019–010

Calendar No. 124

108TH CONGRESS REPORT " SENATE ! 1st Session 108–60

PUEBLO OF SANTA CLARA AND PUEBLO OF SAN 

ILDEFONSO LAND TRUST

JUNE 9, 2003.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. DOMENICI, from the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 246] 

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, to which was 

referred the bill (S. 246) to provide that certain Bureau of Land 

Management land shall be held in trust for the Pueblo of Santa 

Clara and the Pueblo of San Ildefonso in the State of New Mexico, 

having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with amendments and recommends that the bill, as amended, do pass. 

The amendments are as follows:

1. On page 3, line 8, strike ‘‘New Mexico.’’ and insert ‘‘New Mexico, as part of the Santa Clara Reservation.’’. 

2. On page 4, line 18, strike ‘‘New Mexico.’’ and insert ‘‘New Mexico, as part of the San Ildefonso Reservation.’’. 

3. On page 6, strike line 19 and all that follows through page 9, 

line 12 and insert the following:

‘‘(a) APPLICABLE LAW.—The trust land shall be administered in accordance with laws generally applicable to property held in trust by the United States for Indian tribes. 

‘‘(b) PUEBLO LANDS ACT.—The following shall be subject 

to section 17 of the Act of June 7, 1924 (25 U.S.C. 331 

note; commonly known as the ‘‘Pueblo Lands Act’’): 

‘‘(1) The trust land. 

‘‘(2) Any land owned as of the date of enactment of 

this Act or acquired after the date of enactment of this 

Act by the Pueblo of Santa Clara in the Santa Clara 

Pueblo Grant. 

‘‘(3) Any land owned as of the date of enactment of 

this Act or acquired after the date of enactment of this 

2

Act by the Pueblo of San Ildefonso in the San 

Ildefonso Pueblo Grant. 

‘‘(c) USE OF TRUST LAND.—Subject to criteria developed 

by the Pueblos in concert with the Secretary, the trust 

land may be used only for traditional and customary uses 

or stewardship conservation for the benefit of the Pueblo 

for which the trust land is held in trust. Beginning on the 

date of enactment of this Act, the trust land shall not be 

used for any new commercial developments. 

‘‘SEC. 6. EFFECT. 

‘‘Nothing in this Act—

‘‘(1) affects any valid right-of-way, lease, permit, 

mining claim, grazing permit, water right, or other 

right or interest of any person or entity (other than 

the United States) in or to the trust land that is in existence before the date of enactment of this Act; 

‘‘(2) enlarges, impairs, or otherwise affects a right or 

claim of the Pueblos to any land or interest in land 

based on Aboriginal or Indian title that is in existence 

before the date of enactment of this Act; 

‘‘(3) constitutes an express or implied reservation of 

water or water right for any purpose with respect to 

the trust land; or 

‘‘(4) affects any water right of the Pueblos in existence before the date of enactment of this Act.’’.

PURPOSE

The purpose of S. 246 is to place 4,484 acres of public lands in 

New Mexico, including mineral rights, in trust for the Pueblos of 

Santa Clara and San Ildefonso. Of this amount, 2,484 acres will be 

added to the Santa Clara Reservation and 2,000 acres will be 

added to the San Ildefonso Reservation. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED

In 1988, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) declared 4,484 

acres of land in northern New Mexico as ‘‘disposal property.’’ These 

lands are important ancestral homelands to the Pueblos of San 

Ildefonso and Santa Clara and the Pueblos have continued to assert claims to them over the years. San Ildefonso is negotiating a 

settlement of its Indian Claims Commission case—the last such 

case—and this transfer, while not directly connected to the settlement, will help facilitate a final resolution of the case. 

The public land being transferred is almost entirely bordered by 

the land of the two Pueblos and land administered by the U.S. Forest Service, and access by the general public is limited. Due to the 

location of the land and the difficulty of managing it, the BLM declared the area as ‘‘disposal property.’’ On February 15, 2002, the 

BLM published a notice in the Federal Register of the agency’s intent to withdraw the minerals on the land in aid of legislation for 

the benefit of the two Pueblos. 

At a hearing of the Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests 

on February 27, 2003, the Department of the Interior testified generally in support of the legislation but expressed concerns about a 

claim that the Pueblo of San Ildefonso had on the Bureau of Land 

3

Management related to Claim Docket No. 354. On May 8, 2003 the 

Department provided a response to a written question for clarification by Senator Craig stating, ‘‘Upon further review and a closer 

examination of the issue, the Department of the Interior has determined that no modification of bill language is needed. The Department supports S. 246 as introduced. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 246 was introduced by Senators Domenici and Bingaman on 

January 29, 2003. A similar measure, H.R. 507, was introduced in 

the House of Representatives on the same day. The Subcommittee 

on Public Lands and Forests held a hearing on S. 246 on February 

27, 2003. At its business meeting on May 21, 2003, the Committee 

on Energy and Natural Resources ordered S. 246, as amended, favorably reported. Senators Domenici and Bingaman sponsored a 

similar measure, S. 2893, during the 107th Congress. That bill was 

favorably reported by the Committee on October 4, 2002 and 

passed by the Senate as part of an amendment to S. 198 on November 19, 2002. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, in open business session on May 21, 2003, by a voice vote of a quorum present, 

recommends that the Senate pass S. 246, if amended as described 

herein. 

COMMITTEE AMENDMENTS

During the consideration of S. 246, the Committee adopted three 

amendments to clarify language. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1 defines terms used in the Act. 

Section 2(a) places approximately 2,484 acres of public land in 

Rio Arriba County, New Mexico in trust for the Pueblo of Santa 

Clara, New Mexico. Subsection (b) describes that land. 

Section 3(a) places approximately 2,000 acres of public land in 

Rio Arriba and Santa Fe Counties, New Mexico in trust for the 

Pueblo of San Ildefonso, New Mexico. Subsection (b) describes that 

land. 

Section 4 directs the Bureau of Land Management, Office of Cadastral Survey, to complete a survey to establish legal descriptions 

of the trust lands. 

Section 5 provides self explanatory guidelines for administration 

of the trust land. 

Section 6 provides a series of self explanatory disclaimers. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following estimate of costs of this measure has been provided 

by the Congressional Budget Office:

4

S. 246—A bill to provide that certain Bureau of Land Management 

land shall be held in trust for the Pueblo of Santa Clara and 

the Pueblo of San Ildefonso in the state of New Mexico 

CBO estimates that enacting S. 246 would not significantly affect 

the federal budget. The bill could affect direct spending, but we estimate that any such impact would be negligible. S. 246 contains 

no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act and would impose no costs on 

state, local, or tribal governments. 

S. 246 would direct the Secretary of the Interior to take 4,484 

acres of federal lands and interests into trust on behalf of two Indian tribes in New Mexico. The bill would require the Secretary to 

survey a portion of those lands to establish new boundaries of the 

tribes’ reservations. Based on information from the Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM), we estimate that federal spending to complete 

that survey and transfer the lands into trust would not exceed 

$500,000, assuming the availability of appropriated funds. 

Taking lands into trust for Indian tribes could result in forgone 

offsetting receipts (a credit against direct spending) if, under current law, the lands would generate income from programs to develop natural resources. According to BLM, however, the affected 

lands currently generate no significant receipts and are not expected to do so over the next 10 years. Further, the bill specifies 

that valid existing rights would not be affected by the proposed 

transfer of lands; hence, CBO estimates that any forgone offsetting 

receipts under S. 246 would be negligible. 

On May 12, 2003, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for S. 523, 

the Native American Technical Corrections Act of 2003, as ordered 

reported by the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs on April 10, 

2003. S. 523 contains a provision that is similar to S. 246, and our 

cost estimates of these provisions are the same. 

The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Jenny Lin and 

Megan Carroll. This estimate was approved by Peter H. Fontaine, 

Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

REGULATORY IMPACT EVALUATION

In compliance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee makes the following evaluation 

of the regulatory impact which would be incurred in carrying out 

S. 246. The bill is not a regulatory measure in the sense of imposing Government-established standards or significant economic responsibilities on private individuals and businesses. 

No personal information would be collected in administering the 

program. Therefore, there would be no impact on personal privacy. 

Little, if any, additional paperwork would result from the enactment of S. 246, as ordered reported. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

On, February 25, 2003, the Committee on Energy and Natural 

Resources requested legislative reports from the Department of the 

Interior and the Office of Management and Budget setting forth 

Executive agency recommendations on S. 246. These reports had 

not been received at the time the report on S. 246 was filed. When 

the reports become available, the Chairman will request that they 

5

be printed in the Congressional Record for the advice of the Senate. 

The testimony provided by the Bureau of Land Management at the 

Subcommittee hearing follows together with a subsequent clarification of the Administration’s position provided on May 8, 2003:

STATEMENT OF JIM HUGHES, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, BUREAU

OF LAND MANAGEMENT

Mr. Chairman, and members of the Subcommittee, 

thank you for the opportunity to appear here today to discuss S. 246, a bill to provide that certain Bureau of Land 

Management land be held in trust for the Pueblo of Santa 

Clara and the Pueblo of San Ildefonso in the State of New 

Mexico. The Department generally supports S. 246, but 

would like to work with the Subcommittee to make some 

modifications. 

The Department of the Interior generally support S. 246, 

but believes the Committee should consider modifications 

to the bill. The BLM has identified the approximately 

4,480 acres described in the legislation as available for disposal. The BLM agrees that the adjacent Pueblos of Santa 

Clara and San Ildefonso would be appropriate holders of 

the land. 

The two Pueblos have a long-standing interest in acquiring this parcel. The parcel is bordered on the north by the 

Santa Clara Pueblo, on the south by the San Ildefonso 

Pueblo, and on the west by National Forest lands claimed 

as aboriginal holdings by the two tribes. In 1988, the 

BLM’s Taos Resource Management Plan identified the parcel as difficult and uneconomical to manage and determined it suitable for disposal. Currently there are no 

known resource permits, leases, patents or claims affecting 

these lands. 

S. 246 would divide the parcel by conveying approximately 2,480 acres of BLM land to the Pueblo of Santa 

Clara and about 2,000 acres to the Pueblo of San Ildefonso. 

Again, the BLM believes the Pueblos would be appropriate 

owners of the land, and would support placing them in 

trust to be used for traditional and customary uses, or to 

be used for stewardship conservation for the benefit of the 

Pueblos. The Department is concerned however, while this 

legislation would convey land that is currently or has recently been the subject of a land claim, the bill does not 

settle any future claims for land managed by the BLM. 

The bill should be modified to include a provision for the 

Pueblo of San Ildefonso to relinquish any claim under 

Docket No. 354 in the United States Court of Federal 

Claims and a separate provision to waive any future 

claims by the Pueblo of Santa Clara with regard to these 

lands. This would provide finality to long standing land 

claims. 

The Chairman, the Department looks forward to working with the Committee on these bills. Thank you for the 

opportunity to testify before you today. I would be pleased 

to answer any questions that you or the other members 

may have.

6

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY, Washington, DC, May 8, 2003. 

Hon. PETE V. DOMENICI, 

Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Enclosed are responses to questions submitted following the February 27, 2003, hearing on S. 203, ‘‘To 

open certain withdrawn land in Big Horn County, Wyoming, to 

locatable mineral development for bentonite mining,’’ and S. 246, 

‘‘To provide that certain Bureau of Land Management land shall be 

held in trust for the Pueblo of Santa Clara and the Pueblo of San 

Ildefonso in the State of New Mexico,’’ prepared by the Bureau of 

Land Management. 

Thank you for the opportunity to provide this material to the 

Committee. 

Sincerely, 

RICHARD CARDINALE

(For Jane M. Lyder, Legislative Counsel). 

Enclosure. 

QUESTION FROM SENATOR CRAIG

S. 246

Question. In your written testimony you seemed to imply you 

were concerned about any claim that the Pueblo of San Ildefonso 

had on BLM related to Docket No. 354. But during questioning, 

you seemed to imply that your concern was only related to that 

portion of Claim Docket No. 354 that is within the 4,480 acres included in S. 246, could you clarify your concern? 

Answer. Upon further review and a closer examination of the 

issue, the Department of the Interior has determined that no modification of bill language is needed. The Department supports S. 246 

as introduced. 

CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee notes that no changes in existing law are made by the bill S. 246, as ordered reported.

Æ