[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 238 (Monday, December 11, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 77385-77386]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-31365]



[[Page 77385]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR


Consideration of the Accuracy of the Eastern Boundary of the 
Sandia Pueblo Grant and Request for Additional Information

AGENCY: Office of the Solicitor, Interior.

ACTION: Notice and request for further information.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of the Interior announces that it will be 
considering the accuracy of the eastern boundary of the Sandia Pueblo 
Grant to determine whether to conduct a resurvey of the boundary. The 
Department received a request dated November 21, 2000, from an attorney 
representing the County of Bernalillo and the Sandia Mountain 
Coalition, for a resurvey to correct the eastern boundary of the Sandia 
Pueblo Grant. Counsel for the County and the Coalition suggests that 
his request be combined with consideration of the Pueblo of Sandia's 
request for a resurvey, which is the subject of a remand from the U.S. 
District Court in Pueblo of Sandia v. Babbitt as a result of a November 
17, 2000, decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 
dismissing the appeals from the July 18, 1998, ruling of the District 
Court. The Department also has a letter and legal memorandum from an 
attorney representing the Pueblo of Sandia, dated November 30, 2000, 
requesting that the boundary be corrected.
    The subject of the eastern boundary of the Pueblo of Sandia has 
been a matter of concern and debate in the Department of the Interior 
for many years. In 1988, then-Solicitor Ralph Tarr issued an opinion 
rejecting the Pueblo's petition for a resurvey. This decision was 
vacated by a decision of the U.S. District Court in 1998. A substantial 
record has been accumulated over the years in the consideration of the 
boundary issue, but the Department is giving interested parties an 
opportunity to provide any further historical evidence or legal 
arguments that may be pertinent to this matter.

DATES: Interested parties may submit additional historical evidence or 
legal analysis to the address below on or before January 5, 2001.

ADDRESSES: Submit all information requested in this notice to: Angela 
M. Kelsey, Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of the Interior, 
1849 C Street, NW., Mailstop 6456, Washington, DC 20240.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Suzanne R. Schaeffer, Assistant 
Solicitor for Environment, Land & Minerals, Division of Indian Affairs, 
Office of the Solicitor, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1849 C 
Street, NW., Mailstop 6456, Washington, DC 20240. Telephone: 202-208-
4361.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1983, the Pueblo of Sandia petitioned the 
Department of the Interior for a corrected survey designating the 
eastern boundary of its land grant as the ``main ridge'' of the Sandia 
Mountains, located northeast of Albuquerque, NM. The Pueblo claimed 
that an 1859 survey commissioned by the government erroneously set the 
Pueblo's eastern boundary at the base of the Sandia Mountains rather 
than along the Mountain's crest line, as allegedly set forth in the 
Pueblo's 1748 Spanish land grant confirmed by the United States 
Congress in 1858. In 1988 the Department rejected the Pueblo's claim, 
concluding that the original land survey accurately set the Pueblo's 
eastern boundary at the foothills of the Mountains. In the Solicitor's 
Opinion on the Pueblo of Sandia Boundary, 96 I.D. 331 (1988), then-
Solicitor Tarr reasoned that the King of Spain, who originally granted 
the land to the Pueblo, intended to grant it a ``formal'' pueblo only, 
not the larger area claimed. A formal pueblo consists of four square 
leagues of land, the area within the extension of one league (2.6 
miles) measured from the center of the settlement to the north, south, 
east and west.
    The Pueblo sued the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of 
Agriculture, seeking a judgment designating the main ridge of the 
Sandia Mountains as the Pueblo's eastern boundary and directing the 
Secretary of the Interior to correct the 1859 survey. The Secretary of 
Agriculture was included in the suit because the Pueblo claims that the 
incorrect survey boundary excludes approximately 10,000 acres of land 
which is administered as part of the Cibola National Forest and the 
Sandia Mountain Wilderness. The District Court allowed the Sandia 
Mountain Coalition, a coalition of homeowners and others in the 
affected region, and the County of Bernalillo to intervene in the case. 
See Pueblo of Sandia v. Babbitt, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20619 (D.D.C.). 
The court reviewed the Department of Interior's actions under the 
Administrative Procedure Act, and on July 18, 1998, found them to be 
arbitrary and capricious. The court vacated the Solicitor's Opinion and 
remanded the case to the Department of the Interior for action 
consistent with the court's opinion.
    The intervenors, the County of Bernalillo and the Sandia Mountain 
Coalition, appealed from the court's decision, and the United States 
also filed a protective notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals 
for the D.C. Circuit. The D.C. Circuit granted the parties' joint 
motion to hold the proceedings in abeyance pending settlement 
negotiations. The Pueblo, the federal agencies, the County of 
Bernalillo, the Sandia Mountain Coalition, the Sandia Peak Tram 
Company, and the City of Albuquerque then entered into negotiations 
with a private mediator. The County, the Coalition, and the City 
withdrew from mediation in August 1999. Nevertheless, the continuing 
negotiations among the government, the Pueblo, and the Tram Company 
resulted in a settlement, which was submitted to the New Mexico 
Congressional delegation. This settlement requires an Act of Congress 
to become effective. The United States then filed a motion to dismiss 
the appeals, and the Court of Appeals issued its decision granting the 
motion and dismissing the appeals on November 17, 2000. See Pueblo of 
Sandia v. Babbitt, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 29339 (D.C. Cir.).
    Part IV of the 1988 Tarr Opinion concluded that the Department had 
no authority to correct the boundaries of Indian reservations. On 
December 5, 2000, the Solicitor issued an opinion regarding the 
Secretary's authority to correct the boundary between the San Felipe 
Pueblo Grant and the El Ranchito Grant owned by the Pueblo of Santa 
Ana, which overrules Part IV of the Tarr Opinion. The Department has 
made no new decision on the eastern boundary of the Sandia Pueblo 
Grant, but intends to reconsider its earlier decision.
    Counsel for both the Pueblo and the County of Bernalillo and Sandia 
Mountain Coalition have since submitted requests to the Department, 
asking that it correct the eastern boundary of the Sandia Pueblo. It 
continues to be the position of the Pueblo that approximately 10,000 
acres of National Forest was wrongfully excluded from its Spanish Land 
Grant lands. In his letter, counsel for the Pueblo asserts that when 
Congress confirmed the Spanish Land Grant in 1858, it did so in 
reliance on an 1856 Report of the Surveyor General identifying the 
eastern boundary of the Sandia Pueblo Land Grant as ``the main ridge 
called Sandia.'' The letter from counsel for the County and the 
Coalition attaches a report prepared for the U.S. Forest Service by Dr. 
Stanley M. Hordes, dated March 1, 1996, which, counsel asserts, 
establishes that there were

[[Page 77386]]

errors in the translation of the Land Grant and in the monumenting of 
the survey, and that the eastern boundary of the Pueblo, as currently 
recognized by federal agencies and others in maps of the area, is 
erroneous.
    In light of these requests, and consistent with the court's remand 
order, the Department has decided to reevaluate its earlier decision 
regarding the Sandia boundary. The Department has accumulated a 
substantial amount of information over the years related to its 
consideration of these boundary issues, but is soliciting interested 
parties to provide any additional historical evidence or legal 
arguments related to these matters. The Department notes that its 
reconsideration of the Sandia boundary matters will necessarily not 
affect the title to any land held by private landowners in the area. 
The Secretary's resurvey authority is expressly limited by statute so 
that it may not be used to impair the rights and titles of good faith 
purchasers of public lands who may otherwise be affected by the 
resurvey. See Cragin v. Powell, 128 U.S. 691 (1888), see also 43 U.S.C. 
772.

(Authority: 25 U.S.C. 176; 43 U.S.C. 772.)

    Dated: December 5, 2000.
John Leshy,
Solicitor.
[FR Doc. 00-31365 Filed 12-8-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-17-P