UPDATED IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

November 8, 2013

T R I B A L N A T I O N S

L A N D B u y - B a c k P r o g r a m f o r
LETTER FROM SECRETARY JEWELL

The Land Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations is our 

collaborative effort with Indian country, both tribes and 

individuals, to realize the historic opportunity afforded by the 

Cobell Settlement – $1.9 billion Trust Land Consolidation Fund 

to use to compensate individuals who willingly choose to 

transfer fractional land interests to tribal nations for fair market 

value. With the benefit of additional tribal input and 

involvement, we are updating the Initial Implementation Plan 

that the U.S. Department of the Interior published last 

December for the Buy-Back Program.

The updated plan expands the implementation strategy for the Buy-Back Program by soliciting cooperative 

agreement applications from tribes that have jurisdiction over nearly 90 percent of all purchasable 

fractionated interests.

Fractionation of land ownership is a prevalent problem on Indian reservations, locking up resources over 

many years. Fractionation is depicted in maps of Indian country that resemble a complicated jigsaw puzzle. 

It spurs the maintenance of elaborate records for tiny slivers of thousands of interests in a particular piece of 

land and affects more than 150 reservations across Indian country where tracts of land often have hundreds, 

sometimes thousands, of owners. 

An additional related problem is that land goes out of trust each year when fractional interests are passed on 

to non-Indian heirs. Fortunately, the Buy-Back Program and tribes across the country will partner to help 

communities consolidate the lands, stop the loss of trust lands by transferring fractional interests to the tribe, 

and prevent further fractionation.

Fractioned properties go unutilized – hampering efforts to alleviate poverty and unemployment. Nearly 

100 years later, we continue to work to remedy the harms inflicted on tribal communities by the repudiated 

policy of allotment. The Buy-Back Program is one tool that can help restore tribal lands to tribal ownership.

Since establishing the Buy-Back Program in December 2012, the Department has worked actively with tribes 

and incorporated their valuable feedback into Program processes and policies. We have heard from tribal 

leaders that we must implement the Program fairly and equitably, moving quickly so that we may reach as 

much of Indian country as possible during the Program’s 10-year period. We also understand that we must 

minimize implementation costs to maximize the amount of land consolidated. The Program continues to 

review and update our strategy to expand tribal engagement.

The Program embodies the priorities set forth by President Obama’s national policy initiative to build 

effective partnerships with American Indian communities and work more efficiently to find solutions to the 

challenges they face. Through our ongoing collaboration with tribal governments, we will facilitate 

improvements to advance vital economic and social priorities and restore tribal homelands.

The Department and Indian country have an exceptional opportunity to work together in addressing a very 

serious problem. Our positive and productive working relationships with tribes and our commitment to land 

owner outreach will continue to be major driving forces of the Program.
CONTENTS

SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1

INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................................ 6

LAND BUY-BACK PROGRAM FOR TRIBAL NATIONS................................................................................... 9

Key Parameters............................................................................................................................................................... 9

Operational Concepts..................................................................................................................................................12

Primary Processes.........................................................................................................................................................19

Organizational Structure .............................................................................................................................................27

Measuring Program Performance and Progress......................................................................................................30

NEXT STEPS...................................................................................................................................................................31

APPENDIX A – SUMMARY OF TRIBAL CONSULTATIONS ......................................................................A-1

APPENDIX B – FRACTIONATION STATISTICS BY RESERVATION.....................................................B-1
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 1 of 32

SUMMARY

The Cobell Settlement Agreement (Settlement) provides for a $1.9 billion Trust Land Consolidation Fund 

(Fund) to be expended over a ten-year period.

1

 The Settlement makes the Fund available to the U.S. 

Department of the Interior (Department) to acquire fractional interests in trust or restricted land from 

individuals who are willing to sell their interests for fair market value (as defined in the Indian Land 

Consolidation Act [ILCA]).

In 2012, the Secretary established the Land Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations (Buy-Back Program or 

Program) to implement the land consolidation aspects of the Settlement. All lands sold through the BuyBack Program will immediately be held in trust for the recognized tribe with jurisdiction over the land. In 

addition, the Department will contribute up to $60 million to the Education Scholarship Fund for American 

Indians and Alaska Natives, allowing future generations to benefit from the Program.

There are approximately 150 reservations with 2.9 million purchasable fractional interests owned by more 

than 243,000 individuals (the whereabouts of approximately 13 percent of these individuals are currently 

unknown). Although the American Indian Probate Reform Act of 2004 appears to be slowing the growth of 

fractionation, the number of fractional interests remains high and is still increasing. The number of fractional 

interests grew by about 15.7 percent from 2007 to 2013. The overall goal of the Buy-Back Program is to 

reduce the number of fractional interests through voluntary land sales and to place purchased land into trust

for tribes. These transfers will consolidate trust land bases for conservation, stewardship, or other uses 

deemed beneficial by sovereign tribal nations.

This Updated Implementation Plan (Plan), which is based on continued planning and tribal consultation thus 

far, has eight purposes:

 Outline goals and priorities;

 Summarize the key parameters and operational concepts that apply to the Buy-Back 

Program;

 Facilitate tribal participation in the Buy-Back Program;

 Describe the primary land consolidation processes – outreach, land research, valuation, and 

acquisition – as well the organizational structure of the Program;

 

1. The Settlement was confirmed by the Claims Resolution Act of 2010 and approved with finality on 

November 24, 2012, after appeals were exhausted through the U.S. Supreme Court. The ten-year period 

occurs from November 24, 2012 (the date of Final Approval of the Settlement), to November 24, 2022.
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 2 of 32

 Identify Program performance metrics that will be used to ensure timely achievement of 

Program goals and priorities;

 Lay out next steps for continued Program planning and implementation that will allow for 

improvement of the Buy-Back Program;

 Address comments received on the Initial Implementation Plan, dated December 18, 2012,

and during the public comment period ending March 2013 – See Appendix A; and

 Provide context for planning efforts, respond to tribal requests for more complete 

information, and provide additional and updated data about fractionation – See Appendix B.

This is the second iteration of the Program’s Implementation Plan, which is intended to be flexible to 

accommodate evolving developments and subsequent updates. As we implement the Buy-Back Program, the 

Department expects to incorporate lessons learned, best practices, and tribal feedback to enhance the overall 

effectiveness of the Program’s implementation strategy.

The following sections briefly summarize the Plan.

Goals and Priorities. The Department has identified the following primary goals and priorities for the BuyBack Program:

 Reduce the number of fractional interests in trust or restricted lands, using reasonable efforts 

to prioritize the consolidation of the most highly fractionated tracts of land as required by 

the Settlement. The Program will structure acquisitions to maximize the number of tracts in 

which the tribe gains a controlling ownership interest to unlock land for beneficial use or 

conservation by tribal nations, taking tribal priorities into account.

 Manage administrative expenses in the most cost-efficient manner possible, in a way that 

facilitates effective long-term trust management and systems integration.

 Maximize tribal participation in the Program. The Buy-Back Program is structured in a 

manner that provides the flexibility to allow as much opportunity for tribal participation and 

assistance as practical at scheduled locations.

 Establish and maintain clear communications throughout its operation. The Buy-Back 

Program will actively consult with tribes to identify and accommodate tribal acquisition 

priorities as much as possible. The Buy-Back Program will report progress and 

communicate with Indian country throughout the life of the Buy-Back Program and provide 

clear, concise information; options; and guidance to individual Indian landowners about their 

fractional land holdings and the opportunity to participate in the Buy-Back Program at their 

discretion.

Key Parameters and Concepts. The Buy-Back Program is designed to achieve the above goals and priorities

within several key parameters that affect the structure and operations of the Program.

 Approximately 90 percent of the purchasable fractional interests are located within 40 of the 

150 locations with purchasable fractional interests. Consistent with the Initial 
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 3 of 32

Implementation Plan, the Department intends to focus most of its initial efforts among 

these highly fractionated locations.

 The Settlement limits the time and administrative funding available to the Department to 

implement the Program. As a result, the Program can actively operate at each location for a 

limited period of time. 

 The Settlement also limits the funds available to purchase fractional interests. Since this 

amount may not be sufficient to purchase all fractional interests across Indian country, 

flexible purchase ceilings have been developed to achieve a broad use of the Fund and 

ensure that it is not expended in only a limited number of locations.

 Tribal leaders and members have requested that as many tribes as possible be involved in the 

Program. As a result, the Program will include some less fractionated locations in early 

implementation efforts in addition to the locations that are among the most highly 

fractionated. The Department will seek to enter into cooperative agreements with as many 

tribes as possible.

 It is unclear how many owners of fractional interests will be willing to sell their land through 

the Buy-Back Program. The Program has placed an emphasis on direct outreach to these 

landowners and will work directly with the tribes to promote participation on their 

reservations.

Tribal Involvement. The Program continues to work closely with tribes to achieve tribal land consolidation 

goals efficiently and effectively. It is critical that the Buy-Back Program and tribal leaders work together to 

ensure that landowners are made aware of the opportunity to sell land interests for the benefit of both the 

landowner and tribal communities. The Department is committed to a transparent process that provides the 

most opportunity for tribal government involvement. In particular, the Department hopes to enter into 

cooperative agreements with interested tribes to take advantage of tribes’ ability to minimize administrative 

costs and to improve the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the Buy-Back Program. Cooperative 

agreements provide a flexible mechanism for tribal involvement in the Buy-Back Program and will define 

each tribe’s role in implementing the Program on its reservation; however, entering into a cooperative 

agreement is not mandatory to participate in the Program. Some tribes do not require financial assistance to 

support, promote, or help implement the Program, in which case a cooperative agreement would be 

unnecessary. The implementation of the Buy-Back Program will best succeed with the active involvement 

and commitment of tribal communities. 

Primary Processes. There are four basic phases of the land consolidation process - outreach, land research, 

valuation, and acquisition – which are defined briefly below.

 Outreach refers to the process of reaching out to landowners in the tribal community to 

communicate the potential opportunity to sell their fractional interests and to address their 

questions and concerns.
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 4 of 32

 Land research includes collecting the data necessary to establish fair market value for the tracts 

containing fractional interests.

 Valuation is the process of appraising fractionated tracts to determine their fair market value.

 Acquisition is the process in which the Program will extend offers to applicable landowners in 

an effort to acquire interests from those willing to sell.

In order to consolidate lands at as many locations as possible, each phase must be implemented efficiently at 

each reservation. The Program estimates that it may take approximately 18 to 24 months to complete the 

four phases at one location. The size of the Fund and the reach of the Buy-Back Program allow the 

Department to gain efficiencies while minimizing administrative costs. High-level involvement within the 

Department improves coordination between various Departmental offices and bureaus involved, and the 

centralized organizational structure ensures accountability. The Buy-Back Program is building on the best 

practices of past land consolidation efforts and, whenever possible, streamlining the land consolidation 

process to purchase fractional interests effectively and efficiently on a large scale, within the parameters of the 

Settlement.

Organizational Structure. The Secretary of the Interior established the Buy-Back Program within the Office 

of the Secretary. It consists of a Program Manager and staff members who provide expertise in various 

support areas (e.g., communications, cooperative agreements, tribal relations). In addition to staff within the 

Office of the Secretary, the Program is working closely with other Departmental offices and bureaus to 

obtain technical expertise in areas such as mapping, mineral evaluations, appraisals, and acquisitions.

Measuring Program Performance. The Program has begun to focus on developing and measuring 

performance metrics related to the goals and priorities outlined in the section above. These metrics cover 

various aspects of Program implementation, and the Program will communicate this information going 

forward.

Next Steps. The Buy-Back Program continues to work with tribes to implement the Program through 

cooperative agreements, while also working in partnership with tribes that choose not to use cooperative 

agreements to participate in the Program. A major next step will be to provide technical assistance on the 

cooperative agreement application process, which will enhance government-to-government collaboration as 

we work toward the mutual goal of implementing the program as efficiently as possible across Indian country. 

While the primary focus of the Program over the next few years will be to reduce fractionation in locations 

that hold the highest amount of purchasable fractional interests, the Department will pursue implementation 

activities with a limited number of tribes at locations that represent the approximately 110 locations with the 

remaining 10 percent of the fractionated land. Additionally, if they have not done so already, tribes are 
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 5 of 32

encouraged to plan for and identify their specific acquisition priorities as soon as possible. The Department

expects to make initial purchase offers in some locations in the coming months.

Tribal Comments. The Department held tribal consultations regarding the Buy-Back Program’s Initial 

Implementation Plan between January 2013 and March 2013.

2

 Those consultations led directly to many of 

the measures incorporated into this Updated Implementation Plan. The Department received comments 

from 41 tribes, tribal organizations, and individuals. This Plan builds upon that feedback. For a summary of 

the comments received and the Departmental responses, see Appendix A. Examples of actions taken by the 

Department in response to the feedback include the following, as further described in this Plan:

 Improved key aspects of the initial implementation strategy. First, this Plan expands the 

cooperative agreement application and planning processes to encourage tribal engagement, 

especially from the locations with approximately 90 percent of the purchasable fractional 

interests, even before initial efforts are completed. Second, consistent with the Initial 

Implementation Plan, the Department will focus most of its efforts on these locations for 

the next several years with a schedule based on the increased opportunity for tribal input and 

an improved set of implementation factors or criteria. Third, the Program will pursue 

opportunities to include less fractionated locations in early implementation efforts, as this 

will accelerate learning opportunities for developing a comprehensive strategy for the 

purchase of fractional interests at as many less fractionated locations as possible. This 

revised strategy will better engage tribes, increase Program efficiency, fairly guide allocation 

of resources for maximum possible impact, and facilitate overall implementation flexibility –

for both the tribes and the Program.

 Clarified Buy-Back Program processes, potential allocation of the purchase portion of the 

Fund among reservations with fractional interests, and the decision to include a base 

payment of $75 for each offer, as well as $7.50 per acre for subsurface ownership interests 

determined to have nominal value.

 Responded to tribes’ requests for additional information about fractionation by detailing

how the Department will share information with tribes, which will assist them in their efforts 

to plan for the implementation of the Program. In particular, the Department will provide 

tribes with mapping data that depicts fractionated tract boundaries and ownership status. 

The Department will also provide owner contact information upon written request. This

information will accelerate valuation efforts and facilitate tribal consultation and the tribes’ 

identification of acquisition priorities.

For future updates and additional information, visit: www.doi.gov/buybackprogram.

 

2. The Department also published a draft plan in January 2012 and held consultations during 2012 on that plan. 

Feedback from the consultations was reflected in the December 2012 plan.
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 6 of 32

6

th Generation

1/243

Original Allottee 160 acres

2

nd Generation

1/3

3

rd Generation

1/9 

4

th Generation

1/27

5

th Generation

1/81

T R I B E

Tribe

Buy-Back Program Acquisitions

INTRODUCTION

Fractionation of Indian land stems primarily from the 

General Allotment (or “Dawes”) Act of 1887, which 

allowed tribal lands to be allotted to individual tribal 

members, often in 80 and 160 acre parcels. The

expectation was that the United States would hold 

the resulting allotments in trust for individual Indian 

owners for no more than 25 years, after which the 

Indian owner would own the land in fee. These 

periods were extended (now indefinitely) by various 

acts of Congress. Moreover, many of the original 

allottees died without wills. As a result, the heirs of 

original allottees of tribal lands received increasingly 

fractionated ownership interests in the allotments 

that have remained in trust. 

Fractionation has grown exponentially over 

successive generations. As a result, many allotted 

tracts now have hundreds or even thousands of 

individual owners. For example, there are over 1,200 

owners on a single tract of land on the Crow Creek 

Reservation in South Dakota. Monies received for use of the land are divided among the owners, such that 

each owner often receives only a nominal amount based on his or her undivided ownership interest. 

Approximately 60 percent of the 243,000 individual owners received $25 or less during fiscal year 2013.

Currently, the Department holds approximately 56 million acres of land in trust. More than 10 million acres 

are held for individual Indians and nearly 46 million acres are held for Indian tribes. More than 200,000 tracts 

are held in trust by the Department. Of those, approximately 93,900 tracts have multiple owners with 

fractional interests that are subject to purchase and consolidation through the Buy-Back Program. Many of 

these tracts are severely fractionated. The table below shows current fractionation data for 10 Bureau of 

Indian Affairs (BIA) Regions as of September 30, 2013.

3

 

3. For additional information about the data in this Plan, see Appendix B. The Eastern and Alaska Regions are not 

represented as the Eastern Region contains no fractionated lands held in trust, and the Buy-Back Program is barred by 

statute from purchasing fractional interests located within the Alaska Region. 25 U.S.C. § 2219.
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 7 of 32

Unless an individual or a tribe owns a controlling 

interest in a fractionated tract, they must seek and 

obtain approval from co-owners for any purpose, 

including leasing or economic development.

4

When tracts have hundreds or thousands of coowners, there is no practical way to obtain the 

required approvals for leases or other uses of such 

lands. As a result, many highly-fractionated tracts 

are unoccupied and unavailable for any beneficial 

purpose by tribal nations. It is estimated that 

more than half of the 93,909 fractionated tracts 

containing purchasable interests generated no 

income during 2006-2011.

Today, the loss of tribal lands through allotment, combined with the mixed “checkerboard” ownership 

patterns within reservation boundaries, creates major challenges for tribal sovereignty and self-determination, 

for example:

 Land access issues can preclude access to sacred and cultural sites, making it harder for future 

generations to remain rooted in Native culture.

 The checkerboard ownership pattern also creates jurisdictional challenges and ties up reservation 

land, making it hard to pursue much needed economic development.

 Income received from the land is divided so much that individual owners receive pennies, and the 

money often goes off the reservation instead of to the Indian communities that need it most.

All interests purchased by the Buy-Back Program will immediately be held in trust for the tribe with 

jurisdiction, increasing the tribe’s ability to use the land for purposes it deems appropriate for the community 

as a whole.

Recognizing that the Settlement provides a unique opportunity to have a substantial impact on fractionation 

in Indian country, the Department has worked to learn from past efforts to reduce fractionated ownership of 

land. Previous land consolidation efforts were underfunded and focused on purchasing only the smallest of 

fractional interests in a limited number of tracts. The Buy-Back Program is much more expansive. It is

focusing on a large number of tracts and owners at once, without requiring an application from owners,

 

4. For applicable approval requirements, see 25 U.S.C. § 2218. 

BIA 

Region

Fractionated 

Tracts

Fractional 

Interests

Fractional 

Acres

Great Plains 29,021 1,024,350 4,207,826

Rocky 

Mountain

20,656 696,562 3,397,367

Western 9,485 324,641 300,834

Northwest 13,135 271,268 1,015,215

Navajo 4,148 252,640 656,480

Southern 

Plains

7,301 195,397 566,698

Midwest 2,453 131,595 136,393

Eastern 

Oklahoma 5,792 43,575 356,025

Pacific 1,487 30,384 26,195

Southwest 431 11,185 54,122

Total 93,909 2,981,597 10,717,155
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 8 of 32

which allows for efficient and effective purchases that will reduce fractionation in the locations where it is 

most prevalent.

The Department has also identified best practices developed by past land consolidation efforts, incorporated 

them into its planning as appropriate, and continues to consider them as it proceeds with implementation and 

overall management of the new Buy-Back Program.

This Plan provides a basis for continued implementation. The Department looks forward to continuing a 

collaborative implementation of the Buy-Back Program with active tribal involvement and will continue to 

seek additional input from tribes and individuals as we work together to reduce fractionation. 

Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation; Jeanine Gordon and Chelsea Dick, tribal members.
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 9 of 32

LAND BUY-BACK PROGRAM FOR TRIBAL NATIONS

Key Parameters

The Settlement guides the design and implementation of the Buy-Back Program. It establishes a $1.9 billion 

Trust Land Consolidation Fund that will be available to the Secretary for the purchase of fractional interests 

in trust or restricted fee lands during a period of no more than 10 years, starting on November 24, 2012. The 

Settlement limits the use of the Fund to the following purposes:

(1) acquiring fractional interests in trust or restricted lands; (2) implementing the Land 

Consolidation Program; and (3) paying the costs related to the work of the Secretarial 

Commission on Trust Reform, including costs of consultants to the Commission and audits 

recommended by the Commission. An amount of up to a total of not more than fifteen 

percent (15 percent) of the Trust Land Consolidation Fund shall be used for purposes (2) 

and (3) above.

Additionally, the Buy-Back Program will contribute up to $60 million of the $1.9 billon to the Indian 

Education Scholarship Fund, which will provide financial assistance to American Indians and Alaska Natives 

attending either post-secondary vocational schools or institutions of higher education. The fund will be 

administered by the American Indian College Fund in Denver, with 20 percent allotted to the American 

Indian Graduate Center in Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Thus, the Trust Land Consolidation Fund has various components, summarized as follows:

Acquiring Fractional Interests (minimum available for purchase payments) $1,555,000,000

Implementation/Administrative Costs (capped at 15 percent) $285,000,000

Education Fund (maximum available, depending on interests sold) $60,000,000

 Total $1,900,000,000

Several overarching parameters guide the design and implementation of the Buy-Back Program. Five such 

parameters are highlighted below.

First, not all reservations across Indian country contain fractional interests. The Department identified more 

than 2.9 million fractional interests across approximately 150 locations that are purchasable by the Buy-Back 

Program. These fractional interests are concentrated within a few regions within Indian country. Nearly 

90 percent of these purchasable fractional interests are located within 40 of the 150 locations (even so, 

individuals who own fractional interests can be living on other reservations and still benefit from the BuyBack Program). To ensure that we implement the Buy-Back Program at as many locations as possible, 
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 10 of 32

including less fractionated locations, purchase ceilings will be used to protect against premature exhaustion of 

funds.

Second, as indicated above, the Settlement limits the amount of money that the Department may use for 

costs associated with the various phases of implementing the Program (i.e., outreach, land research, 

appraisals, and acquisitions). By law, no more than 15 percent of the Fund ($285,000,000) may be used for 

administrative expenses in order to maximize the amount available for purchasing fractional interests. This 

has important implications for payment of any costs other than purchases. Furthermore, the Settlement 

requires that that Fund be expended by November 24, 2022; therefore, the Department must achieve costefficiency and act expeditiously when administering the Fund (e.g., focus on acquisitions that can be 

completed in a timely manner). Given these terms, the Department is working to enter into cooperative 

agreements with as many tribes as possible. These agreements will provide funding to tribes, from the

administrative portion of the Fund, in order to support their active participation in implementation activities 

at their reservations. The Department expects that implementing the Program using cooperatives agreements

where possible, or less formal arrangements, will minimize administrative costs and improve overall 

effectiveness and efficiency.

Third, despite the large size of the Fund, the Fund may not have sufficient capital to purchase all fractional 

interests across Indian country. It is likely that the value of the land corresponding to the 2.9 million 

purchasable fractional interests will exceed $1.55 billion. Accordingly, the Department will focus on those 

acquisitions that best reduce fractionation, address the effect of allotment, promote tribal sovereignty, and 

facilitate economic development. It also is imperative that the Fund be used thoughtfully and fairly, on cost 

effective acquisitions, to have maximum impact. The Department will communicate carefully with affected 

tribal governments to determine which acquisitions should be prioritized to meet these goals.

Fourth, a consistent theme expressed through tribal consultation and public comment is a desire for land 

consolidation purchases to benefit as many reservations as possible. Of course, increasing the number of 

reservations, tracts, individuals, etc., encompassed by the Buy-Back Program increases the administrative 

costs. Moreover, given that 40 of the 150 fractionated reservations contain approximately 90 percent of the 

total fractional interests, it is possible that, unless otherwise directed, the Fund could be fully expended by 

purchasing interests at only a small number of those highly-fractionated reservations (assuming that 

numerous individuals decide to sell their interests).
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 11 of 32

Fifth, it is not clear how many of the approximately 243,000 individual owners5 will sell their fractional 

interests. Except for the specific provisions contained in the Settlement for purchasing interests from 

persons whose whereabouts are unknown,6 participation in the Buy-Back Program is strictly voluntary. Thus, 

the success of the Buy-Back Program depends on the number of individual owners who decide to sell their 

interests. The active participation of tribal leaders in promoting the Program on their reservations is key to 

encouraging landowners to become involved in the Program. In addition, the Buy-Back Program will provide 

landowners with a base payment of $75 per offer, regardless of the value of the land, based on estimates of

the time and effort required for individual landowners to proceed through the acquisition process and 

facilitate sales. The decision to provide this base payment was a direct result of government-to-government 

consultations between the Department and Indian country. The Program also will make contributions to the 

Indian Education Scholarship Fund with each sale.

Given that the Fund is a finite, time-limited resource the Department is pursuing a balanced approach that 

features flexibility and careful purchase planning measures. The Buy-Back Program must be implemented 

according to prioritized criteria that effectively utilize the purchasing power of the Fund, while obeying the 

administrative cost limit. Accordingly, the Department proposes the following concepts to guide the BuyBack Program, which are detailed below:

 Use flexible purchase ceilings for each reservation where the Buy-Back Program is active to

maximize the number of reservations that could participate in the Buy-Back Program and 

prevent expenditure of the entire Fund in just a few locations.

 Focus most implementation efforts for the next several years on the reservations with a 

significant portion (about 90 percent) of the fractional interests, while retaining the flexibility 

to engage and collaborate with other reservations.

 Utilize cooperative agreements to the extent possible or necessary to allow tribes to carry out 

Buy-Back Program processes within their reservations to maximize effectiveness of the BuyBack Program and avoid unnecessary duplication or reinvention of efforts.

 

5. The whereabouts of approximately 32,500 (13%) of these individuals is currently unknown. In addition, there are 

currently approximately 27,000 deceased individuals with estates that have one or more fractional interests in the 150 

reservations.

6. The Settlement provides for an outreach effort to locate individual owners whose whereabouts are unknown. If 

those owners are not located after the Department undertakes the outreach effort and the passage of 5 years, the owners 

shall be deemed to have consented to the conveyance of fractional interests, or to have accepted an offer made, at fair 

market value.
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 12 of 32

Operational Concepts

Purchase Ceilings. To maximize the number of reservations participating in the Buy-Back Program, the 

Department will use purchase ceilings at each reservation where the Buy-Back Program is active. In 

particular, the Department will apply a formula that considers three factors relevant to fractionation: The 

total number of purchasable fractional interests within a reservation, the number of fractionated tracts within 

a reservation, and the number of acres related to those fractional interests. This formula establishes an initial 

maximum amount of the Fund that could be used to purchase fractional interests within any one reservation.

Table 1 below illustrates application of the formula by listing the fractionated reservations that comprise a 

great majority of the resulting initial purchase ceilings, using data as of September 30, 2013. The purchase 

ceilings represent possible amounts payable to owners who decide to sell fractional interests. The ceilings do 

not include implementation or administrative costs, nor do they necessarily form a basis for determination 

thereof.

The purchase ceiling amounts are not fixed allocations, 

nor are they permanently dedicated for use at any one 

reservation. Rather, the amounts are initial planning tools 

that provide guidance on the total potential land 

acquisition amount within a reservation to ensure that 

funds are available to purchase interests at other 

locations.

If acquisitions at one location reach that reservation’s 

purchase ceiling, the Buy-Back Program would stop

acquiring fractional interests within that reservation 

unless more funding becomes available. For those 

reservations where voluntary sales fail to reach that 

location’s purchase ceiling, the remaining funds will be 

used to purchase interests at a different location. It is 

important to note that any individual landowner who 

receives an offer and who responds within the specified 

timeframe of 45 calendar days will have the opportunity 

to sell his or her land, regardless of whether the reservation’s purchase ceiling has been reached.

The Program will focus initial implementation efforts on the reservations listed in the following table.

How are the purchase ceilings 

determined?

For each of the three data points (i.e., tracts, 

interests, and acres), the Department will 

calculate the proportion of the total for each 

reservation. The three proportions are then 

averaged to produce the evenly weighted 

proportion. That proportion is then 

multiplied by, e.g., the minimum purchase 

amount of the Trust Land Consolidation Fund 

($1.555 billion) to produce a purchase ceiling 

amount for each reservation.

To illustrate, consider Pine Ridge Reservation 

as an example. The 1,201,414 purchasable 

acres associated with its fractionated tracts are 

11.21 percent of all such acres across Indian 

country. Its 6,028 fractionated tracts with 

purchasable interests are 6.42 percent of all 

such tracts in Indian country, and its 195,862 

purchasable fractional interests are 6.57

percent of all such interests. These 

proportions average out to 8.07 percent, 

which, once multiplied by $1.555 billion, 

would provide an initial purchase ceiling of 

$125,427,372 for the Pine Ridge Reservation.

For relevant definitions, see Appendix B.
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 13 of 32

Table 1 – For Illustrative Purposes – Subject to Change7

Land Area Name

(and code(s))

BIA Region

Number of 

Fractionated 

Tracts

Associated 

Purchasable 

Acres

Number of 

Purchasable 

Fractional 

Interests

Weighted 

Proportion

Estimated

Initial 

Purchase 

Ceiling 

(for paying 

owners)

Pine Ridge (344) Great Plains 6,028 1,201,414 195,862 8.07% $125,427,372

Standing Rock (302) Great Plains 6,304 766,680 227,133 7.16% $111,361,180 

Blackfeet (201) Rocky Mountain 4,831 898,086 191,278 6.65% $103,353,167 

Crow (202, 208) Rocky Mountain 4,850 926,013 180,863 6.62% $102,998,163 

Navajo (722, 723, 724, 790, 

791, 792) Navajo, Southwest 4,370 687,504 259,319 6.59% $102,452,432 

Fort Peck (206) Rocky Mountain 4,521 723,154 114,546 5.13% $79,842,140 

Cheyenne River (340) Great Plains 4,066 736,807 65,655 4.47% $69,491,699 

Rosebud (345) Great Plains 3,118 568,870 92,324 3.91% $60,773,153 

Gila River (614) Western 4,707 84,157 173,867 3.88% $60,276,434 

Fort Berthold (301) Great Plains 3,249 469,629 91,707 3.64% $56,589,204 

Fort Belknap (204) Rocky Mountain 3,024 571,758 57,186 3.49% $54,285,469 

Wind River (280) Rocky Mountain 2,539 173,495 137,200 2.97% $46,256,563 

Fort Hall (180) Northwest 2,596 269,448 51,237 2.33% $36,267,732 

Yakama (124) Northwest 2,208 175,977 54,451 1.94% $30,164,180 

Colville (101) Northwest 2,054 165,783 36,361 1.65% $25,676,304 

Sisseton – Wahpeton

(347) Great Plains 1,320 93,033 53,525 1.36% $21,090,308 

Quinault (117) Northwest 1,422 103,903 36,755 1.24% $19,263,655 

Spirit Lake (303 Great Plains 934 56,341 60,068 1.18% $18,322,626 

Chickasaw (906 Eastern Oklahoma 1,878 110,789 14,535 1.17% $18,250,812 

Winnebago (383) Great Plains 641 35,794 73,753 1.16% $18,090,714 

Cheyenne Arapaho (801) Southern Plains 1,138 97,506 39,983 1.15% $17,947,881 

Salt River (615) Western 1,418 21,749 48,967 1.12% $17,391,229 

Crow Creek (342) Great Plains 909 98,861 43,602 1.12% $17,378,622 

Ute (687) Western 1,059 76,758 43,585 1.10% $17,134,573 

Yankton (346) Great Plains 778 45,249 38,811 0.85% $13,229,709 

Northern Cheyenne (207) Rocky Mountain 891 104,862 15,489 0.82% $12,682,196 

Lower Brule (343) Great Plains 595 76,417 30,387 0.79% $12,262,618 

Umatilla (143) Northwest 1,015 66,945 18,828 0.78% $12,113,252 

Muscogee (Creek) (908) Eastern Oklahoma 1,246 69,216 8,566 0.75% $11,714,118 

Turtle Mountain (304) Great Plains 591 33,312 26,170 0.61% $9,422,680 

Seminole (909) Eastern Oklahoma 959 37,978 8,350 0.55% $8,581,615 

Bad River (430) Midwest 620 29,457 20,847 0.54% $8,470,939 

Minnesota Chippewa -

Fond du Lac Band (405) Midwest 351 21,494 27,961 0.50% $7,837,753 

Nez Perce (182 Northwest 620 44,496 12,295 0.50% $7,711,587 

Ponca (813) Southern Plains 405 20,894 25,205 0.49% $7,627,685 

Washoe (672) Western 409 59,310 14,080 0.49% $7,573,730 

Osage (930) Eastern Oklahoma 610 73,529 2,945 0.48% $7,435,102 

Salish & Kootenai (203) Northwest 696 38,180 9,396 0.47% $7,321,585 

Omaha (380) Great Plains 422 22,062 21,528 0.46% $7,138,768 

Fort Yuma (696) Western 712 6,899 13,102 0.42% $6,541,285 

Subtotal 80,104 9,863,808 2,637,722 88.6% $1,377,750,232

Remaining Land Areas 13,805 853,347 343,875 11.4% $177,249,767

Overall Total 93,909 10,717,155 2,981,597 100% $1,555,000,000

 

7. The Initial Purchase Ceilings shown are only estimates and are subject to change, e.g., because of feedback from 

tribal consultations and corrections to underlying data. Amounts shown are meant to illustrate how purchase ceilings 

will be determined, but do not reflect final amounts.
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 14 of 32

Implementation Strategy. The Department cannot immediately make offers at all locations with fractional 

interests. As a result, the Department has developed an implementation strategy that, in conjunction with the

criteria listed below, will determine how tribal nations will be engaged over the next several years. 

The Program will continue to focus most of its initial implementation efforts on the reservations with 

approximately 90 percent of the purchasable fractional interests, giving some priority to the most fractionated 

locations. Proceeding in this manner ensures that the Buy-Back Program focuses its attention on the 

locations where fractionation is most prevalent, consistent with the Initial Implementation Plan. In addition, 

an early concentration on the most fractionated locations should enable the Department to contribute the full 

$60 million to the Indian Education Scholarship Fund as soon as possible.

However, in order to accelerate planning and tribal engagement, the implementation strategy calls for the 

Program to more actively encourage cooperative agreement applications or letters of interest from tribes,

especially those with jurisdiction over the most fractionated reservations. An open solicitation period for

these more fractionated locations will be held at the beginning of fiscal year 2014, lasting from approximately 

November 15, 2013 to March 14, 2014. Tribes with jurisdiction over the more fractionated reservations will 

be able to submit cooperative agreement applications or expressions of interest thereby signaling readiness to 

participate in the Program. By using this approach, tribes will be helping to determine much of the timing of 

Program implementation. This updated implementation strategy, which is based on feedback from tribes,8

facilitates effective implementation and an informed schedule based on an efficient organization of staff 

resources and tribal readiness or interest.

The Program will continue to utilize various criteria to determine the best sequence of implementation and 

use of the Fund, including the following:

 Severity of fractionation (e.g., as reflected by the three factors used to determine the initial 

purchase ceilings described above);

 Degree of ownership overlap between locations or geographic proximity;

 

8. As part of its planning, the Program had pursued an implementation strategy focused on the engagement of a 

small group of “pilot” tribes early on, providing time for the Program to learn from those pilots and identify best 

practices. However, this approach presented various challenges, such as limiting the Department’s staffing flexibility and 

ability to adjust its resources based on the level of tribal interest and readiness. It also limited engagement of tribes 

during Program ramp-up. Tribal feedback from government-to-government consultations indicated that many tribes 

were interested and potentially ready to become involved in the Program, and tribes did not want initial efforts limited to 

a small group of tribes. Therefore, the Department is adjusting its approach to engage additional locations more 

expeditiously.
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 15 of 32

 Diversity of geographic locations to maximize efficiency, resources, and learning 

opportunities, especially for initial efforts in order to facilitate learning);

 Appraisal complexity;

 Overall interest of the tribe as demonstrated through cooperative agreement application 

process;

 Number of owners who have demonstrated an interest in selling fractional interests; and 

 Cost and time efficiency.

The Program will evaluate cooperative agreement applications as they are received, based on the criteria 

noted above. The Program will conduct land consolidation activities for those tribes with approximately 90 

percent of the fractionated lands that do not express interest or apply for cooperative agreements during the 

open solicitation period. Tribes that do not apply during this period will be eligible to apply for cooperative 

agreements if necessary implementation activities are still outstanding and funding is available.

While this implementation strategy will keep the Program focused on the most highly fractionated locations 

for the next several years, the Buy-Back Program will involve less fractionated locations as well. By including 

some less fractionated locations in early implementation efforts, the Department expects to gain the 

experience and input necessary to tailor this Plan for implementation at less fractionated locations. In 

particular, it expects to gauge the effectiveness of its initial operating processes and procedures, learn valuable 

information about the time and costs required for valuations, and afford time to identify willing sellers. 

The Department has had meaningful interactions with a number of less fractionated locations during fiscal 

year 2013 and is looking to work with tribes at a limited number of these locations in order to make offers in 

the near future. This may include locations that submitted proposals for cooperative agreements or initiated 

in-person meetings with Program leadership.

Although the Buy-Back Program will be active at multiple reservations simultaneously, it will be active at each 

location for only a limited period. This is due to the limitations laid out in the Settlement. As the Buy-Back 

Program completes land consolidation activities at initial locations, it will start operations at successive 

locations. The Department will regularly analyze its ability to conduct operations at additional reservations

throughout implementation.

The scope of the Buy-Back Program makes it by far the largest endeavor ever undertaken by the Department 

to address land consolidation in Indian country. Due to the potential challenges, issues, and opportunities the 

Program may encounter during implementation, the Buy-Back Program must continually gauge the 
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 16 of 32

effectiveness of its initial operating processes and procedure and will continually refine the Buy-Back 

Program as challenges are identified and addressed.

The locations where initial efforts occur will include locations with strong tribal support and varying levels of 

direct tribal involvement. Through these initial efforts, the Department expects to learn valuable information 

about the planned processes, the time required for reservation-wide valuations, the likely number of willing 

sellers, etc. The experience gained at the initial locations will inform the Buy-Back Program as it expands 

further into Indian country.

Remainder of Fund. Using purchase ceilings for the most fractionated reservations will leave approximately 

$164,000,000 to purchase fractional interests at other reservations. Currently, the Department expects that 

the Buy-Back Program will have an increased focus on these less fractionated reservations beginning around 

fiscal year 2017.

The Department may use various criteria or factors to guide use of the remaining purchase funds at additional 

less fractionated locations, including those noted above as well as information gathered from initial efforts. 

Consistent with the Initial Implementation Plan, the number of interested sellers9 will likely be an important 

factor for less fractionated locations to ensure that the expenditure of implementation costs are well founded.

If the response from tribes and individuals is insufficient to exhaust the remaining percentage of the Fund, 

the Department will pursue other options to fully expend the Fund within the ten-year timeframe. The 

Department may, for example, use the remaining amounts to purchase interests in locations that have reached 

their purchase ceiling or acquire interests owned by individuals whose whereabouts are unknown. The 

Department continues to explore whether fair market values can be developed in a time- and cost-efficient 

manner for tracts that may not be amenable to mass appraisal, which would provide greater overall flexibility 

and could allow additional reservations to participate.

In summary, a primary planning challenge has been balancing a broad utilization of the Fund within the

timeframe and administrative cost limitations found in the Settlement. The Buy-Back Program outlined in 

this Plan focuses most of its initial efforts on the most fractionated locations with the highest amount of 

purchasable fractional interests while also reserving funds for those less fractionated locations where, for 

example, the tribe is interested and ready for Program implementation. Overall, this approach will effectively 

and efficiently focus on fractional interests across Indian country while minimizing administrative costs.

 

9. For example, if a tribe, or the individuals themselves, demonstrate that 50% or more of the fractional interests 

within a reservation are owned by interested sellers, the Department would include such reservations in the Buy-Back 

Program, cost permitting.
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 17 of 32

Tribal Involvement - Cooperative Agreements. The Department is committed to partnering with tribes to 

complete Program implementation on their reservations. The Department recognizes that a number of tribes 

have existing land consolidation programs, including some that have outstanding, proven track records. Also, 

tribes currently operate various Departmental programs and functions under the Indian Self-Determination 

and Education Assistance Act (Public Law (P.L.) 93-638) agreements, including some that address relevant 

issues such as realty, appraisals, land title and records, forestry, and probate. Although the Indian Land 

Consolidation Act prohibits tribes from utilizing P.L. 93-638 agreements to operate Buy-Back Program

activities, the Department strongly supports the spirit of self-governance and hopes to utilize cooperative 

agreements with tribes (as well as more informal arrangements) to collaboratively undertake land 

consolidation tasks and gain the benefit of tribal involvement, as done in the past. 

The continued use of cooperative agreements will allow tribes to carry out various aspects of the Buy-Back 

Program. In particular, tribes may be able to perform some of the most important functions of the Buy-Back 

Program based on their interests and capacities, including prioritizing tracts, identifying landowners, and 

conducting outreach efforts. In an effort to accelerate the cooperative agreement process, and in direct 

response to feedback from government-to-government consultations, the Department has hired a 

Cooperative Agreement Specialist.

While there are limits to the number of locations where Program activities can operate fully, tribal 

governments can prepare for the Buy-Back Program by completing tasks such as the following:

 Establish a team and point of contact to plan for land consolidation;

 Work with the Buy-Back Program to exchange GIS data;

 Determine tribal acquisition priorities;

 Submit a formal written request for owner name and address information;

 Identify individual landowners who are interested in selling their fractional interests, educate

them about the Program, and encourage them to update their address information by 

contacting the Trust Beneficiary Call Center at (888) 678-6836;

 Attend general outreach meetings, webinars, or regional events;

 Provide information to the Buy-Back Program about the tribe’s land consolidation programs 

and current capacities, capabilities, readiness, and interest in the Program; and

 Engage with the Buy-Back Program to discuss the tribe’s current resources and capabilities 

in areas such as outreach, mapping, land use characterization, and appraisals.
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 18 of 32

Cooperative agreements to conduct land consolidation activities should follow the reservation-wide model 

that the Department will utilize to maintain consistency and cost-effectiveness of the Buy-Back Program. 

Most cooperative agreements will not include all phases of the Buy-Back Program. For example, the 

acquisition phase will be carried out predominantly by the Buy-Back Program due to the necessarily

centralized processes in Departmental systems of record, like the Trust Asset and Accounting Management 

System (TAAMS). Tribal participation in the acquisition phase will be limited to outreach tasks associated 

with this phase. This type of automation is necessary to stay within the administrative cost limits of the 

Settlement.

It is important to note that cooperative agreements are not mandatory for participation in the 

Program, and tribes may request the Department to implement all phases of the land consolidation 

activities on their reservations. The Buy-Back Program will continue to coordinate closely with tribes 

that choose this approach to maximize tribal involvement in implementation. A tribe that does not 

wish to enter into a cooperative agreement must submit a tribal authorization indicating its interest in 

Program participation. This approach would be particularly appropriate and efficient for tribes that 

would like to participate, but do not require funding to help implement the Program.

Program-Provided Indirect Costs.

10

 As previously noted, the Settlement limits the amount of 

funding that may be used for administrative expenses in order to maximize the amount available for 

purchase of fractional interests. The Department has considered tribal input received to date and has 

explored various options to determine which indirect costs might be charged to implement the BuyBack Program. Neither the Settlement nor ILCA require the payment of indirect costs. While some 

tribes may have previously negotiated indirect cost rates for other financial assistance awards, existing 

policy circulars recognize that agencies may establish different rates to address specific program 

needs or circumstances. Thus, to help ensure that the Program limits its administrative expenditures, 

the Program will provide up to 15 percent for indirect costs. This indirect cost rate will apply to 

both internal partners and tribes. The Department believes that this is a reasonable accommodation 

of the needs of tribes to cover indirect administrative costs while remaining true to the provision of 

the Settlement that administrative costs be sharply limited.

 

10. Indirect costs are costs that cannot be specifically identified with producing a specific product or providing a 

specific service, but that can be shown to bear some relationship to, result from, or be in support of the product or 

service.
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 19 of 32

Primary Processes

The Department’s planning efforts have organized land consolidation processes into four phases: outreach, 

land research, valuation, and acquisition. Initially, when a reservation is scheduled for implementation, the 

Buy-Back Program will conduct outreach with the tribal communities so that individuals are aware of the 

opportunity to sell fractional interests. The outreach phase will also entail consultation with the tribe about 

various planning matters such as tribal priorities and tribal involvement. As outreach is occurring, research 

concerning reservation lands will occur simultaneously, with the goal of maximizing the number of 

fractionated tracts that can be valued within the reservation, including those identified as tribal priorities. 

Once the research has been completed, the Buy-Back Program will value as many fractionated tracts of land 

as possible within a reasonable amount of time using mass appraisal valuation techniques. The Department 

has already completed substantial land research and valuation activities, and tribes should communicate with 

the Program before submitting applications for cooperative agreements to avoid duplication of already

performed. Finally, once fair market value determinations have been made, the Department will mail offer 

packages to individuals with ownership interests in those valued tracts and seek to acquire those interests that 

individuals are willing to sell. The Program’s goal is to start sending offers by the end of the 2013 calendar 

year.

Outreach. The Department will disseminate information about the Buy-Back Program to increase overall 

awareness of the land consolidation aspects of the Settlement. Outreach will include notices along with 

regular communications that the Department provides to individual landowners during reservation events 

and via the Program’s website and in-person events. Outreach will also be vital in contacting those

individuals owning fractional interests who no longer reside on a reservation or near a field office. 

The Program has various resources available to support these outreach efforts. First, the Office of the 

Special Trustee’s (OST) Trust Beneficiary Call Center (Call Center) is the primary contact responsible for 

receiving inquiries from landowners regarding the Program. Landowners can contact the Call Center at (888) 

678-6836. If the Call Center is unable to answer questions, it will escalate issues to the appropriate Fiduciary 

Trust Officers (FTOs). Second, the BIA Acquisition Center coordinates with the FTOs on issue resolution, 

as well as organizes and participates in local outreach events. Third, the Program’s staff includes three Senior 

Advisors for Tribal Relations who will provide high-level outreach support across reservations and directly 

contact tribal governments.11

 

11. The Call Center, located in Albuquerque, New Mexico, is a nationwide toll free call center that provides 

convenient “one-stop” service for beneficiary inquiries. Beneficiaries can easily access information and assistance 

regarding their Individual Indian Money (IIM) account statements, account balances, other account attributes, receipts, 
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 20 of 32

In addition to broad outreach concerning the Buy-Back Program, the Department will conduct more 

extensive communications with tribes once the Program is active at those particular reservations. The 

outreach phase has two primary functions.

Foremost, individuals owning fractional interests within a reservation must be informed that the Buy-Back 

Program will be actively valuing fractionated tracts of land within the reservation and that they may be able to 

sell their fractional interests. It is critical that landowner questions and concerns are addressed promptly so 

that owners are equipped to make informed decisions. This outreach also will explain the timeframes in 

which the Buy-Back Program expects to complete its work for the reservation and how individuals may take 

advantage of the opportunity to sell their fractional interests.

In addition, the Department is meeting with tribes to discuss tribal priorities for acquisition, decide how best 

to conduct tailored outreach on the reservation, and determine the tribe’s interest and capacity to conduct 

Buy-Back Program operations through cooperative agreements. Tribal priorities could be identified in a 

number of ways, such as by specific tract identification; geographic regions within the reservation (i.e., county; 

chapter; district; specific section, township, and range designations; or aliquot parts); tract type (e.g., tracts 

that fall within a certain land use planning area or zone); or ownership status (e.g., tracts in which the tribe 

already has some ownership interest regardless of location); or other factors. An exchange of maps – both 

tribal and Departmental – will often be instrumental in working with tribes to identify their acquisition 

priorities. The Department is preparing mapping data for the reservations, in part because BIA intends to 

include maps in each offer package, and looks forward to sharing such data with tribes.

The Buy-Back Program expects to value as many fractionated tracts as possible, and many tracts identified by 

the tribe as priorities for acquisition will automatically be included. The Department is working with tribes to 

develop methods to maximize the acquisition of tribal priority tracts.

The Department understands that tribes often have efficient methods to conduct outreach with their tribal

members, many who own fractional interests. The Buy-Back Program will mail offer packages to individuals 

owning fractional interests in tracts that have been valued, and many individuals may receive this information

without expressing a prior interest to sell. It is imperative that individual landowners are made aware of BuyBack Program activities and benefits, that their decision to sell is voluntary (except for the specific provisions 

contained in the Settlement for purchasing interests from land holders whose whereabouts are unknown), and 

how to complete the offer package if they want to participate. Informative outreach to individual owners is 

 

disbursements, leases, probate processing, and other trust activities, including reform developments and implementation 

(e.g., leasing, lockbox, oil and gas activity, and debit card) at their convenience by calling the toll free number. The 

current average answering speed is 50 seconds, the abandoned rate is 9%, the average handle time is 6.5 minutes, and the 

rate of first line resolution was 97% in fiscal year 2013.
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 21 of 32

often best performed by tribes. The Department has utilized cooperative agreements in the past for this type 

of outreach and, to the extent possible, will continue to do so for the Buy-Back Program. In addition to 

discussing cooperative agreements, the initial meetings will determine the extent to which tribes will be 

involved in other phases of the Buy-Back Program process.

The Program is developing a contact and tract data file that contains information that will facilitate tribal 

involvement in outreach activities, such as the fractionated tracts on a reservation along with the contact 

information of owners holding a purchasable interest in each tract. The data file allows the user to search by 

various criteria including tract number, tract name, tract location, and owner name to locate a desired tract or 

owner. Once a desired tract is selected, the user will be able to view details about the tract, including all of 

the owners of the tract with purchasable interests and their available contact information. Address 

information has been aggregated from various data sources and systems including the Integrated Records 

Management System (IRMS), the Trust Funds Accounting System (TFAS), and TAAMS. For each owner 

with a purchasable interest, the user will be able to view all of the owner’s available address data as well as all 

of the tracts on the reservation in which the owner holds an interest. Additionally, the application allows 

users to add new contact data for an owner if the information provided is out dated or incorrect.

Land Research. During this phase, the Department will collect the data necessary to establish fair market 

value for the tracts containing fractional interests that might be acquired.12 Implementing the Buy-Back 

Program on the scale established by the Settlement requires information for thousands of tracts to be 

generated from TAAMS and other sources to provide the necessary data for determining fair market value. 

The Settlement provides that the Department “shall offer fair market value in accordance with 25 U.S.C. § 

2214 to owners” of fractional interests in trust or restricted lands.13 Fair market value will determine the 

amount that landowners will be paid for their interests in the tracts sold. This value is established by the

Department’s Office of Appraisal Services (OAS) and is a licensed appraiser’s estimate of what a property 

would sell for in an open and competitive market. The OAS completes appraisals by comparing fractionated 

tracts to similar properties with similar characteristics that are sold in the area, adjusting for the differences 

between the prices to provide a value estimate. To determine fair market value, OAS must compile adequate 

information about the tracts that will be valued.

The land research effort included an identification of the fractionated tracts within reservations that contained

purchasable interests. In particular, using data from TAAMS and other sources, the Department is creating

 

12. The Indian Land Consolidation Act provides that the Secretary may develop a system for establishing fair market 

value, including a system based on geographic units. 25 U.S.C. § 2214.

13. See Cobell Settlement Agreement at ¶ F(3), p. 35 and supra note 8.
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 22 of 32

mapping data to depict fractionated tracts within the reservations. Mapping data will facilitate the valuation 

process by enabling tract acreage categorization (e.g., range, dry crop, irrigated crop, etc.), geographical 

analysis, and comparison to surrounding uses and values.

14

It is anticipated that some tracts may require additional information outside of TAAMS before values can be 

determined. For example, additional information could be required to clarify legal descriptions. Most

information will be gathered during the land research phase; however, some tracts may require additional 

research that cannot be conducted with the rest of the reservation because it would diminish the efficiency 

and cost-effectiveness of the Buy-Back Program. The Department will work with tribes to ensure that tracts 

identified as tribal priorities are included in the valuation request to the greatest extent possible.

Additionally, valuation requests will be automated through TAAMS and the Department’s Office of 

Appraisal Services Information System (OASIS). Due to limited access to TAAMS and other databases, 

tribes may not be able to perform this step as efficiently or in as cost-effective a manner as the Department. 

This situation may preclude many tribes from utilizing cooperative agreements for this phase of the process. 

However, a tribe that can provide the necessary information for a reservation-wide valuation request may

include such capability in its cooperative agreement proposal.

 

14. In addition, mapping data may be utilized to create visual layers that will depict the status and progress of the BuyBack Program and help identify acquisition priorities. 
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 23 of 32

Valuation. After the reservation-wide valuation 

needs are determined and described, the Department

will determine the fair market value of those 

fractionated tracts. The Department anticipates 

using various valuation methodologies, relying most 

heavily on mass appraisal valuation techniques such 

as market studies, cost estimates, and project 

appraisal reports. Site-specific valuations and other 

appropriate methods and techniques may be used as 

warranted and as cost permits. All appraisal methods 

used by the Department will conform to the 

Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal 

Practice (USPAP). To ensure that the valuation 

methods and techniques meet industry standards, the 

Department obtained a third-party review of its 

valuation techniques from The Appraisal 

Foundation. The Appraisal Foundation is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization, authorized by 

Congress, dedicated to the development of appraisal 

standards in the United States and to establishing 

qualifications criteria for appraisers. The Appraisal Foundation’s analysis, the Department’s response to 

specific recommendations, and the plan outlining the Program’s appraisal methodologies, are available on the 

Program’s website.

The Department estimates that the majority of tracts within many of the most highly fractionated

reservations will be amenable to mass appraisal valuation techniques. More complicated tracts may be 

difficult to value simultaneously with the rest of the reservation without diminishing the efficiency and costeffectiveness of the Buy-Back Program. The Department understands that an inability to value certain tracts 

may preclude individuals from selling all of their interests or the acquisition of some tribal priorities. Tribal 

acquisition priorities are vitally important to achieving a foundational goal of the Program, which is to 

strengthen tribal sovereignty and promote consolidated trust land bases for conservation, stewardship, and 

beneficial use by sovereign tribal nations. Although the Department cannot guarantee that it will be able to 

purchase all tribal priorities given its financial and authorized operational constraints (e.g., inability to 

purchase fee lands), it continues to encourage tribes to identify tribal acquisition priorities, and it will actively 

consult with tribes to accommodate those priorities to the fullest extent possible. Again, tribes should 

Tracts, Parcels, and Interests

A tract of land, as referenced throughout this Plan, is the 

trust asset in which an individual and/or tribe has an 

ownership interest. It is a defined area, often the 

boundary of an original allotment, and can include the 

surface estate, mineral estate, or both the surface and 

mineral estate. A tract can be owned by one or more 

individuals and tribes. A tract with multiple owners is 

considered a fractionated tract.

An interest refers to an individual’s ownership in a tract 

of land. If a tract of land is owned by only one 

individual or a tribe, the ownership interest is 100

percent. Fractionated tracts have more than one owner 

– often tens or hundreds of different owners, all with 

varying levels of interests.

A tract of land can be composed of one or more parcels. 

Parcels also have defined areas, but are not necessarily 

adjoining plots of land. In other words, a tract may be 

composed of just one single parcel of land, multiple 

adjacent parcels, and in some instances multiple nonadjacent parcels that are separated by other tracts or 

parcels of land.

While sales will be based on fractional interests, fair 

market values are determined at a parcel level. If a tract 

contains a parcel that cannot be evaluated for whatever 

reason, offers for interests in the whole tract cannot be 

made. 
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 24 of 32

identify tribal priority tracts as soon as possible to allow the Buy-Back Program to assess the resources 

required to determine fair market values for those tracts and plan accordingly. However, there may 

nevertheless be instances where a particular tract cannot be able to be valued in a timely and cost-effective 

manner.

The Department is using mass appraisal valuation techniques as much as possible to comply with the 

administrative cost limitations. Tribes seeking cooperative agreements to determine fair market values must 

demonstrate the ability to perform reservation-wide valuations in a manner that is as efficient and costeffective as those performed by the Department. Tribes that currently perform valuation or appraisal work 

for the Department through a P.L. 93-638 agreement or self-governance compact may be better positioned to 

provide fair market values for the Buy-Back Program through a cooperative agreement. Valuations 

performed by a tribe must be reviewed or verified by the Department. Any acquisitions made by the BuyBack Program based on tribally-provided valuations would count towards the purchase ceiling established for 

that reservation.

The following example illustrates application of the valuation method and supporting decisions. It assumes 

that the owner has a 1/100 (1 percent) fractional interest in three distinct 160 acre tracts, each with a different 

bundle of ownership rights (it is further assumed the subsurface ownership rights associated with two of the 

tracts has been determined to have no economic value). The offer to the owner for his or her interest in all 

three tracts would be $1,239 as follows:

Appraised Values

 

 Tract 1 (Surface and Subsurface) $ 640 (1% owner of $64,000 tract value)

 Tract 2 (Surface only) 500 (1% owner of $50,000 tract value) 

 Tract 3 (Subsurface only) 0

Addition for Tract 1 Subsurface 12 (1% of 160*$7.50)

Addition for Tract 3 Subsurface 12 (1% of 160*$7.50) 

Base Payment 75 (per offer, not interest)

Total $1,239
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 25 of 32

Acquisition. Once fair market value determinations are made, the Buy-Back Program will seek to acquire 

fractional interests in those tracts that were valued. Information will be sent to individual owners as part of 

an offer package to sell their fractional interests. To make the acquisitions process more efficient, dedicated 

BIA resources will use TAAMS to automatically generate offer packages, which will include the following 

documents (available on the Program’s website):

 Cover Letter and Instructions; 

 Deed with Fraud Statement;

 Purchasable Interests Inventory (including a legal description and showing the Indian 

Education Scholarship Fund matching contribution for each of the valued interests the 

individual may elect to sell;

 Map(s) showing the general location of the tracts that include the valued interests; and

 Self-addressed return envelope, postage prepaid, if the individual chooses to return the 

completed Purchasable Interests Inventory and the signed and notarized Deed.

Individuals will then have 45 calendar days to sell some or all of their fractional interests for which an offer

has been made. Individuals will voluntarily decide whether to sell their fractional interests, with the exception 

of individuals whose whereabouts are unknown as of final approval of the Settlement; however, if an 

individual receives an offer and responds within 45 calendar days, he or she will have the opportunity to 

finalize the sale. The fair market value of the interests selected on the Purchasable Interests Inventory, and 

included by reference in the Deed, will be the sale price.

The Buy-Back Program will mail offers to landowners based on tribal acquisition priorities and other criteria. 

It is possible that the value of the interests that landowners seek to sell may exceed the reservation’s available 

purchase ceiling. The Program developed an approach to address this possibility, based on tribal feedback 

and other considerations. This approach is a hybrid of the two approaches outlined in the Initial 

Implementation Plan. The Program may send up to three “waves” of offers to a reservation’s landowners. 

The value of the landowners’ interests included in each wave will comprise a certain percentage of the 

reservation’s total purchase ceiling. Offers included in each wave will be determined by tribal acquisition 

priorities, level of fractionation, and percentage of tribal ownership, among other criteria.

Once the Program receives signed offer packages from the landowners, it will scan and load them into 

TAAMS. If an offer package is approved, TAAMS will automatically update the title and trigger the process

of depositing the payments into the landowner’s Individual Indian Money (IIM) account. The Buy-Back 

Program has the primary responsibility for the acquisition phase because the BIA has a highly automated and 

centralized process. The use of cooperative agreements for the acquisition phase will be limited; tribes may, 

however, perform outreach tasks associated with this phase.
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 26 of 32

During the acquisition phase, the Department may also provide the notice required by the Settlement to

purchase those interests from individuals whose whereabouts are unknown. However, it is possible that a 

location’s purchase ceiling amount may be reached by purchasing interests from individuals actively engaged 

in the Buy-Back Program. In those instances, the Buy-Back Program may choose not to utilize its authority 

to purchase those fractional interests from individuals whose whereabouts are unknown. The Department 

may, however, purchase those interests to ensure that the Fund is used in its entirety.

EXAMPLE OF PROGRAM PROCESSES

To illustrate the four Buy-Back Program processes, consider an example reservation with 3,000 tracts that contain 

90,000 fractional interests owned by 10,000 individuals.

1. Outreach. In cooperation with the tribe, outreach must occur to inform the 10,000 individuals that the Buy-Back 

Program will be valuing tracts and purchasing fractional interests from those who desire to voluntarily sell their 

interest(s). During this time, the Department will consult directly with the tribe to ascertain any priorities the tribe may 

have for acquisition. However, because all purchases will be made from willing sellers at this phase, the Buy-Back 

Program cannot force acquisition of interests even for tracts identified as tribal priorities. Direct tribal involvement 

through cooperative agreements will be key to generating interest in selling lands that are tribal priorities. 

2. Land Research. While the Buy-Back Program and tribe are conducting outreach in the communities, the BIA and 

other Departmental agencies will be gathering data necessary to determine the fair market values of the 3,000 

fractionated tracts within the reservation. For a number of reasons, a tract may require extensive research to determine 

its fair market value. For this example, assume 10 percent of the tracts require extensive research that would require 

excessive time or cost to complete. To remain efficient and cost effective, the Buy-Back Program would simply initiate

a valuation request for 2,700 tracts, omitting those 300 tracts that require further data or extensive analysis before 

values can be determined (it is recognized that such an omission will necessarily preclude the Department from 

acquiring all the interests owned by certain individuals). At this stage, the Department will work with the tribe to 

ensure that as many tribal priorities as possible are included in the valuation request.

3. Valuation. At this point, OAS will receive a request to value 2,700 tracts within the reservation. To achieve 

efficiency and cost-effectiveness, OAS will primarily utilize mass-valuation techniques. The number of tracts these 

techniques may capture will vary between reservations, but for this example, only 80 percent of those tracts are 

amenable to some mass appraisal valuation technique. Thus, the Buy-Back Program can expect fair market values for

2,160 of the 3,000 tracts. The Program will work with the tribe to ensure that as many tribal priority tracts as possible

are valued.

4. Acquisition. Now that the Buy-Back Program has received the fair market value for 2,160 tracts, it can send offer 

packages to individuals who own interests in those tracts. At most, offer packages would go to all 10,000 individuals 

who own fractional interests within the reservation (or some subset because some of those 10,000 individuals may own 

interests only in the 840 tracts that were not valued). Offer packages will have a specific response deadline date (i.e., 45

calendar days after BIA mails the package). The goal of the acquisition phase is to obtain a high rate of return of 

properly completed offer packages from the owners, sufficient to expend the purchase ceiling for the reservation within 

the established timeframe. The acquisition phase is highly automated and centralized to reduce administrative costs and 

increase efficiency. This phase will be carried out predominantly by the Buy-Back Program.

The Program, through the Office of the Special Trustee (OST) and BIA utilizing TAAMS and other existing operations 

and systems, will mail offer packages to owners, receive and process completed offers, and post payments to IIM 

accounts. However, the Program welcomes tribal participation in outreach work during the acquisition phase. If too 

few individuals sell their interests at this reservation, the Program will seek to use the remaining purchase ceiling 

amount at other locations.

See the following diagram for an illustration of these processes.
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 27 of 32

Outreach to Tribal Leaders

Tribal Relations team holds initial meeting 

with tribe (first month and periodically 

thereafter); consults directly with the tribe to 

ascertain any priorities for acquisition.

Outreach to Landowners

Inform individual landowners of the opportunity 

to sell interests (intense outreach 2-3 months 

prior to disbursement of offers)

Land 

Research 

(1-3 

months)

Buy-Back 

Program 

Processes 

and 

Necessary 

Timing 

Goals

Valuation of Tracts Amenable to Mass 

Valuation

(3-12 months)

Acquisitions

(3-6 months)

 6 months 1 year 18 m 18 months

The Buy-Back Program will be active at any one location only for as long as it takes to complete the four phases of the 

process. Once the four phases haves been completed at the reservation, the Buy-Back Program will focus its efforts on 

the next location.

Organizational Structure

The Buy-Back Program is a high priority of the Department and acquiring land at the scale and in the limited 

timeframe provided by the Settlement poses an unprecedented challenge. The effort will require strong, 

centralized leadership to ensure effective coordination among the various offices and bureaus involved. It 

will also require substantial leadership from the tribes participating in the Buy-Back Program.

The Department’s organizational structure was designed to meet these challenges and to conduct land 

consolidation activities effectively and efficiently, with significant communication and collaboration. The 

Secretary established the Buy-Back Program within the Office of the Secretary. The Buy-Back Program is 

headed by a Program Manager who reports directly to the Deputy Secretary. There is staff in the Office of 

the Secretary who provide expertise and support in areas such as tribal relations, performance management 

and reporting, communications, and cooperative agreements. There will be staff that will provide expertise 

and support in areas such as budget, systems integration, and administrative records. Extensive technical 

expertise and services within the Department, primarily in the BIA and the OST, will be utilized to implement 
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 28 of 32

the Buy-Back Program. Moreover, an oversight board, which includes the Solicitor, Director of the BIA, and 

Special Trustee for American Indians, holds regular meetings with Program leadership. 

A BIA Acquisitions Director leads operations in the field. Field operations will initially be conducted out of 

three regional Acquisition Centers. The main Acquisition Center will be located in the BIA Rocky Mountain 

Regional Office (Billings, Montana), with additional staff located in the Great Plains Regional Office 

(Aberdeen, South Dakota) and the Midwest Regional Office (Bloomington, Minnesota). Staff also may later 

be added in additional locations (e.g., the Southwest Regional Office in Albuquerque, New Mexico) if 

necessary to meet Program objectives. Staff at each center will have the ability to perform acquisitionsrelated work (including outreach) on any scheduled reservation and will be hired on an “as-needed” basis to 

minimize administrative costs. 

The Acquisition staff will request fair market value determinations for the locations scheduled for 

implementation by the Buy-Back Program and conduct acquisitions once those values are obtained. Fair 

market value determinations will be carried out by OAS and mineral interests will be evaluated by the Office 

of Valuation Service’s Office of Minerals Evaluation (OME). Timber values may also be supplied to OAS 

where applicable by the BIA Forestry Division. The Department will utilize agreements with Departmental 

offices and bureaus to track administrative costs, increase accountability, and ensure that work is completed 

in a timely manner. The Buy-Back Program will also utilize existing Department resources and functions 

including Information Technology, the BIA Land Title and Records Offices, and the OST Call Center. 
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 29 of 32

The following chart illustrates the overall structure.

Office of the Special Trustee for American Indians Office of Valuation Services (Minerals Evaluation) (Currently 9 FTEs; additional hires possible)

Tribes

Bureau of Land Management

Office of Appraisal Services Trust Services (Trust Funds Management)

Office of Budget Deputy Secretary Secretary

Field Operations (Call Center and Outreach) Bureau of Indian Affairs Director Deputy Director Trust Services

Interior Business Center

Senior Advisor Deputy Program Manager

Program Manager Buy-Back Program (Currently 8 FTEs; additional hires possible)

Cooperat vi e Agre me ents

Deputy Director

Buy-Back Oversight Board Secretary (Chair or the Deputy Secretary as designee) Solicitor Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs Special Trustee for American Indians (or designee, Principal Deputy Special Trustee) Deputy Assistant Secretary, Technology, Information & Business Services Director, Bureau of Land Management

Acquisition Director

Additional Acquisition Center(s) (Currently 10 FTEs; additional hires possible) Cooperative Agreements Specialist

Senior Advisor – Tribal Relations

Acquisition Deputy Director Senior Advisor – Tribal Relations Senior Advisor – Tribal Relations Senior Advisor – Performance, Evaluation, & Improvement Public Affairs Specialist Appraisal Team (Currently 10 FTEs; additional hires possible)
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 30 of 32

Measuring Program Performance and Progress

The Buy-Back Program will actively track and monitor performance to ensure that the tasks performed are 

achieving the goals of the Program. To that end, the Program is developing performance metrics, aligned 

with goals, in order to track results. Those involved will regularly report metrics, which the Program will 

evaluate in order to make improvements. Similarly, the Program will be monitoring funding provided, 

comparing and reconciling budgeted estimates with actuals, to make adjustments based on outcomes 

achieved. This will ensure that there is a clear correlation between funding and results. Performance results 

will be shared to continue transparency into the Program. 

For example, the Program will evaluate its performance achieving key goals, such as:

1. Reduce the number of fractional interests in trust or restricted lands, using reasonable efforts to 

prioritize the consolidation of the most highly fractionated tracts of land as required by the 

Settlement.

- The Program will track this goal by dividing number of fractional interests the Buy-Back 

Program purchases by the total purchasable fractional interests. This metric will reflect the 

percent reduction of fractional interests. (Fractional interests purchased / total purchasable 

fractional interests = percent reduction of fractional interests.)

2. Increase the number of trust or restricted acres in tribal land bases by focusing on cost-effective 

acquisitions, which will promote tribal sovereignty and self-determination.

- Similar to the previous goal and metric, the Program will track the total number of acres

purchased, divided by the total number of purchasable trust or restricted acres. This will capture 

the percent increase in the number of trust or restricted acres for tribal land bases. (Acres 

purchased / total purchasable acres = percent increase in tribal land bases.)

3. Target fractionated tracts that are amenable to cost efficient, mass valuation techniques.

- This goal will be tracked by dividing number of fractionated tracts the Program appraises using 

mass valuation techniques by the total number of fractionated tracts. The figure will illustrate 

the percentage of fractionated tracts valued using cost efficient, mass valuation. (Tracts 

appraised using mass valuation / total fractionated tracts = percent of tracts mass appraised.)

4. Manage administrative expenses in the most cost efficient manner possible, in a way that facilitates 

effective long-term trust management and systems integration.

- As a best practice, the Buy-Back Program will track this by using a modified cost performance 

index (Index). The Index uses the percentage of the purchase amount of the Trust Land 

Consolidation Fund ($1.555 billion) expended, divided by the percentage of administrative costs 

($285 million) expended. The resulting figure indicates how efficient the Program is purchasing 

land in proportion to administrative costs. A value of greater than one implies efficient 

spending. If the Index equals one, the Program is spending funds proportionately and is on 

track to expend both funds. A value of less than one indicates inefficient expenditure. (Percent 

of land purchase fund expended / percent of administrative fund expended = cost performance 

index.)
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 31 of 32

NEXT STEPS

As described above, the Department has developed an implementation strategy that will focus its initial 

implementation efforts on the most highly fractionated reservations and actively encourage tribes with 

jurisdiction at those locations to consider the Program’s cooperative agreement application process. An open 

solicitation period will occur for several months (approximately November 15, 2013 – March 14, 2014) which 

will allow highly fractionated locations to signal their interest and readiness to participate in the Program by 

submitting cooperative agreement applications or a letter of interest.

The Buy-Back Program is committed to continuous consultations throughout the life of the Program in 

compliance with the letter and spirit of Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and Coordination with Indian 

Tribal Governments) and Secretarial Order 3314 (Department of the Interior Policy on Consultation with 

Indian Tribes). The success of the Program in restoring lands to tribal control will be predicated on tribal 

input and support; on cooperative agreements between individual tribes and the Federal Government to 

facilitate direct tribal involvement in implementation; and on adherence to the greatest extent possible to

tribal acquisition priorities.

Following publication of the Initial Implementation Plan in December 2012, the Department held 

consultation sessions in Minneapolis, Minnesota; Rapid City, South Dakota; and Seattle, Washington, as well 

as opened a public comment period. Additionally, within the past 12 months, the Program has had individual 

contact with nearly 50 tribes. In the coming months and years, the Program will continue to meet with tribes, 

actively seek their feedback, and welcome their participation.

The Department anticipates extensive use of mass appraisal valuation techniques; therefore, the Buy-Back 

Program wishes to assess whether the tracts that tribes identify as priorities will be captured through mass 

valuation processes as soon as possible. The Department is interested in learning about tribes’ specific 

acquisition priorities now so those may be incorporated into planning efforts. Some tribes have already 

provided information related to priorities. Tribes that have not already done so should send their priorities to

the U.S. Department of the Interior at the following address:

U.S. Department of Interior

Land Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations

1849 C St. NW

MS-7223-MIB 

Washington, DC 20240
www.doi.gov/buybackprogram Call Center (888) 678-6836 Page 32 of 32

The Department continues to implement the Program and will focus on the next steps listed below:

 Update the Program’s website as needed, including resources for tribal leaders and 

landowners;

 Continue to process ownership transactions and update title records in TAAMS to facilitate 

acquisitions and ensure that they are as complete as possible;

 Complete additional land mapping and valuation efforts;

 Automate processes to enable the Buy-Back Program to efficiently and consistently process 

a high volume of transactions;

 Develop and share performance measures, reporting mechanisms, and operating budgets in 

light of additional tribal feedback and Program analysis; and

 Continue working with tribes among the most highly fractionated locations, which represent 

approximately 90 percent of the fractional interests, as well as work with tribes at a limited 

number of less fractionated locations, to secure cooperative agreements to the extent 

possible.
Appendix A-1

APPENDIX A – SUMMARY OF TRIBAL CONSULTATIONS

The Initial Implementation Plan for the Land Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations (Buy-Back Program, the 

Program) was published by Department of the Interior (Department) on December 18, 2012. Following 

publication of the Initial Implementation Plan, the Department sought and continues to seek feedback and 

additional input from tribal communities and the public. To that end, in addition to opening a public 

comment period, the Department held consultation sessions in Minneapolis, Minnesota; Rapid City, South 

Dakota; and Seattle, Washington. Many tribal leaders, tribal organizations, individuals, and members of the 

public reviewed the Initial Implementation Plan and submitted comments, questions, and / or 

recommendations (Comments). The comments received, whether orally during tribal consultations or in 

writing between January 2013 and March 2013, are summarized by common themes in the section below and 

have been reproduced in full on the Buy-Back Program’s website: http://www.doi.gov/buybackprogram. 

The Buy-Back Program has considered each of the comments, implemented them to the extent practicable, 

and will continue to look for opportunities to implement tribal recommendations throughout the existence of 

the Program.

Acquisitions

Commenters raised multiple questions related to the acquisition process. Specifically, commenters asked how 

the Program would collect and honor tribal acquisition priorities. Individual landowners asked whether they 

could sell their surface and mineral interests separately and how the Program would pay them for their 

interests. Finally, commenters raised concerns about the personal cost to landowners of completing the 

administrative functions of an acquisition. Some commenters suggested that the Program provide payment, 

in the form of an incentive or administrative time reimbursement, to the landowners.

Department Action

Tribal Acquisition Priorities: Tribal acquisition priorities are vitally important to achieving a foundational goal of 

the Program, which is to strengthen tribal sovereignty and promote consolidated trust land bases for 

conservation, stewardship, and beneficial use by sovereign tribal nations. The Department cannot guarantee 

that it will be able to purchase all tribal priorities given its financial and authorized operational constraints 

(e.g., inability to purchase fee lands) and because individual owners may decide not to sell their interests; 

however, it will actively consult with tribes to identify tribal acquisition priorities and accommodate those 

priorities to the fullest extent possible.
Appendix A-2

Participation in the Program will in no way interfere with the prerogatives of the sovereign tribal nations to 

purchase lands not authorized for purchase under the settlement (e.g., fee lands15) through whatever means 

they deem to be in the best interest of their tribes.

Purchasing Fee Interests in Trust Land: The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 authorizes the Program to acquire 

"any fractional interest in trust or restricted land." Furthermore, the Program is to be carried out in 

accordance with the Indian Land Consolidation Act (ILCA), which allows for the purchase of “. . . any 

fractional interest in trust or restricted lands.” 25 U.S.C. § 2212(a)(1). Because the Settlement resolves claims 

of individual Indian account holders, the Fund will be focused on paying those individuals fair market value 

for fractional interests in trust or restricted land that they are willing to sell. The Department will not 

purchase fee interests in trust or restricted land.

Selling Surface and Mineral Interests: The Program’s fair market value determinations and offers to purchase 

fractional interests will include the value of surface and mineral interests. The Program will not make 

bifurcated offers to purchase surface and mineral interests separately because such purchases would not 

reduce fractionation. Purchases that would not reduce fractionation, would not fulfill the intentions of the 

Indian Land Consolidation Act, nor would they fulfill the purpose of the Buy-Back Program as outlined in 

the Cobell Settlement Agreement. The Program is also considering including a minimum base payment for 

mineral interests in offers sent to landowners, in accordance with past Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) land 

consolidation activities.

Payment for Interests Purchased: After BIA approves the deed, payment will be deposited into the landowner’s

Individual Indian Money (IIM) account. The payment process will be highly automated, using existing 

systems - the Trust Asset and Accounting Management System (TAAMS) and the Trust Fund Accounting 

System (TFAS) – to achieve consistent, accountable, and cost and time efficient processing. The Program 

estimates that payments will be posted into landowners’ IIM accounts within two days after the Office of the 

Special Trustee (OST) receives BIA deed approval data. Posting payments into IIM accounts allows the 

payments to be identified and reported in quarterly statements of performance in accordance with the terms 

of the Trust Fund Management Reform Act of 1994.

Base Payment: The offer package provided to individual landowners will include a base payment of $75 per 

offer (not per interest), regardless of the value of the land. The base payment will help to offset the time and 

 

15. The Indian Land Tenure Foundation defines fee lands as a “Land ownership status in which the owner holds title 

to and control of the property. The owner may make decisions about land use or sell the land without government 

oversight.” See http://www.iltf.org/glossary. Fee lands have no interest held in trust or restricted status.
Appendix A-3

costs that owners may incur in responding to purchase offers. The amount is consistent with hourly wage 

rates and the anticipated amount of time it would take an owner to complete an offer package. The base 

payment is a payment that is in addition to the appraised value of the interests purchased.

Administrative Costs

Multiple commenters provided suggestions on the manner in which the Program should utilize the portion of 

the Trust Land Consolidation Fund (Fund) that the Settlement made available for implementation costs. 

These comments included the following ideas on how to use this portion of the Fund:

 The Department should not receive any administrative funds for carrying out the mandates of the 

Cobell Settlement Agreement (Settlement);

 The Department should limit its use of the funds to the extent possible;

 The Department should receive additional funding for the administration of the Program;

 Tribes should receive the full amount of the administrative costs portion of the Fund for 

implementation of the Program;

 The Department should share the administrative funds with the tribes for use in outreach, research, 

appraisals, and valuation;

 Tribes should receive cooperative agreement funds in advance of beginning the consolidation 

process so that they can place the funds in interest-bearing accounts and retain the interest earned on 

the deposited funds; and

 Tribes impacted by fractionation should receive any remaining administrative funds following the 

implementation of the Program.

Department Action

Use of Funds to Implement the Settlement: The Department agrees with the recommendation that all expenditures 

not directly related to the Secretarial Commission on Trust Reform or the purchase of fractional interests 

should be limited to the extent possible. The term “administrative funds” or “administrative costs” as used in 

these comments refers to that portion of the Land Consolidation Fund that the Settlement Agreement directs 

the government to use to pay the costs of implementing the Settlement, including the costs of the Buy-Back 

Program. The Settlement sets forth the precise purpose and use of the Fund. It states, in pertinent part, as 

follows: 

“The Trust Land Consolidation Fund shall be used solely for the purposes of (1) Acquiring 

fractional interests in trust or restricted lands; (2) Implementing the Land Consolidation 

Program; and (3) Paying the costs related to the work of the Secretarial Commission on 

Trust Reform, including costs of consultants to the Commission and audits recommended 
Appendix A-4

by the Commission. An amount up to a total of no more than fifteen percent (15 percent) of 

the Trust Land Consolidation Fund will be used for purposes 2 and 3.”16

Under the terms of the Settlement, any unexpended funds revert to the Department of the Treasury 

(Treasury) if not expended within ten years.

17 The Department has no authority to utilize, disperse, retain, or 

invest any portion of the Fund in a manner inconsistent with the mandates of the Settlement, as ratified by 

the United States Congress through the Claims Resolution Act of 2010. 

The Department remains steadfast in its commitment to enter into cooperative agreements with tribes and 

believes that implementing the Program using cooperatives agreements should minimize administrative costs 

and improve the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the Program. Tribal involvement, products, and 

services directed toward implementation of the Program, as identified in the terms and conditions of an 

approved cooperative agreement, will be funded through the administrative costs portion of the Fund.

Amounts provided to tribes under a cooperative agreement will be based on approved budgets that estimate 

the costs associated with the specific services, products and deliverables to be provided by the tribe party to 

the agreement.

Neither the Cobell Settlement Agreement nor the Claims Resolution Act of 2010 express authority to invest 

portions of the Fund. The Department will partially advance or fully reimburse, as deemed appropriate, 

cooperative agreement funds to the tribe for costs incurred in accordance with the tribe’s submitted 

application and the applicable award terms and conditions.

The Department will manage implementation costs in the most cost-effective way possible, in order to meet 

its obligations under the Settlement, including funding the work of the Secretarial Commission on Trust 

Reform, and to purchase as many fractional interests in trust or restricted land as possible. 

Allocation of Funds

Commenters were concerned that the proposed allocation of funds would result in unwelcome competition 

and animosity between tribes not included in the list of the most highly fractionated reservations. They 

requested more information on how the Program calculated the purchase ceilings for the reservations, and 

some commenters requested increases of their reservation ceiling. A few commenters suggested that instead 

of allocating funding nationally by reservation, the Program should allocate funds regionally. Finally, some 

commenters requested that the Department provide estimates on how much it plans to spend on each of the 

 

16. Cobell Settlement Agreement at ¶ F(2).

17. Cobell Settlement Agreement at ¶ F(4).
Appendix A-5

four land acquisition phases (i.e., outreach, land research, valuation, and acquisition) on their particular 

reservations.

Department Action

Allocation of Funding by Reservation: By the terms of the Settlement, the Program is specifically required to “use 

reasonable efforts to prioritize the consolidation of the most highly fractionated tracts of land.”18 During the 

consultations on the Draft Plan and consultations on the Initial Implementation Plan, tribal leaders 

overwhelmingly expressed the desire that the Department expend the Fund on as many reservations as 

possible. As discussed in the Initial Implementation Plan, the Program determined that allocation by 

reservation and the use of flexible purchase ceilings best enabled the Program to prioritize the most highly 

fractionated tracts, while also meeting the mandates of the legislation governing use of the Fund and the 

desire expressed by tribal leaders. 

Purchase Ceilings: The formula used to establish the flexible purchase ceilings is based on the proportional 

number of fractionated tracts, interests, and associated acres at each reservation as described in the Initial 

Implementation Plan.

19 Since the ceilings are flexible, the Program may adjust the ceilings (e.g., because of 

lessons learned during the implementation process or because the number of willing sellers at a location is too 

low). As Larry Roberts, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs, explained during the consultation held 

in Seattle, Washington, “the spending caps themselves are flexible because we really don’t know how many 

willing sellers we’re going to have.”20

Program Costs: There have been no land buy-back efforts implemented on the scale commensurate with the 

Buy-Back Program. This historic endeavor will be a process characterized by much learning, sharing of 

information, and subsequent leaps forward in efficiency and effectiveness. The Program has begun 

developing cost estimates for the various phases. Conducting a cost analysis for every reservation with 

fractional interests, without knowing whether the Buy-Back Program will be able to purchase land on every 

reservation and without the benefit of tribal input and cooperative agreement proposals, does not appear to 

be the best use of the limited administrative funds available to implement the Program. The Department will, 

however, to be better able to provide information regarding costs after obtaining additional information and 

gaining experience during the upcoming efforts at initial locations. 

 

18. Cobell Settlement Agreement at ¶ F(3).

19. See Initial Implementation Plan at 10-12.

20. Seattle Consultation, February 14, 2013, Transcript at 36.
Appendix A-6

Offer Package

Commenters requested more information on the offer package that the Program will distribute during the 

acquisition phase. They also asked that the offer package be user-friendly and made available in advance of 

the Program sending out offers.

Department Action

The proposed offer package, which includes an instruction sheet, contains streamlined versions of the 

standard BIA acquisition documents. For example, the Program will use a slightly modified version of the 

Deed to Restricted Indian Land for the Deed to be included in the packages. The BIA tested the package

and instructions to determine whether various stakeholders found the package and instruction to be userfriendly, and the feedback was positive. The stakeholders found the documents easier to use than other 

acquisition documents and said that the instructions were useful. Although the offer package is currently in 

draft form, it has been posted on the Program’s website. The Program anticipates finalizing it in the near 

future after incorporating feedback from upcoming outreach events, meetings with tribal representatives, and 

Program trainings scheduled with tribal staff. Once complete, the Program will post the final package and 

instructions on its website.

There are multiple resources for landowners to use when completing the offer package documents. 

Landowners may contact their local Fiduciary Trust Officers (FTOs) for assistance, or attend Buy-Back 

Program outreach events in their areas to ask question about the package. In addition, representatives at the

Office of the Special Trustee, Trust Beneficiary Call Center (available at (888) 678-6836) can assist 

landowners with completing the package. And, tribes may facilitate sales by conducting outreach activities

through cooperative agreements. 

Appraisal Approach

Multiple commenters expressed support for the mass appraisal approach. Other commenters expressed 

concerns, stating that mass appraisals would make it difficult for the appraisers to consider the best interests 

of the landowners. Specific concerns included “bullying” landowners into lower rates, inappropriately 

appraising mineral and timber interests, and lack of confidence in the accuracy of the fair market value 

determinations. Those who supported the mass appraisal approach noted that it would lead to efficient 

reviews and keep the Program on track. Suggestions for maintaining efficiency throughout the appraisal 

process included the use of tribal resources (e.g., appraisal or review systems) to complete appraisals and 

stationing appraisers near reservations for quick access to information.
Appendix A-7

Other commenters requested more information on the length of time between an appraisal and the sale and 

on how long the appraisal would remain valid. 

Commenters also requested more information on the mass appraisal process in general. They asked how the 

Program would evaluate mineral interests and when / how it would determine that techniques other than 

mass appraisal would be appropriate.

Department Action

Mass Appraisals: The Settlement and the Claims Resolution Act of 2010 require the Department to offer fair 

market value to owners of fractional interests. The Department will use mass appraisal and other methods as 

appropriate, to establish the fair market value. 

The breadth, scale, limited funding, and limited life span of the Program necessitates the use of mass appraisal 

methods where appropriate. Such use will result in greater efficiency and consistency in valuations, enabling 

the Program to effectively value many acres simultaneously. It will also assist in ensuring effective, efficient, 

and expeditious use of the Fund and reduce the risk of being required to returning some portion of the Fund 

to the Treasury. The Program will use market studies or mass appraisal techniques to appraise homogeneous, 

non-complex, vacant lands that have comparable land sales available. In many highly fractionated Indian 

ownership areas, it is common to have agricultural properties that are similar in use and have active / 

consistent markets or comparable sales data that the Department can use in its appraisals. The Program will 

use the mass appraisal approach in these situations as appropriate. The Program will not use mass appraisals 

for commercial or other lands within urbanized zones where greater variation may exist.

The presence of potentially valuable mineral commodities or timber may also necessitate the use of additional 

methods or analyses. These types of non-homogenous tracts may be difficult to value simultaneously with 

mass appraisal-amenable tracts without diminishing the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the Buy-Back 

Program. The Department understands that an inability to value certain tracts may preclude some individuals 

from selling all of their interests and the acquisition of some tribal priorities. As stated above, the 

Department does expect to determine values through other means as appropriate, and the Initial 

Implementation Plan does provide for tribal participation, including in the valuation process, through 

cooperative agreements.

All appraisal methods used by the Department will conform to the Uniform Standards of Professional 

Appraisal Practice (USPAP). Moreover, in order to ensure that the valuation process is as robust and credible 

as possible, the Department worked with The Appraisal Foundation, a non-profit organization, to obtain an 

independent review of the Department’s methods. The Appraisal Foundation specifically analyzed and 

concurred with the Program’s assertion that mass appraisals will be the most efficient and cost-effective 
Appendix A-8

means to appraise homogenous, non-complex, vacant lands that have comparable land sales available. At the 

same time, recognizing that data limitations, non-homogeneous property types, and unique characteristics of 

specific properties may limit the use of mass appraisals, the Foundation also reviewed appraisal 

methodologies for such instances, including project appraisals and property-specific appraisals.

Appraising Mineral Interests: Opinions of value provided by the Office of Appraisal Services (OAS) will include 

the value of all estates (mineral, surface, timber, etc.). Mineral evaluations of fractional interests will be 

completed by the Office of Mineral Evaluations (OME). The mineral evaluations will receive full 

consideration as a critical part of the data considered by OAS before providing a determination of fair market 

value. 

In the initial phase of the Buy-Back Program, purchase offers will not be made in areas where the Office of 

Mineral Evaluations has not yet obtained adequate information to complete mineral evaluations. Subsequent 

phases may include these areas as mineral information comes available.

Appraisal Validity Length: It is recognized that market values can change soon after an offer is made. Or, in 

some instances, the appraised value may be static for several months or even years. In any case, a continual 

reassessment of market values would be untenable given the Program’s limited timeframe and limited 

administrative funds. Thus, the Program is establishing an administrative appraisal validity period of up to 

nine months from the date of valuation. The administrative appraisal validity period simply means a defined 

internal of time necessary to carry out the Program before OAS or tribal appraisers must reevaluate appraised 

values. For administrative efficiency, establishing this range allows for timely implementation at each 

reservations while setting a date certain upon which property values must be reevaluated if market conditions 

warrant such a review. The administrative appraisal validity period may vary for different reservations, based 

on an area’s market stability or volatility. For example, a reservation within an urbanized area may require 

more frequent assessment than a reservation with remote agricultural lands due to the market volatility for the 

former land area. Each offer will explicitly identify the appraisal date, and the owner can obtain information 

about how the fair market value was assessed at that time. If the owner believes the appraisal is out of date, 

the owner could simply refuse to sell.

At the end of the administratively established timeframe for appraisal validity at each implementation site, the 

Program will ask OAS to evaluate whether market conditions have changed if there are willing sellers and the 

purchase ceiling for the location has not been exhausted. If new information suggests that values have 

changed, then appraisal update work would be required. If market conditions indicate no change, then the 

original appraisals – upon appraisal approval – can continue to be used as needed for the Program subject to 

another administratively defined valuation period.
Appendix A-9

Conflict of Interest

Multiple commenters indicated that the Program had an inherent conflict of interest built into its operational 

model. These commenters explained that, during the land acquisition process, the Program would not be 

able to honor its trust responsibilities to both Indian tribes and individual tribal members simultaneously. 

They expressed the opinion that the Department and tribal governments will push for lower purchase prices, 

whereas the landowners will want higher purchase prices. Commenters suggested two ways of avoiding 

conflict of interest issues: development of a conflict of interest policy or hiring a third party representative as 

a spokesperson for the landowners.

Department Action

The Program will rely on third party reviews or other tests to avoid possible conflicts of interest. For 

example, as outlined above, The Appraisal Foundation will complete a third party review of the Program’s 

appraisal approach. 

Cooperative Agreements

Commenters urged the Department to engage tribes in cooperative agreements to the furthest extent possible 

and requested that the Program provide a template agreement to use as a model. Many of these commenters 

asked if tribes would be able to assume responsibility for any phase of the land acquisition process, or if there 

would be restrictions on tribal activities.

Multiple commenters asked for more information on reimbursement of administrative costs under 

cooperative agreements. Other commenters requested more information on the evaluation of cooperative 

agreement proposals. Specific questions included whether price would be the sole determining factor, or if 

there would be negotiation opportunities rather than outright acceptance or denial. An overarching concern 

was what the commenter referred to as the Department’s assumption that it will be able to operate the 

Program in a cost-efficient manner, thus placing responsibility on the tribes for determining how to 

accomplish tasks with even less resources.

Commenters also wondered whether other forms of agreements, such as Indian Self-Determination and 

Education Assistance Act of 1975 (i.e., Public Law 93-638) contracts or performance agreements, could be 

used in place or in conjunction with cooperative agreements. 

Department Action

The success of the Program hinges on tribal leadership, tribal participation, and tribal facilitation. The 

Department has proposed an implementation strategy that strives to balance its capacity constraints with its 
Appendix A-10

goal of engaging as many tribes as possible through cooperative agreements or other collaborative 

understandings. The Department has also developed and posted comprehensive cooperative agreement 

template and guidance documents, including a list of frequently asked questions, on the Program website to 

assist tribes with the cooperative agreement application process. These documents also describe the land 

consolidation phases and tasks that tribes may elect to participate in through cooperative agreements. 

Tribal cooperative agreement applications will receive every consideration. The Department remains hopeful 

that the use of cooperative agreements will minimize administrative costs and improve overall effectiveness 

and efficiency of the Program.

The Department will use several criteria to evaluate cooperative agreement applications. These criteria may 

include: 

 Completeness of the application package; 

 The tribe’s capacity to perform the tasks and meet the task-specific requirements outlined in the 

Scope of Work; 

 The tribe’s proposed budget; and

 Other considerations as appropriate.

The Indian Land Consolidation Act (ILCA) prohibits tribes from utilizing the Indian Self-Determination and 

Education Assistance Act of 1975 (i.e., Public Law 93-638) contracts to operate Buy-Back Program activities. 

Thus, cooperative agreements are the linchpin without which the goals of the Program will be difficult to 

meet.

Data

Multiple commenters requested that the Program provide TAAMS access to the tribes. One commenter 

suggested that, in lieu of providing access to all tribes, the Program only provide access to tribes with realty 

offices or the capacity to handle the data. Another suggested that the Program provide access to the Regional 

or agency offices, so that tribes could access TAAMS at those offices.

Other commenters questioned the accuracy of the GIS data that the Program will use for mapping purposes.

They suggested that the Program use GIS data from the tribes if that information is more up-to-date. One 

commenter also asked whether the Program’s GIS data would be based on ground or legal acres.

Department Action

Access to TAAMS: Due to the limited timeframe and funding available to the Program, it will not be able to 

provide the necessary security, training, and infrastructure to enable every tribe to access TAAMS. Access to 
Appendix A-11

TAAMS is also restricted due to some security requirements mandated by the Privacy Act of 1974. Although 

the Program is continuing its efforts to provide access to tribes that have contracted or compacted with BIA 

Real Estate Services, the Program will provide other tribes that do not have TAAMS access with an owner 

contact and tract tool to obtain the land ownership information needed for identifying tribal priorities and 

planning outreach activities.

Data Accuracy: Since trust reform efforts began in the late 1990s, the Department has made significant 

progress in the area of data and records cleanup. The BLM, OST, and BIA have both made data and records 

clean up a priority. As BIA Director Mike Black explained, “[The Department has made] a concerted effort 

here, over the past three years after about 2009 when the original settlement was signed, to make sure that 

our title systems are as updated as they possibly - - as possibly can be. We made a concerted effort at all of 

the [LTROs] to make sure that our title data is accurate. . . .[B]ut [if anyone is aware of errors] please let us 

know.”21

The Department is cognizant of the importance of accurate data on which to base planning and purchase 

activity and intends to address known and suspected instances of inaccurate data prior to initiating Buy-Back 

activities at those locations. As the Program works through the data cleanup process, it encourages tribes to 

submit information or supporting data that would increase the quality of the final dataset.

For the purposes of the Buy-Back Program, interests are based on legal acres. The Department recognizes 

that there are three different acreage types: actual or ground, legal or record, and computed or spatial. For 

any given parcel, there may be three different total acreage results. Ideally, ground, legal, and computed 

acreages should be identical; however, while survey technology has improved its measurements, spatial 

technology may be based on varying algorithms and other dependencies, causing variances in acreage. The 

Department believes that using legal acres will produce the most accurate estimates given its limited budget 

and timeframe to complete the Buy-Back Program.

Fractionation Definition

One commenter was concerned that the Initial Implementation Plan did not include the definition of 

“fractionation,” a key term in relation to the Program’s goals. 

Department Action

 

21. Seattle Consultation, February 14, 2013, Transcript at 42.
Appendix A-12

As the introduction to the Initial Implementation Plan explains, fractionation results “when the heirs of 

original allottees of tribal lands receive [...] increasingly diffuse ownership interest in the allotments that have 

remained in trust.” Because of the increasingly diffuse ownership interests, “[m]any trust allotments are 

owned in common by hundreds or even thousands of beneficiaries - each with undivided (fractionated) 

interests in the whole parcel.”22 Under the terms of the Settlement, the Fund may only purchase fractionated 

tracts,23 which the Initial Implementation Plan defines as “a tract held in trust or restricted status that has two 

or more unique owners (one of which may be the tribe).”24

Individual Tribes

Multiple commenters stressed the importance of the Department recognizing the uniqueness of each tribe, 

noting that tribes have the right to self-determination and that each acts on that right in a different manner. 

Commenters stated that the Department should acknowledge this fact and support each tribe through an 

individualized approach. 

Department Action

The Department recognizes the uniqueness of each tribe, will consult with tribes individually, and will 

evaluate tribal proposals individually, before initiating Buy-Back Program activities on their reservations. As 

Larry Roberts, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Indian Affairs explained during the consultation held in Seattle, 

Washington, “We know that it’s not going to be a one-size-fits-all in Indian country. And what we’re going 

to need to do is, as we go to each specific tribe, we’re going to have to work directly with tribal leadership to 

figure out, Okay, Fort Peck has these issues; Fort Belknap has these issues; here’s how tribal leadership

suggests we address those issues. And so it’s not going to be a one-size-fits-all approach.”25

Legal Concerns

Several commenters suggested that the approach laid out in the Initial Implementation Plan violated, or could 

potentially violate, certain statutes. For example, multiple commenters are concerned that the National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) exemption for the Program’s mass appraisals may cause legal challenges.

 

22. Cobell XX, 532 F. Supp. 2d 37, 41 (D.D.C. 2008)).

23. Cobell Settlement Agreement at ¶ F(2).

24. Initial Implementation Plan at B-1.

25. Seattle Consultation, February 14, 2013, Transcript at 51.
Appendix A-13

Other commenters stated that the Settlement ignores the authorities given to tribes under the American 

Indian Agriculture Resource Management Act (AIARMA). 

In addition, commenters noted that the Initial Implementation Plan does not address how the Department 

will notify the other owners of a land tract when sending out offers to individual landowners with interests on 

that tract. These commenters raised concern that there was not a process in place to notify landowners once 

tribal ownership on a tract reached 51 percent. Finally, one commenter, speaking as a tribal attorney, was 

concerned about the legal implications of distributing landowners’ addresses to representatives of the 

Program.

Department Action

NEPA: Because the change in title does not change the use of the property, the conveyance is categorically 

excluded from preparation of an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement under 

NEPA.

AIARMA: The Department will actively consult with tribes to ensure that purchased interests support the 

tribe’s Agricultural Resource Plan to the fullest extent possible. 

Notice to Landowners: Once the Program acquires fractional ownership interests from willing sellers, co-owners 

with interests in the same tracts have a right, under the terms of 25 U.S.C. 2212(c), to purchase the interests 

of other co-owners for the same amount the Department paid for the interests. The cover letter 

accompanying the offer package directs owners interested in purchasing co-owner interests to contact the 

Call Center. A list of interests purchased and the associated amount paid will be provided upon request.

Co-owners will have 30 days from receipt of this list to submit payment for the interests acquired by the 

Department. Once the Department receives payment from the co-owner, the transaction is complete, and 

the Department will convey the interests to the co-owner.

Notice of 51 Percent Ownership in a Tract: The Department is not required to notify the individuals when a tribe 

has obtained 51 percent or some other level of ownership interest in a tract.

Liens

Commenters reiterated requests that the Department waive liens on fractionated tracts or interests considered 

by the Program.

Department Action

The Department will not place liens on interests purchased under the Program and transferred to the tribes.
Appendix A-14

Ongoing Consultation

Multiple commenters requested additional information on the operations of the Program. These commenters 

were concerned that the Department had not provided adequate time for public consultation and requested 

that the Department continue to hold consultations as the Program develops. They stated that if the 

Department chooses to hold these meetings, it should provide advance information on the details of these 

meetings, as well as any changes to schedule, to the tribes and members of the public. In addition, 

commenters asked that the Program follow-up with responses / answers to comments and questions 

submitted during previous consultations and continue to do so for future consultations.

In general, commenters believe each tribe should conduct all Program related outreach on their own 

reservation. Commenters expressed the belief that tribes would know how to tailor the messaging to its 

members and have more success in reaching out to landowners. Many of these commenters emphasized the 

importance of informing landowners of the value of participating in the Program and the benefits of selling 

their land. Commenters suggested publishing this type of information in a brochure, tribal newspapers, tribal 

websites, and public forums, or setting up local kiosks to answer questions related to Program activities.

Department Action

The Department recognizes that the Program will only be successful to the extent that tribal leaders and tribal 

members have all relevant information regarding the benefits of participation in the Program. The Program 

held tribal consultations regarding land consolidation in the summer and fall of 2011. That period of 

consultations led directly to the publication of the Department’s draft plan in January 2012. Following the 

publication of the Initial Implementation Plan in December 2012, additional consultations took place in early 

2013. In accordance with the applicable regulations, the Department publishes advance notice of upcoming 

tribal consultations in the Federal Register.

The Department agrees with the belief that, as a general matter, success in performing Program outreach, and 

in communicating the benefits of participating in the Program, will be best achieved by are the tribal leaders 

of affected reservations. 

The full text of the Settlement, transcripts from previous consultations, and other resources, may be obtained 

from the Program’s website: http://www.doi.gov/buybackprogram.
Appendix A-15

Permanent Structures

Many commenters stated that the Program should include permanent structures on land interests in both the 

appraisal and acquisition process. These commenters stated that if the Program buys the land and not the 

improvements it will cause many legal issues and confusion for the landowners. One commenter expressed 

the belief that DOI misinterpreted the American Indian Probate Reform Act (AIPRA) and that 

improvements are trust, not fee, assets.

One commenter asked whether tribes or counties are accountable for maintaining ownership records on 

permanent structures independent of the TAAMS or tribal system if the tribes acquire a controlling interest in 

the property.

Department Action

As a general rule, the Department considers permanent improvements to be non-trust-property. 76 Fed. Reg. 

7,500, 7,501 (Feb. 10, 2011). The Department does not maintain a record of improvements in TAAMS or 

any other system of record. Therefore, fractional interest acquisitions through the Program will not include 

permanent improvements. There may be circumstances, however, where improvements to property have a 

material effect on the highest and best use of a fractionated tract. Where the appraiser determines that 

improvements have changed the highest and best use and there are not sufficient like properties to allow for 

mass appraisal, such properties may not be included in mass appraisal but will be set aside for consideration –

depending upon tribal priorities and availability of funding – for a site-specific appraisal.

Estate Planning and Probate

Commenters suggested that the Department devote the Settlement funds or other resources to estate 

planning and existing probate cases in Indian country. These individuals stated that probate should take 

precedence to the Buy-Back Program because not addressing this issue first will only cause further 

fractionation. According to commenters, probate and estate planning already exist as ways to address the 

issue and need to be the focus before moving to a new approach.

One commenter specifically asked about how the Program would handle estates listed in the Title Status 

Report (TSR).

Department Action

Under the terms of the authorizing legislation, the Program cannot use the Fund for estate planning purposes 

or for processing of probate. The Department understands the importance of completing probates as quickly 

as possible and has devoted significant resources to cleaning up the back logged probate cases. Probate 
Appendix A-16

continues to be a priority for the BIA. The Program is reviewing the possibility of "purchase at probate" to 

acquire purchasable interests, especially if these interests align with tribal priorities.

The Department is processing estates in the TSRs as efficiently as possible, with the understanding that the 

timeframes are also dependent on the timely receipt of family data information.

Scholarship Fund

Commenters asked about administration of, qualification for, and the time-line regarding availability of, the 

Scholarship Fund. Some suggested criteria limiting scholarship awards to students studying real estate or 

similar topics, or only to students on the most highly fractionated reservations (e.g., top 10 most highly 

fractionated). Another popular suggestion was for the Program to distribute the scholarship funds 

proportionally by Region based on total sales; others rejected this option stating that all tribes should have 

equal access to the scholarship funds. Some commenters disagreed with the Scholarship Fund going to a 

national non-profit, recommending that tribes be the recipients of the funds. 

Department Action

The Settlement provided for the establishment of an Indian Education Scholarship Fund for American 

Indian and Alaska Native Students to provide financial assistance to Indian students attending post-secondary 

vocational and college institutions. 

Funds for Indian Education Scholarships will be available to Native American students “to defray the cost of 

attendance at both post-secondary vocational schools and institutions of higher education.” Money for the 

Scholarship Fund will come from three principal sources: 

 Balances remaining in the Accounting / Trust Administration Fund;

 Payments for Class Members designated as “whereabouts unknown,” whose funds are not claimed 

within five years of Final Approval; and 

 Up to $60 million from the Trust Land Consolidation Fund, an incentive intended to encourage 

individual Indians to participate in the Land Consolidation Program.26

As outlined below, each acquisition completed by the Program will contribute to reaching the $60 million in 

scholarship monies that may be available from the Trust Land Consolidation Fund. It is important to note 

that the funds placed into the Scholarship Fund do not come from the purchase amount paid to individual 

sellers, so it will not reduce the amount a landowner will receive for his / her interests.

 

26. Cobell Settlement Agreement at ¶ A(6).
Appendix A-17

 For purchases of interests costing less than $200, $10 will be added to the Scholarship Fund. 

 For purchases of interests costing between $200 and $500, $25 will be added. 

 For purchases of interests costing over $500, 5 percent of the purchase price will be added.

Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement and the Claims Resolution Act of 2010, the Secretary of the Interior 

will appoint two members to the Board of Trustees for the Scholarship Fund only after consultation with 

tribes. Tribes were able to submit names to the Department for consideration as potential candidates for 

membership on the Board of Trustees for the Scholarship Fund. The Department conducted a 30-day 

written consultation period regarding the establishment the Board, as published in a ‘Dear Tribal Leader 

Letter’ and in the Federal Register. That consultation concluded on April 11, 2013. The Department 

reopened the consultation period and published a “Request for Nominations to Serve on Board of Trustees 

for the Cobell Education Scholarship Fund” in the Federal Register.27 That period for submitting 

nominations opened on April 18, 2013 and closed on May 30, 2013. 

The American Indian College Fund will be responsible for establishing the eligibility criteria for the award of 

scholarships as well as for managing and administering the Scholarship Fund.

Sequencing

Initial Locations / Order of Reservations: A few tribes submitted comments in which they sought to have their 

reservation selected for the initial efforts and/or asked how the Department would choose the initial

locations participants. Many commenters asked how the Department would determine the order (or 

sequence) of reservations participating in the Program. Multiple tribes provided specific criteria for the 

Department to consider as it determined the sequencing. For example, some tribes suggested that having 

existing land buy-back programs or “readiness” should place a tribe higher in the sequence. Many tribes 

raised concerns about how the Department would incorporate Program activities on reservations not among 

the most fractionated and whether there would be funding remaining by the time the Program reached these 

reservations. Others suggested that the Program operate on all “ready” reservations rather than limit the 

number of active reservations at one time. 

Order of Offers: In terms of the order in which the Program will send offers to landowners at each location, 

some commenters argued that the Department should primarily consider tribal priorities, while others 

thought the Program should target large interests first in order to reach tribal majority ownership of land.

 

27. Federal Register/ Vol. 78, No. 75 / Thursday, April 18, 2013 / Notices.
Appendix A-18

Offer Package Evaluation: Individual landowners also asked how the Program would review their offer packages 

to determine which interests to purchase for the reservations.

Department Action

Initial Locations / Order of Reservations: The Department considered issues related to sequencing and updated its 

approach. Refer to the “Operational Concepts: Implementation Strategy” section of the Updated 

Implementation plan for more information.

Offer Package Evaluation: The Department’s plan to evaluate offer packages is flexible and subject to change, 

based on consultation input, lessons learned, and tribal priorities. Since it is possible that the value of the 

interests that landowners seek to sell may exceed the reservation’s available purchase ceiling, the Program 

needed to develop an approach to sending offers to landowners and approving those offers that the 

landowners return. 

As stated in the Initial Implementation Plan, the Department identified two potential approaches for 

approving applications and Deeds. One approach is for the Department to review and approve sale 

applications and Deeds in the order received until reaching the reservation’s purchase ceiling. Alternatively, 

the Department could gather and analyze applications and Deeds as a group, approving those that best 

achieve the goals and objectives of the Buy-Back Program (e.g., acquisitions that maximize the number of 

tracts with majority ownership and / or those that relate to a tribal priority).

The Department will apply a hybrid of the two approaches discussed in the plan and will send out offers to a 

reservation’s landowners in “waves.” The value of the landowners’ interests included in each wave will make 

up a certain percentage of the reservation’s total purchase ceiling. As the packages are returned and 

approved, the Program will purchase those landowners’ interests who have agreed to sell. After 45 calendar 

days from when BIA mailed the Wave 1 offer packages, the Program will evaluate the value of the interests 

that landowners chose to sell in Wave 1. If appropriate, a subsequent wave will proceed similarly; however, 

the Program and tribe will consider the response rate to Wave 1 when determining the appropriate 

percentage for a subsequent wave and/or whether individuals have expressed an interest in selling their 

interests. It is important to note that once a reservation meets its purchase ceiling, the succeeding wave will 

not occur. In addition, any landowner who receives an offer from the Program will be able to sell his / her 

land, regardless of whether the reservation has reached or exceeded its ceiling at that point. 

Settlement

Multiple commenters expressed concerns regarding the final structure of the Program as set forth in the 

Settlement and the Claims Resolution Act of 2010. One major concern was that the Settlement provided 
Appendix A-19

preference to the tribes to receive purchased lands, as opposed to giving this opportunity to individual Indian 

landowners. Additionally, some commenters requested that the Program purchase fee and non-fractionated 

lands or lands outside of reservations, as opposed to solely purchasing trust and restricted status fractionated 

lands. Some commenters suggested using any remaining funds to purchase these types of lands, instead of 

returning the funds to the Treasury. A few commenters suggested that Congress revisit the final Settlement 

and attempt to make the law more tribe-friendly, and some requested additional information on the details of 

the Settlement.

Department Action

The Settlement and its implementing legislation are the sources of authority for the Buy-Back Program. In 

accordance with the terms of the authorizing legislation, only fractional interests in trust or restricted lands 

may be purchased utilizing the Fund. The Department has no authority to ignore this directive and cannot 

use the Fund to purchase fee lands. 

Staff / Training

Regarding staff and training, commenters suggested that the Program honor the Department’s Indian 

Preference policy. These individuals said that by hiring tribal members, the Program would help with 

unemployment and have access to people familiar with the land and existing programs on the reservations. 

Commenters also suggested that the Department continue to consult with tribes throughout the process of 

implementing the Program, as well as communicate frequently with individuals and tribes who have worked 

on previous land buy-back efforts.

Other commenters questioned whether the Program would have adequate staff and expertise to complete 

complex appraisals and address other issues as they arise. These commenters suggested that the Program 

continue to seek feedback from specialists and conduct continuous training of its staff members.

More specifically, one commenter noted that the Initial Implementation Plan did not include a process or 

design to carry out the stated intentions of continuous consultation, input and learning throughout the 

Program’s life. The commenter urged the development of a clear and specific process for taking in 

information and input on the Buy-Back Program. 

Department Action

The Department is committed to working with all parties throughout Indian country to take advantage of this 

historic opportunity and successfully implement the Buy-Back Program. It will continue to consult with the 
Appendix A-20

tribal communities and subject matter experts throughout the existence of the Program and will honor the 

Indian Preference policy in law and in spirit. 

The Program will conduct additional individual consultations with each tribe seeking to develop a cooperative 

agreement to implement a particular phase or phases of the Buy-Back Program. One result of some 

cooperative agreements to implement the Program may be the hiring of additional tribal staff where 

appropriate. 

In the effort to develop clear and specific processes for evaluation and learning, taken in direct response to 

the need identified by a commenter, the Department hired a Senior Advisor for Performance, Evaluation, 

and Improvement. Among other responsibilities, the holder of this position is required to: 

 Develop and monitor Program performance metrics for the multiple Department offices and 

bureaus involved in the Buy-Back Program;

 Design, develop, and evaluate business processes and procedures to achieve maximum efficiency, 

effectiveness, and continuous improvement; and

 Collaborate with various Department offices, contractors, and tribes to develop or improve business 

processes, automate tasks, integrate systems, and ensure seamless data sharing across organizations.

Furthermore, the Department fully agrees with the importance of capturing the lessons learned throughout 

the existence of the Program. Lessons should be captured and shared from the experiences of Department 

staff responsible for implementing this and previous buy-back efforts and from the experiences of tribal 

leaders and tribal members. To this end, the Department is building intentional learning into the Buy-Back 

Program processes ongoing tribal communication and consultations remain a Program priority

Taxes

Commenters asked for clarification on whether the IRS guidance issued on the exemption of settlement 

dollars is applicable to money received from selling land to the Buy-Back Program and whether the money 

received from the Buy-Back Program will be taxed as income by the State or Federal Government. 

Department Action

The Claims Resolution Act of 2010 states that the funds received under the Cobell Settlement will not be 

considered for purposes of calculating gross income. The IRS guidance, Notice 2012-60, is specific to the 

treatment of per capita payments received by tribal members pursuant to certain tribal trust settlements and is 

not applicable to the Cobell Settlement.
Appendix A-21

Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and other Federal Assistance Programs

Multiple commenters asked about the impact of revenue from land sales on subsidy programs and/or 

requested that the Federal Government exempt sales revenue that results from land sales from Federal 

assistance programs, such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and Supplemental Security 

Income (SSI).

Department Action

Individuals participating in any type of government assistance program should find out how funds received 

from the sale of their trust or restricted land interest may be counted by the assistance program. Each state 

and Federal program sets forth its own eligibility requirements which the Department is not in a position to 

address.

Timeframe

Commenters raised concerns about the ability of the Department to complete the goals of the Program 

within the ten-year timeframe. In general, these commenters suggested that if the Program works closely 

with tribes, the Department is more likely to achieve this goal. Other commenters expressed the belief that 

the timeline is too long and the Program should start purchasing lands right away. 

Some commenters wanted to know the timeline of sales, from the offer to closing / receiving money in their 

accounts. Commenters also were curious when the Program would begin meeting with tribes, when satellite 

offices will begin work, and when the initial efforts would begin. 

Department Action

Tribal involvement, transparency, flexibility, timely decision making, and ongoing communication throughout 

the life of the Program is critical to the success of the Program. The Department’s senior leadership is 

committed to ensuring successful implementation of the Program the ten-year timeframe and has instituted a 

reporting and oversight structures commensurate with the Program’s importance.

The Program is finalizing its planning efforts and is already meeting with tribes upon request. The 

Department plans to contact each tribe before activity at the tribes’ reservation, assuming the tribe has not 

already contacted the Program. The Program’s goal is to send the first purchase offers before the end of 

2013.
Appendix A-22

When the Buy-Back Program receives a completed offer package, it will have 30 days to approve the 

purchase and process the landowner’s payment. Approval will depend on whether the landowner completed 

all required documentation.

Voluntary Sales

Many commenters expressed concerns that the Program or tribe would force individual landowners to sell 

their land. Other commenters stated that they were not interested in participating in the Program, or were 

interested in buying more land. Those not interested in selling stated reasons such as their land being linked 

to their tribal membership or identity, the potential for mineral and oil value to increase over time, wanting to 

keep the land as their birthright, or the potential for the sales to cause divisions or disputes between tribal 

members. Some commenters raised the concern that the Program would not be successful because there will 

not be enough landowners willing to sell their fractional interests. 

Department Action

Under the terms of the Settlement and the Claims Resolution Act of 2010, all sales are voluntary. The 

Department will follow that directive. The Department has no control over the prerogatives of sovereign 

tribal nations to exercise whatever rights they may have regarding the purchase of land outside of the confines 

of the Buy-Back Program. 

Whereabouts Unknown

Commenters requested additional information on the topic of whereabouts unknown (WAU). One 

commenter indicated that the five-year waiting period was too lengthy, while other commenters raised 

concerns over whether individuals who did not respond to offers would fall into the whereabouts unknown 

category. Another commenter also asked whether an amount of the Fund would be set aside during the fiveyear waiting period while the Program worked to locate landowners whose whereabouts are unknown. Some 

commenters suggested that the Department send lists of WAU individuals to the tribes for them to populate 

recent addresses. 

Department Action

WAU is the term used to describe IIM account holders without current address information on file with 

OST. The Settlement provides for an outreach effort to locate landowners whose whereabouts are unknown 

as of the date of final approval of the Settlement. If those owners are not located after the Department 

undertakes the outreach effort and the passage of five years, the landowners shall be deemed to have 

consented to the conveyance of fractional interests that are located on a parcel of highly fractionated Indian 
Appendix A-23

land. Cobell Settlement Agreement at ¶ F(6); Claims Resolution Act of 2010 § 101(e)(5). This provision relates 

to WAU as to the date of final approval the Settlement, not individuals that become WAU after final 

approval. In the event WAU purchases are made they will be for fair market value with the money deposited 

into an IIM account as detailed in the Settlement Agreement. Landowners can find out if they have an 

account on the WAU list by visiting the OST website. It is important to note that the WAU provisions are 

not applicable to a non-WAU landowner who receives an offer and chooses not to respond.
Appendix B-1

APPENDIX B – FRACTIONATION STATISTICS BY RESERVATION

Overview

The fractionation related data and statistics used throughout this document were generated primarily from the 

Trust Asset and Accounting Management System (TAAMS) as of September 30, 2013. The following table 

lists the data in further detail by land area codes within TAAMS, which generally results in a grouping of trust 

lands by BIA Region. Each tribe typically has a unique tribe code within TAAMS that corresponds to a single

land area code. Due to state borders and other factors, however, some tribes may have jurisdiction over 

multiple land area codes. Moreover, in a few instances, the table currently lists multiple tribes for one land 

area code. The table below seeks to group related land areas under a single tribe and additional work is 

necessary to identify lands to a particular recognized tribe. The Department will continue to publish an 

electronic version of the data on the Program’s website, where additional data points and future corrections 

or updates may be included.

The data and approximations in this document are subject to change. The Department will continue to refine 

its analysis of fractional interests and the owners thereof. Feedback is encouraged. In particular, if tribes or 

others have reason to believe that any of the information is inaccurate or that a reservation is excluded in 

error, they should contact: U.S. Department of the Interior, attention: 1849 C St. NW, MS-7223-MIB, 

Washington, DC 20240. Please refer to the Program’s website for direct contact information for the 

Program’s Senior Advisors for Tribal Relations. 

Definitions and Explanations

It is important to distinguish “aggregated” and “segregated” interest counts. There are many instances where 

a single individual owns multiple fractional interests in the same tract of land. Such multiple ownership 

occurs when an individual inherits interests in the same tract of land at different times. For example, an 

individual may receive an interest in a tract of land when their father passes, and the individual may receive an 

additional interest in that same tract upon their mother’s passing. This document combines/adds these 

multiple “segregated” interests and represents them as a single “aggregated” interest. Aggregated interest 

counts will be used going forward.

The following table begins by listing the “Total Number of Tracts Held in Trust” within a specific land area 

code. This column includes both 100 percent tribal tracts as well as allotted tracts with multiple undivided 

ownership interests. The next column narrows those tracts down to only those “Number of Fractionated 

Tracts Containing Purchasable Interests.” The term “fractionated tract” is defined as a tract held in trust or 

restricted status that has two or more unique owners (one of which may be the tribe). A “fractionated tract” 
Appendix B-2

is defined as a tract with either of two or more fractional interests, each being less than a 100 percent interest

(the sum of the fractional interests equals 100 percent). The term “purchasable interest” is an aggregated 

fractional interest in a fractionated tract that is held in trust or restricted status (i.e., not a fee interest) where a 

recognized tribal government exercises jurisdiction, excluding interests owned by a tribe or the Government,

beneficial interests (e.g., life estates), and interests where no tribe has jurisdiction (e.g., public domain).

The “Number of Fractionated Tracts with corresponding Levels of Tribal Ownership” lists the number of 

purchasable tracts by whether the tribe already has or does not have majority ownership. The “Number of 

Highly Fractionated Tracts” is defined by the Indian Land Consolidation Act (ILCA) at 25 U.S.C. § 2201(6). 

The “Number of Acres” column lists the amount of acreage associated with the “Fractionated Tracts 

Containing Purchasable Interests.” In contrast to the table accompanying the Initial Implementation Plan, 

this number now reflects the purchasable acres.

1 The acreage number is the sum of the acres of surface-only, 

mineral-only, and combined estate acreages. For example, if the surface and mineral estates encompassing 

the same 80-acre tract of land have been severed or split, the acreage count would include them separately.

The next section of the table describes fractional interest information. The “Number of Purchasable 

Fractional Interests” follows the definition described above. The “Number of <2% Interests” is a data point 

listed as a discretionary priority within ILCA. The “Number of <5% Interests” also has statutory 

significance; such interests should not be further fractionated by intestate succession as a result of the “single 

heir” rule enacted as part of the American Indian Probate Reform Act of 2004. 

The final section of the table provides information about unique or individual owners. First, the “Number of 

Unique Individuals owning Purchasable Fractional Interests” identifies the total number of people that own 

fractional interests at a given reservation. This column includes individual owners that are deceased. The 

sum of this column exceeds the total number of unique individuals owning fractional interests because this 

column counts individuals multiple times, i.e., for each reservation in which they own fractional interests. 

The final columns are the number of individuals who are currently identified as whereabouts unknown and 

the number of individuals who are over 65 years of age.

The primary difference between the figures in this document and those within the Initial Implementation

Plan is the passage of time during which additional transactions have occurred. To ensure consistent 

reporting going forward, the Buy-Back Program will continue to utilize the definitions and data queries used 

to generate this document and will post updated data to the Program’s website as available.

 

1. For example, if there was an 80 acre tract with two distinct owners (i.e., with a tribe owning 40% and an individual 

owning the remaining 60%) the purchasable acres is 48 acres.
Appendix B

-3

Tract Data Individuals and Interests

Land Area Namei

BIA Region

Land Area Code(s)

Tracts Held in Trust

Fractionated Tracts w/ 

Purchasable Interests

Highly Fractionated 

Tractsii

Acres Associated 

w/Fractionated & 

Purchasable Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership 

Interestiii

Purchasable Fractional 

Interests

<2% Interestsiv

<5% Interestsv

Unique Individuals

owning Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Fractional Interest 

Owners Under Legal 

Disabilityvi

Fractional Interest 

owners

over 65 Years of Age

<50% >=50%

WAU Fractional 

Interest Owners

Factional 

Interests owned 

by WAUs

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least 1 WAU 

owner

1 Confederated Tribes of the Colville 

Reservation, Washington (101) Northwest 101 6,352 2,054 108 113,29

2 1,424 630 36,361 4,695 5,163 6,014 523 1,660 686 136 1,089

2 Spokane Tribe of the Spokane 

Reservation, Washington (102) Northwest 102 1,280 389 21 21,598 372 17 8,803 1,679 1,896 2,158 134 494 164 50 372

3 Kalispell Indian Community of the 

Kalispell Reservation, Washington (103) Northwest 103 166 75

3 1,997 54 21 1,035 165 208 241 13 44 305 49

4 Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis 

Reservation, Washington (105) Northwest 105 137 64 15 1,268 63

1 2,117 615 721 795 33 57 24 13 144

5 Lummi Tribe of the Lummi 

Reservation, Washington (107) Northwest 107 1,119 343 16 4,311 340

3 6,926 1,583 1,715 1,974 242 619 145 33 305

6 Makah Indian Tribe of the Makah 

Indian Reservation, Washington (108) Northwest 108 714 257 13 1,554 225 32 5,816 996 1,109 1,273 106 426 145 13 232

7

Muckleshoot Indian Tribe of the 

Muckleshoot Reservation, Washington 

(109)

Northwest 109 305 76 10 1,270 742 1,951 533 655 808 67 112 418 127

8 Nisqually Indian Tribe of the Nisqually 

Reservation, Washington (110) Northwest 110 70 17

3 760 152 1,080 639 672 706 27 43 13 13 138

9 Nooksack Indian Tribe of Washington 

(111) Northwest 111 153 49

4 2,050 490 1,206 499 554 607 51 88 243 112

10 Suquamish Indian Tribe of the Port 

Madison Reservation, Washington (114) Northwest 114 235 66

5 1,895 624 1,673 912 1,000 1,120 127 171 45 35 214

11 Puyallup Tribe of the Puyallup 

Reservation, Washington (115) Northwest 115 142 16

0 19 151 929 26 699 25655

12 Quileute Tribe of the Quileute 

Reservation, Washington (116) Northwest 116 65 30

34 300 565 161 227 3079 1496 55

13 Quinault Tribe of the Quinault 

Reservation, Washington (117) Northwest 117 2,103 1,422 121 90,472 1,365 57 36,755 3,524 3,928 4,458 312 1,338 512 45 987

14 Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe of 

Washington (119) Northwest 119 66 33

8 947 321 1,598 424 466 512 45 113 24 10 72
Appendix B

-4

Tract Data Individuals and Interests

Land Area Namei

BIA Region

Land Area Code(s)

Tracts Held in Trust

Fractionated Tracts w/ 

Purchasable Interests

Highly Fractionated 

Tractsii

Acres Associated 

w/Fractionated & 

Purchasable Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership 

Interestiii

Purchasable Fractional 

Interests

<2% Interestsiv

<5% Interestsv

Unique Individuals

owning Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Fractional Interest 

Owners Under Legal 

Disabilityvi

Fractional Interest 

owners

over 65 Years of Age

<50% >=50%

WAU Fractional 

Interest Owners

Factional 

Interests owned 

by WAUs

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least 1 WAU 

owner

15

Skokomish Indian Tribe of the 

Skokomish Reservation, Washington 

(120)

Northwest 120 130 81 14 2,286 810 3,528 893 999 1,047 59 182 563 236

16 Squaxin Island Tribe of the Squaxin 

Island Reservation, Washington (121) Northwest 121 48 20

6 590 173 1,359 700 726 741 50 86 176 134

17 Swinomish Indians of the Swinomish 

Reservation, Washington (122) Northwest 122 163 78 13 3,554 77

1 3,180 1,032 1,119 1,168 101 195 42 26 171

18 Tulalip Tribes of the Tulalip 

Reservation, Washington (123) Northwest 123 644 146

2 2,832 1433 1,852 552 693 935 109 164 66 24 141

19 Confederated Tribes and Bands of the 

Yakama Nation, Washington (124) Northwest 124 6,426 2,208 177 137,061 1,838 370 54,451 4,109 4,442 4,913 195 787 502 56 830

20

Confederated Tribes of the Siletz 

Indians of Oregon (previously listed as 

the Confederated Tribes of the Siletz 

Reservation) (142)

Northwest 142 6210 4710300300001

21 Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla 

Reservation, Oregon (143) Northwest 143 1,543 1,015 45 58,178 970 45 18,828 2,301 2,675 3,125 101 296 181 48 570

22 Burns Paiute Tribe of the Burns Paiute 

Indian Colony of Oregon (144) Northwest 144 86 75

3 10,285 750 1,787 171 190 2198 31 211 34

23 Confederated Tribes of the Warm 

Springs Reservation, Oregon (145) Northwest 145 2,306 385

8 12,690 123 262 3,998 738 829 951 29 87 69 29 136

24 Shoshone

-Bannock Tribes of the Fort 

Hall Reservation of Idaho (180) Northwest 180 5,293 2,596 107 220,658 2,058 538 51,237 2,499 2,763 3,156 114 1,140 710 90 500

25 Coeur D'Alene Tribe of the Coeur 

D'Alene Reservation, Idaho (181) Northwest 181 1,177 300

3 28,880 246 54 3,156 696 854 1,057 57 151 98 17 195

26

Nez Perce Tribe, Idaho (previously 

listed as Nez Perce Tribe of Idaho) 

(182)

Northwest 182 989 620 28 31,648 493 127 12,295 1,687 1,867 2,092 81 311 180 19 421

27 Kootenai Tribe of Idaho (183) Northwest 183 34 23

0 692 203 220 49 62 6315554
Appendix B

-5

Tract Data Individuals and Interests

Land Area Namei

BIA Region

Land Area Code(s)

Tracts Held in Trust

Fractionated Tracts w/ 

Purchasable Interests

Highly Fractionated 

Tractsii

Acres Associated 

w/Fractionated & 

Purchasable Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership 

Interestiii

Purchasable Fractional 

Interests

<2% Interestsiv

<5% Interestsv

Unique Individuals

owning Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Fractional Interest 

Owners Under Legal 

Disabilityvi

Fractional Interest 

owners

over 65 Years of Age

<50% >=50%

WAU Fractional 

Interest Owners

Factional 

Interests owned 

by WAUs

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least 1 WAU 

owner

28 Blackfeet Tribe of the Blackfeet Indian 

Reservation of Montana (201)

Rocky 

Mountain 201 11,824 4,831 754 813,308 4,698 133 191,278 6,766 7,193 7,798 509 8,372 2,483 107 1,506

29 Crow Tribe of Montana (202) Rocky 

Mountain 202 9,975 4,794 619 829,868 4,566 228 179,268 3,949 4,292 4,853 223 3,142 1,520 156 842

30 Crow Tribe of Montana (202) Rocky 

Mountain 208 559 56

7 8,388 560 1,595 570 750 919 29 38 25 30 176

31

Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes 

of the Flathead Reservation, Montana 

(203)

Northwest 203 3,868 696 21 25,622 545 151 9,396 2,027 2,406 3,012 418 989 346 45 519

32

Fort Belknap Indian Community of the 

Fort Belknap Reservation of Montana 

(204)

Rocky 

Mountain 204 5,352 3,024 111 509,816 2,821 203 57,186 2,920 3,379 4,004 236 2,340 1,047 100 716

33

Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the 

Fort Peck Indian Reservation, Montana 

(206)

Rocky 

Mountain 206 7,463 4,521 347 639,342 4,328 193 114,546 9,304 10,034 10,90 3

712 5,151 1,843 277 1,681

34

Northern Cheyenne Tribe of the 

Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation, 

Montana (207)

Rocky 

Mountain 207 2,447 891 43 68,303 625 266 15,489 2,384 2,677 3,064 245 1,097 429 112 401

35

Arapahoe Tribe of the Wind River 

Reservation, Wyoming (281) & 

Shoshone Tribe of the Wind River 

Reservation, Wyoming (282)

Rocky 

Mountain 280 5,270 2,539 488 141,554 2,273 266 137,200 6,699 6,987 7,354 451 4,341 1,194 266 1,003

36

Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort 

Berthold Reservation, North Dakota 

(301) (Mandan, Hidatsa & Arikara)

Great 

Plains 301 9,554 3,249 310 417,948 3,046 203 91,707 4,003 4,367 4,945 214 2,221 932 97 699

37 Standing Rock Sioux Tribe of North & 

South Dakota (302)

Great 

Plains 302 10,078 6,304 951 431,999 3,988 2,316 227,133 18,663 19,477 20,21 2

1,773 18,819 3,794 725 2,543

38 Spirit Lake Tribe, North Dakota (303) Great 

Plains 303 1,365 934 234 41,661 770 164 60,068 5,318 5,597 5,807 331 2,739 530 114 844

39 Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa 

Indians of North Dakota (304)

Great 

Plains 304 1,342 591 80 30,322 584

7 26,170 7,663 8,157 8,735 806 2,107 333 86 2,007
Appendix B

-6

Tract Data Individuals and Interests

Land Area Namei

BIA Region

Land Area Code(s)

Tracts Held in Trust

Fractionated Tracts w/ 

Purchasable Interests

Highly Fractionated 

Tractsii

Acres Associated 

w/Fractionated & 

Purchasable Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership 

Interestiii

Purchasable Fractional 

Interests

<2% Interestsiv

<5% Interestsv

Unique Individuals

owning Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Fractional Interest 

Owners Under Legal 

Disabilityvi

Fractional Interest 

owners

over 65 Years of Age

<50% >=50%

WAU Fractional 

Interest Owners

Factional 

Interests owned 

by WAUs

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least 1 WAU 

owner

40

Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe of the 

Cheyenne River Reservation, South 

Dakota (340)

Great 

Plains 340 12,321 4,066 121 638,315 3,712 354 65,655 5,820 6,816 8,087 619 3,771 1,471 167 1,341

41 Crow Creek Sioux Tribe of the Crow 

Creek Reservation, South Dakota (342)

Great 

Plains 342 1,771 909 132 75,962 748 161 43,602 8,083 8,408 8,726 533 2,533 474 183 1,203

42 Lower Brule Sioux Tribe of the Lower 

Brule Reservation, South Dakota (343)

Great 

Plains 343 1,797 595 120 38,917 307 288 30,387 4,454 4,716 4,906 375 1,899 321 92 697

43 Oglala Sioux Tribe of the Pine Ridge 

Reservation, South Dakota (344)

Great 

Plains 344 12,016 6,028 774 736,381 4,207 1,821 195,862 19,942 21,136 22,59 4

2,223 14,839 3,071 508 3,233

44 Rosebud Sioux Tribe of the Rosebud 

Indian Reservation, South Dakota (345)

Great 

Plains 345 6,947 3,118 438 177,781 892 2,226 92,324 13,755 14,379 15,06 4

1,630 10,704 2,061 326 1,960

45 Yankton Sioux Tribe of South Dakota 

(346)

Great 

Plains 346 1,029 778 166 27,260 546 232 38,811 6,202 6,484 6,662 391 2,093 457 113 1,081

46

Sisseton - Wahpeton Oyate of the Lake 

Traverse Reservation, South Dakota 

(347)

Great 

Plains 347 1,985 1,320 227 56,735 973 347 53,525 4,570 4,838 5,097 340 3,639 717 83 1,104

47 Omaha Tribe of Nebraska (380) Great 

Plains 380 603 422 75 20,181 395 27 21,528 2,476 2,590 2,704 260 1,504 273 52 351

48 Santee Sioux Nation, Nebraska (382) Great 

Plains 382 142 66 19 2,436 54 12 3,825 1,584 1,754 1,832 128 255 42 27 338

49 Winnebago Tribe of Nebraska (383) Great 

Plains 383 734 641 286 22,120 480 161 73,753 4,032 4,144 4,227 358 5,885 500 86 765

50 Minnesota Chippewa 

- Bois Forte Band Midwest 404 430 200 92 8,413 157 43 15,440 1,755 1,835 1,899 162 1,126 180 21 318

51 Minnesota Chippewa - Fond du Lac 

Band Midwest 405 595 351 157 9,168 196 155 27,961 4,455 4,567 4,654 785 3,846 292 58 736

52 Minnesota Chippewa 

- Grand Portage 

Band Midwest 406 486 116 40 4,144 72 44 5,540 567 600 613 58 652 90

5 143

53 Minnesota Chippewa 

- Leech Lake 

Band Midwest 407 645 250 66 10,605 234 16 19,431 6,097 6,318 6,521 879 2,376 201 72 928
Appendix B

-7

Tract Data Individuals and Interests

Land Area Namei

BIA Region

Land Area Code(s)

Tracts Held in Trust

Fractionated Tracts w/ 

Purchasable Interests

Highly Fractionated 

Tractsii

Acres Associated 

w/Fractionated & 

Purchasable Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership 

Interestiii

Purchasable Fractional 

Interests

<2% Interestsiv

<5% Interestsv

Unique Individuals

owning Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Fractional Interest 

Owners Under Legal 

Disabilityvi

Fractional Interest 

owners

over 65 Years of Age

<50% >=50%

WAU Fractional 

Interest Owners

Factional 

Interests owned 

by WAUs

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least 1 WAU 

owner

54 Minnesota Chippewa - White Earth 

Band Midwest 408 749 41 12 2,395 41

0 4,046 2,882 3,039 3,136 415 537 36 28 445

55 Minnesota Chippewa 

- Mille Lacs Band Midwest 410 334 280 133 271 751 141 186 222 30 138 253 29

56 Upper Sioux Community, Minnesota 

(401) Midwest 401 10

20 5220 44 21 36 447720 15

57 Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians, 

Minnesota (409) Midwest 409 1,550

10 1501201200000

58

Bad River Band of the Lake Superior 

Tribe of Chippewa Indians of the Bad 

River Reservation, Wisconsin (430)

Midwest 430 1,318 620 96 9,854 248 372 20,847 4,644 4,809 4,960 1,095 4,523 443 58 715

59

Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake 

Superior Chippewa Indians of 

Wisconsin (431)

Midwest 431 806 313 83 4,415 75 238 18,288 3,679 3,756 3,858 1,017 3,656 250 61 545

60

Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake 

Superior Chippewa Indians of the Lac 

du Flambeau Reservation of Wisconsin 

(432)

Midwest 432 507 199 29 1,667 23 176 5,120 1,178 1,224 1,296 196 724 143 19 215

61 Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin 

(433) Midwest 433 447 25

1 136 232 338 236 243 313 109 113 190 38

62 Forest County Potawatomi Community, 

Wisconsin (434) Midwest 434 69

71 28570 310 147 164 182 21 3553 33

63 Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior 

Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin (435) Midwest 435 114 36 14 503 11 25 3,448 1,485 1,506 1,519 284 701 33 19 230

64 Stockbridge Munsee Community, 

Wisconsin (438) Midwest 438 157

30 1930 337 16 269 14304

65 Ho

-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin (439) Midwest 439 212 104 10 2,371 986 3,166 1,294 1,457 1,598 114 223 65 35 262

66 Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin 

(440) Midwest 440 1,325 14

0 53 140 2200 22 20 20 1201
Appendix B

-8

Tract Data Individuals and Interests

Land Area Namei

BIA Region

Land Area Code(s)

Tracts Held in Trust

Fractionated Tracts w/ 

Purchasable Interests

Highly Fractionated 

Tractsii

Acres Associated 

w/Fractionated & 

Purchasable Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership 

Interestiii

Purchasable Fractional 

Interests

<2% Interestsiv

<5% Interestsv

Unique Individuals

owning Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Fractional Interest 

Owners Under Legal 

Disabilityvi

Fractional Interest 

owners

over 65 Years of Age

<50% >=50%

WAU Fractional 

Interest Owners

Factional 

Interests owned 

by WAUs

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least 1 WAU 

owner

67 Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of 

Michigan (472) Midwest 472 100 25

5 677 250 1,012 622 688 734 40 51 133 131

68 Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, 

Michigan (475) Midwest 475 260 116 31 2,000 47 69 5,535 2,075 2,166 2,217 408 968 98 34 393

69 Keweenaw Bay Indian Community, 

Michigan (475) Midwest 476

422 13420 261 211 233 235 23 2524 57

70 Big Sandy Rancheria of Mono Indians 

of California (506) Pacific 506 12

30 1530 1599 1544200

71 Big Valley Band of Pomo Indians of the 

Big Valley Rancheria, California (507) Pacific 507 27 12

07 120 5846 50 27 31 1203

72 Cloverdale Rancheria of Pomo Indians 

of California (510) Pacific 510

220 1320800448200

73 Robinson Rancheria of Pomo Indians 

of California (516) Pacific 516 16

40 2340 2005 107 13400

74

Guidiville Rancheria of California (520)

Pacific 520210210300333100

75 Hopland Band of Pomo Indians of the 

Hopland Rancheria, California (521) Pacific 521 25 11

0 33 110 105 40 48 74 23 2850 13

76

Fort Independence Indian Community 

of Paiute Indians of the Fort 

Independence Reservation, California 

(525)

Pacific 525 48 280 78 280 254 39 72 106 56 144 280 12

77 Northfork Rancheria of Mono Indians 

of California (532) Pacific 532

210 8010700755100

78 Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi 

Indians of California (534) Pacific 534

810 1710600666100

79

Pinoleville Pomo Nation, California 

(formerly the Pinoleville Rancheria of 

Pomo Indians of California) (535)

Pacific 535 1160 2660 1400 1477400
Appendix B

-9

Tract Data Individuals and Interests

Land Area Namei

BIA Region

Land Area Code(s)

Tracts Held in Trust

Fractionated Tracts w/ 

Purchasable Interests

Highly Fractionated 

Tractsii

Acres Associated 

w/Fractionated & 

Purchasable Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership 

Interestiii

Purchasable Fractional 

Interests

<2% Interestsiv

<5% Interestsv

Unique Individuals

owning Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Fractional Interest 

Owners Under Legal 

Disabilityvi

Fractional Interest 

owners

over 65 Years of Age

<50% >=50%

WAU Fractional 

Interest Owners

Factional 

Interests owned 

by WAUs

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least 1 WAU 

owner

80 Redwood Valley Rancheria of Pomo 

Indians of California (539)

Pacific 539620320 38 13 19 1936226

81

Round Valley Indian Tribes of the 

Round Valley Reservation, California 

(540)

Pacific 540 362 185 22 4,555 1832 6,860 1,334 1,483 1,605 454 1,649 152 12 275

82 Greenville Rancheria of Maidu Indians 

of California (545) Pacific 545

210010807800000

83 Table Mountain Rancheria of California 

(551) Pacific 551 16

10610400433100

84 Karuk Tribe (formerly the Karuk Tribe 

of California) (555) Pacific 555 27

10 1410700711100

85 Blue Lake Rancheria, California (558) Pacific 558 20

40440600655300

86 Elk Valley Rancheria, California (559) Pacific 559 14

10210400433100

87 Hoopa Valley Tribe, California (561) Pacific 561 447 98

0 591 971 1,009 198 276 462 78 155 516 53

88 Yurok Tribe of the Yurok Reservation, 

California (562) Pacific 562 221 167

8 3,699 1670 4,585 1,029 1,204 1,357 517 1,515 1578 147

89

Quartz Valley Indian Community of the 

Quartz Valley Reservation of California 

(563)

Pacific 563620 2320500522100

90 Smith River Rancheria, California (564) Pacific 564 45

90 2290 2800 2888404

91

Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians, 

California (formerly the Augustine 

Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians of the 

Augustine Reservation (567)

Pacific 567630 5812 1704 1700020

92 Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, 

California (568) Pacific 568 22

90 20890 120 35 45 5912249
Appendix B

-10

Tract Data Individuals and Interests

Land Area Namei

BIA Region

Land Area Code(s)

Tracts Held in Trust

Fractionated Tracts w/ 

Purchasable Interests

Highly Fractionated 

Tractsii

Acres Associated 

w/Fractionated & 

Purchasable Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership 

Interestiii

Purchasable Fractional 

Interests

<2% Interestsiv

<5% Interestsv

Unique Individuals

owning Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Fractional Interest 

Owners Under Legal 

Disabilityvi

Fractional Interest 

owners

over 65 Years of Age

<50% >=50%

WAU Fractional 

Interest Owners

Factional 

Interests owned 

by WAUs

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least 1 WAU 

owner

93

La Jolla Band of Luiseno Mission 

Indians, California (formerly the La 

Jolla Band of Luiseno Mission Indians 

of the La Jolla Reservation) (576)

Pacific 576 80 390 342 390 553 179 233 281 13 24 104 45

94

Morongo Band of Mission Indians, 

California (formerly the Morango Band 

of Cahuilla Mission Indians of the 

Morongo Reservation) (582)

Pacific 582 708 2027 644 2011 3,061 693 773 1,008 54 156 57 31 140

95 Pala Band of Luiseno Mission Indians 

of the Pala Reservation, California (583) Pacific 583 478 236 10 809 236

0 5,517 675 752 869 46 297 106 16 139

96

Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians 

of the Agua Caliente Indian 

Reservation, California (584)

Pacific 584 477 1730 7,899 1730 1,132 81 112 2267 25 18 14 15

97

Pechanga Band of Luiseno Mission 

Indians of the Pechanga Reservation, 

California (586)

Pacific 586 160 1046 1,094 1022 3,687 676 775 890 68 237 779 167

98

Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission 

Indians of the Rincon Reservation, 

California (587)

Pacific 587 104 380 141 380 494 129 173 2236 14 122 40

99

Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation 

(formerly the Sycuan Band of Diegueno 

Mission Indians of California) (594)

Pacific 594 28 192 199 145 519 133 140 1578 22 122 25

100

Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla 

Indians, California (formerly the 

Torres-Martinez Band of Cahuilla 

Mission Indians of California) (595)

Pacific 595 231 1194 3,539 1190 2,224 384443 518 32 111 50 19 56

101

Colorado River Indian Tribe of the 

Colorado River Indian Reservation, 

Arizona and California (603)

Western 603 896 5285 4,109 442 86 8,618 1,043 1,243 1,524 124 621 248 26 265

102 Fort Mojave Indian Tribe of Arizona 

California & Nevada (604) Western 604 28

20 16020 2207 1100000
Appendix B

-11

Tract Data Individuals and Interests

Land Area Namei

BIA Region

Land Area Code(s)

Tracts Held in Trust

Fractionated Tracts w/ 

Purchasable Interests

Highly Fractionated 

Tractsii

Acres Associated 

w/Fractionated & 

Purchasable Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership 

Interestiii

Purchasable Fractional 

Interests

<2% Interestsiv

<5% Interestsv

Unique Individuals

owning Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Fractional Interest 

Owners Under Legal 

Disabilityvi

Fractional Interest 

owners

over 65 Years of Age

<50% >=50%

WAU Fractional 

Interest Owners

Factional 

Interests owned 

by WAUs

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least 1 WAU 

owner

103 Hopi Tribe of Arizona (608) Western 608 25 11

5 216 110 973 470 525 548 68 114 115 142

104 Tohono O'odham Nation of Arizona 

(610) Western 611 312 281 65 36,316 281

0 14,081 1,543 1,707 1,772 102 426 149 57 253

105

Gila River Indian Community of the 

Gila River Indian Reservation, Arizona 

(614)

Western 614 5,643 4,707 594 79,284 4,687 20 173,867 9,125 9,823 10,48 8801 10,663 2,706 264 1,430

106

Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian 

Community of the Salt River 

Reservation, Arizona (615)

Western 615 1,844 1,418 158 21,165 1,4117 48,967 4,835 5,322 5,799 458 3,688 935 128 738

107

California Valley Miwok Tribe, 

California (formerly the Sheep Ranch 

Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians of 

California (628)

Pacific 628110110200200000

108

Habematolel Pomo of Upper Lake, 

California (formerly the Upper Lake 

Band of Pomo Indians of Upper Lake 

Rancheria of California) (636)

Pacific 636940 1140 1400 1488400

109 Ely Shoshone Tribe of Nevada (644) Western 644

410 16010 247 13 2433107

110

Fort McDermitt Paiute and Shoshone 

Tribes of the Fort McDermitt Indian 

Reservation, Nevada and Oregon (646)

Western 646 1643 14240 558 416 453 463 70 8345 76

111 Walker River Paiute Tribe of the 

Walker River Reservation, Nevada (656) Western 656 505 348 11 6,274 342

6 6,656 1,027 1,188 1,421 188 530 192 12 269

112 Yomba Shoshone Tribe of the Yomba 

Reservation, Nevada (661) Western 661

950 32250 108 68 87 103 23 2452 21

113

Washoe Tribe of Nevada & California 

(Carson Colony, Dresslerville Colony, 

Woodsford Community, Stewart 

Community, & Washoe Ranches) (672)

Western 672 490 409 38 54,731 4009 14,080 1,132 1,192 1,266 126 1,216 2896 255
Appendix B-12

Tract Data Individuals and Interests

Land Area Name

i

BIA Region

Land Area Code(s)

Tracts Held in Trust

Fractionated Tracts w/ 

Purchasable Interests

Highly Fractionated 

Tractsii

Acres Associated 

w/Fractionated & 

Purchasable Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership 

Interestiii

Purchasable Fractional 

Interests

<2% Interestsiv

<5% Interests

v

Unique Individuals

owning Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Fractional Interest 

Owners Under Legal 

Disabilityvi

Fractional Interest 

owners

over 65 Years of Age

<50% >=50%

WAU Fractional 

Interest Owners

Factional 

Interests owned 

by WAUs

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least 1 WAU 

owner

114 Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah & 

Ouray Reservation, Utah (687) Western 687 2,101 1,059 186 60,882 917 142 43,585 2,095 2,241 2,313 133 1,667 565 88 315

115 Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma 

Indian Reservation, California (696)

Western 696 902 712 8 6,709 701 11 13,102 1,137 1,322 1,614 78 357 176 39 267

116 Pueblo of Acoma (703) Southwest 703 40 1 0 320 1 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 2

117 Laguna (707) Southwest 707 69 29 2 3,298 28 1 716 274 355 425 68 113 20 3 99

118 Pueblo of San Felipe (712) Southwest 712 36 1 0 71 1 0 43 31 36 43 0 0 0 0 9

119 Zuni Tribe of the Zuni Reservation, 

New Mexico ( 721) Southwest 721 44 12 1 1,791 12 0 530 386 425 464 48 52 8 4 64

120

Southern Ute Indian Tribe of the 

Southern Ute Reservation, Colorado 

(750)

Southwest 750 687 107 14 6,937 91 16 2,210 712 780 876 25 63 21 31 116

121

Ute Mountain Tribe of the Ute 

Mountain Reservation, Colorado, New 

Mexico & Utah (751)

Southwest 754 104 59 2 7,304 55 4 1,004 253 316 360 44 83 29 11 36

122 Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico 

& Utah (780) Southwest 722 430 222 19 30,967 222 0 6,679 1,074 1,162 1,278 121 505 134 19 259

123 Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico 

& Utah (780) Navajo 723 133 106 19 16,728 106 0 5,711 1,065 1,088 1,117 182 954 88 19 190

124 Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico 

& Utah (780) Navajo 724 75 46 3 7,186 46 0 1,143 400 509 572 96 168 36 9 107

125 Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico 

& Utah (780) Navajo 790 1,281 508 75 72,934 508 0 20,836 4,462 5,185 5,682 1,330 4,491 398 25 1,184

126 Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico 

& Utah (780) Navajo 791 4,288 3,446 841 536,387 3,434 12 223,634 24,342 25,848 26,900

2,398 12,007 2,237 297 5,472

127 Navajo Nation, Arizona, New Mexico 

& Utah (780) Navajo 792 177 42 2 6,317 42 0 1,316 557 677 768 126 197 37 1 157
Appendix B

-13

Tract Data Individuals and Interests

Land Area Namei

BIA Region

Land Area Code(s)

Tracts Held in Trust

Fractionated Tracts w/ 

Purchasable Interests

Highly Fractionated 

Tractsii

Acres Associated 

w/Fractionated & 

Purchasable Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership 

Interestiii

Purchasable Fractional 

Interests

<2% Interestsiv

<5% Interestsv

Unique Individuals

owning Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Fractional Interest 

Owners Under Legal 

Disabilityvi

Fractional Interest 

owners

over 65 Years of Age

<50% >=50%

WAU Fractional 

Interest Owners

Factional 

Interests owned 

by WAUs

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least 1 WAU 

owner

128 Cheyenne & Arapaho Tribes, 

Oklahoma (802)

Southern 

Plains 801 1,334 1,138 147 84,909 1,136

2 39,983 5,550 6,116 6,507 363 1,706 537 224 803

129 Kiowa Indian Tribe of Oklahoma (802) *

Southern 

Plains 802 4,535 2,980 116 222,389 2,966 14 56,194 6,668 7,895 9,465 563 2,372 990 206 1,690

130 Fort Sill Apache Tribe of Oklahoma 

(803)

Southern 

Plains 803 76 50

1 2,495 500 639 175 216 2769 19 105 55

131

Wichita and Affiliated Tribes (Wichita, 

Keechi, Waco & Tawakonie), 

Oklahoma (804)*

Southern 

Plains 804 1,103 841 38 64,197 841

0 16,549 1,944 2,289 2,741 109 509 237 54 473

132 Otoe

-Missouria Tribe of Indians, 

Oklahoma(811)

Southern 

Plains 811 461 358 45 21,750 357

1 12,475 1,643 1,869 2,051 161 741 181 46 384

133 Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma (812) Southern 

Plains 812 452 363 29 23,067 362

1 9,985 1,664 1,827 2,000 136 498 179 22 403

134 Ponca Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma 

(813)

Southern 

Plains 813 498 405 90 18,262 404

1 25,205 2,541 2,679 2,796 236 1,716 248 72 382

135 Tonkawa Tribe of Indians of Oklahoma 

(814)

Southern 

Plains 814 12

70 25170 273 87 100 115 15 2962 19

136 Absentee Shawnee Tribe of Indians of 

Oklahoma (820)

Southern 

Plains 820 438 259 30 14,539 259

0 8,694 1,931 2,090 2,224 157 625 125 15 508

137 Citizen Potawatomi Nation, Oklahoma 

(821)

Southern 

Plains 821 112 63 11 3,196 61

2 2,378 1,208 1,355 1,463 147 241 497 461

138 Iowa Tribe of Oklahoma (822) Southern 

Plains 822 65 50 11 1,778 47

3 2,604 745 796 839 63 167 29 19 163

139 Kickapoo Tribe of Oklahoma (823) Southern 

Plains 823 218 129

7 5,214 1290 3,353 816 927 1,095 122 338 74 23 169

140 Sac & Fox Nation, Oklahoma (824) Southern 

Plains 824 391 247 15 16,352 247

0 5,672 1,176 1,301 1,523 132 311 97 20 321

141 Iowa Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska 

(860)

Southern 

Plains 860 48

51 11950 151 85 98 1065630 28

142 Kickapoo Tribe of Indians of the 

Kickapoo Reservation in Kansas (861)

Southern 

Plains 861 201 78

5 2,506 726 1,482 427 516 622 19 35 17 12 116
Appendix B-14

Tract Data Individuals and Interests

Land Area Name

i

BIA Region

Land Area Code(s)

Tracts Held in Trust

Fractionated Tracts w/ 

Purchasable Interests

Highly Fractionated 

Tractsii

Acres Associated 

w/Fractionated & 

Purchasable Interests

Level of Tribal 

Ownership 

Interestiii

Purchasable Fractional 

Interests

<2% Interestsiv

<5% Interests

v

Unique Individuals

owning Fractional 

Interests

Whereabouts Unknown

Fractional Interest 

Owners Under Legal 

Disabilityvi

Fractional Interest 

owners

over 65 Years of Age

<50% >=50%

WAU Fractional 

Interest Owners

Factional 

Interests owned 

by WAUs

Fractionated 

Tracts w/ at 

least 1 WAU 

owner

143 Prairie Band of Potawatomi Nation, 

Kansas (862)

Southern 

Plains 862 581 326 39 15,626 318 8 9,647 1,651 1,942 2,194 117 404 142 34 406

144 Sac & Fox Nation of Missouri in 

Kansas and Nebraska (863)

Southern 

Plains 863 8 2 1 41 2 0 113 101 107 113 3 3 1 1 21

145 Cherokee Nation, Oklahoma (905) Eastern 

Oklahoma 905 743 275 1 6,170 274 1 1,333 178 323 787 201 349 174 0 111

146 Chickasaw Nation, Oklahoma (906) Eastern 

Oklahoma 906 2,452 1,878 6 57,648 1,878 0 14,535 1,667 2,399 3,662 689 1,945 878 7 757

147 Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma (907) Eastern 

Oklahoma 907 822 500 0 19,299 500 0 2,606 413 586 1,290 262 452 266 2 303

148 Muscogee (Creek) Nation, Oklahoma 

(908)

Eastern 

Oklahoma 908 1,974 1,246 0 43,775 1,246 0 8,566 850 1,503 2,669 419 1,107 503 2 636

149 Seminole Nation of Oklahoma (909) Eastern 

Oklahoma 909 1,212 959 4 21,188 959 0 8,350 932 1,253 1,765 383 1,441 539 3 304

150 Quapaw Tribe of Indians, Oklahoma 

(920)

Eastern 

Oklahoma 920 295 223 9 9,739 217 6 3,477 282 348 390 13 78 60 2 119

151 Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma 

(921)

Eastern 

Oklahoma 921 47 30 1 354 30 0 283 105 130 160 8 10 5 1 62

152 Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma 

(923)

Eastern 

Oklahoma 923 162 71 1 2,048 70 1 1,480 554 634 761 80 139 46 16 182

153 Osage Nation, Oklahoma (formerly the 

Osage Tribe) (930)

Eastern 

Oklahoma 930 10,615 610 1 63,333 601 9 2,945 188 291 683 34 84 55 27 123

Total 202,985 93,909 10,417 8,267,214 80,443 13,466 2,981,597 300,227 326,657 184,694 44,111

 

* The Program is analyzing these land areas codes to determine which recognized tribe has jurisdiction for each tract. Once this analysis is complete, each tribe will comprise one data row. This may impact the number of tribes that fall within 

the approximately 90% of purchasable fractional interests (i.e., Table 1 of the Updated Implementation Plan).
Appendix B-15

 

i Federally Recognized Tribe with Jurisdiction

ii

 Defined as a tract of land with 50-99 co-owners with no owner having an interest greater than 10% or a tract of land with 100 plus co-owners. See 25 U.S.C. § 2201(6).

iii

 Ownership in Fractionated Tracts Containing Purchasable Interests.

iv

 The Secretary may give priority to the acquisition of fractional interests representing 2 percent or less of a parcel of trust or restricted land. See 25 U.S.C. § 2212(b)(2).

v

 AIPRA Intestate Descent Rule. See 25 U.S.C. § 2006.

vi

 For example, individuals that are non-compos mentis or minors.