[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 159 (Wednesday, November 12, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H10643-H10646]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




PERMITTING MINERAL LEASING OF INDIAN LAND LOCATED WITHIN FORT BERTHOLD 
                           INDIAN RESERVATION

  Mrs. CHENOWETH. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
Senate bill (S. 1079) to permit the mineral leasing of Indian land 
located within the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation in any case in 
which there is consent from a majority interest in the parcel of land 
under consideration for lease, as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                S. 1079

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. LEASES OF ALLOTTED LANDS OF THE FORT BERTHOLD 
                   INDIAN RESERVATION.

       (a) In General.--
       (1) Definitions.--In this section:
       (A) Indian land.--The term ``Indian land'' means an 
     undivided interest in a single parcel of land that--
       (i) is located within the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation 
     in North Dakota; and
       (ii) is held in trust or restricted status by the United 
     States.
       (B) Individually owned indian land.--The term 
     ``individually owned Indian land'' means Indian land that is 
     owned by 1 or more individuals.
       (C) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary 
     of the Interior.
       (2) Effect of approval by secretary of the interior.--
       (A) In general.--The Secretary may approve any mineral 
     lease or agreement that affects individually owned Indian 
     land, if--
       (i) the owners of a majority of the undivided interest in 
     the Indian land that is the subject of the mineral lease or 
     agreement (including any interest covered by a lease or 
     agreement executed by the Secretary under paragraph (3)) 
     consent to the lease or agreement; and
       (ii) the Secretary determines that approving the lease or 
     agreement is in the best interest of the Indian owners of the 
     Indian land.
       (B) Effect of approval.--Upon the approval by the Secretary 
     under subparagraph (A), the lease or agreement shall be 
     binding, to the same extent as if all of the Indian owners of 
     the Indian land involved had consented to the lease or 
     agreement, upon--
       (i) all owners of the undivided interest in the Indian land 
     subject to the lease or agreement (including any interest 
     owned by an Indian tribe); and
       (ii) all other parties to the lease or agreement.
       (C) Distribution of proceeds.--The proceeds derived from a 
     lease or agreement that is approved by the Secretary under 
     subparagraph (A) shall be distributed to all owners of the 
     Indian land that is subject to the lease or agreement in 
     accordance with the interest owned by each such owner.
       (3) Execution of lease or agreement by secretary.--The 
     Secretary may execute a mineral lease or agreement that 
     affects individually owned Indian land on behalf of an Indian 
     owner if--
       (A) that owner is deceased and the heirs to, or devisees 
     of, the interest of the deceased owner have not been 
     determined; or
       (B) the heirs or devisees referred to in subparagraph (A) 
     have been determined, but 1 or more of the heirs or devisees 
     cannot be located.
       (4) Public auction or advertised sale not required.--It 
     shall not be a requirement for the approval or execution of a 
     lease or agreement under this subsection that the lease or 
     agreement be offered for sale through a public auction or 
     advertised sale.
       (b) Rule of Construction.--This Act supersedes the Act of 
     March 3, 1909 (35 Stat. 783, chapter 263; 25 U.S.C. 396) only 
     to the extent provided in subsection (a).

     SEC. 2. PILOT PROJECT FOR PLUMAS, LASSEN, AND TAHOE NATIONAL 
                   FORESTS TO IMPLEMENT QUINCY LIBRARY GROUP 
                   PROPOSAL.

       (a) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term 
     ``Quincy Library Group-Community Stability Proposal'' means 
     the agreement by a coalition of representatives of fisheries, 
     timber, environmental, county government, citizen groups, and 
     local communities that formed in northern California to 
     develop a resource management program that promotes ecologic 
     and economic health for certain Federal lands and communities 
     in the Sierra Nevada area. Such proposal includes the map 
     entitled ``QUINCY LIBRARY GROUP Community Stability 
     Proposal'', dated October 12, 1993, and prepared by VESTRA 
     Resources of Redding, California.
       (b) Pilot Project Required.--
       (1) Pilot project and purpose.--The Secretary of 
     Agriculture (in this section referred to as the 
     ``Secretary''), acting through the Forest Service and after 
     completion of an environmental impact statement (a record of 
     decision for which shall be adopted within 300 days), shall 
     conduct a pilot project on the Federal lands described in 
     paragraph (2) to implement and demonstrate the effectiveness 
     of the resource management activities described in subsection 
     (d) and the other requirements of this section, as 
     recommended in the Quincy Library Group-Community Stability 
     Proposal.
       (2) Pilot project area.--The Secretary shall conduct the 
     pilot project on the Federal lands within Plumas National 
     Forest, Lassen National Forest, and the Sierraville Ranger 
     District of Tahoe National Forest in the State of California 
     designated as ``Available for Group Selection'' on the map 
     entitled ``QUINCY LIBRARY GROUP Community Stability 
     Proposal'', dated October 12, 1993 (in this section referred 
     to as the ``pilot project area''). Such map shall be on file 
     and available for inspection in the appropriate offices of 
     the Forest Service.
       (c) Exclusion of Certain Lands, Riparian Protection and 
     Compliance.--
       (1) Exclusion.--All spotted owl habitat areas and protected 
     activity centers located within the pilot project area 
     designated under subsection (b)(2) will be deferred from 
     resource management activities required under subsection (d) 
     and timber harvesting during the term of the pilot project.
       (2) Riparian protection.--
       (A) In general.--The Scientific Analysis Team guidelines 
     for riparian system protection described in subparagraph (B) 
     shall apply to all resource management activities conducted 
     under subsection (d) and all timber harvesting activities 
     that occur in the pilot project area during the term of the 
     pilot project.
       (B) Guidelines described.--The guidelines referred to in 
     subparagraph (A) are those in the document entitled 
     ``Viability Assessments and Management Considerations for 
     Species Associated with Late-Successional and Old-Growth 
     Forests of the Pacific Northwest'', a Forest Service research 
     document dated March 1993 and co-authored by the Scientific 
     Analysis Team, including Dr. Jack Ward Thomas.
       (C) Limitation.--Nothing in this section shall be construed 
     to require the application of the Scientific Analysis Team 
     guidelines to any livestock grazing in the pilot project area 
     during the term of the pilot project, unless the livestock 
     grazing is being conducted in the specific location at which 
     the Scientific Analysis Team guidelines are being applied to 
     an activity under subsection (d).
       (3) Compliance.--All resource management activities 
     required by subsection (d) shall be implemented to the extent 
     consistent with applicable Federal law and the standards and 
     guidelines for the conservation of the California spotted owl 
     as set forth in the California Spotted Owl Sierran Provence 
     Interim Guidelines or the subsequently issued guidelines, 
     whichever are in effect.
       (4) Roadless area protection.--The Regional Forester for 
     Region 5 shall direct that any resource management activity 
     required by subsection (d)(1) and (2), all road building, all 
     timber harvesting activities, and any riparian management 
     under subsection (d)(4) that utilizes road construction or 
     timber harvesting shall not be conducted on Federal lands 
     within the Plumas National Forest, Lassen National Forest, 
     and the Sierraville Ranger District of the Tahoe National 
     Forest that are designated as either ``Off Base'' or 
     ``Deferred'' on the map referred to in subsection (a). Such 
     direction shall be effective during the term of the pilot 
     project.
       (d) Resource Management Activities.--During the term of the 
     pilot project, the Secretary shall implement and carry out 
     the following resource management activities on an acreage 
     basis on the Federal lands included within the pilot project 
     area designated under subsection (b)(2):
       (1) Fuelbreak construction.--Construction of a strategic 
     system of defensible fuel profile zones, including shaded 
     fuelbreaks, utilizing thinning, individual tree selection, 
     and other methods of vegetation management consistent with 
     the Quincy Library Group-Community Stability Proposal, on not 
     less than 40,000, but not more than 60,000, acres per year.
       (2) Group selection and individual tree selection.--
     Utilization of group selection and individual tree selection 
     uneven-aged forest management prescriptions described in the 
     Quincy Library Group-Community Stability Proposal to achieve 
     a desired future condition of all-age, multistory, fire 
     resilient forests as follows:
       (A) Group selection.--Group selection on an average acreage 
     of .57 percent of the pilot project area land each year of 
     the pilot project.
       (B) Individual tree selection.--Individual tree selection 
     may also be utilized within the pilot project area.
       (3) Total acreage.--The total acreage on which resource 
     management activities are

[[Page H10644]]

     implemented under this subsection shall not exceed 70,000 
     acres each year.
       (4) Riparian management.--A program of riparian management, 
     including wide protection zones and riparian restoration 
     projects, consistent with riparian protection guidelines in 
     subsection (c)(2)(B).
       (e) Cost-Effectiveness.--In conducting the pilot project, 
     Secretary shall use the most cost-effective means available, 
     as determined by the Secretary, to implement resource 
     management activities described in subsection (d).
       (f) Funding.--
       (1) Source of funds.--In conducting the pilot project, the 
     Secretary shall use, subject to the relevant reprogramming 
     guidelines of the House and Senate Committees on 
     Appropriations--
       (A) those funds specifically provided to the Forest Service 
     by the Secretary to implement resource management activities 
     according to the Quincy Library Group-Community Stability 
     Proposal; and
       (B) year-end excess funds that are allocated for the 
     administration and management of Plumas National Forest, 
     Lassen National Forest, and the Sierraville Ranger District 
     of Tahoe National Forest.
       (2) Prohibition on use of certain funds.--The Secretary may 
     not conduct the pilot project using funds appropriated for 
     any other unit of the National Forest System.
       (3) Flexibility.--Subject to normal reprogramming 
     guidelines, during the term of the pilot project, the forest 
     supervisors of Plumas National Forest, Lassen National 
     Forest, and Tahoe National Forest may allocate and use all 
     accounts that contain year-end excess funds and all available 
     excess funds for the administration and management of Plumas 
     National Forest, Lassen National Forest, and the Sierraville 
     Ranger District of Tahoe National Forest to perform the 
     resource management activities described in subsection (d).
       (4) Restriction.--The Secretary or the forest supervisors, 
     as the case may be, shall not utilize authority provided 
     under paragraphs (1)(B) and (3) if, in their judgment, doing 
     so will limit other nontimber related multiple use activities 
     for which such funds were available.
       (5) Overhead.--The Secretary shall seek to ensure that of 
     amounts available to carry out this section--
       (A) not more than 12 percent is used or allocated for 
     general administration or other overhead; and
       (B) at least 88 percent is used to implement and carry out 
     activities required by this section.
       (6) Authorized supplemental funds.--There are authorized to 
     be appropriated to implement and carry out the pilot project 
     such sums as are necessary.
       (7) Baseline funds.--Amounts available for resource 
     management activities authorized under subsection (d) shall 
     at a minimum include existing baseline funding levels.
       (g) Term of Pilot Project.--The Secretary shall conduct the 
     pilot project until the earlier of: (1) the date on which the 
     Secretary completes amendment or revision of the land and 
     resource management plans directed under and in compliance 
     with subsection (i) for the Plumas National Forest, Lassen 
     National Forest, and Tahoe National Forest; or (2) five years 
     after the date of the commencement of the pilot project.
       (h) Consultation.--(1) The statement required by subsection 
     (b)(1) shall be prepared in consultation with interested 
     members of the public, including the Quincy Library Group.
       (2) Contracting.--The Forest Service, subject to the 
     availability of appropriations, may carry out any (or all) of 
     the requirements of this section using private contracts.
       (i) Corresponding Forest Plan Amendments.--Within 2 years 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Regional 
     Forester for Region 5 shall initiate the process to amend or 
     revise the land and resource management plans for Plumas 
     National Forest, Lassen National Forest, and Tahoe National 
     Forest. The process shall include preparation of at least one 
     alternative that--
       (1) incorporates the pilot project and area designations 
     made by subsection (b), the resource management activities 
     described in subsection (d), and other aspects of the Quincy 
     Library Group-Community Stability Proposal; and
       (2) makes other changes warranted by the analyses conducted 
     in compliance with section 102(2) of the National 
     Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4332(2)), section 
     6 of the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning 
     Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 1604), and other applicable laws.
       (j) Status Reports.--
       (1) In general.--Not later than February 28 of each year 
     during the term of the pilot project, the Secretary shall 
     submit to Congress a report on the status of the pilot 
     project. The report shall include at least the following:
       (A) A complete accounting of the use of funds made 
     available under subsection (f)(1)(A) until such funds are 
     fully expended.
       (B) A complete accounting of the use of funds and accounts 
     made available under subsection (f)(1) for the previous 
     fiscal year, including a schedule of the amounts drawn from 
     each account used to perform resource management activities 
     described in subsection (d).
       (C) A description of total acres treated for each of the 
     resource management activities required under subsection (d), 
     forest health improvements, fire risk reductions, water yield 
     increases, and other natural resources-related benefits 
     achieved by the implementation of the resource management 
     activities described in subsection (d).
       (D) A description of the economic benefits to local 
     communities achieved by the implementation of the pilot 
     project.
       (E) A comparison of the revenues generated by, and costs 
     incurred in, the implementation of the resource management 
     activities described in subsection (d) on the Federal lands 
     included in the pilot project area with the revenues and 
     costs during each of the fiscal years 1992 through 1997 for 
     timber management of such lands before their inclusion in the 
     pilot project.
       (F) A proposed schedule for the resource management 
     activities to be undertaken in the pilot project area during 
     the 1-year period beginning on the date of submittal of the 
     report.
       (G) A description of any adverse environmental impacts from 
     the pilot project.
       (2) Limitation on expenditures.--The amount of Federal 
     funds expended on each annual report under this subsection 
     shall not exceed $125,000.
       (k) Final Report.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish an 
     independent scientific panel to review and report on whether, 
     and to what extent, implementation of the pilot project under 
     this section achieved the goals stated in the Quincy Library 
     Group-Community Stability Proposal, including improved 
     ecological health and community stability. The membership of 
     the panel shall reflect expertise in diverse disciplines in 
     order to adequately address all of those goals.
       (2) Preparation.--The panel shall initiate such review no 
     sooner than 18 months after the first day of the term of the 
     pilot project under subsection (g). The panel shall prepare 
     the report in consultation with interested members of the 
     public, including the Quincy Library Group. The report shall 
     include, but not be limited to, the following:
       (A) A description of any adverse environmental impacts 
     resulting from implementation of the pilot project.
       (B) An assessment of watershed monitoring data on lands 
     treated pursuant to this section. Such assessment shall 
     address the following issues on a priority basis: timing of 
     water releases; water quality changes; and water yield 
     changes over the short- and long-term in the pilot project 
     area.
       (3) Submission to the congress.--The panel shall submit the 
     final report to the Congress as soon as practicable, but in 
     no case later than 18 months after completion of the pilot 
     project.
       (4) Limitation on expenditures.--The amount of Federal 
     funds expended for the report under this subsection, other 
     than for watershed monitoring, shall not exceed $350,000. The 
     amount of Federal funds expended for watershed monitoring 
     under this subsection shall not exceed $175,000 for each 
     fiscal year in which the report is prepared.
       (l) Relationship to Other Laws.--Nothing in this section 
     exempts the pilot project from any Federal environmental law.
       (m) Loans for Demonstration Projects for Wood Waste or Low-
     Quality Wood Byproducts.--
       (1) Evaluation of loan advisability.--The Alternative 
     Agricultural Research and Commercialization Corporation 
     established under section 1658 of the Food, Agriculture, 
     Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5902) (in this 
     section referred to as the ``Corporation'') shall evaluate 
     the advisability of making commercialization assistance loans 
     under section 1661 of such Act (7 U.S.C. 5905) to support a 
     minimum of 2 demonstration projects for the development and 
     demonstration of commercial application of technology to 
     convert wood waste or low-quality wood byproducts into 
     usable, higher value products.
       (2) Location of demonstration projects.--If the Corporation 
     determines to make loans under this subsection to support the 
     development and demonstration of commercial application of 
     technology to convert wood waste or low-quality wood 
     byproducts into usable, higher value products, the 
     Corporation shall consider making one loan with regard to a 
     demonstration project to be conducted in the pilot project 
     area and one loan with regard to a demonstration project to 
     be conducted in southeast Alaska.
       (3) Eligibility requirements.--To be eligible for a loan 
     under this subsection, a demonstration project shall be 
     required to satisfy the eligibility requirements imposed by 
     the Corporation under section 1661 of the Food, Agriculture, 
     Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5905).

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from 
Idaho [Mrs. Chenoweth] and the gentleman from North Dakota [Mr. 
Pomeroy] each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Idaho [Mrs. Chenoweth].

                              {time}  2045

  Mrs. CHENOWETH. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  (Mrs. CHENOWETH asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
her remarks.)
  Mrs. CHENOWETH. Mr. Speaker, S. 1079 would facilitate the oil and gas 
exploration on the Fort Berthold Indian

[[Page H10645]]

Reservation by allowing the Secretary of the Interior to approve 
mineral leases affecting individually owned Indian land if a majority 
of the owners of the undivided mineral interests consent. S. 1079 would 
supersede a 1909 law which provides that the Secretary may not approve 
a mineral lease affecting individually owned Indian land unless every 
single person who has an undivided mineral interest in that land 
consents.
  Approximately 70 percent of the individually owned tracts of Indian 
land on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation are owned by groups of 20 
or more individuals, and some tracts are owned by 200 individuals. In 
many instances, these individuals have not been identified or cannot be 
located. The requirements of the 1909 law have proven to be so 
difficult to meet that very little oil production has taken place on 
individually owned Indian land within a geological basin which has 
produced over 1 billion barrels of oil.
  The Mandan Indian Nation and the Hidatsa Indian Nation and the 
Arikara Indian Nation all support S. 1079. The administration supports 
S. 1079. And the gentleman from North Dakota [Mr. Pomeroy], who has 
introduced a companion bill, H.R. 2309, also supports S. 1079.
  Also, the bill as amended directs the Secretary of Agriculture to 
conduct a pilot project on designated lands within the Plumas, Lassen, 
and Tahoe National Forests in the State of California to demonstrate 
the effectiveness of the resource management activities proposed by the 
Quincy Library Group and to amend current land and resource management 
plans for these national forests to consider the incorporation of these 
resource management activities. The text is essentially that which 
passed the House on July 9, 1997, by a vote of 429 to 1. It has minor 
changes as amended by the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural 
Resources. It has one major change adopted by the Senate that takes the 
5-year pilot project and allows it to be cut off sooner after 
amendments to the land management plans pursuant to subsection (i) of 
that section of the bill.
  This is a good piece of legislation. It solves a big problem created 
by outdated laws and so forth. I recommend that it pass, Mr. Speaker.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. 
I thank the gentlewoman from Idaho [Mrs. Chenoweth], the subcommittee 
Chair, for her assistance in this matter. She has superbly described S. 
1079. I would add, I would have preferred the consideration of this in 
an unamended form, but I am really pleased that it is before us on the 
suspension calendar.
  I do support the legislation. It is strongly supported by the tribal 
government at issue. At a time when we are encouraging economic self-
sufficiency, the tribal government is eager to explore oil and gas 
development on tribal lands. Because this reservation wholly lies 
within the Williston Basin, an area where there has been a lot of 
successful oil development, their prospects are very good that they 
will receive leasing activity and the economic development that flows 
from that; that they will subsequently see oil development and also 
create a substantial number of jobs in the development of their oil 
resources.
  How cruel our existing policy has been relative to the development of 
leasing activity within Indian lands. By requiring, as we have done 
since the 1909 act, virtually every interest owner, no matter how 
minute, to have to be identified and have them sign off on the 
proposal, we have essentially shut Indian oil development down cold.
  I think that this legislation, which will be so particularly 
important to the tribe at issue, may also serve as an example that we 
might follow later on. And so as we help the Fort Berthold Indian 
Reservation tonight, I believe that we may be doing a favor for all 
Indian reservations that might be interested in exploring mineral 
leasing activity in the future. Mr. Speaker, again I thank all in the 
majority for helping us bring this matter forward.
  Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, S. 1079 is a bill introduced 
by Senator Dorgan that allows the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort 
Berthold Reservation in North Dakota to take an important step toward 
future economic development. Congressman Pomeroy of North Dakota has 
sponsored similar legislation in the House.
  In an attempt to force Senate action on the Quincy Library Group 
legislation, the majority has sent S. 1079 to the desk with an 
unrelated amendment, that with one change is the text of Quincy Library 
Group bill (H.R. 858) that was reported by the Senate Energy and 
Natural Resources Committee last month.
  Members may recall that when the House considered H.R. 858 in July, I 
initially opposed the bill. However, after negotiating with Chairman 
Young, a number of important changes were made to the bill on the House 
floor. With those changes I voted for the bill. I recognized at the 
time that the bill was far from a perfect measure but it was 
significantly improved.
  The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee has made further 
changes to the bill. Two of the most important changes were to provide 
roadless area protection to large areas of the three national forests 
and to provide the pilot project will end the earlier of when the 
forest plan is amended or 5 years.
  I am pleased to see the language added on roadless area protection. 
This change provides a statutory basis for such protection but it by no 
means is the only protection that can be provided. There is no 
requirement that the Forest Service undertake activities on lands that 
were not identified as off-base or deferred. The Forest Service has the 
authority and I expect them to use it to not enter into lands where it 
has been brought to their attention that such activities would harm 
either the land or the resources found on those lands.
  Likewise, the Senate change on the time limit of the pilot project is 
an improvement. As I and others had noted, it made no sense to require 
the Forest Service to continue the pilot project even after the plan 
amendment process has been completed. This is inconsistent with the 
normal operation of environmental laws.
  Let us not forget, the Quincy Library Group legislation is a pilot 
project. As such, it sets no precedent for further action on other 
proposals. In fact, it would be irresponsible to act on other such 
proposals before this pilot project was completed and we and others had 
a chance to review its strengths and weaknesses. I still have 
reservations on this proposal but it obvious that the bill has been 
substantively improved from where it started out. I expect the Forest 
Service to see that all environmental laws are complied with, as the 
bill requires.
  Mr. Speaker, I will not oppose the nongermane amendment that is being 
offered to S. 1079 but I must question the majority's tactic of using 
this bill as an attempt to force Senate action of the Quincy Library 
Group legislation. The only thing this strategy has to offer is that 
the Senate will have before it two Quincy bills before it rather than 
one.
  I regret the S. 1079 is being held hostage. The underlying bill would 
allow the Secretary of the Interior to approve the mineral lease of 
lands for individual Indians living on the Fort Berthold Reservation 
when a majority of interest owners have agreed to the lease. Otherwise, 
approval of the lease would require unanimous consent of all the 
interest owners.
  Because many of the ownership of interests individual Indian lands 
have been divided and subdivided into hundreds of shares over the past 
century, leasing of these Indian lands for any purpose has posed an 
insurmountable problem because it is nearly impossible for the Bureau 
of Indian Affairs or the tribes to identify and track down each 
individual interest owner, much less get their unanimous consent.
  Basically, this bill tackles the fractionated heirship problem that 
plagues many Indian reservations across the country. On the whole it is 
a good approach and may be considered as one model for national 
legislation that addresses this problem for all Indian tribes.
  Nevertheless, I have two concerns about this bill. The first is 
procedural. No hearings or other kind of legislative record has been 
built up here in the House of Representatives. This is not the first 
time nor, I suspend, the last that Indian bills are going to be handled 
in this fashion. I just want to point this out for the record.
  Second, I remain concerned about a provision in the bill that allows 
the Secretary to execute a mineral lease on behalf of an Indian owner 
if the land is in probate and the heirs or devisees have not been 
determined or cannot be located.
  With the extent of fractionated heirship in Indian country, there 
will certainly be many cases where the heirs have not been determined 
or cannot be located. In this case, the bill does not impose a 
requirement that the Secretary make serious effort to determine or 
locate the heirs. I am concerned that the BIA will simply use this 
language as an excuse to simply rubber stamp any lease application for 
lands in probate.
  I hope that this will not be the result of this bill and strongly 
urge the administration to adopt regulations that impose a serious duty 
to make a good faith effort to give notice to, and determine and 
locate, those heirs and

[[Page H10646]]

devisees of lands subject to this bill. Furthermore, the administration 
should also adopt regulations that at least give the probate process a 
fair but timely chance of working.
  Having voiced these concerns, I will support passage of this bill.
  Mr. POMEROY. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. CHENOWETH. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and 
I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Calvert). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentlewoman from Idaho [Mrs. Chenoweth] that the House 
suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 1079, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the Senate bill, as amended, was 
passed.
  The title of the Senate bill was amended so as to read: ``A bill to 
permit the mineral leasing of Indian land located within the Fort 
Berthold Indian Reservation in any case in which there is consent from 
a majority interest in the parcel of land under consideration for 
lease, to direct the Secretary of Agriculture to conduct a pilot 
project on designated national forest lands in California to 
demonstrate the effectiveness of resource management activities 
proposed by the Quincy Library Group, and for other purposes.''
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________