99–010 

Calendar No. 720 

111TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 111–379 

INDIAN PUEBLO CULTURAL CENTER CLARIFICATION ACT 

DECEMBER 20, 2010.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. DORGAN, from the Committee on Indian Affairs, 

submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany H.R. 4445] 

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

(H.R. 4445) to amend Public Law 95–232 to repeal a restriction on 

treating as Indian country certain lands held in trust for Indian 

pueblos in New Mexico, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon without an amendment and recommends that the bill 

do pass. 

PURPOSE

The purpose of H.R. 4445 is to amend Public Law 95–232 by repealing a restriction on treating an 11.2857 acre parcel of land held 

in trust by the United States for the 19 Indian Pueblos in New 

Mexico as Indian country. 

BACKGROUND

The Indian Pueblo Cultural Center is located on an 11.2857 acre 

parcel of land located in Albuquerque, NM. This parcel of land was 

originally owned by the United States and was the site of the Albuquerque Indian School, which was administered by the Bureau of 

Indian Affairs (BIA). In the 1960’s, the federal government determined that the lands and improvements of the Indian school property were no longer needed for Indian school purposes. Subsequently, the BIA conveyed the land in 1969 by quitclaim deed to 

the 19 Pueblos in New Mexico as tenants in common. The purpose 

of the conveyance was to enable the Pueblos to develop an Indian 

Pueblo Cultural Center on the property. 

The All Indian Pueblo Council (AIPC) is comprised of the 19 New 

Mexico Pueblos and one Texan Pueblo (Ysleta del Sur became a 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with REPORTS
2 

1This administrative proceeding involved an enrolled member of the Pueblo of Laguna whose 

place of business was located at the Indian Pueblo Cultural Center. His business was to do private investigation, primarily background investigations for casinos owned and operated by the 

Pueblos of Acoma, Sandia, and San Felipe. 2 Neither Bernalillo County nor the City of Albuquerque, in which the 11.2857 acre parcel of 

trust land is located, has attempted to impose any tax on IPMI or Pueblo members based on 

their activity on the property. Further, the County and City have never attempted to tax the 

property itself, or the substantial improvements on that land. 

member of the AIPC in 2009). The AIPC meets monthly to discuss 

issues such as education, culture, and water and land rights. As coowners of the 11.2857 acre parcel of property conveyed to them by 

the BIA in 1969, the Indian Pueblos, through the AIPC, sought to 

clarify the legal status of the property by requesting that the land 

be taken into trust by the United States for the benefit of the 19 

Pueblos in New Mexico. 

In 1978, Congress enacted Public Law 95–232, which directed 

the Secretary of the Interior to place the 11.2857 acre parcel of 

land into trust for the benefit of the 19 Pueblos in New Mexico. 

Section (b) of that Act states: 

Such land shall be held in trust jointly for such Indian pueblos and shall enjoy the tax-exempt status of other trust lands, 

including exemption from State taxation and regulations. However, such property shall not be ‘‘Indian country’’ as defined in 

section 1151 of title 18, United States Code. (italics added). 

In 1997, the New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department 

(NMTRD) sought to impose its gross receipts tax on a business 

owned by an enrolled tribal member and located at the Indian 

Pueblo Cultural Center (In the Matter of the Protest of Val Tech & 

Associates, NMTRD Decision and Order, No. 97–26).1 In an administrative hearing, the NMTRD concluded that Congress intended to 

authorize the State of New Mexico to tax business activity on the 

11.2857 acre parcel of trust land by providing in Public Law 95– 

232 that the land would ‘‘not be Indian country as defined in section 1151 of title 18, United States Code.’’ The NMTRD held that 

while the 11.2857 acre parcel of trust property itself was exempt 

from state taxation, the business activity taking place on the property was subject to state taxation. The NMTRD decision was not 

appealed. 

NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION

The Indian Pueblo Marketing, Inc. (IPMI) is a corporation chartered by the Secretary of the Interior, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 477, 

and is owned jointly by the 19 New Mexico Pueblos. IPMI has conducted retail business operations on the 11.2857 acre parcel of 

trust land since 1987. During that period, IPMI has never paid 

state taxes on its business operations at the Indian Pueblo Cultural 

Center, and the State of New Mexico has only assessed taxes 

against IPMI for its business operations at the Cultural Center one 

time.2 This tax assessment occurred in 1998 when the NMTRD assessed cigarette and tobacco taxes against IPMI based on the Val 

Tech decision. 

In 1999, however, the NMTRD entered into an agreement with 

IPMI withdrawing the assessments on cigarette and tobacco taxes 

against IPMI. The agreement was approved by the NMTRD and 

the State Attorney General and provided that Public Law 95–232 

‘‘does not reflect any intention by Congress that the Pueblos’ activVerDate Mar 15 2010 10:43 Dec 21, 2010 Jkt 99010 PO 00000 Frm 000002 Fmt 06659 Sfmt 06602 E:\HR\OC\SR379.XXX SR379

erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with REPORTS
3 

ity on the Cultural Center trust land would be subject to state taxation.’’ 

Despite the 1999 agreement, the NMTRD denied requests by 

IPMI in 2000, 2004, and 2008 to issue a written ruling confirming 

that IPMI’s business activity on the 11.2857 acre parcel of trust 

land is exempt from taxation by the State of New Mexico. Without 

a written ruling by the NMTRD, it is unclear if the NMTRD has 

the authority to impose state taxes based on the Val Tech decision, 

notwithstanding the 1999 agreement. 

Since 1978, Congress has enacted the Santa Fe Indian School 

Act, Public Law 106–568, and the Albuquerque Indian School Act, 

Public Law 110–453. These two public laws declared that the lands 

identified in each Act would be held in trust for the 19 Pueblos in 

New Mexico. However, neither Act included a provision stating 

that the lands to be placed in trust would not be Indian country, 

as PL 95–232 did for the 11.2857 acre parcel of trust property containing the Indian Pueblo Cultural Center. Enacting H.R. 4445 

would clarify that the 11.2857 acre parcel of trust land containing 

the Indian Pueblo Cultural Center maintains the same legal status 

as these other lands jointly held in trust for the 19 New Mexico 

Pueblos. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

On January 13, 2010, Representative Heinrich, for himself and 

Representatives Lujan and Teague, introduced H.R. 4445. The bill 

was referred to the House Natural Resources Committee. On April 

21, 2010, the Natural Resources Committee held a hearing on the 

bill, at which the Department of Interior, the State of New Mexico, 

and the Indian Pueblos of New Mexico testified in favor of the bill. 

On June 28, 2010, the Natural Resources Committee reported the 

bill out of Committee, as amended. On June 30, 2010, the House 

of Representatives passed H.R. 4445, as amended, by unanimous 

voice vote. The bill was received in the Senate and referred to the 

Senate Indian Affairs Committee. On November 18, 2010, the Indian Affairs Committee held an open business meeting where H.R. 

4445 was considered and favorably reported by a voice vote. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title 

This section provides that this Act may be cited as the ‘‘Indian 

Pueblo Cultural Center Clarification Act.’’ 

Section 2. Repeal of restriction on treating as Indian Country certain lands held in trust for Indian Pueblos in New Mexico 

This section of the bill amends Public Law 95–232, by striking 

the provision in that law which prohibits the parcel of land from 

being treated as ‘‘Indian Country’’ as defined in section 1151 of title 

18 of the United States Code. 

Section 3. Prohibition on gaming 

This section adds language to Public Law 95–232 prohibiting 

gaming from occurring on the parcel that is held in trust jointly for 

the 19 Pueblos of New Mexico. 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with REPORTS
4 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

On November 18, 2010, the Indian Affairs Committee convened 

a business meeting to consider H.R. 4445 and other measures. The 

Committee, by a voice vote, ordered the bill reported to the full 

Senate with the recommendation that the bill do pass. 

COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

The following cost estimate, as provided by the Congressional 

Budget Office, dated December 1, 2010, was prepared for H.R. 

4445: 

DECEMBER 1, 2010. 

Hon. BYRON L. DORGAN, 

Chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 4445, the Indian Pueblo 

Cultural Center Clarification Act. 

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

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Jeff LaFave. 

Sincerely, 

DOUGLAS W. ELMENDORF. 

Enclosure. 

H.R. 4445—Indian Pueblo Cultural Center Clarification Act 

H.R. 4445 would eliminate a provision of current law that prohibits certain land, located in New Mexico and held in trust by the 

federal government for the New Mexico Pueblos, from being considered Indian Country, as defined by federal law. Because the federal 

government is responsible for certain law enforcement activities in 

Indian Country, enacting the legislation could increase the workload of certain federal law enforcement agencies. Based on information from the Department of the Interior, CBO estimates that any 

costs associated with additional law enforcement activities would 

be insignificant and subject to the availability of appropriated 

funds. Enacting H.R. 4445 would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. 

H.R. 4445 would impose an intergovernmental mandate as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) by prohibiting gaming on some land held in trust for the Pueblos in New 

Mexico. Because the Pueblos are not currently operating gaming 

activities on this land nor do they have plans to do so in the future, 

CBO estimates that the cost, if any, would be small and well below 

the annual threshold established in UMRA ($70 million in 2010, 

adjusted annually for inflation). 

This bill contains no new private-sector mandates as defined in 

UMRA. 

On June 25, 2010, CBO transmitted a cost estimate for H.R. 

4445 as ordered reported by the House Committee on Natural Resources on June 16, 2010. The House and Senate versions of the 

legislation are similar, and the CBO cost estimates are the same. 

The CBO staff contacts for this estimate are Jeff LaFave (for federal costs) and Melissa Merrell (for the state, local, and tribal imVerDate Mar 15 2010 10:43 Dec 21, 2010 Jkt 99010 PO 00000 Frm 000004 Fmt 06659 Sfmt 06602 E:\HR\OC\SR379.XXX SR379

erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with REPORTS
5 

pact). The estimate was approved by Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis. 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

The Committee has received no communications from the Executive Branch regarding H.R. 4445. 

REGULATORY AND PAPERWORK IMPACT STATEMENT

Paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate requires that each report accompanying a bill to evaluate the 

regulatory and paperwork impact that would be incurred in carrying out the bill. The Committee has concluded that the regulatory and paperwork impacts of H.R. 4445 should be de minimis. 

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 H.R 4445, as 

ordered reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be 

omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter printed in italic): 

PUBLIC LAW 95–232 

* * * * * * * 

(b) Upon approval by the Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary 

shall accept such conveyances on behalf of the United States. Such 

land shall be held in trust jointly for such Indian pueblos and shall 

enjoy the tax-exempt status of other trust lands, including exemption from State taxation and regulation. øHowever, such property 

shall not be ‘‘Indian country’’ as defined in section 1151 of title 18, 

United States Code.¿ The Secretary shall cause a description of 

such trust land to be published in the Federal Register. 

* * * * * * * 

(e) PROHIBITION ON GAMING.—Gaming, as defined and regulated 

by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2701 et seq.), shall 

be prohibited on land held in trust pursuant to subsection (b). 

Æ 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with REPORTS