[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 5]
[House]
[Pages 6946-6947]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1310
      HILL CREEK CULTURAL PRESERVATION AND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ACT

  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass 
the bill (H.R. 356) to clarify authority granted under the Act entitled 
``An Act to define the exterior boundary of the Uintah and Ouray Indian 
Reservation in the State of Utah, and for other purposes''.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                                H.R. 356

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Hill Creek Cultural 
     Preservation and Energy Development Act''.

     SEC. 2. CLARIFICATION OF AUTHORITY.

       The Act entitled ``An Act to define the exterior boundary 
     of the Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation in the State of 
     Utah, and for other purposes'', approved March 11, 1948 (62 
     Stat. 72), as amended by the Act entitled ``An Act to amend 
     the Act extending the exterior boundary of the Uintah and 
     Ouray Indian Reservation in the State of Utah so as to 
     authorize such State to exchange certain mineral lands for 
     other lands mineral in character'' approved August 9, 1955, 
     (69 Stat. 544), is further amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``Sec. 5.  In order to further clarify authorizations under 
     this Act, the State of Utah is hereby authorized to 
     relinquish to the United States, for the benefit of the Ute 
     Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, State 
     school trust or other State-owned subsurface mineral lands 
     located beneath the surface estate delineated in Public Law 
     440 (approved March 11, 1948) and south of the border between 
     Grand County, Utah, and Uintah County, Utah, and select in 
     lieu of such relinquished lands, on an acre-for-acre basis, 
     any subsurface mineral lands of the United States located 
     beneath the surface estate delineated in Public Law 440 
     (approved March 11, 1948) and north of the border between 
     Grand County, Utah, and Uintah County, Utah, subject to the 
     following conditions:
       ``(1) Reservation by united states.--The Secretary of the 
     Interior shall reserve an overriding interest in that portion 
     of the mineral estate comprised of minerals subject to 
     leasing under the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 171 et seq.) 
     in any mineral lands conveyed to the State.
       ``(2) Extent of overriding interest.--The overriding 
     interest reserved by the United States under paragraph (1) 
     shall consist of--
       ``(A) 50 percent of any bonus bid or other payment received 
     by the State as consideration for securing any lease or 
     authorization to develop such mineral resources;
       ``(B) 50 percent of any rental or other payments received 
     by the State as consideration for the lease or authorization 
     to develop such mineral resources;
       ``(C) a 6.25 percent overriding royalty on the gross 
     proceeds of oil and gas production under any lease or 
     authorization to develop such oil and gas resources; and
       ``(D) an overriding royalty on the gross proceeds of 
     production of such minerals other than oil and gas, equal to 
     50 percent of the royalty rate established by the Secretary 
     of the Interior by regulation as of October 1, 2011.
       ``(3) Reservation by state of utah.--The State of Utah 
     shall reserve, for the benefit of its State school trust, an 
     overriding interest in that portion of the mineral estate 
     comprised of minerals subject to leasing under the Mineral 
     Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) in any mineral lands 
     relinquished by the State to the United States.
       ``(4) Extent of overriding interest.--The overriding 
     interest reserved by the State under paragraph (3) shall 
     consist of--
       ``(A) 50 percent of any bonus bid or other payment received 
     by the United States as consideration for securing any lease 
     or authorization to develop such mineral resources on the 
     relinquished lands;
       ``(B) 50 percent of any rental or other payments received 
     by the United States as consideration for the lease or 
     authorization to develop such mineral resources;
       ``(C) a 6.25 percent overriding royalty on the gross 
     proceeds of oil and gas production under any lease or 
     authorization to develop such oil and gas resources; and
       ``(D) an overriding royalty on the gross proceeds of 
     production of such minerals other than oil and gas, equal to 
     50 percent of the royalty rate established by the Secretary 
     of the Interior by regulation as of October 1, 2011.
       ``(5) No obligation to lease.--Neither the United States 
     nor the State shall be obligated to lease or otherwise 
     develop oil and gas resources in which the other party 
     retains an overriding interest under this section.
       ``(6) Cooperative agreements.--The Secretary of the 
     Interior is authorized to enter into cooperative agreements 
     with the State and the Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and 
     Ouray Reservation to facilitate the relinquishment and 
     selection of lands to be conveyed under this section, and the 
     administration of the overriding interests reserved 
     hereunder.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Utah (Mr. Bishop) and the gentleman from the Northern Mariana Islands 
(Mr. Sablan) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Utah.


                             General Leave

  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 
5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include 
extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Utah?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  H.R. 356 is called the Hill Creek Cultural Preservation and Energy 
Development Act, and it's to promote economic development within the 
Uintah and Ouray Indian Reservation and to increase funding for public 
education within the State of Utah, as well as to protect some 
culturally and environmentally sensitive lands that are within that 
particular reservation.
  This is a bipartisan bill. It's supported by the entire Utah 
congressional delegation, the oil and gas industry, the Ute Tribe, the 
Wilderness Society. Actually, everybody with an IQ over 7 is in support 
of it. It's a noncontroversial measure that will authorize the 
Secretary of the Interior to resolve a decades-old land tenure issue in 
a manner that's supported by all parties.
  In 1948, Congress extended the Uintah and Ouray Reservation, 
surrounding about 18,000 acres of school trust lands and mineral leases 
that were within that portion. In 1955, Congress attempted to solve the 
dispute amongst some of these lands, and actually failed in doing so. 
So the Ute Tribe has long protected the southern portion of this Hill 
Creek area for cultural and environmental reasons. It's also in an area 
that's known as the Book Cliffs, which is one of the most remote and 
rugged places within the State of Utah.
  The Utah School Institutional Trust Lands Administration, or SITLA, 
which manages the school lands in Utah, has a constitutional mandate to 
generate income from trust lands to fund the public education.
  So, to achieve the desires of the State, for funding education, and 
the

[[Page 6947]]

Tribe, to promote their cultural areas, both parties have worked 
together in a cooperative way to craft a plan that authorizes the 
Secretary to exchange land so that areas that are now with SITLA in the 
southern part that want to be preserved will be sent over to the 
reservation.
  Areas in the northern part that have mineral resources on them will 
be given over to SITLA on an acre-by-acre basis. And once the exchange 
is complete, both the tribe and SITLA will jointly develop oil and gas 
resources located within the northern portion of Hill Creek and share 
in that revenue. American taxpayers will also share in the mineral 
revenue.
  So, Mr. Speaker, Congress needs to take note that this model of how 
you resolve land tenure issues is an extremely effective one. Divisive 
issues in the past can be resolved through a collaborative process that 
allows for all points of view to be considered and heard, as was done 
in this particular bill. In this example, we're able to balance these 
multiple views and, as a result, we will protect some of our wildest 
places in Utah and also allow for responsible oil and gas production 
that will help in funding the education system in Utah.
  So I'm hoping to replicate this collaborative model to resolve some 
of the other longstanding issues that are public land conflicts in my 
home State of Utah.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. SABLAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, H.R. 356 clarifies existing law regarding the Federal 
Government's authority to permit land exchanges within the boundaries 
of the Ute Indian Reservation in northeastern Utah and resolve the 
tribe's split estate problem caused by Federal error over 50 years ago.
  The legislation returns the subsurface mineral estate to the Ute 
Tribe in a portion of its reservation that the tribe considers 
culturally and environmentally significant and, thus, preserves the 
area's pristine wilderness from development.
  Last Congress, the House passed a virtually identical bill under 
suspension of the rules by voice vote, and again, I urge my colleagues 
to support H.R. 356.
  Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers. I yield back the balance of 
my time.
  Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, the State and the tribe have been 
trying to get Congress to act on this measure for a number of years. 
It's a widely popular proposal. It's supported by the State. It's 
supported by local governments. It's supported by the tribes. It is a 
bipartisan bill, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) that the House suspend the rules and 
pass the bill, H.R. 356.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________