U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

66-729 PDF 2012

H.R. 1158, TO AUTHORIZE CONVEYANCE OF MINERAL RIGHTS BY THE 

SECRETARY OF INTERIOR IN THE 

STATE OF MONTANA; & H.R. 1560, 

TO AMEND THE YSLETA DEL SUR 

PUEBLO AND ALABAMA AND 

COUSHATTA INDIAN TRIBES OF 

TEXAS RESTORATION ACT 

LEGISLATIVE HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INDIAN AND 

ALASKA NATIVE AFFAIRS 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

Wednesday, June 22, 2011 

Serial No. 112-43 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov 

or 

Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES 

DOC HASTINGS, WA, Chairman 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, MA, Ranking Democrat Member 

Don Young, AK 

John J. Duncan, Jr., TN 

Louie Gohmert, TX 

Rob Bishop, UT 

Doug Lamborn, CO 

Robert J. Wittman, VA 

Paul C. Broun, GA 

John Fleming, LA 

Mike Coffman, CO 

Tom McClintock, CA 

Glenn Thompson, PA 

Jeff Denham, CA 

Dan Benishek, MI 

David Rivera, FL 

Jeff Duncan, SC 

Scott R. Tipton, CO 

Paul A. Gosar, AZ 

Rau ́l R. Labrador, ID 

Kristi L. Noem, SD 

Steve Southerland II, FL 

Bill Flores, TX 

Andy Harris, MD 

Jeffrey M. Landry, LA 

Charles J. ‘‘Chuck’’ Fleischmann, TN 

Jon Runyan, NJ 

Bill Johnson, OH 

Dale E. Kildee, MI 

Peter A. DeFazio, OR 

Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, AS 

Frank Pallone, Jr., NJ 

Grace F. Napolitano, CA 

Rush D. Holt, NJ 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, AZ 

Madeleine Z. Bordallo, GU 

Jim Costa, CA 

Dan Boren, OK 

Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, CNMI 

Martin Heinrich, NM 

Ben Ray Luja ́n, NM 

John P. Sarbanes, MD 

Betty Sutton, OH 

Niki Tsongas, MA 

Pedro R. Pierluisi, PR 

John Garamendi, CA 

Colleen W. Hanabusa, HI 

Vacancy 

Todd Young, Chief of Staff 

Lisa Pittman, Chief Counsel 

Jeffrey Duncan, Democrat Staff Director 

David Watkins, Democrat Chief Counsel 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON INDIAN AND ALASKA NATIVE AFFAIRS 

DON YOUNG, AK, Chairman 

DAN BOREN, OK, Ranking Democrat Member 

Tom McClintock, CA 

Jeff Denham, CA 

Dan Benishek, MI 

Paul A. Gosar, AZ 

Rau ́l R. Labrador, ID 

Kristi L. Noem, SD 

Doc Hastings, WA, ex officio 

Dale E. Kildee, MI 

Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, AS 

Ben Ray Luja ́n, NM 

Colleen W. Hanabusa, HI 

Edward J. Markey, MA, ex officio 

(III) 

CONTENTS 

Page 

Hearing held on Wednesday, June 22, 2011 ......................................................... 1 

Statement of Members: 

Luja ́n, Hon. Ben Ray, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

New Mexico ................................................................................................... 2 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 4 

Young, Hon. Don, the Representative in Congress for the State of Alaska, 

Prepared statement of .................................................................................. 1 

Statement of Witnesses: 

Fox, Hon. Joe, Jr., Vice President, Northern Cheyenne Tribe, Lame Deer, 

Montana ......................................................................................................... 19 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 20 

Gillette, Jodi, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C. ...................................................... 11 

Prepared statement on H.R. 1158 ........................................................... 13 

Prepared statement on H.R. 1560 ........................................................... 14 

Hisa, Hon. Carlos, Lieutenant Governor, Ysleta del Sur Pueblo, El Paso, 

Texas .............................................................................................................. 25 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 26 

Kerr, Charles H., President & CEO, Great Northern Properties Limited 

Partnership, Houston, Texas ....................................................................... 28 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 29 

Rehberg, Hon. Dennis, a Representative in Congress for the State of 

Montana—At Large ...................................................................................... 7 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 9 

Reyes, Hon. Silvestre, a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Texas .............................................................................................................. 5 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 6 

Additional materials supplied: 

List of documents retained in the Committee’s official files ......................... 36 

(1) 

LEGISLATIVE HEARING ON H.R. 1158, TO 

AUTHORIZE THE CONVEYANCE OF MINERAL 

RIGHTS BY THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR IN THE STATE OF MONTANA, AND 

FOR OTHER PURPOSES; AND H.R. 1560, TO 

AMEND THE YSLETA DEL SUR PUEBLO AND 

ALABAMA AND COUSHATTA INDIAN TRIBES 

OF TEXAS RESTORATION ACT TO ALLOW 

THE YSLETA DEL SUR PUEBLO TRIBE TO 

DETERMINE BLOOD QUANTUM REQUIREMENT FOR MEMBERSHIP IN THAT TRIBE. 

Wednesday, June 22, 2011 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Subcommittee on Indian and Alaska Native Affairs 

Committee on Natural Resources 

Washington, D.C. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 11:10 a.m. in Room 

1334, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Doc Hastings [Acting 

Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives McClintock, Gosar, Hastings [ex officio], 

Luja ́n, and Hanabusa. 

Mr. HASTINGS [presiding]. The Subcommittee will come to order. 

The Subcommittee on Indian and Alaska Native Affairs is meeting 

today to hear testimony on two bills, H.R. 1158, the Montana 

Mineral Conveyance Act, and H.R. 1560, the bill to authorize the 

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo to determine its tribal enrollment rules, on 

the same footing as other recognized tribes. 

Under Rule 4[f], opening statements are limited to the Chairman 

and Ranking Member of the Committee so that we can hear from 

our witnesses. I ask unanimous consent, however, that any other 

Member who wants to submit a statement for the record be allowed 

to do so. Without objection, so ordered. 

I note that I am pinch-hitting today for Chairman Young, who 

is preoccupied. So without objection, his statement will appear in 

the record. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Young follows:] 

Statement of The Honorable Don Young, Chairman, 

Subcommittee on Indian and Alaska Native Affairs, on H.R. 1158 

Today, we will hear testimony from government and stakeholders regarding two 

bills: H.R. 1158, a bill to authorize the conveyance of mineral rights by the Secretary of the Interior in the State of Montana, and H.R. 1560, a bill to amend the 

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and the Alabama and Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas Restoration Act to allow the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo Tribe to determine blood quantum 

requirement for membership in that tribe. 

These bills have been referred to this subcommittee and are believed to be noncontroversial measures. The first bill, H.R. 1158, ‘‘The Montana Mineral Conveyance Act,’’ as introduced by Representative Denny Rehberg, would provide for a land 

2 

exchange in the State of Montana. This land exchange would mutually benefit the 

Northern Cheyenne Tribe, the federal government, and a privately owned coal company. To this day, the Tribe does not own all the subsurface rights on their reservation. H.R. 1158, would bring ownership of those un-owned subsurface tracts to the 

Tribe, after an exchange between the federal government and a privately owned 

company. 

H.R. 1560, as introduced by Representative Silvestre Reyes, would allow the 

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo to set their own blood quantum requirement that a member 

must possess before enrolling in their Tribe. Under current law, enrolled members 

must possess at least 1/8 degree or more Yseleta del Sur Indian blood. Similar bills 

have been introduced in every Congress since the 105th Congress. 

I look forward to our witnesses’ testimonies and hope to move quickly these bills 

to a full Committee vote. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Now I will recognize the gentleman from New 

Mexico for his opening statement. The gentleman is recognized. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. BEN RAY LUJA ́ N, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I would like 

to begin by thanking Chairman Doc Hastings for being with us 

today. And as well, I am here on behalf of Ranking Member Dan 

Boren. 

I would like to welcome our colleagues from Montana and Texas 

to the table today, Chairman Rehberg and Congressman Reyes, 

whose bills we have the pleasure of learning more about today. 

Both bills H.R. 1158 and H.R. 1560 provide solutions to longstanding issues facing tribes from both the Congressmen’s districts, 

and I look forward to hearing their testimonies. 

I would also like to give a special welcome to Lt. Governor Hisa 

of Ysleta del Sur Pueblo, Pueblo Indian Tribe, that has close ties 

to New Mexico; and that I had the pleasure of visiting with in the 

past and at various meetings of the All-Indian Pueblo Council 

meetings. 

I was fortunate to be at the IPC traditional meeting held at 

Tewa Pueblo for the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo inauguration ceremony 

back in 2010. 

I appreciate your appearance here today, and I thank you for 

making the long journey to Washington, D.C., to represent your 

people. Welcome. 

The first piece of legislation we will hear witnesses on today is 

Mr. Rehberg’s bill, H.R. 1158, which addresses two issues facing 

the Northern Cheyenne Tribe: the Federal Government’s failure to 

obtain, for over 100 years, the subsurface mineral rights on eight 

sections of Northern Cheyenne Reservation land currently owned 

by Great Northern Properties, GNP, which is the largest owner of 

coal reserves in the U.S. other than the Federal Government; and 

the Federal Government’s transfer of 533 million tons of Federal 

mineral rights on the Tribe’s ancestral homeland to the State of 

Montana without adequate tribal consultation or consideration of 

potential impacts development of those tracts would have on the 

Tribe’s reservation. 

To resolve these issues, the bill would authorize the Secretary of 

the Interior to transfer subsurface mineral rights to eight sections 

of Federal land managed by the Bureau of Land Management to 

3 

GNP, in exchange for GNP’s transfer to the Tribe the rights to the 

subsurface of eight sections of land within the reservation. 

For its part, the Tribe will waive and release its breach of trust 

claims against the United States for the Federal Government’s failure to resolve the Tribe’s split estate, and for the Federal Government’s conveyance of Federal coal tracts located on the Tribe’s ancestral homelands to the State of Montana. 

I look forward to hearing more about the details of this bill, particularly with respect to how the mineral estates on the tracts to 

be exchanged are valued, and how the bill’s objective to settle longstanding claims against the United States by a tribal beneficiary 

factors into that analysis. 

The second piece of legislation we will hear witnesses on today 

is H.R. 1560, a bill to amend the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and Alabama and Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas Restoration Act to 

allow the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo Tribe to determine blood quantum 

requirements for membership in their own tribe. 

This bill is very important to me because of the implications that 

it has upon the ability of this Tribe to determine the outcome of 

its own future. The Pueblo of Ysleta del Sur has endured many 

struggles to reach the point today. 

Effectively, Congressman Reyes’s bill would allow Ysleta del Sur 

Pueblo to determine its own requirements for membership, an inherent right of all but two of the 565 Federally recognized Indian 

Tribes in the United States. This bill is about allowing Ysleta del 

Sur to create a foundation for its own future based upon the needs 

of its tribal citizenry, on the principles of tribal self-governance and 

determination. 

Tribal membership is rooted in the very notion of sovereignty, 

and it is critical to the preservation and protection of the Pueblo 

people and their culture. No other entity should be in charge of determining who is qualified to be a tribal member, other than the 

Tribe itself. There is no doubt that support for this legislation 

means understanding and respecting tribal sovereignty, because it 

reflects the ability of a sovereign tribe to carry on their own culture 

and traditions. 

Ysleta del Sur has the proud support of the Pueblo Tribes by virtue of membership in the All-Indian Pueblo Council, an organization made up of New Mexico’s 19 Pueblos. After being absent for 

over 330 years, Ysleta del Sur Pueblo recently rejoined the Pueblo 

Council to take its rightful place among its fellow Pueblos, charging 

itself with promoting social justice and the commonwealth of all 

Indian Pueblo people. 

Mr. Chairman, I would ask unanimous consent to submit into 

the record a letter of support from the All-Indian Pueblo Council 

for H.R. 1560. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Without objection, so ordered. 

[NOTE: The letter submitted for the record by Mr. Luja ́n has 

been retained in the Committee’s official files.] 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity 

to hear this important bill, and I look forward to the opportunity 

to ask questions. Thank you very much. 

[Prepared statement of Mr. Luja ́n follows:] 

4 

Statement of The Honorable Ben Ray Luja ́n, a Representative in Congress 

from the State of New Mexico, on H.R. 1158 (Rehberg) and H.R. 1560 

(Reyes) 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To begin, I’d like to welcome my Colleagues from Montana and Texas at the witness table today, Congressman Rehberg and Congressman 

Reyes, whose bills we have the pleasure of learning more about today. Both bills, 

H.R. 1158 and H.R. 1560, provide solutions to longstanding issues facing tribes 

from both the congressmen’s districts. I look forward to hearing their testimonies. 

I’d also like to give a special welcome to Lieutenant Governor Hisa of the Ysleta 

Del Sur Pueblo—a Pueblo Indian Tribe that has close ties to New Mexico and one 

that I have had the pleasure of visiting with in the past at various All Indian Pueblo Council meetings.—I was fortunate to be at the AIPC traditional meeting held 

at KEWA Pueblo for the Ysleta Del Pueblo Sur inauguration ceremony back in 

2010. I appreciate your appearance here today and thank you for making the long 

journey to Washington to represent your people. Welcome! 

The first piece of legislation we will hear witnesses on today is Mr. Rehberg’s bill, 

H.R. 1158, which addresses two issues facing the Northern Cheyenne Tribe: (1) the 

federal government’s failure to obtain, for over 100 years, the subsurface mineral 

rights on 8 sections of Northern Cheyenne Reservation land currently owned by 

Great Northern Properties (‘‘GNP’’), which is the largest owner of coal reserves in 

the U.S. other than the federal government; and (2) the federal government’s transfer 533 million tons of federal mineral rights on the Tribe’s ancestral homelands to 

the State of Montana without adequate tribal consultation or consideration of potential impacts development of those tracts would have on the Tribe’s Reservation. 

To resolve these issues, the bill would authorize the Secretary of the Interior to 

transfer subsurface mineral rights to 8 sections of federal land managed by the Bureau of Land Management to ‘‘GNP’’ in exchange for GNP’s transfer to the Tribe 

the rights to the subsurface of 8 sections of land within the Reservation. 

For its part, the Tribe will waive and release its breach of trust claims against 

the United States for the federal government’s failure to resolve the Tribe’s split estate and for the federal government’s conveyance of federal coal tracts located on 

the Tribe’s ancestral homelands to the State of Montana. 

I look forward to learning more about the details of this bill, particularly with respect to how the mineral estates on the tracts to be exchanged are valued, and how 

the bill’s objective—to settle longstanding claims against the United States by a 

tribal beneficiary—factors into that analysis. 

The second piece of legislation we will hear witness on is H.R. 1560—a bill to 

amend the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and Alabama and Coushatta Indian Tribes 

of Texas Restoration Act to allow Ysleta del Sur Pueblo Tribe to determine blood 

quantum requirements for membership in their own tribe. 

This bill is very important to me because of the implications it has upon the ability of this tribe to determine the outcome of its own future. The Pueblo of Ysleta 

Del Sur has endured many struggles to reach this point today. Effectively Congressman Reyes’ bill would allow Ysleta del Sur Pueblo to determine blood quantum requirement for membership in their own tribe, an inherent right of all but 2 of the 

565 federally recognized Indian tribes in the United States. This bill is about allowing Ysleta Del Sur to create a foundation for its own future based upon the needs 

of its tribal citizenry and the principles of tribal self-governance and self-determination. 

Tribal membership is rooted in the very notion of sovereignty and is critical to 

the preservation and protection of Pueblo people and their culture. No other entity 

should be in charge of determining who is qualified to be a tribal member other 

than the tribe itself. There is no doubt that support for this legislation means understanding and respecting tribal sovereignty because it reflects the ability of a sovereign tribe to carry on their own culture and traditions. 

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo has the broad support of Pueblo tribes by virtue of its membership in the All Indian Pueblo Council, an organization made up of New Mexico’s 

19 Pueblos. After being absent for over 330 years, Ysleta del Sur Pueblo recently 

rejoined the Pueblo Council to take its rightful place among its fellow Pueblos, 

charging itself with promoting social justice and the common welfare of all Pueblo 

people. 

I ask my colleagues to support Ysleta Del Pueblo Sur in its efforts to determine 

its own membership by swiftly approving H.R. 1560. 

Thank you again Mr. Chairman for the opportunity to hear this very important 

bill and I look forward for the opportunity to ask questions. 

Thank you. 

5 

Mr. HASTINGS. I thank the gentleman for his statement. On our 

first panel of witnesses are our two colleagues, one from Montana 

and one from Texas. I understand that Mr. Reyes has a very tight 

schedule, and Mr. Rehberg likes to have—so he has allowed Mr. 

Reyes to go first. 

So with that, the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. I am 

sure you know the light schedule. The green light goes on, you 

have five minutes; yellow light, 30 seconds. Your full statement 

will appear in the record. 

So Mr. Reyes, you are recognized for five minutes. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. SILVESTRE REYES, A 

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS 

Mr. REYES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank my colleague for allowing me to go first. I very much appreciate it. 

Good morning, and I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, and the 

Ranking Member, for the support that you have given me, and also 

the members of this Committee for their assistance, as well. 

My legislation, H.R. 1560, is set to grant the people of the Ysleta 

del Sur Pueblo the right to determine their own membership. This 

historic Federally recognized Native American Tribe is the oldest 

community in Texas, and one of only three Native American Tribes 

in the State. 

The tribal community, which is known as Tewa, was established 

in 1681, after the Pueblo revolt against the Spanish colonization of 

the Americas, nearly a century before the Declaration of Independence, and more than 160 years before the annexation of Texas to 

the United States. 

For over three centuries, the Tewa have maintained a vibrant 

presence in my Congressional District in El Paso, Texas, and are 

a central part of our community’s culture and heritage. Today there 

are nearly 1700 enrolled members in the Tribe. But without this 

legislation, and without this action that will correct an injustice 

that has existed in Federal law since 1987, the Ysleta del Sur 

Pueblo will lose its recognition as a sovereign nation. 

Due to an unfairly imposed one-eighth blood quantum requirement by Congress that singles out the Tewa and coming generations, they will lose their Federally recognized status, and the right 

to self-govern their historic community. 

Of the 565 Federally recognized Native American Tribes in the 

U.S., the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo is one of the very few, if not the 

only one, whose tribal membership criteria is proscribed by the 

Federal Government, and not by the people of the Tribe. Every 

other Native American Tribe has a right to determine the criteria 

of its own membership based on customs, traditions, language, and 

tribal blood. 

According to a former Tewa Governor, the imposed blood quantum requirement was the first time Congress had taken such action since 1946, and has not done so since. None of the newly recognized tribes since the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo have been subjected 

to such blood quantum requirements by our Federal Government. 

My legislation corrects this inequity and the singling out of the 

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo. It removes the one-eighth blood quantum requirement in the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo in the Alabama and 

6 

Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas Restoration Act of 1987. It also 

allows the Tewa to determine their own criteria for membership 

based on their own unique culture, heritage, and traditions. 

My legislation has no cost associated with it, and I ask unanimous consent to submit two letters for the record from the Bureau 

of Indian Affairs and the Department of Health and Human Services that support this fact. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Without objection, so ordered. 

[NOTE: The two letters submitted for the record by Mr. Reyes 

have been retained in the Committee’s official files.] 

Mr. REYES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Ysleta del Sur Pueblo 

has been an important part of the community’s history for nearly 

330 years. They are an important part of our identity, and continue 

to make invaluable contributions to our region’s culture and heritage. 

In addition, the Tribe is an important part of our regional economy, providing employment opportunities to approximately 400 

people. 

As many of you know, I have been deeply committed to correcting this inequity for many years. It has passed this Committee 

and the House under both Republican and Democrat leadership, in 

the 106th Congress and in the previous two Congresses, as well. 

I appreciate the opportunity that many of you have shown to 

support this important legislation in the past, and in helping us to 

rectify this inequity. Passage of this bill and its enactment into law 

is critical to this historic tribe’s existence. By eliminating this unfair tribal enrollment requirement, the Tewa will have the same 

rights afforded to every other Federally recognized Native American Tribe, and they will be able to preserve the unique heritage, 

based on shared history, customs, and language, in addition to tribal blood. This bill will ensure their survival as the oldest community in Texas, and the only Pueblo still in existence in the State. 

I strongly urge your support again of this very important legislation to our Tewa Tribe. I thank you for your attention. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Reyes follows:] 

Statement of The Honorable Silvestre Reyes, a Representative in Congress 

from the State of Texas, in support of H.R. 1560 

Good morning, I would like to thank the Chairman and Ranking Member, and 

the committee for holding this hearing on my legislation, H.R. 1560, to grant the 

people of the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo the right to determine their own membership. 

This historic federally-recognized Native American tribe is the oldest community in 

Texas, and one of only three Native American tribes in the state. The Tribal community, known as ‘‘Tigua,’’ was established in 1682, after the Pueblo Revolt against 

the Spanish colonization of the Americas, nearly a century before the Declaration 

of Independence, and more than 160 years before the annexation of Texas to the 

United States. 

For over three centuries, the Tigua have maintained a vibrant presence in my 

congressional district in El Paso, Texas, and are a central part of our community’s 

rich culture and heritage. Today, there are nearly 1,700 enrolled members in the 

Tribe, but without legislative action to correct an injustice that has existed in federal law since 1987, the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo will lose its recognition as a sovereign 

nation. Due to an unfairly-imposed one-eighth blood quantum requirement by Congress that singles out the Tigua, in the coming generations, they will lose their federally-recognized status, and the right to self-govern their historic community. 

Of the 565 federally-recognized Native American tribes in the United States, the 

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo is one of the very few, if not the only one, whose tribal membership criteria is prescribed by the federal government, and not by the members 

7 

of the tribe. Every other Native American tribe has the right to determine the criteria of its own membership, based on its unique customs, traditions, and language, 

in addition to tribal blood. According to a former Tigua governor, the imposed blood 

quantum requirement was the first time Congress had taken such action since 1946, 

and it has not done so since. None of the newly-recognized tribes since the Ysleta 

del Sur Pueblo have been subject to such blood quantum requirements by the federal government. 

My legislation corrects this inequity and the singling out of the Ysleta del Sur 

Pueblo. It removes the one-eighth blood quantum requirement in the Ysleta del Sur 

Pueblo and Alabama Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas Restoration Act of 1987, and 

allows the Tigua to determine their own criteria for membership based on its own 

unique culture, heritage, and traditions. 

My legislation has no cost associated with it, and I ask unanimous consent to submit two letters for the record, from the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Department of Health & Human Services, that support this fact. 

The Ysleta del Sur Pueblo has been an important part of the community’s cultural 

heritage for nearly 330 years. The tribe is an inseparable part of our history, and 

it should be allowed to preserve its status as a sovereign nation for future generations. 

As many of you know, I have been deeply committed to correcting this inequity 

for many years. It has passed this committee and the House under both Republican 

and Democratic leadership in the 106th Congress and in the previous two Congresses. I appreciate the support that many of you have shown in this effort and 

in helping to rectifying this inequity. 

Passage of this bill and its enactment into law is critical to this historic tribe’s 

survival. By eliminating this unfair tribal enrollment requirement, the Tigua will 

have the same rights afforded to every other federally-recognized Native American 

tribe, and will be able to preserve their unique heritage based on shared history, 

customs, and language, in addition to tribal blood. This bill will ensure the preservation of Texas’ oldest community, and the only remaining pueblo in the state. I 

strongly urge your support of this legislation. 

Mr. HASTINGS. I thank the gentleman for his testimony, and I 

will recognize the gentleman from Montana, Mr. Rehberg, for five 

minutes. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. DENNIS REHBERG, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MONTANA 

Mr. REHBERG. Chairman Hastings, Mr. Luja ́n, thank you for inviting me to testify before the Subcommittee on my bill. 

Before I begin, it is a privilege to welcome one of my constituents 

here today, Joe Fox, to testify. Joe is Vice President of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe, which is located in southeastern Montana. 

I introduced this Act to right a wrong that has been done to the 

Northern Cheyenne. For more than 111 years, the Northern Cheyenne have been deprived of controlling eight sections of land on 

their reservation, the only subsurface rights on the reservation 

they do not own. The Tribe does not own this property because of 

an oversight of the United States more than a century ago. The 

failure to remedy this oversight has gone on for far too long. This 

legislation makes the Northern Cheyenne whole again, which is 

why I am proud to sponsor it. 

In 1900 the Federal Government failed to purchase eight sections 

of subsurface property within the reservation. This omission left 

those sections under control of the Northern Pacific Railway, which 

has since been passed into Great Northern Properties. The Tribe 

and Great Northern Properties negotiated an agreement that provides for relinquishment by GNP to the Tribe of these eight sections, or about 5,000 acres of on-reservation subsurface coal owned 

by GNP. 

8 

In return, GNP will receive approximately 5,000 acres off-reservation Federal coal located in Bowl Mountains and Bridge Creek 

Federal coal tracks in Montana. This collaborative legislation 

strikes a reasonable balance between all impacted parties. The 

Tribe regains subsurface control, which makes their land and resources contiguous and provides needed revenue; and Great Northern Properties receives subsurface access from two other areas in 

Montana currently owned by the Federal Government. 

This bill will provide much-needed impact funding for the Northern Cheyenne, as well. The Tribe will receive 40 percent of the royalties Great Northern Properties is paid from any coal development 

that occurs on Federal land received by GNP as compensation. This 

money will help alleviate some of the challenges now faced on the 

reservation, whether it is for health care, education, or infrastructure. 

I would also like to mention that enactment of this legislation 

will ensure that 280 miners at Signal Peaks Mine in Mussel Shell 

County, Montana will keep their good-paying jobs. Rural Montana 

desperately needs these jobs, and this bill will provide an avenue 

for more coal production. This area has been devastated by recent 

flooding, and Signal Peak Energy, the mine’s owner, has been integral in helping Roundup’s residents protect their businesses and 

homes. I want to thank them for those efforts. 

It is important to stress the bipartisan nature of this legislation. 

This legislation had bipartisan support in 2002, when the Board of 

Land Commissioners, which is comprised of the top five elected officials in the State, entered into the so-called Otter Creek settlement with the Northern Cheyenne. That settlement was supported 

by the entire Montana Congressional delegation. This legislation 

has also been introduced on the Senate side by Sen. Baucus and 

Sen. Taster, and supported by the Governor, Gov. Schweitzer. 

As you know, Federal coal royalties are split between the Federal 

Government and states. While both lose out on royalties, the State 

supports the settlement and its job-creating impacts. In return for 

the package of commitments, the Tribe, in 2002, promptly dismissed, with prejudice, a Federal Court lawsuit against the United 

States challenging the transfer of the Otter Creek tracts to the 

State. 

I am working with the Congressional Budget Office to ascertain 

the cost to the Federal Government of the withdrawal of royalties, 

but the Tribe’s aforementioned claim could offset the value of these 

royalties. The Tribe committed that in return for the conveyance to 

it of the eight sections, it would release any and all claims it may 

have against the United States for its failure to acquire that subsurface. Furthermore, $70 million in impact funding contemplated 

by the Tribe’s Otter Creek settlement has been deleted from the 

bill. Congress, as a result, will not need to appropriate any funds 

for this legislation upon passage. 

With passage of this legislation, the American taxpayer will 

avoid costly litigation, the Tribe will regain control of its own resources and associated revenue, and the people of America will 

benefit from the development of Montana’s abundant coal reserves. 

Coal can and should be a part of America’s all-of-the-above energy 

9 

solution to ease prices while stimulating job growth in our rural 

communities. 

Because of everything the bill will do for the Northern Cheyenne, 

H.R. 1158 has the support of the Montana-Wyoming Tribal Leaders Council and the National Congress of American Indians. This 

bill is the right thing to do. 

Again, I want to thank you for allowing this opportunity. I would 

like to enter a couple of letters into the record, if I may, please. 

Mr. HASTINGS. If you would identify the letters, we would be 

more than happy to do those. 

Mr. REHBERG. They are a letter of support from the Montana 

Board of Land Commissioners, and a resolution passed by the Montana-Wyoming Tribal Council, Leaders Council. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Without objection, they will be part of the record. 

Mr. REHBERG. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Rehberg follows:] 

Statement of The Honorable Dennis Rehberg, a Representative in Congress 

from the State of Montana—At Large, on H.R. 1158 

Chairman Young and Ranking Member Boren, thank you for inviting me to testify 

before the Subcommittee on H.R. 1158, the Montana Mineral Conveyance Act. 

Before I begin, it’s a privilege to welcome one of my constituents here today, Joe 

Fox Jr., to testify on this bill. Joe is Vice President of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe, 

which is located in Southeastern Montana, and he will be able to share with the 

Subcommittee the importance of this legislation to the Northern Cheyenne. Montana’s a long way from Washington, and I appreciate his willingness to travel across 

the country for this hearing. 

I introduced the Montana Mineral Conveyance Act to right a wrong that has been 

done to the Northern Cheyenne. For more than 111 years, the Northern Cheyenne 

have been deprived of controlling eight sections of land on their Reservation—the 

only subsurface rights on the Reservation they do not own. 

The Tribe does not own this property because of an oversight of the United States 

more than a century ago. The failure to remedy this oversight has gone on for too 

long. This legislation makes the Northern Cheyenne whole again, which is why I’m 

proud to sponsor it. 

In 1900, the federal government failed to purchase eight sections of subsurface 

property within the Reservation. This omission left these sections under control of 

the Northern Pacific Railway, which has since been passed onto Great Northern 

Properties. The Tribe and Great Northern Properties negotiated an agreement that 

provides for relinquishment by GNP to the Tribe of these eight sections—or about 

5,000 acres—of on-Reservation subsurface coal owned by GNP. In return, GNP will 

receive approximately 5,000 acres of off-Reservation federal coal located in the Bull 

Mountains and Bridge Creek federal coal tracts in Montana. 

This collaborative legislation strikes a reasonable balance between all impacted 

parties. The Tribe regains subsurface control, which makes their land and resources 

contiguous and provides needed revenue. Great Northern Properties receives subsurface access from two other areas in Montana currently owned by the federal government. 

This bill will provide much-needed impact funding for the Northern Cheyenne as 

well. The Tribe will receive 40% of the royalties Great Northern Properties is paid 

from any coal development that occurs on the federal land received by GNP as compensation. This money will help alleviate some of the challenges now faced on the 

Reservation, whether it’s for healthcare, education or infrastructure. 

I’d also like to mention that enactment of this legislation will ensure that 280 

miners at Signal Peak’s mine in Musselshell County, Montana will keep their goodpaying jobs. Rural Montana desperately needs these jobs, and this bill will provide 

an avenue for uninterrupted coal production. This area has been devastated by recent flooding, and Signal Peak Energy, the mine’s owner, has been integral in helping Roundup’s residents protect their businesses and homes. I want to thank them 

for their efforts. 

It’s important to stress the bipartisan nature of this legislation. This legislation 

had bipartisan support in 2002—when the Montana Board of Land Commissioners, 

which is comprised of the top five elected officials in the State, entered into the soVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:34 Feb 28, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 L:\DOCS\66729.TXT Hresour1 PsN: KATHY
10 

called Otter Creek settlement with the Northern Cheyenne. That settlement was 

supported by the entire Montana Congressional delegation. 

This bipartisan support continues. Senator Baucus has introduced companion legislation in the Senate. And, the current Montana Board of Land Commissioners, 

which has five Democrats, including Governor Schweitzer, has sent a letter urging 

Congress to pass the bill. Today’s hearing is a great start. 

As you know, federal coal royalties are split between the federal government and 

the states. While both lose out on royalties, the state supports the settlement and 

its job-creating impacts. In return for the package of commitments, the Tribe in 

2002 promptly dismissed with prejudice a federal court lawsuit against the United 

States challenging the transfer of the Otter Creek tracts to the State. 

I’m working with the Congressional Budget Office to ascertain the cost to the federal government of the withdrawn royalties, but the Tribe’s aforementioned claim 

could offset the value of these royalties. The Tribe committed that, in return for the 

conveyance to it of the eight sections, it would release any and all claims it may 

have against the United States for its failure to acquire that subsurface. Furthermore, $70 million in impact funding contemplated by the Tribe’s Otter Creek settlement has been deleted from the bill. Congress, as a result, will not need to appropriate any funds for this legislation upon passage. 

With passage of this legislation, the American taxpayer will avoid costly litigation, 

the Tribe will regain control of its own resources and the associated revenue, and 

the people of Montana will benefit from the development of Montana’s abundant 

coal reserves. Montana has been called the ‘‘Saudi Arabia’’ of coal. It’s plentiful and 

relatively easy to get to—when the government permits it. Coal can, and should be 

a part of America’s all-of-the-above energy solution to ease prices while stimulating 

job growth in our rural communities. 

Because of everything the bill will do for the Northern Cheyenne, H.R. 1158 has 

the support of the Montana-Wyoming Tribal Leaders Council and the National Congress of American Indians. This bill is the right thing to do. 

In closing, I want to thank Chairman Young and Ranking Member Boren for holding a hearing on this legislation. I also want to thank the Tribe and all those who’ve 

come together on this agreement. With your permission, I’d like to submit for the 

record a letter of support from the Montana Board of Land Commissioners and a 

resolution passed by the Montana-Wyoming Tribal Leaders Council. Again, thank 

you, and I’d be happy to answer any questions the Subcommittee may have. 

[NOTE: The letters submitted for the record by Mr. Rehberg 

have been retained in the Committee’s official files.] 

Mr. HASTINGS. I want to thank my colleagues for their testimony. 

This Committee, unlike other committees, do question Members. 

Other committees don’t do that. I guess it is not because we are 

not afraid of what you might say, but whatever it is. 

So I just have one question, and I think you alluded to that in 

your testimony. But the potential is here, clearly, for all of the 

above energy, if a tribe decides to exercise their rights, if this bill 

should pass. Is that the essence of what this bill is? 

Mr. REHBERG. That is correct. It is a jobs-creator because the 

property we are talking about, specifically the subsurface, is in the 

way of, or in the path of an existing mine. And we actually need 

to probably get, need to get something done through Congress, and 

signed by the President, if we can, by September, and the Senate 

is ready to fast-track this, as well. Because it does affect 280 jobs 

at Signal Peak; it is something that has a little time sensitivity. 

So it is part of the all-of-the-above solution, and it is part of the 

jobs package. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Good. Well, I appreciate the gentleman’s response. I, too, am a very strong supporter of all-of-the-above energy, and I recognize that the fossil fuels that we have in this country are immense, and we should be utilizing all of those that we 

possibly can, if that is what the decision is. 

11 

Mr. REHBERG. Again, Mr. Chairman, and I would like to stress 

that I really thank the Cheyenne Tribe for being willing to drop the 

financial aspect. That is really what is going to allow this to move 

forward. Because we are in a budget crisis; we know that. I am 

having to try to find at least $25 billion worth of reductions just 

in my Appropriations Subcommittee alone. 

And by their being willing to drop the financial aspect, this goes 

a long ways toward helping us solve a fiscal crisis, too. So it is jobs, 

it is all of the above, and it is helping with our fiscal crisis. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Well, I thank the gentleman for his testimony. 

And when these agreements can be worked out before a bill is introduced, obviously that is very, very helpful. 

Mr. REHBERG. And unusual. 

Mr. HASTINGS. I have no further questions. I will ask if any of 

my colleagues want to ask any questions, rather than going one by 

one. OK? 

With that, Mr. Rehberg, thank you very much for your testimony. I would like to ask that if there are further questions from 

the Members, we would appreciate it if you could respond in a 

timely manner. 

Mr. REHBERG. I will indeed. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. HASTINGS. Thank you. We will now call the next panel. Our 

next witnesses are Jodi Gillette, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for 

Indian Affairs. She is accompanied by Mitchell Leverette of the Bureau of Land Management. Mr. Leverette is the Division Chief for 

BLM’s Solid Waste Materials Divisions. 

Once again I remind that your testimony, Ms. Gillette, will be 

entirely part of the record. You have five minutes. And you heard 

that when the green light goes on, you have the five minutes; yellow light, 30 seconds; and the red light, hopefully you can wrap up. 

So with that, gentlelady, you are recognized. 

STATEMENT OF JODI GILLETTE, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR INDIAN AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE 

INTERIOR 

Ms. GILLETTE. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the 

Subcommittee. My name is Jodi Gillette, and I am the Deputy 

Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs at the Department of the 

Interior. 

I am here today to provide the Department’s position on 

H.R. 1560, a bill to amend the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and Alabama 

and Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas Restoration Act, to allow the 

Tribe to determine blood quantum requirements for membership in 

their Tribe, and H.R. 1158, the Montana Mineral Conveyance Act. 

It is an honor to appear today before this new and important 

Subcommittee. I will testify first on H.R. l560, and then 

H.R. 1158. 

In 1987, Congress passed the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and Alabama 

and Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas Restoration Act, which restored the Federal trust relationship between the Federal Government and the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo. The Restoration Act proscribes 

membership for the Tribe to only those individuals on the Tribe’s 

1984 membership roll and to their descendants with at least one 

12 

eighth or more Tewa Ysleta del Sur Pueblo Indian blood, and who 

are enrolled by the Tribe. 

H.R. 1560 would amend the Restoration Act to enable the Tribe 

to determine for themselves the blood quantum requirements, if 

any, for membership into the Tribe. This amendment would allow 

the Tribe to determine their own enrollment criteria, as any other 

Federally recognized tribe has the right to do. 

While the legislation would allow the Tribe to determine the size 

of its own membership, the Department does not expect an additional tribal priority allocation base funding amount to be awarded 

to the Tribe. The Department supports the Tribe’s request to determine its criteria for membership, which is consistent with the Administration’s support for the policies of self-governance and selfdetermination for all Federally recognized tribes. 

H.R. 1158 states that the Northern Cheyenne Tribe has been 

wronged in two ways by the Federal Government. First in 1990, 

when the reservation was expanded, the United States Indian inspector made efforts to purchase private lands within the reservation boundaries, but was unable to secure subsurface rights in 

eight sections, about 5,000 acres, from Northern Pacific Railway. 

The mineral rights to the Cheyenne tracts, as they as known, are 

now held by a successor of the railroad, Great Northern Properties. 

Second is the potential for mineral development of the Otter 

Creek area, which is east of the Tribe’s reservation. The 1998 Interior Appropriations Act authorized the conveyance to the State of 

Montana of all the Federal mineral rights on three Otter Creek 

tract parts, of which are located within three to four miles of the 

Northern Cheyenne Reservation. 

The Northern Cheyenne filed suit in the U.S. District Court in 

the District of Columbia in January 2002, against the Secretary of 

the Interior, to stop the transfer, and to assert that extensive coal 

mining so close to the reservation would violate several Federal 

laws and the Federal trust responsibility to the Tribe. 

The Tribe’s suit was withdrawn, with prejudice, when the Tribe 

entered into an agreement with the Montana State Board of Land 

Commissioners, guaranteeing tribal consultation on the approval of 

mining plans. 

H.R. 1158 seeks to accomplish the conveyance to the Tribe of 

about 5,000 acres in subsurface mineral rights that the Tribe did 

not receive in 1900, when it acquired the rights to the surface. 

Great Northern Properties, under the bill, would receive an exchange conveyance of all interest of the United States of approximately 5,000 acres of unleased Federal coal rights in Montana. The 

Department supports the goals of H.R. 1158, but has some concerns, and would like to work with the Subcommittee to make some 

refinements to ensure that the exchange is equal value, and that 

the appraisals are done consistent with the Department of Justice 

appraisal standards, and to make its implementation practical. 

H.R. 1158 would bring closure to the Tribe’s claim against the 

United States dating back to 1900, but at a cost to the United 

States and the State of Montana in royalty payments and other 

revenue associated with Federal coal leasing of these lands. 

Furthermore, the Bureau of Land Management estimates the offreservation Federal coal rights being conveyed to the Great NorthVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:34 Feb 28, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 L:\DOCS\66729.TXT Hresour1 PsN: KATHY
13 

ern Properties contain nearly twice as much coal as the Cheyenne 

tracts contain. 

In addition, we have some concerns with the language in Section 

4[a] and 5[c] requiring the conveyance to be carried out ‘‘notwithstanding any other Federal law,’’ as well as the language in Section 

5[c] that require the conveyance to be carried out within 90 days 

of receiving the revenue-sharing agreement, and would like to work 

with the Subcommittee to address these concerns. 

Last, Section 3[2][d] should be amended to reference the appropriate date of March 18, 2011. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to testify on H.R. 1560 and 

H.R. 1158, and I would be glad to take any of your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Gillette follows:] 

Statement of Jodi Gillette, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Indian Affairs, 

U.S. Department of the Interior, on H.R. 1158 

Good morning Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee. My name is Jodi 

Gillette. I am the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs at the Department 

of the Interior (Department). I am here today to provide the Department’s position 

on H.R. 1158, the Montana Mineral Conveyance Act. It is an honor to appear today 

before this new and important Subcommittee. 

H.R. 1158 seeks to accomplish the conveyance to the Northern Cheyenne Tribe 

(Tribe) in Montana of about 5,000 acres in subsurface mineral rights that the Tribe 

did not receive in 1900, when it acquired the rights to the surface. The subsurface 

rights are held by a third party, Great Northern Properties, which, under the bill, 

would receive in exchange approximately 5,000 acres of unleased Federal coal rights 

in Montana. 

The Department of the Interior supports the goals of H.R. 1158, but has some 

concerns and would like to work with the Committee to make some refinements to 

ensure that the exchange is equal value and to make its implementation practical. 

We would like to work with the Sponsor and the Subcommittee to ensure that the 

exchanges of mineral interests are of equal value and that the appraisals are done 

consistent with Department of Justice appraisal standards. 

BACKGROUND 

H.R. 1158 states that the Northern Cheyenne Tribe has been wronged in two 

ways by the Federal Government. In 1900, when the reservation was expanded, the 

United States Indian Inspector made efforts to purchase private lands within reservation boundaries, but was unable to secure subsurface rights in eight sections, 

about 5,000 acres, from the Northern Pacific Railway. The mineral rights to the 

Cheyenne tracts, as they are known, are now held by a successor of the railroad, 

Great Northern Properties. 

Great Northern Properties has other mineral holdings in the area, including some 

near the lands containing the mineral rights they would receive in exchange for relinquishing the Cheyenne tracts. These holdings are in an area called Otter Creek, 

east of the Reservation. It is the potential mineral development of the Otter Creek 

area that leads to the second claim the Northern Cheyenne Tribe asserts it has 

against the Federal Government. 

The Department of the Interior Appropriations Act of 1998 authorized the conveyance to the State of Montana of all the Federal mineral rights on three Otter Creek 

tracts, parts of which are located within 3 to 4 miles of the Northern Cheyenne Reservation. 

The Northern Cheyenne filed suit in the U.S. District Court in the District of Columbia in January 2002 against the Secretary of the Interior, to stop the transfer 

and to assert that extensive coal mining so close to its reservation would violate several Federal laws and the Federal trust responsibility to the Tribe. 

The Tribe’s suit was withdrawn with prejudice when the Tribe entered into an 

agreement with the Montana State Board of Land Commissioners guaranteeing 

tribal consultation on the approval of mining plans. The agreement also requires the 

State Board’s support of the legislation before you today. 

H.R. 1158 

H.R. 1158 requires the Secretary of the Interior to convey to Great Northern 

Properties all interest of the United States in specified unleased Federal coal tracts 

14 

in Montana outside of the Tribe’s reservation, if Great Northern Properties conveys 

to the Northern Cheyenne Indian Tribe all its mineral interests underlying specified 

tracts of land within the Tribe’s reservation. 

The bill also requires the Northern Cheyenne Tribe to waive legal claims related 

to the failure of the United States to acquire in trust for the Tribe the private mineral interests underlying the Cheyenne tracts as part of the Tribe’s reservation. 

These waivers should be drafted and included in the bill. The bill instructs the Tribe 

and Great Northern Properties to notify the Secretary in writing when they have 

agreed to a formula for the sharing of revenue from the coal produced from the Federal tracts. Finally, we recommend that Great Northern Properties also waive its 

potential claims against the United States. 

H.R. 1158 would bring closure to the Tribe’s claim against the United States dating back to 1900, but at a cost to the United States and State of Montana, in royalty 

payments and other revenue associated with Federal coal leasing of these lands. 

Furthermore, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) estimates the off-reservation 

Federal coal rights being conveyed to Great Northern Properties contain nearly 

twice as much coal as the Cheyenne tracts contain. 

In addition, a portion of the Federal tracts that the bill defines as subject to transfer to Great Northern Properties is included in an ongoing Lease by Application 

process initiated in 2008 by Signal Peak Energy, which operates an underground 

coal mine in the area. An Environmental Assessment has been completed for this 

lease sale, and BLM signed a Finding of No Significant Impact and Decision Record 

in April 2011. The decision was made to offer the Bull Mountain No. 1 Mine Coal 

Lease by Application for sale. 

If the lease sale is completed before this legislation becomes law, 20 percent of 

the bidder’s bonus payment would be due when the bid is submitted with the balance of the bonus due when the lease is awarded. If a successful bonus bid is received at the sale and all of the other requirements are met, then the payment is 

sent to the U.S. Treasury with 48 percent obligated to the State of Montana. If the 

conveyance under this legislation is consummated before the actual issuance of the 

coal lease, then the Federal Government would not receive the balance of the bonus 

payment. 

In addition, we have concerns with language in section 4(a) and 5(c) requiring the 

conveyance be carried out ‘‘notwithstanding any other Federal law’’ as well as the 

language in Section 5(c) that requires the conveyance be carried out within 90 days 

of receiving the revenue-sharing agreement and would like to work with the subcommittee to address these concerns. Lastly, section 3(2)(D) should be amended to 

reference the appropriate date of March 18, 2011. 

CONCLUSION 

Thank you again for the opportunity to testify on the Montana Mineral Conveyance Act. BLM would be glad to work with the Committee on any technical issues 

associated with the land conveyance. I would be glad to answer your questions. 

Statement of Jodi Gillette, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Indian Affairs, 

U.S. Department of the Interior, on H.R. 1560 

Good morning Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee. My name is Jodi 

Gillette. I am the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs at the Department 

of the Interior (Department). I am here today to provide the Department’s position 

on H.R. 1560, a bill to amend the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and Alabama Coushatta 

Indian Tribes of Texas Restoration Act to allow the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo Tribe to 

determine blood quantum requirements for membership in their Tribe. The Department supports H.R. 1560. 

BACKGROUND 

In 1987 Congress passed the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and Alabama and Coushatta 

Indian Tribes of Texas Restoration Act (Restoration Act), which restored the federal 

trust relationship between the federal government and the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo 

(Tribe). 

The Restoration Act, (25 U.S.C. § 1300G–7(a)(2)(i)), prescribes membership for the 

Tribe to only those individuals on the Tribe’s 1984 Membership Roll, and to their 

descendants with at least 1/8 or more Tigua-Ysleta del Sur Pueblo Indian blood and 

who are enrolled by the Tribe. This codified criterion has been adopted into Article 

3, Section 3.01, of the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo Code of Laws. Currently the tribal enrollment for the Ysleta Del Sur Pueblo is 1,691 members. Indian Affairs cannot find 

any other instances where a Tribe’s membership is bound by a blood quantum requirement under Federal statute. 

15 

H.R. 1560 

H.R. 1560 would amend the Restoration Act to enable the Tribe to determine for 

themselves the blood-quantum requirements, if any, for membership into the Tribe. 

The proposed amendment would delete the 1/8 blood quantum requirement and replace the current requirement with ‘‘any person of Tigua-Ysleta del Sur Pueblo Indian blood enrolled by the tribe.’’ This amendment would allow the Tribe to determine their own enrollment criteria, as any other federally-recognized tribe has the 

right to do. 

While the legislation would allow the Tribe to determine the size of its own membership, the Department does not expect an additional Tribal Priority Allocation 

base funding amount to be awarded to the Tribe. 

Indian tribes have the inherent authority to determine their membership. The Supreme Court has noted, ‘‘A tribe’s right to define its own membership for tribal purposes has long been recognized as central to its existence as an independent political 

community.’’ See Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49 (1978). The Department is in receipt of copies of tribal resolutions from the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo Tribal Council in support of the change to the blood quantum requirements stated within the legislation. The Department supports the Tribe’s request to determine its criteria for membership, which is consistent with the Administration’s support for the 

policies of Self-Governance and Self-Determination for all federally recognized 

tribes. 

CONCLUSION 

This concludes my prepared statement. I will be happy to answer any questions 

the Subcommittee may have. 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK. [Presiding.] Thank you very much, and that is 

what we will do now. I have just one question for you, and that 

is, this does deal with sovereignty issues, does it not? 

Ms. GILLETTE. Correct. 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Well, why would the Department object to the 

phrase ‘‘notwithstanding any other law?’’ Sovereignty is absolute, is 

it not? 

Ms. GILLETTE. Sovereignty is, I am sorry? 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Absolute. You are either sovereign or you are 

not. 

Ms. GILLETTE. I would like to get back to you on that, unless you 

have a response, if I could. 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK. All right, I appreciate that. That is my only 

question. I will defer to the Ranking Member, Mr. Luja ́n. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. In regards to 

H.R. 1560, Ms. Gillette, what was the policy behind the Federal 

Government setting the one-eighth-degree blood quantum threshold to the Tewa Indians in the Restoration Act? 

Ms. GILLETTE. The funding? I am sorry. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. What was the policy behind the establishment of that 

policy? 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. Of establishing—I don’t think that the Department, 

I think Congress put that into the law. Are you talking about the 

one-eighth-degree blood quantum? 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. Correct. 

Ms. GILLETTE. I am not, I don’t believe that we had a policy on 

that. I don’t—— 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. It was at the direction of Congress that the Department established the one-eighth-degree threshold? 

Ms. GILLETTE. Actually, it is part of the recognition, or the Restoration Act that was passed by Congress. So the Department 

doesn’t have blood quantum requirements as part of how they 

16 

interact with tribes; that is an inherent sovereign right of tribes to 

determine their own membership. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. So going back to your testimony, it appears to indicate that the Administration supports H.R. 1560, is that correct? 

Ms. GILLETTE. That is correct. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. In regards to H.R. 1158, in your testimony you imply 

that the land exchange authorized by this bill would result in a 

windfall profit in royalties to GNP. This statement is based on an 

estimate that the underlying mineral estate on the Federal tracts 

is worth twice as much as the mineral estate underlying the Cheyenne tracts. 

Yet this bill would settle claims against the United States that 

could be worth millions in liability. Moreover, the bill would compensate the Tribe for its loss by authorizing a revenue-sharing 

agreement with GNP for any coal developed on these tracts. 

As trustee, isn’t it in the Department’s interest to see this bill 

enacted so as to close the door on its liability, rather than engage 

in potential costly litigation? 

Ms. GILLETTE. I believe that it is in the best interest for all parties that we are supportive of the legislation. I believe that the Department would like to work with the Subcommittee to address 

some of those concerns of valuation, and we would like to have further discussion with that. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. Mr. Kerr—oh, he is on the next panel. I apologize. 

Ms. Gillette, on the 20 percent of the bidder’s bonus payment is 

due to the United States when the bid for a lease sale is submitted, 

and the remainder of such payment is due when the lease is 

awarded. What is a bonus payment? 

Mr. LEVERETTE. Yes. A bonus payment is a payment that the 

successful bidder pays, or a bidder pays when they are bidding on 

a competitive co-lease. A competitive co-lease consists of three payments: the royalty payment, which is for underground mines, 8 

percent; the bonus bid; and the rental, if production is not occurring. 

So the bonus is a payment that is made over and above the royalty payment, and you bid that bonus at the time of the competitive bid or the competitive sale. The normal process is 20 percent 

is due at the time of the bid. And we have a policy that some sales 

can pay the balance over five years, but for this sale we are trying 

to, the payment would be required, the full payment would be required at the issuance of the lease. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. So under the current policy, the remaining portion or 

time period for that bonus payment is five years? Is that what I 

just heard? 

Mr. LEVERETTE. Yes. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. Is the 20/80 percent scheme current policy? 

Mr. LEVERETTE. Yes. And the policy says that some sales, we 

should do the deferred bonus, but it doesn’t say we have to do all 

of them that way. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. I appreciate it. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Mr. Gosar. 

Dr. GOSAR. More of a comment, Ms. Gillette, in regards to the 

appraisal process. We are finding that in Arizona, as well as in any 

other appraisal process, this is arduous. So I would hope that we 

17 

would have a streamlined effect in that appraisal process. Because 

that will be the holdup. Because we are seeing that all the way 

across the board. 

So I would actually urge some urgency in regards to streamlining 

that appraisal process. 

And then just a real quick question also to my colleague on the 

other side of the aisle. It is Congress’s jurisdiction in regards to 

oversight of the tribes, is it not? 

Ms. GILLETTE. I believe so. 

Dr. GOSAR. Thank you. 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Are you done? That is it? OK. Ms. Hanabusa. 

Ms. HANABUSA. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Ms. Gillette, going back 

to H.R. 1560, it seems that one of the uniqueness of what has led 

to this bill is the fact that in 1968, when the Tribe I guess was first 

recognized, for some reason the fiduciary responsibility was transferred to the State of Texas, it appears. And somehow the Restoration Act then took that back. Am I correct about that? 

Ms. GILLETTE. Yes. 

Ms. HANABUSA. And the one-eighth blood quantum, was that 

something that was instituted in 1968? Or was that something that 

happened in the Restoration Act? 

Ms. GILLETTE. I would have to check back on the record for that. 

But in the Restoration Act, that is where the blood quantum was 

specified as part of the legislation, so it was actually in the Act. 

Ms. HANABUSA. Is there a reason why, or are you aware of the 

reason why the transfer or the taking back from the State of Texas 

of this responsibility, in the Restoration Act? Was there something 

improper about the original transfer of that obligation to the State 

of Texas? 

Ms. GILLETTE. I am not sure. I am sorry, I don’t have the specifics of that history. 

Ms. HANABUSA. Could you get back to me on that? 

Ms. GILLETTE. Sure. 

Ms. HANABUSA. Switching to H.R. 1158, in reviewing the bill 

itself, there is, of course, Section 5, which speaks to the waiver of 

legal claims. That statement is also found in Section 2, subpart [8]. 

And it just refers to the Tribe will waive all legal claims against 

the United States. 

Is there a process where, for example, the Secretary would be 

satisfied that the Tribe has waived? In other words, you know, I 

don’t want to see us faced with some other kind of class action suit 

because the waiver is improper. 

So in your mind, when this says the Tribe will waive, who or 

what type of transaction is going to be necessary to ensure that 

there has been a proper waiver? 

Ms. GILLETTE. I will have to get back to you on that. I am not 

sure what the—that is probably a question that I would ask my solicitor. 

Ms. HANABUSA. OK. Now, in addition to that, along those same 

lines, in reading your testimony, you also recommend that the 

Great Northern Properties waive its potential claims against the 

United States as well. I did not find anything like that in the bill. 

So you are asking that a section like that be included? 

Ms. GILLETTE. That is correct. 

18 

Ms. HANABUSA. When you are asking for their waiver of potential 

claims against the United States, what kinds of claims were you 

thinking of when that was written into your testimony? 

Ms. GILLETTE. I will defer to my colleague. 

Mr. LEVERETTE. I think we were thinking of some type of takings 

claim for their resources on the reservation, their mineral resources. 

Ms. HANABUSA. That is what I thought you were going to say. 

So are you saying that though it appears that we are talking about 

the same kinds of claims, both that the Tribe would have for our 

failure to protect their interests and the underlying mineral rights; 

and then you are also saying that the Great Northern Properties 

has basically somehow vested in those same claims? Is that what 

the concern is? 

Because we are talking about the same mineral rights, aren’t 

we? Subsurface mineral rights. 

Mr. LEVERETTE. Yes. 

Ms. HANABUSA. So you are saying that you believe that what has 

happened in this transaction is that the tribes have a legal claim, 

because the government did not protect their interests in those 

claims; and Great Northern Properties, through this action way 

back when, is somehow vested in the same rights, even if the government may not have legally protected the people who truly have 

the rights to those claims? Am I understanding you correctly? 

Mr. LEVERETTE. Yes, and that is what this bill is doing. It will 

give Great Northern additional mineral rights, and convey the subsurface minerals to the tribe on the reservation. And once that 

agreement is made, we would hope that all the litigation would, 

would be removed, or not brought. 

Ms. HANABUSA. I think I understand what you are saying. But 

can you write up for me as well these potential claims against the 

United States that you are envisioning? And this is on page 2, 

paragraph, the second paragraph under H.R. 1158. Thank you 

very much. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Thank you. I want to thank Ms. Gillette for 

her testimony today, and for Mr. Leverette’s expertise. We will now 

dismiss this panel, and I will call up our final panel of witnesses 

this morning. 

They are Joe Fox, the Vice President of the Northern Cheyenne 

Tribe; Carlos Hisa, the Lieutenant Governor or the Ysleta del Sur 

Pueblo; and Charles Kerr, President and CEO of Great Northern 

Properties. 

Again, as a reminder, your oral statements are limited to five 

minutes. However, your written statement will appear in full in the 

hearing record. We thank you for joining us this morning. 

Also to remind you the microphones are manually activated, so 

be sure to push that button and get that green light on your microphone base. And we have the lighting system, which has already 

been explained. So with that, I will introduce again the Hon. Joe 

Fox, Jr., Vice President of Northern Cheyenne Tribe. 

19 

STATEMENT OF JOE FOX, JR., VICE PRESIDENT, 

NORTHERN CHEYENNE TRIBE 

Mr. FOX. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Subcommittee members. 

I am Joe Fox, Jr., Vice President of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe. 

Thank you for the opportunity to convey my Tribe’s total support 

of H.R. 1158. 

We greatly appreciate Rep. Rehberg’s championing of this muchdeserved bill for our Tribe. At this time I would like to introduce 

two gentlemen, William Walksalong, former Chairman of the 

Northern Cheyenne Tribe, also Administrative Assistant to the 

President’s Office, LeRoy Spain, and also Steve Chestnut, Chief 

Legal Counsel for the Northern Cheyenne Tribe. These two gentlemen have been involved in this bill process for 18 years. 

The following summarizes somewhat the points discussed at 

greater length in my written submission to the Committee on 

H.R. 1158. It is of tremendous importance to my people. We have 

been pursuing remedies for the issues it addresses for decades. 

Our reservation is truly the homeland of the Northern Cheyenne 

people. Ninety-nine percent of the surface is owned and controlled 

and used by the Northern Cheyenne, and 90 percent of the resident 

population is Northern Cheyenne. Of all subsurface, except for each 

section of subsurfaces owned by Great Northern Properties, have 

been addressed by H.R. 1158, is owned by the Tribe as a whole. 

H.R. 1158 will correct a 111-year-old Federal error, which had 

an unintended effect of denying the Tribe, from 1900 to the 

present, ownership of these eight sections of subsurface. H.R. 1158 

would consolidate our land base, prevent development of that subsurface without our consent, and otherwise protect our homeland. 

Protection of our reservation is of the greatest importance to us. 

H.R. 1158 will also help address a major problem which has 

plagued us for 40 years, arising from the intensifying pattern of 

coal-related development encircling our reservation. Much of this 

development has been sponsored and facilitated by the Tribe’s 

trustee, the United States, and has provided vast revenues to the 

United States. 

As shown on two maps attached to my written statement, our 

reservation has been surrounded by coal-related development. Although the development provides tremendous revenue in the form 

of bonuses, rents, royalties, and multiple tax revenues to the 

United States, the State and its subdivisions, we receive none of 

that revenue. 

Also, the Tribe and its members barely share in the upside of the 

development, such as jobs, commercial opportunity, although our 

unemployment rate averaged around 65 percent. Thus, we get negatives and virtually none of the positives of the nearby development that surrounds our homeland. 

Public services and facilities on the reservation are chronically 

substandard and inferior to those of the off-reservation communities. This is made worse by the increasing pressures of surrounding development. 

H.R. 1158 would enable the Tribe to acquire, from GNP at least, 

a 40 percent interest in the royalties. GNP would receive from the 

leasing of the coal tracts, GNP would receive, under H.R. 1158, the 

Bowl Mountain tracts. And if ever developed, the Bridge Creek 

20 

tracts. Thus, for the first time, the Tribe would receive development-related funding to address the substandard and declining 

conditions on the reservation. The funding would come from royalties received by GNP under an arrangement the Tribe conceived, 

and then negotiated with GNP. 

H.R. 1158 is a key element of the comprehensive settlement arrangements developed and negotiated by the Tribe with the Montana Congressional Delegation. Sen. Campbell, State of Montana, 

Great Northern Properties, in consultation with the Secretary of 

the Interior, Gale Norton, and a bill in Montana State Office and 

the Bureau of Indian Affairs. 

The Tribe initiated that settlement effort in 2001, triggered by 

Federal legislation causing the transfer of the Federal Otter Creek 

coal tracts to the State of Montana. Those massive tracts lie just 

east of our reservation, and combine with adjoining private and 

State coal, contain about 1.2 billion tons of minable coal. 

It was very difficult to achieve this settlement. Many parties 

were involved, and we pursued it with great determination and 

honor all settlement commitments we made, including dismissal of 

litigation we had filed against the United States challenging the 

Otter Creek transfer. 

The settlement arrangements also called for Federal legislation that would provide $70 million in Federal impact funding to the 

Tribe. Unfortunately, we had to delete the funding from the bill 

with the current Congressional realities. Therefore, the impact 

funding we would now receive is from royalty interests we proposed 

and negotiated with GNP. In the future, our Tribe will continue to 

pursue the $70 million in impact funding. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Fox follows:] 

Statement of Joe Fox, Jr., Vice President, 

Northern Cheyenne Tribe, on H.R. 1158 

Chairman Young and Committee Members, I am Joe Fox, Jr., Vice President of 

the Northern Cheyenne Tribe of Montana. I was elected as Vice President for a fouryear term by vote of our Tribal membership. Prior to that, I was elected by the people to multiple terms on our Tribal governing body, the 11-person Northern Cheyenne Tribal Council. I am pleased to be here today to testify on behalf of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe in strong support of H.R. 1158, the Montana Mineral Conveyance Act. I am accompanied by Steve Chestnut, who has been the Tribe’s principle 

attorney since 1973, and has represented the Tribe in all of the matters referred 

to in our submissions to the Committee. 

If H.R. 1158 is enacted, several long-standing paramount issues for the Northern 

Cheyenne will finally be resolved. First, our Reservation will finally be made whole 

by rectifying an error made by the United States over a century ago. Second, commitments made to the Tribe in 2002 by the Montana Congressional delegation, others and the State of Montana to help mitigate the adverse effects on our Tribe and 

Reservation of 40 years of coal-related development encircling our Reservation, 

largely sponsored and facilitated by the Federal Government, notwithstanding its 

trust responsibilities to the Tribe, will be fulfilled. H.R. 1158 will enable the provision to the Tribe by Great Northern Properties (GNP) of a desperately needed revenue stream to help mitigated the many impacts of the encircling development on 

our Reservation and people. This pattern of development culminated most recently 

in the Congressionally-directed transfer to the State of Montana in 2002 of the massive federal Otter Creek coal tracks adjacent to our reservation. 

Attached to my written statement is a document that summarizes the Northern 

Cheyennes’ dramatic struggles over the past 40 years with that coal-related development, which provides perspective on why the enactment of the Montana Mineral 

Conveyance Act is just and appropriate. I also have attached copies of a letter 

signed by each member of the State of Montana’s Board of Land Commissioners 

(consisting of the State’s five top elected officials), a resolution of the Montana-WyoVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:34 Feb 28, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 L:\DOCS\66729.TXT Hresour1 PsN: KATHY
21 

ming Tribal Leader’s Council, and a resolution of the National Congress of American 

Indians, each supporting H.R. 1158 and urging its passage. Finally, I have included 

two maps—one showing how our Reservation has been encircled by coal-related development projects, and another showing our Reservation, its communities and the 

network of on-Reservation roads serving those off-Reservation projects. As discussed 

in greater detail herein, these projects visit extensive unmitigated impacts on our 

Reservation and people, while the Tribe and its members are excluded from the 

compensating benefits (impact funding, employment, and commercial opportunity) of 

such development. 

We Northern Cheyenne cherish our land. To us, our land is everything. It has provided for our families for centuries. After we were forcibly relocated to the Oklahoma Territory in 1878 as retribution for our resistance to White domination and 

our participation in the Battle of the Little Bighorn (the Custer Battle), we (uniquely among all other tribes so relocated) trekked back to our historic homeland in 

Montana. This journey came at great cost to the Tribe—death, imprisonment and 

other deprivations—as we were hounded along the way by thousands of hostile military and settlers. We eventually made it back to Montana to reclaim our homeland 

and the Northern Cheyenne Reservation was later formally established by Presidential Executive Order in 1884. 

Today the Northern Cheyenne Reservation is bordered on the west by the much 

larger Crow Indian Reservation and on the east by the Tongue River. Our Reservation is truly the homeland of the Northern Cheyenne. The Reservation population 

is approximately 90% Northern Cheyenne. Non-Indian presence on the Reservation 

is minimal. A majority of our more than 9000 Tribal members reside on the Reservation. Traditional Cheyenne values and culture still thrive on the Reservation 

and the Cheyenne language is still spoken. The Reservation remains culturally distinct from the surrounding land and communities. 

Of its 447,000 acres, 99% of the Reservation surface is owned, controlled and used 

by the Tribe and its members. The primary land uses are cattle grazing, timber harvesting (entirely suspended for years due to adverse market conditions), and ceremonial and subsistence use. Non-Indian use of Reservation lands is minimal. The 

entire Reservation mineral estate—except for the eight sections that are the subject 

of H.R. 1158—is owned by the Tribe as a single entity. Because of the paramount 

importance to us of our land, we have a sacred duty to pursue ownership of the 

eight sections. Securing ownership of those eight sections has been a priority of the 

Northern Cheyenne for decades and H.R. 1158 will finally accomplish that goal. 

The eight sections of subsurface are also of great commercial value—50 years ago, 

the then-owner Burlington Northern Railroad—leased that subsurface to Peabody 

Coal Company for valuable consideration. Although those leases are no longer in 

force, we don’t want to suffer that experience again. But, without ownership of that 

subsurface, we at best have limited power over, and would suffer impacts and gain 

scant benefits from, its development. 

We have been continuously deprived of ownership of the eight sections because 

of a federal error which occurred at the end of the 19th century. Because of hostilities and violence then prevailing between Northern Cheyenne and legal and illegal non-Indian settlers on or adjacent to the Tribe’s 1884 Reservation, Congress directed Indian Inspector James McLaughlin to buy out the legal and non-Indian illegal interests on and near the Reservation, so that the Reservation could be enlarged 

eastward to the middle of Tongue River. McLaughlin proceeded to do so, paying the 

legal and illegal settlers between $1500 and $2000 per claim. In contrast, Inspector 

McLaughlin paid only $25 per family to Northern Cheyennes then living on federal 

land previously allocated to them east of the Tongue River. The Reservation was 

then expanded eastward to mid-channel of the Tongue River by Presidential Executive Order in 1900. 

In performing his duties, Inspector McLaughlin made a critical error. Although 

he purchased all lands within the Reservation (as expanded) then owned by Northern Pacific Railway, Inspector McLaughlin missed eight sections of subsurface beneath surface the Railway had previously conveyed to others. For 111 years, the 

United States has failed to remedy this error by buying this valuable mineral estate 

for the Tribe. Approximately 20 years ago, Great Northern Properties (GNP) purchased the entire inventory of railroad subsurface in Montana and elsewhere, including the eight sections on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation. With the willing 

cooperation of GNP and the Tribe, the United States is now in a position to remedy 

that continuing federal omission. The Northern Cheyenne have waited many decades for this opportunity. 

The Northern Cheyenne Reservation lies in the heart of Montana’s Powder River 

coal region. As shown in the attached maps, the Reservation is surrounded on all 

sides by major existing and proposed coal-related projects and includes a network 

22 

of roads used by these off-Reservation projects to travel through the reservation and 

the region. This pattern of development produces major influxes of newcomers to the 

area and leads to undesirable socio-economic effects on the Tribe, including on-Reservation crime, traffic and accidents. Because Tribal government lacks adequate 

legal authority and resources to deal with these non-Indian incursions, there are 

heightened tensions between Tribal members and non-Indian intruders. 

Public services and facilities on the Reservation have long been grossly inadequate, both in absolute terms and in marked contrast to off-Reservation communities. The surrounding development increases pressures on those public services 

and facilities. Severe deficits have been documented Reservation housing, water and 

sewer, solid waste, education, health care, law enforcement, fire protection, and 

transportation. Those deficits increase as on-and off-Reservation populations increase with development. 

With no tax base and minimal on-Reservation economic development, the Tribe 

thoroughly lacks the financial resources to address these socio-economic impacts and 

respond to the increased demands. In contrast, the surrounding development produces tremendous public revenues (lease bonuses, rents and royalties, state production taxes, real and personal property taxes, and other exactions) for the United 

States, the State and the counties and municipalities adjoin the Reservation. The 

Tribe is privy to none of these public revenues. 

Also, although the Northern Cheyenne constitute the largest indigenous community in the immediate area, and suffer chronic unemployment rates averaging 65%, 

very few Northern Cheyenne are employed in these off-Reservation projects. Indeed, 

reservation unemployment rates have not improved during the course of this development of coal mines and power plants in the vicinity of the Reservation. Historically, Native Americans employment in Montana’s Powder River Basin mines has 

averaged approximately only 3.5% of the total labor force, absent any special hiring 

agreement mandates, even though the Northern Cheyenne represent the area’s largest, most available and neediest labor pool. State law does not authorize the holders 

of State mining leases to offer any employment preferences to local Native Americans. Relief in this area occurs only in the few situations where the Tribe, through 

aggressive legal action, wrests a special employment program from a typically hostile project, with predictable ensuing enforcement difficulties. The bottom line is 

that average per capita income on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation is a minor 

fraction of that in surrounding communities, and the Tribal unemployment rate is 

many multiples of the off-Reservation rate. 

In summary, because of the very weak economic ties between the Reservation and 

surrounding off-Reservation communities, the Northern Cheyenne have not shared 

in the economic gains from regional coal development. The Reservation does not 

benefit significantly in terms of jobs, construction contracts, general business activity, or increases in Tribal governmental revenues from the regional increase in economic activity generated by additional off-Reservation coal development. Thus, the 

Northern Cheyenne suffer an array of major adverse impacts from the off-Reservation (largely federally-sponsored or facilitated) coal-related development and enjoy 

few, if any, of the compensating benefits enjoyed by the United States, the State 

and surrounding communities and residents. 

The Congressionally-directed transfer in 2002 of the massive federal Otter Creek 

Coal Tracts to the State of Montana perpetuates and exacerbates these inequities. 

The Otter Creek Tracts comprise about 8,000 acres of coal lands along both sides 

of Otter Creek south of Ashland, Montana, and just east of the Northern Cheyenne 

Reservation. The Tracts are estimated to contain 533 million tons of recoverable coal 

reserves. The surface rights to the Otter Creek Tracts are held by private landowners, the State of Montana and the Bureau of Land Management. Otter Creek 

is a tributary of the Tongue River, which forms the eastern boundary of the Northern Cheyenne Reservation. 

Although outside the boundaries of the Reservation, the Otter Creek Valley is 

within the ancestral territory of the Northern Cheyenne. Following bloody conflicts 

between the United States government and the Tribe in the latter part of the 19th 

century, the United States reserved lands for the Northern Cheyenne both east and 

west of the Tongue River. With the assistance of the United States, many Northern 

Cheyenne families homesteaded under federal law east of the Tongue River along 

Otter Creek. These families were later induced to move by the federal government, 

for unconscionably low consideration of $25 per family, onto the Northern Cheyenne 

Reservation when the final boundaries of the Reservation were established in 1900. 

Consequently, the Otter Creek area has great legal, historical and cultural importance to the Tribe and its members. Ancestors of current Tribal members are buried 

in the Otter Creek are. 

23 

For the past 40 years, all of the foregoing Northern Cheyenne concerns and issues 

regarding encircling coal-related development have been very publically and repeatedly raised by the Northern Cheyenne to the United States, the State and industry, 

as described in the memo submitted contemporaneously herewith. Most recently, 

the Tribe did so in connection with the plan to transfer the Otter Creek Tracts to 

the State. 

The Otter Creek Tracts contain more than half a billion tons of federal coal and 

are checkerboarded with more than 700 million tons of private and other State coal. 

The result is the single largest block of currently available, developable coal reserves in Montana. Those resources have now been entirely leased to a whollyowned subsidiary of Arch Coal, Inc., the Nation’s second largest coal mining company, and Arch is aggressively proceeding toward development. 

Out of the above concerns, the Tribe, in extensive correspondence and meetings 

with all major interests, strongly and repeatedly expressed opposition to the proposed transfer of the Otter Creek tracts to the State, without accompanying mitigation measures. Solely on its own initiative, throughout 2001 the Tribe met separately and extensively with members of Congress, the Governor, the other top elected officials of the State, the Secretary of the Interior, BLM, BIA, industry and other 

interested parties, while the Secretary honored a commitment sought and obtained 

by the Tribe to withhold the Otter Creek transfer while the Tribe pursued settlement discussions. 

With scant resources for travel, professional assistance and other necessary expenses—but armed with a long and remarkably successful record of advocating and 

demonstrating the legitimacy of its concerns—the Tribe’s settlement initiative bore 

fruit: 

1. The Tribe proposed and successfully negotiated and drafted a Settlement 

Agreement with the Montana Board of Land Commissioners, which committed the State to the following: 

a. In leasing the Otter Creek Tracts to industry, the State will require that 

the lessee, in close consultation with the Tribe, adopt special Operating 

Plans aimed at providing: 

– enhanced Project employment opportunity to Indians (principally 

Northern Cheyennes), including training at all levels and for advancement; 

– enhanced opportunity to Northern Cheyenne businesses to obtain 

Project contracts for goods and services; 

– an on-Reservation conduct program designed to encourage Project 

employees and truckers to behave appropriately while on the Reservation; 

– enhanced environmental protection for the Reservation; and 

– enhanced protection for Northern Cheyenne historic, cultural, religious and burial sites in the conduct of Project operations. 

b. State Land Board support for the improvement of certain off-Reservation 

roads in the area. 

c. State Land Board support for cooperative law enforcement agreements 

among the Tribe and State and county law enforcement agencies. 

d. State Land Board support for legislation along the lines now before this 

Committee (including promised federal impact funding for the Tribe, 

which has now been deleted from the bill), even though departure of the 

Bull Mountains tracts and the Bridge Creek tracts from federal ownership will eliminate the State’s half-interest in proceeds of federal leasing 

of those tracts. 

In return for the foregoing State commitments, the Tribe agreed to dismiss with 

prejudice a lawsuit it had filed in Federal District Court in Washington, D.C. to enjoin the Secretary’s transfer of the Otter Creek Tracts to the State. The Tribe filed 

that action on the eve of consummation of the Otter Creek settlement, upon receiving a tip from an informed source that—notwithstanding her standstill commitment 

and without notifying the Tribe—the Secretary was about to convey the tracts to 

the State. After consummating the Settlement Agreement with the State, as promised the Tribe immediately dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice. 

As part of its settlement initiative, the Tribe on its own initiation also approached 

GNP with a proposal to resolve by agreement the 111-year old federal error which 

deprived the Tribe of ownership of the eight sections of Reservation subsurface now 

owned by GNP. The Tribe successfully negotiated and drafted a written agreement 

with GNP committing GNP to deed its eight sections of Reservation subsurface to 

the Tribe if GNP receives off-Reservation federal coal reserves in Montana in lieu 

thereof. Because the eight Reservation sections were encumbered by a royalty interest reserved by the Burlington Northern subsidiary that sold the eight sections to 

24 

GNP, the Tribe—GNP agreement also provides that the Tribe will receive at least 

an identical interest in the royalties GNP would receive from leasing the off-Reservation federal coal—specifically, at least 40% of those royalties if the off-Reservation coal is subbituminous and at least 24% if the off-Reservation coal is lignite. The 

federal coal tracts which have been identified by GNP and the Tribe for this transaction, and which are described in the bill, consist of tracts within the Bull Mountains Life of Mine Plan to be mined in the near term, plus tracts at Bridge Creek 

immediately to the east of the Northern Cheyenne Reservation. 

Without these Bull Mountain tracts, the Bull Mountains Mine would have to shut 

down within approximately three years, and hundreds of jobs and secondary economic development would be lost to that part of Montana. In contrast, the Bridge 

Creek tracts would be mined—if at all—many years from now. 

The Tribe’s royalty interest in the Bull Mountains tracts would provide sorely 

needed revenue to the besieged and impoverished Northern Cheyenne Tribe. The 

Tribe’s royalty interest in the Bridge Creek tracts would, if the tracts were ever 

mined, be the only source of funding available to the Tribe to deal with the impacts 

of the mining of those tracts on the margins of the Reservation. All of these tracts 

contain subbituminous coal and the Tribe would therefore hold at least a 40% interest in the royalties derived therefrom. 

In negotiating its Otter Creek settlement with all parties from beginning to end, 

the Tribe worked closely and with the encouragement of the Montana Congressional 

delegation (Senators Burns and Senator Baucus and Representative Rehberg), Senator Campbell, and the BLM’s Montana State Office. In addition to legislation facilitating the coal transfers described above, the Tribe also negotiated for federal impact funding which, for the first time, would provide public revenues to the Tribe 

to help mitigate the accrued and projected impacts of the current and projected coalrelated development encircling the Reservation. Again, largely sponsored and facilitated by the Tribe’s trustee (the United States), the trustee receives major financial 

returns from this development while visiting a broad range of unmitigated major 

impacts on the Tribe and Reservation. In addition, uniquely among all other affected jurisdictions (federal and state), the Tribe is frozen-out from any mitigation 

funding, as well as anything beyond token employment and commercial opportunities. 

The understanding reached with Congressional representatives in the settlement discussions, was that federal impact funding of $10 million per year for seven years 

would be sought through legislation, structured in a way to assure that that financial resource would be a permanent resource, available to the Tribe to fund on-Reservation public services, facilities and other governmental matters, as new development projects proceeded within 25 miles of the Reservation. 

The Tribe, in good faith, relied on all of these commitments in consummating the 

Otter Creek settlement and dismissing its litigation against the Otter Creek transfer. However, the impact funding has now been withdrawn from the bill in light of 

the current prevailing difficulties in securing any direct funding from Congress. 

Thus, as things currently stand, the proceeds of the proposed Tribal 40% interest 

in the GNP royalties stands as the only potential source of impact funding available 

to the Tribe to cope with the accrued and future impacts of surrounding coal-related 

development, including the massive development envisioned at the Otter Creek 

tracts. 

As it always has, the Tribe has proceeded throughout this episode with integrity 

and honor. The bill, if enacted, would achieve the following constructive results: 

(1) Remediate the federal government’s 111-year error which has deprived the 

Tribe of ownership of eight sections of Reservation subsurface. As the bill 

provides, in return for the mineral conveyances provided for in the bill, the 

Tribe would release any and all claims it may have against the United 

States for that error. 

(2) Consolidate the Tribe’s land base. 

(3) Prevent GNP (or anyone else) from developing the eight sections without 

Tribal consent or benefit, irrespective of the long-standing Tribal concerns 

about Reservation coal development. 

(4) At long last, provide revenue to the Tribe to help the Tribe cope with the 

accrued and future impacts of adjoining off-Reservation coal-related development. 

(5) Address the long-standing injustices suffered by the Tribe from federallysponsored and facilitated coal-related development in areas near the Reservation, while the Tribe’s trustee financially benefits from such development. 

(6) Reward the Tribe for its self-generated, steadfast and honorable effort to resolve these matters by agreement rather than litigation. 

25 

Again, Chairman Young and Committee Members, I want to thank you for your 

consideration of H.R. 1158, the Montana Mineral Conveyance Act. Enactment of 

this bill will help address many wrongs that have been done to the Northern Cheyenne by the United States over the centuries. The Tribe did not create the situation 

we now find ourselves in and we hope Congress and the Administration can do the 

right thing and enable the Northern Cheyenne to be in control of their own destiny. 

[NOTE: Attachments have been retained in the Committee’s official files.] 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Thank you, Mr. Fox, I am going to have to interrupt you. The five minutes has expired. But your full testimony 

will appear in the Committee’s record. I thank you, and if you will 

hang on for a moment, we will get to some questions in a few minutes. 

Our next witness is the Hon. Carlos Hisa, the Lieutenant Governor of the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF THE HON. CARLOS HISA, LIEUTENANT 

GOVERNOR OF THE YSLETA DEL SUR PUEBLO INDIAN 

RESERVATION 

Mr. HISA. Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of 

the Committee. Thank you for allowing me to come and present. 

It is an honor to be here. 

My name is Carlos Hisa. I am the Lieutenant Governor for 

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo Indian Reservation located in El Paso, Texas. 

With me today I have Chris Gomez, Council Member for the 

Pueblo, and Trini Gonzalez, also Council Member for the Pueblo. 

Once again, thank you. 

With the blessing of our Cacique, we are here asking the Committee to consider House Bill H.R. 1560. House Bill H.R. 1560 will 

allow the Pueblo to determine its own membership. It is something 

that every other nation and tribe here in the United States of 

America has the ability of doing—so we are just coming here asking for parity, fairness, to be able to do the same. 

This bill is the same bill that was introduced by Congressman 

Reyes on the last session. It was House Bill H.R. 5811. The bill 

passed with no problems, no opposition here from the House, but 

it failed to pass in the Senate because of an inaccurate report by 

the CBO. The CBO stated that the additional membership would 

have to come along with additional funding from the Federal Government. Again, that was an inaccurate statement. You heard earlier from a BIA representative stating it would not affect the funding, current funding situation. And also in my written testimony 

you will find a letter from IHS and BIA stating the same, that 

funding is not based on population, so it will not affect any funding 

that we are receiving currently from the Federal Government. 

In addition to that, I also want to add that is a very important 

issue for our Pueblo. I have been in office for 10 years, and ever 

since I have been elected this has been a priority for Pueblo. 

Thanks to the efforts of Congressman Reyes and his support, we 

have come year after year and tried to get this passed. 

Last week, June 13 was a very special day for the Pueblo. It is 

their annual feast day. It is the biggest day of celebration and tradition and ceremony for the Pueblo. We had over 101 participants 

dancing in 103-degree weather. That doesn’t include the people 

26 

helping in the kitchen, the chancellors, everybody else that was 

helping. 

In the group of dancers, there was, my daughter was dancing. 

She is 13 years old. She was there because she wanted to be there. 

She participated from 6 o’clock in the morning to 8:45 at night, 

when we, it was approximately 8:45 when we terminated the feast 

day. 

Actually, she was there because she wanted to. She understands 

our way of life. She recognizes that our efforts from our ancestors 

to remain Tewa and just fight for what we believe in is something 

that we cannot let die. 

She does not meet the quantum requirements. That day she was 

Tewa. She is Tewa. And nobody asked for her blood quantum 

where she stood. She just participated because it comes from the 

heart, and she is considered part of the Pueblo. 

The question we need to ask each other is if my daughter decides 

to run for a position on Council in the near future, will she be recognized as a legitimate Council member, as a legitimate tribal 

member, by the Federal Government? Is that, that actually threatens who we are as a people, and our future, and our existence. 

So with that, I ask that the Committee consider and support the 

passage of House Bill H.R. 1560. I am here to answer any questions that you might have, and thank you once again. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hisa follows:] 

Statement of The Honorable Carlos Hisa, Lt. Governor, 

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo, on H.R. 1530 

Good morning Mr. Chairman, honorable members of the Indian and Alaska Native Affairs Sub-Committee. My name is Carlos Hisa. I am a member of Ysleta del 

Sur Pueblo located in El Paso County, Texas. For the past 10 years I have served 

as the Lt. Governor of the Pueblo. My term of office is one year. The matter under 

consideration has been a priority for the Pueblo since before my first term. 

Any assessment of last year’s elections must acknowledge the American spirit for 

local control and cost constraint. The bill, H.R. 1530, embodies such spirit. This bill 

is about local freedom—to determine the destiny of one’s own community. 

H.R. 1530 is about freedom—freedom from intrusive federal control. Beginning in 

the 1970s, this Congress embarked on a new federal Indian policy. You rejected the 

destructive policies of termination of Indian tribes, assimilation of Indian people and 

their culture, and the dispossession and despoiling of Indian lands. Instead, you created the present self-determination era of Indian law to free Indian tribes from an 

overreaching federal government. This Congress has encouraged Indian tribes to 

take up the mantle of self-government as distinct and independent political entities. 

Critical to that task is the ability of an Indian tribe to determine its own membership. The Supreme Court has noted, ‘‘A tribe’s right to define its own membership 

for tribal purposes has long been recognized as central to its existence as an independent political community.’’ See Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49 

(1978). 

The Pueblo has occupied its present location since the Spaniards removed it from 

New Mexico during the Pueblo Revolt of 1680, which is twice as long as the existence of the State of Texas. It is the longest continually occupied community in 

Texas. It is the only Indian Pueblo in Texas. It recently rejoined the All Indian 

Pueblo Council after being absent for over 330 years. The Council now comprises 

twenty Pueblos. 

In 1968, toward the end of the termination era, Congress recognized the Pueblo 

as an Indian tribe and transferred federal trust responsibilities for the Pueblo to 

the State of Texas. On August 18, 1987, the United States Congress restored the 

Federal trust relationship between the United States and the Pueblo. In the Restoration Act, Congress imposed a 1/8th Tigua blood quantum requirement for membership. 

No other Indian tribe in Texas is subject to a congressionally mandated blood 

quantum limitation on its membership. No other Pueblo is subject to such a blood 

27 

quantum limitation. Except for two early termination era enactments, Congress has 

subjected no other tribe in the United States to such a blood quantum limitation. 

In fact Congress has declined to include such a blood quantum limitation on those 

Indian tribes which Congress has recognized (five tribes) or restored to trust relationship (two tribes) subsequent to the Pueblo’s Restoration Act. With the exception 

of Ysleta del Sur Pueblo, Congress has not imposed a blood quantum limitation on 

any tribe in over half a century. 

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo is a tribe of Tigua Indians. To be Tigua is to believe in the 

power of the drum, the heartbeat of our community; to respect the authority of the 

Cacique; and to revere our traditions. Unfortunately, the blood quantum limitation 

has had the effect of preventing Tiguas from being members. At present, sixty-six 

percent of tribal members lack a 1/4 blood quantum. Absent the other parent having 

sufficient Tigua blood quantum, the children of sixty-six percent of tribal members 

cannot be members of the Pueblo despite being Tigua. This includes my three 

daughters. 

Our young men and women are vibrant Pueblo people who are part of our community. Many aspire to serve our Pueblo, but do not meet the blood quantum limitation 

to be a member. They participate in our cultural events, they study our history, they 

engage in community service, they learn and speak the Tiwa language, and they understand the importance of carrying the traditions of our Pueblo forward. These ‘‘descendants’’ are a part of our community and our people recognize them as legitimate 

members. They are Tigua. They are our future, our hope, but they will not be able 

to serve as Tribal Councilmen and Councilwomen, offices that are older than the 

office of President of the United States. They will not be eligible for services from 

the Pueblo. 

They live on our reservation and interact with our members who are their mothers, fathers, grandfathers, grandmothers, cousins, uncles, aunts, and neighbors and 

influence the entire community for good or for bad. They must be treated like citizens of our Pueblo, but if not included as members they will not be subject to the 

jurisdiction of the Pueblo. The inability to exert jurisdiction over people who are the 

children of many of our members has a negative social impact on our Pueblo. 

Passage of H.R. 1530 frees the Pueblo to make all Tigua members rather than 

accepting only those who meet the requisite blood quantum but who may otherwise 

be anything but ‘‘Tigua.’’ Passage of H.R. 1530 assures the future of the Pueblo and 

the continued security of its people and neighbors without cost to the federal government. 

The legislative history of the Pueblo’s Restoration Act records the Department of 

the Interior’s belief that the Congress should place some limit on the potential service population of tribes being made eligible for federal benefits for the first time— 

a concern, as previously noted, that has been applied only to this Pueblo. Congress 

has never seen fit to do so since the Pueblo’s Restoration Act, perhaps due to the 

sentiments expressed in a House Committee Report accompanying the bill – 

The Committee has strong reservations about the constitutionality of a law 

which would determine eligibility for such Federal services based on a racial criterium such as the degree of Indian blood instead of a political 

criterium such as the membership in an Indian tribe. 

The language of H.R. 1530 is the same as that H.R. 5811 introduced by Congressman Reyes in the last Congress. On a motion to suspend the rules, the House 

agreed to and passed the bill by voice vote on September 22, 2010. The Senate Indian Affairs Committee reported the bill favorably by unanimous voice vote on November 18, 2010. The bill was placed on the Senate Legislative Calendar under 

General Orders where it languished, possibly due to an erroneous CBO cost estimate. 

Given the unique manner in which the federal government funds Native American services, enactment of H.R. 1530 will have no fiscal impact. In support of this 

statement I am providing the committee with copies of an April 29, 2011 letter from 

William T. Walker, Regional Director of the southwest Region of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and a May 11, 2011 letter from Assistant Surgeon General Richie K. 

Grinnell, Acting Director of the Department of Health and Human Services Albuquerque Area Health Services. In his letter, Director Walker confirms: 

‘‘An increase in tribal members, once recognized, has no bearing on the TPA 

base budget.’’ 

Assistant Surgeon General Grinnell confirms in his letter that under this legislation: 

‘‘The Ysleta del Sur Pueblo funding would not increase due to an increase 

in Tribal enrollment.’’ 

In addition to these two letters, I respectfully direct your attention to the CBO 

cost estimate of H.R. 2912, introduced in the 108th Congress, which was passed and 

28 

signed into law, and did for the Osage Tribe what the H.R. 1530 will do for the 

Pueblo: 

The CBO estimates that implementing H.R. 2912 would have no effect on 

the federal budget because federal agencies currently provide services to all 

Osage Indians and do not restrict services to those considered to be members of the tribe under the Osage Allotment Act. Enacting H.R. 2912 would 

not affect revenues or direct spending. 

I am providing the committee with a copy of the Osage CBO estimate. 

Passage of H.R. 1530 frees the Pueblo to determine its own future, is consistent 

with recent congressional action, and has no impact on the federal coffers. I respectfully request your support for and passage of H.R. 1530. 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Thank you. Our final witness is Charles Kerr, 

President and CEO of Great Northern Properties. 

STATEMENT OF CHARLES KERR, PRESIDENT AND CEO, 

GREAT NORTHERN PROPERTIES 

Mr. KERR. Mr. Chairman, Committee members, my name is 

Chuck Kerr, President and CEO of Great Northern Properties. I 

am pleased to be here today to testify in strong support of 

H.R. 1158, the Montana Mineral Conveyance Act. 

GNP is a privately held limited partnership that in 1992 acquired all of the former Northern Pacific, now Burlington Northern 

Santa Fe, land grant lands in Montana and North Dakota. In this 

acquisition, GNP acquired approximately 5 million middle acres, 

225,000 surface acres, under which lie about 20 billion tons of coal. 

As part of that transaction, we did acquire the eight sections of 

land that are obviously subject to H.R. 1158. 

A lot of history has transpired relative to the Otter Creek tracts, 

and leading up to H.R. 1158. My testimony today is on GNP’s 

involvement. 

GNP is a facilitator here. This is all about the Tribe, and the correction of an error that was made by the U.S. Government in 1900. 

Our job here is to work with the Tribe and facilitate this exchange. 

GNP and the Tribe entered into an agreement to facilitate that. 

This agreement provides for two things. Number one, coordination 

and cooperation in facilitating the exchange, and to the extent that 

impact money could be provided, to support that. But second, to 

also provide a means of income for the Tribe on off-reservation exchanged tracts via a vehicle called the non-participating royalty interest. 

GNP and the Tribe have agreed that the Tribe would participate 

in the off-reservation exchange tracts, if so enacted, to the tune of 

a 40 percent royalty interest to the Northern Cheyenne. 

What is important to note is the underlying fundamentals that 

created this agreement. Number one, this is a settlement. This isn’t 

your typical land exchange. And because of that, we are very concerned about the timing of this exchange. 

The goal here is to effect a quick exchange that will allow completion of the goals of fixing the error, as well as providing income 

to the Tribe, without the costly time-consuming appraisals and additional studies that would be required. 

The second driver obviously is the revenue source. The Northern 

Cheyenne need revenue. They are not applying for impact funding 

under this bill. This would potentially provide them with an income 

stream. 

29 

Third, and a major driver to the Northern Cheyenne, is that this 

consolidates their ownership of their own mineral resource. And 

this is extremely important to them because it will allow them to 

control 100 percent of the Tribe’s mineral resources, the development and timing of that. It is extremely important for GNP to facilitate this. We are going to be a neighbor and an economic partner of the Tribe if so enacted. 

The two tracts that we have nominated for the exchange satisfy 

the criteria above that I have previously explained. The Bridge 

Creek are very near the Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation, 

and it is likely that the development of those tracts will take place 

some time in the next 15 to 20 years. It is a long time in coming; 

it is a wonderful reserve, but it will take time. 

The five sections of tracts of land that we have nominated in the 

Bowl Mountains area do two things. Number one, it does facilitate 

an important problem that the current underground mine operator 

is undergoing, in that they need these five tracts in order to continue mining. Without these tracts in some control of theirs, they 

will not be able to mine. 

Currently the lease process being undertaken by the Federal 

Government is being challenged legally. It is uncertain as to when 

that will take place. 

The Bowl Mountains tracts are likely to be mined in the next 10 

to 15 years. Revenue could be seen to the Tribe and GNP as early 

as 2015, but the majority of the income will occur in the next 10 

to 12 years. 

We believe that this, the enactment of H.R. 1158, is the right 

thing to do. It satisfies all sorts of issues on numerous fronts. It 

consolidates Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation’s holdings, 

provides them with income. It solves an issue that the U.S. has 

with the Northern Cheyenne, and it also provides the State of Montana and GNP with this fulfillment of its obligations under the 

agreements that were there. 

We ask for strong support of the Committee in H.R. 1158. I am 

available for questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Kerr follows:] 

Statement of Chuck Kerr, President & CEO, Great Northern Properties 

Limited Partnership, on H.R. 1158 

Chairman Young and Committee Members, I am Chuck Kerr, President and Chief 

Executive Officer of Great Northern Properties Limited Partnership (‘‘GNP’’). I am 

pleased to be here today to testify in strong support of H.R. 1158, the Montana 

Mineral Conveyance Act. 

GNP is a privately held limited partnership that in 1992, acquired all of the 

former Northern Pacific Railroad (now Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad 

(‘‘BNSF’’)) land grant lands in Montana and North Dakota within the Northern 

Powder River Basin and Northern Lignite coal fields, respectively. GNP lands obtained in this transaction contain more than 20 billion tons of coal and lignite and 

are comprised of nearly 5 million acres of mineral rights and about 225,000 acres 

of surface ownership. This acquisition included the eight sections of mineral rights 

located on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation (the ‘‘Reservation’’) which is the subject of H.R. 1158, the Montana Mineral Conveyance Act (the ‘‘Exchange’’)(See attached Map 1). GNP’s lands are generally located on odd numbered sections within 

a 120 mile wide strip straddling the BNSF main line between Bismarck, ND and 

Billings, MT with the BLM generally owning the even numbered sections creating 

the infamous ‘‘checkerboard’’ ownership. The National Mining Association has determined that GNP is the largest owner of coal reserves in the U.S. other than the 

U.S. Government. 

30 

A quick bit of historical review is in order to explain to the Committee Members 

GNP’s role in this Exchange. Through a long series of interactions by and among 

the U.S. Government, the State of Montana, and the Crown Butte Mines Company 

to settle the New World Mine buy-out, the U.S. Government transferred all its mineral rights to the State of Montana in and to the lands depicted as Otter Creek 

Tracts #1, 2, and 3 on the attached Map 1. Because this transfer would have directly and materially impacted the Northern Cheyenne Tribe (the ‘‘Tribe’’), another 

sequence of events occurred by and among the Tribe, the State of Montana, the 

Montana Congressional delegation, and ultimately GNP, that culminated in a formalized Settlement Agreement between the State of Montana and the Tribe. The 

Settlement Agreement provided that (i) the Montana State Land Board would require any lessee of the Otter Creek tracts to abide by certain terms and conditions 

regarding mine operations protecting and ensuring certain rights in favor of the 

Tribe, (ii) on-going support from the State of Montana on mitigation of impacts of 

these operations to the Tribe, and (iii) a separate commitment made by the Montana 

Congressional delegation to the Tribe to seek enactment of federal legislation providing for impact and cultural program funding and to secure the promptest possible 

enactment of federal legislation authorizing an acreage exchange with GNP to correct an 111 year old error made by the U.S. Government to acquire subsurface 

rights to the eight sections within the Reservation upon the expansion of the Reservation. In conjunction with the State of Montana Settlement Agreement, GNP and 

the Tribe entered into a separate agreement (‘‘GNP–Tribe Agreement’’) outlining 

terms and conditions to facilitate the Exchange. 

The GNP–Tribe Agreement is important to understand. The substantive terms of 

this Agreement provide that (i) both GNP and the Tribe would cooperate to 

‘‘...secure the promptest possible enactment of mutually satisfactory federal legislation...authorizing and directing the Exchange and providing for coal developmentrelated federal impact funding to the Tribe’’, and (ii) upon enactment of the Exchange, promptly transfer an agreed upon non-participating royalty interest to the 

Tribe (‘‘Tribe NPRI’’) on the off-Reservation Exchange acreage. The genesis of this 

NPRI lies in the underlying 1992 sale/purchase transaction between BNSF and 

GNP. As additional purchase compensation to BNSF, GNP agreed to pay BNSF an 

NPRI (‘‘BNSF NPRI’’) on certain undeveloped acreage. The 8 sections of minerals 

owned by GNP on the Reservation are burdened by the BNSF NPRI. In the event 

of the Exchange is enacted, GNP would exchange its on-Reservation mineral interests for off-Reservation mineral interests, but because the BNSF NPRI is a covenant 

running with the land and would not transfer in the Exchange, the BNSF NPRI 

would still burden the on-Reservation acreage while there would be no such burden 

on the off-Reservation Exchange tracts. GNP and the Tribe agreed to create a similar NPRI in favor of the Tribe on the off-Reservation Exchange acreage equal to the 

on-Reservation NPRI. For the off-Reservation tracts that have been selected, the 

Tribe NPRI would equal 40% of any royalties received by GNP. In crafting the 

GNP–Tribe Agreement, there was mutual agreement on the key drivers that created 

the framework of this Agreement. 

The most important driver was the fact that this Exchange was a settlement that 

would resolve a 111 year old issue between the Tribe and the U.S. Government and 

not a typical land exchange. As a settlement, it was expected no costly and time 

consuming appraisals or additional studies would be required. The Tribe is not capable of paying for these studies and GNP has no obligation or desire to do so. Because of the unique economic partnership that could potentially exist between GNP 

and the Tribe, both parties would be mutually aligned in the future development 

of the Exchange tracts. 

The second driver was the provision of a revenue source to the Tribe on the offReservation Exchange tracts via the NPRI vehicle previously described. Another important driver was, and still is, timing. The Tribe is in desperate need of revenue. 

Inasmuch as the Tribe and GNP were potentially going to be economic partners, priority was given to picking off-Reservation tracts that could yield cash flow as soon 

as possible. 

Lastly, a major driver to both the Tribe and GNP, was the fact that enactment 

of the Exchange would yield tremendous intangible value by allowing each party to 

unilaterally develop its own resources. Currently, GNP’s ownership of the On-Reservation Exchange Tracts precludes the Tribe from developing its own resources 

without the involvement of GNP. Likewise, GNP would not be able to develop its 

on-Reservation Tracts without the Tribe. The Exchange would allow the Tribe to 

control its own timing and destiny with regard to future coal development on the 

Reservation. 

As shown on the attached Map 1, GNP has substantial coal holdings in close proximity to the Northern Cheyenne Reservation. GNP is committed to honor its agreeVerDate Nov 24 2008 10:34 Feb 28, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 L:\DOCS\66729.TXT Hresour1 PsN: KATHY
31 

ments and obligations to the Northern Cheyenne to resolve this matter. It is extremely important to GNP that we not only live up to our commitments, but to be 

a good neighbor and potentially an economic partner with the Northern Cheyenne. 

GNP works very hard to cultivate long lasting relationships that provide mutual 

alignment of the parties during the relationship and we believe this Exchange personifies that type of relationship. 

Keeping in mind GNP’s objectives of finding suitable exchange tracts that would 

provide the best chance for potential revenues to both the Tribe and GNP and aid 

the development of GNP’s current ownership, GNP and the Tribe consulted and cooperated with each other in the current selection of the off-Reservation exchange 

tracts. Several different attempts have been made in this selection process yielding 

the current slate of nominated tracts. Upon execution of the GNP–Tribe Agreement, 

tracts were selected in areas that, at that time, were likely to lead to rapid development. This selection has subsequently been modified because one selected area is 

being abandon by the current mine operator and the other area is close to an area 

recently designated a wilderness study area. With the re-engagement of the parties 

to move forward on the Exchange, a mutual reassessment of the Exchange tracts 

was conducted and a new group of tracts selected. The second group of Exchange 

tracts targeted three geographically diverse areas. The Tribe, to insure buy-off from 

all potential stake-holders, sought approval from a local environmental advocacy 

group, the Northern Plains Resource Council (the ‘‘NPRC’’). The NPRC protested 

two of the three selections based on surface ownership issues. Once again, a re-selection process was undertaken, this time, giving consideration to the NPRC surface 

ownership concerns, culminating in the current selection. 

The current selection of the 3 sections in the Bridge Creek area as shown on the 

attached Map 1 will meet the Exchange criteria agreed to between GNP and the 

Tribe, address the concerns expressed by the NPRC, but will also provide intangible 

benefits by being in an area known to the Tribe and in which if ever developed, 

could provide for Tribal employment and control/protection opportunities given its 

proximity to the Reservation. 

The five (5) sections selected in the Bull Mountains Area (see attached Map 2) 

were chosen in cooperation with GNP, the Tribe and Signal Peak Energy, the current operators of the Bull Mountains underground mine. Signal Peak is expanding 

their current mine permit area and is experiencing timing issues that may curtail 

current mining operations. The nominated Exchange Acreage in the Bull Mountains 

area is subject to an on-going Lease By Application (‘‘LBA’’) process being managed 

by the Bureau of Land Management. It is unknown when the process will be completed, which is a major issue for Signal Peak, and the lease process is currently 

being challenged by various environmental groups. The LBA lease process is likely 

to undergo additional challenges in federal district courts given recent precedence 

to similar proceedings in Wyoming. The Exchange would likely alleviate the timing 

problems and allow Signal Peak to continue its mine operations uninterrupted keeping nearly 300 miners employed in good paying jobs. 

As Congress reviews this legislation, timing and probability of development need 

to be taken into consideration. At Bull Mountains, the first royalty cash flow from 

the Exchange Tracts will likely occur in 2015 and will not be a steady cash flow. 

A small amount of Exchange Tract coal will be mined in 2015 (∼5%), ∼ 20% in 2017– 

2018, with the remainder (∼75%) in 2022-2024. In other words, the majority of the 

Bull Mountains cash flow WILL NOT occur in the next 10 years. 

At Bridge Creek, IF IT IS EVER MINED, optimistically, first production could 

take place in 15 years. There are no current plans to mine Bridge Creek and development is almost solely dependent on the development of Otter Creek. First production at Otter Creek is likely 7–10 years away which will provide the necessary 

transportation infrastructure for the area, including Bridge Creek. The take-away 

here is that there is no immediate and significant cash flow out of any of the Exchange tracts and there is a high probability that Bridge Creek may never be 

mined. As a real life example, GNP bought its 5 million mineral acres and 20 billion 

tons of coal from BNSF in 1992. There are 60 identified developable and mineable 

areas on GNP lands and since the purchase in 1992, not one ton of our 20 billion 

tons has been developed!! As I am sure the Members of this Committee may have 

noticed, any new coal development faces many challenges. GHG issues, regulatory 

uncertainty, lack of transportation infrastructure and strong environmental opposition are just a few of the hurdles we face in opening up new coal reserves. 

GNP is participating in this Exchange primarily because we want to establish a 

long lasting relationship with the Tribe, it is the right thing to do and, it may help 

the development of some of our resources in the future...maybe. This Exchange is 

all about the Tribe. GNP is under no obligation to participate in this Exchange and 

while GNP may some derive some economic benefit from this Exchange, the bigger 

32 

value is the relationship we will have built with the Tribe and the satisfaction of 

our (and others) commitment to resolve this issue. In the State of Montana Settlement Agreement and as part of the commitment made by the Montana Congressional Delegation, the Tribe was to receive impact funding given all of the coal development that may take place in the future. Given the legislative environment, the 

Tribe has elected not to pursue impact funding in the Exchange yet needs financial 

assistance. The Exchange, if enacted, not only remedies a long standing dispute between the U.S. Government and the Tribe, but also provides a means for the Tribe 

to realize revenue paid to them by private industry, potentially in lieu of federal 

impact funding. 

At the end of the day, GNP’s primary role in this legislation is to be a facilitator. 

I believe GNP’s role as a facilitator in the enactment of H.R. 1158 is a win-win on 

numerous fronts. First, the enactment fulfills an obligation by the U.S. Government 

to correct an error that has gone on for 111 years. The enactment consolidates the 

ownership of mineral estate on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation allowing the 

Tribe to control the development of its resources in its sole discretion. It satisfies 

the obligation of the State of Montana in the Settlement Agreement to assist in the 

exchange. The enactment provides relief to Signal Peak in allowing uninterrupted 

mining operations. The enactment would provide a much needed income stream to 

the Northern Cheyenne from non-Reservation private sources, and not from the U.S. 

Government. And lastly, the enactment fulfills GNP’s obligations contained in the 

Agreement between GNP and the Tribe, potentially helps GNP in the development 

of some of its other resources, and hopefully solidifies a deep, long lasting cordial 

relationship between GNP and the Tribe. 

[NOTE: Attachments have been retained in the Committee’s official files.] 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Thank you for your testimony. We will now 

move to five-minute questions by the Members. The Chair will 

begin. 

Vice President Fox, in 2004 similar legislation was introduced, 

but no hearings were held. One of the differences between the 2004 

legislation and H.R. 1158 is a provision that would authorize a $70 

million impact assistance fund that would benefit the Tribe. That 

provision is not in H.R. 1158. Why is that? 

Mr. FOX. My understanding, Chairman, is that because, as I 

stated in my statement, the realities of the budgetary processes 

that are going on here with Congress. I think it is a process that 

would be probably expedited in a way that the land issue, primarily the Northern Cheyenne Tribe want their reservation and 

their lands back in whole, with the sections and the coal would be 

reinstated as part of the correction at this time. I think that is why 

it was excluded, Chairman. 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK. So you will be developing these resources, and 

that essentially becomes a tremendous economic engine for the 

Tribe. 

Mr. FOX. Well, in the future, Chairman, that would probably be 

most likely that the Tribe would also be looking at ways and plans. 

And maybe in the future that this is a potential economic endeavor 

for the Tribe. 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Very good. Mr. Hisa, regarding H.R. 1560, it 

strikes me as one of the inherent powers of sovereignty is to determine the qualification of citizenship. That is essentially what this 

bill is doing, is it not? 

Mr. HISA. Correct. That is all we are asking for. 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK. That is the way it looks to me, too. That is all 

I have. I would defer to the Ranking Member, Mr. Luja ́n, for five 

minutes. 

33 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Lt. Gov. Hisa, 

what are the implications if Congress does not change the oneeighth blood quantum requirement for the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo? 

Mr. HISA. As you heard in my testimony, my daughters don’t 

qualify for recognition at this point. They are Tewa, we do consider 

them Tewa in the Pueblo. But again, they are not recognized by 

the Federal Government. 

I am not the only one in that situation. A lot of our families are 

in that situation, as well. We do have a lot of descendants waiting 

to be considered Tewa by the Federal Government. So it is a huge 

impact; our future depends on it, and our existence depends on it. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. I appreciate that very much. Vice President Fox, does 

H.R. 1158 contain any provisions that the Tribe would have authority to control and protect off-reservation tracts from harm to 

the land, water, and air upon development of coal mining? 

Mr. FOX. With that, we have, we have, you know, the Class I air, 

that is being designated by the Tribe. Currently that is a process 

that has the impacts of the Tribe to this point in time. But you 

know, that is as far as I know, Congressman. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. So, Vice President Fox, even though H.R. 1158 

doesn’t contain those provisions, the Tribe will be working to ensure that you are able to protect your land, water, and air in those 

areas? 

Mr. FOX. That is correct. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. And Mr. Kerr, will GNP work with the Tribe to make 

sure that we are ensuring protections of land, water, and air in 

these areas? 

Mr. KERR. Absolutely. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. Very good. Vice President Fox, how will the Tribe’s 

royalty interest in coal developed in both the Bowl Mountain and 

Bridge Creek Federal tracts assist its goal in achieving self-governance? 

Mr. FOX. At this point in time, the 40 percent royalties, that 

would help offset, and also would help the financial stability of the 

Tribe. And also, would also be determined for economic purposes 

for the Tribe to be self-sustained, and in helping with the constraints of budgetary processes that we do face today. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. Vice President Fox, do you believe that that can be 

achieved while protecting land, water, and air, as well? 

Mr. FOX. I think it can be, through the processes of negotiating 

and a good work relationship with our neighbors. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. I appreciate that. Mr. Kerr, your written statement 

indicates that development of coal resources in the Bowl Mountain 

area is burdened by an uncertain future due to the lease-by-application process. For example, the process has been challenged in 

Federal Court by environmental groups. 

Why was this section in particular, if development is unlikely in 

the near term? Why was this section chosen, if development is unlikely in the near term, of Bowl Mountain? 

Mr. KERR. Well, development is likely. It is in the expanded mine 

plan of the Signal Peak area. It is just going to take a long time 

for the mine to reach these tracts to receive income. 

There is no question that the tracts will be developed, it is just 

a matter of when. And that is the issue. The Signal Peak Mine is 

34 

going to start mining on the first tracts within the next two to 

three years, and they need to control the mineral rights to be able 

to mine. The lease-by-application process is being challenged, and 

it is uncertain as to when that process will be completed. And so 

it is likely going to be beyond the three-year period. 

The majority of the income, however, on the five tracts is going 

to take place later in 2020-to-2022 timeframe. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. And how will GNP benefit from the selections specifically? 

Mr. KERR. Well, obviously, we are going to be mineral owner, and 

so we will participate in the royalties paid. We would share the 

royalties received to the tune of GNP receiving 60 percent and the 

Tribe receiving 40 percent. 

Mr. LUJA ́ N. Very good. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Thank you. Ms. Hanabusa. 

Ms. HANABUSA. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Kerr, I would like to 

understand right now, as we sit here today, is GNP still mining 

what would be considered the eight tracts that are at issue? 

Mr. KERR. No, the eight tracts on the Northern Cheyenne are undeveloped. 

Ms. HANABUSA. They are undeveloped? 

Mr. KERR. Correct. 

Ms. HANABUSA. But these are the issues regarding the subsurface mineral rights, correct? 

Mr. KERR. Correct. In order for us to develop beyond reservation 

tracts, we wouldn’t—the eight reservation tracts are owned in a 

checkerboard fashion. The Northern Cheyenne or the U.S. Government controls the offsetting section. 

So in order for this, for GNP to attempt to develop, we would 

need to work in concert with the Tribe, as well as the BLM, which 

is a very long and protracted affair. And then on these tracts, if 

they were developed, the Tribe would receive no income. 

Ms. HANABUSA. And you, GNP, has claimed some sort of interest 

in these tracts today, correct? 

Mr. KERR. That is correct. 

Ms. HANABUSA. And what is the basis of your claim, GNP’s 

claim? 

Mr. KERR. Well, these tracts were originally given to the railroads as part of the land grants back in the 1800s for the transcontinental railroads. We acquired these properties in 1992 from 

the railroads. 

And so when the transfer took place, we acceded to the railroad. 

What happened here is that in 1900, when the reservation was expanded, these mineral rights were not acquired by the U.S. Government for the benefit of the Northern Cheyenne. It was a mistake. And so we actually owned the mineral rights under these, 

under these tracts, in error. 

Ms. HANABUSA. So the settlement is really one where you are 

going to get 5,000 acres somewhere off reservation, Federal lands, 

and those are the tracts you described, two and five I think were 

the different ones. And in exchange for that, GNP is going to waive 

any interest it may have to the underlying subsurface rights on the 

eight tracts in the Cheyenne property. 

Mr. HISA. That is correct. 

35 

Ms. HANABUSA. You heard the testimony of Ms. Gillette, where 

she is recommending that you also waive any claims against the 

United States as part of this bill. Is that going to become an issue? 

Mr. KERR. I need to understand what they are asking us to 

waive. If they are concerned about a taking, or waiving our rights 

to a claim against the United States on these, on this exchange, I 

think that is something that we would take under consideration, 

and likely agree to. 

Ms. HANABUSA. Also as part of this bill, it says that if any portion of the mineral conveyance under 4[a], which is the conveyance 

by GNP, is invalidated by a Federal Court, then basically the whole 

deal is off. Is that your understanding? 

Mr. KERR. I am not familiar with that clause. 

Ms. HANABUSA. You are not familiar with that? Now, over the 

years, since 1992 has it been that you have been actually, you acquired the interest, GNP acquired the interest? 

Mr. KERR. Correct. 

Ms. HANABUSA. Has there been mining elsewhere, on reservation 

property? 

Mr. KERR. No. Since 1992, no new coal has been developed on 

not only these tracts, but on the 5 million mineral acres that GNP 

acquired from the railroad in the States of Montana and North Dakota. In this transaction, no new coal has been developed. 

Ms. HANABUSA. But there was already coal being mined somewhere in those acres. 

Mr. KERR. No. 

Ms. HANABUSA. None? 

Mr. KERR. No, this is fully undeveloped. 

Ms. HANABUSA. Fully undeveloped. I am of course trying to ascertain what kind of damages you may have suffered, so it is good 

to know that you haven’t really suffered anything, because you 

haven’t mined anything. 

Mr. KERR. No, the true value here is in the future cash flow. 

Ms. HANABUSA. Future, exactly. 

Mr. KERR. Correct. 

Ms. HANABUSA. Exactly. And that is of course assuming that we 

don’t get caught up in some kind of protracted litigation as to who 

had the right to deed the land grant, and so forth and so on, which 

could tie everyone up for more than decades. 

Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. MCCLINTOCK. That concludes the Committee’s questions. I 

would like to thank the witnesses and the Members and the staff 

for their participation and preparation today. 

Members of the Subcommittee may have additional questions for 

the witnesses, so we would ask you to respond to those in writing. 

And as the Chair noted earlier, the hearing record will be left open 

for 10 business days. 

If there is no further business, without objection, the Subcommittee stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:12 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

[Additional material submitted for the record follows:] 

36 

The documents listed below were submitted for the record and have 

been retained in the Committee’s official files. 

Submitted for the record by Mr. Joe Fox, Jr. Vice President, Northern 

Cheyenne Tribe: 

• Document titled ‘‘Montana Mineral Conveyance Act—Historical Perspective’’ 

• Document from the National Congress of American Indians titled ‘‘The 

National Congress of American Indians Resolution #MKE–11–022’’ 

Submitted for the record by The Honorable Carlos Hisa, Lt. Governor of 

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo: 

• A letter from the Department of Health & Human Services—Mr. Richie K. 

Grinnell, M.P.H., Assistant Surgeon General, Acting Director—to Governor 

Frank Paiz of Ysleta del Sur Pueblo, dated May 11, 2011. 

• A letter from the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Southwest Region, to the Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs from the Regional 

Director, Southwest Region. Subject: Recommendation for Approval on Proposed Legislation—H.R. 5811, dated April 20, 2011. 

• Document from the Congressional Budget Office, Cost Estimate regarding 

‘‘H.R. 2912, an Act to reaffirm the inherent sovereign rights of the Osage 

Tribe to determine its membership and form of government,’’ dated July 20, 

2004. 

Submitted for the record by The Honorable Ben Ray Luja ́n: 

• A letter from the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Southwest Region, to the Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs from the Regional 

Director, Southwest Region. Subject: Recommendation for Approval on Proposed Legislation—H.R. 5811, dated April 20, 2011. 

• A letter from the Department of Health & Human Services—Mr. Richie K. 

Grinnell, M.P.H., Assistant Surgeon General, Acting Director—to Governor 

Frank Paiz of Ysleta del Sur Pueblo, dated May 11, 2011. 

• A letter from the All Indian Pueblo Council, Office of the Chairman, to Congressman Ben Ray Luja ́n from Chandler Sanchez, Chairman, dated June 21, 

2011. 

Submitted for the record by The Honorable Frank Paiz, Governor of Ysleta 

del Sur Pueblo 

• A letter from the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Southwest Region, to the Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs, from the Regional Director, Southwest Region. Subject: Recommendation for Approval on 

Proposed Legislation—H.R. 5811, dated April 20, 2011. 

• A letter from the Department of Health & Human Services—Mr. Richie K. 

Grinnell, M.P.H., Assistant Surgeon General, Acting Director, to Governor 

Frank Paiz of Ysleta del Sur Pueblo, dated May 11, 2011. 

Submitted for the record by The Honorable Dennis Rehberg: 

• A letter from the State of Montana, Board of Land Commissioners regarding 

‘‘Revised Draft of Proposed ‘Montana Mineral Conveyance Act’’’ to Senator 

Baucus, Senator Tester, and Representative Rehberg, dated March 21, 2011. 

• Document from the Montana-Wyoming Tribal Leaders Council, titled ‘‘A Resolution to urge Montana Congressional Delegation to pursue Enactment of 

S. 647 and H.R. 1158 as promptly as possible.’’ 

Submitted for the record by The Honorable Silvestre Reyes: 

• A letter from the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs 

Southwest Region, to the Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs from the Regional 

Director, Southwest Region. Subject: Recommendation for Approval on Proposed Legislation—H.R. 5811, dated April 20, 2011. 

• A letter from the Department of Health & Human Services—Mr. Richie K. 

Grinnell, M.P.H., Assistant Surgeon General, Acting Director, to Governor 

Frank Paiz of Ysleta del Sur Pueblo, dated May 11, 2011. 

Æ