[House Report 118-423]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


118th Congress   }                                      {       Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session      }                                      {      118-423

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



 
   PUYALLUP TRIBE OF INDIANS LAND INTO TRUST CONFIRMATION ACT OF 2023

                                _______
                                

 March 12, 2024.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                        [To accompany H.R. 929]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

    The Committee on Natural Resources, to whom was referred 
the bill (H.R. 929) to take certain land in the State of 
Washington into trust for the benefit of the Puyallup Tribe of 
the Puyallup Reservation, and for other purposes, having 
considered the same, reports favorably thereon without 
amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

                       PURPOSE OF THE LEGISLATION

    The purpose of H.R. 929 is to take certain land in the 
State of Washington into trust for the benefit of the Puyallup 
Tribe of the Puyallup Reservation, and for other purposes.

                  BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    H.R. 929 would take approximately 17 acres of fee land in 
Pierce County, Washington, into trust for the benefit of the 
Puyallup Tribe of Indians. The land taken into trust would be 
part of the tribe's reservation. Gaming, pursuant to the Indian 
Gaming Regulatory Act,\1\ would be prohibited on the land 
placed into trust under the bill.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\25 USC 2701 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Puyallup tribe is located south of Seattle in Tacoma, 
Washington. In 1854, the Puyallup Tribe, alongside two other 
tribes, entered into a treaty with the United States, now known 
as the Medicine Creek Treaty.\2\ As a result, all three tribes 
were moved onto small reservations located away from the 
resources the tribe relied on, leading to the Treaty Wars from 
1855 to 1856.\3\ In August of 1856, the United States came into 
agreement with the three tribes resulting in an additional 
18,062 acres being added to the Puyallup Reservation on 
Commencement Bay within Puget Sound.\4\ Further settlement of 
the area by non-Indians, the arrival of the Northern Pacific 
Railroad terminal in the 1870s, and the signing of the General 
Allotment Act in 1887 led to the tribe holding only around 
three percent of their designated reservation lands by 1984.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\Puyallup tribe of Indians'', Tiller's Guide to Indian Country, 
Ed. by Veronica E. Velarde Tiller (2015).
    \3\``Our Story,'' Puyallup Tribe. http://puyallup-tribe.com/
ourtribe/.
    \4\Id.
    \5\Michael Douglas, ``Puyallup Land Claims Settlement,'' 
HistoryLink.org, Oct. 12, 2016. www.historylink.org/File/20157 
(hereinafter Douglas, Puyallup Land Claims Settlement); and Timothy 
Egan, ``Indian Tribe Agrees to Drop Claim to Tacoma Land for $162 
Million,'' New York Times, Aug. 29.1988. https://www.nytimes.com/1988/
08/29/us/indian-tribe-agrees-to-drop-claim-to-tacoma-land-for-162-
million.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Puyallup tribe began to pursue reacquisition of their 
reservation lands in the late 1970s, working to place several 
tracts of land into trust for their tribal members within the 
City of Tacoma, which were within the tribe's historic 
reservation. In 1978, the Secretary of the Interior's authority 
to place land into trust for the Puyallup was confirmed in 
Andrus v. City of Tacoma.\6\ The 1983 case of Puyallup Indian 
Tribe v. Port of Tacoma affirmed the tribe's title to 12 acres 
of riverbed land exposed when the Army Corps of Engineers 
rechanneled the Puyallup River from 1948 to 1950.\7\ The tribe 
continued to pursue the reacquisition of reservation lands by 
filing a complaint against the Port of Tacoma and the Union 
Pacific Railroad to reacquire 120 acres of tideland along 
Commencement Bay and Puyallup River, disrupting title to lands 
where much of the city's industry was located.\8\ After years 
of negotiations, the Puyallup Land Claims Settlement Act\9\ was 
enacted in 1990 by Congress to formalize the land claim 
settlement negotiated between all parties, including the 
Puyallup tribe, the Federal government, the State of 
Washington, local governments, and private entities.\10\ In 
exchange for relinquishing any legal claims to various acres of 
land, the tribe received $162 million and 900 acres of 
land.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\City of Tacoma, Wash. v. Andrus, 457 F. Supp. 342 (D.D.C. 1978).
    \7\Puyallup Indian Tribe v. Port of Tacoma, 717 F.2d 1251 (9th Cir. 
1983).
    \8\Douglas, Puyallup Land Claims Settlement.
    \9\P.L. 101-41.
    \10\Douglas, Puyallup Land Claims Settlement.
    \11\Associated Press. ``Tribe Wins Money in Settlement of Land 
Suit.'' The New York Times, Mar. 25, 1990. https://www.nytimes.com/
1990/03/25/us/tribe-wins-money-in-settlement-of-land-suit.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Since the 1990 settlement, the Puyallup tribe has engaged 
in several economic development projects on their trust lands 
within the Tacoma area and continues to seek restoration of the 
tribe's homelands.
    In the mid-2010s, the Puyallup tribe began the process of 
taking the East Alexander Avenue parcels and the Ruston Way 
parcels into trust as a discretionary trust acquisition through 
the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) administrative process. 
However, likely soil and groundwater contamination of the land 
was found through Environmental Site Assessments. The findings 
triggered the Department of the Interior's policy to ``minimize 
the exposure of bureaus/offices to liabilities and potential 
remediation costs by avoiding the acquisition of real property 
that is contaminated, unless otherwise specifically directed by 
Congress . . .''\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\Department of Interior, Department Manual, effective Oct. 12, 
2016. 602 DM 2, at 2.5, available at: https://www.doi.gov/sites/
doi.gov/files/elips/documents/602-dm-2_0.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    According to the tribe, the BIA is unwilling to take the 
land into trust with the current documented environmental 
contamination. The BIA has stated to the tribe in 
correspondence that, because of the liability implications for 
the federal government and the cost implications if the tribe 
proceeds through the regulatory process, congressional action 
is ``the most viable option'' for the Puyallup tribe to have 
these lands placed into trust, partially because further 
environmental remediation would be prohibitively expensive to 
the tribe.\13\ H.R. 929 includes language stating that the 
United States shall not be liable for any environmental 
contamination that occurred on or before the date on which the 
land is taken into trust.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\Letter to Chairman Bill Sterud, Puyallup Tribe of Indians, from 
Bryan Mercier, Northwest Regional Director, BIA. August 15, 2022. On 
file with committee staff.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            COMMITTEE ACTION

    H.R. 929 was introduced on February 9, 2023, by Rep. Kilmer 
(D-WA). The bill was referred to the Committee on Natural 
Resources, and within the Committee to the Subcommittee on 
Indian and Insular Affairs. On July 12, 2023, the Subcommittee 
on Indian and Insular Affairs held a hearing on the bill. On 
September 20, 2023, the Committee on Natural Resources met to 
consider the bill. The Subcommittee on Indian and Insular 
Affairs was discharged from further consideration of H.R. 929 
by unanimous consent. The bill was then ordered favorably 
reported to the House of Representatives by unanimous consent.

                                HEARINGS

    For the purposes of clause 3(c)(6) of House rule XIII, the 
following hearing was used to develop or consider this measure: 
hearing by the Subcommittee on Indian and Insular Affairs held 
on July 12, 2023.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title

    This Act may be cited as the ``Puyallup Tribe of Indians 
Land into Trust Confirmation Act of 2023.''

Section 2. Land to be taken into trust for the benefit of the Puyallup 
        Tribe of the Puyallup reservation

    Takes roughly 17.264 acres of land owned in fee by the 
Puyallup Tribe, identified as three parcels of land into trust 
by the United States for the benefit of the tribe. Any 
environmental liability on the United States is waived, and all 
class II and class III gaming under the Indian Gaming 
Regulatory Act is prohibited on the land in question.

            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.

           COMPLIANCE WITH HOUSE RULE XIII AND CONGRESSIONAL 
                               BUDGET ACT

    1. Cost of Legislation and the Congressional Budget Act. 
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) and (3) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and 
sections 308(a) and 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974, the Committee has received the following estimate for the 
bill from the Director of the Congressional Budget Office:

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


    H.R. 929 would direct the Department of the Interior (DOI) 
to take into trust approximately 17 acres of land in Pierce 
County, Washington, owned by the Puyallup Tribe. Under the 
bill, DOI would hold title to that land for the benefit of the 
tribe, and the United States would not be liable for any 
environmental contamination that occurred on or before the date 
the land would be taken into trust. The legislation also would 
prohibit certain types of gaming on those lands. Using 
information from DOI, CBO estimates that the administrative 
costs to implement H.R. 929 would not be significant; any 
spending would be subject to the availability of appropriated 
funds.
    H.R. 929 would impose an intergovernmental mandate as 
defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). The bill 
would prohibit state and local governments from taxing land 
taken into trust for the Puyallup Tribe. Information from 
Pierce County about taxes and other receipts associated with 
the land indicates that those foregone revenues would total 
less than $100,000 annually, well below the annual 
intergovernmental threshold established in UMRA ($99 million in 
2023, adjusted annually for inflation).
    The bill contains no private-sector mandates.
    The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Julia Aman 
(for federal costs) and Rachel Austin (for mandates). The 
estimate was reviewed by Emily Stern, Senior Adviser for Budget 
Analysis.

                                         Phillip L. Swagel,
                             Director, Congressional Budget Office.

    2. 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 take certain land in the State of 
Washington into trust for the benefit of the Puyallup Tribe of 
the Puyallup Reservation, and for other purposes.

                           EARMARK STATEMENT

    This bill does not contain any Congressional earmarks, 
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined 
under clause 9(e), 9(f), and 9(g) of rule XXI of the rules of 
the House of Representatives.

                 UNFUNDED MANDATES REFORM ACT STATEMENT

    According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), H.R. 
929 would impose an intergovernmental mandate as defined in the 
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). However, CBO estimates 
that any unfunded mandate would fall well below the annual 
intergovernmental threshold established in UMRA.

                           EXISTING PROGRAMS

    Directed Rule Making. This bill does not contain any 
directed rule makings.
    Duplication of Existing Programs. This bill does not 
establish or reauthorize a program of the federal government 
known to be duplicative of another program. Such program was 
not included in any report from the Government Accountability 
Office to Congress pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139 
or identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal Domestic 
Assistance published pursuant to the Federal Program 
Information Act (Public Law 95-220, as amended by Public Law 
98-169) as relating to other programs.

                  APPLICABILITY TO LEGISLATIVE BRANCH

    The Committee finds that the legislation does not relate to 
the terms and conditions of employment or access to public 
services or accommodations within the meaning of section 
102(b)(3) of the Congressional Accountability Act.

                PREEMPTION OF STATE, LOCAL OR TRIBAL LAW

    Any preemptive effect of this bill over state, local, or 
tribal law is intended to be consistent with the bill's 
purposes and text and the Supremacy Clause of Article VI of the 
U.S. Constitution.

                        CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

    As ordered reported by the Committee on Natural Resources, 
H.R. 929 makes no changes in existing law.

                                  [all]