
will permit Signal Peak to undermine the Bull Mountains. We strongly
recommend that you oppose the bill.
Our groups thank you for your attention to these important issues
and look forward to working with the Committee to protect the integrity
of the law and those who depend on it. We appreciate your consideration
of our recommendations.
Sincerely,
Anne Hedges, Montana Environmental Information Center
Jeremy Nichols, Center for Biological Diversity
Aimee Erickson, Citizens Coal Council
Shiloh Hernandez, Earthjustice
Caryn Miske, Montana Chapter of the Sierra Club
Robert Byron, MD, MPH, Montana Health Professionals for a
Healthy Climate
Erica Lighthiser, Park County Environmental Council
Mike Scott, Sierra Club
Melissa Hornbein, Western Environmental Law Center
Jeff Smith, 350 Montana
______
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Ranching over a longwall mine is like sharing a tent with a camel,
and you and the camel are shut in together. The camel is much larger
than you, so you have to adjust your movement to his whether you like
it or not. My camel was named Signal Peak Energy. Despite my owning the
tent long before his arrival, he was immediately the dominant tenant in
our relationship. Even though the social responsibilities for taxes,
etc. were mine, control of the tent was his.
As you'll read, the result of this unpleasant relationship was
repeated damage to my land, loss and damage to water sources, loss of
access to my own property, damaged roads, legal harassment, and a
constant feeling of unease and fear of what damage might happen next.
Eventually, the impacts from this mine became a significant part of my
decision to sell most of my beloved ranchlands.
This forced relationship began in 1990, when the coal prospecting
predecessors to Signal Peak first wanted surface access to do various
preparations for a future mine. Agreements had to be negotiated--
damages for roads used, monitoring wells drilled, and access at all
hours of the day and night. Some things were never mentioned until they
happened, and then were not explained very well. It was clear early on
that underground coal mines don't make good neighbors, at least not
this one. Little did I know how bad it would get.
In 1990, The Bureau of Land Management negotiated a coal-for-land
trade with the prospectors who were touting their design to open a
mine. BLM did an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on this proposal,
but when we local landowners questioned what would happen to our water
if this mine came about, we were told that our concerns were premature
until a mining permit was granted.
By 1992, the prospectors had secured a coal mining permit from the
State of Montana which approved a very different mine plan than the one
they are currently pursuing. The State of Montana did a mine EIS for
the permit at the time, which was insufficient. Work done by the State
of the Montana in the environmental area was generally not very good
quality, as Montana's history of superfund sites and environmental
disasters indicates. After the permit was secured, the original
permittee began a search high and low to get a bidder for the permit.
It was not a popular product, but they finally found a guy in
Tennessee, John M. Baugues, to take it over.
The mine limped along, mining where the previous small miner had
mined, but in the meantime, the mine personnel were running about on
our ranch.
In 1998, the State of Montana revoked John M. Baugues' Mountain
Inc. mine permit for a ``pattern of violations.'' The water monitoring
ceased, and the casing for the monitoring wells was removed and left to
lie on the prairie.
While we had peace until 2003, the money guys on the other side
were busy hunting up suckers to resurrect the revoked mining permit.
When the 2003 Montana Legislature came up, they were in Helena with a
bill to resurrect the mine permit based on environmental work more than
a decade old. The idea was that resurrecting the permit, rather than
applying for a new one would be so much cheaper, and it was. The Bill
was sent to the Agriculture Committee, because the Energy Committee was
too busy that session. The Ag Committee had no idea what was going on.
The only parties there to testify were myself and the would-be miners.
The legislature resurrected the permit subject to approval by the
federal Office of Surface Mining (OSM).
OSM coughed out an approval eventually. This set the unfortunate
precedent that a permanent revocation is never permanent.
Back came all the monitors, monitoring wells, and road uses. The
first immediate impact was degradation of our roads, given they were
poorly designed for the mine's uses. Given the challenges that already
face rural roads, this was both a significant inconvenience and, at
times, a risk to local safety.
Signal Peak mined by press release from 2003 until August 2008.
They finally got First Energy of Ohio and the Boich Family of Ohio to
put up the money to buy a longwall machine and build a 33 mile railroad
to ship the coal to Broadview, Montana.
The mine president would stop by to visit every now and then. He
asked my husband, Don, what he could do for us. Don very sweetly said
they could just go away. The mine president looked very surprised and a
little hurt. Sadly they didn't just go away.
Signal Peak began mining after getting their machine in and the
railroad constructed. They mined Panel 1, and began Panel 2, arriving
on our land with a bang on November 30, 2010. I had just arrived home
from getting my shoulder replaced. Thirty minutes later the mine
president called, much disturbed.
At the beginning of Panel 2, the first on our land, the earth had
cracked open two hundred feet down to the coal and the miners. He was
in desperate fear of an explosion from spontaneous combustion. He could
barely utter the words ``SponCom'' in his panic. (SponCom is a computer
program that assesses the potential for spontaneous combustion in
coal.) He needed to put a road across a roadless area to the base of
Dunn Mountain immediately and begin hauling nitrogen in to pump into
the mine to keep it from exploding. The unspoken implication was that
if I didn't give permission and anything awful happened, it would be my
fault. The result was a massive distraction on our ranch for months.
A formerly roadless area became an industrial zone with 24/7
nitrogen in huge tanker trucks, with bright lights and a complete man
camp and diesel storage area beginning December 1, 2010 and remaining
until the middle of February of 2011. The road and the man camp have
never been reclaimed, and the scar on the face of Dunn Mountain, from
which they clawed the topsoil and vegetation, has been ``reclaimed''
but with little success.
The way the mine was set up, each longwall panel began on my land
as the machine began to work its way back to the mains. The damage was
most severe over the set up rooms. Frequently the land cover was low,
but even when the cover was thicker, the damage seemed to be severe
with large cracks on each one.
The mine repaired the biggest cracks, but the effects on my ranch
water did not appear until Panel 4. The first spring, Turtle Pond, kept
its water, but has never looked prosperous since undermining. The next
spring up the drainage on Panel 4 was Bull Spring. It lost water
immediately. I waited to complain until 2016, hoping it would appear
``opportunistically.'' It did not.
In 2016, Signal Peak reworked Bull Spring. Our original piping was
broken when it was undermined. The current owners of my property do not
think it has been fixed. Our rigid piping was replaced with flexible
black plastic. I think the gate roads in that area may not be
collapsing very fast, or the new pipe could be locking with trapped air
in high places.
Panel 5 took out our main road up to the high pastures, and our
access was blocked for several months. For a family ranching operation,
loss of access to grazing lands can compromise one's livelihood.
At about this time Signal Peak filed a slap suit against me and my
neighbor to the north, along with a subpoena duces tecum, (i.e. bring
all one's papers on a certain subject). It was unclear if they wanted
me to go back 30 years or what. On top of all the other stressors due
to mining impacts, that lawsuit wrecked my peace of mind the entire
spring season. A sheriff came out to serve papers on me, and one of my
dogs kept him pinned in his car for a while. I can't say that I was
sorry. The mine's lawyers would set a date for a hearing on the
subpoena, and then cancel it the day before the hearing. They did that
twice.
The mine lost the legal battle in district court in Yellowstone
County. The mine appealed to the Montana Supreme Court and lost there
as well.
I had tried to be reasonably accommodating, but I couldn't swallow
everything they tried to promote. There was a new mine president, and
he wanted total acquiescence. One of the worst things about that
subpoena was that I had to go through my husband's day books and the
ones that I had started keeping when his health began to decline to
meet the demands of the lawsuit. The documents I turned over included
some from the week of my husband's death in October 2014, the year our
first waters were undermined. That was very painful to relive,
especially for a lawsuit that felt designed more for harassment than
clarity.
During my husband's health decline and after his death, I was
supervising an employee on a daily basis and trying to keep the ranch
work afloat. I did that for four more years. Between the problems from
the mine and the general workload of the ranch, I was trying to figure
out what to do.
In late summer of 2018, I suffered a personal hip injury, and that
was the last straw. Had I not been dealing with the mine issues, I
might have been able to hand on, but the stress and worry of that made
continuing untenable.
I spent the year of 2019 dealing to sell the ranch. Even with a
willing buyer, making a deal on something like that is more like
turning a battle cruiser than a rowboat. The deal was completed
December 18, 2019; it would have been my husband's 86th birthday.
I saw the best days of ranching in the Bulls. We had water and
grass. The natural water of the springs protected us from the vagaries
of depending on dams entirely, or the mechanical efficacy of wells. The
year after I sold, the mountain spring drainage was completely dried up
by Panel 8. I cannot express to you how infinitely sad that is for that
wet drainage to be gone.
Now there are two storage tanks that have to have human
intervention for anything to get a drink. There is no guarantee that
calves can reach the water when they come in to drink. The tank that my
father put in slid downhill 3 feet when it was undermined, and the
water is no longer level, so there is now less of it in the tank.
Montana Department of Environmental Quality only requires the mine to
haul water for livestock when they are in the pasture. Nothing else is
supposed to drink the water that the mine hauls, and there is no other
water.
A subsided ranch is no place for an old lady. When one stops a
pickup on a subsided panel, one has to be very careful not to catch the
front of one's foot on a rough bump or step over a crack and have the
back edge next to the crack give way and tip one over backward. In
other words, it is not safe to go out alone. It seems like every time
one stops the pickup, there is a crack or a place to trip. People have
driven their pickups into larger cracks that cannot be seen if the
grass is tall.
My place in the Bull Mountains was the place of my heart, and it
breaks my heart to see what Signal Peak's longwall has done to the land
there. Coal has broken up our small community of ranchers and broken
the land as well. Water is life, but coal has taken our life.
Ellen Pfister, Shepherd, Montana
______
August 29, 2024
Dear Chair Schatz and Ranking Member Murkowski:
We strongly object to S. 4444, sponsored by Senator Steve Daines.
This bill would have a profound impact on our climate, allowing a
single, coal mining company with a history of corruption to receive a
sweetheart deal and evade crucial and court-ordered environmental
review.
The Signal Peak Coal Mine in eastern Montana has sought approval
for a massive expansion of its underground operations since 2012. If it
is successful, it would become the largest underground coal mine in the
nation, with annual climate-damaging emissions that would be larger
than any single point-source in the nation--all while evading a crucial
environmental review that would force consideration and disclosure of
these impacts as well as impacts to critical water resources in the
area.
The climate impacts of this mine expansion cannot be overstated. In
2022, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals found that the Office of Surface
Mining violated the National Environmental Policy Act in approving a
cursory environmental assessment for the mine expansion. The court
faulted OSM for failing to consider the climate impacts from burning
the coal despite the fact that the ``expansion is expected to result in
the emissions of 190 million tons of greenhouse gases.'' The court went
on to find that ``for each year of its operation, the coal from this
project is expected to generate more GHG emissions than the single
largest source of GHG emissions in the United States.'' It found that
OSM was ``obscuring and grossly understating the magnitude of the Mine
Expansion's emissions relative to other domestic sources of GHGs.'' 350
Mont. v. Haaland, 50 F.4th at 1259
Despite the court's acknowledgement of the devastating climate
implications of this mine, this bill attempts to evade the legal
obligations of OSM and the mine to analyze the impacts of the mine
expansion, disclose those impacts to the public, accept public comment
on the EIS, and consider alternatives to the proposed expansion. A mine
that seeks to be the largest underground coal mine by annual production
in the United States should not be allowed to escape environmental
review and public involvement when the climate impacts will be so
profound.
We urge the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs to vote no on S.
4444, in order to protect the climate as well as present and future
generations from unmitigated greenhouse gas emissions. The enduring,
expensive and profound harm caused by the climate crisis extends beyond
Montana's borders and will have a lasting detrimental effect on our
nation and our world. It is time to slow the emissions of greenhouse
gas pollution, not pave the way for increased coal production that
could set a dangerous precedent and leave lasting harm. We urge you to
vote no.
Sincerely,
Derf Johnson, Montana Environmental Information Center
Jeff Smith, 350 Montana
Bonnie Hickey, Bridger Bowl Ski Area
Sharon Patton-Griffin, Citizens for Clean Energy
Winona Rached, Families for a Livable Climate
Sarah Stands, Park County Environmental Council
Frank Szollosi, Montana Wildlife Federation
Caryn Miske, Montana Chapter of the Sierra Club
Kiersten Iwai, Forward Montana
______
Sep 25, 2024
My name is Georgene Grace Crow, I am an enrolled Crow from the
Mighty Few district. I am totally against this act. The chairman should
have come forth to the Crow people and had us make a vote on it. Which
wasn't even addressed until someone has a voice. We the people of the
great Crow nation are against this Act!!!!!!
Georgene Grace Yellowmule Crow
______
September 25, 2024
Hello Senate Committee,
Signal Peak Energy is criminal as such the US Government should not
be in the business of supporting this unethical operation by voting for
S. 4444. Other reasons to oppose this legislation include:
The Apsaalooke Allottees Alliance has publicly shared that
S. 4444 will not benefit the Crow due to the language of the
bill itself.
Signal Peak should be providing some of its revenue to
assist with building a local and Tribal economies that don't
rely solely on coal mining.
Signal Peak is a bad actor and should be held accountable
for the damage it's done to Montana ranches and the climate.
Signal Peak should have to complete the court-ordered
Environmental Impact Statement before any additional mining can
occur.
Signal Peak should have to follow the law, fix the mess it's
already made at the mine, and provide ranchers and wildlife
with lost water resources before it can continue its mining
operations.
Thank you for opposing S. 4444 and demonstrating opposition to
criminal behavior.
Hannah Hernandez, Heron, MT
______
Joe and Barbara Hope Mineral Trust
May 23, 2024
Re: Letter of Support for the Crow Revenue Act
Dear Senator Daines,
On behalf of the Joe and Barbara Hope Mineral Trust, I am writing
to express our full support for the Crow Revenue Act. Our family has
been ranching on the Crow Reservation for nearly a century, fostering
strong collaborative relationships with our tribal neighbors over the
years. We believe this Act not only resolves land ownership issues but
also strengthens the historical ties and shared efforts between us and
the Crow Tribe.
Additionally, the legislation provides essential revenue to the
Crow Tribe and ensures stability for the Bull Mountains Mine and
surrounding communities, We commend your dedication to our community
and appreciate your efforts in crafting legislation that benefits the
state of Montana.
In conclusion, we strongly endorse your initiative to enact this
crucial piece of legislation for southeastern Montana and believe it
will have a lasting positive impact on our region.
Sincerely,
Joseph A. Hope, Trustee
______
September 24, 2024
S. 4444 is a giveaway of public land to a private entity and is
therefore corrupt. The Crow tribe has declared that it will give them
no benefits. Any votes for this bill violate the sovereignty of the
Crow Nation and are themselves corrupt actions against the Crow.
Howard Christiansen
______
Sur/Madame:
I am totally against this bill which does not appear to help the
Crow Nation and which would appropriate public land for private use!
How bold of you Sen. Daines!
Jane Borish
______
Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
I urge you to vote ``NO'' on S. 4444. In spite of its title it is
NOT a bill that would benefit the Crow tribe with revenue, due to the
language in the bill. But crucially, it would unfairly provide a
sweetheart deal to Signal Peak, a company proven to be a bad actor by
repeatedly failing to follow public safety and environmental laws.
Signal Peak should be required to compensate the Crow tribe and
neighboring ranchers for damage already done to their water supply, and
should be required to clean up its mess before any land swap deal is
even considered. And even then it should have to fund the oversight
needed to ensure it follows the laws in the future.
Thank you for considering my concerns.
Joe Loos, Missoula, MT
______
I ask the Committee to vote no on this bill.
Thank you.
Kasey Felder, Laurel, MT
______
As a Montanan, I urge you to vote NO on S. 4444. This bill benefits
Signal Peak Energy, a bad actor corporation with a history of
embezzlement, worker injuries, and ties to Vladimir Putin. The bill
does NOT benefit the Crow tribe.
Kathy Heffernan, Missoula, MT
______
Dear Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
I'm writing to express my great alarm and concern regarding Senate
Bill 4444, introduced by Senator Daines of Montana. I'm also from
Montana, and I want to express my great concern about this bill's
actual intentions. First, please know that Signal Peak is not respected
in Montana because of the environmental and social problems they have
caused. (For example, an untended and highly toxic coal ash heap near
Crow Agency is polluting the nearby community, kids in a daycare near
it are breathing the dust that comes from it, and everyone knows it is
full of heavy metals and other carcinogens. Similarly, Signal Peak was
responsible for the destruction of culturally significant
archaeological sites because it did not put out the money to ensure
such sites were protected when it mined on the reservation.) Signal
Peak has a long, dirty track record in Montana, misusing federal funds
they should have spent on clean-up or social infrastructure. The Crow
Nation doesn't ``need'' this kind of ``help'' any more that they need
an infestation of cockroaches.
S. 4444 is environmental racism in action--nothing more, nothing
less. The company and Senator Daines see our Indian reservations as
energy colonies to be exploited, regardless of the consequences for the
Apsaalooke people or the environment. We Montanans--white, Crow, or
otherwise--are not fooled for one instance by Daines' true intentions.
We oppose S. 4444, S. 4431, and S. 4432 on the grounds that these are
giveaways to a ``bad actor'' company by a less-than-genuine senator to
the destruction of a people who are already reaping the negative
fallout of Signal Peak's previous destruction on the Crow Reservation
and elsewhere in Montana.
Thank you for this opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Laura Ferguson, Helena, MT
______
Respectfully,
This bill is frankly ridiculous on its face as a swap or any kind
of reasonable deal for the Crow tribe, the US government (taxpayers) or
any other entity other than the Hope Family trust. I would have hoped
that this kind of bald face stealing from indigenous members of society
would have ended in the middle of the last century. Mr Daines should be
ashamed for his part in this attempted larceny. Please vote no on S.
4444.
Thank You,
Lee Calhoun, Whitefish MT
______
Please oppose S. 4444.
As a resident in Missoula, I now that Signal Peak Energy is a
flagrant bad actor with previous links to Vladimir Putin, as well as a
history of bribery, embezzlement, drug trafficking and worker injuries.
The US Attorney's office called the mine a ``den of thievery'' due to
its rampant disregard for laws. The mine's owners have paid over $1.1
billion in penalties and fines in the last few years. Our government
should not be getting in bed with a corporation that has committed
these crimes, let alone the severe damage it's caused to nearby
ranches, including loss of water resources for ranching operations and
wildlife and large, dangerous cracks in the landscape.
Signal Peak has received millions of dollars in tax abatements from
local governments even though it has made more than $1 billion over the
last several years. The company should provide some of this historic
revenue to local governments and the Crow Nation that could assist with
building a local economy that doesn't rely solely on dirty and
dangerous coal mining.
The Apsaalooke Allottees Alliance has publicly shared that
S. 4444 will not benefit the Crow due to the language of the
bill itself.
Signal Peak should be providing some of its revenue to
assist with building a local and Tribal economies that don't
rely solely on coal mining.
Signal Peak is a bad actor and should be held accountable
for the damage it's done to Montana ranches and the climate.
Signal Peak should have to complete the court-ordered
Environmental Impact Statement before any additional mining can
occur.
Signal Peak should have to follow the law, fix the mess it's
already made at the mine, and provide ranchers and wildlife
with lost water resources before it can continue its mining
operations.
Thank you,
Lynn Tennefoss
______
Dear Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
I find proposed Senate Bill 4444 misleading and urge you not to
support it. From what I have read Sen. Daines has proposed a bill that
would allow a private entity to take ownership of public land and
publicly owned coal that Signal Peak wants to mine (S. 4444). This bill
is misleadingly titled the ``Crow Revenue Act,'' even though it will
not result in revenue for the Crow.
Thank you for considering my comments.
Sincerely,
Mark Payne, Bozeman, MT
______
Dear Senate Indian Affairs Committee,
I oppose S. 4444. This bill proposes to give access of public lands
to a bad actor private entity, Signal Peak. This is a firm that has
committed environmental crimes and has not been held accountable. I
also understand that a false claim of benefit to the Crow Nation is
included in the suite of bills concerning this action in Montana. We do
not need sweetheart deals.
Thank you for your work,
Mary LaPorte, Missoula, Montana
______
Signal Peak Energy is a flagrant bad actor with previous links to
Vladimir Putin, as well as a history of bribery, embezzlement, drug
trafficking and worker injuries. The US Attorney's office called the
mine a ``den of thievery'' due to its rampant disregard for laws. The
mine's owners have paid over $1.1 billion in penalties and fines in the
last few years. Our government should not be getting in bed with a
corporation that has committed these crimes, let alone the severe
damage it's caused to nearby ranches, including loss of water resources
for ranching operations and wildlife and large, dangerous cracks in the
landscape.
Signal Peak has received millions of dollars in tax abatements from
local governments even though it has made more than $1 billion over the
last several years. The company should provide some of this historic
revenue to local governments and the Crow Nation that could assist with
building a local economy that doesn't rely solely on dirty and
dangerous coal mining
Montana doesn't need this, shame on Senator Daines for trying to
push this senate bill.
Sincerly,
Mary Melanie Moore
______
Dear Committee Members,
Please vote against S. 4444. This bill is bad public policy and is
designed to enrich a company that the US Attorney has described as a
``den of thievery'' due to its rampant disregard for laws and the
interests and welfare of the local agricultural/ranching community.
Thank you.
Michael King, Helena, MT
______
Distinguished committee members,
I am writing to express my opposition to Sen. Steve Daines'
proposed legislation, S. 4444 as a Roundup, Montana resident. I served
as a Musselshell County Commissioner from 2015 to 2020 and was
disheartened by Signal Peak Energy's aggressive lobbying to evade its
tax obligations. The footprint of a corporation like Signal Peak in a
small rural community like ours cannot be overstated. As a public
servant, I found this company's unwillingness to pay its fair share to
maintain the local infrastructure it relied upon--and negatively
impacted--very disturbing. I was even more disturbed by Signal Peak's
multiple criminal violations and the damage its mining activity has
done to our land and fragile water resources.
Over the years, I have come to see Signal Peak as a bad neighbor
unwilling to meet even the lowest standards of responsible corporate
behavior. S. 4444 seems designed to reward this bad behavior. This
bill's clear aim is to allow Signal Peak to evade laws that require an
honest analysis of the mine's impact on our land and water.
Water is a resource that will define our future, and conflicts over
it are on the horizon. In Montana, extractive industries have
repeatedly taken our natural resources, leaving taxpayers to cover the
costs of environmental damage. The Bull Mountains are no different--
mining has already scarred the land and water springs have dried up.
For decades, the people of Musselshell County have waited for a
proper Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to assess the full effects
of mining. This essential review must be completed to understand the
long-term consequences. Without it, we risk further harm to our land
and water--vital resources for today and future generations.
Beyond the loss of proper environmental analysis, S. 4444 would
also privatize public lands that locals rely on for hunting,
recreation, and connection to the beauty of the Bull Mountains. As we
look ahead, we need a diverse, resilient economy that doesn't depend
solely on coal. Clean, abundant water and recreational opportunities
are key to that vision.
While I understand the financial challenges Musselshell County
faces, my community deserves better than continued dependence on the
mine's revenue. Montana's history shows us that laws should protect the
people and the environment, not corporate profits.
S. 4444, as written, undermines environmental protections and gives
away public lands. It should not be brought to a vote. Let's protect
our land, water, and future, and ensure Musselshell County's economy is
built on sustainability--not short-term, narrow mining interests.
Nicole Borner, Roundup, MT
______
As a Montanan, I urge you to vote against S. 4444, the Crow Revenue
Act, which benefits Signal Peak Energy and the Hope family and does a
disservice to the Crow Nation in Montana. Unlike its title S. 4444
would not produce revenue for the Crow Nation. While S. 4444 provides
the public minerals and surface rights (Bull Mountains Tracts) to the
Hope Family, the Crow Nation would receive mineral tracts on the Hope
Family lands which are unlikely to be mined for coal. In S. 4444, the
Hope Family Trust would receive 100 percent of the royalties from the
Bull Mountain tracts plus an unnamed share of royalties from the 100
percent tribally owned Hope Family tracts. Thus, the winner would be
the Hope Family Trust and ultimately, the loser would be the Crow
Nation.
Currently, the Bull Mountain Tracts are leased by the United States
for coal mining, with royalties payable to the United States. However,
S. 4444 would give valuable mineral and surface rights and coal
royalties that should be payable to the United States and instead
providing them to the Hope Family Trust. Please stand up for the
interests of the U.S. taxpayers and the peoples of the Crow Nation by
voting against S. 4444.
Patti Steinmuller, Bozeman, MT
______
Dear Senate Committee on Indian Affairs,
I do not support S. 4444 as it would allow a private entity to take
ownership of public land and publicly owned coal. Signal Peak is a bad
actor who needs to clean up the mess they have already made. Our public
lands need to stay public and in a way beneficial to all citizens.
Please reject this bill to protect our environment and avoid
another environmental disaster.
Sincerely,
Peggy Mahle
______
I don't support this bill that exists only to prop up a corrupt coal
company.
Signal Peak has received millions of dollars in tax abatements from
local governments even though it has made more than $1 billion over the
last several years. The company should provide some of this historic
revenue to local governments and the Crow Nation that could assist with
building a local economy that doesn't rely solely on dirty and
dangerous coal mining.
The Apsaalooke Allottees Alliance has publicly shared that
S.4444 will not benefit the Crow due to the language of the
bill itself.
Signal Peak should be providing some of its revenue to
assist with building a local and Tribal economies that don't
rely solely on coal mining.
Signal Peak is a bad actor and should be held accountable
for the damage it's done to Montana ranches and the climate.
Signal Peak should have to complete the court-ordered
Environmental Impact Statement before any additional mining can
occur.
Signal Peak should have to follow the law, fix the mess it's
already made at the mine, and provide ranchers and wildlife
with lost water resources before it can continue its mining
operations.
Sincereley,
Robin Vogler, Bigfork, MT
______
I am writing to submit comments on S. 4444.
Signal Peak Energy is a flagrant bad actor with previous links to
Vladimir Putin, as well as a history of bribery, embezzlement, drug
trafficking and worker injuries. The US Attorney's office called the
mine a ``den of thievery'' due to its rampant disregard for laws. The
mine's owners have paid over $1.1 billion in penalties and fines in the
last few years. Our government should not be getting in bed with a
corporation that has committed these crimes, let alone the severe
damage it's caused to nearby ranches, including loss of water resources
for ranching operations and wildlife and large, dangerous cracks in the
landscape.
Signal Peak has received millions of dollars in tax abatements from
local governments even though it has made more than $1 billion over the
last several years. The company should provide some of this historic
revenue to local governments and the Crow Nation that could assist with
building a local economy that doesn't rely solely on dirty and
dangerous coal mining.
Here are some talking points that may be helpful:
The Apsaalooke Allottees Alliance has publicly shared that
S.4444 will not benefit the Crow due to the language of the
bill itself.
Signal Peak should be providing some of its revenue to
assist with building a local and Tribal economies that don't
rely solely on coal mining.
Signal Peak is a bad actor and should be held accountable
for the damage it's done to Montana ranches and the climate.
Signal Peak should have to complete the court-ordered
Environmental Impact Statement before any additional mining can
occur.
Signal Peak should have to follow the law, fix the mess it's
already made at the mine, and provide ranchers and wildlife
with lost water resources before it can continue its mining
operations.
Thank you for this opportunity to comment..
Sincerely,
Ruth Swenson, Helena, MT
______
Dear Committee Members,
I am concerned about this bill for several reasons, and I hope you
will call out the inaccuracies and misleading content regarding this
bill's true intentions to give Signal Peak preferential treatment over
that of the environment and Montana constituents most directly
involved.
The Apsaalooke Allottees Alliance has publicly shared that
S.4444 will not benefit the Crow due to the language of the
bill itself.
Signal Peak should be providing some of its revenue to
assist with building a local and Tribal economies that don't
rely solely on coal mining.
Signal Peak is a bad actor and should be held accountable
for the damage it's done to Montana ranches and the climate.
Signal Peak should have to complete the court-ordered
Environmental Impact Statement before any additional mining can
occur.
Signal Peak should have to follow the law, fix the mess it's
already made at the mine, and provide ranchers and wildlife
with lost water resources before it can continue its mining
operations.
Thank you,
Geoff Showers, Resident of MT
______
This bill is moving Montana in the wrong direction! Do not support.
Thanks,
Steve McArthur
______
Dear Senators,
S. 4444 is a bad bill which props up a failing coal company and
does great harm to the environment in my beloved state. It is time to
move away from coal altogether. This is a hand out to one of the worse
actors in the industry.
Sincerely,
Sue Dickenson, Great Falls, MT
______
Please vote NO on this bill.
Susan Cushman, Condon, MT
______
This bill will not provide revenue to the Crow people as the name
implies. Instead, it will reward a bad actor with a sweetheart deal.
Terry Dokken, Missoula, MT
______
Senators,
As former chair of Bull Mountain Land Alliance, I can speak for 40
families threatened by Sen. Daines sham Crow Revenue Act. This act
deprives the Federal government of $10.65m in coal lease payments for
35 million tons of coal while providing no certain benefit to the Crow
people. What it does do is provide a way for Signal Peak Energy (SPE),
operator of an underground coal mine, to sidestep a legal ruling
requiring SPE to obtain an Environmental Impact Statement prior to
exploiting Federal coal in the Bull Mountains.
SPE has been operating in the Bull Mountains without an EIS for 14
years, dewatering springs and wetlands both within and beyond their
permit boundary and creating dangerous subsidence features threatening
the livelihoods of ranchers and the homes of residents. Without an EIS
identifying all the likely impacts of longwall mining in the Bull
Mountains SPE can continue to deny responsibility for the destruction
it is inflicting on the residents, the wildlife and the environment.
Now Senator Daines, without consulting any of the local landowners,
seeks to help SPE continue expanding and avoid an EIS altogether by
turning Federal coal into private coal through the introduction of his
spurious Crow Revenue Act. Daines coal trade is not with the Crow tribe
at all but with the Hope Family Trust (HFT) and provides only that at
some future unspecified date the HFT and the Crow tribe will negotiate
a revenue sharing agreement.
Because Senator Daines has structured this Act as an equal exchange
he had to include in the trade to the Hope Family Trust 940 acres of
BLM public land, some of which is the only public land directly
accessible to the public in this part of the Bull Mountains.
I urge you on behalf of Montanans directly affected to reject this
subterfuge.
Patrick Thiele,Roundup, MT
______
To committee members,
My name is Tom Baratta, and I own property just outside the permit
boundary of Signal Peak Energy's Bull Mountains Mine #1. Over the years
Signal Peak has been involved with numerous illegal activities, ignored
labor laws, and has been criminally convicted and fined for
environmental and safety violations. They have failed to complete
adequate water monitoring and have somehow ``lost'' other monitoring
information. They have intimidated and harassed local ranch owners with
litigation resulting in at least two ranches to sellout.
Signal Peak uses the most environmentally damaging method for
extracting coal. The practice of long wall mining has dewatered at
least 13 springs in the area, damaged riparian areas and caused
extensive subsidence cracks in areas that have been undercut by mining.
It has been impossible to work with the mine and Montana Department of
Environmental Quality to mitigate or reclaim the damage mining activity
has caused. We as landowners need a proper Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) conducted so that we have baseline data to help
determine any damages caused by mining activity. Too often Signal Peak
has evaded responsibility for damages to privately owned land and
water, and this is EIS can ensure we hold them responsible for repair
and reclamation.
S. 4444 would only benefit the out-of-state owners of Signal Peak,
a company already on criminal probation with the U.S. Department of
Justice. S.4444 would allow continued violations of the law and reward
the corporation's non-compliant stance regarding responsible analysis
of mining impacts.
Signal Peak avoided its responsibility to perform an EIS in 2009,
successfully lobbying to be able to do a much less rigorous
Environmental Analysis (EA). The EA that was conducted is highly flawed
based on inadequate and outdated research. This bill is intended to
allow Signal Peak to again avoid complying with National Environmental
Policy Act rules requiring an EIS be conducted prior to permitting.
Without an EIS, we homeowners and ranchers run great risk of losing
our life investments and way of life. We need a completed EIS to know
when material damage is done to our land as a result of mining
activity. We know from our history with Signal Peak that we cannot
trust them to take responsibility for their actions and work with the
landowner to repair and reclaim damage done by the mine.
Please apply the law equally and justly in determining your
position on this bill. Do not allow a criminally-convicted corporation
to steal from Montanans and cause damage to hardworking ranchers and
landowners.
Thank you,
Tom Baratta, Roundup, MT
______
Crow Tribe of Indians
May 23, 2024
Dear Senator Daines:
On behalf of the Crow Tribe of Indians, I would like to express our
support of The Crow Revenue Act. As you are aware, this legislation
fixes Long-standing inholdings on our Reservation and provides our
tribe with much needed revenue.
The transfer of approximately 4,660 acres of private subsurface
inholding on the Crow Reservation to the Crow Tribe of Montana in
exchange for 4,530 acres of federal subsurface and 940 acres of federal
surface interest in Musselshell County, MT along with the Revenue
Sharing Agreement in the Bull Mountains Tracts will ensure the Tribe
receives much needed revenue from mineral production that would
otherwise be lost. This transfer will ensure a sustainable source of
income for the Crow Tribe, employees of the Bull Mountains Mine in
Musselshell County, and energy for the Nation. We strongly believe this
transfer is a benefit for all parties involved, the State of Montana,
and the country.
The Crow Tribe of Indians proudly supports this Legislation and
thanks you for your leadership in crafting legislation that will
positively impact so many.
Sincerely,
Hon. Frank White Clay, Chairman
______
September 18, 2024
Re: Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act
of 2024--S. 4633, H.R. 8940
Dear Chair Schatz and Vice Chair Murkowski:
The undersigned Governors' Representatives on Colorado River
matters for the states of Wyoming and Utah write in support of the
efforts of the settling parties to comprehensively resolve the Colorado
River water rights claims of Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San
Juan Southern Paiute Tribe in Arizona through negotiated settlements.
The settlement to be authorized by the Northeastern Arizona Indian
Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 (H.R. 8940/S. 4633) will resolve
decades of litigation and uncertainty for the Tribes and help provide
needed water and water infrastructure to Tribal communities. However,
the proposed settlement also raises significant issues which may affect
each of our states' rights and interests to Colorado River water, and
those issues have not yet been resolved. \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We each submitted testimony to the House Committee on Natural
Resources, Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries on H.R. 8940,
Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act. Our testimony
provides general descriptions of our concerns and so we provide each
here as attachments for your reference (The information referred to has
been retained in the Committee files).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In an attempt to resolve our concerns and avoid negative unintended
consequences, beginning in August 2024, representatives from our states
have met on several occasions with the Tribes and the states of
Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, and California. Although the
meetings have been productive, we have been unable in that brief time
to resolve the extremely complex and difficult issues this legislation
presents. There simply has not been enough time to resolve our
outstanding concerns.
We remain committed to working collectively with the Tribes and the
other Colorado River Basin States to identify solutions that are
consistent with the Colorado River Compacts and state and federal law,
and which will ultimately benefit the Colorado River Basin as a whole.
However, we need more time to develop appropriate and durable
solutions, and to explore the opportunity for a consensus approach
among the Basin States. Accordingly, we respectfully request that the
Senate Committee on Indian Affairs postpone the September 25, 2024,
hearing on S. 4633/H.R. 8940.
Other States were invited to join this letter. One state was not
able to join at the time of this correspondence given the time
constraints and importance of coordination among the State and their
Tribal Nations
Regards, Regards,
Gene Shawcroft, Colorado River Commissioner, State of Utah
Brandon Gebhart, Colorado River Commissioner, State of
Wyoming
______
OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR, STATE OF MONTANA
June 11, 2024
Dear Senator Daines,
The Bull Mountains Mine is a critical economic driver in
Musselshell and Yellowstone Counties, and I applaud your efforts to
protect the livelihoods of the hundreds of employees against the
regulatory attacks of the federal government. I want to express my
support for each of your bills addressing the imminent federal threat
to the Bull Mountains Mine.
The Crow Revenue Act is a win-win for Montana. The bill would
empower and support the Crow Tribe and, at the same time, protect the
workers and families that rely on the Bull Mountains Mine. Senate Bills
4431 and 4432 are laudable proposals aimed at neutralizing the delay
tactics of the Department of the Interior. For too long, the permits
for the Bull Mountains Mine have been held in regulatory limbo, with no
action for months and in violation of a court ordered timeline. The
Office of Surface Mining should not be allowed to indefinitely delay
permitting processes without reason.
The Bull Mountains Mine not only provides jobs and economic life to
the communities of Roundup, Billings, and the surrounding area, it
provides our allies in Asia with reliable energy supplies. Japan,
Korea, and Taiwan all receive coal from Montana. It is important for
the global energy security of our allies that the United States
continue to provide reliable fuel to these countries.
I urge your colleagues in the U.S. Senate to join you in supporting
these bills of vital importance not only to Montana, but to the country
and our allies abroad.
Sincerely,
Greg Gianforte, Governor
______
Montana Association of Oil, Gas, & Coal Counties
May 28, 2024
Members of the 118th Congress,
On behalf of the Montana Association of Oil, Gas, and Coal
Counties--an association of 33 county commissions that supports and
promotes the development of Montana's abundant oil, gas, and coal
resources. I am writing to urge you to support the Crow Revenue Act
introduced by Senator Steve Daines.
The 4,660 acres of private subsurface inholdings that the Act would
exchange for the 4,530 acres of federal subsurface and 940 acres of
federal surface interests stands to benefit all parties involved, while
providing a path forward for the Bull Mountains Mine in Musselshell
County.
The Bull Mountains Mine directly employs approximately 260 workers
in Musselshell and Yellowstone Counties, and indirecty impacts hundreds
more. If the Bull Mountains Mine is forced to close due to the lack of
a timely permit approval process, hundreds will be left without work--
sending an economic shock through the local economy.
But individuals employed by the mine will not be the only ones that
suffer if a solution is not passed to allow production to continue at
the Bull Mountains Mine. If action is not taken, the schools, local
governments, and critical community services that are supported through
revenue generated by the Mine will also be in jeopardy.
In just the past three years, Signal Peak has paid over $211
million in taxes to the state, Yellowstone, and Musselshell counties.
This revenue funds Montana's public education system, provides funding
to local governments for critical public safety services, and supports
much needed infrastructure improvements. In short. there is not a
corner of our state that does not benefit from the Bull Mountains Mine,
the high-wage careers it supports, and the tax revenue it provides.
The Montana Association of Oil, Gas, and Coal Counties strongly
supports Senator Daines' Crow Revenue Act, the certainty it will
provide for the communities that rely on the Bull Mountains Mine, as
well as the revenue and economic opportunity it will provide to the
Crow Tribe.
We encourage your strong support of this common-sense solution.
Respectfully,
Shelby DeMars, Executive Director
______
OFFICE OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, STATE OF MONTANA
September 23, 2024
RE: Crow Revenue Act Support
Dear Senator Daines:
As Superintendent of Public Instruction for the State of Montana
and the senior commissioner of the Montana Land Board, I wish to convey
my full support for the Crow Revenue Act. The exchange of subsurface
mineral properties outlined in the Act will provide revenues to the
Crow Tribe and assure substantial job creation with the Bull Mountain
Mine.
Revenues to the State Trust Lands will flow to Montana's students
as continued mine development delivers extraction royalties associated
with its subsurface interests within the operation. During Fiscal Year
2023, coal royalties from state trust lands generated over $46 million,
which flow into Montana public schools.
The enhancement of the local and regional communities will continue
to be realized with longterm job creation and its accompanying
contributions.
The Crow Revenue Act is a win-win for all involved and I proudly
support its passage.
Sincerely,
Elsie Arntzen, Montana State Superintendent
______
Montana State Senate
June 6, 2024
Members of the 118th Congress,
We urge you to support the Crow Revenue Act introduced by Senator
Steve Daines. The proposed land swap is a needed win-win-win for our
corner of the country.
By exchanging 4,660 acres of private subsurface holdings for 4,530
acres of federal subsurface and 940 acres of federal surface interests,
Congress can ensure the continuation of good-paying jobs, economic
development for the Crow Nation, and crucial tax revenue for schools.
Hundreds of workers in Yellowstone and Musselshell Counties depend
on the Bull Mountains Mine for the paychecks that support their
families. The Act will keep these Montanans employed, preserving local
rural communities.
The Act would provide a mechanism for the Crow Tribe to bring in
new revenue. After hundreds of years of Congress harming and ignoring
Indian Country, this proposal is one small, yet important, step in the
right direction toward economic opportunity and local empowerment for
Native communities in South-Central Montana.
Finally, Montanans are facing unprecedented property taxes. While
many factors have led to Montana's broken property tax situation, a
major contributing factor has been the decline of natural resource
development in the Treasure State shifting greater burden onto
residential homeowners. The Crow Revenue Act will help maintain or
reduce property taxes for homeowners struggling with rapidly increasing
costs of living.
In short, Senator Daines's proposal is a rare opportunity for
Congress to make a big positive impact without spending additional
money that the federal government doesn't have.
As the local lawmakers representing the impacted area, we urge you
to support the CrowRevenue Act.
Senator Barry Usher, Senate District 20, Yellowstone &
Musselshell Counties
Representative Gary Parry, House District 39, Colstrip,
Montana
Representative Gayle Lammers, House District 41, Hardin,
Montana
Senator Jason Small, Senate District 21, Busby, Montana
Representative Greg Oblander, House District 40, Shepherd,
Montana
______
MUSSELSHELL COUNTY
June 21, 2024
Dear Senator Daines,
We sincerely appreciate all your office's efforts to provide
``certainty for the Bull Mountains Mine in Musselshell County'' by
sponsoring this act to allow the Signal Peak mine to continue its
operations over the next decade. As you are aware, the Coal Mine's
continued operations is a significant revenue source for Musselshell
County, as well as a primary source of employment for many Musselshell
County residents. The mine is vital for maintaining Musselshell
County's government services and continued economic growth. The mine's
continued operation is crucial to allow Musselshell County time to
transition from coal over the next decade.
We look forward to continue working with your office, in the hopes
that Musselshell County's overall revenue from the Signal Peak mine is
not reduced as a result of this act.
Sincerely,
Michael Turley, Commission Chairman
Robert Pancratz, Vice Chair
______
MONTANA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
June 11, 2024
Members of the 118th Congress,
It is imperative that you support the Crow Revenue Act introduced
by Senator Steve Daines. The solution put forth in the legislation will
benefit all parties involved including:
260 workers and their families from Musselshell and
Yellowstone Counties
100s more businesses and workers that are dependent on the
Bull Mountains Mine'soperation
Schools, local governments, critical community services
supported through the mine'srevenue
The State of Montana that received $211 million in taxes the
past couple of years from themine's operation.
The Crow Tribe that will benefit from the revenue and
economic opportunity.
In short, this bill fixes long-standing inholdings on the Crow
Reservation while also providing much needed revenue to the Crow Tribe
and certainty for the Bull Mountains Mine in Musselshell County.
This legislation is good for the local communities, the Crow Tribe,
and the State of Montana.
Please support Senator Daines. Please support Montana.
Respectfully submitted,
Representative Kerri Seekins-Crowe, House District 43
______
City of Roundup
May 24, 2024
To whom it may concern,
On behalf of the City of Roundup we are in full support of Steve
Daines and his Crow Revenue Act.
This act would transfer approximately 4,660 acres of private
subsurface inholdings (Hope Family Tracts) on the Crow Reservation to
the Crow Tribe of Montana in exchange for 4,530 acres of federal
subsurface and 940 acres of federal surface interests in Musselshell
County, MT (Bull Mountains Tracts). Further the bill would require that
the Crow Tribe and the Hope Family enter into a Revenue Sharing
Agreement for any interests developed in the Bull Mountains Tracts.
Similar to the bipartisan Northern Cheyenne Lands Act signed into
law in 2014 that supported the Northern Cheyenne Tribe, this simple
bill fixes long standing inholdings on the Crow Reservation while also
providing much needed revenue to the Crow Tribe and certainty for the
Bull Mountains Mine in Musselshell County.
The City of Roundup fully supports this bill to be passed in its
entirety
Respectfully Submitted
Sandra Jones, Mayor
______
SIGNAL PEAK ENERGY, LLC
May 23, 2024
Dear Senator Daines,
Signal Peak Energy, LLC (``SPE'') writes in strong support of the
Crow Revenue Act (``the Act''), which seeks to convey mineral interests
to be held in trust for the benefit of the Crow Tribe of Montana (``the
Crow''). As the current lessee of the federal mineral leases that are
needlessly held up in litigation, SPE supports the proposed legislation
and recognizes its positive economic impacts regarding federal and
tribal mineral rights in Montana.
The Act would enable the Crow to access mineral interests
previously held by the Hope Family Trust, allowing for greater tribal
control of land-based resources within the reservation. In exchange,
the United States will convey to the Hope Family Trust its mineral
interests and surface land in the Bull Mountains, relinquishing the
federal leases held by SPE. SPE acknowledges the economic benefits that
this will provide the Crow and commends the Act's role in supporting
tribal economic development opportunities, while also ensuring that the
HopeFamily Trust is fairly compensated.
The Act will directly promote the economic welfare and sovereignty
of the Crow. SPE recognizes that these benefits outweigh the
cancellation of the federal leases it currently holds in the Bull
Mountains and fully supports the Crow Revenue Act.
Thank you for your sponsorship of this legislation. SPE greatly
appreciates your continued commitment to economic growth for all
Montanans.
Sincerely,
Parker J. Phipps, President/CEO
______
Yellowstone County Board of County Commissioners
May 28, 2024
To Whom It May Concern:
On behalf of the Yellowstone County Board of County Commissioners,
we are writing to express our support for the Crow Revenue Act
introduced by Senator Daines.
The enacting of the legislation would be of great benefit to both
Yellowstone County and Musselshell County, allowing the Crow Tribe to
trade tribal land for federal land in the Bull Mountains. This trade
allows Signal Peak Energy, LLC to access privately owned land for their
coal mining operation and give royalties to the Crow Tribe.
Signal Peak employs over 250 employees and provides work to many
contractors in our state. Aside from gross proceed truces collected and
distributed, this legislation provides for the continuance of these
good-paying jobs in our area while helping our country maintain energy
independence.
We thank you for your consideration of this important legislation
and look forward to its adoption.
Sincerely,
John Ostlund, Chairman
Mark Morse, Member
Donald W. Jones, Member
______
State of Arizona
September 20, 2024
Re: Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act
of 2024 (S. 4633)
Dear Chairman Schatz and Vice Chairwoman Murkowski:
I am pleased to express my strong support for S. 4633, the
Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024. This
important legislation approves and authorizes a comprehensive
settlement of the water rights claims of the Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe
and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe in Arizona. Settling the outstanding
tribal water rights claims in Arizona is a priority for the State, and
enactment of this legislation is a critical step in achieving that
goal.
The three Tribes have some of the largest outstanding tribal water
rights claims in Arizona, including claims to the Colorado River, in-
state surface water and groundwater. The settlement of these claims
will end decades of conflict and litigation, provide certainty to the
Tribes and other water users regarding their water rights, and ensure
reliable, secure and safe water supplies for the three Tribes.
Many homes on the three Reservations lack access to clean running
water, a basic human necessity. The settlement will help alleviate this
situation by providing the Tribes with rights to reliable and
sustainable water supplies, and by providing funding for the
construction and operation of much needed infrastructure projects to
treat and deliver the water to communities on the three Reservations.
Enactment of the legislation by Congress will therefore contribute to
the process of ensuring that all Arizonans have access to clean running
water in their homes and protect against future public health crises.
The historic and generational impact of this settlement cannot be
overstated, for its significance in securing a sustainable water
supply, supporting the establishment of tribal homelands, and affirming
the sovereignty of these tribal nations.
This settlement is the result of the tireless efforts of the three
Tribes, the State of Arizona, municipalities and numerous water users
and communities in the state. I would like to thank all the parties for
their hard work on the settlement, Senator Kelly and Senator Sinema for
their sponsorship, and the Senate Committee for hearing this
legislation which is of such great importance to the State of Arizona.
Sincerely,
Hon. Katie Hobbs, Governor
______
SOUTHERN NEVADA WATER AUTHORITY
August 20, 2024
Dear Senator Cortez Masto and Congresswoman Lee:
On behalf of the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNW A), I write
to express support for the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Act of 2024 (H.R. 8940/S. 4633). This settlement act will
resolve decades of litigation and provide the Navajo Nation, Hopi
Tribe, and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe with reliable water rights
and infrastructure that will improve domestic and economic conditions
for their members. As this legislation moves through the Committees
that you each sit on--the Senate Indian Affairs Committee and the House
Natural Resources Committee--SNWA requests that you consider our
comments and suggestions outlined in this letter.
As you know, the Colorado River Compact of 1922 (Compact) operates
on the fundamental provision that divides rights and obligations based
on an Upper Basin and Lower Basin. However, the Navajo Nation's
reservation spreads through three Colorado River Basin States (Basin
States)--Utah, New Mexico, and Arizona--and straddles the Upper and
Lower Basins, adding an additional layer of complexity. The
Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 would
allocate Colorado River Water to the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe,
including Lower Basin and Upper Basin water. The agreement would allow
the Navajo Nation and Hopi Tribe to use these allocations of Colorado
River water on their Reservations and lease water in both the Upper and
Lower Basins in the State of Arizona. Given the intricacies and nuances
resulting from the inter-Basin and interstate nature of the Tribal
lands, collaboration will be key.To avoid negative unintended
consequences and to remain consistent with the Compact, SNW A
respectfully proposes that Congress, the Basin States, and the Tribes
work together on technical modifications to H.R. 8940/S. 4633 in a
manner similar to the process used in 2009 for the Northwestern New
Mexico Rural Water Projects Act, P.L. 111-11 (the ``Navajo-Gallop
Project''). In drafting that legislation, the Governors'
Representatives on Colorado River Operations for all seven Basin States
collaborated and submitted ``recommended modifications'' on how the
Navajo-Gallup Project could be improved by incorporating aspects of the
Compact, delineating conditions for use of Colorado River water in
Arizona, and establishing accounting procedures--including how flows at
Lee Ferry would be calculated.
Although the dynamics of H.R. 8940/S. 4633 are unique and perhaps
more complex than those of the Navajo-Gallup Project, the Northwestern
New Mexico Rural Water Projects Act demonstrated that a careful and
deliberate assessment of how to account for water use, consistent with
the Compact (articles III(c) III(d) in particular), was necessary. That
is why SNWA recommends collaboration between lawmakers and
stakeholders, to ensure that H.R. 8940/S. 4633 addresses where the
water can be used, how that use is allocated to Arizona's,
apportionments under articles III(a) and (b) of the Compact, and how
such uses should be considered in the context of calculating flows at
Lee Ferry.
SNWA has reviewed the written testimony of other Basin States, and
while there are numerous areas of agreement, two issues raised in the
written testimony must be addressed. First, SNWA strongly believes that
the inter-Basin flexibility afforded to the Navajo Nation and the Hopi
Tribe in this legislation should be considered a unique exception,
rather than a new precedent. H.R. 8940/S.4633 indicates that, in
Arizona, the Tribes may use Upper Basin water in the Lower Basin, and
Lower Basin water in the Upper Basin. As described above, the
boundaries of the sovereign Navajo Nation stretch into three Basin
States and include significant portions of the Upper Basin and Lower
Basin, placing the Navajo Nation in a unique position requiring unique
needs. Nevada is opposed to using Northeastern Arizona Indian Water
Rights Settlement Act of 2024 as a vehicle that gives other Basin
States and Tribes the same flexibility. Instead, the ability to use
Upper Basin apportionments in Lower Basin areas of a State should be
addressed through Project-specific legislation.
Second, SNWA is opposed to an accounting standard that would
attempt to ascertain the consumptive use of the Navajo Nation or Hopi
Tribe and then speculate on the amount of water not fully consumed,
with the aim of crediting purported un-consumed volumes against the
Upper Basin States' obligations at Lee Ferry under article III(d). This
approach appears to be unmoored from actual water volumes, as there
does not appear to be any mechanism for ensuring that any un-consumed
water actually constitutes return flows to the main stem. As, with the
Navajo-Gallop Project, the federal government, Basin States, and Tribes
should work cooperatively to establish a reliable and equitable
accounting methodology.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
John J. Entsminger, General Manager
______
AZTEC LAND AND CATTLE COMPANY, LIMITED
September 16, 2024
Re: S. 4633--Northeastern Arizona Water Rights Settlement
Act
Dear Senator Kelly,
As President of the Aztec Land and Cattle Company, Limited, and
Manager of its affiliated Aztec Land Company, LLC, I thank you for
sponsoring the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act.
Our company, with its long-standing presence and extensive land
holdings in northeastern Arizona, has been actively involved in the
negotiations and discussions leading up to this settlement. The Act
will resolve decades of litigation and provide water security to
northeastern Arizona.
The Aztec Land and Cattle Company, a true icon in the state, was
established in 1884. It made its mark by purchasing a million acres in
northern Arizona from the Atlantic & Pacific Railroad. The company's
rich history includes importing about 32,000 head of cattle from Texas
for its ranching operations in Arizona, with the cattle brand being the
Hashknife. The legends about its cowboys in the Hashknife Outfit are
still told.
After selling its cattle in 1905 because of drought and low market
prices, the Aztec Land and Cattle Company embarked on a program of
leasing its grazing land to local cattle ranchers--a program that
continues to this day. Many of the company's current grazing lessees
are direct descendants of its original lessees. Today, Aztec and its
affiliates own approximately 240,000 acres in Navajo County, Arizona,
and 320,000 acres of mineral rights (some without surface ownership) in
Navajo and Coconino Counties. It is the second largest private
landowner in Arizona and holds one of the few remaining large-scale
tracts of rural private land available for development in the state.
Aztec Land and Cattle Company's rural land ownership is extremely
valuable for developing and preserving agricultural and open space
values.
In 2012, Snowflake, Taylor, and Navajo County received devastating
news. The Catalyst Paper mill was closing, causing job losses, tax
revenue losses, and the closure of the Apache Railway. An investor
planned to rip the rail system apart and sell it for scrap.
Partnering with MPS Eggs, Aztec saved the railroad. Apache Railway
is a Class III short-line railroad running for 55 miles off the BNSF
Railway's transcontinental mainline near Holbrook, Arizona. The Apache
Railway serves much of Aztec's land, providing access to both national
and international markets. Thanks to Aztec and MPS's efforts, it has
operated continuously since its incorporation in 1917. As hub for rail
car repair and storage the Apache now operates near the old paper
plant, providing jobs and tax revenue.
Driven with concern for the community, its experience and business
ingenuity, and sheer determination, the Aztec Land and Cattle Company
also reacquired Dry Lake Farm--a portion of the Papermill property that
Aztec had owned before selling in 1960 to the Papermill--for continued
farming. Dry Lake Farm has water rights to Phoenix Park Wash and
numerous wells in a closed basin. The farm is used for livestock
pasture, forage, and stockwatering and has produced crops for over 130
years.
With its history and economic diversity in agribusiness, real
estate development, commerce, and transportation, Aztec Land and Cattle
Company has a broad understanding of the serious issues facing northern
Arizona. Water security and ongoing water litigation with the Navajo,
Hopi, and San Juan Southern Paiute tribes are at the top of the list.
Like others in the region, the Aztec Land and Cattle Company has
faced enormously expensive and seemingly unending water litigation for
several decades. This litigation stems from the complex and long-
standing water rights disputes with the Navajo, Hopi, and San Juan
Southern Paiute tribes. Without a settlement of these tribal claims,
that litigation will likely continue for years, posing a significant
threat to the region's water security and economic stability. The
rising costs of ongoing trials and an uncertain water supply can
potentially drive northern Arizona's farms and communities out of
business.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act will
finally end the decades of litigation by resolving the water rights
claims of the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan Southern
Paiute Tribe. Approval of the settlement will not only provide water
certainty to the Tribes and water users near tribal lands but also
ensure the sustainability of local agriculture, businesses, and
communities. The settlement agreement includes several essential
commitments by the Tribes, which have agreed to not object to certain
off-reservation uses of surface water and groundwater. There will be no
Tribal objections to existing surface water diversions and off-
reservation storage and reservoir systems. As drought continues, Aztec
Land and Cattle Company and others will need to rely more on
groundwater--and the Tribes will waive objections to most groundwater
pumping.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties such as the City of Flagstaff to use this
legislation to obtain funding for non-tribal purposes. There should be
no additions to the legislation.
The agreements in the Act are not just about the present but about
securing a future for northeastern Arizona. They will lift the ugly
cloud of ceaseless litigation and worries about water rights, helping
stakeholders plan for their futures. The settlement is a win-win
situation, providing water certainty to the Tribes and water users near
tribal lands, while also ensuring the sustainability of local
agriculture, businesses, and communities.
For the past 30 years, parties like the Aztec Land and Cattle
Company have been trying to settle with the Tribes. Now, the
Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act presents a
rare, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to resolve these issues. Your
continued support is crucial and urgently needed.
Sincerely,
Stephen M. Brophy, President
______
Bar T Bar Ranch, Inc.
September 16, 2024
Re: S. 4633--Northeastern Arizona Water Rights Settlement
Act
Dear Senator Kelly,
On behalf of the Bar T Bar Ranch, Inc. (and its affiliates Bar T
Bar Ranch Company, LLP, Meteor Crater Enterprises, Inc., and Crater
Ranch, LLC), I am writing to thank you for sponsoring the Northeastern
Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act. This Act is not just a
legal matter but a crucial lifeline for our operations and the future
of our community, especially in the face of pressing water rights
issues.
Bar T Bar Ranch, a family-owned and operated Arizona agribusiness,
is a testament to the enduring spirit of ranching. Established in 1924
by the Chilson family, it has upheld a legacy of ranching excellence
and land stewardship. This commitment to ethical care and management,
balanced with a pursuit of increased profitability, improved
communication, and enhanced product quality, has earned Bar T Bar a
place of respect and admiration in the industry.
The Bar T Bar Ranch is not just a business; it's a way of life.
With a sprawling 300,000-acre winter range and a picturesque summer
headquarters, the ranch is home to a thriving cattle operation,
producing high-quality feeder cattle, commercial bred replacement
heifers, registered bulls, and beef for consumers. This dedication to
excellence has earned Bar T Bar recognition, including the prestigious
2016 Range Managers of the Year award.
The ranch actively participates in the Diablo Trust, a
collaborative landmanagement team that protects open spaces and healthy
habitats. Experts predict that 40 percent of family farms and ranches,
or over 370 million acres of land, will be sold and converted to
housing, shopping centers, and industrial uses. Should this happen,
developments will undoubtedly transfer valuable water from watersheds
and wildlife to serve municipal and industrial uses. Diablo Trust is
working to keep ranch lands in our region intact through conservation,
collaboration, and scientific research so there will always be ``a
West.''
A reliable water supply is critical for Bar T Bar Ranch. Drought
over the past few years has been challenging. Litigation over tribal
water rights has also been a burden, significantly straining the
farming and ranching industry's resources.
Bar T Bar and the Chilson family have faced expensive and seemingly
unending water litigation for almost 50 years. Without a settlement of
tribal claims, that litigation will likely continue for many more
years.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act will
finally end the decades of litigation. This historic Act will approve
an agreement among the principal stakeholders in northeastern Arizona,
finally resolving the water right claims of the Navajo Nation, the Hopi
Tribe, and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe. Approval of the
settlement will not only provide water certainty both to the Tribes and
to the water users near tribal lands, including Bar T Bar Ranch and its
affiliate operations, but will also secure a prosperous future for our
shared community.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties such as the City of Flagstaff to use this
legislation to obtain funding for non-tribal purposes. There should be
no additions to the legislation.
The settlement agreement, in addition to resolving the litigation,
includes commitments by the Tribes to not object to certain off-
reservation uses of surface water and groundwater. This means that Bar
T Bar's Hay, Tremaine and Soldier Lakes (to which the public has an
interest) and even small off-reservation reservoirs, like the private
stockponds necessary for ranch and wildlife management, will not be
challenged by the Tribes. These commitments are not just about the
present, but about securing a future for the farming and ranching
industry in northeastern Arizona, a future that is crucial to our
collective prosperity and the sustainability of our region.
Bar T Bar Ranch is a testament to the enduring spirit of ranching,
where tradition and innovation converge to create a sustainable and
prosperous future. We invite you to join us in this endeavor by
supporting the passage of the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Act. Your support is crucial in turning our positive vision
for Arizona's future into a reality.
Please come visit our ranch sometime.
Sincerely,
Judith E. (Chilson) Prosser, President
______
Town of Eagar
September 16, 2024
Re: S. 4633--Northeastern Arizona Water Rights Settlement
Act
Dear Senator Kelly,
As mayor of the Town of Eagar, I want to thank you for sponsoring
the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act. Your
continued support is critical in this historic settlement.
Nestled at the base of the White Mountains in northeastern Arizona,
Eagar is a hub for outdoor enthusiasts and a haven for those seeking a
small-town atmosphere. With a rich history dating back to the late
1800s, the town, originally named ``Union,'' was once a central point
for several homesteads. Today, it pays homage to its roots by bearing
the name of the original homesteading family. Eagar's appeal extends
beyond its history, offering visitors and residents various
recreational activities throughout the year, from winter skiing to fall
foliage. Its low crime rate, pristine mountain environment, and
proximity to major transportation routes make it attractive for
individuals and businesses.
While natural resources remain a part of Eagar's identity, the town
has diversified its economy. Power plants and tourism now form a
significant part of the employment base, complemented by ranching,
retail, and forestry. Eagar's unique blend of history, recreation, and
economic diversity makes it a compelling case study in sustainable
growth for rural communities.
Water is a crucial resource for Eagar, with a municipal well system
serving the needs of its residents and visitors. The surrounding
reservoirs and creeks support local irrigation interests and are
critical to ensuring the continued vitality of the region's
agricultural activities. These waterways also offer public access,
enhancing the town's recreational appeal and highlighting the
interconnectedness of water resources and community well-being.
As to its water rights, Eagar has faced an expensive challenge--
ongoing litigation involving the adverse water rights claims of the
Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe.
This water lawsuit, which has been ongoing for about 50 years, has been
a significant drain on the town's resources and has hindered its
ability to plan for a secure water Where Roads Hit The Trails future.
Despite efforts to settle it in the past, a resolution has remained
elusive, making the proposed Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Act all the more crucial.
The proposed Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement
Act is the result of years of negotiations. It will finally resolve the
Tribes' water rights claims. This resolution will not only mark the end
of the contentious and costly litigation with the Tribes but also
provide water certainty to both the Tribes and the communities like
Eagar that are near Tribal lands.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties such as the City of Flagstaff to use this
legislation to obtain funding for non-tribal purposes. There should be
no additions to the legislation.
In the settlement, the Navajo, Hopi, and San Juan Southern Paiute
Tribes agree that they will not object to certain off-reservation water
uses, such as groundwater pumping, existing surface water diversions,
and water storage reservoirs. In return, the passage of the Act will
provide the Tribes with water from various sources, including Colorado
River water. This provision is a significant step towards addressing
the water needs of the Tribes, reducing competition among the Tribes
and off-reservation communities for scarce water resources.
The Town of Eagar urges you to continue supporting the Northeastern
Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act. We thank you for your
efforts.
Sincerely,
Hon. Guy Phelps, Mayor
______
CITY OF HOLBROOK, ARIZONA
September 16, 2024
Re: S. 4633--Northeastern Arizona Water Rights Settlement
Act
Dear Senator Kelly,
As Mayor of Holbrook, and on behalf of the City's council and
citizens, I thank you for sponsoring the Northeastern Arizona Indian
Water Rights Settlement Act.
``What began as a town too tough for women and churches, is now too
good to miss,'' we write on our website. We think the settlement act is
too good to miss, too. This Act holds the potential to bring about a
significant change for communities like the City of Holbrook, providing
us with a much-needed assurance about our water rights and enabling us
to plan for future growth.
Back in 1870, Northeastern Arizona was isolated and barren, with
the only fertile land situated along the Little Colorado River. At the
junction of the Little Colorado and the Rio Puerco was Horsehead
Crossing, a vital river crossing for those traveling north and south.
By 1876, Horsehead Crossing had become an essential stagecoach
crossing, boasting a general store, saloon, stage station, and corrals
amidst a grove of old cottonwood trees. In 1881, the Atlantic & Pacific
Railroad chose this settlement as a railhead for supply wagons headed
south to Fort Apache, building a train depot about two miles west of
the crossing. Holbrook, named after the railroad's chief engineer,
Henry Holbrook, who oversaw the construction of this section of the
rail line, then emerged around the new depot.
Today, Holbrook is the county seat of Navajo County, located in
eastern Arizona along the banks of the Little Colorado River. It serves
as a convergence point for Interstate AO (old Route 66), U.S. Highway
180, and State Highway 77. With a population of approximately 5,000,
Holbrook's economy primarily relies on public administration,
construction, accommodation, and food services.
Given its location on important commercial routes, the future of
Holbrook's economy is promising, but the City needs a reliable water
supply. Like other municipalities in Northeastern Arizona, the City has
shouldered an enormous financial burden in water rights litigation that
has spanned almost 50 years. The bulk of the litigation concerns the
adverse claims of the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan
Southern Paiute Tribe.
The proposed Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement
Act is the result of years of negotiations and discussions among the
principal non-Indian stakeholders in Northeastern Arizona and the
Tribes. It will finally resolve the water rights claims of the Tribes,
which have been a source of contention and litigation for decades.
Approval of the settlement will mark the end of this long-standing
issue, providing water certainty both to the Tribes and to the
communities near Tribal lands, paving the way for a more sustainable
and prosperous future for northeastern Arizona.
The benefits of the settlement extend beyond Holbrook. Nearby
communities, including those near the Navajo, Hopi, and San Juan
Southern Paiute reservations, will also experience positive changes.
These off-reservation communities, which have long-standing
relationships with the Tribes, have been adversely affected by the
water rights litigation, straining resources and hindering potential
development for many years. The settlement, by resolving these issues,
will pave the way for these communities to flourish.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties such as the City of Flagstaff to use this
legislation to obtain funding for non-tribal purposes. There should be
no additions to the legislation.
The settlement agreement includes, among other things, the Tribes'
commitments not to object to certain off-reservation uses of water,
such as groundwater pumping, existing surface water diversions, and
water storage reservoirs. In return, passage of the Act will provide
the Tribes with water from various sources, including Colorado River
water, thereby reducing competition among the Tribes and offreservation
communities for scarce water resources in the area.
The City of Holbrook urges you to continue supporting the
Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act.
Sincerely,
Hon. Kathleen Smith, Mayor
______
City of Show Low
September 16, 2024
Re: S. 4633--Northeastern Arizona Water Rights Settlement
Act
Dear Senator Kelly,
On behalf of the City of Show Low, I want to thank you for
sponsoring the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act.
Show Low, established in 1870, has blossomed into the largest city
in northeastern Arizona's White Mountains. It serves as the region's
business and marketing center, boasting an array of shopping centers,
charming restaurants, and warm hospitality. Its elevation and
surrounding forests and lakes provide a refreshing escape from the
scorching summer heat, attracting tourists seeking respite. Equipped
with a hospital, airport, community college, and numerous public
schools, Show Low offers essential amenities and resources. The
upcoming Amazon distribution warehouse promises to boost employment
opportunities for the City's steadily growing population.
Legend has it that Show Low's unique name originated from a high-
stakes poker game between Corydon E. Cooley and Marion Clark, partners
in a vast 100,000-acre ranch. Both vied for control of the ranch, so
they decided to settle the matter over a game of cards. After hours and
hours of stalemate, Clark declared, ``If you can show low, you win.''
Cooley triumphantly revealed the deuce of clubs, the lowest possible
card, securing his victory. Today, Show Low's main street, aptly named
``Deuce of Clubs,'' commemorates this tale.
Show Low has been an active participant in the water rights
settlement negotiations with the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the
San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe since 1994. These talks, part of the
almost 50-year litigation known as ``the Little Colorado River
adjudication,'' involve the Tribes' adverse claims to water rights to
the river and its tributaries. Show Low Creek and Silver Creek, which
are tributaries to the Little Colorado River, supply irrigation,
stockwatering, and municipal water to Show Low and the surrounding
communities. They fill the reservoirs in the Show Low System: Show Low
Lake, Rainbow Lake, Upper Rainbow Lake, Scotts Reservoir, and Woodland
Lake. These lakes, which are manmade reservoirs used to store and
release irrigation water, have become highly-valued recreation and
wildlife assets in the area.
In 2002, an intense wildfire called the Rodeo-Chediski Fire came
dangerously close to Show Low, triggering a city-wide evacuation.
Fortunately, firefighters managed to contain the blaze near the City
limits, leaving Show Low unscathed. The lakes played an important role
in fire suppression, allowing tankers to quickly fill. Given the threat
of wildfire throughout the Southwest, it is possible that these lakes
will play a role in fire suppression again.
Preserving Show Low's rights to Show Low Creek, Silver Creek, and
the reservoirs is crucial.
The proposed Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement
Act, the result of years of negotiations and discussions, will finally
resolve the Tribes' water rights claims. This resolution will not only
mark the end of the contentious and expensive litigation with the
Tribes but also provide water certainty to both the Tribes and the
communities near Tribal lands, including Show Low and the surrounding
areas. This means a secure and sustainable water supply for our growing
population and businesses, ensuring our continued prosperity.
Show Low believes settlements are far more productive and less
costly to taxpayers than litigation. We have seen this firsthand with
the successful resolution of the White Mountain Apache Tribe Water
Rights Quantification Act of 2010 (as recently updated in Public Law
No. 117-342), which has brought years of conflict to an end.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties such as the City of Flagstaff to use this
legislation to obtain funding for non-tribal purposes. There should be
no additions to the legislation.
In this settlement, the Navajo, Hopi, and San Juan Southern Paiute
Tribes agree that they will not object to certain off-reservation water
uses, such as groundwater pumping, existing surface water diversions,
and water storage reservoirs. In return, passage of the Act will
provide the Tribes with water from various sources, including Colorado
River water. This provision is a significant step towards addressing
the water needs of the Tribes, reducing competition among the Tribes
and off-reservation communities for scarce water resources, and
promoting a more equitable distribution of water rights.
The City of Show Low urges you to continue to support the
Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act. This historic
Act, which will benefit both Northeastern Arizona and the Tribes, is a
testament to our shared commitment to building strong communities on
and off Tribal lands.
Sincerely,
Connie Kakavas, Vice Mayor
______
Show Low/Pinetop-Woodland Irrigation Company, Inc.
September 16, 2024
Re: S. 4633--Northeastern Arizona Water Rights Settlement
Act
Dear Senator Kelly,
On behalf of the Show Low/Pinetop-Woodland Irrigation Company, I
want to thank you for sponsoring the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water
Rights Settlement Act.
In the 1880s, settlers homesteaded a remote, forested area in
northeastern Arizona. Since then, the area has attracted an increasing
number of full and part-time residents. The old homestead areas are now
known as the town of Pinetop-Lakeside and the city of Show Low.
The original settlers worked cooperatively to get water to their
orchards, pastures and farms and, to do so, created a series of
irrigation companies, such as the Show Low Irrigation Company, the
Woodland Irrigation Company, and the Pinetop Irrigation Company. Over
the years, these irrigation companies changed names. They also changed
their corporate structures, eventually merging into one entity: the
Show Low/Pinetop-Woodland Irrigation Company, a non-profit irrigation
water company.
Woodland Lake, Rainbow Lake, Lower Rainbow Lake, Scotts Reservoir,
and Show Low Lake are all manmade reservoirs that arc part of the
irrigation storage and delivery system operated by the Irrigation
Company. The reservoirs store water from Show Low Creek and its
tributaries. The stored water is released to irrigate approximately
1,000 acres of land owned by people in the Pinetop-Lakeside and Show
Low areas. The system infrastructure not only transports irrigation
water but is also critical to the region's flood control.
Although the reservoirs serve primarily as irrigation storage
facilities, they are also integral to tourism in Pinetop-Lakeside and
Show Low, where hiking, camping, picnicking, boating, and other
activities are popular with visitors. Agreements with the forest
service, the state of Arizona, and local municipalities such as
Pinetop-Lakeside allow public access and recreation at the reservoirs.
Wildfire is a pervasive summer threat in the Pinetop-Lakeside and
Show Low areas. The reservoirs are important fire suppression assets.
The storage and irrigation facilities operated by the Irrigation
Company are valuable to the company's water users. They are also vital
to the tourism and natural beauty characteristic of Pinetop-Lakeside
and Show Low.
The Irrigation Company has registered numerous water rights claims
in its name on behalf of its shareholders. For almost 50 years, the
Irrigation Company has defended these rights in a water trial called
``the Little Colorado River adjudication.'' The bulk of this decades-
long adjudication proceeding revolves around the adverse claims of the
Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe.
Litigation is expensive, and it is difficult for the Irrigation Company
to continue with never-ending litigation. The Irrigation Company
believes settlement, rather than protracted litigation, is the best way
to resolve conflicting water claims.
The proposed Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement
Act follows years of negotiations and discussions among the principal
non-Indian stakeholders in Northeastern Arizona and the Tribes. The
Irrigation Company has been an active participant in negotiations since
1994. The resulting Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement
Act that we ask you to support will finally resolve the water rights
claims of the Tribes, which have been a source of contention and
litigation in the Little Colorado River watershed for too long.
Approval of the settlement will mark the end of this long-standing
issue, providing water certainty both to the Tribes and to the
communities near Tribal lands. It will save non-profits like us the
cost oflitigation, which is difficult to sustain. Ending the litigation
and providing water security will pave the way for northeastern
Arizona's more sustainable and prosperous future, a future that
benefits both the Tribes and the communities.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties to use this legislation to obtain funding for non-
tribal purposes. There should be no additions to the legislation.
The settlement agreement addresses important issues. For example,
the Navajo, Hopi, and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribes agree to not
object to certain off-reservation uses of water, such as groundwater
pumping, existing surface water diversions, and water storage
reservoirs. In return, passage of the Act will provide the Tribes with
water from various sources, including Colorado River water, thereby
reducing competition among the Tribes and off-reservation communities
for scarce water resources. These commitments are a significant step
towards ensuring the region's fair and sustainable distribution of
water resources.
The Show Low/Pinetop-Woodland Irrigation Company urges you to
continue supporting the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement. Your continued support is crucial in this historic Act that
is critical for building and maintaining solid communities on and off
Tribal lands.
Sincerely,
C. Trent Adams Secretary
______
Silver Creek Irrigation District
September 16, 2024
Re: S. 4633--Northeastern Arizona Water Rights Settlement
Act
Dear Senator Kelly,
On behalf of the Silver Creek Irrigation District, I want to thank
you for sponsoring the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Act.
The Silver Creek Irrigation District traces its roots back to 1873
when James Stinson settled the area now called Snowflake and who, two
years later, claimed all of the waters of Silver Creek and its
tributaries for agriculture and livestock. After a few years, the
Snowflake & Taylor Agriculture Company--now known as the Silver Creek
Irrigation District--was formed in 1896.
Today, the District is a significant force in Navajo County, not
only serving farms and ranches but also playing a crucial role in
preventing potential natural disasters. The District operates six major
storage facilities, including White Mountain Lake, Mexican Lake, Little
Mormon Lake, Ortega Lake, and Millet Swale. Some of these are operated
in tandem with the Silver Creek Flood Control District to mitigate the
risk of spring and monsoon flooding, when the Silver Creek and its
tributaries fill with mountain runoff and race into the Silver Creek
drainage area. These reservoirs are vital in regulating and controlling
these waters, thereby ensuring the safety of the region. The main
function of the reservoirs, however, is to store water that the
District delivers to 2,500 acres of irrigated land in and around
Shumway, Snowflake and Taylor.
Public recreation, wildlife, and fire suppression needs are also
served by the District's reservoirs. A residential community has formed
around White Mountain Lake, where property owners have access to the
water.
Farmers, ranchers, and the local communities of Snowflake, Taylor,
Shumway, and White Mountain Lake depend on the District's irrigation
water and flood safety management. These communities and enterprises
might not see the behind-the-scenes work that the District has done
over the past 50 years to protect its water rights in a water trial
called ``the Little Colorado River adjudication.''
The bulk of this decades-long adjudication proceeding revolves
around the adverse claims of the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the
San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe. Litigation is expensive, and it is
challenging for the District to continue to pay for neverending
litigation. The Irrigation Company believes settlement, rather than
protracted litigation, is the best way to resolve conflicting water
claims.
Since 1994, the District has participated in settlement discussions
with the Tribes. The proposed Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Act follows these many years of negotiations. The settlement
will finally resolve the Tribes' water rights claims, marking the end
of the litigation and providing water certainty both to the Tribes and
to the communities near Tribal lands.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties to use this legislation to obtain funding for non-
tribal purposes. There should be no additions to the legislation.
The settlement embraces agreements that are critical to the Silver
Creek Irrigation District. For instance, the Navajo, Hopi, and San Juan
Southern Paiute Tribes agree that they will not object to certain off-
reservation uses of water, such as groundwater pumping, existing
surface water diversions, and water storage reservoirs. In return,
passage of the Act will provide the Tribes with water from various
other sources, including Colorado River water, thereby reducing
competition among the Tribes and offreservation communities for scarce
water resources.
The Silver Creek Irrigation District urges you to continue
supporting the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act.
This historic Act will benefit Northeastern Arizona and the Tribes, and
its passage is vital for building strong communities on and off Tribal
lands.
Sincerely,
Vance Muder, President
______
Town of Taylor, Arizona
September 16, 2024
Re: S. 4633--Northeastern Arizona Water Rights Settlement
Act
Dear Senator Kelly:
As mayor of one of Arizona's fastest-growing rural communities, I
want to express our gratitude on behalf of our council and community
members for sponsoring the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Act.
With its rich history and family-oriented culture, Taylor and its
neighboring town, Snowflake, have seen explosive growth over the past
few years. With its potential to deliver significant change, the Act
can ignite a new era of prosperity for communities like ours. It
provides much-needed assurance about our water rights, enabling us to
plan confidently for future growth.
Taylor is on the bank of Silver Creek, a 45-mile stream that is a
tributary to the Little Colorado River. Since its establishment in
1878, our community and in particular, our farms and ranches, have
relied on Silver Creek.
Taylor has been a party to litigation known as ``the Little
Colorado River adjudication'' for almost 50 years. The adjudication
concerns the adverse claims of the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and
the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe. The state superior court manages
the adjudication proceedings by watershed. The Silver Creek watershed
was chosen as the first to go to trial in the adjudication proceedings,
creating an enormous and unsustainable expense for Taylor and its
neighboring water users. Litigation in the Silver Creek watershed was
temporarily stayed in 1994 when settlement negotiations with the Navajo
and Hopi began. The court has reopened litigation, and if the Act is
not supported, it will extend the financial burden of individuals,
towns, cities, and water providers in the region for years to come.
The proposed Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement
Act follows years of negotiations and discussions among the principal
non-Indian stakeholders in Northeastern Arizona and the Tribes. It will
finally resolve the water rights claims of the Tribes, which have been
a source of contention and litigation for too long. Approval of the
settlement will mark the end of this long-standing issue, providing
water certainty both to the Tribes and to the communities near Tribal
lands. It will also save small communities like Taylor the unbearable
cost oflitigation expenses. Ending the litigation and providing water
security will pave the way for a more sustainable and prosperous future
for northeastern Arizona.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties such as the City of Flagstaff to use this
legislation to obtain funding for non-tribal purposes. There should be
no additions to the legislation.
The settlement agreement includes, among other things, the Navajo,
Hopi, and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribes' commitments not to object to
certain off-reservation uses of water, such as groundwater pumping,
existing surface water diversions, and water storage reservoirs. In
return, passage of the Act will provide the Tribes with water from
various sources, including Colorado River water, thereby reducing
competition among the Tribes and off-reservation communities for scarce
water resources. These commitments are a significant step towards
ensuring the region's fair and sustainable distribution of water
resources.
The Town of Taylor urges you to continue supporting the
Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act.
Sincerely,
Hon. Shawn Palmer, Mayor
______
City of Winslow, Arizona
September 16, 2024
Re: H.R. 8940--The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Act
Dear Senator Kelly:
On behalf of the City of Winslow, its council and residents, I want
to express our gratitude for sponsoring the Northeastern Arizona Indian
Water Rights Settlement Act.
The City of Winslow incorporated in 1900, but its origins trace
back to 1880 when it served as a key railroad stop along the Atlantic
and Pacific Railroad line. The City then became a popular stop along
Route 66, earning Winslow its mention in the Eagles' song ``Take it
Easy.'' Beyond its pop culture appeal, Winslow boasts beautiful natural
landscapes, including the nearby Meteor Crater, the best-preserved
impact site on Earth. Now accessible by Interstate 40, Winslow's
economy is transitioning from its historical reliance on Route 66
tourism and railroad transportation to warehousing, distribution
centers and manufacturing facilities. The Winslow Industrial and
Commerce Park is an example of public-private business innovation, with
the potential to create a significant number of jobs and attract
substantial investment.
The future of Winslow's economy is promising, but the City needs a
legally reliable water supply.
For almost 50 years, Winslow and others in northeastern Arizona
have defended their water rights in what is known as ``the Little
Colorado River adjudication,'' a court case involving the adverse
claims of the Navajo, Hopi and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribes. Winslow
has also actively participated in efforts to reach a settlement in the
adjudication proceedings.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act is the
result of years of negotiations and settlement discussions among the
principal stakeholders in northeastern Arizona and the Tribes. It will
finally resolve the water rights claims of the Tribes, which have been
a source of contention and litigation. Approval of the settlement will
mark the end of this long-standing issue, providing water certainty
both to the Tribes and to the communities near tribal lands, paving the
way for a more sustainable and prosperous future for northeastern
Arizona.
The benefits of the settlement extend beyond Winslow. Nearby
communities, including those near the Navajo, Hopi, and San Juan
Southern Paiute reservations, will also experience positive changes.
These off-reservation communities, which have long-standing
relationships with the Tribes, have been adversely affected by the
water rights litigation, straining resources and hindering potential
development for many years. The settlement will resolve these issues.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties such as the City of Flagstaff to use this
legislation to obtain funding for non-tribal purposes. There should be
no additions to the legislation.
The settlement agreement includes, among other things, the Tribes'
commitments not to object to certain off-reservation uses of water,
such as groundwater pumping, existing surface water diversions, and
enjoyment of reservoirs such as the popular Clear Creek Reservoir near
Winslow. In return, passage of the Act will provide the Tribes with
water from various sources, including Colorado River water, thereby
reducing competition among the Tribes and offreservation communities
for scarce water resources in the area.
The City of Winslow urges you to continue supporting the
Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act. By lending
your support to the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement
Act, you are contributing to the end of nearly 50 years of litigation
and helping Arizona achieve the most significant water rights
settlement in the history of the United States. This historic act will
benefit northeastern Arizona, and its passage is vital for building
strong communities on and off tribal lands.
Sincerely,
Hon. Roberta ``Birdie'' Cano, Mayor
______
FLYING M RANCH LLLP
September 17, 2024
Re: S. 4633--Northeastern Arizona Water Rights Settlement
Act
Dear Senator Kelly,
As partners in the Flying M Ranch, we are writing to thank you for
sponsoring the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act.
This Act is not just a legal matter but a crucial lifeline for our
operations and the future of our community, especially in the face of
pressing water rights issues.
The Flying M Ranch, a family legacy since 1914, stands as a
testament to sustainable ranching in northeastern Arizona. Encompassing
93,000 acres in northern Arizona's Coconino County, this working ranch
is home to 900 cattle and is deeply committed to environmental
stewardship. The Metzger family, owners of the Flying M Ranch, champion
holistic range management practices, utilizing electric fences to
promote pasture regeneration and to maintain the delicate balance of
the ecosystem.
Without water, the Ranch cannot operate and the surrounding
national and state public lands will suffer. Flying M Ranch has two
lakes and almost 100 earthen ponds that are used by cattle and
wildlife. The lakes include Morton Reservoir and Kinnikinick Lake, both
not only important to the Ranch, but public recreation facilities and
forest management resources for the State of Arizona and the Coconino
National Forest.
The Flying M Ranch is more than just a cattle operation; it's a
vital partner in the Diablo Trust. This innovative collaboration,
founded over 30 years ago, unites ranchers, conservationists, and
agencies in a shared mission to preserve the region's unique landscape.
Through scientific research, monitoring, and collaborative land
management, the Diablo Trust works tirelessly to ensure the health of
grasslands, restore wildlife populations, and educate the public about
the importance of working lands in the Southwest. The Flying M Ranch,
with its rich history and commitment to sustainability, exemplifies the
positive impact that ranching can have on both the environment and the
community.
An environmental and practical challenge that Flying M Ranch has
struggled with over the past few years is relentless drought. On top of
that, it has faced expensive and seemingly unending water litigation
for almost 50 years. Without a settlement of tribal claims, that
litigation will likely continue for many more years.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act will
finally end the decades of litigation. This historic Act will approve
an agreement among the principal stakeholders in northeastern Arizona,
finally resolving the water right claims of the Navajo Nation, the Hopi
Tribe, and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe. Approval of the
settlement will not only provide water certainty both to the Tribes and
to the water users near tribal lands, including Flying M Ranch, but
will also secure a prosperous future for our shared community.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties such as the City of Flagstaff to use this
legislation to obtain funding for non-tribal purposes. There should be
no additions to the legislation.
In addition to resolving the litigation, the settlement agreement
includes commitments by the Tribes to not object to certain off-
reservation uses of surface water and groundwater. This means that
Flying M Ranch's lakes and stockponds necessary for ranch and wildlife
management will not be challenged by the Tribes. As drought continues,
ranches such as the Flying M may need to rely more on groundwater--and
the Tribes will waive objections to our groundwater pumping.
The agreements in the Act are not just about the present, but about
securing a future for the farming and ranching industry in northeastern
Arizona, a future that is crucial to our collective prosperity and the
sustainability of our region.
Your continued support is needed to end the ongoing litigation and
water insecurity issues in northeastern Arizona. We thank you for
considering our comments and welcome you to visit our ranch sometime.
Sincerely,
Diana M. Kessler; Kit Metzger
______
FOREST LAKES DOMESTIC WATER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
September 17, 2024
Re: S. 4633--Northeastern Arizona Water Rights Settlement
Act
Dear Senator Kelly:
As Treasure of the Forest Lakes Domestic Water Improvement District
Board, I want to express our gratitude for sponsoring the Northeastern
Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act.
The District serves Forest Lakes, a small unincorporated community
in Coconino County. Forest Lakes is primarily a seasonal community
where retirees and tourists visit to enjoy the cooler summer weather in
the Mogollon Rim and the nearby recreational lakes, streams, and hiking
trails. The District provides water to the community with a groundwater
well system.
Despite our small size and the seasonal nature of our customers'
needs, the District is facing significant challenges in protecting our
water rights. A portion of our service area falls within the Little
Colorado River watershed which lies within Arizona's 2nd Congressional
District. The magnitude of impending water rights issues cannot be
overstated.
The District ( and its predecessor organizations) has been
embroiled in a legal battle known as ``the Little Colorado River
adjudication'' for nearly half a century. The bulk of this decades-long
adjudication proceeding revolves around the adverse claims of the
Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe.
The prolonged nature of this litigation underscores the pressing need
for resolution.
The proposed Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement
Act follows years of negotiations and discussions among the principal
non-Indian stakeholders in Northeastern Arizona and the Tribes. It will
finally resolve the water rights claims of the Tribes, which have been
a source of contention and litigation in the Little Colorado River
watershed for too long. Approval of the settlement will mark the end of
this long-standing issue, providing water certainty both to the Tribes
and to the communities near Tribal lands. It will also save small water
providers like us the unsustainable cost of litigation. Ending the
litigation and providing water security will pave the way for a more
sustainable and prosperous future for northeastern Arizona.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties such as the City of Flagstaff to use this
legislation to obtain funding for non-tribal purposes. There should be
no additions to the legislation.
The settlement agreement includes, among other things, the Navajo,
Hopi, and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribes' commitments not to object to
certain off-reservation uses of water, such as groundwater pumping,
existing surface water diversions, and water storage reservoirs. In
return, passage of the Act will provide the Tribes with water from
various sources, including Colorado River water, thereby reducing
competition among the Tribes and off-reservation communities for scarce
water resources. These commitments are a major step towards ensuring
the region's fair and sustainable distribution of water resources.
The Forest Lakes Domestic Water Improvement District urges you to
continue supporting the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Act. This historic Act, which will benefit Northeastern
Arizona and the Tribes, is crucial for building strong communities on
and off Tribal lands. By supporting this Act, you are not only
contributing to the well-being and prosperity of our community and the
Tribes but also positively impacting our shared future. Your support
will bring about tangible benefits for all involved.
Please visit Forest Lakes sometime and we'll show you our water
system.
Sincerely,
Joe Taylor, Treasure of the Board of Directors
______
GROVER'S HILL IRRIGATION DISTRICT
September 17, 2024
Re: S. 4633--Northeastern Arizona Water Rights Settlement Act
Dear Senator Kelly,
As Secretary/Treasurer of the Grover's Hill Irrigation District's
Board of Directors, I want to thank you for sponsoring the Northeastern
Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act.
Once known as the Lyman Water Company, Grover's Hill Irrigation
District delivers irrigation water to landowners in and around St.
Johns via more than 16 miles of ditches and pipelines from Lyman Lake,
a manmade irrigation storage reservoir built on the Little Colorado
River in 1911. With its shoreline managed by Arizona State Parks, Lyman
Lake is a critical water source for farmers and homeowners in Apache
County and a popular recreational destination for tourists visiting the
area.
Apache County faces challenges unique to other areas of the state.
Surface water is fully appropriated, meaning groundwater is the only
``new'' water source. Economically, the county is among the nation's
most impoverished counties and ranked third nationally for food
insecurity--primarily because so much of its land is public or tribal.
Faced with these obstacles, irrigation water providers such as Grover's
Hill Irrigation District place great value on the surface water and
groundwater to which they are legally entitled. Its water deliveries
are a lifeline to District member farmers, businesses, and homeowners
who are the county's economic backbone.
The District has been a party to water adjudication proceedings
since the 1970s. Adverse tribal water claims are the bulk of the
litigation. An advocate for sett lements instead of protracted,
expensive litigation, the District helped negotiate the Zuni Indian
Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act of 2003, PL 108-34, 117 Stat. 782
(June 23, 2003), to which it is a party. In 2010, the White Mountain
Apache Tribe's claims were settled. The remaining Indian water claims
in the adjudication are those of the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and
the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe. The District has been in settlement
negotiations with them since 1994.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act will
approve a historic settlement among the principal stakeholders in
Northeastern Arizona. This Act, after thirty years of settlement
efforts, will finally resolve the remaining Indian water rights claims
and end decades of litigation. Your support for this Act is crucial in
bringing about this significant change.
Water and money are scarce here in Apache County, but the passage
of the Act can bring much-needed relief. As a public body serving local
taxpayers and property owners, the Grover's Hill Irrigation District is
confident that the Act is in the best interest of its members and
Northeastern Arizona as a whole. By providing water certainty to tribal
and non-tribal water users, the Act will pave the way for significant
economic development throughout the region. It will also alleviate the
strain on resources caused by litigation of tribal water rights, a
burden that has hindered communities in the area for too long. The Act
will also provide the Tribes with water from various sources, including
Colorado River water, thereby reducing competition among the Tribes and
off-reservation communities for scarce water resources in the area.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties such as the City of Flagstaff to use this
legislation to obtain funding for non-tribal purposes. There should be
no additions to the legislation.
On behalf of the Grover's Hill Irrigation District, I strongly urge
you to continue to support the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Act. This historic Act greatly benefits Northeastern
Arizona, and its passage is vital for building strong communities on
and off tribal lands.
Sincerely,
Treharne Platt, Secretary/Treasurer
______
J Albert Brown Ranches, Inc.
September 17, 2024
Re: S. 4633--Northeastern Arizona Water Rights Settlement
Act
Dear Senator Kelly:
As president and manager of J. Albert Brown Ranches, Inc., I thank
you for sponsoring the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Act.
There's a saying in Arizona's ranching community: You need more
lawyers than ranch hands to stay in business. With at least half of our
family licensed to practice law, there's a stark reality to that quip.
For most of their careers, our family's lawyers have grappled with the
ongoing water litigation that J. Albert Brown Ranches and its neighbors
face.
The litigation involves the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the
San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, all of which have claims to water
rights that are adverse to non-Indian water users in the Little
Colorado River watershed. Since 1994, our Ranch and attorneys have been
in the negotiations and discussions leading up to a potential
settlement of the Tribal claims. We are hopeful that if passed, the Act
will not only resolve decades of litigation but also provide water
security for all of us--whether Indian or non-Indian--in northeastern
Arizona.
For some background, J. Albert Brown Ranch is a working cattle
ranch in Apache County. Started over 100 years ago by Joseph Albert
Brown and his wife, Elda Whiting Brown, the family-owned and operated
Ranch is in its 5th generation of the Brown family. My grandfather,
Jack A. Brown, served in the Arizona State Legislature for 36 years and
was known as the ``cowboy legislator.''
The Ranch spans about 85,000 acres of land, which includes federal
and state leases and deeded acreage. Water supply throughout the range
comes from various sources, including springs, wells, and stockponds.
The water supply is critical for ranch operations, wildlife, wildfire
suppression and rangeland health. Ongoing drought has been a
significant challenge over the past several years, making access to the
Ranch's water sources more critical than ever. Like others in the
region, the Ranch may need to rely more on groundwater than springs and
natural drainage if the drought continues.
Drought is not the only challenge. For several decades, J. Albert
Brown Ranches has faced enormously expensive and seemingly unending
water litigation. As I mentioned, this litigation stems from the
complex and long-standing water rights disputes with the Tribes.
Without a settlement of these Tribal claims, the litigation will likely
continue for years, posing a significant threat to the region's water
security and economic stability.
The approval of the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Act is crucial. It will not only provide water certainty to
the Tribes and water users near tribal lands but also ensure the
sustainability of local agriculture, businesses, and communities. The
settlement agreement includes several essential commitments by the
Tribes, which have agreed to not object to certain off-reservation uses
of surface water and groundwater. There will be no Tribal objections to
existing surface water diversions and off-reservation storage and
reservoir systems. The Tribes will waive objections to our groundwater
pumping.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties to use this legislation to obtain frinding for non-
tribal purposes. There should be no additions to the legislation.
The agreements in the Act are not just about the present but about
securing a future for northeastern Arizona. They will end ceaseless
litigation and worries about water rights, helping stakeholders plan
for their futures. The settlement is a win-win situation, providing
water certainty to the Tribes and water users near Tribal lands, and
ensuring the sustainability of local agriculture, businesses, and
communities. This future is within our reach with your support.
J. Albert Brown Ranches is an example of how Arizona's families
contribute to the local economy, provide public service, and maintain
values important to our communities. We deeply value your support and
hope you will continue to join our family in advocating for this
urgently needed settlement. We are located in the heart of Apache
County. Please come visit sometime.
Sincerely,
Jackson Brown, President/Manager
______
LAKESIDE IRRIGATION COMPANY, INC.
September 17, 2024
Re: S. 4633--Northeastern Arizona Water Rights Settlement
Act
Dear Senator Kelly:
On behalf of the Lakeside Irrigation Company, I want to thank you
for sponsoring the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement
Act.
The Lakeside Irrigation Company is a small water company that has
been serving farms and homes in the Lakeside area since 1898 and
probably earlier. Started by pioneers who settled the region, the
company pipes water from Adair Springs for two miles for delivery to
about fifty shareholder property owners in Lakeside.
Despite being a small water company, we play a crucial role in the
lives of our shareholders, who rely on us to provide water for their
farms, orchards, and gardens. Our journey has not been without
challenges, including reduced output from the springs due to ongoing
drought, the need to convert open ditches to pipelines to conserve
water, and the ongoing battle to defend our right to use the water that
we have relied on for over 125 years.
For nearly half a century, Lakeside Irrigation Company has had to
contend with a water trial known as ``the Little Colorado River
adjudication.'' The bulk of this decades-long adjudication proceeding
revolves around the adverse claims of the Navajo Nation, the Hopi
Tribe, and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe. Litigation is expensive,
and it is difficult for the Lakeside Irrigation Company to continue
with never-ending litigation. Like other stakeholders in the watershed,
the Lakeside Irrigation Company has always believed that settlement,
rather than protracted litigation, is the best way to resolve
conflicting water claims.
The proposed Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement
Act follows years of negotiations and discussions among the principal
non-Indian stakeholders in Northeastern Arizona and the Tribes,
including the active participation of the Lakeside Irrigation Company.
It will finally resolve the water rights claims of the Tribes, which
have been a source of contention and litigation in the Little Colorado
River watershed for too long. Approval of the settlement will mark the
end of this long-standing issue, providing water certainty both to the
Tribes and to the communities near Tribal lands. It will also save
small water providers like us the cost of litigation, which is
difficult to sustain. Ending the litigation and providing water
security will pave the way for a more sustainable and prosperous future
for northeastern Arizona.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties such as the City of Flagstaff to use this
legislation to obtain funding for non-tribal purposes. There should be
no additions to the legislation.
The settlement agreement includes, among other things, the Navajo,
Hopi, and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribes' commitments not to object to
certain off-reservation uses of water, such as groundwater pumping,
existing surface water diversions, including capturing spring water,
and water storage reservoirs. In return, passage of the Act will
provide the Tribes with water from various sources, including Colorado
River water, thereby reducing competition among the Tribes and off-
reservation communities for scarce water resources. These commitments
are a significant step towards ensuring the region's fair and
sustainable distribution of water resources.
The Lakeside Irrigation Company urges you to continue supporting
the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act. This
historic Act, which will benefit Northeastern Arizona and the Tribes,
is crucial for building strong communities on and off Tribal lands. By
supporting this Act, you are not only contributing to the well-being
and prosperity of our community and the Tribes but also positively
impacting our shared future. Your support will bring about tangible
benefits such as increased water security, reduced litigation costs,
and improved relations among all stakeholders. These are just a few
examples of the many positive outcomes this Act will bring.
Please visit us sometime.
Sincerely,
Jerome Huerta, Secretary
______
Town of Snowflake, Arizona
September 17, 2024
Dear Senator Kelly:
On behalf of the citizens of the Town of Snowflake, I want to thank
you for sponsoring the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Act.
Snowflake is a bridge between the past and the future. Visit us,
and you'll see a peaceful pastoral community dotted with historic homes
open for tours. Founded in 1878 by Mormon pioneers Erastus Snow and
William Jordan Flake, the town is in Navajo County, near Silver Creek.
While Snowflake honors its pioneer heritage with events like Pioneer
Days, it is also a town embracing the future. It has become a hub for
renewable energy projects, including wind farms and a biomass power
plant. A 40-acre greenhouse facility, Copperstate Farms, adds to the
town's economic diversity. With infrastructure like the Apache Railway,
which connects to the BNSF mainline, and the abundant Coconino Aquifer,
Snowflake expects continued growth and development. The town's
commitment to progress while preserving its rich history makes it a
truly unique and attractive place to live and visit.
Like the Town of Taylor that borders it, Snowflake has for the past
few decades been a party to litigation known as ``the Little Colorado
River adjudication.'' The adjudication concerns the adverse claims of
the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan Southern Paiute
Tribe. The Silver Creek watershed, of which Snowflake is a part, was
chosen as the first to go to trial in the Little Colorado River
adjudication proceedings, creating an enormous expense for Snowflake
and its neighboring water users. Litigation in the Silver Creek
watershed was temporarily stayed in 1994 when settlement negotiations
with the Navajo and Hopi began. The court has reopened litigation, and
if the Act is not supported, it will extend the financial burden of
individuals, towns, cities, and water providers in the region for years
to come.
The proposed Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement
Act, the result of years of negotiations and discussions, will finally
resolve the water rights claims of the Tribes. These claims, a source
of court proceedings for too long, will mark the end of the litigation
with the Tribes, providing water certainty both to the Tribes and to
the communities near Tribal lands. It will also save small communities
like Snowflake from the relentless, financially choking cost of
litigation expenses. Together, water security and freedom from the
adjudication brighten the future of northeastern Arizona, bringing a
sense of relief and hope to our community.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties such as the City of Flagstaff to use this
legislation to obtain funding for non-tribal purposes. There should be
no additions to the legislation.
In the settlement, the Navajo, Hopi, and San Juan Southern Paiute
Tribes agree that they will not object to ce1tain off-reservation uses
of water, such as groundwater pumping, existing surface water
diversions, and water storage reservoirs. In return, passage of the Act
will provide the Tribes with water from various sources, including
Colorado River water, thereby reducing competition among the Tribes and
off-reservation communities for scarce water resources. These
commitments are not just a step, they are a significant stride towards
ensuring the region's fair and sustainable di stribution of water
resources, underlining the importance of your support in this crucial
issue.
The Town of Snowflake urges you to continue to support the
Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act. This historic
Act, which will benefit both Northeastern Arizona and the Tribes, is a
testament to our shared commitment to building strong communities on
and off Tribal lands.
Sincerely,
Hon. Byron Lewis, Mayor
______
Town of Springerville, Arizona
September 17, 2024
Re: S. 4633--Northeastern Arizona Water Rights Settlement
Act
Dear Senator Kelly:
As mayor of the Town of Springerville, I thank you on behalf of
myself and the Town Council for sponsoring the much-needed Northeastern
Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act. This critical legislation
will solve problems that have faced communities like Springerville for
decades.
Dubbed ``The Gateway to the White Mountains,''.Springerville is a
hidden gem in northeastern Arizona. Founded in 1879 and incorporated in
1948, this town of 2,000 residents offers a unique blend of small-town
charm and diverse economic drivers. Visitors and businesses alike are
drawn to its stunning four-season climate, ranging from crisp 20-degree
winters ideal for skiing at nearby Sunrise Park Resort to sunny 90-
degree summers perfect for exploring the Apaehe-Sitgreaves National
Forest. Springerville boasts excellent infrastructure, including a
full-service hospital, K-12 schools, a community college, and a
municipal airport, making it an attractive location for families,
entrepreneurs, and tourists.
Springerville has been grappling with a costly and protracted legal
battle: a nearly 50-year-old lawsuit over competing water rights elaims
involving the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan Southern
Paiute Tribe. This ongoing litigation has drained the town's resources
and cast a shadow over its ability to secure a sustainable water
future. While past attempts at resolution have faltered, the proposed
Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act offers hope.
The proposed Act, a culmination of years of negotiations, holds the
promise of finally resolving the Tribes' water rights claims. Its
enactment will not only bring an end to the divisive and costly
litigation but also provide a much-needed sense of water security for
the Tribes and neighboring communities like Springerville. This, in
turn, will usher in a new era of stability and prosperity.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties such as the City of Flagstaff to use this
legislation to obtain funding for non-tribal purposes. There should be
no additions to the legislation.
Under the settlement terms, the Navajo, Hopi, and San Juan Southern
Paiute Tribes agree to refrain from objecting to specific off-
reservation water uses, including groundwater pumping, existing surface
water diversions, and water storage reservoirs. In exchange, the
passage of the Act will provide the Tribes with water from various
sources, notably Colorado River water. This provision is crucial to
satisfying the Tribes' water needs and alleviating competition for
limited resources among the Tribes and nearby nonIndian communities.
The Town of Springerville urges your continued support for the
Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act. Thank you for
your assistance.
Sincerely,
Hon. Shelly Reidhead, Mayor
______
CITY OF ST. JOHNS, ARIZONA
September 17, 2024
Re: S. 4633--Northeastern Arizona Water Rights Settlement
Act
Dear Senator Kelly:
On behalf of the City of St. Johns, I want to thank you for
sponsoring the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act.
St. Johns is the Apache County seat, but perhaps more important to
its residents, it is a close-knit community of friendly neighbors, once
known as El Vadito (Little River Crossing) by Spanish explorers, has a
rich history that we are proud of. The City was founded as a farming
community on the banks of the Little Colorado River, serving as a vital
stop on the route from Phoenix to Albuquerque. Today, St. Johns
continues to honor its agricultural heritage while embracing modernity
with two major power plants and other businesses.
St. Johns is a gateway to Arizona's spectacular natural wonders.
Within an hour's drive, visitors can explore Native American
reservations, ancient archaeological sites, the Petrified Forest
National Park, and the unique Painted Desert. Nearby Lyman Lake State
Park offers plenty of boating, fishing, and camping opportunities for
outdoor enthusiasts.
Little Colorado River water is essential to St. Johns. River water
is impounded at Lyman Dam and then delivered by the St. Johns
Irrigation Company and the Grover's Hill Irrigation District to farms
and homes in the City limits. These two entities hold water rights
under the Norviel Decree issued by the Apache County Superior Court in
1918. Additionally, St. Johns relies on groundwater for its municipal
potable water supply.
With virtually every drop of upper Little Colorado River surface
water appropriated, water is a vital resource for St. Johns and its
people. Like other municipalities in Northeastern Arizona, the City has
shouldered an enormous financial burden in water rights litigation that
has spanned almost 50 years. The bulk of the litigation concerns the
adverse claims of the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan
Southern Paiute Tribe.
The proposed Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement
Act follows years of negotiations and discussions among the principal
non-Indian stakeholders in Northeastern Arizona and the Tribes. It will
finally resolve the Tribes' water rights claims, which have been a
source of contention and litigation for decades. Approval of the
settlement will mark the end of this long-standing issue, providing
water certainty both to the Tribes and to the communities near Tribal
lands, paving the way for a more sustainable and prosperous future for
northeastern Arizona.
The settlement's benefits extend beyond the St. Johns city limits.
Nearby communities, including those near the Navajo, Hopi, and San Juan
Southern Paiute reservations, will also experience positive changes.
These off-reservation communities, which have long-standing
relationships with the Tribes, have been adversely affected by the
water rights litigation, straining resources and hindering potential
development for many years. By resolving these issues, the settlement
will pave the way for these communities to flourish.
The Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Agreement,
when enacted, will provide $5 billion for water projects (mostly
drinking water) for the Tribes. We recognize that $5 billion is a lot
of money but we believe that it is important to provide drinking water
to Tribal residents. In contrast, we strongly oppose any efforts by
non-Indian parties such as the City of Flagstaff to use this
legislation to obtain funding for non-tribal purposes. There should be
no additions to the legislation.
The settlement agreement includes the Tribes' commitments not to
object to certain off-reservation water uses, such as groundwater
pumping, existing surface water diversions, and water storage
reservoirs. In return, passage of the Act will provide the Tribes with
water from various sources, including Colorado River water, thereby
reducing competition among the Tribes and off-reservation communities
for scarce water resources in the area.
The City of St. Johns thanks you for your support to the
Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act. This historic
Act will benefit Northeastern Arizona, and its passage is vital for
building strong communities on and off Tribal lands.
Please stop by. We're a friendly place, and we will enjoy visiting
you.
Sincerely,
Hon. Spence Udall, Mayor
______
STATE OF ARIZONA
September 20, 2024
Re: Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act
of 2024 (S. 4633)
Dear Chairman Schatz and Vice Chairwoman Murkowski:
I am pleased to express my strong support for S. 4633, the
Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024. This
important legislation approves and authorizes a comprehensive
settlement of the water rights claims of the Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe
and San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe in Arizona. Settling the outstanding
tribal water rights claims in Arizona is a priority for the State, and
enactment of this legislation is a critical step in achieving that
goal.
The three Tribes have some of the largest outstanding tribal water
rights claims in Arizona, including claims to the Colorado River, in-
state surface water and groundwater. The settlement of these claims
will end decades of conflict and litigation, provide certainty to the
Tribes and other water users regarding their water rights, and ensure
reliable, secure and safe water supplies for the three Tribes.
Many homes on the three Reservations lack access to clean running
water, a basic human necessity. The settlement will help alleviate this
situation by providing the Tribes with rights to reliable and
sustainable water supplies, and by providing funding for the
construction and operation of much needed infrastructure projects to
treat and deliver the water to communities on the three Reservations.
Enactment of the legislation by Congress will therefore contribute to
the process of ensuring that all Arizonans have access to clean running
water in their homes and protect against future public health crises.
The historic and generational impact of this settlement cannot be
overstated, for its significance in securing a sustainable water
supply, supporting the establishment of tribal homelands, and affirming
the sovereignty of these tribal nations.
This settlement is the result of the tireless efforts of the three
Tribes, the State of Arizona, municipalities and numerous water users
and communities in the state. I would like to thank all the parties for
their hard work on the settlement, Senator Kelly and Senator Sinema for
their sponsorship, and the Senate Committee for hearing this
legislation which is of such great importance to the State of Arizona.
Sincerely,
Hon. Katie Hobbs, Governor
______
The Navajo Nation
May 24, 2024
RE: CMY-26-24 An Action Relating to Resources and
Development, Budget and Finance, and Naabik'iyati'
Committees and the Navajo Nation Council; Approving the
Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement
Agreement; Approving a Limited Waiver of Sovereign Immunity
to Allow the Navajo Nation to be Joined as a Party in
Certain Actions; Consenting and Conditionally Approving
Associated Rights-of-Way and Waiving Associated Taxes
Requires Under Navajo Law; Requesting Waivers of Sections
Contained in 25 C.F.R. Part 169; and Approving a Side
Agreement Concerning C-Aquifer Pumping
Dear Honorable Delegates of the 25th Navajo Nation Council,
This is a historic resolution. It approves the water rights
settlement agreement for the all of the Navajo Nation's water rights
within Arizona and is a comprehensive settlement that includes the Hopi
Tribe and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe.
The Navajo Nation stands in unanimity on securing water rights for
the Navajo Nation. The Navajo Nation Council voted unanimously to
approve this settlement as part of consent agenda that included the Rio
San Jose Stream System water rights settlement as well. I am proud to
sign this resolution into law within twenty-four hours of its passage.
The Hopi Tribal Council passed its approving resolution on May 20,
2024, with a vote of 15 in favor and O opposed and the San Juan
Southern Paiute Tribe approved the settlement on May 24, 2024, with a
vote of 6 in favor, 0 opposed, and 1 abstention.
This settlement has been years in the making. Formal discussions
started in 1994 and various attempts have been made to reach this
settlement. We have never been this close. Importantly, this current
effort is tribally lead.
The settlement secures enforceable water rights and includes a
substantial funding request of Congress. Importantly, it calls for the
need to address some Law of the Colorado River matters that currently
prevent the Navajo Nation from diverting and moving water where it is
needed on the Navajo Nation.
As we know, the next step is to work with our Congressional
Delegation and all members of Congress in passing the necessary
legislation to authorize the United States Department of the Interior
to sign the agreement, provide the necessary funding, and address the
Law of the Colorado River matters. I am confident that our
Congressional Delegation understands the historic nature of this
settlement and will work with us to obtain quick passage of federal
legislation. If any changes are made to the settlement the Navajo
Nation Waters Rights Commission is delegated the authority to make
necessary technical and conforming changes to the settlement agreement.
The settlement agreement would then go to the Attorney General and the
President to execute the conformed settlement agreement.
While we have another road to go down, today is a historic
achievement. I look forward to standing in unanimity with the Navajo
Nation Council on fuhue endeavors to meet the needs of the Navajo
People.
Sincerely,
Dr. Buu Nygren, President
______
City of Flagstaff
June 4, 2024
Re: Letter of Support for Proposed Northeastern Arizona
Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024
Dear Senators Sinema and Kelly, and Representatives Crane, Schweikert,
Gallego, Stanton, Biggs, Ciscomani, Grijalva, Lesko and Gosar:
As Mayor of the City of Flagstaff, I strongly support the
Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights Settlement Act (``Act''). On
June 3, 2024, City Attorney, Sterling Solomon, along with
representatives of other parties to the settlement negotiations,
executed a joint letter in support of the Northeastern Arizona Indian
Water Rights Settlement Agreement and the proposed legislation.
Naturally, the Flagstaff City Council must still conduct a final review
of the Settlement Agreement with exhibits, as well as the proposed
legislation, and make an independent decision at a future date.
However, in the meantime, I want to share the City's strong support in
advancing the proposed settlement legislation.
As you know, there is a critical need for regional water supply
projects in Northeastern Arizona, not only for the Navajo Nation, the
Hopi Tribe and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, but also for the
City of Flagstaff. With over 80,000 residents and more than 6 million
visitors each year, Flagstaff continues to manage water wisely through
conservation and maintains one of the lowest per person water usage
rates in the State. Even with these laudable efforts, the reality of
climate variability, wildfires and reduced local groundwater supplies,
requires the City to address its pressing water resiliency and water
security needs by developing its municipal water supply at Red Gap
Ranch, a city-owned property located about 35-miles east of Flagstaff
along Interstate 40.
Red Gap Ranch was acquired by the City with 71 percent voter
approval in 2004. Since then, the City has invested millions of dollars
in designing and developing this Regional Pipeline Project including
drilling wells and conducting two detailed feasibility analysis reports
with Jacobs Engineering. This Project is designed to deliver 16,000
acre-feet of water per year for the City's municipal needs, with the
ability to provide water to customers such as the Navajo Nation, the
Hopi Tribe, the Arizona State Land Department (ASLD) and others at
various Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) connection points
at intersections along the Interstate 40 corridor. These locations are
currently being designed by Jacobs Engineering in cooperation with
ADOT, and with anticipated further input from the ASLD, the Navajo
Nation and the Hopi Tribe.
Although not identified in the Act, the Red Gap Ranch Regional
Pipeline Project is specifically referenced in the Northeastern Arizona
Water Rights Settlement Agreement. Indeed, under the Settlement
Agreement, the Navajo Nation may connect to the Regional Pipeline
Project to serve additional Navajo Lands at Twin Arrows, near Winona,
or at locations that would support supplemental needs in the
southwestern area of the Navajo Reservation or at Leupp. Also, under
the Settlement Agreement, the Arizona State Land Department and the
City will coordinate regarding future pumping on State Lands near Red
Gap Ranch.
The City strongly supports federal funding for the requested water
supply projects identified by the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe and the
San Juan Southern Paiute in the Act. These Tribal water supply projects
are critically needed on their respective reservations and are long
overdue. Economically viable Tribal communities depend on reliable
water supplies. In addition to the Tribal water supply projects, it is
imperative that Congress supports federal funding to complete the Red
Gap Ranch Regional Pipeline Project. This Regional Pipeline Project is
virtually shovel-ready, can be constructed within five (5) years, and
the City is willing to meet the cost-share requirements. This Regional
Pipeline Project will provide water security for Flagstaff and will
benefit other regional participants like the Navajo Nation, the Hopi
Tribe, the Arizona State Land Department and other communities in
Coconino County.
For details about the Red Gap Ranch Regional Pipeline Project, the
status of its development and requested funding, please feel free to
contact me directly.
Sincerely,
Hon. Becky Daggett, Mayor
______
American Rivers
July 16, 2024
RE: Support of the Yavapai Apache Nation Settling its Water
Rights in the State of Arizona
Dear Chairman Westerman, Ranking Member Grijalva, and Members of the
Committee,
American Rivers is pleased to submit a letter of support to the
House Natural Resources Committee for the Yavapai Apache Nation's (YAN)
proposed water settlement. American Rivers and YAN have developed a
deep and supportive relationship through collaboration on the
conservation of the Verde River in central Arizona. We support the
Nation's need and right, as a sovereign, to negotiate a permanent water
settlement with the State of Arizona and the United States. Indeed,
this is necessary in order to provide for a ``permanent homeland'' for
the Nation.
Since 1973, American Rivers has protected wild rivers, restored
damaged rivers, and conserved clean water for people and nature. With
headquarters in Washington, D.C. and 355,000 supporters, members, and
volunteers across the country, we are the most trusted and influential
river conservation organization in the United States, delivering
solutions for a better future. On behalf of AR, I would like to thank
Chairman Bruce Westerman and Ranking Member Raul Grijalva for your
leadership to conserve rivers, improve clean water access, and
safeguard public drinking water supplies now and into the future.
Native Nations are key partners in this shared work, and YAN in
particular is a valued and trusted partner of American Rivers. In
addition to our desire for the Nation to have all of the resources that
it needs in order to flourish into the future, we appreciate the steps
that it took in order to protect the Verde River and local groundwater
in the details of its proposed water settlement. This exemplifies the
forward-thinking nature of the Nation and its long-standing
relationship to water in an arid region. Thank you for your
consideration of our testimony.
Sincerely,
Tom Kiernan, President/CEO
______
Business for Water Stewardship
Dear Arizona Delegation and Members of Congress:
On behalf of Business for Water Stewardship and signees, we submit
this letter in full support of the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights
Settlement Act of 2024 (Settlement Act). We are grateful for the
leadership of the Arizona Delegation on this critical issue, and we
respectfully request that Congress swiftly enact this historic
legislation.
The Settlement Act ratifies and funds the recently completed
Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Agreement, which resolves
the Nation's water rights claims, brings additional, sustainable water
supplies to the Verde Valley, protects local groundwater supplies, and
helps keep the Verde River flowing.
The Verde River is one of the last free flowing rivers in the
Southwestern U.S., and it is a unique global treasure that has been
central to local cultures, economies, community health and identity.
However, flows in the river have steadily declined in recent decades
due to groundwater pumping and a drying climate. A primary goal of the
Nation's Settlement is to help maintain flows in the Verde River for
the benefit of the Nation, neighboring communities, water users, and
all who rely on a healthy flowing Verde River.
We acknowledge the steadfast leadership of Chairwoman Lewis, the
Nation's Tribal Council, Elders, and staff, and all those who came
before to achieve this truly historic agreement that will help
safeguard the water, future of the Nation, neighboring communities, and
all who depend on water provided by a flowing Verde River.
We respectfully ask Congress to take the next step: Enact the
Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act.
ADDITIONAL LETTER
Dear Chairman Schatz:
This letter is submitted on behalf of Business for Water
Stewardship to supplement the hearing record for the Legislative
Hearing and Business Meeting held on September 25, 2024, in order to
express our concerns with the comments made by Assistant Secretary
Newland on behalf of the Department of the Interior (Interior) about
the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 (S.
4705).
Business for Water Stewardship is a marquee program of the
Bonneville Environmental Foundation (BEF) and works hand-in-hand with
businesses to advance solutions necessary to sustain the well-being of
our communities, economies and rivers. Arizona is a focus of our work,
and we work with businesses globally to fund water resilience projects
and support environmental water stewardship, planning and policy.
Business for Water Stewardship has a strong partnership with the
Yavapai-Apache Nation (Nation) focused on water conservation,
protecting local groundwater sources and the health and vitality of the
Verde River, which is a remarkable ribbon of life and one of Arizona's
last free-flowing rivers. We also support the Nation's decades-long
effort to achieve a fair and equitable water rights settlement, which
S. 4705 will confirm. To this end, we appreciated Interior's testimony
noting that it ``strongly supports the resolution of Indian water
rights claims through negotiated settlements.'' We also agree that
Indian water settlements, in addition to providing Tribes with safe and
reliable water supplies, ``have the potential to end decades of
controversy and contention among Tribal Nations and neighboring
communities and promote cooperation in the management of water
resources.'' Indeed, this is precisely what the Yavapai-Apache Nation
Water Rights Settlement will accomplish when enacted.
Given our understanding of the history of the Nation's settlement
efforts, however, we were confused by Interior's written testimony to
this Committee about the Settlement, particularly Interior's suggestion
that (a) the Settlement is the product of only recent negotiations
conducted on an expedited timeline; (b) the water to be delivered from
the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir for treatment on the Reservation
``greatly exceeds'' the Nation's projected water demands for domestic,
commercial, municipal, and industrial (DCMI) uses; and (c) ``upsizing''
the Cragin-Verde pipeline to provide imported water to Verde Valley
Communities that opt into receiving water from the C.C. Cragin Dam and
Reservoir by the statutory deadline should not be supported.
Accordingly, Business for Water Stewardship is writing here to
respectfully supplement the record in response to Interior's testimony
and provide you with our on the ground knowledge of the Nation's
settlement.
It is well known and documented that the Yavapai-Apache Nation has
been working with the Salt River Project, the State of Arizona, and
local communities to negotiate a water rights settlement since at least
2011. To suggest the Nation's settlement is the product of only recent
negotiations conducted on an expedited timeline is misinformed.
In 2023, the Nation filed an amended claim in Arizona's Gila River
General Stream Adjudication asserting water rights for 11,629 acre-feet
per year (AFY) for its existing 1,809 acre Reservation. In the
Settlement, however, the Nation agreed to a compromise water budget of
no more than 6,888 AFY of water (5,991 AFY in net depletion) to provide
for its permanent tribal homeland. Moreover, the Nation will complete
an administrative land exchange with the U.S. Forest Service this year,
which will restore significant lands to the Reservation that are
contiguous to the Nation's Middle Verde District in Camp Verde. The
notice of Interior's intent to place these lands into trust has already
been issued and the NEPA process is complete. Ultimately, the Nation
agreed in the Settlement to serve both its existing and new Reservation
lands (totaling 5,106 acres) with its original water settlement budget
of 6,888 AFY, including for all existing and future DCMI and other uses
on these lands, forever.
The Nation's Reservation (as expanded) will provide important
future commercial and economic development opportunities for the Nation
and needed goods, services, and jobs for the Verde Valley region. For
the Nation to be truly self-sufficient, it must engage in economic
development on its new lands to support its Tribal members, maintain
its culture, and develop long overdue housing for its people.
To do this, the Nation, like all communities, must have a reliable
water supply. We appreciate that the Nation, as part of its Settlement,
plans to develop these lands using a sustainable water approach which
includes limited groundwater pumping, the use of imported water from
the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir, and the development of reclaimed
water sources. Therefore, we were confused to see testimony from
officials in Washington suggesting that the water to be delivered to
the Nation under the Settlement ``far exceeds'' the Nation's on
Reservation water needs for its permanent tribal homeland. This
conclusion is contrary to our on the ground knowledge of the facts.
We are also confused by Interior's decision to not support an
upsized Cragin-Verde pipeline under S. 4705. Under the Act, local Verde
Valley communities will have until December 31, 2029, to undertake the
necessary planning steps needed to decide whether it is appropriate for
their community to opt into an upsized version of the Cragin-Verde
Pipeline under S. 4705. If the Verde Valley communities do not opt in
by the deadline, the pipeline will not be upsized, and federal funds
will only be authorized and appropriated by Congress to develop a
project for the on-Reservation needs of the Nation under the
Settlement.
The Nation's settlement is a generational opportunity for the
Yavapai and Apache people and for the region as a whole. But the
Cragin-Verde Pipeline can only be constructed once, and it cannot be
upsized later should Interior realize that its calculus on the pipeline
is wrong. In taking this position, Interior may have failed to consider
the multitude of federal benefits that can be achieved with an upsized
pipeline, including reducing pressure on declining local aquifers and
conserving groundwater resources that directly support: (a) the
downstream segment of the Verde River designated as a National Wild and
Scenic River under the Arizona Wilderness Act of 1984 (P.L. 98-406);
(b) two other downstream federally recognized Indian Tribes that rely
on the Verde River to help meet their settled water rights (Fort
McDowell Yavapai Nation and Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community);
and (c) inflows to Bureau of Reclamation's Bartlett Dam and Reservoir,
that provides a critical and significant source of water for the fifth
largest metropolitan area in the United States (Phoenix).
The Cragin-Verde Pipeline Project was ultimately determined by the
Nation, the State of Arizona, the Salt River Project, Reclamation, and
the other settling parties to be the best alternative to deliver water
to the Nation for Settlement. The enactment of S. 4705 will confirm a
long overdue Indian water rights settlement for the Yavapai-Apache
Nation while also providing water certainty to the entire Verde Valley
and the United States' federal interests in a sustainable water supply
and Verde River. We urge you to enact S. 4705 expeditiously. Business
for Water Stewardship appreciates the opportunity to submit these
supplemental comments for the record.
Sincerely,
Todd Reeve, CEO, Bonneville Environmental Foundation;
Founder, Business for Water Stewardship
______
Town of Camp Verde
August 23, 2024
Re: Request for Hearing on the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water
Rights Settlement Act of 2024 (S.4705)
Dear Chairman Schatz and Vice-Chairman Murkowski:
On behalf of the Town of Camp Verde (Town), I respectfully request
the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs hold a hearing on the Yavapai-
Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 (S. 4705)
(Settlement) as soon as practical.
The Yavapai-Apache Nation and Town are neighbors in the Verde
Valley. The Town's land and water future are closely intertwined with
those of the Nation. Our Town and the Nation enjoy a cooperative,
respectful, and constructive government-to-government relationship with
shared goals and objectives. To this end, the Town has worked closely
with the Nation for many years to complete a mutually beneficial
Settlement that will help achieve water security for the Town and the
Nation, while also benefitting the health and vitality of the Verde
River and the Verde Valley region as a whole.
I thank you for your leadership on Indian water rights settlements
generally and we hope you will promptly hold a hearing on this
Settlement. We appreciate your attention to this request.
Respectfully,
Steve Wene, Attorney
______
Town of Clarkdale
August 26, 2023
Re: Request for Hearing on the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights
Settlement Act of 2024 (S. 4705)
Dear Chairman Schatz and Vice Chairman Murkowski:
On behalf of the Town of Clarkdale, we are writing to respectfully
request that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs hold a hearing on
the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 (S. 4705)
at its earliest convenience.
The Yavapai-Apache Nation is one of our neighbors in the Verde
Valley and has two neighborhoods within the Clarkdale Town limits. The
Town's lands and water future are closely intertwined with those of the
Nation. Our Town enjoys a cooperative, mutually respectful, and
beneficial government-to-government relationship with the Nation on
these shared goals and objectives. To this end, we have worked closely
with the Nation for many years to complete a mutually beneficial water
rights Settlement Agreement that will help achieve water security for
the Town and the Nation, while also benefitting the health and vitality
of the Verde River and the Verde Valley region as a whole.
On behalf of the Town of Clarkdale, we thank you for your
leadership on Indian water rights settlements, and we hope you will
promptly hold a hearing on the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights
Settlement Act of 2024 (S. 4705). We appreciate your attention to this
request.
Sincerely,
Susan Guthrie, APR, CM-ICMA, MPA Town Manager
______
Greater Verde Valley Chamber of Commerce
October 14, 2024
Dear Chairman Schatz:
This letter is submitted on behalf of the Greater Verde Valley
Chamber of Commerce to supplement the hearing record for the
Legislative Hearing and Business Meeting held on September 25, 2024, in
order to express our concerns with the comments made by Assistant
Secretary Newland on behalf of the Department of the Interior
(Interior) about the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act
of 2024 (S. 4705).
The Greater Verde Valley Chamber of Commerce has a strong
partnership with the Yavapai-Apache Nation (Nation) focused on water
conservation, protecting local groundwater sources and the health and
vitality of the Verde River, which is a remarkable ribbon of life and
one of Arizona's last free-flowing rivers. We also support the Nation's
decades-long effort to achieve a fair and equitable water rights
settlement, which S. 4705 will confirm. To this end, we appreciated
Interior's testimony noting that it ``strongly supports the resolution
of Indian water rights claims through negotiated settlements.'' We also
agree that Indian water settlements, in addition to providing Tribes
with safe and reliable water supplies, ``have the potential to end
decades of controversy and contention among Tribal Nations and
neighboring communities and promote cooperation in the management of
water resources.'' Indeed, this is precisely what the Yavapai-Apache
Nation Water Rights Settlement will accomplish when enacted.
Given our understanding of the history of the Nation's settlement
efforts, however, we were confused by Interior's written testimony to
this Committee about the Settlement, particularly Interior's suggestion
that (a) the Settlement is the product of only recent negotiations
conducted on an expedited timeline; (b) the water to be delivered from
the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir for treatment on the Reservation
``greatly exceeds'' the Nation's projected water demands for domestic,
commercial, municipal, and industrial (DCMI) uses; and (c) ``upsizing''
the Cragin-Verde pipeline to provide imported water to Verde Valley
Communities that opt into receiving water from the C.C. Cragin Dam and
Reservoir by the statutory deadline should not be supported.
Accordingly, the Greater Verde Valley Chamber of Commerce is writing
here to respectfully supplement the record in response to Interior's
testimony and provide you with our on the ground knowledge of the
Nation's settlement.
It is well known and documented that the Yavapai-Apache Nation has
been working with the Salt River Project, the State of Arizona, and
local communities to negotiate a water rights settlement since at least
2011. To suggest the Nation's settlement is the product of only recent
negotiations conducted on an expedited timeline is misinformed.
In 2023, the Nation filed an amended claim in Arizona's Gila River
General Stream Adjudication asserting water rights for 11,629 acre-feet
per year (AFY) for its existing 1,809 acre Reservation. In the
Settlement, however, the Nation agreed to a compromise water budget of
no more than 6,888 AFY of water (5,991 AFY in net depletion) to provide
for its permanent tribal homeland. Moreover, the Nation will complete
an administrative land exchange with the U.S. Forest Service this year,
which will restore significant lands to the Reservation that are
contiguous to the Nation's Middle Verde District in Camp Verde. The
notice of Interior's intent to place these lands into trust has already
been issued and the NEPA process is complete. Ultimately, the Nation
agreed in the Settlement to serve both its existing and new Reservation
lands (totaling 5,106 acres) with its original water settlement budget
of 6,888 AFY, including for all existing and future DCMI and other uses
on these lands, forever.
The Nation's Reservation (as expanded) will provide important
future commercial and economic development opportunities for the Nation
and needed goods, services, and jobs for the Verde Valley region. For
the Nation to be truly self-sufficient, it must engage in economic
development on its new lands to support its Tribal members, maintain
its culture, and develop long overdue housing for its people.
To do this, the Nation, like all communities, must have a reliable
water supply. We appreciate that the Nation, as part of its Settlement,
plans to develop these lands using a sustainable water approach which
includes limited groundwater pumping, the use of imported water from
the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir, and the development of reclaimed
water sources. Therefore, we were confused to see testimony from
officials in Washington suggesting that the water to be delivered to
the Nation under the Settlement ``far exceeds'' the Nation's on
Reservation water needs for its permanent tribal homeland. This
conclusion is contrary to our on-the-ground knowledge of the facts.
We are also confused by Interior's decision to not support an
upsized Cragin-Verde pipeline under S. 4705. Under the Act, local Verde
Valley communities will have until December 31, 2029, to undertake the
necessary planning steps needed to decide whether it is appropriate for
their community to opt into an upsized version of the Cragin-Verde
Pipeline under S. 4705. If the Verde Valley communities do not opt in
by the deadline, the pipeline will not be upsized, and federal funds
will only be authorized and appropriated by Congress to develop a
project for the on-Reservation needs of the Nation under the
Settlement.
The Nation's settlement is a generational opportunity for the
Yavapai and Apache people and for the region as a whole. But the
Cragin-Verde Pipeline can only be constructed once, and it cannot be
upsized later should Interior realize that its calculus on the pipeline
is wrong. In taking this position, Interior may have failed to consider
the multitude of federal benefits that can be achieved with an upsized
pipeline, including reducing pressure on declining local aquifers and
conserving groundwater resources that directly support: (a) the
downstream segment of the Verde River designated as a National Wild and
Scenic River under the Arizona Wilderness Act of 1984 (P.L. 98-406);
(b) two other downstream federally recognized Indian Tribes that rely
on the Verde River to help meet their settled water rights (Fort
McDowell Yavapai Nation and Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community);
and (c) inflows to Bureau of Reclamation's Bartlett Dam and Reservoir,
that provides a critical and significant source of water for the fifth
largest metropolitan area in the United States (Phoenix).
The Cragin-Verde Pipeline Project was ultimately determined by the
Nation, the State of Arizona, the Salt River Project, Reclamation, and
the other settling parties to be the best alternative to deliver water
to the Nation for Settlement. The enactment of S. 4705 will confirm a
long overdue Indian water rights settlement for the Yavapai-Apache
Nation while also providing water certainty to the entire Verde Valley
and the United States' federal interests in a sustainable water supply
and Verde River. We urge you to enact S. 4705 expeditiously.
Sincerely,
Christian Oliva del Rio, IOM, President/CEO
______
EDF Action
July 29, 2024
Re: Support for the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights
Settlement Act of 2024, H.R. 8949
Dear Arizona Delegation and Members of Congress:
On behalf of Environmental Defense Action Fund (EDF Action) and
over 90,000 EDF Action members and activists living across the State of
Arizona, we submit this letter in full support of the Yavapai-Apache
Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 (Settlement Act). We are
grateful for the leadership of the Arizona Delegation on this critical
issue, and we respectfully request that Congress swiftly enact this
historic legislation.
EDF Action works with many stakeholders, Tribes, communities,
governments, and other groups on water issues throughout Arizona,
serving the public interest in pursuit of water security for all
people, now and into the future. We have partnered with Yavapai-Apache
Nation (the Nation), local governments, and community groups in the
Verde watershed for over a decade. Much of our focus is ensuring rural
communities, who often face critical water needs and tend to be
overlooked, enjoy stable and healthy water supplies as a foundation for
self-determination, community health and well-being, and prosperity.
The Settlement Act represents a historic leap forward toward these
goals.
The Settlement Act ratifies and funds the recently completed
Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Agreement, which resolves
the Nation's water rights claims, brings additional, sustainable water
supplies to the Verde Valley, protects local groundwater supplies, and
helps keep the Verde River flowing. The Settlement Act will also
finalize a land exchange (if it is not completed through the
administrative process by the time the Act is passed) that supports the
Nation in securing a permanent Tribal homeland that will meet the needs
of a growing population and economy.
The Verde River is one of the last free flowing rivers left in the
Southwestern U.S., it is a unique global treasure that has been central
to local cultures, economies, community health and identity, and ways
of life, since time immemorial. However, flows in the river have
steadily declined in recent decades due to groundwater pumping and a
drying climate. A primary goal of the Nation's Settlement is to help
maintain flows in the Verde River for the benefit of the Nation,
neighboring communities, federal partners including for the designated
National Wild and Scenic River segment downstream of the Nation, and
all who rely on a healthy flowing Verde River.
In testimony before Congress on July 24, 2024, Yavapai-Apache
Nation Chairwoman Tanya Lewis stated: ``The passage of H.R. 8949 to
ratify the Yavapai-Apache Nation's Water Rights Settlement Agreement is
essential if our Nation is to finally attain a secure water future and
a permanent Tribal homeland for the Yavepe and Dilzhe'e people. In this
time of persistent drought and aridification in Arizona, we must take
concrete and generational action to secure the long-term needs of our
communities. . .it is now time for the Nation, with the assistance of
our trustee the United States, to build the water infrastructure needed
to ensure that the Nation can continue to live and thrive in the Verde
Valley as was guaranteed to us in our Treaty with the United States.''
We acknowledge the steadfast leadership of Chairwoman Lewis, the
Nation's Tribal Council, Elders, and staff, and all those who came
before, on the road to achieve this truly special, historic agreement
that will help safeguard the water future of the Nation, neighboring
communities, and all who depend on a healthy, flowing Verde River.
We respectfully ask Congress to take the next step: Enact the
Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act.
Additional Letter
Dear Chairman Schatz and Vice Chair Murkowski:
Environmental Defense Action Fund (EDF Action) submits this letter
to supplement the hearing record for the Legislative Hearing and
Business Meeting held on September 25, 2024, in order to express our
concerns with the comments made by the Assistant Secretary Newland on
behalf of the Department of the Interior (Interior) about the Yavapai-
Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 (S. 4705). We
continue to urge the Committee to advance this critical legislation
this year.
EDF Action, with over 90,000 members and activists in the state of
Arizona, works with many stakeholders, Tribes, communities,
governments, and other groups on water issues throughout the state,
serving the public interest in pursuit of water security for all
people, now and into the future. We have partnered with Yavapai-Apache
Nation (the Nation), local governments, and community groups in the
Verde watershed for over a decade. Much of our focus is ensuring rural
communities, who often face critical water needs and tend to be
overlooked, enjoy stable and healthy water supplies as a foundation for
self-determination, community health and well-being, and prosperity.
S.4705 represents a historic leap forward toward these goals.
Our strong partnership with the Nation is focused on protecting
local groundwater sources and the health and vitality of the Verde
River, an irreplaceable ribbon of life and one of southwest's last
free-flowing rivers. We support the Nation's decades-long effort to
achieve a fair and equitable water rights settlement--which S. 4705
will confirm. To this end, we appreciated Interior's testimony noting
that it ``strongly supports the resolution of Indian water rights
claims through negotiated settlements.'' We also agree that
settlements, in addition to providing a pathway for Tribes to secure
safe and reliable water supplies, ``have the potential to end decades
of controversy and contention among Tribal Nations and neighboring
communities and promote cooperation in the management of water
resources.'' This is precisely what the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water
Rights Settlement will accomplish when enacted.
Given our longstanding partnership and interest in the history of
the Nation's settlement efforts, we were however disappointed with
Interior's written testimony to this Committee about the Yavapai-Apache
Nation Water Rights Settlement, particularly Interior's suggestions
that: (1) the Settlement is the product of only recent negotiation
efforts conducted on an expedited timeline; (2) the water to be
delivered from the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir for treatment on the
Reservation ``greatly exceeds'' the Nation's projected water demands
for domestic, commercial, municipal, and industrial (DCMI) uses; and
(3) ``Upsizing'' the Cragin-Verde pipeline to provide imported water
those Verde Valley Communities that opt into receiving water from the
C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir by the statutory deadline should not be
supported. Accordingly, EDF Action is writing here to respectfully
supplement the record in response to Interior's testimony to provide
you with our on the ground knowledge of the Nation's settlement.
It is well documented in the Verde Valley that the Yavapai-Apache
Nation has been working with the Salt River Project, the State of
Arizona, and local communities to negotiate a water rights settlement
since at least 2011. It is clear from the long and robust record, that
the Nation's settlement efforts have been underway for many years, and
the historic settlement is the product of those efforts.
In 2023, the Nation filed an amended claim in Arizona's Gila River
General Stream Adjudication asserting water rights for 11,629 acre-feet
per year (AFY) for their existing 1,809 acre Reservation. In
Settlement, however, the Nation agreed to a compromise water budget of
no more than 6,888 AFY of water (5,991 AFY in net depletion) to provide
for its permanent tribal homeland. Moreover, the Nation will complete
an administrative land exchange with the U.S. Forest Service this year,
which will restore significant lands to the Reservation that are
contiguous to the Nation's Middle Verde District in Camp Verde. The
notice of Interior's intent to place these lands into trust has already
been issued and the NEPA process is complete.
Ultimately, the Nation agreed in Settlement to serve both its
existing and new Reservation lands (totaling 5,106 acres) with its
original water settlement budget of 6,888 AFY, including for all
existing and future DCMI and other uses on these lands, forever.
The Nation's Reservation, as expanded, will provide important
future commercial and economic development opportunities for the Nation
and needed goods, services, and jobs for the Verde Valley region. This
is particularly so given the Nation's acquisition of previously
undevelopable Forest Service lands within the boundaries of Camp Verde
and the proximity of these lands to Interstate I-17 and the 260
Highway, which are major transportation corridors. For the Nation to be
truly self-sufficient, it must engage in economic development on its
new lands, to support its Tribal members, maintain its culture, and
develop long overdue housing for its people.
To do this, the Nation, like all communities, must have a reliable
water supply. We appreciate that the Nation, as part of its Settlement,
plans to develop these lands using a sustainable water approach which
includes limited groundwater pumping, the use of imported water from
the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir, and the development of reclaimed
water sources. We appreciate how, through Settlement, the Nation has,
and will continue to, determine their own water supply needs. We were
therefore disappointed to see a misconception in testimony to this
Committee that the water to be delivered to the Nation under the
Settlement ``far exceeds'' the Nation's on Reservation water needs for
its permanent Tribal homeland. The innovative and sustainable water
supply approach negotiated by the Nation and parties in the Settlement
is necessary to securing a reliable water supply today and into the
future.
Regarding the Cragin-Verde pipeline, there will be ample
opportunity and time to consider its ultimate size. Local Verde Valley
communities will have until December 31, 2029, to decide whether it is
appropriate for their community to opt into an upsized version of the
Cragin-Verde Pipeline under S. 4705. And of course, if the Verde Valley
communities do not opt in by the deadline, the pipeline will not be
upsized, and federal funds will only be authorized and appropriated by
Congress to develop a project for the on Reservation needs of the
Nation under the Settlement. The Cragin-Verde Pipeline can only be
constructed once--it cannot be upsized later. The Nation's settlement--
including the Cragin-Verde pipeline under S.4705--is a generational
opportunity for the Yavapai and Apache people, for the region, and for
the entire state.
There are a multitude of federal benefits that can be achieved with
an upsized pipeline, including reducing pressure on local aquifers and
conserving groundwater sources that support the Verde River benefiting,
among other things: (a) the downstream segment of the Verde River
designated as a National Wild and Scenic River under the Arizona
Wilderness Act of 1984 (P.L. 98-406); (b) two other downstream
federally recognized Tribes that rely on the Verde River to help meet
their settled water rights (Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation and Salt River
Pima-Maricopa Indian Community); and (c) inflows to Bureau of
Reclamation's Bartlett Dam and Reservoir, an important source of water
for the Phoenix metropolitan area.
The Cragin-Verde Pipeline Project was ultimately determined by the
Nation, the State of Arizona, the Salt River Project, the Bureau of
Reclamation, and the other settling parties to be the best alternative
to deliver water to the Nation for Settlement. The enactment of S.4705
will finally confirm a long over-due and needed water rights settlement
for the Yavapai-Apache Nation, providing water certainty to the entire
Verde Valley and the United States' federal interests in a sustainable
Verde River.
We acknowledge the steadfast leadership of Chairwoman Lewis, the
Nation's Tribal Council, Elders, and staff, and all those who came
before, on the road to achieve this truly special, historic agreement
that will help safeguard the Nation's water future, as well as water
security for neighboring communities, and all who depend on a healthy,
flowing Verde River. We strongly support the Nation's sovereignty and
self-determination.
We urge you to enact S. 4705 without delay. EDF Action appreciates
the opportunity to submit these supplemental comments for the record.
If there are any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Chris Kuzdas, Ph.D., Arizona Water Program Director
______
Friends of the Verde River
October 15, 2024
Dear Chairman Schatz:
This letter is submitted on behalf of Friends of the Verde River to
supplement the hearing record for the Legislative Hearing and Business
Meeting held on September 25, 2024, in order to express our concerns
with the comments made by the Assistant Secretary Newland on behalf of
the Department of the Interior (Interior) about the Yavapai-Apache
Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 (S. 4705).
Friends of the Verde River is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization
located in the Verde Valley that implements on-the-ground projects,
facilitates regional coordination, and informs statewide policy from a
local perspective. Our objective is to work collaboratively for a
healthy, flowing Verde River system.
Friends of the Verde River has a strong partnership with the
Yavapai-Apache Nation (Nation) focused on protecting local groundwater
sources and the health and vitality of the Verde River, which is
remarkable ribbon of life and one of Arizona's last free-flowing
rivers. We also support the Nation's decades-long effort to achieve a
fair and equitable water rights settlement, which S. 4705 will confirm.
To this end, we appreciated Interior's testimony noting that it
``strongly supports the resolution of Indian water rights claims
through negotiated settlements.'' We also agree that Indian water
settlements, in addition to providing Tribes with safe and reliable
water supplies, ``have the potential to end decades of controversy and
contention among Tribal Nations and neighboring communities and promote
cooperation in the management of water resources.'' Indeed, this is
precisely what the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement will
accomplish when enacted.
Given understanding of the history of the Nation's settlement
efforts, however, we were disappointed with Interior's written
testimony to this Committee about the Settlement, particularly
Interior's suggestion that (a) the Settlement is the product of only
recent negotiations efforts conducted on an expedited timeline; (b) the
water to be delivered from the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir for
treatment on the Reservation ``greatly exceeds'' the Nation's projected
water demands for domestic, commercial, municipal, and industrial
(DCMI) uses; and (c) ``upsizing'' the Cragin-Verde pipeline to provide
imported water those Verde Valley Communities that opt into receiving
water from the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir by the statutory deadline
should not be supported. Accordingly, Friends of the Verde River is
writing here to respectfully supplement the record in response to
Interior's testimony to provide you with our on the ground knowledge of
the Nation's settlement.
First, it is well known and documented in the Verde Valley that the
Yavapai-Apache Nation has been working with the Salt River Project, the
State of Arizona, and local communities to negotiate a water rights
settlement since at least 2011. To suggest the Nation's settlement is
the product of only recent negotiations conducted on an expedited
timeline is grossly misinformed.
Second, in 2023, the Nation filed an amended claim in Arizona's
Gila River General Stream Adjudication asserting water rights for
11,629 acre-feet per year (AFY) for its existing 1,809-acre
Reservation. In Settlement, however, the Nation agreed to a compromise
water budget of no more than 6,888 AFY of water (5,991 AFY in net
depletion) to provide for its permanent tribal homeland. Moreover, the
Nation will complete an administrative land exchange with the U.S.
Forest Service this year, which will restore significant lands to the
Reservation that are contiguous to the Nation's Middle Verde District
in Camp Verde. The notice of Interior's intent to place these lands
into trust has already been issued and the NEPA process is complete.
Ultimately, the Nation agreed in Settlement to serve both its existing
and new Reservation lands (totaling 5,106 acres) with its original
water settlement budget of 6,888 AFY, including for all existing and
future DCMI and other uses on these lands, forever.
The Nation's Reservation (as expanded) will provide important
future commercial and economic development opportunities for the Nation
and needed goods, services, and jobs for the Verde Valley region. This
is particularly so given the Nation's acquisition of previously
undevelopable Forest Service lands within the boundaries of Camp Verde
and the proximity of these lands to Interstate I-17 and the 260
Highway, which are major transportation corridors. For the Nation to be
truly self-sufficient, it must engage in economic development on its
new lands, to support its Tribal members, maintain its culture, and
develop long overdue housing for its people.
To do this, the Nation, like all communities, must have a reliable
water supply. We appreciate that the Nation, as part of its Settlement,
plans to develop these lands using a sustainable water approach which
includes limited groundwater pumping, the use of imported water from
the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir, and the development of reclaimed
water sources. We were therefore quite perplexed to see officials in
Washington, DC testify from afar that the water to be delivered to the
Nation under the Settlement ``far exceeds'' the Nation's on Reservation
water needs for its permanent tribal homeland. This conclusion is not
supported by anything we are aware of, and it is contrary to our on the
ground knowledge of the facts.
Finally, we respectfully disagree with Interior's decision to not
support an upsized Cragin-Verde pipeline under S. 4705. Under the Act,
local Verde Valley communities will have until December 31, 2029, to
undertake the necessary planning steps needed to decide whether it is
appropriate for their community to opt into an upsized version of the
Cragin-Verde Pipeline under S. 4705. And of course, if the Verde Valley
communities do not opt in by the deadline, the pipeline will not be
upsized, and federal funds will only be authorized and appropriated by
Congress to develop a project for the on Reservation needs of the
Nation under the Settlement.
The Nation's settlement is a generational opportunity for the
Yavapai and Apache people and for the region as a whole. But the
Cragin-Verde Pipeline can only be constructed once, and it cannot be
upsized later should Interior realize that its calculus on the pipeline
is wrong. In taking this position, Interior may have failed to consider
the multitude of federal benefits that can be achieved with an upsized
pipeline, including reducing pressure on local aquifers and conserving
groundwater sources that support the Verde River benefiting, among
other things: (a) the downstream segment of the Verde River designated
as a National Wild and Scenic River under the Arizona Wilderness Act of
1984 (P.L. 98-406); (b) two other downstream federally recognized
Indian Tribes that rely on the Verde River to help meet their settled
water rights (Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation and Salt River Pima-Maricopa
Indian Community); and (c) inflows to Bureau of Reclamation's Bartlett
Dam and Reservoir, that serves as a significant source of water for
metropolitan Phoenix.
The Cragin-Verde Pipeline Project was ultimately determined by the
Nation, the State of Arizona, the Salt River Project, Reclamation, and
the other settling parties to be the best alternative to deliver water
to the Nation for Settlement. The enactment of S. 4705 will finally
confirm a long over-due Indian water rights settlement for the Yavapai-
Apache Nation while also providing water certainty to the entire Verde
Valley and the United States' federal interests in a sustainable Verde
River. We urge you to enact S. 4705 expeditiously.
The Friends of the Verde River appreciates the opportunity to
submit these supplemental comments for the record.
Sincerely,
W. David Gressly, Executive Director
______
STATE OF ARIZONA
August 23, 2024
Re: Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of
2024 (S. 4705)
Dear Chairman Schatz and Vice Chairman Murkowski:
I am writing to express my support for S. 4705, the Yavapai-Apache
Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024, and to respectfully request
for a hearing to be held by the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs
in September, or as soon as possible.
This critical legislation approves and authorizes a comprehensive
settlement of the water rights claims of the Yavapai-Apache Nation in
Arizona. Securing this settlement is a priority for the State of
Arizona because it provides members of the Yavapai-Apache Nation with
reliable and sustainable water supplies, which in turn helps secure
their permanent homeland. It is also a priority for the State of
Arizona because the settlement provides certainty to non-tribal water
users regarding the available water supplies in Arizona, enhances the
preservation of the Verde River, and supports our policy to preserve
groundwater.
I would like to thank the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs for
considering the legislation, Senator Kelly for introducing this
important bill, and Senator Sinema for cosponsoring it. This
legislation will have a generational impact on the Yavapai-Apache
Nation and the State of Arizona, and I appreciate your consideration of
this request to hold a hearing on the bill in the coming weeks.
Sincerely,
Katie Hobbs, Governor
______
Greater Verde Valley Chamber of Commerce
Dear Arizona Delegation and Members of Congress:
On behalf of the Greater Verde Valley Chamber of Commerce and
signees, we submit this letter in full support of the Yavapai-Apache
Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 (Settlement Act). We are
grateful for the leadership of the Arizona Delegation on this critical
issue, and we respectfully request that Congress swiftly enact this
historic legislation.
The Settlement Act ratifies and funds the recently completed
Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Agreement, which resolves
the Nation's water rights claims, brings additional, sustainable water
supplies to the Verde Valley, protects local groundwater supplies, and
helps keep the Verde River flowing.
The Verde River is one of the last free flowing rivers in the
Southwestern U.S., and it is a unique global treasure that has been
central to local cultures, economies, community health and identity.
However, flows in the river have steadily declined in recent decades
due to groundwater pumping and a drying climate. A primary goal of the
Nation's Settlement is to help maintain flows in the Verde River for
the benefit of the Nation, neighboring communities, water users, and
all who rely on a healthy flowing Verde River.
We acknowledge the steadfast leadership of Chairwoman Lewis, the
Nation's Tribal Council, Elders, and staff, and all those who came
before to achieve this truly historic agreement that will help
safeguard the water, future of the Nation, neighboring communities, and
all who depend on water provided by a flowing Verde River.
We respectfully ask Congress to take the next step: Enact the
Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act.
Sincerely,
Christian Oliva del Rio, IOM, President/CEO
______
National Audubon Society
September 9, 2024
RE: Support for the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights
Settlement Act of 2024
Dear Arizona Congressional Delegation:
The National Audubon Society (Audubon) protects birds, and the
places they need, today and tomorrow. It is with great enthusiasm that
we write on behalf of Audubon in support of the Yavapai-Apache Nation's
water rights settlement and pending legislation, the Yavapai-Apache
Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024.
The Yavapai-Apache Nation and other parties in Arizona have come to
a historic agreement with the settlement now before Congress. Not only
will this settlement--when passed by Congress and signed by the
President--ensure a reliable and sustainable water supply for the
Yavapai-Apache Nation in north central Arizona's iconic ``Verde
Valley,'' it will preserve the Verde River and its precious habitat by
reducing reliance on groundwater.
Audubon's focus on birds means we also prioritize the protection of
the habitat they need. Within the Verde Valley, we have identified four
Important Bird Areas, all of which rely on healthy groundwater levels
to sustain flowing rivers and streams and the rich plant life and
wildlife they support. This settlement will also help sustain a portion
of the Verde River downstream of the Yavapai-Apache Nation that was
designated as a Wild and Scenic River by Congress in 1984.
The settlement is the result of innovative and creative thinking
from the Yavapai-Apache Nation, Salt River Project, the Town of Camp
Verde, the Town of Cottonwood, the Town of Clarkdale, and others. The
settlement includes building a 60-mile water pipeline from C.C. Cragin
Reservoir on the Mogollon Rim, north of Payson, increasing the capture
of wastewater into sewer systems, boosting the use of reclaimed water,
and the potential for regional water planning and collaboration among
nearby municipalities and the Yavapai-Apache Nation.
Audubon Southwest, our regional office in Arizona and New Mexico,
is also part of the Water for Arizona Coalition. In 2022, Water for
Arizona outlined a vision for how to improve Arizona's water outlook,
called the Arizona Water Security Plan. One of the six key tenets is:
Continue to support Tribes in resolving Tribal water issues. This
settlement is a key milestone as Arizona works to improve its overall
water security.
It is long past due for the Yavapai-Apache Nation to have secure
and reliable water supplies, and this settlement is a monumental step
forward for their growing community. We urge you to support the passage
of the settlement and the provision of approximately $1 billion to
ensure the project is brought to completion.
Thank you for your consideration of this water rights settlement
for the Yavapai-Apache Nation.
Sincerely,
Julie Hill-Gabriel, Vice President, Water Conservation
Jonathan Hayes, Vice President/Executive Director, Audubon
Southwest
______
The Nature Conservancy in Arizona
July 19, 2024
Dear Ms. Trujillo, Mr. Newland and Mr. Palumbo,
On behalf of The Nature Conservancy, please accept this letter of
support for the Yavapai-Apache Nation Tribal Water Settlement Act of
2024 which has a hearing in House Natural Resources on Tuesday of next
week. The Nature Conservancy has worked for decades with local partners
in the Verde River basin, including the Yavapai-Apache Nation, to
protect water quality and quantity, and preserve ecologically important
places while keeping healthy working landscapes in production.
After decades of negotiation, the Yavapai-Apache Nation has reached
agreement with the Salt River Project, the State of Arizona, local
communities, and others to achieve a final resolution of the Nation's
longstanding water rights claims. Unlike other Indian reservations, the
Yavapai-Apache Nation's Reservation is made up of several non-
contiguous land areas that are intertwined geographically and
economically with our neighboring off-reservation communities. For this
reason, when the Verde Valley thrives, the Yavapai-Apache Nation
thrives. This resolution has been executed in a way that brings both
renewable water supplies to the Verde Valley and helps keep the Verde
River flowing as one of Arizona's few remaining perennial rivers.
The central pillar of this settlement is a once-in-a-lifetime
opportunity to construct a pipeline to deliver water from the C.C.
Cragin Reservoir on the Mogollon Rim to the Yavapai-Apache Nation,
where it will be treated to drinking water standards for distribution
on the Reservation, and potentially, to local off-reservation
communities under specific circumstances spelled out in the draft
legislation. Building the Cragin-Verde pipeline will finally provide
water security for the Nation by delivering a renewable water supply to
the Verde Valley, thereby reducing reliance on groundwater resources.
This same pipeline will also protect flows in the Verde River, which is
a cultural resource for the Yavapai-Apache Nation and an economic
driver for the entire Verde Valley.
The Nature Conservancy values the Yavapai-Apache Nation's
commitment to water security for not only their tribal community, but
the entire Verde Valley. We fully support the Yavapai-Apache Nation
Tribal Water Settlement Act of 2024 and look forward to the
Department's support as well.
Additional Letter
Senators Brian Schatz and Lisa Murkowski,
This letter is submitted on behalf of The Nature Conservancy of
Arizona to supplement the hearing record for the Legislative Hearing
and Business Meeting held on September 25, 2024, surrounding the
Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 (S. 4705).
The Nature Conservancy, a global nonprofit, non-governmental
organization working to ``protect the lands and waters on which all
life depends'' in over 75 nations. The Nature Conservancy in Arizona, a
chapter of The Nature Conservancy, has worked for decades with local
partners in the Verde River basin, including the Yavapai-Apache Nation,
to protect water quality and quantity, and preserve ecologically
important places while keeping healthy working landscapes in
production.
The Nature Conservancy in Arizona has a strong partnership with the
Yavapai-Apache Nation (Nation) focused on protecting local groundwater
sources and the health and vitality of the Verde River, which is
remarkable ribbon of life and one of Arizona's last free-flowing
rivers. We also support the Nation's decades-long effort to achieve a
fair and equitable water rights settlement, which S. 4705 will confirm.
To this end, we appreciated Interior's testimony noting that it
``strongly supports the resolution of Indian water rights claims
through negotiated settlements.'' We also agree that Indian water
settlements, in addition to providing Tribes with safe and reliable
water supplies, ``have the potential to end decades of controversy and
contention among Tribal Nations and neighboring communities and promote
cooperation in the management of water resources.'' Indeed, this is
precisely what the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement will
accomplish when enacted. We would like to clarify several points we
noted during the hearing.
First, the Yavapai-Apache Nation has been working with the Salt
River Project, the State of Arizona, and local communities to negotiate
a water rights settlement since 2011.
Second, in 2023, the Nation filed an amended claim in Arizona's
Gila River General Stream Adjudication asserting water rights for
11,629 acre-feet per year (AFY) for its existing 1,809 acre
Reservation. In Settlement, however, the Nation agreed to a compromise
water budget of no more than 6,888 AFY of water (5,991 AFY in net
depletion) to provide for its permanent tribal homeland. Moreover, the
Nation will complete an administrative land exchange with the U.S.
Forest Service this year, which will restore significant lands to the
Reservation that are contiguous to the Nation's Middle Verde District
in Camp Verde. The notice of Interior's intent to place these lands
into trust has already been issued and the NEPA process is complete.
Ultimately, the Nation agreed in Settlement to serve both its existing
and new Reservation lands (totaling 5,106 acres) with its original
water settlement budget of 6,888 AFY, including for all existing and
future DCMI and other uses on these lands, forever.
The Nation's Reservation (as expanded) will provide important
future commercial and economic development opportunities for the Nation
and needed goods, services, and jobs for the Verde Valley region. This
is particularly so given the Nation's acquisition of previously
undevelopable Forest Service lands within the boundaries of Camp Verde
and the proximity of these lands to Interstate I-17 and the 260
Highway, which are major transportation corridors. For the Nation to be
truly self-sufficient, it must engage in economic development on its
new lands, to support its Tribal members, maintain its culture, and
develop long overdue housing for its people.
To do this, the Nation, like all communities, must have a reliable
water supply. We appreciate that the Nation, as part of its Settlement,
plans to develop these lands using a sustainable water source which
includes limited groundwater pumping, the use of imported water from
the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir, and the development of reclaimed
water sources. We do not agree with testimony you received that water
to the Nation under the Settlement ``far exceeds'' the Nation's on
Reservation water needs for its permanent tribal homeland.
Finally, the Conservancy supports an upsized Cragin-Verde pipeline
as envisioned in S. 4705. Under the Act, local Verde Valley communities
will have until December 31, 2029, to undertake the necessary planning
steps needed to decide whether it is appropriate for their community to
opt into an upsized version of the Cragin-Verde Pipeline. If the Verde
Valley communities do not opt in by the deadline, the pipeline will not
be upsized, and federal funds will only be authorized and appropriated
by Congress to develop a project for the on Reservation needs of the
Nation under the Settlement. The flexibility for the size of the
pipeline allows time for communities to make the right decisions for
their residents while utilizing planning tools.
The Nation's settlement is a generational opportunity for the
Yavapai and Apache people and for the region as a whole. But the
Cragin-Verde Pipeline should only be constructed once, and it cannot be
upsized later. Consideration must be given to the multitude of federal
benefits that can be achieved with an upsized pipeline, including
reducing pressure on local aquifers and conserving groundwater sources
that support the Verde River benefiting, among other things: (a) the
downstream segment of the Verde River designated as a National Wild and
Scenic River under the Arizona Wilderness Act of 1984 (P.L. 98-406);
(b) two other downstream federally recognized Indian Tribes that rely
on the Verde River to help meet their settled water rights (Fort
McDowell Yavapai Nation and Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community);
and (c) inflows to Bureau of Reclamation's Bartlett Dam and Reservoir,
that serves as a significant source of water for metropolitan Phoenix.
The Cragin-Verde Pipeline Project was ultimately determined by the
Nation, the State of Arizona, the Salt River Project, Reclamation, and
the other settling parties to be the best alternative to deliver water
to the Nation for Settlement. Passing S. 4705 will finally confirm a
long over-due and needed Indian water rights settlement for the
Yavapai-Apache Nation, providing water certainty to the entire Verde
Valley and the United States' federal interests in a sustainable Verde
River. We urge you to pass S. 4705 expeditiously.
The Nature Conservancy in Arizona appreciates the opportunity to
submit these supplemental comments for the record.
Sincerely,
Daniel Stellar, State Director
______
Salt River Project (SRP)
August 23, 2024
Dear Chairman Schatz and Vice Chairman Murkowski:
On behalf of Salt River Project (SRP), I am writing to share our
strong support for S. 4705, the Yavapai-Apache Nation Indian Water
Rights Settlement Act of 2024, and to request that you hold a
legislative hearing on the bill when the Senate returns to Washington
next month.
A hearing before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs (Committee)
is the first step toward passage of S. 4705, legislation introduced by
Arizona Senators Mark Kelly and Kyrsten Sinema, that would resolve the
Yavapai-Apache Nation's (``Nation'') water rights and provides access
to a renewable supply of water for the Nation. Resolving these claims
constitutes a monumental step forward in providing certainty regarding
available water supplies not just for the Nation, but for users in the
Verde Valley, as well as downstream users of Verde River water in the
Phoenix Metropolitan area. This settlement is the culmination of
decades of work to resolve the Nation's water rights and is a win-win
solution for all parties involved, as well as the Verde River. SRP is
thankful for the dedication of Senators Kelly and Sinema to deliver
this legislation, which will ultimately secure a renewable supply of
water for the Nation.
SRP, comprised of the Salt River Valley Water Users' Association
and the Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District,
is the Phoenix metropolitan area's largest supplier ofraw water,
delivering more than 800,000 acre-feet annually to municipal, urban and
agricultural water users. SRP has a long history of actively working
with Native American communities throughout the state to address
concerns about water supplies, identify alternative supply options to
meet demands, and collaborate on programs to resolve water resource
conflicts.
SRP strongly supports S. 4705 and looks forward to the Committee's
next steps. We are thankful for Chairman Schatz and Vice Chairman
Murkowski's leadership on the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, and
attention to this bill as well as to the Yavapai-Apache Nation.
Sincerely,
Leslie A. Meyers, SRP Associate General Manager/Chief Water
Resources and Services Executive
______
Camp Verde AZ
October 15, 2024
Dear Chairman Schatz and Vice Chair Murkowski:
My name is Tony Gioia. I am the former Mayor of the Town of Camp
Verde AZ, a former Town councilman, first Chairman of the Yavapai
County Water Advisory Committee, former member of the State of Arizona
Gila River Water Adjudication Judge's Steering Committee, former Vice
President Verde River Basin Partnership, one of the founders of Friends
of the Verde River, and longtime advocate for the Verde River. I am
submitting this letter to supplement the hearing record for the
Legislative Hearing and Business Meeting held on September 25, 2024, to
express my concerns with the comments made by the Assistant Secretary
Newland on behalf of the Department of the Interior (Interior) about
the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 (S.
4705).
First, I want to make clear that Camp Verde and communities
throughout the Verde Valley have a strong partnership with the Yavapai-
Apache Nation (Nation), including in our shared efforts to protect
local groundwater sources and the health and vitality of the Verde
River, which remains a remarkable ribbon of life and one of Arizona's
last free-flowing rivers. I am also pleased to support the Nation's
decades-long effort to achieve a fair and equitable water rights
settlement, which S. 4705 will confirm. To this end, I strongly agree
with Interior's testimony that Indian water settlements, in addition to
providing Tribes with safe and reliable water supplies, ``have the
potential to end decades of controversy and contention among Tribal
Nations and neighboring communities and promote cooperation in the
management of water resources.'' Indeed, this is precisely what the
Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement will accomplish when
enacted.
Given my understanding of the history of the Nation's settlement
efforts and first-hand knowledge of the Verde Valley and Verde River, I
was disappointed, however, with much of Interior's written testimony on
the Nation's Settlement, particularly Interior's suggestion that (a)
the Settlement is the product of only recent negotiations efforts
conducted on an expedited timeline; (b) the water to be delivered from
the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir for treatment on the Reservation
``greatly exceeds'' the Nation's projected water demands for domestic,
commercial, municipal, and industrial (DCMI) uses; and (c) ``upsizing''
the Cragin-Verde pipeline to provide imported water those Verde Valley
Communities that opt into receiving water from the C.C. Cragin Dam and
Reservoir by the statutory deadline should not be supported.
Accordingly, I am writing here to respectfully supplement the record in
response to Interior's testimony to provide you with my on the ground
knowledge of the Nation's settlement.
First, it is well known and documented in the Verde Valley that the
Yavapai-Apache Nation has been working with the Salt River Project, the
State of Arizona, the United States, and local communities to negotiate
a water rights settlement since at least 2011. For myself, I have been
involved with the Nations water rights effort since 2008. To suggest
the Nation's settlement is the product of only recent negotiations
conducted on an expedited timeline is grossly misinformed.
Second, in 2023, the Nation filed an amended claim in Arizona's
Gila River General Stream Adjudication asserting water rights for
11,629 acre-feet per year (AFY) for its existing 1,809 acre
Reservation. In Settlement, however, the Nation agreed to a compromise
water budget of no more than 6,888 AFY of water (5,991 AFY in net
depletion) to provide for its permanent tribal homeland. Moreover, the
Nation is about to complete an administrative land exchange with the
U.S. Forest Service which will add significant lands to the Reservation
that are contiguous to the Nation's Middle Verde District in Camp
Verde. The notice of Interior's intent to place these lands into trust
has already been issued and the appraisal and NEPA process is complete.
Ultimately, the Nation agreed in Settlement to serve both its existing
and expanded Reservation lands (totaling 5,106 acres) with its original
water settlement budget of 6,888 AFY, including for all existing and
future DCMI and other uses on these lands, forever.
The Nation's Reservation (as expanded) will provide important
future commercial and economic development opportunities for the Nation
and needed goods, services, and jobs for the Verde Valley region. This
is particularly so given the Nation's acquisition of previously
undevelopable Forest Service lands within the boundaries of Camp Verde
and the proximity of these lands to Interstate I-17 and the 260
Highway, which are major transportation corridors. For the Nation to be
truly self-sufficient, it must engage in economic development on its
new lands, to support its Tribal members, maintain its culture, and
develop long overdue housing for its people.
To do this, the Nation, like all communities, must have a reliable
water supply. I appreciate that the Nation, as part of its Settlement,
plans to develop these lands using a sustainable water approach which
includes limited groundwater pumping, the use of imported water from
the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir, and the development of reclaimed
water sources. I was therefor perplexed to see officials in Washington,
DC testify from afar that the water to be delivered to the Nation under
the Settlement ``far exceeds'' the Nation's on Reservation water needs
for its permanent tribal homeland. This conclusion is unsupported and
contrary to my on the ground knowledge of the facts.
Finally, I respectfully disagree with Interior's decision to not
support an upsized Cragin-Verde pipeline under S. 4705. Under the Act,
local Verde Valley communities will have until December 31, 2029, to
undertake the necessary planning steps needed to decide whether it is
appropriate for their community to opt into an upsized version of the
Cragin-Verde Pipeline under S. 4705. And of course, if the Verde Valley
communities do not opt in by the deadline, the pipeline will not be
upsized, and federal funds will only be authorized and appropriated by
Congress to develop a project for the on Reservation needs of the
Nation under the Settlement.
The Nation's settlement is a generational opportunity for the
Yavapai and Apache people and for our region as a whole. But the
Cragin-Verde Pipeline can only be constructed once, and it cannot be
upsized later should Interior realize that its calculus on the pipeline
is wrong. It also appears that Interior has not considered the
multitude of federal benefits that can be achieved with an upsized
pipeline, including reducing pressure on local aquifers and conserving
groundwater sources that support the Verde River benefiting, among
other things: (a) the downstream segment of the Verde River designated
as a National Wild and Scenic River under the Arizona Wilderness Act of
1984 (P.L. 98-406); (b) two other downstream federally recognized
Indian Tribes that rely on the Verde River to help meet their settled
water rights (Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation and Salt River Pima-Maricopa
Indian Community); and (c) inflows to Bureau of Reclamation's Bartlett
Dam and Reservoir, that serves as a significant source of water for
metropolitan Phoenix and other Valley of the Sun cities.
The Cragin-Verde Pipeline Project was ultimately determined by the
Nation, the State of Arizona, the Salt River Project, Reclamation, and
the other settling parties to be the best alternative to deliver water
to the Nation for Settlement. The enactment of S. 4705 will finally
confirm a long over-due Indian water rights settlement for the Yavapai-
Apache Nation while also providing water certainty to the entire Verde
Valley and the United States' federal interests in a sustainable Verde
River. I urge you to enact S. 4705 expeditiously.
I appreciate the opportunity to submit these supplemental comments
for the record. If there are any questions, please feel free to contact
me.
Sincerely,
Hon. Tony Gioia
______
Town of Camp Verde
October 16, 2024
Dear Chairman Schatz:
This letter is submitted by the Town of Camp Verde, Arizona
(hereinafter ``Camp Verde'') to supplement the hearing record for the
Legislative Hearing and Business Meeting held on September 25, 2024,
and to express concerns with the comments made by the Assistant
Secretary Newland on behalf of the Department of the Interior
(Interior) about the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act
of 2024 (S. 4705).
Camp Verde enjoys a great relationship with our neighbor, the
Yavapai-Apache Nation. One area of longstanding collaboration between
our community and the Nation involves our mutual efforts to protect
local aquifers as well as the health and vitality of the Verde River,
which flows through the heart of our communities. As a party to the
Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement (Settlement) to be
confirmed by S. 4705, Camp Verde and the Nation have negotiated
mutually acceptable terms for Settlement that, among other things, will
help preserve our local aquifers, protect the Verde River, and help
address water certainty for Camp Verde for many years to come. To this
end, we were heartened to see that Interior ``strongly supports the
resolution of Indian water rights claims through negotiated
settlements.'' We also agree that Indian water settlements, in addition
to providing tribes with safe and reliable water supplies, ``have the
potential to end decades of controversy and contention among Tribal
Nations and neighboring communities and promote cooperation in the
management of water resources.'' Indeed, this is precisely what the
Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement will accomplish when
enacted.
Given our first-hand knowledge of the history of the settlement
negotiations and the terms of the Settlement, we were disappointed with
Interior's written testimony to this Committee about the Yavapai-Apache
Nation Water Rights Settlement, particularly its suggestion that (a)
the Settlement is the product of only recent negotiations efforts
conducted on an expedited timeline; (b) the water to be delivered from
the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir for treatment on the Reservation
``greatly exceeds'' the Nation's projected water demands for domestic,
commercial, municipal, and industrial (DCMI) uses; and (c) ``upsizing''
the Cragin-Verde pipeline to provide imported water to Verde Valley
Communities that opt into receiving water from the C.C. Cragin Dam and
Reservoir by the statutory deadline should not be supported.
Accordingly, Camp Verde is writing here to respectfully supplement the
record in response to Interior's testimony to provide you with our on
the ground knowledge of the Settlement.
First, it is well known and documented in the Verde Valley that the
Yavapai-Apache Nation has been working with the Salt River Project, the
State of Arizona, and local communities to negotiate a water rights
settlement since at least 2011. Over the years, the Nation's leaders
and attorneys have met with representatives of my community numerous
times to discuss the settlement, hear concerns, and ultimately
negotiate the final terms of settlement. To suggest the Nation's
settlement is the product of only recent negotiations conducted on an
expedited time line is misinformed.
Second, it is our understanding that, in 2023, the Nation filed an
amended claim in Arizona's Gila River General Stream Adjudication
asserting water rights for 11,629 acre-feet per year (AFY) for its
existing 1,809 acre Reservation. In Settlement, however, the Nation
agreed to a compromised water budget of no more than 6,888 AFY of water
from surface and groundwater sources (5,991 AFY in net depletion) for
its permanent tribal homeland. Moreover, the Nation Will complete an
administrative land exchange with the U.S. Forest Service this year,
which will restore significant lands to the Reservation that are
contiguous to the Nation's Middle Verde District in Camp Verde. The
notice of Interior's intent to place these lands into trust has already
been issued and the NEPA process is complete. Ultimately, the Nation
agreed in Settlement to serve both its existing and new Reservation
lands (totaling 5,106 acres) with its original water settlement budget
of 6,888 AFY, including for all existing and future DCMI and other uses
on these lands.
The Nation's Reservation is uniquely situated to support the future
commercial and economic development needs of our region, particularly
given the Nation's acquisition of previously undevelopable Forest
Service lands within the boundaries of Camp Verde and the close
proximity of these lands to Interstate I-17 and Arizona's State Route
260, which are major transportation corridors. We therefore anticipate
that a great deal of economic growth and job creation for our region
will occur on the Nation's lands--but for this to occur, the Nation
needs a reliable water supply. The Nation's actions to significantly
decrease their water budget as part of this settlement shows their
commitment to negotiating in this process. Camp Verde was therefore
perplexed with Interior's testimony that the water to be delivered to
the Nation under the Settlement ``far exceeds'' the Nation's on
Reservation water needs for its permanent tribal homeland. We are not
aware of any facts that support this conclusion.
Finally, we respectfully disagree with Interior's decision to not
support an upsized Cragin-Verde pipeline under S. 4705. Under the Act,
local Verde Valley communities, including Camp Verde, will have until
December 31, 2029, to undertake the necessary planning steps needed to
decide whether it is appropriate for our community to opt into an
upsized version of the Cragin-Verde Pipeline under S. 4705. As
proposed, it is our understanding that, if the Verde Valley communities
do not opt in by the deadline, the pipeline will not be upsized and
federal funds will only be authorized and appropriated by Congress to
develop a project for the on Reservation needs of the Nation.
The Nation's settlement is a generational opportunity for the
Yavapai and Apache people and for our region as a whole. The Cragin-
Verde Pipeline can only be constructed once and it cannot be upsized
later, should Interior realize that its calculus on the pipeline is
wrong. It also appears that Interior has failed to consider the
multitude of federal benefits to be achieved with an upsized pipeline,
including reducing pressure on local aquifers which we share with the
Nation, and conserving groundwater sources that support the Verde
River, thereby benefiting (a) the downstream segment of the Verde River
designated as a National Wild and Scenic River under the Arizona
Wilderness Act of 1984 (P.L. 98-406); (b) two other downstream
federally recognized Indian Tribes that rely on the Verde River to help
meet their settled water rights (Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation and Salt
River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community); and (c) inflows to Bureau of
Reclamation's Bartlett Dam and Reservoir, that serves as a significant
source of water for metropolitan Phoenix.
The enactment of S. 4705 will finally confirm a long over-due and
needed Indian water rights settlement for the Yavapai-Apache Nation
that will also provide water certainty to our community, the entire
Verde Valley, and the United States' federal interests. The Town of
Camp Verde appreciates the opportunity to submit comments for the
record which address some of Interior's statements to this Committee.
If there are any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Hon. Dee Jenkins, Mayor
______
Town of Clarkdale
October 11, 2024
Dear Chairman Schatz:
This letter is submitted by the Town of Clarkdale, Arizona to
supplement the hearing record for the Legislative Hearing and Business
Meeting held on Sept. 25, 2024, to express our concerns with the
comments made by the Assistant Secretary Newland on behalf of the
Department of the Interior (Interior) about the Yavapai-Apache Nation
Water Rights Settlement Act of 2024 (S. 4705).
The Town of Clarkdale enjoys a great relationship with our
neighbor, the Yavapai-Apache Nation. One area of longstanding
collaboration between our community and the Nation involves our mutual
efforts to protect local aquifers as well as the health and vitality of
the Verde River, which flows through the heart of our communities. As a
party to the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement (Settlement)
to be confirmed by S. 4705, the Town of Clarkdale and the Nation have
negotiated mutually acceptable terms for Settlement that, among other
things, will help preserve our local aquifers, protect the Verde River,
and provide water certainty for the Town of Clarkdale for many years to
come. To this end, we were heartened to see that Interior ``strongly
supports the resolution of Indian water rights claims through
negotiated settlements.'' We also agree that Indian water settlements,
in addition to providing tribes with safe and reliable water supplies,
``have the potential to end decades of controversy and contention among
Tribal Nations and neighboring communities and promote cooperation in
the management of water resources.'' Indeed, this is precisely what the
Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement will accomplish when
enacted.
Given our first-hand knowledge of the history of the settlement
negotiations and the terms of the Settlement, we were disappointed with
Interior's written testimony to this Committee about the YavapaiApache
Nation Water Rights Settlement, particularly its suggestion that (a)
the Settlement is the product of only recent negotiations efforts
conducted on an expedited timeline; (b) the water to be delivered from
the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir for treatment on the Reservation
``greatly exceeds'' the Nation's projected water demands for domestic,
commercial, municipal, and industrial (DCMI) uses; and (c) ``upsizing''
the Cragin-Verde pipeline to provide imported water Verde Valley
Communities that opt into receiving water from the C.C. Cragin Dam and
Reservoir by the statutory deadline should not be supported.
Accordingly, Town of Clarkdale is writing here to respectfully
supplement the record in response to Interior's testimony to provide
you with our on the ground knowledge of the Settlement.
First, it is well known and documented in the Verde Valley that the
Yavapai-Apace Nation has been working with the Salt R.iver Project, the
State of Arizona, and local communities to negotiate a water rights
settlement since at least 2011. Over the years, the Nation's leaders
and attorneys have met with representatives of my community numerous
times over many years to discuss the settlement, hear concerns, and
ultimately negotiate the final terms of settlement. To suggest the
Nation's settlement is the product of only recent negotiations
conducted on an expedited time line is grossly misinformed.
Second, in 2023, the Nation filed an amended claim in Arizona's
Gila River General Stream Adjudication asserting water rights for
11,629 acre-feet per year (AFY) for its existing 1,809 acre
Reservation. In Settlement, however, the Nation agreed to a compromised
water budget of no more than 6,888 AFY of water from surface and
groundwater sources (5,991 AFY in net depletion) for its permanent
tribal homeland. Moreover, the Nation will complete an administrative
land exchange with the U.S. Forest Service this year, which will
restore significant lands to the Reservation that are contiguous to the
Nation's Middle Verde District in Camp Verde. The notice of Interior's
intent to place these lands into trust has already been issued and the
NEPA process is complete. Ultimately, the Nation agreed in Settlement
to serve both its existing and new Reservation lands (totaling 5,106
acres) with its original water settlement budget of 6,888 AFY,
including for all existing and future DCMI and other uses on these
lands.
The Nation's Reservation is uniquely situated to support the future
commercial and economic development needs of our region, particularly
given the Nation's acquisition of previously undevelopable Forest
Service lands within the boundaries of Camp Verde and the close
proximity of these lands to Interstate I-17 and the 260 Highway, which
are major transportation corridors. We therefore anticipate that a
great deal of economic growth and job creation for our region will
occur on the Nation's lands--but for this to occur, the Nation needs a
reliable water supply. The Town of Clarkdale was therefore quite
perplexed with Interior's testimony and to see that officials in
Washington, DC have decided from afar that the water to be delivered to
the Nation under the Settlement ``far exceeds'' the Nation's on
Reservation water needs for its permanent tribal homeland. This
conclusion is not supported by anything we are aware of, and it is
contrary to our on the ground knowledge of the facts.
Finally, we respectfully disagree with Interior's decision to not
support an upsized Cragin-Verde pipeline under S. 4705. Under the Act,
local Verde Valley communities, including the Town of Clarkdale, will
have until Dec. 31, 2029, to undertake the necessary planning steps
needed to decide whether it is appropriate for our community to opt
into an upsized version of the Cragin-Verde Pipeline under S. 4705. And
of course, if the Verde Valley communities do not opt in by the
deadline, the pipeline will not be upsized and federal funds will only
be authorized and appropriated by Congress to develop a project for the
on Reservation needs of the Nation.
The Nation's settlement is a generational opportunity for the
Yavapai and Apache people and for our region as a whole. The Cragin-
Verde Pipeline can only be constructed once and it cannot be upsized
later, should Interior realize that its calculus on the pipeline is
wrong. It also appears that Interior has wholly failed to consider the
multitude of federal benefits to be achieved with an upsized pipeline,
including reducing pressure on local aquifers which we share with the
Nation, and conserving groundwater sources that support the Verde
River, thereby benefiting (a) the downstream segment of the Verde River
designated as a National Wild and Scenic River under the Arizona
Wilderness Act of 1984 (P.L. 98-406); (b) two other downstream
federally recognized Indian Tribes that rely on the Verde River to help
meet their settled water rights (Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation and Salt
River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community); and (c) inflows to Bureau of
Reclamation's Bartlett Dam and Reservoir, that serves as a significant
source of water for metropolitan Phoenix.
As part of settlement negotiations, we are aware of Reclamation's
detailed efforts to evaluate the design and costs of the Cragin-Verde
Pipeline Project, which were ultimately accepted by the Nation, the
State of Arizona, SRP, Reclamation, and the parties as the best
alternative to deliver water to the Nation for Settlement.
Reclamation's cost estimates have also been reviewed and determined to
be reasonable by an independent third-party contractor. Quite simply,
the Cragin-Verde Pipeline project makes sense, and it is supported by
detailed cost estimates and evaluations conducted by Reclamation and
reviewed by independent experts.
The enactment of S. 4705 will finally confirm a long over-due and
needed Indian water rights settlement for the Yavapai-Apache Nation
that will also provide water certainty to our community, the entire
Verde Valley, and the United States' federal interests. The Town of
Clarkdale appreciates the opportunity to submit comments for the record
which address some of Interior's statements to this Committee. If there
are any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Hon. Susan Guthrie J., Town Manager
______
Yavapai County Board of Supervisors
October 15, 2024
Dear Chairman Schatz:
My name is James Gregory. I am the Yavapai County Supervisor for
District 2 and a resident of Yavapai County for over 40 years. I am
submitting this letter to supplement the hearing record for the
Legislative Hearing and Business Meeting held on September 25, 2024, to
express concerns with the comments made by the Assistant Secretary
Newland on behalf of the Department of the Interior (Interior) about
the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement Act of2024 (S. 4705).
Yavapai-County enjoys a great relationship with the Yavapai-Apache
Nation. One area of longstanding collaboration between the County and
the Nation involves our mutual efforts to protect local aquifers as
well as the health and vitality of the Verde River, which flows through
the heart of many of our communities, including District 2.
As a County Supervisor for District 2 and as the former Chairman of
Yavapai-County Board of Supervisors, I have consistently supported the
Nation's decades-long effort to achieve a fair and equitable water
rights settlement, which S. 4705 will confirm. To this end, I
appreciated Interior's testimony noting that it ``strongly supports the
resolution oflndian water rights claims through negotiated
settlements.'' I also agree that Indian water settlements, in addition
to providing Tribes with safe and reliable water supplies, ``have the
potential to end decades of controversy and contention among Tribal
Nations and neighboring communities and promote cooperation in the
management of water resources.'' Indeed, this is precisely what the
YavapaiApache Nation Water Rights Settlement will accomplish when
enacted.
Given my understanding of the history of the Nation's settlement
efforts, however, I was disappointed with Interior's written testimony
about the Settlement, particularly Interior's suggestion that (a) the
Settlement is the product of only recent negotiations efforts conducted
on an expedited timeline; (b) the water to be delivered from the C.C.
Cragin Dam and Reservoir for treatment on the Reservation ``greatly
exceeds'' the Nation's projected water demands for domestic,
commercial, municipal, and industrial (DCMI) uses; and ( c)
``upsizing'' the Cragin Verde pipeline to provide imported water those
Verde Valley Communities that opt into receiving water from the C.C.
Cragin Dam and Reservoir by the statutory deadline should not be
supported. Accordingly, I am writing here to respectfully supplement
the record in response to Interior's testimony to provide you with my
on the ground knowledge of the Nation's settlement.
First, it is well known and documented in the Verde Valley that the
Yavapai-Apache Nation has been working with the Salt River Project, the
federal government, the State of Arizona, and local communities to
negotiate a water rights settlement since at least 2011. To suggest the
Nation's settlement is the product of only recent negotiations
conducted on an expedited timeline is grossly misinformed.
Second, in 2023, the Nation filed an amended claim in Arizona's
Gila River General Stream Adjudication asserting water rights for
11,629 acre-feet per year (AFY) for its existing 1,809-acre
Reservation. In Settlement, however, the Nation agreed to a compromise
water budget of no more than 6,888 AFY of water (5,991 AFY in net
depletion) to provide for its permanent tribal homeland. Moreover, the
Nation will complete an administrative land exchange with the U.S.
Forest Service this year, which will restore significant lands to the
Reservation that are contiguous to the Nation's Middle Verde District
in Camp Verde. The notice of Interior's intent to place these lands
into trust has already been issued and the NEPA process is complete.
Ultimately, the Nation agreed in its Settlement to serve both its
existing and increased Reservation lands (totaling 5,106 acres) with
its original water settlement budget of 6,888 AFY, including for all
existing and future DCMI and other uses on these lands, forever.
The Nation's Reservation (as expanded) will provide important
future commercial and economic development opportunities for the Nation
and needed goods, services, and jobs for the Verde Valley region. This
is particularly so given the Nation's acquisition of previously
undevelopable Forest Service lands within the boundaries of Camp Verde
and the proximity of these lands to Interstate I-17 and the 260
Highway, which are major transportation corridors. For the Nation to be
truly self-sufficient, it must engage in economic development on its
new lands to support its Tribal members, maintain its culture, and
develop long overdue housing for its people.
To do this, the Nation, like all communities, must have a reliable
water supply. I appreciate that the Nation, as part of its Settlement,
plans to develop these lands using a sustainable water approach which
includes limited groundwater pumping, the use of imported water from
the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir, and the development of reclaimed
water sources. I was therefore perplexed to see officials in
Washington, DC testify from afar that the water to be delivered to the
Nation under the Settlement ``far exceeds'' the Nation's on Reservation
water needs for its permanent tribal homeland. This conclusion is not
supported by anything I am aware of, and it is contrary to my on the
ground knowledge of the facts.
Finally, I respectfully disagree with Interior's decision to not
support an upsized Cragin-Verde pipeline under S. 4705. Under the Act,
local Verde Valley communities will have until December 31, 2029, to
undertake the necessary planning steps needed to decide whether it is
appropriate for their community to opt into an upsized version of the
Cragin-Verde Pipeline under S. 4705. And of course, if the Verde Valley
communities do not opt in by the deadline, the pipeline will not be
upsized, and federal funds will only be authorized and appropriated by
Congress to develop a project for the on Reservation needs of the
Nation under the Settlement.
The Nation's settlement is a generational opportunity for the
Yavapai and Apache people and for our region as a whole. But the
Cragin-Verde Pipeline can only be constructed once, and it cannot be
upsized later should Interior realize that its calculus on the pipeline
is wrong. In taking this position on an upsized pipeline, Interior may
have failed to consider the multitude of federal benefits that can be
achieved with an upsized pipeline, including reducing pressure on local
aquifers and conserving groundwater sources that support the Verde
River benefiting, among other things: (a) the downstream segment of the
Verde River designated as a National Wild and Scenic River under the
Arizona Wilderness Act of 1984 (P.L. 98-406); (b) two other downstream
federally recognized Indian Tribes that rely on the Verde River to help
meet their settled water rights (Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation and Salt
River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community); and (c) inflows to Bureau of
Reclamation's Bat1lett Dam and Reservoir, that serves as a significant
source of water for metropolitan Phoenix.
The Cragin-Verde Pipeline Project was ultimately determined by the
Nation, the State of Arizona, the Salt River Project, Reclamation, and
the other settling parties to be the best alternative to deliver water
to the Nation for Settlement. The enactment of S. 4 705 will finally
confirm a long over-due Indian water rights settlement for the Yavapai-
Apache Nation while also providing water certainty to the entire Verde
Valley and the United States' federal interests in a sustainable Verde
River. I urge you to enact S. 4705 expeditiously.
I appreciate the opportunity to submit these supplemental comments
for the record. If there are any questions, please feel free to contact
me.
Thank you,
James Gregory, Supervisor, District 2
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to
Hon. Johnny Lehi, Jr.
Question 1. In addition to creating a homeland for your Tribe after
decades of uncertainty, what other benefits and resources would be
unlocked for San Juan Southern Paiute from having land placed into
trust on its behalf, as well as water rights associated with those
lands?
Answer. The Settlement Act offers a long-awaited resolution to the
Paiute Tribe's decades-long pursuit of justice. By providing a
permanent land base and water rights, this legislation addresses
historical inequities and ensures a future where the Tribe can thrive
as a sovereign nation. In order to understand the significance of this
settlement and answer the question posed by Chairman Schatz, a brief
overview of the Tribe's history and the challenges it has faced in
securing its rightful homeland is required.
I. Brief Overview
A. History of the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe
The Paiute Tribe is a culturally and politically autonomous Native
American tribe, with members residing in two distinct regions: northern
Arizona and southern Utah. The Tribe's original territory was annexed
into the Navajo Reservation through Executive Orders in 1884 and 1933,
driven by the substantial increase in Navajo Tribal Members and their
territorial expansion. These annexations had severe consequences for
the Paiute Tribe, as it gradually lost its aboriginal territory,
legitimizing the increasing Navajo encroachment.
Today, the Paiute Tribe is surrounded by the Navajo Nation but
remains recognized as part of the Southern Paiute Nation by the Navajo
and other Southern Paiute Tribes in Arizona, southern Utah, and
southeastern Nevada. The two areas currently inhabited by Paiute Tribal
Members are approximately 90 miles apart. The southern settlement,
known as Atatsiv or ``Sands,'' refers to the sandy, spring-fed farmland
plateau northwest of Tuba City. \1\ The northern settlement,
Kaivyaxarur or ``the Mountain Place,'' is located around Navajo
Mountain, with homes and grazing areas primarily north and northeast of
the mountain. \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ PAMELA BUNT, ATATSIVWU UMANAKWAT KAIVYAXARURUVATUXW, FROM THE
SANDS TO THE MOUNTAIN: ETHNOHISTORY AND ETHNOGRAPHY OF THE SAN JUAN
SOUTHERN PAIUTE TRIBE 284 (1987).
\2\ Id. at 1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1907, the Assistant Secretary of the Interior established an
exclusive reservation for the Paiutes, known as the ``Paiute Strip,''
stretching from the 110th parallel in Monument Valley west to the
Colorado River. \3\ However, in 1922, under pressure from White
lobbyists seeking opportunities for mineral exploration, the federal
government returned the Paiute Strip to the public domain. \4\ By 1933,
after no minerals were found, the land was annexed to the Navajo
Nation, despite Paiute Tribal Members still residing in the area.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Id. at 8, 96.
\4\ See ALBERT FALL, THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR'S APPROVAL OF THE
RETURN THE PAIUTE RESERVATION TO PUBLIC DOMAIN, 304 (July 17, 1922) (on
file with the National Archives, Record Group 75, Central Classified
Files, Western Navajo Agency, File 17605-1922); see also Letter to
Paradise Oil (June 4) (on file with the National Archives, Record Group
75, Central Classified Files, Western Navajo Agency, File 42622-192.1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Despite these challenges, the Paiute Tribe continued to live and
farm in their traditional areas. Federal neglect from the 1930s to the
early 1980s deepened the Tribe's hardships and struggles with poverty.
However, this lack of attention inadvertently contributed to the
preservation of the Paiute language and cultural traditions. \5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See PROPOSED FINDINGS FOR FEDERAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT, infra note 6,
at 32-33.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Efforts to Secure Land and Water
The Tribe has spent half a century asserting its rights and
interests in its aboriginal land and the associated water. This
Settlement Act is a result of the culmination of efforts made by the
Tribe's past leaders and elders, some of whom have left this world
without seeing this achievement. We owe them our gratitude and our
recognition.
1. The Navajo-Hopi-San Juan Southern Paiute Land Disputes
In 1934, Congress ``permanently [withdrew] from all forms of entry
or disposal'' approximately 8.2 million acres of land, known as the
``1934 Act Lands,'' for ``the benefit of the Navajo and such other
Indians as may already be located thereon'' (the ``1934 Act''). The
1934 Act Lands were incorporated into what became recognized as the
``Navajo Reservation,'' sparking decades of disputes among the Navajo
Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the Paiute Tribe.
In 1974, Congress enacted legislation permitting the Federal
District Court to partition lands between the Navajo Nation and the
Hopi Tribe and to address claims by other Native groups regarding
rights and interests in the 1934 Act Lands. This led to decades of
litigation over tribal interests in the 1934 Act Lands between the
Navajo Nation and Hopi Tribe, culminating in the 1982 case Masayesva v.
Zah in the Arizona District Court. Our Tribe moved to intervene in the
litigation, countering arguments that it was not a ``tribe'' and
therefore lacked standing to participate. During this time, the Tribe
worked diligently to obtain federal recognition, which was granted by
the Bureau of Indian Affairs on December 11, 1989. \6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Indian Entities Recognized and Eligible to Receive Services
from the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs, 83 Fed. Reg. 34,863,
34,866 (July 23, 2018); Notice of Final Determination that the San Juan
Southern Paiute Tribe Exists as an Indian Tribe, 54 Fed. Reg. 51,502
(Dec. 15, 1989); see also, U.S. DEPT. OF THE INTERIOR, OFFICE OF FED.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT, NO. SJP-V001-D004, SUMMARY UNDER THE CRITERIA AND
EVIDENCE FOR PROPOSED FINDINGS FOR FEDERAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE SAN
JUAN SOUTHERN PAIUTE TRIBE (1987) [hereinafter PROPOSED FINDINGS FOR
FEDERAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT] (available upon request).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Arizona District Court ultimately held that the Paiute Tribe
qualified as the ``such other Indians as may already be located
thereon'' under the 1934 Act. The court further held that the 1934 Act
``conveyed an equitable property interest'' to the Paiute Tribe in
approximately 26,000 acres of land within the Navajo Reservation's
boundaries. \7\ While the District Court issued a final judgment
recognizing the Paiute Tribe's property interest, it concluded that it
could not partition the land between the Navajo Nation and the Paiute
Tribe because Congress did not specifically authorize it to do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Masayesva v. Zah, 794 F. Supp. 899,929 (D. Ariz.1992), appeal
filed, Sept. 3, 1993 (No. 93-15216).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although this land recognition marked the first win in our Tribe's
fight to reclaim part of our aboriginal territoty, the lack of a formal
partition meant that our Tribe's struggle for an exclusive homeland
continued.
2. The San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe and Navajo Nation Land Treaty of
2000
To resolve the land dispute and dismiss the appeal pending in the
9th Circuit, the Paiute Tribe and the Navajo Nation negotiated a land
treaty, which was finalized and executed in 2000 (the ``Treaty''). The
Treaty set aside two parcels of land within the Navajo Reservation to
be held in trust by the United States exclusively for the Paiute Tribe
(the ``Treaty Lands''). \8\ The Treaty establishes a homeland for the
Paiute Tribe and resolves the long-standing Masayesva v. Zah litigation
between the Paiute Tribe and the Navajo Nation, addressing the extent
of the Paiute Tribe's interest in the 1934 Act Lands. Through the
Treaty, the Paiute Tribe and the Navajo Nation expressed their ``desire
to establish harmony between the two nations for all future
generations.'' \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Treaty, Navajo Nation-San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, Mar.
18, 2000; Addendum to Treaty, Navajo Nation-San Juan Southern Paiute
Tribe, May 7, 2004.
\9\ Id. at Article I.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the Treaty was signed over 20 years ago, it has yet to be
ratified by Congress, leaving the Tribe in a state of uncertainty.
Without ratification, the Paiute Tribe has been unable to fully assert
its sovereignty or develop the infrastructure necessary to support its
people.
3. History of S. 4633
The Settlement Act, also referred to as S. 4633 in the Senate and
H.R. 8940 in the House, is a landmark piece of legislation designed to
resolve long-standing water rights disputes among the Navajo Nation,
the Hopi Tribe, and the Paiute Tribe. The Settlement Act represents the
culmination of decades of litigation and negotiation, particularly
within the context of H.R. 8940 and the Little Colorado River
Adjudication.
a. HR. 2461 and the Little Colorado Adjudication
Prior to the Treaty, the Navajo Nation and Paiute Tribe had both
filed Statements of Claimant in the Little Colorado River Adjudication,
claiming rights to use water in the Treaty Lands. The Paiute Tribe's
claim was submitted with the United States' report titled ``Report of
Water Claims by the United States of America for the San Juan Southern
Paiute Tribe, December 1991.'' On November 22, 1994, the United States
filed the United States' Statement of Amended Claims, which included
the Paiute Tribe in the claims asserted by the United States on behalf
of Indian tribes in the Adjudication. The United States submitted a
corresponding report titled ``Report of Amended Water Claims by the
United States of America for the Indian Lands in the Little Colorado
River Basin, November 22, 1994,'' which included specific details
regarding the water rights claims of the Paiute Tribe. During the
1990s, the United States, Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe, Paiute Tribe, and
non-Indian parties undertook efforts to negotiate a water rights
settlement for the entire region. However, these early settlement
efforts were unsuccessful, and the litigation continued.
As part of a contested case initiated in 2016 for the Navajo Nation
in the Little Colorado River Adjudication, the Navajo Nation claimed
rights to the water located beneath the Treaty Lands it agreed to
partition to the Paiute Tribe, as well as water in areas in where the
Paiute Tribe currently shares a joint interest with the Navajo Nation.
In response, the Paiute Tribe was forced to object to the Navajo
Nation's water claims in order to protect its joint and undivided
interest in the water rights for the 26,000 acres of 1934 Act Lands.
The Tribe's assertion of rights in the Little Colorado River
Adjudication did not stop the Tribe's efforts to have the Treaty
ratified. On August 24, 2022, after several requests, the Navajo Nation
sent a letter to Congressman O'Halleran confirming the Navajo Nation's
ongoing support of the Treaty Legislation. It was only when Congressman
Crane succeeded in representing the District that the Tribe's efforts
finally began to pay off. Congressman Crane championed our Tribe's
tireless attempts to have the Treaty ratified. On April 3, 2023,
Congressman Crane introduced H.R. 2461, ``the San Juan Southern Paiute
Tribal Homelands Act of 2023.'' The sole purpose of H.R. 2461 was to
ratify the Treaty and create the San Juan Southern Paiute Reservation.
In the months following the introduction of H.R. 2461, the Tribe
continued to work towards its passage. On June 7, 2023, Johnny Lehi,
Jr. testified before the United States Subcommittee on Indian and
Insular Affairs in support of H.R. 2461. The Tribe subsequently
received comments regarding the provisions for water rights in H.R.
2461, noting that while the Treaty provided for a quit claim of those
rights, it did not quantify them.
Congressman Crane's support in assisting the Tribe to establish its
exclusive reservation has surpassed the efforts of any previous
representative and we cannot thank him enough. Without the inclusion of
H.R. 2461 in the Settlement Act, S. 4633 and H.R. 8940 would likely not
exist.
b. The Tribe's Inclusion in the Settlement Act Negotiations
In or around October 2023, the Tribe learned that the Navajo
Nation, the Hopi Tribe, and the Arizona State parties in the Little
Colorado River Adjudication had renewed settlement negotiations of the
Hopi Tribe and Navajo Nation's water rights in the Lower Colorado River
Basin. The Tribe was informed that it would need to formally request to
participate in these negotiations. On December 14, 2023, the Tribe
submitted its formal request, and on January 23, 2024, the Tribe was
welcomed into the settlement negotiations. At that time, it was
suggested that the ratification of the Treaty be incorporated into the
negotiated settlement.
The Tribe spent the next four months engaged in daily meetings to
negotiate and draft the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Agreement. Significant time was needed to review prior
drafts and underlying documents, as well as to revise, draft, and
negotiate the Tribe's rights with the other parties. The goal was to
have the Settlement Act introduced before Congress this year. Entering
these negotiations at such a late stage was a monumental task for the
Tribe, but I am proud to say that we accomplished it.
II. Benefits and Resources Unlocked By Land In Trust and Water Rights
The Settlement Act is far more than just a legislative act; it
represents a landmark moment in the long and often arduous journey of
the Paiute Tribe toward justice and restoration. For a Tribe that has
endured displacement, resource deprivation, and jurisdictional limbo
for generations, S. 4633 offers not only tangible resources but also an
opportunity to restore sovereignty, preserve cultural identity, and
build a sustainable future. It establishes a homeland, secures water
rights, and creates the legal and financial framework necessary to
ensure that the Paiute people can thrive in the years to come.
The most immediate and profound benefit of S. 4633 is the creation
of a permanent homeland. For decades, the Paiute Tribe has existed as a
landless people, confined to scattered settlements within the Navajo
Nation's expansive reservation. Without a defined land base, the Tribe
lacked the ability to establish governance, provide critical services,
or create a space for cultural and communal gathering. This state of
limbo undermined the Tribe's sovereignty and deprived its members of a
sense of belonging and permanence. The establishment of a reservation
through S. 4633 finally provides the Paiute people with a place to call
``home.'' This land is more than just acreage; it is a symbol of the
Tribe's resilience and serves as the foundation for its self-determined
future. A reservation allows the Tribe to govern itself, enforce its
laws, and implement policies that reflect its values and priorities,
making self-determination a reality rather than an aspiration.
Beyond governance, the reservation will serve as a cultural anchor
for the Tribe. Over the years, the Paiute people have faced immense
pressure to assimilate into surrounding conununities, risking the
erosion of their language, traditions, and spiritual practices. By
creating a defined and protected homeland, S. 4633 ensures that the
Tribe has a dedicated space to preserve and celebrate its heritage. The
land will host sacred ceremonies, language revitalization programs, and
cultural education initiatives that reconnect younger generations to
their ancestors' ways of life. It will be a place where elders can
share their wisdom and stories with youth, ensuring that the Paiute
identity remains strong for generations to come.
In addition to its cultural and symbolic significance, the
reservation will address critical infrastructure and service gaps that
have long plagued the Tribe. For decades, Paiute communities have
struggled with inadequate access to clean water, electricity, and
sanitation--basic services that most Americans take for granted. The
trust land designation and water rights allocation under S. 4633
provide the legal and financial tools necessary to close these gaps,
ensuring that the Tribe can access the resources needed to thrive. The
legislation also funds the construction of critical infrastructure,
such as water delivery systems and housing, ensuring that Tribal
Members have access to safe living conditions and a sustainable quality
of life. The iina ba-paa tuwaqat'si pipeline, a centerpiece of the
settlement, will deliver clean, reliable water to the Paiute
reservation, ending the water insecurity that has hindered the Tribe's
development. For the first time, the Paiute people will be able to
build homes, schools, healthcare facilities, and community centers on
land they own and control. This will create a solid foundation for
improved public health and education outcomes, fostering a brighter
future for the Tribe.
The economic benefits realized by S. 4633 cannot be overstated.
With a permanent land base and secured water rights, the Tribe will be
able to develop enterprises that generate revenue and create jobs for
its members. Without a reservation, the Tribe's economic development
has been significantly hindered. There are also a myriad of federal
programs outside the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Indian Health
Services that support the work of Indian tribes through grants and
other forms of business development assistance. These programs often
require a tribe to have an exclusive land base, and with the passage of
S. 4633, the Tribe will gain access to apply for these grants and
funding opportunities. For example, passage of the legislation will
allow the Tribe to improve the road leading into the Southern Area
community of Hidden Springs, which is washed out during rainstorms.
With a land base, the Tribe will have jurisdiction over the area and
can use funding, previously unavailable, to repair the road and make it
safer for their children to cross on their way to the bus stop.
The Paiute Tribal Members will finally have the right to build
permanent housing when S. 4633 moves forward. For years, the Tribe has
been restricted by both the Bennett Freeze and Navajo law, preventing
the development of permanent homes for Paiute Tribal Members, despite
being on their aboriginal homeland. Although the Tribe has acquired
small fee lands, development on these lands has been limited, and the
Tribe lacks the autonomy over them that a reservation provides. While
other tribes have had access to housing funds, the Tribe has been
unable to use these resources without its own exclusive reservation.
Taking the San Juan Southern Paiute Reservation into trust will allow
the Tribe to develop those 5,400-acres into a flourishing community for
the Paiute people. All of this requires a reservation and an adequate
water supply, both of which S. 4633 provides to the Tribe.
Agriculture, which has always been a vital part of Paiute culture,
can now flourish with access to water for irrigation. Additionally, the
reservation's proximity to scenic areas and cultural landmarks presents
opportunities for eco-tourism and heritage-based ventures that showcase
the Paiute way of life. These enterprises not only provide economic
benefits but also foster cultural pride and engagement. Furthermore,
the infrastructure projects funded by the settlement, along with other
existing progtruns available only to reservations--such as housing
construction, pipeline installation, and community development--will
create immediate employment opportunities for Tribal Members, helping
to reduce poverty and unemployment within the community.
Equally important is the environmental stewardship enabled by S.
4633. The Paiute people have always maintained a deep spiritual
connection to the land and water, viewing themselves as caretakers
rather than owners. With control over their resources, the Tribe can
implement sustainable practices that protect the environment while
meeting the needs of their people. The secured water rights allow for
careful management of groundwater, springs, and other resources,
ensuring that these vital assets are not depleted or contaminated. The
Tribe can also undertake reforestation, habitat restoration, and other
conservation projects that preserve the biodiversity of their homeland
and combat the effects of climate change.
While the tangible benefits of S. 4633 are undeniably significant,
the emotional and psychological impact on the Paiute people is just as
profound. For generations, the Tribe has lived with the trauma of
displacement and marginalization. The establishment of a reservation
and the recognition of water rights represent a long-overdue
acknowledgment of the injustices they have endured. This legislation is
a step toward healing, offering the Paiute people a chance to reclaim
their identity and rebuild their community with dignity. For elders who
have spent their lives fighting for this moment, it is the fulfillment
of a dream and a testament to their resilience. For younger
generations, it is not just a promise of stability and opportunity--it
is a chance to grow up with pride in their heritage and hope for a
brighter future.
Finally, the benefits of S. 4633 extend beyond the Paiute Tribe
itself. By resolving longstanding land and water disputes, the
legislation fosters harmony between the Paiute Tribe and its neighbors,
including the Navajo Nation and the Hopi Tribe. Collaborative water
management and regional economic partnerships will strengthen
relationships and promote shared prosperity, creating a ripple effect
of stability and growth throughout northeastern Arizona.
III. Conclusion
The Settlement Act, S. 4633, is a profound and long-overdue act of
justice for the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe. It is not merely about
transferring land or securing water rights; it is about restoring
dignity, sovereignty, and opportunity to a people who have endured
generations of displacement and systemic neglect. By establishing a
permanent homeland, securing vital water resources, and providing the
legal and financial framework for self-determination, S. 4633 allows
the Tribe to reclaim its rightful place as stewards of its ancestral
lands and architects of its future.
This legislation marks the beginning of a new chapter for the
Paiute people--a chapter defined by cultural revitalization, economic
empowerment, and environmental stewardship. The benefits it unlocks
extend far beyond material resources; it provides a foundation for the
Tribe to heal, thrive, and preserve its identity for future
generations. Moreover, the collaborative spirit of S. 4633 sets a
powerful example for resolving disputes and fostering harmony between
Tribal nations and their neighbors.
For the Paiute people, S. 4633 represents the culmination of
decades of struggle, resilience, and advocacy. It is a testament to
their enduring spirit and an acknowledgment of the injustices they have
faced. For the United States, it is an opportunity to reaffirm its
commitment to upholding its trust responsibilities and promoting equity
for Indigenous communities. In passing this legislation, Congress
ensures that the Paiute people are no longer outsiders in their own
land, but rightful custodians of a future built on justice, hope, and
self-determination.
On behalf of the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe, we once again
thank the Subcommittee for its attention and interest in this historic
legislation. We remain available to answer any questions or concerns
that may arise.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to
Hon. Tanya Lewis
Question 1. In its testimony, the Department of the Interior noted
concerns with the size of the proposed Tu nliinichoh Water
Infrastructure Project (Project), with capacities of the Cragin-Verde
Pipeline Project pipeline and the Yavapai-Apache Nation Drinking Water
System far exceeding expected demand, as documented in the Gila River
Adjudication. Is the size of the Project largely based on the projected
water needs of the Yavapai Apache Nation, the surrounding non-Indian
communities, or both? Are these needs based on farming, municipal,
wastewater, or domestic use?
Answer. Under the Yavapai-Apache Nation Water Rights Settlement
dated June 26, 2024 (Settlement), the Project is based on the projected
water needs of the Nation for the Yavapai-Apache Reservation
(Reservation). The Project and Drinking Water System are neither
oversized for the Nation's expected water demands for its Reservation
nor unsupported by the Nation's claims in the Gila River Adjudication
under federal law.
While Section 114 of the Act provides an opportunity to upsize the
Project pipeline to deliver up to 1,639.74 acre-feet per year (AFY) of
additional water for Verde Valley Communities if contracted for by
December 31, 2029, see Answer to Question 3, infra., as a baseline, the
Project and corresponding Yavapai-Apache Nation Drinking Water System
(Drinking Water System) is sized under the Settlement to deliver and
treat 4,610 AFY \1\ of water from the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir
(Cragin Reservoir) for use on the Reservation from the following water
sources:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The total amount of YAN Cragin Water (2,910.26 AFY/26.45
percent) and SRP Water (500 AFY/4.55 percent) is based on a percentage
of storage capacity in Cragin Reservoir and an annual calculated ``not
to exceed'' average. In any given year, YAN Cragin Water could deliver
up to 3,394.06 AFY and up to 583.86 AFY of SRP Water. However, for
purposes of simplifying these Answers, a total annual delivery amount
of 4,610 is used.
Yan Cragin Water--2,910 AFY (average)
SRP Water--500 AFY (average)
YAN CAP Water (by exchange through Cragin Reservoir)--1,200 AFY
TOTAL: 4,610 AFY
Of these sources, the Settlement requires that the 3,410 AFY of
appropriable surface water to be delivered from the Cragin Reservoir
(YAN Cragin Water and SRP Water) must be used exclusively on the
Reservation, while the Nation is entitled (as in other Arizona Indian
water rights settlements), \2\ to temporarily lease some or all of the
its 1,200 AFY of the YAN Central Arizona Project (CAP) Water exchanged
through the Cragin Reservoir to off-Reservation entities, until such
time as the Nation requires this water source to meet its on-
Reservation permanent Tribal homeland needs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See, e.g., Ak Chin Community Water Rights Settlement Act of
1984, Pub. L. No. 98-520, 98 Stat. 2698 (as amended by the Act of Oct.
24, 1992, Pub. L. No. 102-497, 10, 106 Stat. 3255, 3258 and the Act
of Oct. 10, 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-285, 114 Stat. 878, 878-79); Salt
River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Water Rights Settlement Act of
1988, Pub. L. No. 100-512, 102 Stat. 2549; Gila River Indian Community
Water Rights Settlement Act of 2004, Title II, Arizona Water Settlement
Act, Pub. L. No. No. 108-451, 118 Stat. 3478 (2004).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because of the policies of the United States that removed the
Yavapai and Apache people from their original 900 square mile
reservation in 1875, the Nation's current Reservation totals no more
than 1,809 acres of land. However, because of a land exchange the
Nation recently completed with the USDA Forest Service and the pending
addition of certain contiguous fee owned lands, by or upon the passage
of the Act, the Nation's Reservation will total 5,106 acres of land.
For the Nation to be self-sufficient and engage in Indian self-
determination as contemplated by the U.S. Supreme Court in Winters, \3\
it must have sufficient water to construct community housing and engage
in the types of economic development that can generate tribal revenues
to support governmental services, enhance the lives of community
members and their families, and protect the culture and lifeways of the
Nation. Accordingly, the water demands of the 5,106 acre Reservation
were carefully evaluated by the Nation, the settling parties, the
Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), and the Nation's technical
experts, and it was determined that the Project and Drinking Water
System must have the capacity to deliver and treat up to 4,610 AFY of
water to meet the existing and future needs of the Reservation as a
permanent Tribal homeland under the Winters Doctrine.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Winters v. United States, 207 U.S. 564 (1908); see also In re
Gen. Adjudication of All Rights to Use Water in the Gila River Sys. &
Source, 35 P.3d 68, 79 (Ariz. 2001) (Gila V) (establishing the factors
to be used in Arizona to quantify federal reserved water rights for
Indian tribes under Winters).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Nation's 4,610 AFY of long-term water demand was confirmed by
the Drinking Water Infrastructure Plan Report prepared by Carollo
Engineers, Inc., dated July 2024 (Carollo Report) and the Memorandum
summarizing Land Use and Water Projections, also prepared by Carollo
Engineers, Inc., dated August 15, 2024 (Carollo Memo). In its Report
(as summarized in the Carollo Memo), Carollo Engineers used a standard
land use planning approach used in the industry to calculate the
Nation's domestic, commercial, municipal, industrial (DCMI) water
demands for the Reservation consistent with Gila V and Winters. \4\
This included conducting a complete analysis of all existing meter data
and water demands by DCMI use, and a calculation of reasonably
foreseeable future DCMI demands for the expanded Reservation at full
build out. Both the Carollo Report and the Carollo Memo were provided
to the Department of the Interior (Interior) prior to the hearing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The land use planning approach is a valid means to demonstrate
tribal water requirements under the Winters Doctrine in the Gila River
Adjudication. See, e.g., Gila V, 35 P.3d at 79 (approving the use of
land use plans or other land use planning approaches to quantify water
rights so long as the approach used considers ``actual and proposed
uses'', and ``recommendations of feasibility'' to establish ``the
amount of water necessary to accomplish the homeland purpose.''). In
fact, the Arizona Supreme Court justified its decision to use a land
use planning approach for quantify tribal water rights (in part) by
noting that this approach had already been used to justify Indian water
rights settlements in Arizona, including in the Fort McDowell Yavapai
Nation's 1990 Indian water rights settlement. Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The suggestion in Question 1 and in Interior's testimony that the
settling parties' decision to size the Project and the Drinking Water
System at a capacity to deliver 4,610 AFY of water to the Nation's
expanded Reservation ``far exceeds'' the Nation's expected water demand
``as documented in the Gila River Adjudication'' misunderstands both
the Nation's filing in the Gila River Adjudication and the terms of the
Settlement.
The Nation filed an amended water rights claim in the Gila River
Adjudication on January 6, 2023 (Amended Claim). In its Amended Claim,
the Nation asserted water rights under the federal reserved water
rights doctrine and Winters for DCMI, irrigation, and other uses
totaling 11,629 AFY in diversion requirements for its then existing
1,809-acre Reservation. However, under the Settlement, the Nation must
have sufficient water to serve its much larger and expanded Reservation
that will total 5,106 acres of land no later than by the enactment of
the Act. \5\ Because the Nation could only assert water rights in the
Gila River Adjudication for its smaller Reservation land base that was
in existence on the date of the filing of the claim (1,809 acres),
Interior's reliance on the Amended Claim to document the capacity
needed for the Project and Drinking Water System for the expanded
Reservation of 5,106 acres in Settlement is misplaced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ The Nation has a pending fee to trust application with the
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) that will add the contiguous USDA Forest
Service lands to the Middle Verde and Montezuma Districts of the
Reservation. In addition, the Act would also add a number of additional
fee held parcels to the Reservation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moreover, as part of the Nation's compromise in Settlement, the
Nation agreed to a significantly reduced water budget compared to its
2023 Amended Claim, and agreed to use its reduced water budget to meet
all DCMI, irrigation, and other water needs for both the existing and
expanded Reservation. \6\ Specifically, under the Settlement, the Total
Maximum Annual Diversion Amount for all on Reservation uses is 6,888.50
AFY (5,991 AFY in depletion), which is far less than the Nation's 2023
Amended Claim. See Settlement, Paragraph 4.0.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ The Nation's Amended Claim prioritized current and future
irrigation uses on its existing 1,809-acre Reservation consistent with
the Nation's farming practices, its desire to protect and preserve
arable farmlands from development, and its need to avoid residential or
commercial development in the flood plain of the Verde River. Because
of the Nation's small Reservation land base, this resulted in a limited
claim for on Reservation DCMI uses. However, the Nation's DCMI demands
will substantially increase with the expanded Reservation as documented
in the Carollo Report. These expanded DCMI uses are necessary to
finally meet the long overdue housing and economic development needs of
the Reservation as a true permanent tribal homeland.
Question 1a. Are these needs calculated based on irrigatable acres
of reservation land or on population?
Answer. The capacity of the Project and associated Drinking Water
System is sized to deliver and treat 4,610 AFY of water from the Cragin
Reservoir to support the Nation's long-term ``permanent tribal
homeland'' DCMI needs on the expanded Reservation. Agricultural
irrigation from local ditches and other historic sources accounts for
approximately 2,199 AFY of the Nation's water budget under the
Settlement. The Nation also expects to expand its irrigated land base
in the future by using highly treated reclaimed water produced from the
Nation's capture and treatment of wastewater from its expanded DCMI
uses on the existing and expanded Reservation. But to be clear, the
Project and Drinking Water System were sized to deliver water to meet
the Nation's on-Reservation DCMI uses, they were not sized to deliver
water for direct agricultural irrigation (though it could be used for
this purpose under the Settlement if deemed feasible by the Nation).
\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ In Gila V, 35 P.3d at 79, the Arizona Supreme Court rejected
the exclusive use of the practicably irrigated acre (PIA) standard for
quantifying tribal claims in the Gila River Adjudication and instead
adopted a ``multi-faceted approach'', Id. at 79, that is intended to
take into consideration the unique ``geography, topography, and natural
resources'' of each of Arizona's federally recognized Indian tribes.
Id. at 80.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Nation's anticipated population was a factor in the Nation's
DCMI calculations, just as it was in the Nation's 2023 claim filed in
the Gila River Adjudication. However, while the Arizona Supreme Court
made clear in Gila V that a tribe's present and projected future
population should be considered when examining Tribal water rights
claims under Winters, the Court also cautioned that population should
``never be the only factor'' considered. Gila V, 35 P.3d at 76. \8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ The approval of the Nation Settlement is governed by the
standards set forth in Gila V, which is binding precedent in the Gila
River Adjudication in Arizona.
Question 2. It is unusual for non-Indian parties to participate in
an Indian water rights settlement without contributing state or local
funding as part of the share of capital costs for any infrastructure
serving non-Indian water users. Why does S. 4705 lack a requirement for
the state or local county to contribute in this way?
Answer. Unlike reservations in many other states, none of the
Indian reservations in Arizona are checkerboarded with interspersed
non-Indian owned lands within their exterior boundaries. Consequently,
nearly all prior Indian water right settlements in Arizona have focused
on providing water resources and facilities to deliver and use water on
the reservations at issue. Aside from the leasing of some limited
tribal settlement water for use off a reservation, none of the
settlement water or federal funding provided by the Arizona settlements
has been made available to off-reservation individuals or communities.
The one exception to this is the rehabilitation and improvement of the
San Carlos Indian Irrigation Project (SCIIP) which was authorized by
the federal legislation approving the Gila River Indian Community Water
Rights Settlement in 2004. In approximately 1934, Congress authorized
SCIPP to construct Coolidge dam and an associated irrigation delivery
system on the Gila River in Central Arizona to provide irrigation water
to Gila River reservation lands, as well as to an equivalent amount of
non-Indian lands off the reservation. The Gila River Indian Community
settlement legislation authorized the rehabilitation of both the on-and
off-reservation portions of SCIPP from federal funds deposited in the
Lower Colorado River Basin Development Fund, without any local
contribution.
Similarly, Congress has authorized settlements in other states and
provided funds for projects that benefit non-Indian parties without
requiring local contribution from the non-Indian beneficiaries. For
example, the Consolidated Salish, Kalispell, and Kootenai of the
Flathead Reservation Water Rights Settlement includes funding for
improvements to dams, canals, and other infrastructure in the Flathead
Indian Irrigation Project that benefit all water users in the area, the
majority of whom are non-Indian, without those users being required to
financially contribute to the settlement. The Gros Ventre and
Assiniboine Tribes of the Fort Belknap Indian Community Water Rights
Settlement also provided funds to improve the efficiency of the U.S.
Bureau of Reclamation Milk River Project, which furnishes irrigation to
large areas of non-tribal land. Those funds were provided without
requiring contribution from the local parties benefiting from those
improvements.
Further, examining only financial contributions to this Settlement
misses the mark. The non-Indian parties will contribute valuable
infrastructure and water resources that are critical to Settlement. As
noted in response to Question 1, supra, non-Indian water users are
contributing significant water resources to the Settlement. The State
parties are contributing an average of 3,410 AFY of water stored in
Cragin Reservoir toward the Settlement that would not otherwise be
available to the Nation. That contribution is of enormous worth, both
economically and in terms of the Nation's long-term growth and
viability. Under the terms of the Settlement, the Salt River Project is
also making available annual water storage in the existing Cragin
Reservoir. The United States is only required to expend 0.2 percent of
the Project Fund to secure this storage infrastructure. \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ As described in the response to Question 1, the Salt River
Project will make an annual allocation of 4,610 AF of capacity in
Cragin Reservoir available to the Nation, while requiring that the
United States only reimburse the Salt River Project for incurred
capital and OM&R costs proportional to the Nation's allocation. These
reimbursed costs are presently $1,590,789 which is 0.2 percent of the
current Project Fund ($731,059,000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the Salt River Project is making additional water
stored in Cragin Reservoir available to allow the Nation to utilize its
existing CAP allocation. Under the Settlement, the Salt River Project
and Nation will execute an agreement that allows the Nation to exchange
its CAP allocation for water stored in Cragin Reservoir. Without an
exchange, the Nation cannot make use of its CAP allocation on the
Reservation because there is no mechanism for delivering CAP water to
the Reservation. Under the Settlement, the Nation will be able to
access and use its CAP allocation on the Reservation or make it
available for lease to Verde Valley Communities to reduce their
reliance on groundwater. Both options provide substantial financial and
water resource benefits to the Nation.
Section 114(a) of the Act also provides an opportunity to upsize
the Project pipeline to deliver up to 1,639.74 AFY of water from the
Cragin Reservoir to Verde Valley Communities, if those communities
enter into binding contracts for such water by December 31, 2029. Any
Verde Valley Communities contracting for water through the Project
would be obligated to pay their proportionate share of the ongoing
operations, maintenance, and replacement costs (OM&R) of the Project.
Importantly, such proportional contributions would directly decrease
the cost to the Nation associated with the delivery of water through
the Project. If those communities elect to contract for the full amount
of additional water and lease the Nation's 1,200 AFY CAP allocation,
the Nation's annual OM&R costs would be reduced by at least 45 percent.
\10\ The value the additional capacity would provide to the Nation thus
outweighs the incremental costs associated with upsizing the pipeline.
The estimated incremental cost of constructing a pipeline that could be
used by both the Nation and Verde Valley Communities is approximately
$80 million. Increasing pipeline capacity by approximately 73 percent
would only increase the pipeline cost by 12 percent. \11\ Given the
generational nature of the Settlement, such offset potentially dwarfs
the incremental costs associated with upsizing the Project pipeline to
accommodate deliveries to the Verde Valley Communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Verde Valley Communities' Cragin Water (1,639.74 AFY) +
Nation's CAP allocation (1,200 AFY) = 2,840 AFY. Dividing that amount
by the total average annual capacity of the Cragin-Verde Pipeline
(6,250 AFY) = 45 percent. This percentage increases to 55 percent with
full reservoir conditions and maximum deliveries.
\11\ ``Value Planning Study Phase II: Yavapai-Apache Nation Indian
Water Rights Settlement'' Cragin to Middle Verde Direct Supply--Cost
Update, February 8, 2024.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Delivery of water to participating Verde Valley Communities would
also reduce those communities' reliance on groundwater pumping that
negatively impacts the Verde River and the Nation. The Verde River is
an essential part of the culture and lifeways of the Nation.
Unsustainable groundwater pumping to meet growth in the Verde Valley
threatens the health of the Verde River. Replacing groundwater pumping
with sustainable surface water from the Cragin Reservoir protects the
river, the Nation's instream flow rights, and the Nation's cultural and
religious lifeways.
Any Verde Valley community that elects to contract for the delivery
of surface water from the Cragin Reservoir through the Project will
necessarily incur major infrastructure and treatment costs to transport
that water from the delivery point at the Reservation to their own
community. Requiring Verde Valley Communities that wish to avail
themselves of the additional water made available under the Settlement
to shoulder the incremental costs associated with upsizing the Project
pipeline would almost certainly preclude those communities from
participation. As a result, the communities would not replace their
current reliance on groundwater pumping with a sustainable, but much
more costly, long-term surface water source. Without participation by
one or more Verde Valley Communities, the long-term costs to the Nation
associated with the OM&R of the Project will be substantially higher.
As a result, the Nation believes that it is in the interest of the
Nation and the Verde Valley region to provide an opportunity to the
Verde Valley Communities to contract for water from Cragin Reservoir.
Question 3. In your testimony, you note that many non-Tribal
communities in the Verde Valley provide drinking water to the Yavapai
Apache Reservation lands (at Camp Verde, Middle Verde, and Clarkdale
Districts), and part of the settlement provides for their access to a
secure water supply from the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir. How much of
the Project design, scope, and costs in S. 4705 will go toward serving
Indian water users on the Reservation, compared to local non-Tribal
communities off the Reservation?
Answer. As noted in response to Question 1, supra., the water
supplies to be delivered by the Project under the Settlement and Act
will be used to provide the Nation with a secure water supply for its
Reservation. In fact, all appropriable surface water sources delivered
from the Cragin Reservoir to meet the Nation's 4,610 AFY DCMI demand
must be used on the Reservation. This can be accomplished in two
different ways under the Settlement. First, through the direct delivery
of Cragin Reservoir water to the Nation for treatment in its Drinking
Water System and distribution to on-Reservation uses, or second, by an
``exchange'' which requires that the Nation deliver treated water from
its Drinking Water System to the Town of Camp Verde in exchange for
Camp Verde's delivery of an equal amount of potable water to the Nation
for use on the Middle Verde or Camp Verde Districts of the Reservation.
The Clarkdale District of the Reservation is located some distance
away from the Project's delivery infrastructure and the Drinking Water
System. The Settlement therefore anticipates that the Town of Clarkdale
will continue to provide water service to the Clarkdale District from
its municipal water sources, though all deliveries of water to the
Nation's Clarkdale District are counted against the Nation's water
budget under the Settlement.
Question 3a. How many acre-feet per year will go toward Indian
water users on the Reservation compared to local non-Tribal communities
off the Reservation?
As noted in response to Questions 1, supra., no water allocated to
the Nation under the Settlement will ``go toward local non-Tribal
communities off the Reservation.'' Unless the Verde Valley Communities
elect to enter into a long-term contract with the Salt River Project
prior to December 31, 2029 for additional water made available by the
Salt River Project in Cragin Reservoir, and as explained in response to
Question 3(a) above, all water delivered through the Project (except
the Nation's CAP allocation which can be temporarily leased) will be
used on the Reservation for tribal purposes. If one or more Verde
Valley Community does enter into a contract to receive water from
Cragin Reservoir prior to the 2029 deadline, those communities would
receive a portion of up to 1,639 AFY of additional water made available
by the Salt River Project in the Cragin Reservoir. That water would be
in addition to the water in Cragin Reservoir that would be provided to
the Nation under the Settlement or in exchange for the Nation's
existing CAP allocation.
Question 4. The Department of the Interior raised concerns about
basing pipeline costs on a Value Planning Study that it prepared with
input from the Yavapai Nation and the Salt River Project. Does the
Yavapai Apache Nation plan to work with Interior on a more accurate and
complete estimate of the pipeline and Project costs going forward, so
that such an estimate is appropriately reflected in S. 4705?
Answer. The Nation has been in settlement negotiations with the
settling parties and representatives from the Department of the
Interior since 2011. The Nation has also worked in lockstep with the
Department of the Interior for two years to develop an accurate and
complete cost estimate for the Project through the Value Planning Study
(VPS) process and through Carollo's preparation of the Drinking Water
Infrastructure Plan Report that was also funded by Interior. In 2022,
Reclamation commissioned and funded the VPS to determine the best water
source alternatives for the Settlement and to provide a detailed cost
estimate for the delivery of these water sources to fill out the
Nation's water settlement budget. The VPS Study was completed in July
2023 with the full participation of Reclamation and other Interior
representatives on the Federal Negotiation Team.
Immediately after the completion of the VPS in July 2023, the
Settling Parties and Reclamation's Value Planning Team held multiple
meetings and agreed that delivery of water from the Cragin Reservoir
via the Project was the best, and likely only, alternative to provide
the necessary water supply to complete the Settlement.
In November 2023, Reclamation's Value Planning Team, along with
technical representatives from the Salt River Project and the Nation,
visually inspected the location of the Cragin Reservoir outlet works
and traveled the entire 60-mile length of the Project's pipeline route
to examine the geology, topography, and other features of the route and
identify any other factors that should be considered for the cost
estimate. Thereafter, Reclamation's Value Planning Team undertook
additional work to prepare a detailed cost estimate for the Project
that incorporated this information, including contingencies. The final
cost estimate was provided to Interior and the settling parties in
January 2024.
The Nation subsequently commissioned a review of the Value Planning
Team's cost estimate by RMCI, a nationwide contractor with experience
in constructing large infrastructure projects and pipelines of this
type. RMCI concluded that the Value Planning Team's cost estimate was
reasonable and properly estimated. RMCI's review and opinion was also
provided to Interior in support of the reasonableness of the cost
estimate in July 2024.
Once the Project and Drinking Water System is authorized by
Congress, Interior (with the assistance of the Nation) will engage in
detailed engineering and design work for both the Project and Drinking
Water System and it will perform an environmental review under the
National Environmental Policy Act and other requirements of law. This
approach is both technically appropriate and necessary to ensure that
Interior will meet its federal trust responsibility to secure the
Nation a permanent supply of water for its homeland.
For over 100 years, the United States has invested countless
dollars and resources constructing and maintaining large water
infrastructure projects on the Verde River, including Bartlett and
Horseshoe Reservoirs. These federal reclamation projects have provided
a steady and reliable water supply to metropolitan Phoenix since the
turn of the century, ushering in a wave of development and prosperity
for non-Indians throughout the region. Meanwhile, the Yavapai-Apache
Nation still lacks a legally certain and reliable water supply for the
Reservation and the Yavapai and Apache people.
Had the United States made a similar investment to meet the needs
of the Nation when it authorized construction of the massive federal
infrastructure projects on the Verde River and elsewhere throughout the
State of Arizona, there is no doubt this infrastructure would have cost
the United States much less money. Unfortunately, that was not the
case. Now the United States must do what it should have done more than
100 years ago--authorize and fund the Project and Drinking Water System
that will finally provide the Nation with a reliable and secure water
supply and resolve many years of water uncertainty for the Nation and
other water users in the Verde River Watershed. It has been stated many
times, this infrastructure does not get less expensive if we wait.
As noted above, the United States determined, and the Nation
agreed, that the only way to meet the long-term water needs of the
Nation is to construct the necessary infrastructure to import water
under the Settlement from Cragin Reservoir for use by the Nation on its
expanded Reservation. This is why the Nation jointly worked with
Interior to develop the details of the VPS and the final cost
estimates. While the Nation understands Interior's concern that it is
difficult to guarantee the ultimate cost of the Project and Drinking
Water System, this is true for any large-scale infrastructure project,
regardless of the level of planning and cost estimates developed in
advance of construction. These concerns also do not provide a
sufficient justification for the United States to step away from its
responsibility to the Yavapai and Apache people, who are finally on the
verge of achieving an Indian water rights settlement that will provide
a reliable long-term water supply for after more than a century of
neglect.
Finally, it is important to understand that the Gila River
Adjudication is currently scheduled to begin the adjudication phase of
the Nation's water rights sometime beginning after issuance of the
Hydrographic Survey Report in September 2028. At this time, the Nation,
the United States as trustee for the Nation, and the settling parties
will have little choice but to devote their resources to litigation as
opposed to settlement. Should the Nation be required to first perform
an appraisal level study or engage in other protected engineering or
cost related studies before Congress can consider approving the
Settlement and corresponding Pipeline and Drinking Water System, it is
unlikely there will be a settlement of the Nation's water rights at
all--and the Nation, the United States as its trustee, and the parties
will have missed a generational opportunity to finally secure a
reliable water supply for the Yavapai and Apache people, protect the
Verde River, and fulfill the United States' trust and treaty
obligations to the Nation. This should not be the final result of so
many years of detailed planning and good faith negotiation and
compromise by so many.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to
Hon. Timothy L. Nuvangyaoma
Question 1. With enactment of S. 4633, how many of the estimated 18
percent of Hopi households in villages without access to piped public
water supply would gain access from the proposed Project?
Answer. With the enactment of S. 4633 and completion of the iina
ba-paa tuwaqat'si pipeline and new groundwater and local water
infrastructure projects funded by the Hopi Tribe Water Settlement Trust
Fund, all of the Hopi households in villages without access to a piped
public water supply should have the opportunity to gain access. A
funding shortfall could arise from the Tribe's obligation to contribute
to potential iina ba-paa tuwaqat'si pipeline cost overruns from the
Hopi Tribe Water Settlement Trust Fund. The Tribe is confident,
however, that the flexibility built into section 8 of S. 4633 gives the
Tribe the ability to manage and absorb any such cost overruns without
compromising the Tribe's ability to provide all Hopi households in
villages with access to a piped public water supply.
Question 2. How many Hopi households that are currently supplied by
the Tribe's public water systems would have their access improved,
repaired, or replaced with enactment of S. 4633?
Answer. All Hopi households, including those currently served by
public water systems, are in critical need of improved water
infrastructure and access. With the enactment of S. 4633 and completion
of the iina ba-paa tuwaqat'si pipeline and new groundwater and local
infrastructure projects funded by the Hopi Tribe Water Settlement Trust
Fund, all Hopi households that are currently supplied by the Tribe's
public water systems would have their access improved, repaired, or
replaced.
Question 3. In your testimony, you note the poor state of the Hopi
Tribe's current public water infrastructure, including its inability to
meet current water demands and inadequate fire protection needs. What
is the scope of the public water infrastructure on the Hopi Reservation
that would be replaced or repaired with enactment of S. 4633?
Answer. Substantially all of the public water infrastructure on the
Hopi Reservation must be replaced or repaired as soon as possible. The
Hopi Tribe anticipates that the Hopi Tribe Water Settlement Trust Fund
provided by S. 4633 will be sufficient to fund all of the necessary
replacements and repairs. A funding shortfall could arise from the
Tribe's obligation to contribute to potential iina ba-paa tuwaqat'si
pipeline cost overruns from the Hopi Tribe Water Settlement Trust Fund.
The Tribe is confident, however, that the flexibility built into
section 8 of S. 4633 gives the Tribe the ability to manage and absorb
any such cost overruns without compromising the Tribe's ability to fund
all necessary replacements or repairs of public water infrastructure.
There are sixteen existing public water systems on the Hopi
Reservation, most of which were constructed between the 1950s and the
1990s and are now old, undersized, inefficient, and inadequate to meet
even present Hopi needs, much less future needs. For example, many of
the systems' supply wells are over fifty years old and approaching the
end of their useful life and while some villages have fire hydrants,
they cannot be used for fire suppression. These are just some of the
problems Hopi face on a daily basis.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to
Hon. Bryan Newland
Question 1. S. 4633 authorizes the Navajo Nation, which has water
rights in both the Upper and Lower Basins, to lease and exchange its
water across basins in a period when Upper and Lower Basin states are
working to negotiate new Colorado River 2026 management guidelines.
Interior must balance its role as both steward of water resources and
as trustee to ensure Tribes can use their water rights in their
homelands. How is Interior working to balance these priorities in S.
4633, especially with respect to the role it played in water settlement
agreement negotiations for the Northeastern Arizona Indian Water Rights
Settlement Agreement and the role it plays in water allocation and
management under the 1922 Colorado River Compact?
Answer. The Department is involved in on-going discussions among
the Colorado River Basin States (Basin States), the Navajo Nation, the
Hopi Tribe, and the San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe in an effort to
reach consensus on how the Tribal rights proposed in S.4633 can be
accomplished in conjunction with the rights of the Basin States under
existing law including the 1922 Colorado River Compact.
Question 2. S. 4633 also authorizes an intertribal treaty addendum
to transfer of roughly 5,400 acres of land within the Navajo Nation,
currently held in trust by Interior for the Navajo Nation, to be held
in trust by Interior for the San Juan Southern Paiute. How will
Interior implement this transfer?
Question 2a. Does an intertribal transfer of trust land have a
precedent at Interior using its land into trust administrative process?
Answer. The 2000 Treaty between the Navajo Nation and the San Juan
Southern Paiute Tribe, which requires ratification by Congress, is
unique, and the Department is unaware of any similar trust-to-trust
precedent. S. 4633 calls for the trust transfer to be processed as a
mandatory transfer rather than a discretionary administrative transfer.
The Treaty and S. 4633 require the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to
complete a legal survey of the two parcels to be transferred from the
Navajo Reservation to the newly established San Juan Southern Paiute
Reservation. The survey would produce a legal description for the
trust-to-trust land transfer document which can be recorded in the
Trust Asset and Accounting Management System (TAAMS) maintained by the
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA).
Question 3. The Department of the Interior cited concerns with the
Project costs associated with S. 4705, including insufficient time to
review Yavapai Apache Nation's July 9, 2024 Drinking Water System cost
basis plans. What is the status of the Department's review of these
plans?
Answer. The Department has held numerous meetings with the Yavapai-
Apache Nation to discuss concerns with S.4705, including the
reliability of the cost estimates contained in the bill. Additional
meetings are planned.
Question 3a. Does the Department have concerns about these plans,
specifically the possible underestimation of the cost of the Drinking
Water System in S. 4705? Are these concerns similar to those that
Interior expressed on the cost of the Pipeline in S. 4705?
Answer. The Department has concerns about estimates for both the
Drinking Water System and the Pipeline. The Department has consistently
testified that design costs based on preliminary or appraisal level
studies, as is the case here, should not be used as a basis for
congressional authorization of projects.
Question 4. It is unusual for non-Indian parties to participate in
an Indian water rights settlement without contributing state or local
funding as part of the share of capital costs for any infrastructure
serving non-Indian water users. Why does S. 4705 lack a requirement for
the state or local county to contribute in this way?
Answer. S. 4705 was drafted by the parties and does not reflect the
views of the Department. As reflected in the Department's testimony on
S. 4705, the Department does not support providing this substantial
benefit without appropriate contributions from the non-Indian parties.
Question 4a. What was Interior's role in helping the parties
negotiate this specific term in the settlement agreement?
Answer. This specific term in S. 4705 is unusual and was drafted by
the parties late in negotiations. A Federal Negotiation Team
participated in the negotiations and expressed concern over the lack of
financial contributions by non-Federal parties benefiting from the
settlement. Federal Negotiation Teams do not have the authority to
approve any terms of a settlement.
Question 5. Together, S. 4633, S. 4643, S. 4705, and S. 4998
authorize nearly $7 billion in mandatory funding to pay for those
Indian water rights settlements, plus ``such sums'' in some cases for
certain expenses. The $2.5 billion set aside for the Indian Water
Rights Settlement Completion Fund in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law
is not available for these pending settlements. As a result, enacted
settlements that are authorized to receive mandatory funds, such as
Hualapai, have nonetheless requested discretionary funds for Fiscal
Year 2025 in the President's Budget Request in the absence of available
mandatory funds. If these pending settlement bills are enacted without
additional appropriations or authorized funding for the Indian Water
Rights Settlement Completion Fund, what funds are available at Interior
and Treasury to pay for them?
Answer. Without the mandatory funding called for in each
settlement, funding would be addressed through the annual discretionary
budget process.
Question 6. In the 118th Congress, several calls from Congress have
required a ``pay-for'' for Indian water rights settlements, regardless
of whether they authorize mandatory or discretionary funding for fund-
based or project-based settlements. Is there precedent to have a
mandatory or discretionary pay-for or offset for the cost of
implementing settlement agreements in previously enacted Indian water
rights settlements?
Answer. The Department is not aware of any precedent for
discretionary pay-for or offset in previously enacted Indian water
rights settlements.
Question 6a. Is Interior aware or tracking new or developing legal
claims in basins where Indian water rights have not yet been
adjudicated or settled? If yes, identify these basins and whether such
basins are located in prior appropriation or riparian states.
Answer. The United States and Tribes are involved in general stream
adjudications and other litigation involving Indian water rights
throughout the western United States. The Department will evaluate
potential new cases or seek to file claims as appropriate as new
adjudications are initiated.
Question 7. In addition to the four settlement bills considered at
the September 25 hearing, this Committee has considered eight others in
the 118th Congress--each important and unique, and critical to those
Tribes' wellbeing and water security. How important is it for Congress
to finalize these settlements, particularly in light of the ongoing and
worsening mega drought?
Answer. At the center of the United States' trust and treaty
obligations is the responsibility to ensure that Indian Tribes have the
right to continue to exist in their homelands. Without water, no Tribal
community can survive much less thrive. Water is a sacred and valuable
resource for Tribal Nations and long-standing water crises continues to
undermine public health and economic development in Indian Country. The
Indian water settlements that the Department has fully supported and
are currently pending before Congress will ensure that the Tribes have
safe, reliable water supplies; improved environment and health;
enhanced economic growth opportunities all the while promoting Tribal
sovereignty and self-sufficiency and advancing the United States' trust
relationship with Tribes. As drought intensifies in the Western United
States and the cost of water infrastructure increases on a yearly
basis, delay in securing water rights and funding to put that water to
use poses even more harm to Tribal Nations who have so long suffered
with lack of water infrastructure most American citizens take for
granted. These wrongs must be rectified now.
Question 7a. As water becomes a scarcer resource, does Interior
have an estimate of how much it costs U.S. taxpayers to wait, delay, or
refuse to enact Indian water rights settlements?
Answer. Predicting future drought and the impacts of climate change
are difficult due to the variety of factors involved. There is no
single figure on Indian water rights settlement projects' cost
escalations as they are unique in nature and have their own local cost
trends. In general, the cost oflndian water right settlements has
significantly increased over time due to (a) water scarcity, (b)
general inflationary pressures, (c) inflationary pressures for heavy
civil works projects, and (d) inflationary pressures for remote
projects. In regard to water scarcity, the availability of water is
heavily dependent on individual settlements, as water sources are
depleted during the long-term trend towards aridification, but is
likely to increase the cost of settlements both due to the increased
cost of infrastructure as well as the value of the water itself.
Question 8. At the September 25th hearing, Chairman Whiteclay
confirmed knowledge of Tribal cultural resources and sites in the Bull
Mountains that could be impacted by mining activities. Generally, how
does DOI balance interests in development of natural resources with
protection of Tribal cultural resources, including sacred sites, on
Tribal trust lands? For example, would an EIS or other NEPA review be a
factor to consider when striking this balance?
Answer. The Department of the Interior (DOI) is unwavering in its
commitment to a thoughtful and balanced approach. This approach
harmonizes natural resource development with the vital protection of
Tribal cultural resources. Our strategy is multifaceted, encompassing
thorough consultations, comprehensive environmental and cultural
resource reviews, and adherence to legal protections.
DOI prioritizes meaningful consultation with Tribal governments and
communities. Recognizing the inherent sovereignty of Tribal nations,
DOI engages in government-to-government dialogues that not only empower
Tribes but also ensure they play a significant role in decisions
impacting their lands and resources. Their input is crucial in shaping
our strategies and decisions.
Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and
the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) is indispensable in
project planning. These critical laws evaluate potential impacts on the
environment and cultural resources, allowing DOI to identify essential
mitigation measures to minimize adverse effects. Strict adherence to
these laws ensures that our approach fosters informed decisionmaking
that honors Tribal interests.
Ultimately, the DOI is dedicated to achieving an equitable balance
that honors Tribal rights and cultural preservation. We are committed
to considering and actively promoting the economic benefits that Tribes
can gain through responsible and respectful resource management.
Question 8a. How would Interior balance competing interests from
several Tribes if more than one has a claim to the area?
Answer. DOI would evaluate competing Tribal claims. DOI would
facilitate open and inclusive discussions among the Tribes to
understand each Tribe's claims, cultural significance, and use of the
area. DOI would assess claims based on legal precedents, treaties, and
any relevant legislation. DOI may employ mediators to help the Tribes
negotiate terms that could lead to shared use/benefits or co-management
of the area, fostering collaboration rather than conflict.
Question 9. The Montana Department of Revenue estimates that
approximately $1.145 million in income tax revenue would be lost in
Montana between 2024 and 2028 if S. 4444 is enacted. Does Interior (or
its federal partners) have its own estimates of projected federal
revenue loss associated with enactment of S. 4444?
Answer. Based on the amount of recoverable coal that the BLM
estimates remains in the Bull Mountains Tracts, approximately $132
million in Federal royalty obligations would be foregone if the bill
were enacted and the lands transferred out of Federal management. Under
the Mineral Leasing Act, half of that amount (approximately $66
million) would have gone to the State of Montana. Therefore, the
anticipated Federal revenue loss would be approximately $66 million.
Question 10. The Bull Mountain Tracts managed by the Bureau of Land
Management in Montana are currently a federal asset. If S. 4444 is
enacted, will an EIS be required to develop these tracts for coal
mining?
Answer. If the bill were enacted, the Federal coal lease would be
relinquished and the Bull Mountains Tracts would be conveyed out of
Federal management. Because the development of these lands for coal
mining would no longer be a major Federal action, an analysis under the
National Environmental Policy Act would not be required.
Question 10a. Without an EIS, how would potential impacts to water
quality or quantity in the area be measured/estimated? For impacts to
Tribal cultural resources and sacred sites? For impacts to outdoor
recreation and hunting?
Answer. As noted in the response to Question l0(a), once the
Federal coal lease is relinquished and the Bull Mountains Tracts
conveyed out of Federal management, an analysis under the National
Environmental Policy Action would not be required. However, the
development of these lands for coal mining would be subject to the
Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 (SMCRA). Montana has
an approved regulatory program under SMCRA and would be responsible for
ensuring that any coal mining was fully compliant with the requirements
of its approved program, including minimizing the disturbances to the
quality and quantity of water in surface and ground water systems and
fish, wildlife, and related environmental values. Other applicable
Federal or state laws may also apply to the development of the coal
tracts.
Question 11. If enacted, S. 4444 would authorize transfer of
certain federal parcels in the Bull Mountains to the Hope Family Trust,
which plans to partner with Signal Peak Energy, LLC to mine coal
resources in the tracts' mineral estate. Given Signal Peak's public
record of environmental, workplace, and firearms, drug, bribery, and
embezzlement violations, and its probationary status stemming from
criminal and civil proceedings involving the U.S. Department of Justice
and the Securities and Exchange Commission, does Interior's role as
trustee of public and Tribal lands affect its position on the proposed
land transfer in S.4444?
Answer. The Department supports the bill's goals of addressing
inholdings within the boundaries of the Crow Indian Reservation and
providing an additional source of revenue for the Crow Tribe.
Question 12. The mineral swap proposed in S. 4444 does not specify
whether it is an acre-for-acre or value-for-value exchange. Is this
lack of specificity a concern?
Answer. The Department does not consider S. 4444--as currently
drafted--to be a land exchange in the traditional sense. The bill
requires, within 60 days: (1) the relinquishment of a Federal coal
lease; (2) the conveyance of surface acreage and mineral estate
associated with this Federal coal lease out of Federal management to a
private party; and (3) the conveyance of private mineral estate within
the boundaries of the Crow Reservation to the Crow Tribe of Montana. It
is currently unclear whether the parcels to be conveyed are of equal
value. As stated in our testimony, the Department would like to work
with the Sponsor to ensure that these parcels are of equal value.
Question 12a. Does Interior uphold a standard for (Tribal or other)
land exchanges to ensure there is an approximate acre-for-acre or
value-for-value exchange?
Answer. The Department has previously supported land exchanges to
consolidate ownership of scattered tracts for more efficient management
and to acquire environmentally sensitive areas while transferring
public lands into non-Federal ownership for local needs. In each of
these cases, the Department has recommended that the proposed land
exchange be of equal value to ensure that the American taxpayer
received a fair return.
Question 13. According to your written testimony, private
landowners own the surface rights above the Hope Family subsurface
mineral rights. If S. 4444 is enacted, how could access and development
occur given status of the split estate?
Answer. It is an established legal precedent that, in such
situations, the mineral estate is the ``dominant estate,'' meaning that
the surface owner may not deny the mineral owner (or agents of the
mineral owner) reasonable surface access to develop minerals.
Reasonableness is understood to include actions that satisfy the
surface owner's entitlement to compensation and other considerations.
Question 14. Chairman White Clay testified that he believes the
Crow Tribe would benefit from the export of the coal tonnage from
mining in the Bull Mountains. Where would the coal mined from the Bull
Mountain Tracts be exported to? How much of the mined coal would be
retained for domestic use?
Answer. According to online information \1\ posted by Signal Peak's
coal marketing affiliate, ``[n]early 100 percent of Signal Peak's
current production is being exported by Global Coal Sales via Westshore
Terminals in British Columbia to end-users for the production of
electricity.'' The lessee may market coal extracted from the Bull
Mountain tracts through the same marketing channels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``About Global Coal Sales Group, LLC.'' Global Coal Sales
Group, LLC, November 15, 2024, https://globalcoalsales.com/
Question 15. The State of Montana recently approved Signal Peak
Energy, LLC's amendment (AM6) to its surface mining permit (Cl993017)
for expansion of mining activities within and outside current Bull
Mountain Mine No. 1. What is the impact of this amendment to Signal
Peak's mining operations, i.e., does it extend the life of the mine? If
so, for how long? Does this extension affect any urgency to enact S.
4444?
Answer. The Montana Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) has
an approved regulatory program in accordance with the Surface Mining
Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 and is the primary regulatory
authority responsible for the permitting, inspection, and enforcement
of coal mining in Montana. AM6 did not include any Federal coal. As
such, Montana DEQ is the best point of contact for information about
AM6.
Question 15a. Should the AM6 amendment be a consideration in any
revenue sharing agreement contemplated in S. 4444?
Answer. The Bull Mountain Tracts are not held in trust or
restricted status, nor would mineral revenue generated from these
tracts and shared with the Tribe as contemplated in Section 3,
Paragraph (d) of S. 4444 be deemed trust revenue. Further, S. 4444 does
not include parameters for the revenue sharing agreement, therefore the
Department does not have enough information to comment.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to
Hon. Buu Nygren
Question 1. If both S. 4633 and S. 4998 are enacted, would the
Navajo Nation's water rights be resolved in every basin on Navajo
Nation lands where it has claims? Or does the addition of additional
trust lands introduce the possibility of additional water rights claims
on new reservation lands?
Answer. The Navajo Nation has additional water claims in two
tributaries to the Little Colorado River in New Mexico: the Zuni River
Basin, and the Rio Puerco Basin (which flows through the City of
Gallup). The Zuni River Basin claims are being addressed through that
general stream adjudication which includes the Zuni Pueblo. The Zuni
Pueblo has reached a settlement agreement with the State of New Mexico.
The Navajo Nation is working on a similar agreement.
The Rio Puerco claims, although not quantified, will not be
significant because the municipal water demands will be served by the
Navajo Gallup Water Supply Project. In the Rio Grande Basin, S. 4998
includes provisions to quantify Navajo Nation claims for the Rio San
Jose and Rio Puerco basins. Water claims in the Rio Salado Basin remain
to be quantified.
Water rights for new trust lands, in most cases, will be dealt with
at the time of acquisition based on existing uses on such acquired
lands, and not involve additional claims to be settled.
Question 2. If enacted, S. 4633 would authorize one of the largest
water infrastructure projects in history for an Indian water rights
settlement. Together with the infrastructure already authorized for the
Navajo Nation's Navajo-Utah Water Rights Settlement Act of 2019 and the
Navajo-San Juan Water Rights Settlement ratified by the Northwestern
New Mexico Rural Water Projects Act of 2009, these facilities will
require long-term operations, maintenance, and repair in order to
successfully treat, store, and deliver water to Navajo and non-Navajo
communities across the Navajo Nation. Those operations, maintenance,
and repair costs will be the Navajo Nation's responsibility. What is
the Navajo Nation's plan to sign up enough water users to ensure the
long-term sustainability of the infrastructure contemplated in S. 4633,
and to the infrastructure that it will connect to that was authorized
in prior settlements in adjacent basins?
Answer. Water is a necessary condition for economic development and
prosperity. Without water, nothing can happen: no homes, no businesses,
no livelihoods. These settlement projects need to be implemented with
the anticipation of future economic development and future livelihoods.
In most areas municipal groundwater will be developed first. These
``groundwater islands'' will grow, and will have developed far greater
water use by the time the surface water arrives. For instance, in the
Gallup Area the Gallup Regional System is already connecting to the
local Navajo Tribal Utility Authority (NTUA) public water systems and
they are mining groundwater during the short term. By the time water
from the San Juan River shows up in 2029 these growing communities will
already be connected to the regional system, and they will switch over
to the sustainable San Juan River surface water supply.
The Navajo Nation is keenly aware of the gap between the cost of
the operation, maintenance, and repair (OM&R) for these proposed water
projects, and of the limited ability of the Navajo Nation water users
to pay for this OM&R. The Navajo Nation has taken multiple steps to
address this problem.
The recent authorities include OM&R trust funds. These trust funds
will help with the OM&R for ten to fifteen years at which time the
number of water users will increase which reduces the unit cost of the
water delivered. During these years, the local economy and number of
livelihoods will increase allowing customers to be better able to carry
a greater share of the OM&R burden.
These authorities are adding new customers (and the potential for
thousands of new customers) to the current service area of the Navajo
Gallup Water Supply Project (NGWSP). And the new authorities include
funding for NGWSP waterline connections to the supply points of the
NTUA public water systems. These connections ensure that the NGWSP
supply will be where the customers are. These authorities also allow
for deferred construction of facilities so that they can be deferred
until the water demands are in place which will reduce the unit cost of
the water. The authority also includes the ability to supply renewable
energy to the water projects which will further reduce the operating
costs.
In addition, the Navajo Nation directs a part of the gross receipts
tax collected from the construction of water projects to the Navajo
Tribal Utility Authority OM&R Trust Fund. The Navajo Nation has already
contributed its own financial resources into these OM&R funds to help
ensure that there are OM&R resources for all of the water facilities
being constructed today. Overall, providing customers with reliable
water supply is predicted to stimulate more economic growth and bring
families back to the Navajo Nation, where they will form the customer
base that is needed to make this water infrastructure self-sustaining.
Question 2a. How will the Navajo Nation manage its water rights
across various basins and settlement agreements?
Answer. The Navajo Nation Department of Water Resources (DWR) is
well equipped to handle this challenge. DWR manages Navajo Nation water
resources for the benefit of present and future generations, and its
expert staff works on implementation of our various settlement
agreements. All of these water projects will be metered. The diversion
from Colorado River sources will be measured and reported to the
appropriate state authority for administrative purposes. And water
conveyed to any community, whether it is in the Upper Basin or the
Lower Basin, will also be metered. The accounting will be
straightforward.
Question 2b. How will the Navajo Nation work with other partners,
including states and Tribes, to negotiate and manage water leases,
exchanges, and transfers between basins or off reservation?
Answer. The Navajo Nation will manage its leases, exchanges, and
transfers within the authorities provided by the settlement legislation
and in a cooperative manner.
Question 2c. Does it have a plan for doing so based on climate,
groundwater, and surface water projections for the foreseeable future?
Answer. The Navajo Nation Department of Water Resources is
committed to providing reliable water supplies, and continues to study
climate projections to develop strategies for better water management.
These settlement water projects are based on using surface water and
groundwater conjunctively. The Navajo Nation understands that in the
future Department of Interior water contracts will be subject to the
water available to the Colorado River Storage Projects, and that any
single supply source may at times be at risk due to changes in climate
patterns.
As one response, the Navajo Nation will continue to develop
municipal water from the Coconino Aquifer and the Navajo Aquifer.
Conjunctive systems are better able to spread the hydrologic risk. For
that reason, the original NGWSP authority included a Conjunctive
Groundwater Component. During periods of drought groundwater pumping
will be increased. When surface water is abundant, surface water will
be used. And in the future, surface water may be recharged into the
local aquifers as part of Aquifer Storage and Recovery (ASR) projects.
Under the Settlement Agreement approved by S. 4633, ASR wells will be
developed to ensure reliable supplies for the Kayenta NTUA system and
others. The Navajo Nation and the USGS are investigating the
application of aquifer storage and recovery in other areas on the
Navajo Nation.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ben Ray Lujan to
Hon. Bryan Newland
Question 1. Assistant Secretary Newland, what changes to S. 4633
does Interior believe are necessary to increase the San Juan Lateral
pipeline's capacity and the Navajo-Gallup service areas in Arizona?
Answer. Several changes are needed to S. 4633 to allow the Navajo-
Gallup Water Supply Project (NGWSP) to serve additional Navajo chapters
in Arizona that need clean drinking water. First, S. 4633 should
include language expanding the NGWSP's service area to allow for
delivery of water to several Navajo chapters in Arizona. Additionally,
S. 4633 should increase NGWSP's authorized capacity by up to 12,000
acre-feet per year to serve these Navajo chapters in Arizona. Finally,
S. 4633 should include authorization to convey Navajo Nation Upper
Basin Colorado River Water into Arizona through the NGWSP.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Ben Ray Lujan to
Hon. Buu Nygren
Question. President Nygren, concerning S. 4633 Northeast Arizona
Water Rights Settlement Act, has the Navajo Nation given Upper and
Lower Basin states the ability to come to an agreement on how water
accounting in S. 4633 will work, especially for any inter-basin
transfers?
Answer. The Navajo Nation is committed to working with all seven
Colorado River Basin states to come to an agreement on accounting. On
November 12, 2024, the Basin States met to work through issues related
to accounting and management of water rights under S. 4633. The Nation
and the seven Basin States continue to meet regularly and are working
to reaching consensus. The Navajo Nation appreciates the commitment of
the states of the Upper and Lower Basin to work on these issues with
us.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Brian Schatz to
Hon. Frank White Clay
Question 1. You testified that transfer of the Hope Family
subsurface rights to the Tribe will consolidate ownership and control
lands within the Tribe's reservation. Does the Crow Tribe own the
surface rights to the acreage to be transferred? If not, please explain
how control of a split estate will assist the Tribe in both
consolidating and controlling these lands.
Answer. The Tribe does not own the surface rights on the Hope
Family subsurface rights but in Montana the subsurface rights are the
dominant estate allowing the Tribe to develop the minerals without
consent of the subservient surface estate owner.
Question 2. You testified that there were ``421 jobs'' at the Crow
Tribe. It is unclear from your testimony what this jobs number relates
to. Is 421 the number of people currently employed by the Tribe
government-wide? Is it the number of people that Signal Peak Energy,
LLC currently employs, and if so, how many of these employees are
Tribal members or live in Montana? Alternatively, is this the number of
people that could be employed if S. 4444 is enacted? Or another
explanation? Please clarify your statement for the record.
Answer. 421 jobs in the number of individuals (Tribal members) that
the Tribe employs with its general fund that is supported by coal
royalties such as those that will be derived from the Signal Peak Mine.
Question 2a. How many citizens of the Crow Tribe will lose their
jobs once the Absaloka Mine is closed?
Answer. The approximate number of employees employed by the Tribe's
general fund that will lose their jobs is 375. The rest will need to be
reassigned to other federal purposes to continue their employment.
Question 2b. How many citizens of the Crow Tribe could be employed
by Signal Peak Energy, LLC if the Bull Mountains Mine No. 1 is permited
to expand to the Bull Mountain Tracts currently managed by the BLM,
particularly given its proximity from the reservation?
Answer. There are a handful of tribal members that employed by
Singal Peak but the Tribe is hopeful that some of the laid off coal
miners will be able to obtain employment from Signal Peak.
Question 3. You testified the Tribe that the transfer of
approximately 4,660 acres of subsurface interests within the Crow Tribe
reservation is critical to the Tribe's ability to exercise full control
over future development. You also testified that it is unlikely that
the Tribe will mine the Hope Family Tracts. What development of these
subsurface interests on the Hope Family Tracts is possible?
Answer. Should coal become a viable energy source again, the Hope
Family Tracts could be mined since the estate is dominant. The tribe is
actively pursuing alternative uses for its coal in a prudent manner.
Question 4. You testified that, until recently, the Tribe was on
the federal ``Do Not Pay'' list and this impacted your Tribe's ability
to access funding through the CARES Act and the Consolidated
Appropriations Act of 2021. The Inflation Reduction Act and the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act have later deadlines. Now that
the Crow Tribe is no longer on the ``Do Not Pay'' list, has the Tribe
applied for (or does it intend to apply for) federal funding
opportunities under these laws?
Answer. While the Tribe actively applies for grant funding
available to it. Most of the funding under CARES and the Consolidated
Appropriations Act of 2021 have already passed and there is no ability
for the Tribe to make up for the funding opportunities that it missed
due to being wrongfully placed on the ``Do Not Pay'' list.
Question 5. Senator Daines noted that the intent and purpose of S.
4444 is to facilitate a revenue sharing agreement between the Tribe and
the Hope Family for minerals developed at the mine in the Bull
Mountains operated by Signal Peak Energy, LLC, and cited to the
relevant provision in the introduced text as ``clerical error'' during
the September 25th hearing. Even if the introduced text is corrected,
why does the Tribe need a revenue sharing agreement with the Hope
Family at all? Why is there not simply an agreement between the Tribe
and Signal Peak?
Answer. The Hope Family will own the minerals that Signal Peak will
mine, therefore, it is necessary to enter into an agreement with them
to ensure the Tribe receives the royalties from the Bull Mountain
Tracts. The Tribe, Hope Family, and Signal Peak have arranged for
Singal Peak to compensate the Tribe directly.
Question 6. Does approval of Signal Peak Energy, LLC's amendment
(AM6) to its surface mining permit (C1993017) for expansion of mining
activities within and outside current Bull Mountain Mine No. 1 have any
effect on the agreement contemplated in S. 4444?
Answer. To the best of the Tribe's understanding this permit will
not effect S. 4444, and Signal Peak will begin mining the Bull Mountain
tracts upon implementation of the Act.
Question 7. Please share a copy of the revenue projections that the
Tribe will gain from its partnership with Signal Peak Energy, LLC that
you referenced in your testimony before the Commitee on September 25,
2024.
Answer. The approximate gain to the Tribe starts at $100 million
over 10 years with an increase for coal prices in the market.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Mark Kelly to
Hon. Bryan Newland
Question 1. As I understand it, the appropriate method for
determining the amount of water a Tribe in Arizona is entitled to is
the amount of water necessary for the Tribe to have a permanent
homeland, is this correct?
Answer. In an adjudication of Indian water rights, the United
States follows a practice of asserting maximum credible claims. Such
claims are often based on a homeland purpose.
Question 1a. Relatedly, this means the amount of water necessary
for economic development, community development, irrigation, cultural
uses, residential uses, and recreational uses, correct?
Answer. A homeland purpose claim may include all of these uses.
Question 2. Is it correct that if S. 4705 is enacted the Yavapai-
Apache Nation will be settling for any water right claims that it might
have forever?
Answer. The goal of S. 4 705 and all Indian Water Rights
Settlements is finality.
Question 2a. This means that the Nation has to plan for beyond
fifty years, but in fact for at least the next seven generations if it
wants to secure its people a future in the homeland that the United
States' sought to take away from them?
Answer. The United States supports quantification of federal
reserved water rights that take into consideration past, present, and
future uses.
Question 3. Regarding the Nation's claim in the Gila River
Adjudication, isn't it correct that the Nation filed documented claims
for 11,628 AFY of water?
Answer. The Nation filed claims for 11,628 AFY for water use on its
existing Reservation and the Dinah Hood Allotment. The United States as
trustee filed claims for 4,492 AFY for the Reservation and an
additional 327 AFY for the Dinah Hood Allotment. These claims were
filed based on the water rights of the Nation's trust lands as they
existed on January 5, 2023, the date of the claims filing.
Question 3a. Isn't it also correct that once the Nation completes
its pending administrative land exchange with the US Forest Service and
additional lands into trust processes, that it will increase its
Reservation size from 1,809 acres to a total Reservation size of 5,106
acres?
Answer. That is the understanding of the Department.
Question 3b. Isn't the Nation entitled to update its water rights
claims to include claims for the expanded Reservation?
Answer. The Nation may update its water rights claims in the Gila
River Adjudication once it acquires fee title to property. The United
States would expect to file updated claims for the property if it is
thereafter taken into trust. The United States would need to initiate a
claims study process to determine appropriate claims for the added
lands.
Question 4. Regarding the negotiation for the Nation's claim in the
amount of 6,888.50 AFY, isn't it correct that the United States
participated through its Federal Negotiation Team in these negotiations
since 2011, and that the United States was aware of the negotiated
water budget since 2011?
Answer. The settlement ``water budget'' discussed during the
negotiation process was based on sources of water available on the
Nation's existing trust lands. It was not based on the sources located
off those lands nor was it based on the Nation's recently-acquired
lands from the Forest Service. A Federal Negotiation Team participated
in the negotiations. Federal Negotiation Teams do not have the
authority to approve any terms of a settlement. The Federal approval
process includes approval by the Department's Working Group on Indian
Water Settlements (Working Group) and approval by the Office of
Management and Budget (0MB).
Question 4a. If the Unites States had a concern with the Nation's
water settlement budget, why didn't the United States raise these
concerns during the last 13 years?
Answer. The lengthy negotiations leading to the settlement to be
approved by S. 4705 were contentious with numerous starts and stops. It
was only in 2024 that the parties reached an agreement that was taken
before the Working Group for consideration.
Question 5. Isn't it also correct that the United States and the
parties determined the only viable source to secure the necessary water
to fill out the Nation's settlement budget was from the C.C. Cragin Dam
and Reservoir?
Answer. The Department conducted a Value Planning (VP) Study to
consider options to satisfy the Nation's stated goal of supplying 5,991
acre-feet of water to its trust lands. The VP study considered numerous
alternatives including use of the C.C. Cragin Dam and Reservoir. VP
studies are often used to determine a broad range of ideas or options (
alternatives and considerations/options) that best meet the project
goals stated by the parties. A VP study is not a decision document and
is only a guidance document that will be used by the parties to further
settlement negotiations by focusing in greater detail on project
options and potential sources for settlement.
Question 6. Regarding the increasing the pipeline of the C.C.
Cragin pipeline project to provide water to the Verde Valley community,
is it not correct that any increase in the project capacity does not
happen unless a Verde Valley community agrees to take the water by
December 31, 2029?
Answer. S. 4705 speaks for itself.
Question 7. Is it correct that there are numerous federal interests
in protecting the instream flow of the Verde River, including of
downstream Tribal interests of two settled Indian Tribes, as well as
the Wild and Scenic designation of the Verde River?
Answer. The goal of an Indian water rights settlement is to assure
that Tribes receive equivalent benefits for rights, which they, and the
United States as trustee, may release as part of a settlement; Tribes
realize value from confirmed water rights resulting from a settlement;
and a settlement contains appropriate cost-sharing proportionate to the
benefits received by all parties benefiting from the settlement. In
addition, settlements should provide finality and certainty to all
parties involved.
Question 8. How docs the United States intend to protect the flow
of the Verde River if it cannot stop the communities from pumping the
groundwater, a critical element of the flow of the Verde River?
Answer. The United States did not file in-stream flow claims to the
Verde River on behalf of the Yavapai-Apache Nation. S. 4705 would not
prevent non-Indian Verde River communities from pumping groundwater.
Instead, S. 4 705 would allow such groundwater pumping to increase.
Question 9. Isn't it correct that providing the Verde Valley
Communities the opportunity for surface water would be one way to
protect the federal interests in the Verde River?
Answer. Importing water supplies to replace use of existing and
future surface and groundwater supplies could preserve the Verde River
and local aquifers. However, this protection could also be accomplished
through appropriate water management practices by the State of Arizona.
It is not appropriate to require the United States to bear the entire
cost of an imported water supply that may preserve the Verde River.
Question 10. How long will it take the Department of the Interior
to complete the pending lands to trust process (151 process) for the
Forest Service land exchange lands that the Tribe expects to receive
via the administrative land exchange into trust?
Answer. It is anticipated that this acquisition will take
approximately three months to complete.
Question 11. Is it correct the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) process needed to take the land exchange lands into trust was
done simultaneously with the Forest Service land exchange process and
that this process is complete, pending the issuance of a final Record
of Decision?
Answer. Yes.
Question 12. Is it correct that the administrative lands into trust
process under Part 151 is available to the Nation to take into trust
the additional 208 acres of fee land that the Nation owns that is or
will become contiguous to the Reservation once the Forest Service
exchange lands are taken into trust?
Answer. Yes.
Question 13. Isn't it correct that the when the land exchange lands
(3,088 acres) and the additional fee to trust land (209 acres) are
taken into trust, 3,297 acres of land will then be in trust and part of
the Nation's Reservation by the enforceability date of this settlement?
Answer. S. 4705 speaks for itself.
Question 14. Is it the United States' position that a Nation whose
land base was destroyed because of the United States' policy that the
Nation can never expand its land base?
Answer. No.
Question 15. Is it the United States' position that if a Nation
does acquire land it cannot plan to include it as a part of its
permanent homeland?
Answer. No.
Question 16. Is it the Department of Interior's position that while
it supports restoration of Tribal homelands, it does not support
securing a Tribe sufficient water necessary to make a permanent
homeland?
Answer. No.
[all]