[House Report 105-716]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



105th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 2d Session                                                     105-716
_______________________________________________________________________


 
    UNRECOGNIZED SOUTHEAST ALASKA NATIVE COMMUNITIES RECOGNITION ACT

_______________________________________________________________________


 September 15, 1998.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on 
            the State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Young of Alaska, from the Committee on Resources, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 2812]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Resources, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 2812) to provide for the recognition of certain Native 
communities under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, and 
for other purposes, having considered the same, report 
favorably thereon without amendment and recommend that the bill 
do pass.

                          Purpose of the Bill

    The purpose of H.R. 2812 is to provide for the recognition 
of certain Native communities under the Alaska Native Claims 
Settlement Act, and for other purposes.

                  Background and Need for Legislation

    The purpose of H.R. 2812 is to recognize five communities 
in Southeast Alaska Haines, Ketchikan, Petersburg, Wrangell, 
and Tenakee under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act 
(ANCSA), and authorize each to form an urban corporation, 
except Tenakee which is authorized to form a group corporation. 
H.R. 2812 does not award any land or compensation to the newly 
formed corporations. Instead, the bill provides that only a 
future Act of Congress may convey compensation (land, money, or 
other benefits) to the five new Native corporations.

                          Background on ANCSA

    The aboriginal land claims of Alaska Natives were settled 
in the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (ANCSA). 
ANCSA extinguished all Alaska Native claims based on aboriginal 
title, right, occupancy and use of Alaska's lands and waters. 
To compensate the Alaska Natives, ANCSA transferred 
approximately 44 million acres of public land (in fee simple 
title) and nearly $1 billion to them. The compensation is 
intended to meet the social, economic, cultural and other needs 
of Alaska Natives. The land and cash compensation were not 
awarded to tribes, clans, or families, but to eligible private 
corporations organized by Alaska Natives. There are generally 
two types of corporations: corporations organized by village 
and those organized according to 12 geographic regions. All 
Alaska Natives are shareholders of a regional corporation, but 
not all belong to a village corporation. The law also 
prescribes the process for selecting, awarding, and 
distributing lands and funds to qualified corporations.
    Generally, Native communities in Alaska are qualified to 
form Native corporations only if recognized in ANCSA, or if 
they meet certain criteria. However, section 16 of ANCSA 
addresses Native communities in the Southeast region of the 
State separately. Section 16 lists 12 Native communities that 
may form corporations, ten of which are Native villages, and 
two of which are ``urban'' communities (Juneau and Sitka) that 
were historically Native, but no longer considered 
``villages.'' Section 16 does not contain a process to 
determine whether an unrecognized community in Southeast Alaska 
is eligible to form a corporation.
    There are several reasons for the special consideration 
given to Southeast Alaska Native communities. One is that there 
was an earlier land claims settlement for them: the 1959 
Tlingit and Haida Settlement, which awarded $7.5 million to 
tribes in Southeast. Another is that demographic and land 
ownership patterns in this area of Alaska are considerably 
different from the rest of the State.
    Each corporation formed pursuant to section 16 was awarded 
23,040 acres of land around the core township. Such property 
can be valuable for timber harvesting and for social, 
cultural,and subsistence benefits. Native residents of unrecognized 
communities in Southeast Alaska remain eligible to be at-large 
shareholders of Sealaska, the regional Native corporation.

      Land Claims of Unrecognized Communities in Southeast Alaska

    Haines, Ketchikan, Petersburg, Wrangell, and Tenakee, all 
located in Southeast Alaska, were not recognized under section 
16 of ANCSA. After ANCSA was enacted, Native residents of these 
``unrecognized'' communities appealed to the Secretary of the 
Interior to be included in the land claims settlement. 
Administrative appeals and mechanisms were subsequently 
exhausted by the villages without success.
    The five unrecognized communities continued to press the 
government for recognition and inclusion in ANCSA. In response, 
Congress in 1993 directed the Secretary of the Interior to 
examine why these five communities were not recognized in 
ANCSA. The Institute of Social and Economic Research 
(University of Alaska Anchorage) was contracted to study the 
issue, and in 1994 produced A Study of Five Southeast Alaska 
Communities. The report thoroughly examines the history and 
describes the status of the five communities' Native claims, 
and compares the attributes of these communities with those of 
Southeast Alaska communities that were allowed to form Native 
corporations. It notes that ``the omission of the [five] 
communities is not clearly explained in any provision of ANCSA 
or in the accompanying conference report.''
    Despite appeals to the Interior Department, the land claims 
of the five unrecognized Native villages of Haines, Ketchikan, 
Petersburg, Wrangell, and Tenakee are unresolved.

                          Summary of H.R. 2812

    H.R. 2812 grants recognition under the Alaska Native Claims 
Settlement Act to the five unrecognized Native communities. 
Haines, Ketchikan, Petersburg, and Wrangell are authorized to 
form urban corporations, and Tenakee is authorized to form a 
group corporation. However, the legislation neither authorizes 
the conveyance of land or compensation to the new corporations, 
nor creates an entitlement to public lands. Instead, the bill 
directs the Secretary of the Interior to submit a report to 
Congress recommending what land or other appropriate 
compensation should be awarded to the corporations. As 
introduced, the bill provides that any land or compensation to 
fully settle the unrecognized villages' land claims must be 
authorized by a separate Act of Congress.
    H.R. 2812 justly and fairly grants the recognition sought 
by the five communities. Congress unintentionally left the five 
Native villages in Southeast Alaska out of ANCSA. The 1993 
study referenced above provides a historical summary of 
Natives' ties to these communities. A close examination of the 
historical, cultural, and demographic characteristics of these 
communities establish the basis for recognizing their land 
claims, which have at least as much standing as those of 
several other Southeast Alaska Native villages recognized under 
section 16. Deprived of recognition and with an incomplete 
explanation for their omission from ANCSA, the five villages 
have been unable to form Native corporations, and do not share 
in the same social, cultural, and economic benefits as 
residents of villages elsewhere in the State.
    This bill does not affect the land entitlements of the 
existing ANCSA Native corporations and has no impact on the 
ANCSA section 7(i) entitlements of the regional corporations

                            Committee Action

    H.R. 2812 was introduced on November 4, 1997, by 
Congressman Don Young (R-AK). The bill was referred to the 
Committee on Resources. On February 25, 1998, the Committee 
held a hearing on H.R. 2812, where the Administration testified 
in opposition to the bill, the coalition of five communities 
recognized under the legislation testified in support, and an 
environmental organization testified in opposition. On May 20, 
1998, the full Resources Committee met to consider H.R. 2812. 
No amendments were offered and the bill was ordered favorably 
reported to the House of Representatives by a rollcall vote of 
21 to 5, with one voting present, as follows:


            Committee Oversight Findings and Recommendations

    With respect to the requirements of clause 2(l)(3) of rule 
XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, and clause 
2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives, 
the Committee on Resources' oversight findings and 
recommendations are reflected in the body of this report.

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Article I, section 8 of the Constitution of the United 
States grants Congress the authority to enact H.R. 2812.

                        Cost of the Legislation

    Clause 7(a) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison by the 
Committee of the costs which would be incurred in carrying out 
H.R. 2812. However, clause 7(d) of that rule provides that this 
requirement does not apply when the Committee has included in 
its report a timely submitted cost estimate of the bill 
prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget Office 
under section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

                     Compliance With House Rule XI

    1. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(B) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, H.R. 
2812 does not contain any new budget authority, spending 
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in 
revenues or tax expenditures.
    2. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(D) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee has received no report of oversight findings and 
recommendations from the Committee on Government Reform and 
Oversight on the subject of H.R. 2812.
    3. With respect to the requirement of clause 2(l)(3)(C) of 
rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 403 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the 
Committee has received the following cost estimate for H.R. 
2812 from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.

               congressional budget office cost estimate

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                      Washington, DC, June 9, 1998.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Resources,
U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 2812, the 
Unrecognized Southeast Alaska Native Communities Recognition 
Act.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Victoria V. 
Heid (for federal costs), and Marjories Miller (for the state, 
local, and tribal impact).
            Sincerely,
                                         June E. O'Neill, Director.
    Enclosure.

H.R. 2812--Unrecognized Southeast Alaska Native Communities Recognition 
        Act

    Summary: H.R. 2812 would amend the Alaska Native Claims 
Settlement Act by allowing five communities in southeast Alaska 
to organize as Native corporations: four as urban corporations 
and one as a group corporation.
    CBO estimates that implementing this bill would cost about 
$1 million over the 1999-2003 period for grants to the five 
communities, assuming appropriation of the authorized amounts. 
Enacting the bill would not affect direct spending or receipts; 
therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would not apply. H.R. 2812 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and would 
have no significant impact on the budgets of state, local, or 
tribal governments.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated 
budgetary impact of H.R. 2812 is shown in the following table. 
The costs of this legislation fall within budget function 300 
(natural resources and the environment).

                                    [By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]                                    
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   1998    1999    2000    2001    2002    2003 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION                                       
                                                                                                                
Estimated authorization level...................................       0       1       0       0       0       0
Estimated outlays...............................................       0   (\1\)   (\1\)   (\1\)       0       0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Less than $500,000.                                                                                         

    Basis of estimate: H.R. 2812 would amend the Alaska Native 
Claims Settlement Act by allowing the Native residents of 
Haines, Ketchikan, Petersburg, and Wrangell, in southeast 
Alaska, to organize as urban corporations, and by allowing the 
Native residents of Tenakee, Alaska, to organize as a group 
corporation. H.R. 2812 would authorize grants of $250,000 to 
each of the five Native communities for planning, development, 
and organization of the new corporations. The bill states that 
none of the changes made by H.R. 2812 would create any 
entitlement to federal lands for the new corporations without a 
subsequent act of the Congress. The bill would direct the 
Secretary of the Interior to prepare, by December 31, 1998, a 
report making recommendations to the Congress regarding lands 
and other appropriate compensation to be provided to the new 
corporations. CBO expects that preparing the report would have 
a negligible cost.
    Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
    Estimated impact on State, local and tribal governments: 
H.R. 2812 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in 
UMRA and would have no significant impact on the budgets of 
state, local, or tribal governments. This bill would give the 
new corporations no rights to property or resources, but it 
would direct the Secretary of the Interior to make 
recommendations to the Congress regarding lands and other 
appropriate compensation to be provided to these corporations. 
Further legislation would be required to provide any such 
compensation.
    Estimated impact on the private sector: This bill would 
impose no new private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Victoria V. Heid. 
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Marjorie 
Miller.
    Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                    Compliance With Public Law 104-4

    H.R. 2812 contains no unfunded mandates.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3 of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the 
bill, as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is printed 
in italic and existing law in which no change is proposed is 
shown in roman):

ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                         regional corporations

  Sec. 7. (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (j) During the five years following the enactment of this 
Act, not less than 10% of all corporate funds received by each 
of the twelve Regional Corporations under section 6 (Alaska 
Native Fund), and under subsection (i) (revenues from the 
timber resources and subsurface estate patented to it pursuant 
to this Act), and all other net income, shall be distributed 
among the stockholders of the twelve Regional Corporations. Not 
less than 45% of funds from such sources during the first five-
year period, and 50% thereafter, shall be distributed among the 
Village Corporations in the region and the class of 
stockholders who are not residents of those villages, as 
provided in subsection to it. In the case of the thirteenth 
Regional Corporation, if organized, not less than 50% of all 
corporate funds received under section 6 shall be distributed 
to the stockholders. Native members of the communities of 
Haines, Ketchikan, Petersburg, Tenakee, and Wrangell who become 
shareholders in an Urban or Group Corporation for such a 
community shall continue to be eligible to receive 
distributions under this subsection as at-large shareholders of 
Sealaska Corporation.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (r) No provision of the Unrecognized Southeast Alaska Native 
Communities Recognition Act shall affect the ratio for 
determination of distribution of revenues among Native 
Corporations under this section of the Act and the 1982 Section 
7(i) Settlement Agreement among the Regional Corporations or 
among Village Corporations under subsection (j).

                          village corporations

  Sec. 8. (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (d)(1) The Secretary shall enroll to each of the Urban 
Corporations for Haines, Ketchikan, Petersburg, or Wrangell 
those individual Natives who enrolled under this Act to Haines, 
Ketchikan, Petersburg, or Wrangell, and shall enroll to the 
Group Corporation for Tenakee those individual Natives who 
enrolled under this Act to Tenakee.
  (2) Those Natives who, pursuant to paragraph (1), are 
enrolled to an Urban Corporation for Haines, Ketchikan, 
Petersburg, or Wrangell, or to a Group Corporation for Tenakee, 
and who were enrolled as shareholders of the Regional 
Corporation for southeast Alaska on or before March 30, 1973, 
shall receive 100 shares of Settlement Common Stock in such 
Urban or Group Corporation.
  (3) A Native who has received shares of stock in the Regional 
Corporation for southeast Alaska through inheritance from a 
decedent Native who originally enrolled to Haines, Ketchikan, 
Petersburg, Tenakee, or Wrangell, which decedent Native was not 
a shareholder in a Village, Group or Urban Corporation, shall 
receive the identical number of shares of Settlement Common 
Stock in the Urban Corporation for Haines, Ketchikan, 
Petersburg, or Wrangell, or in the Group Corporation for 
Tenakee, as the number of shares inherited by that Native from 
the decedent Native who would have been eligible to be enrolled 
to such Urban or Group Corporation.
  (4) Nothing in this subsection shall affect entitlement to 
land of any Regional Corporation pursuant to section 12(b) or 
section 14(h)(8).

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                      the tlingit-haida settlement

  Sec. 16. (a) * * *

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *

  (e)(1) The Native residents of each of the Native villages of 
Haines, Ketchikan, Petersburg, and Wrangell, Alaska, may 
organize as an Urban Corporation.
  (2) The Native residents of the Native village of Tenakee, 
Alaska, may organize as a Group Corporation.
  (3) Nothing in this subsection shall affect any entitlement 
to land of any Native Corporation pursuant to this Act or any 
other provision of law.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


                     DISSENTING VIEWS ON H.R. 2812

    We strongly oppose this legislation.
    H.R. 2812 designates five new Native development 
corporations to be capitalized with land from the Tongass 
National Forest or other assets as determined by a future 
Congress. The premise underlying the bill is that Natives in 
these five Southeast Alaska communities did not receive the 
same benefits from the 1971 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act 
as did Natives in other Alaskan villages.
    We oppose reopening the 27 year-old settlement on the 
rationale that some Alaska Natives got a better deal than 
others. In enacting the 1971 Settlement Act--which conveyed 
over 40 million acres of land and nearly $1 billion in 
compensation to Alaska Natives--Congress in fact did not 
exclude Natives in these five Southeast communities. All 
eligible Natives were enrolled as at-large shareholders in the 
Sealaska regional corporation. In addition to financial 
compensation, Sealaska received about 313,000 acres of surface 
lands and 589,000 acres of subsurface, including some of the 
most productive timber lands in Southeast Alaska.
    It is important to recognize that Natives in these five 
communities are not ``landless.'' They are shareholders of 
Sealaska, one of the most land-rich Native regional 
corporations in Alaska, a corporation that has generated 
significant revenues, primarily from clear-cutting the old-
growth forest on its lands and exporting the logs.
    There is no question that the 1971 Alaska Native Claims 
Settlement Act did not treat equally every community and every 
region in Alaska. There are thousands of other ``at-large'' 
shareholders of regional corporations who did not receive dual-
enrollment in village corporations and who are not included in 
this bill. Native shareholders of some regional corporations, 
such as the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation on the North 
Slope, received more economically valuable assets than did 
other regional corporations such as Calista in the southwest. 
In recognition of these regional inequities, Congress included 
section 7(I) in the 1971 Settlement Act, requiring that revenue 
from timber, mineral and oil and gas development in any one 
region be distributed amongst all the regions.
    Both the Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior have 
stated that they will recommend this bill be vetoed if enacted 
by Congress. The Administration testified before the Committee 
that there is ``no legal or equitable justification'' for 
Congress to rewrite the 1971 Settlement Act as provided for in 
H.R. 2812.
    Among the Administration's concerns is the likelihood of 
future land conveyances from the Tongass National Forest if 
five new development corporations are created by Congress. 
Diverse interests in Alaska, including the Southeast Alaska 
Conservation Council and the Alaska Outdoor Council (an 
affiliate of the National Rifle Association), also oppose this 
bill because of concerns that it will ultimately lead to 
additional conveyances of important national forest lands out 
of public ownership.
    We share these concerns and urge the House to reject this 
legislation.

                                   George Miller.
                                   Bruce F. Vento.
                                   Maurice Hinchey.

                                
