[House Report 110-276]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



110th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                    110-276

======================================================================

 
  TO WAIVE APPLICATION OF THE INDIAN SELF-DETERMINATION AND EDUCATION 
ASSISTANCE ACT TO A SPECIFIC PARCEL OF REAL PROPERTY TRANSFERRED BY THE 
UNITED STATES TO 2 INDIAN TRIBES IN THE STATE OF OREGON, AND FOR OTHER 
                                PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

 July 30, 2007.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

  Mr. Rahall, from the Committee on Natural Resources, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 375]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred the 
bill (S. 375) to waive application of the Indian Self-
Determination and Education Assistance Act to a specific parcel 
of real property transferred by the United States to 2 Indian 
tribes in the State of Oregon, 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 S. 375 is to waive application of the Indian 
Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act to a specific 
parcel of real property transferred by the United States to two 
Indian tribes in the State of Oregon, and for other purposes.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    The parcel at issue was originally part of the Chemawa 
Indian School campus in Keizer, Oregon. In 1973 and 1974, the 
United States transferred land, including this parcel, to the 
State of Oregon for highway and associated road projects. In 
1988, upon the completion of Interstate Route 5 and Salem 
Parkway, the State deeded the remaining acreage of the parcel 
back to the United States. Because the United States had no use 
for the returned acreage for the administration of Indian 
affairs, the Department of the Interior transferred the 
property to the Tribes for economic development and other 
purposes.
    The land transfer was executed via quitclaim deed to the 
tribes pursuant to the ISDEAA, which requires the United States 
to include a reversionary clause in the deed. This clause 
states that title to the parcel will revert back to the United 
States if the land is not used for economic development 
purposes. On July 7, 2006, the Acting Northwest Regional 
Director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs informed the 
Confederated Tribes of the Siletz Reservation that the United 
States intended for the tribes to freely and fully develop the 
property. Although the Tribes intend to use the land for 
economic development purposes, the reversionary clause has 
created financing difficulties.
    The land is an integral component of a major commercial 
development project in Keizer, Oregon. The property development 
plan includes a gas station, restaurants, retail space and flex 
office space. By waiving the application of the ISDEAA to the 
transfer of the property, S. 375 will clear title to the land 
and allow the tribes to obtain conventional financing from 
commercial lending institutions and to realize the full 
commercial potential of the property. Additionally, because S. 
375 directs the Secretary to issue a new quitclaim deed that is 
exempt from the ISDEAA, there will be no reversionary clause. 
Consequently, the Tribes will be able to fully utilize the land 
for non-gaming economic development purposes. The land will 
remain in fee status and all applicable taxes and regulations 
will apply.

Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 
        Sec. 450 et seq.)

    Enacted in 1975, the ISDEAA authorizes Indian tribes and 
tribal organizations to contract or compact for the operation 
of federal programs within the Department of the Interior and 
the Indian Health Service. It also authorizes the Secretary of 
the Interior to transfer excess property to an Indian tribe in 
connection with an ISDEAA contract, but the property must 
revert back to the Secretary if the contract is terminated or 
the property is not used in accordance with the ISDEAA (25 
U.S.C. 450j(f)). The Secretary does not have the authority to 
waive application of the reversionary clause. Here, the Tribes 
do not wish to terminate the ISDEAA contract and they intend to 
use the property in a manner consistent with the ISDEAA 
contract.

Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. Sec. 2701 et seq.)

    Generally, the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) 
prohibits gaming on land acquired after October 17, 1988. Even 
then, the land must be placed into trust to qualify as ``Indian 
lands'' for purposes of the IGRA. Here, the Tribes do not 
intend to conduct gaming and the land is held in fee simple, 
not trust status. Moreover, gaming is explicitly prohibited on 
the lands at issue.

Legislative history

    In the 109th Congress, Representative Hooley (D-OR) 
introduced H.R. 5394, which was referred to the House Committee 
on Resources. On May 24, 2006, the Committee requested 
executive comment but the Department of the Interior did not 
provide it. This Congress, Representatives Hooley, Blumenauer 
(D-OR), DeFazio (D-OR), and Wu (D-OR) introduced H.R. 679 on 
January 24, 2007. S. 375 was introduced in the Senate on 
January 24, 2007 by Senators Smith (R-OR) and Wyden (D-OR). It 
was referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs, which 
unanimously ordered the bill to be reported without amendment 
on February 8, 2007. On May 22, 2007, the Senate passed S. 375 
without amendment by unanimous consent. On May 23, 2007, S. 375 
was referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    S. 375 was introduced on January 24, 2007 by Senator Gordon 
Smith (R-OR) and Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR). The bill was 
referred to the Committee on Natural Resources on May 22, 2007. 
The bill was then forwarded to the full Committee. A hearing 
was held on July 11, 2007, at which the Department of the 
Interior testified in support of this measure. On July 18, 
2007, the full Natural Resources Committee met to consider the 
bill. No amendments were offered and the bill was then ordered 
favorably reported to the House of Representatives by unanimous 
consent.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Findings

    Section 1 sets forth findings supporting the intent of the 
bill, including that the parcel of land in the quitclaim deed 
is approximately 19.86 acres of land originally part of the 
Chemawa Indian School; that the United States does not desire 
the return of the parcel and does not intend under any 
circumstance to take action to seek return of the parcel; and 
that in reliance on this intent, the Tribes have committed over 
$2.5 million to infrastructure improvements to the parcel.

Section 2. Waiver of application of Indian Self-Determination and 
        Education Assistance Act

    Section 2 provides that the Indian Self-Determination and 
Education Assistance Act does not apply to the transfer of the 
parcel of real property deeded by the United States to the 
ConfederatedTribes of Siletz Indians of Oregon and the 
Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon by quitclaim 
deed dated June 18, 2002. The Secretary of the Interior is directed to 
issue a new deed that does not include any restriction on the right to 
alienate the parcel or any reference to any provision of the Indian 
Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act. Class II and Class III 
Gaming pursuant to the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et 
seq.) may not be conducted on the property.

            COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

    Regarding clause 2(b)(1) of rule X and clause 3(c)(1) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, the 
Committee on Natural 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 this bill.

                    COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII

    1. Cost of Legislation. Clause 3(d)(2) 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 this bill. However, clause 3(d)(3)(B) 
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 402 of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
    2. Congressional Budget Act. As required by clause 3(c)(2) 
of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
section 308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, this 
bill does not contain any new budget authority, spending 
authority, credit authority, or an increase or decrease in 
revenues or tax expenditures.
    3. General Performance Goals and Objectives. This bill does 
not authorize funding and therefore, clause 3(c)(4) of rule 
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives does not 
apply.
    4. Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate. Under clause 
3(c)(3) of rule XIII 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 this bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office:

S. 375--An act to waive application of the Indian Self-Determination 
        and Education Assistance Act to a specific parcel of real 
        property transferred by the United States to two Indian tribes 
        in the state of Oregon, and for other purposes

    S. 375 would direct the Secretary of the Interior to issue 
a new deed to the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians and the 
Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community of Oregon, 
exempting approximately 20 acres of land currently owned by the 
tribes from provisions of the Indian Self-Determination and 
Education Assistance Act. CBO estimates that enacting S. 375 
would have no significant impact on the federal budget.
    S. 375 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and 
would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 
Enacting this legislation would benefit the Siletz and Grand 
Ronde Indian tribes in Oregon.
    In June 2002, the federal government transferred 
approximately 20 acres of land to the Confederated Tribes of 
Siletz Indians and the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde 
Community of Oregon. S. 375 would direct the Secretary to 
reissue a deed for the land that waives provisions of the 
Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act related 
to the use of that property. Because the land in question is 
not currently owned or held in trust by the United States, CBO 
estimates that enacting the legislation would have no 
significant effect on the federal budget.
    On February 20, 2007, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for 
S. 375, as ordered reported by the Senate Committee on Indian 
Affairs on February 8, 2007. The two versions of the 
legislation are similar, and our cost estimates are identical.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Daniel Hoople. 
This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy 
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

                    COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4

    This bill contains no unfunded mandates.

                           EARMARK STATEMENT

    S. 375 does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited 
tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 
9(d), 9(e) or 9(f) of rule XXI.

                PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

    This bill is not intended to preempt any State, local or 
tribal law.

                        CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

    If enacted, this bill would make no changes in existing 
law.

                                  
