```

[Senate Report 113-242]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                       Calendar No. 530
113th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     113-242

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

 
TO EXCHANGE TRUST AND FEE LAND TO RESOLVE LAND DISPUTES CREATED BY THE 
REALIGNMENT OF THE BLACKFOOT RIVER ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF THE FORT HALL 
               INDIAN RESERVATION, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                _______
                                

   August 5 (legislative day, August 1), 2014.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

           Mr. Tester, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 2040]

    The Committee on Indian Affairs, to which was referred the 
bill (S. 2040) to exchange trust and fee land to resolve land 
disputes created by the realignment of the Blackfoot River 
along the boundary of the Fort Hall Indian Reservation, and for 
other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably 
thereon without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.

                                PURPOSE

    S. 2040 would rectify border changes to the Fort Hall 
Reservation following the realignment of the Blackfoot River 
and would allow the local Flood Control District to compensate 
non-Indian landowners for the land swapped with the Shoshone-
Bannock Tribes.

                               BACKGROUND

    The Fort Hall Reservation was created by Executive Order in 
1867 and confirmed by the Fort Bridger Treaty of 1868. The 
Executive Order establishing the Reservation designates the 
Blackfoot River as the Reservation's northern boundary. 
Following the realignment of the Blackfoot River by the Army 
Corps of Engineers in 1964, land disputes arose as various 
tracts of land that had previously been on one side of the 
River were now on the other. At issue are 25 parcels of land 
(approximately 37.04 acres) of Indian land formerly on the 
southern side of the river now on the northern side and 19 
parcels (approximately 31.01 acres) of non-Indian land formerly 
on the northern side and now on the southern side and within 
the Reservation's boundary. Due to their inaccessibility, the 
non-Indian lands have remained unused for years.
    In the late 1980's, the Snake River Basin Adjudication 
began decreeing water rights on all streams and rivers within 
the Snake River Basin in Idaho, which includes the Blackfoot 
River. Several non-Indian landowners whose lands were affected 
by the realignment of the Blackfoot River asserted claims for 
water rights on Fort Hall Reservation lands. The Shoshone-
Bannock Tribes opposed these claims, which has resulted in 
litigation still currently pending as part of the Snake River 
Basin Adjudication.

                          NEED FOR LEGISLATION

    Congressional approval of the settlement agreement is 
required to extinguish claims and title to certain trust lands 
and to place other lands into trust for the benefit of the 
Tribes.

                          LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

    This legislation was introduced on February 25, 2014, by 
Senator Mike Crapo (R-ID) with Senator James Risch (R-ID) as an 
original cosponsor. The bill was referred to the Committee on 
Indian Affairs. On May 7, 2014, the committee held a hearing on 
the bill. On May 21, 2014, the committee met to consider the 
bill. No amendments were offered, and the bill was ordered to 
be reported favorably to the Senate by voice vote. There is an 
identical companion bill in the House of Representatives (H.R. 
5049), which was introduced by Representative Michael Simpson 
(R-ID) and Representative Betty McCollum (D-MN).
    There have been two previous introductions of this 
legislation. In the 111th Congress, Senators Crapo and Risch 
introduced S. 2802 which was favorably reported by the 
Committee to the full Senate. No further action was taken. In 
the 112th Congress, Senators Crapo and Risch introduced S. 1065 
which was reported favorably out of Committee. No further 
action was taken. There have also been House companion bills in 
previous Congresses.
    Previous versions of this bill authorized funds to be 
released by the Treasury for the execution of the land swap, 
but the current legislation does not. In the 111th Congress, S. 
2802 authorized $1 million to compensate Indians and non-
Indians for the trespass to land and for the land's value. In 
the 112th Congress, S. 1065 would have reduced the 
authorization to $700,000. The stakeholders support the current 
bill without these authorizations.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title

    This section sets forth the short title of the Act as the 
``Blackfoot River Land Exchange Act of 2014.''

Section 2. Findings; purposes

    This section describes the findings and purposes of the 
Act, including a summary of relations between the United States 
and the Tribes and a description of the Reservation. According 
to the Executive Order establishing the boundaries of the 
Reservation, the Blackfoot River in its natural state forms the 
northern border of the Reservation.

Section 3. Definitions

    Section 3 sets forth the definitions for terms within the 
Act.

Section 4. Release of claims to certain Indian and non-Indian owned 
        lands

    This section extinguishes or releases claims relating to 
the boundary disputes caused by the realignment of the 
Blackfoot River. All existing and future claims to the lands 
transferred by this legislation and all right, title, and 
interest that the Tribes, allottees, non-Indian landowners, and 
the Blackfoot River Flood Control District No. 7 may have had 
to the land are extinguished. With respect to Indian lands, any 
interests or claims held by the Tribes, allottees, or the 
United States acting as trustee for the Tribes or allottees 
arising under section 2116 of the Revised Statutes (Indian 
Trade and Intercourse Act, 25 U.S.C. 177) are extinguished. Any 
transferal of non-Indian land under section 5 of this Act that 
violates section 2116 of the Revised Statutes shall be 
considered valid as long as it is consistent with all other 
applicable Federal laws (including regulations). Section (b) 
states that the Secretary may execute and file appropriate 
documentation with the Bingham County (Idaho) clerk, or any 
other appropriate county officer, as she sees fit.

Section 5. Non-Indian land to be placed into trust for tribes

    Section 5 provides that, effective on the date of enactment 
of the Act, the non-Indian land described within the bill shall 
be considered to be held in trust by the United States for the 
benefit of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes.

Section 6. Trust land to be converted to fee land

    This section requires the Secretary to transfer the Indian 
land at issue in the Act to the Blackfoot River Flood Control 
District No. 7 for use or sale. Proceeds from the sale of the 
former trust land will be used to compensate non-Indian land 
owners for any net loss of land resulting from this Act as well 
as to provide for administrative and other expenses incurred by 
the Flood Control District in its carrying out the Act. The 
Flood Control District may dispose of remaining land after the 
sale of the land as it deems appropriate.

Section 7. Effect on original reservation boundary

    This section states that nothing in this Act will alter the 
boundary of the Fort Hall Reservation as determined by the 
Executive Order of 1867 and confirmed by the treaty in 1868.

Section 8. Effect on tribal water rights

    Section 8 affirms that nothing in this Act affects the 
water rights controlled by the Tribes pursuant to the 1990 Fort 
Hall Indian Water Rights Agreement, ratified by the Fort Hall 
Indian Water Rights Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-602).

Section 9. Disclaimers regarding claims

    Section 9 ensures that nothing in the Act: (1) affects 
Idaho's sovereign claim to title in the beds and banks of the 
River; (2) affects Idaho's ability to establish title under the 
Quiet Title Act; (3) affects the Tribes' or the United States' 
ability to claim ownership of the beds and banks of the River; 
or (4) extinguishes or conveys any water rights or claims to 
water rights of non-Indian landowners in the Snake River Basin 
Adjudication.

                   COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

    The following cost estimate, as provided by the 
Congressional Budget Office, dated June 17, 2014, was prepared 
for S. 2040:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                     Washington, DC, June 17, 2014.
Hon. Jon Tester,
Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs,
U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 2040, the Blackfoot 
River Land Exchange Act of 2014.
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Martin von 
Gnechten.
            Sincerely,
                                              Douglas W. Elmendorf.
    Enclosure.

S. 2040--Blackfoot River Land Exchange Act of 2014

    S. 2040 would require an exchange of tribal and private 
lands to settle a dispute between the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes 
and certain non-Indian landowners in southeastern Idaho. Under 
the bill, the Department of the Interior (DOI) would exchange 
37 acres of Indian trust land for 31 acres of private land that 
would be held in trust for the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes. Based 
on information provided by DOI, CBO estimates that implementing 
the legislation would have no significant effect on the federal 
budget. Enacting S. 2040 would not affect direct spending or 
revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.
    By requiring the exchange of lands through federal statute, 
S. 2040 would impose both intergovernmental and private-sector 
mandates, as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 
(UMRA), on tribal and nontribal land owners. The bill would 
terminate rights to certain parcels of land surrounding the 
Blackfoot River, and extinguish any past, present, or future 
claims on that land. The cost of the mandates would be the 
forgone compensation for damages that could have been collected 
through legal actions related to clarifying title to the 
property, and the net value of the land being exchanged by the 
federal government. Any forgone damages are unlikely to be 
significant. In a market study used by DOI, the value of the 
land is estimated to be less than $500,000. Therefore, CBO 
estimates that the aggregate cost of the mandates would fall 
well below the annual thresholds established in UMRA for both 
intergovernmental and private-sector mandates ($76 million and 
$152 million, respectively, in 2014, adjusted annually for 
inflation).
    The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Martin von 
Gnechten (for federal costs), Melissa Merrell (for the state 
and local impact) and Marin Burnett (for the private-sector 
impact). The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy 
Assistant Director for Budget Analysis.

               REGULATORY AND PAPERWORK IMPACT STATEMENT

    Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the 
Senate requires each report accompanying a bill to evaluate the 
regulatory and paperwork impact that would be incurred in 
carrying out the bill. The Committee believes that S. 2040 will 
have a minimal impact on regulatory or paperwork requirements.

                        EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

    The Committee has received no communications from the 
Executive Branch regarding S. 2040.

                        CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

    In accordance with subsection 12 of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee finds that the 
enactment of S. 2040 will not make any changes in existing law.

                                  

```