Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?
                                                       Calendar No. 507
107th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     107-214

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



 
 PROVIDING EQUITABLE COMPENSATION TO THE YANKTON SIOUX TRIBE OF SOUTH 
DAKOTA AND THE SANTEE SIOUX TRIBE OF NEBRASKA FOR THE LOSS OF VALUE OF 
                             CERTAIN LANDS

                                _______
                                

                 July  22, 2002.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

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

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 434]

    The Committee on Indian Affairs, to which was referred the 
bill (S. 434) providing equitable compensation to the Yankton 
Sioux Tribe of South Dakota and the Santee Sioux Tribe of 
Nebraska for the loss of value of certain lands, having 
considered the same, reports favorably thereon with 
amendment(s) and recommends that the bill (as amended) do pass.

                                PURPOSE

    The purpose of S. 434, the Yankton Sioux Tribe and Santee 
Sioux Tribe Equitable Compensation Act, is to provide 
additional compensation to the Yankton and Santee Sioux Tribes 
for the acquisition by the United States of 2,851.40 acres of 
the Yankton Sioux Reservation for Fort Randall Dam and 
Reservoir and 593.10 acres of the Santee Sioux Reservation for 
Gavins Point Dam and Reservoir on the Missouri River.

                               BACKGROUND

    Pursuant to the Treaty of April 19, 1858 (11 Stat. 743) a 
430,405-acre reservation was established for the Yankton Sioux 
Indian Tribe along the east bank of the Missouri River in 
Charles Mix County, South Dakota. Approximately 40,000 acres of 
the reservation is currently in tribal or individual Indian 
trust status. In 1866, President Andrew Johnson signed an 
Executive Order setting aside four townships in northeastern 
Nebraska near the mouth of the Niobrara River as a permanent 
home for remnants of six Santee Sioux bands driven out of 
Minnesota following the so-called ``Sioux Uprising of 1862''. 
Although subsequent Executive Orders adjusted the boundaries 
and expanded the size of the reservation to 165,195 acres, only 
about 7,000 acres of that area remain in tribal or individual 
trust status.
    Under the Flood Control Act of 1944 (33 U.S.C. 701 et 
seq.), the Congress authorized construction of five massive dam 
projects on the Missouri River as part of the Pick-Sloan 
program, the primary purpose of which was to provide flood 
control downstream, as well as improved navigation, hydro-power 
generation, improved water supplies, and enhanced recreation. 
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which constructed and 
operates the dams, estimates that the projects' overall annual 
contribution to the national economy averages $1.9 billion. 
However, for the Yankton and Santee Sioux Tribes and other 
tribes along the Missouri, the human and economic costs of the 
projects have far outweighed any benefits received, since the 
lands affected by Pick-Sloan were, by and large, Indian lands, 
and entire tribal communities and their economies were 
destroyed.
    Fort Randall Dam and Reservoir project, an integral part of 
the Pick-Sloan program, initially flooded 2,851 acres of 
Yankton Sioux tribal land and forced the relocation and 
resettlement of at least 20 families from the traditional and 
self-sustaining community of White Swan, one of four major 
settlement areas on the reservation. Unlike communities on 
other reservation that were relocated to higher ground to make 
way for Pick-Sloan projects, the White Swan community was 
completely dissolved and its residents were dispersed.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ ``Historical Analysis of the Impact of Missouri River Pick-
Sloan Sam Projects on the Yankton and Santee Sioux Indian Tribes'' by 
Michael Lawson, Ph.D., April, 1999.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In 1952, the U.S. District Court awarded the Yankton Sioux 
$121,210, or about $42 an acre, for the appraised value of the 
flooded land in condemnation proceedings in which neither the 
Tribe nor its affected members were represented by private 
counsel. Significantly, the appraised value of the lands on the 
Yankton Reservation was less than half of the value that 
wasestablished for comparable lands on four other Sioux reservations 
appraised in 1951. In 1954, the Congress appropriated $106,500 for 
severance damages for Yankton Sioux tribal members, but by August, 
1956, when these funds were distributed to some, but not all, affected 
tribal families, nine years had passed since their land had been 
condemned and six years had passed since their families had been forced 
to move.
    The Gavins Point Dam and Reservoir Project, also an 
integral part of the Pick-Sloan program, inundated 593 acres of 
Santee Sioux tribal and individual trust land near the main 
settlement area of the Indian village of Santee in Knox County, 
Nebraska. This lost acreage, comprising about 8.5 percent of 
the reservation and considered among the best agricultural land 
on the Santee Sioux Reservation, included 380 acres of 
pastureland and 200 acres of cropland that was part of a tribal 
farm.
    On or about January, 1958, the U.S. District Court awarded 
the Santee Sioux $52,000, or $87.67 an acre, for the appraised 
value of the inundated lands pursuant to a 1955 agreement 
between the Tribe and the Corps of Engineers. Records as to the 
actual distribution of these funds are not available. As was 
the case with the payment to the Yankton Sioux Tribe, the 
payment to the Santee Sioux Tribe, made years after the taking 
of their land, did not account for the inflation in property 
values between the time of the taking and the time of 
settlement. Significantly, within months of the award, the U.S. 
District Court in South Dakota ruled that the Army lacked 
congressional authorization to condemn tribal land for its 
Pick-Sloan projects.
    In 1984, a joint Federal-Tribal study found that the 
compensation that was provided by the United States to tribes 
impacted by the Pick-Sloan projects greatly undervalued their 
losses. To provide more just compensation, in 1992 the Congress 
enacted legislation that established a trust fund of 
$149,200,000 for the Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort 
Berthold Reservation related to the loss of 176,000 acres to 
the Garrison Dam project, and a trust fund of $90,600,000 for 
the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe related to the loss of 56,000 
acres to the Oahe Dam project.\2\ In 1996, the Congress 
established a $27,500,000 Recovery Fund for the Crow Creek 
Sioux Tribe and a $39,900,000 Recovery Fund for the Lower Brule 
Sioux Tribe related to the loss of 15,693 and 22,296 acres of 
land, respectively, to the Fort Randall and Big Bend Dam 
projects.\3\ In 2000, the Congress established a Recovery Fund 
of $290,723,000 for the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe of South 
Dakota, which lost approximately 104,000 acres to the Oahe Dam 
project.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ P.L. 102-575, title XXXV, 106 Stat. 4731 (Oct. 30, 1992).
    \3\ P.L. 104-223, 110 Stat. 3026 (Oct. 1, 1996), and P.L. 105-132, 
111 Stat. 2563 (Dec. 2, 1997).
    \4\ P.L. 106-511, 114 Stat. 2365 (Nov. 13, 2000).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Fort Berthold, Cheyenne River, Standing Rock, Crow 
Creek, and Lower Brule Tribes all received initial settlements 
from Congress between 1947 and 1962 that included payment for 
direct property damages, severance damages (including the cost 
of relocation and reestablishment of affected tribal members), 
and rehabilitation for the entire reservation. In providing 
funds for rehabilitation, Congress recognize that the tribes as 
a whole and not just the tribal members within the taking areas 
were affected negatively by the loss of the fertile bottomland 
environment and reservation infrastructure. Accordingly, the 
five settlements provided compensation for severance damages 
and rehabilitation that averaged four and a half times more 
than was paid for direct damages.
    In 1960, a Bureau of Indian Affairs comparative study of 
the experience of six reservations impacted by Pick-Sloan dams 
found that the average total payment per family within the 
taking area at Yankton was $5,605, whereas the payment averaged 
$16,680 on the other five reservations (Fort Berthold, Standing 
Rock, Cheyenne River, Crow Creek, and Lower Brule). Although 
the Yankton Sioux Tribe and the Santee Sioux Tribes received 
settlements for the appraised value of their property in 
condemnation proceedings and an amount for severance damages, 
neither tribe received any payments for direct property damages 
nor any funds for rehabilitation, even though a large number of 
tribal members residing outside the taking area on both tribes' 
reservations were also impacted by the dam projects.
    The Committee recognizes that any attempt to measure the 
tangible and intangible values associated with the loss of 
tribal life and tradition along a free flowing river in 
monetary terms is necessarily subjective. Nevertheless, in view 
of the losses experienced by the Yankton Sioux Tribe and the 
Santee Sioux Tribe as a result of Pick-Sloan dams and 
reservoirs, and the precedents for providing additional 
compensation for other Missouri River tribes similarly 
affected, the Committee finds that it is appropriate to provide 
additional equitable compensation for the Yankton and Santee 
Sioux Tribes as would be provided by S. 434.
    The amount to be deposited into the Yankton Sioux Tribe 
Development Trust Fund is based on the per-acre amount of 
compensation provided to the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe in 1997 
for inundated land ($1,763 per acre) multiplied by 2,851.4 (the 
number of acres of land flooded by the Fort Randall project), 
which equals $5,027,018, multiplied by 458 percent (the average 
of the sum paid by Congress for severance damages and 
rehabilitation over and above the sums paid for property 
damages in five initial tribal settlements between 1948 and 
1962), for a total of $23,023,743.
    The amount to be deposited into the Santee Sioux Tribe 
Development Trust Fund is calculated by taking the number of 
acres of land flooded by the Gavins Point project (593.1) and 
multiplying it by the per-acre amount of compensation provided 
to the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe in 1997 for inundated land 
($1,763), which equals $1,045,635. This amount, multiplied by 
458 percent (the average of sum paid by Congress for severance 
damages and rehabilitation over and above sums paid for 
property damages in five initial tribal settlements between 
1948 and 1962), equals $4,789,010.

                      S. 434 SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS

    S. 434 would establish the Yankton Sioux Tribe Development 
Trust fund and the Santee Sioux Tribe Development Trust Fund in 
the U.S. Treasury. On the first day of the 11th fiscal year 
after the date of enactment, $23,023,743, together with 
interest accrued from the date of enactment, would be deposited 
into the Yankton Sioux Tribe Development Trust Fund, and 
$4,789,010, together with interest accrued from the date of 
enactment, would be deposited into the Santee Sioux Tribe 
Development Trust Fund. The Secretary of the Treasury would 
beauthorized and directed to invest these funds in interest-bearing 
obligations of the United States or in obligations guaranteed as to 
both principal and interest by the United States.
    Once both funds have been capitalized, the Secretary of the 
Treasury would be authorized to transfer any accrued interest 
into separate accounts for transfer to the Secretary of the 
Interior, without fiscal year limitation on the availability of 
such funds. In turn, the Secretary of the Interior would be 
authorized to make payments to the Tribes for use in carrying 
out projects and programs that would implement tribal plans for 
socio-economic recovery and cultural preservation.
    The tribal councils, in consultation with the Secretary of 
the Interior and the Secretary of Health and Human Services, 
are to prepare the plans, which must set forth a combination of 
economic development, infrastructure development, educational, 
health, recreation and social welfare objectives. Each council 
must permit tribal members to review and comment on the initial 
plan, as well as on any proposed revisions to it. Activities 
carried out under these plans would be subject to existing 
requirements of the Office of Management and Budget for annual 
audits, and audit determinations would be required to be 
published together with tribal council proceedings. Per capita 
payments from the Funds are prohibited.
    Payments from the trust funds to either Tribe could not be 
used as a basis for reducing or denying any service or program 
to which the Tribe or a tribal member is otherwise entitled, 
for subjecting the Tribe or a tribal member to any Federal or 
State income tax; or for affecting Pick-Sloan Missouri River 
power rates. Finally, once the tribal trust funds have been 
fully capitalized, S. 434 would extinguish all Yankton and 
Santee Sioux tribal claims against the United States for losses 
related to the construction of Fort Randall and Gavins Point 
dams and reservoirs.

                          LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

    On May 27, 1999, during the 106th Congress, Senator Daschle 
of South Dakota and Senator Kerrey of Nebraska introduced S. 
1148 as the Yankton Sioux Tribe and Santee Sioux Tribe of 
Nebraska Development Trust Fund Act, which was referred to the 
Committee on Indian Affairs. Senator Johnson of South Dakota 
and Senator Hagel of Nebraska were added as cosponsors. The 
Committee held a hearing on S. 1148 on May 17, 2000. The 
Department of the Interior witness expressed the 
Administration's support for the bill if it were amended to 
address concerns regarding the manner in which the proposed 
trust funds would be funded, per capita payments, and waiver of 
claims. Both Tribes testified in strong support of the 
legislation.
    On June 21, 2000, the Committee on Indian Affairs 
considered and adopted an amendment-in-the-nature-of-a-
substitute to S. 1148 on behalf of the bill's sponsors. The 
substitute included changes that (1) provide for capitalizing 
the trust funds from the General Fund of the Treasury, with 
interest, on the first day after the 11th year after the date 
of enactment; (2) prohibit per capita payments from the trust 
funds; (3) extinguish all tribal claims for losses related to 
construction of the two dams once the tribal trust funds have 
been fully capitalized; (4) require the tribes to consult with 
the Secretaries of Interior and Health and Human Services in 
preparing plans to use the trust funds; and, (5) include plan 
activities under existing requirements of the Office of 
Management and Budget for annual audits of such activities and 
require audit determinations to be published with tribal 
council proceedings. These changes addressed the concerns 
expressed by the Department of the Interior in its testimony 
and were acceptable to the Tribes. However, S. 1148 was not 
enacted into law.
    S. 434 was introduced on March 1, 2001, by Senator Thomas 
A. Daschle, for himself, Senator Tim Johnson, and Senator Chuck 
Hagel, and was referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs. 
Senator E. Benjamin Nelson was subsequently added as a 
cosponsor. S. 434 is similar to S. 1148, but differs from it in 
that no compensation is provided for certain items included in 
the earlier bill (the use value of land on the reservation of 
the Yankton Sioux Tribe lost to erosion since 1953, and the 
loss value of Niobrara Island, located in the vicinity of the 
Santee Sioux Tribe Indian Reservation) and the amount of 
compensation to each Tribe is reduced accordingly. On March 21, 
2002, the Committee on Indian Affairs, by voice vote, ordered 
the bill favorably reported to the Senate, with the 
recommendation that the Senate do pass S. 434 as reported. The 
Committee has made certain technical amendments to the bill.

            COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION AND TABULATION OF VOTE

    The Committee on Indian Affairs, in an open business 
session on March 21, 2002, approved S. 434 by voice vote and 
ordered the bill reported favorably to the Senate.

                      SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1--Short title

    This section cities the short title of S. 434 as the 
``Yankton Sioux Tribe and Santee Sioux Tribe Equitable 
Compensation Act''.

Section 2--Findings

    This section sets forth ten Congressional findings:
    The first finding is that by enacting the Flood Control Act 
of 1944, Congress approved the Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin 
program to promote the general economic development of the 
United States, to provide for irrigation above Sioux City, 
Iowa, to protect urban and rural areas from devastating floods 
of the Missouri River, and for other purposes.
    The second findings is that the water impounded for the 
Fort Randall and Gavins Point projects of the Pick-Sloan 
program inundated the fertile, wooded bottom lands along the 
Missouri River that constituted the most productive 
agricultural and pastoral lands of, and the homeland of, the 
members of the Yankton Sioux Tribe and the Santee Sioux Tribe.
    The third findings is that the Fort Randall project, 
including the Fort Randall Dam and Reservoir, overlies the 
western boundary of the Yankton Sioux Indian Reservation.
    The fourth finding is that the Gavins Point project, 
including the Gavins Point Dam and Reservoir, overlies the 
eastern boundary of the Santee Sioux Tribe Indian Reservation.
    The fifth finding is that although the Fort Randall and 
Gavins Point projects are majorcomponents of the Pick-Sloan 
program, and contribute to the economy of the United States by 
generating a substantial quantity of hydropower and impounding a 
substantial amount of water, the reservations of the Yankton Sioux 
Tribe and the Santee Sioux Tribe remain undeveloped.
    The sixth finding is that the United States Army Corps of 
Engineers took the Indian lands used for the Fort Randall and 
Gavins Point projects by condemnation proceedings.
    The seventh finding is that the Federal Government did not 
give the Yankton Sioux Tribe and the Santee Sioux Tribe an 
opportunity to receive compensation for direct damages from the 
Pick-Sloan program, even though the Federal Government gave 
five Indian tribes on reservations upstream from the Yankton 
Sioux Tribe and Santee Sioux Tribe such an opportunity.
    The eighth finding is that the Yankton Sioux Tribe and the 
Santee Sioux Tribe did not receive just compensation for the 
taking through condemnation of their productive agricultural 
lands referred to in the sixth finding.
    The ninth finding is that the settlement agreement that the 
United States entered into with the Yankton Sioux Tribe and the 
Santee Sioux Tribe to provide compensation for the taking by 
condemnation referred to in the sixth finding did not take into 
account the increase in property values over the years between 
the date of taking and the date of settlement.
    The tenth finding states that in addition to the financial 
compensation provided under the settlement agreements referred 
to in the ninth finding, (A) the Yankton Sioux Tribe should 
receive $23,023,743 for the loss value of 2,851.40 acres of 
land taken for the Fort Randall Dam and Reservoir, and (B) the 
Santee Sioux Tribe should receive $4,789,010 for the loss value 
of 593.1 acres of land near the Santee village.

Section 3--Definitions

    This section provides definitions for the terms ``Indian 
Tribe''; ``Santee Sioux Tribe''; and ``Yankton Sioux Tribe''.

Section 4--Yankton Sioux Tribe Development Trust Fund

    Subsection (a) provides for the establishment in the United 
States Treasury of a fund to be known as the ``Yankton Sioux 
Tribe Development Trust Fund'' (``Fund'') that shall consist of 
any amounts deposited into it pursuant to this Act.
    Subsection (b) provides that on the first day of the 11th 
fiscal year that begins after the date of enactment of this 
Act, the Secretary of the Treasury shall, from the General Fund 
of the Treasury, deposit into the Fund established under 
subsection (a) $23,023,743, together with an additional amount 
that equals the amount of interest that would have accrued on 
this amount if it had been invested in interest-bearing 
obligations of the United States, or in obligations guaranteed 
as to both principal and interest by the United States, on the 
first day of the fiscal year that begins after the date of 
enactment of this Act and compounded annually thereafter.
    Subsection (c) requires the Secretary of the Treasury to 
invest that portion of the Fund that in his judgment is not 
required to meet current withdrawals. Such investments may be 
made only in interest-bearing obligations of the United States 
or in obligations guaranteed as to both principal and interest 
by the United States. The Secretary of the Treasury shall 
deposit interest resulting from such investments into the Fund.
    Subsection (d)(1) provides that, beginning on the first day 
of the 11th fiscal year after the date of enactment of this 
Act, and on the first day of each fiscal year thereafter, the 
Secretary of the Treasury shall withdraw the aggregate amount 
of interest deposited into the Fund for that fiscal year and 
transfer that amount to the Secretary of the Interior for use, 
without fiscal year limitation, in accordance with paragraph 
(d)(2).
    Subsection (d)(2) provides that the Secretary of the 
Interior shall use the amounts transferred under subsection 
(d)(1) only for the purpose of making payments to the Yankton 
Sioux Tribe as such payments are requested by the Tribe by 
tribal resolution, but only after the Tribe has adopted a 
tribal plan under section 6; funds so transferred may be 
expended only to carry out projects and programs under the 
tribal plan.
    Subsection (e) bars the Secretary of the Treasury from 
transferring or withdrawing any amount deposited under 
subsection (b) of this section except as provided in 
subsections (c) and (d)(1) of this section.

Section 5--Santee Sioux Tribe Development Trust Fund

    Subsection (a) provides for the establishment in the United 
States Treasury of a fund to be known as the ``Santee Sioux 
Tribe Development Trust Fund'' (``Fund'') that shall consist of 
any amounts deposited into it pursuant to this Act.
    Subsection (b) provides that on the first day of the 11th 
fiscal year that begins after the date of enactment of this 
Act, the Secretary of the Treasury shall, from the General Fund 
of the Treasury, deposit into the Fund established under 
subsection (a) $4,789,010, together with an amount of interest 
that equals the amount of interest that would have accrued on 
this amount if such amount had been invested in interest-
bearing obligations of the United States, or in obligations 
guaranteed as to both principal and interest by the United 
States, on the first day of the first fiscal year that begins 
after the date of enactment of this Act and compounded annually 
thereafter.
    Subsection (c) requires the Secretary of the Treasury to 
invest that portion of the Fund that in his judgment is not 
required to meet current withdrawals. Such investments may be 
made only in interest-bearing obligations of the United States 
or in obligations guaranteed as to both principal and interest 
by the United States. The Secretary of the Treasury shall 
deposit interest resulting from such investments into the Fund.
    Subsection (d)(1) provides that, beginning on the first day 
of the 11th fiscal year after the date of enactment of this 
Act, and on the first day of each fiscal year thereafter, the 
Secretary of the Treasury shall withdraw the aggregate amount 
of interest deposited into the Fund for the fiscal year and 
transfer that amount of the Secretary of the Interior for use, 
without fiscal year limitation, in accordance with subsection 
(d)(2).
    Subsection (d)(2) provides that the Secretary of the 
Interior shall use the amounts deposited under subsection 
(d)(1) only for the purpose of making payments to the Santee 
Sioux Tribe as such payments are requested by the Tribe by 
tribal resolution, but only after the Tribe has adopted a 
tribal plan under section 6, and provides that funds so 
transferred may be expended only to carry our projects and 
programs under the tribal plan.
    Subsection (e) bars the Secretary of the Treasury from 
transferring or withdrawing any amount deposited into the Fund 
under subsection (b) of this section except as provided in 
subsections (c) and (d)(1) of this section.

Section 6--Tribal plans

    Subsection (a) provides that, not later than 24 months 
after the date of enactment of this Act, the tribal councils of 
the Yankton Sioux and Santee Sioux Tribes shall each prepare a 
plan (tribal plan) for the use of the payments made to each 
tribe under sections 4(d) or 5(d) of this Act.
    Subsection (b) requires that each tribal plan shall provide 
for the manner in which the tribe shall expend payments made to 
the tribe under section 4(d) or 5(d) to promote (1) economic 
development, (2) infrastructure development, (3) educational 
health, recreational, and social welfare objectives of the 
tribe and its members, or (4) any combination of such 
activities.
    Subsection (c)(1) provides that the tribal councils of the 
Yankton Sioux and Santee Sioux Tribes shall make copies of 
their respective plans available to their members for review 
and comment before the tribal plan becomes final, in accordance 
with procedures established by the tribal council.
    Subsection (c)(2) provides that each tribal council may, on 
an annual basis, revise and update its tribal plan. In revising 
the tribal plan, the tribal council shall provide the members 
of the tribe opportunity to review and comment on any proposed 
revision.
    Subsection (c)(3) requires each tribal council to consult 
with the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Health 
and Human Services in preparing its tribal plan and any 
revisions to update the plan.
    Subsection (c)(4)(A) provides that the activities of the 
tribes in carrying out their respective tribal plans shall be 
audited as part of the annual single-agency audit that the 
tribes are required to prepare pursuant to the Office of 
Management and Budget Circular A-133.
    Subsection (c)(4)(B) requires the auditors to determine 
whether funds received by each tribe for the period covered by 
the audits were expended to carry out the respective tribal 
plans in a manner consistent with this section, and to include 
such determinations in the written findings of the audits.
    Subsection (c)(5)(C) requires that a copy of the written 
findings of the audits shall be inserted in the published 
minutes of each tribal council's proceedings for the session at 
which the audit is presented to each council.
    Subsection (d) prohibits any portion of any payment made 
under this Act from being distributed to any member of the 
Yankton Sioux Tribe or the Santee Sioux Tribe on a per capita 
basis.

Section 7--Eligibility of tribe for certain programs and services

    Subsection (a) declares that no payment made to the Yankton 
Sioux Tribe or the Santee Sioux Tribe pursuant to this Act 
shall result in the reduction or denial of any service or 
program to which, pursuant to Federal law, the Yankton Sioux 
Tribe or Santee Sioux Tribe is otherwise entitled because of 
the status of the tribe as a Federally-recognized Indian tribe, 
or any individual who is a member of either tribe because of 
that individual's status as a tribal member.
    Subsection (b) provides that no payment made pursuant to 
this Act shall be subject to any Federal or State income tax.
    Subsection (c) provides that no payment made pursuant to 
this Act shall affect Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin power 
rates.

Section 8--Statutory construction

    This section provides that nothing in this Act may be 
construed as diminishing or affecting any water rights of an 
Indian tribe, except as specifically provided in another 
provision of this Act, any treaty right that is in effect on 
the date of enactment of this Act, or any authority of the 
Secretary of the Interior or the head of any other Federal 
agency under a law in effect on the date of enactment of this 
Act.

Section 9--Authorization of appropriations

    This section authorizes to be appropriated such sums as are 
necessary to carry out this Act, including such sums as may be 
necessary for the administration of the Yankton Sioux Tribe 
Development Trust Fund under section 4 and the Santee Sioux 
Tribe Development Trust Fund under section 5.

Section 10--Extinguishment of claims

    This section provides that all monetary claims that the 
Yankton Sioux Tribe or the Santee Sioux Tribe has or may have 
against the United States for loss of value or use of land 
related to lands described in section 2(a)(10) resulting from 
the Fort Randall and Gavins Point projects of the Pick-Sloan 
Missouri River Basin program shall be extinguished upon the 
deposit of funds under sections 4(b) and 5(b) of this Act.

                   COST AND BUDGETARY CONSIDERATIONS

    The cost estimate for S. 434, as provided by the 
Congressional Budget Office, is set forth below.

S. 434--Yankton Sioux Tribe and Santee Sioux Tribe Equitable 
        Compensation Act

    Summary: S. 434 would compensate the Yankton Sioux Tribe 
and the Santee Sioux Tribe for the taking of certain tribal 
lands by the Federal Government. CBO estimates that enacting 
this bill would have no significant impact on the Federal 
budget over the 2002-2012 period. Enacting S. 434 would 
increase direct spending by an estimated $49 million, but pay-
as-you-go procedures would not apply because the spending would 
not occur until fiscal year 2013.
    S. 434 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA). 
Tribal governments might incur some costs as a result of the 
bill's enactment, but those costs would be voluntary.
    Estimated cost to the Federal Government: CBO estimates 
that enacting S. 434 would result in direct spending of $49 
million in 2013, but would have no significant impact on the 
Federal budget before then. For this estimate, CBO assumes that 
S. 434 will be enacted by the end of fiscal year 2002.
    S. 434 would provide compensation to the two tribes for the 
taking of 3,445 acres of land by the Federal Government for 
various water projects. The bill would establish the Yankton 
Sioux Tribe Development Trust Fund and the Santee Sioux Tribe 
Development Trust Fund and would direct the Secretary of the 
Treasury to deposit a total of $28 million into interest-
bearing accounts to benefit the tribes on the first day of the 
11th fiscal year that begins after the date of enactment. An 
additional deposit equal to the amount of interest that the 
fund would have earned if the fund had been capitalized and 
invested in 2003 would be made at the same time. CBO estimates 
that this additional payment would be $21 million, for total 
deposit of $49 million in 2013. Once the Secretary pays these 
amounts, any monetary claims the tribes may have against the 
United States regarding the affected lands would be 
extinguished. Starting in 2013, the bill would allow the tribes 
to spend amounts equivalent to the annual interest earned on 
the fund pursuant to a tribal spending plan.
    Payments to certain trust funds that are held and managed 
in a fiduciary capacity by the Federal Government on behalf of 
Indian tribes are treated as payments to a nonfederal entity. 
As a result, CBO expects that the entire amount deposited to 
the fund in 2013 would be recorded as budget authority and 
outlays in that year. Because the trust funds would be 
nonbudgetary, the subsequent use of such funds by the tribe 
would not affect Federal outlays.
    Pay-as-you-go considerations: The Balanced Budget and 
Emergency Deficit Control Act sets up pay-as-you-go procedures 
for legislation affecting direct spending or receipts. For the 
purposes of enforcing pay-as-you-go procedures, only the 
effects through 2006 are counted. CBO estimates that enacting 
S. 434 would not affect direct spending or receipts in any of 
those years.
    Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 434 
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as 
defined in UMRA, but it would impose some conditions on the 
affected tribes for receipt of Federal funds. The bill would 
require the tribes to prepare and adopt plans for using 
payments from the trust fund and to obtain audits of their 
expenditures. The tribes would receive significant benefits 
from enactment of this legislation.
    Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Lanette J. Walker; 
impact on State, local, and tribal governments: Marjorie 
Miller; impact on the private sector: Cecil McPherson.
    Estimated approved by: Peter H. Fontaine, Deputy Assistant 
Director for Budget Analysis.

                        EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

    No executive communications have been received in the 107th 
Congress. The views of the Administration on S. 1148 were set 
forth in the Committee's report on that bill, Report 106-367 
(August 25, 2000).

               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 evaluate 
the regulatory and paperwork impact that would be incurred in 
carrying out the bill. The Committee believes that the 
regulatory and paperwork impact of S. 434 will be minimal.

                        CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

    In compliance with subsection 12 of rule XXVI of the 
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee finds that the 
enactment of S. 434 will not result in any changes in existing 
law.