39–010 

Calendar No. 534 

113TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 113–260 

TO ENCOURAGE THE STATE OF ALASKA TO ENTER INTO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS WITH INDIAN TRIBES IN THE STATE RELATING 

TO THE ENFORCEMENT OF CERTAIN STATE LAWS BY INDIAN TRIBES, 

TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN RURAL ALASKA, TO REDUCE ALCOHOL AND DRUG ABUSE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

SEPTEMBER 18, 2014.—Ordered to be reported 

Mr. TESTER, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 1474] 

The Committee on Indian Affairs, to which was referred the bill 

(S. 1474) to encourage the state of Alaska to enter into intergovernmental agreements with Indian tribes in the State relating to the 

enforcement of certain State laws by Indian tribes, to improve the 

quality of life in rural Alaska, to reduce alcohol and drug abuse, 

and for other purposes, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an amendment and recommends that the bill, as 

amended, do pass. 

PURPOSE

The purpose of S. 1474 is to supplement State jurisdiction in 

Alaska Native villages with enhanced tribal and local authority to 

improve the quality of life in rural Alaska by helping to address 

and reduce domestic violence against Alaska Native women and 

children along with alcohol and drug abuse. 

BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR LEGISLATION

Many Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages face significant 

public safety challenges and struggle to combat staggering rates of 

violent crime with inadequate resources and technology. There are 

229 Federally recognized tribes in Alaska, which are often geographically isolated by rivers, oceans, and mountains. Alaska tribes 

can exercise civil authority; however, the recent reauthorization of 

the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) has clouded to what extent that civil authority lies over non-tribal members. Only a handful of tribes in Alaska have any law enforcement presence. Those 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
2 

tribes that do have peace officers or tribal police provide basic law 

enforcement and those offices have little training or equipment. 

In Alaska there are approximately 100 tribal courts exercising 

tribes’ jurisdiction. Many of these tribes have developed their own 

constitutions, ordinances and protocols that incorporate the tribes’ 

traditional values and practices. Tribal courts in Alaska typically 

address civil issues such as child welfare, Indian Child Welfare Act 

cases, customary adoptions, public intoxication, disorderly conduct, 

domestic violence, and minor juvenile offenses, through tribal remedies. 

The State of Alaska has asserted exclusive criminal jurisdiction 

over all lands, including Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act and 

tribal land. Approximately 370 State troopers have primary responsibility for law enforcement in rural Alaska, but have a full-time 

presence in less than half of the remote Alaska Native villages. 

Seventy-five villages lack any law enforcement presence at all. The 

State exercises its jurisdiction through the provision of law enforcement and judicial services from a set of regional locations under 

the direction and control of State commissioners and judges. 

The 2013 reauthorization of VAWA prohibited Alaska tribes— 

with the exception of the Metlakatla Indian Community—from the 

criminal jurisdiction expansions granted to other non-Alaskan 

tribes. Section 910 of VAWA further prohibited Alaska tribes—with 

the exception of the Metlakatla Indian Community—from issuing 

and enforcing domestic violence protective orders against non-member Alaska Natives and non-Natives. In 2013, the Indian Law and 

Order Commission issued a report, entitled ‘‘A Roadmap for Making Native America Safer,’’ that recommended several changes to 

Federal law to improve public safety conditions in rural Alaska, including changes that would allow Alaska Native tribes to exercise 

criminal jurisdiction in their villages. 

The Committee on Indian Affairs held a legislative hearing on S. 

1474 on April 2, 2014, where Alaska tribes and the Department of 

the Interior testified in support of the bill. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 1474 was introduced on August 1, 2013, by Senator Mark 

Begich and Senator Lisa Murkowski. The bill was referred to the 

Committee on Indian Affairs. On April 2, 2014, the Committee held 

a hearing on the bill. On May 21, 2014, the Committee met to consider the bill. One substitute amendment was offered by Senator 

Begich, and the bill, as amended, was adopted unanimously and ordered favorably reported to the Senate by voice vote. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF BILL AS ORDERED REPORTED

Senator Begich filed an amendment in the nature of a substitute. 

The bill as amended, would do the following: 

Section 1—Short title 

The Act may be cited as the ‘‘Alaska Safe Families and Villages 

Act of 2014’’. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
3 

Section 2—Findings and purposes 

Section 2 states the findings of Congress and purposes for the 

need for this act. 

The substitute amendment added statistics and other findings 

supporting the need for the legislation. New findings include references to the Indian Law and Order Commission Report, which 

was not complete at the time of the bill’s introduction. The amended language also expands the bill’s purpose to support tribes in the 

State in the enforcement and adjudication of tribal laws relating to 

child abuse and neglect, domestic violence, and drug and alcohol offenses. 

Section 3—Definitions 

Section 3 defines the key terms used throughout this act. 

Section 4—Alaska Safe Families and Villages Self Governance 

Intergovernmental Program 

Section 4 establishes authority for the United States Attorney 

General to create the ‘‘Alaska Safe Families and Villages Self Governance Intergovernmental Grant Program’’ to make grants available to Alaska Native tribes carrying out intergovernmental agreements with the State of Alaska, in an effort to provide more local 

tools and options to combat village public safety issues. Section 4 

also provides guidelines for tribes that seek to enter into such 

agreements and establishes support for the use and execution of 

tribal remedies. 

The following are required for tribes to be deemed eligible for the 

program: 

• Submit an application; 

• Have three fiscal years of clean financial records; 

• Demonstrate sufficient capacity to conduct the program, 

such as a history operating children’s courts, or other social 

service or law enforcement programs; and 

• Certify or evidence intent to enter into negotiations relating to an intergovernmental agreement with the State. 

Section 4 allows tribes that are still in the planning phase and 

do not yet have a formalized agreement with the State to be 

deemed eligible for the grant program. 

Section 5—Alaska Safe Families and Villages Self Governance Tribal Law Project 

The provisions in Section 5 are conceptually modeled after prior 

versions of the bill (S. 1192), which would expand tribal authority 

over certain matters relating to child abuse, neglect, domestic violence, and drug and alcohol related offenses. This section does not 

require tribes to enter into agreements with the State. 

Tribes can apply directly with the Department of Justice (DOJ) 

to participate in the Alaska Self Governance Tribal Law Project. 

Once approved, the participating tribe would be eligible to exercise 

civil jurisdiction concurrent with the State over (A) any member of, 

or person eligible for membership in, the Indian tribe; and (B) any 

nonmember of the Indian tribe, if the nonmember resides or is located in the remote Alaska Native village in which the Indian tribe 

operates. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
4 

The intent is to hold village residents’ locally accountable for 

troublesome behavior, to minimize village residents’ entanglement 

in the complex state judicial and incarceration systems, and to support local public safety presence that is predictable, accountable, 

respected, and culturally relevant in an effort to decrease public 

safety problems in remote Alaska Native villages by providing 

more tools for tribal governments and tribal courts. 

Section 5 holds participating tribes accountable to the protections 

found in Title II of the Indian Civil Rights Act, which includes due 

process and the right to a jury of one’s peers, for all tribally imposed civil sanctions. There is no limit on the number of tribes that 

can apply and participate in this program. 

Section 6—Administration 

Section 6 clarifies the effects of the bill, including provisions that 

explicitly state that the bill does not establish Indian Country within the state, nor does it confer criminal jurisdiction on a tribe, unless agreed to in an intergovernmental agreement with the State. 

Section 7—Technical assistance 

Section 7 provides for expanded technical assistance by the Attorney General to Indian tribes within the State of Alaska. 

Section 8—Funding 

Section 8 makes participating tribes eligible for DOI—Bureau of 

Indian Affairs tribal court and law enforcement programs and 

funding. 

Section 9—Repeal of special rule for State of Alaska 

Section 9 repeals Section 910 of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 (18 U.S.C. 2265 note; Public Law 113– 

4) which prohibits Alaska tribes—other than the Metlakatla Indian 

Community—from issuing and enforcing domestic violence protective orders against non-member Alaska Natives and non-Natives. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following cost estimate, as provided by the Congressional 

Budget Office, dated September 12, 2014, was prepared for S. 1474: 

SEPTEMBER 12, 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. 1474, the Alaska Safe Families and Villages Act of 2014. 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark Grabowicz. 

Sincerely, 

DOUGLAS W. ELMENDORF. 

Enclosure. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
5 

S. 1474—The Alaska Safe Families and Villages Act of 2013 

Summary: S. 1474 would direct the Department of Justice (DOJ) 

to make grants to Alaskan Indian tribes to assist them in forming 

intergovernmental agreements with the state of Alaska. Such 

agreements would aim to reduce domestic violence and drug abuse 

and improve the criminal justice system. The bill also would authorize DOJ to provide Alaskan tribes with training and technical 

assistance on certain judicial matters. 

Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO esti- mates that implementing S. 1474 would cost $14 million over the 

2015–2019 period. Pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply to this 

legislation because it would not affect direct spending or revenues. 

S. 1474 contains an intergovernmental mandate as defined in the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) by requiring states to 

give full faith and credit to court orders and decrees issued by some 

Alaskan tribes. CBO estimates that the cost to comply with that 

mandate would be small and well below the threshold established 

in that act ($76 million in 2014, adjusted annually for inflation). 

S. 1474 also contains a private-sector mandate as defined in 

UMRA by eliminating an existing right of action against the state 

of Alaska for the actions carried out by tribes participating in grant 

programs established by the bill. CBO estimates that the cost of 

complying with the mandate would fall below the private-sector 

threshold established in UMRA ($152 million in 2014, adjusted annually for inflation). 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary effects of S. 1474 are shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget function 750 (administration 

of justice) 

Based on information from DOJ about the cost of establishing 

and maintaining new programs for Indian tribes in remote areas 

of Alaska, CBO estimates that implementing S. 1474 would require 

funding of $16 million over the 2015–2019 period. We expect DOJ 

to use those funds to hire additional staff in Alaska, provide training and technical assistance to Indian tribes, and award grants to 

selected tribes. CBO assumes that the estimated amounts will be 

appropriated near the start of each fiscal year and that outlays will 

follow the historical rate of spending for similar activities. 

Pay-As-You-Go considerations: None. 

Estimated impact on state and local Governments: S. 1474 contains an intergovernmental mandate as defined in UMRA by requiring states to give full faith and credit to court orders and decrees issued by some Alaskan tribes. Some, but not all, states currently recognize the actions of tribal courts. Based on information 

from state representatives, CBO expects that the tribes would be 

issuing relatively few orders that would need to be enforced by 

other jurisdictions and the costs for states to enforce those orders 

would be small and well below the threshold established in that act 

($76 million in 2014, adjusted annually for inflation). 

Estimated impact on the private sector: S. 1474 would impose a 

private-sector mandate as defined in UMRA by eliminating an existing right of action against the state of Alaska. The legislation 

would authorize Indian tribes in Alaska that participate in the programs established by the bill to enforce certain state and tribal 

laws on Indian land. The legislation also would eliminate liability 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
6 

for the state, or any political subdivision of the state, for the actions carried out by tribes participating in those programs. The cost 

of the mandate would be the value of forgone compensation for 

damages that would have been awarded to private entities in 

claims against the state of Alaska. Because of the relatively low 

cap on damages that can be awarded in actions against Alaska, 

CBO estimates that the annual cost of complying with the mandate 

would fall below the private-sector threshold established in UMRA 

($152 million in 2014, adjusted annually for inflation). 

Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Mark Grabowicz; Impact 

on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Melissa Merrell; Impact 

on the Private Sector: Marin Burnett. 

Estimate 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. 1474 will have a minimal impact on regulatory or paperwork requirements. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

The Committee has received no communications from the Executive Branch regarding S. 1474. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In accordance with subsection 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill S. 

1474, as ordered reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter printed in italic): 

18 U.S.C. 2265 note; Public Law 113–4 (Violence Against Women 

Reauthorization Act of 2013) 

øSEC. 910. SPECIAL RULE FOR THE STATE OF ALASKA 

(a) EXPANDED JURISDICTION.—In the State of Alaska, the amendments made by sections 904 and 905 shall only apply to the Indian 

country (as defined in section 1151 of title 18, United States Code) 

of the Metlakatla Indian Community, Annette Island Reserve. 

(b) RETAINED JURISDICTION.—The jurisdiction and authority of 

each Indian tribe in the State of Alaska under section 2265(e) of 

title 18, United States Code (as in effect on the day before the date 

of enactment of this Act)— 

(1) shall remain in full force and effect; and 

(2) are not limited or diminished by this Act or any amendment made by this Act. 

(c) SAVINGS PROVISION.—Nothing in this Act or an amendment 

made by this Act limits or diminishes the jurisdiction of the State 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING
7 

of Alaska, any subdivision of the State of Alaska, or any Indian 

tribe in the State of Alaska.¿ 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with HEARING