[House Report 110-610]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



110th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     110-610

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

 
TO RATIFY A CONVEYANCE OF A PORTION OF THE JICARILLA APACHE RESERVATION 
 TO RIO ARRIBA COUNTY, STATE OF NEW MEXICO, PURSUANT TO THE SETTLEMENT 
   OF LITIGATION BETWEEN THE JICARILLA APACHE NATION AND RIO ARRIBA 
COUNTY, STATE OF NEW MEXICO, TO AUTHORIZE ISSUANCE OF A PATENT FOR SAID 
  LANDS, AND TO CHANGE THE EXTERIOR BOUNDARY OF THE JICARILLA APACHE 
            RESERVATION ACCORDINGLY, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

 April 29, 2008.--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 H.R. 3522]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred the 
bill (H.R. 3522) to ratify a conveyance of a portion of the 
Jicarilla Apache Reservation to Rio Arriba County, State of New 
Mexico, pursuant to the settlement of litigation between the 
Jicarilla Apache Nation and Rio Arriba County, State of New 
Mexico, to authorize issuance of a patent for said lands, and 
to change the exterior boundary of the Jicarilla Apache 
Reservation accordingly, 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. 3522 is to ratify a conveyance of a 
portion of the Jicarilla Apache Reservation to Rio Arriba 
County, State of New Mexico, pursuant to the settlement of 
litigation between the Jicarilla Apache and Rio Arriba County, 
State of New Mexico, to authorize issuance of a patent for said 
lands, and to change the exterior boundary of the Jicarilla 
Apache Reservation accordingly, and for other purposes.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    For nearly 20 years, there has been a dispute between the 
Jicarilla Apache Tribe and Rio Arriba County, New Mexico, over 
the ownership of a road on a parcel of land formerly referred 
to as Theis Ranch. The Jicarilla Apache Tribe purchased the 
Theis Ranch in 1985. In September of 1988, the Secretary of the 
Interior placed the Theis Ranch property in trust and declared 
it part of the Jicarilla Apache Reservation.
    In 1987, a lawsuit was filed in New Mexico state court to 
determine the ownership status of the disputed road. The 
District Court ruled in favor of the Tribe, and subsequently 
the County appealed. This appeal is currently pending before 
the New Mexico Court of Appeals. In an effort to settle the 
dispute outside the courtroom, the Tribe and the County entered 
into mediation. In 2003, the Tribe and County reached a 
settlement that was approved by the Secretary of the Interior. 
The settlement agreement provided that the Tribe would transfer 
approximately 70.5 acres of land located within the expanded 
1988 reservation to the County. In exchange, the County agreed 
to abandon any and all claims to the disputed road. H.R. 3522 
ratifies the conveyance of the land as established in the 
settlement agreement, and is therefore necessary to resolution 
of the litigation.
    In the 109th Congress, H.R. 4876, a nearly identical bill, 
passed the House under suspension of the rules.

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 3522 was introduced on September 10, 2007 by 
Representative Tom Udall (D-NM). The bill was referred to the 
Committee on Natural Resources. On April 9, 2008, the Committee 
on Natural Resources held a hearing on the bill. The full 
Committee on Natural Resources met to consider the bill on 
April 17, 2008, and ordered it favorably reported to the House 
of Representatives by unanimous consent.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Definitions

    Section 1 defines the terms ``Jicarilla Apache Nation,'' 
``1988 Reservation Addition,'' ``Settlement Agreement,'' 
``Lawsuit,'' ``Rio Arriba County,'' ``Settlement Lands,'' 
``Secretary,'' and ``Disputed County Road'' for purposes of 
this Act.

Section 2. Congressional findings

    Section 2 sets forth the findings supporting the background 
and reasoning for this bill, including that the Jicarilla 
Apache Nation and the County of Rio Arriba, New Mexico, have 
reached a Settlement Agreement over a lawsuit involving a 
disputed road. Furthermore, it provides that the Settlement 
Agreement has been approved by the Secretary of the Interior.

Section 3. Condition on effect of section

    Section 3 provides that ratification of the conveyance and 
issuance of a patent shall not occur until after the conditions 
set forth in subsection (a) are met by the Jicarilla Apache 
Nation and the County of Rio Arriba, New Mexico, and the 
Secretary of the Interior has published such findings in the 
Federal Register.

Section 4. Ratification of conveyance; issuance of patent

    Section 4 ratifies and approves the Jicarilla Apache 
Nation's quitclaim deed for the settlement lands to the County 
of Rio Arriba. Further, it requires the Secretary of the 
Interior to issue a patent for the settlement lands to the 
County of Rio Arriba.

Section 5. Boundary change

    Section 5 provides that lands conveyed to the County of Rio 
Arriba under this Act shall cease to be a part of the Jicarilla 
Apache Reservation.

            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. As required by 
clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII, the general performance goal or 
objective of this bill is to ratify a conveyance of a portion 
of the Jicarilla Apache Reservation to Rio Arriba County, State 
of New Mexico, pursuant to the settlement of litigation between 
the Jicarilla Apache and Rio Arriba County, State of New 
Mexico, to authorize issuance of a patent for said lands, and 
to change the exterior boundary of the Jicarilla Apache 
Reservation accordingly.
    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:

H.R. 3522--A bill to ratify a conveyance of a portion of the Jicarilla 
        Apache Reservation to Rio Arriba County, state of New Mexico, 
        pursuant to the settlement of litigation between the Jicarilla 
        Apache Nation and Rio Arriba County, state of New Mexico, to 
        authorize issuance of a patent for said lands, and to change 
        the exterior boundary of the Jicarilla Apache Reservation 
        accordingly

    CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 3522 would have no 
significant impact on the federal budget. H.R. 3522 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.
    H.R. 3522 would authorize a settlement between the 
Jicarilla Apache Nation and Rio Arriba County, New Mexico, 
regarding a dispute over the ownership of a road on the tribe's 
reservation. The settlement agreement that would be ratified by 
the bill would remove approximately 70 acres of land within the 
reservation from trust and reservation status, which would 
allow that land to be conveyed to Rio Arriba County, provided 
that certain conditions are met. In exchange, the county would 
agree to abandon all other legal claims to the disputed road. 
Based on information provided by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, 
CBO expects that implementing this conveyance would have no 
significant impact on administrative costs to that agency.
    The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Leigh Angres. 
The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                    COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 104-4

    This bill contains no unfunded mandates.

                           EARMARK STATEMENT

    H.R. 3522 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.

                                  
