[Senate Report 117-18]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 52
117th Congress } { Report
SENATE
1st Session } { 117-18
======================================================================
TO AMEND THE GRAND RONDE RESERVATION ACT, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
_______
April 28, 2021.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. Schatz, from the Committee on Indian Affairs,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 559]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Indian Affairs, to which was referred the
bill (S. 559) to amend the Grand Ronde Reservation Act, and for
other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably
thereon without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to reinstitute the ability of
the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde (Tribe) to pursue land
claims in the State of Oregon following the termination of that
right pursuant to the 1994 amendment to the Grand Ronde
Reservation Act.
BACKGROUND
The Tribe's reservation was originally established by
treaties entered into and ratified between 1853 and 1855, and
by the Executive Order of June 30, 1857. In 1954, Congress
terminated the Tribe through Public Law 83-588. Congress later
reversed the termination by enactment of the Grand Ronde
Restoration Act (Public Law 98-165) in 1983. The Grand Ronde
Restoration Act restored the Tribe's federal recognition by
reinstating its Indian Reorganization Act charter and requiring
Congressional legislation to reestablish a reservation.
Following the development of a reservation plan, Congress
passed the Grand Ronde Reservation Act in 1988 for the Tribe to
establish 9,811 acres as reservation land. After the Grand
Ronde Reservation Act was enacted, the U.S. Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) detected a land survey error dating back to
1871 when David Thompson, U.S. Deputy Surveyor, incorrectly
surveyed the eastern boundary of the Tribe's original
reservation by not accounting for an additional 84 acres.
Since the 1871 surveying, the BLM treated the 84 acres as
Oregon & California Railroad Grant Lands and permitted the
harvesting of timber from the land. Once informed of the land
survey error, the Tribe found that the harvested land, also
known as the Thompson Strip, was unmanageable due to its narrow
boundaries and its divided ownership interests between several
parties. The Tribe determined a land exchange with BLM was the
best course of compensation for the land survey error. In 1994,
Congress passed Public Law 103-435 that allowed the Tribe to
exchange an additional 240 acres of BLM land for relinquishing
claims to any land that was part of their original reservation
prior to termination. This agreement was included in a 1994
amendment to the Grand Ronde Reservation Act that was passed in
an Indian technical corrections bill and later signed into law
on November 2, 1994.
NEED FOR LEGISLATION
The language used in the 1994 amendment to the Grand Ronde
Reservation Act relinquished any land claims by the Tribe
within the State of Oregon. The Tribe seeks enactment of S. 559
to preserve their pre-1994 right to compensation and alleviate
any potential issues should another land survey error arise.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
Senators Merkley and Wyden introduced S. 559, a bill to
amend the Grand Ronde Reservation Act and for other purposes,
on March 3, 2021. The Senate referred the bill to the Committee
on the same day. The bill, S. 559, is identical to the version
favorably reported by the Committee, as amended, in the 116th
Congress. On March 10, 2021, at a duly called business meeting,
the Committee considered and reported S. 559 favorably without
amendment.
116th Congress. S. 2716, a bill to amend the Grand Ronde
Reservation Act and for other purposes was introduced by
Senators Merkley and Wyden on October 28, 2019. The Committee
held a legislative hearing on June 24, 2020. Mr. Darryl
LaCounte, Director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, testified
on behalf of the U.S. Department of the Interior on the bill
stating that they were willing to work with the Committee on
technical corrections.
On July 29, 2020, the Committee held a duly called business
meeting to consider eleven bills, including S. 2716. One timely
filed amendment made technical corrections to S. 2716,
clarifying that any lands obtained from a land claim settlement
were not eligible, or to be used, for Class II or Class III
gaming as these terms are defined under the Indian Gaming
Regulatory Act. The Committee ordered reported S. 2716 as
amended favorably to the full Senate. On December 15, 2020, the
Committee reported S. 2716 with an amendment and the bill as
amended passed the Senate by unanimous consent on December 20,
2020.
The House companion bill, H.R. 4888, to amend the Grand
Ronde Reservation Act and for other purposes, was introduced by
Representatives Kurt Schrader, Suzanne Bonamici, Peter DeFazio,
and Earl Blumenauer on October 28, 2019, and referred to the
House Committee on Natural Resources. On November 12, 2019, the
bill was further referred to the House Committee on Natural
Resources Subcommittee for Indigenous Peoples (Subcommittee).
The Subcommittee held a hearing on the bill on February 5,
2020. No further action was taken on H.R. 4888.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1. Short title
This section amends section 1(d) of the Grand Ronde
Reservation Act by striking ``lands within the State of
Oregon'' and inserting ``the 84 acres known as the Thompson
Strip''. The section also redesignates paragraphs and inserts a
paragraph 2 which provides for a prohibition of Class II or
Class III gaming (as these terms are defined by section 4 of
the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act) on any lands obtained as part
of a land claim settlement for the Tribe.
Section 2. Indian reservation drinking water program
This section provides that nothing in this Act, or an
amendment made by this Act, shall be construed to enlarge,
confirm, adjudicate, affect, or modify any treaty right of an
Indian tribe (as defined by section 4 of the Indian Self-
Determination and Education Assistance Act).
COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS
The following cost estimate, as provided by the
Congressional Budget Office, dated March 19, 2021, was prepared
for S. 314:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office
Washington, DC, March 23, 2021.
Hon. Brian Schatz,
Chairman Committee on Indian Affairs,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 559, a bill to amend
the Grand Ronde Reservation Act.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Jon Sperl.
Sincerely,
Phillip L. Swagel,
Director.
Enclosure.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Grand Ronde Reservation Act, enacted in 1994,
authorized the Department of the Interior (DOI) to provide 240
acres of land to the Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde
Community in Oregon. That land was added to the tribes'
reservation. In exchange, the tribes relinquished their right
to pursue claims to all other land within the state. S. 559
would lower the amount of relinquished land to an 84-acre
parcel, which in the future would allow the tribes to acquire
additional land in Oregon to which they have a valid claim.
Using information from DOI, CBO estimates that the agency
would incur administrative costs to update documents concerning
the affected parcels of land; however, those costs would not be
significant. Any such spending would be subject to the
availability of appropriated funds.
S. 559 also would impose an intergovernmental mandate--as
defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)--on the
tribes by prohibiting some forms of gaming on tribal land in
Oregon. The land was obtained by the confederated tribes as
part of a land claim settlement, and because gaming on such
land is currently allowed under federal law, the proposed ban
would be a mandate. However, because gaming does not occur now
on the tribal land and the tribes have no plans to begin gaming
activities, the cost of the mandate would be small and below
the threshold established in UMRA ($85 million in 2021,
adjusted annually for inflation).
The bill contains no private-sector mandates as defined in
UMRA.
The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Jon Sperl (for
federal costs) and Rachel Austin (for mandates). The estimate
was reviewed by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Director of Budget
Analysis.
REGULATORY AND PAPERWORK IMPACT STATEMENT
Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the
Senate requires each report accompanying a bill to evaluate the
regulatory and paperwork impact that would be incurred in
carrying out the bill. The Committee believes that S. 559 will
have minimal impact on regulatory or paperwork requirements.
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS
Except as otherwise noted, the Committee has received no
communications from the Executive Branch regarding S. 559.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
In accordance with Committee Rules, subsection 12 of rule
XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate is waived. In the
opinion of the Committee, it is necessary to dispense with
subsection 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate
to expedite the business of the Senate.
[all]